JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
The Ukraine Crisis: Situation Update #9
Brief #137 – Foreign Policy
By Abran C
Over 100 days into Russia’s war on Ukraine, there is still no end in sight. Russia now controls a large swath of Ukrainian territory that extends from around Ukraine’s second city of Kharkiv, through the separatist-held cities of Donetsk and Luhansk, and westward to the city of Kherson, forming a land bridge linking the captured territory to the Crimean peninsula.
Should Religious Organizations Continue To Receive Federal Grants For Social Service Programs?
Brief #188 – Civil Rights
By Rodney A. Maggay
On August 31, 2021 H.R. 5129 was introduced in the House of Representatives. The bill was the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) Modernization Act of 2022. This bill reauthorized a continued funding of the Community Services Block Grant Program which makes grants to States, territories, Indian tribes and other non – governmental entities for government programs to help reduce poverty, empower residents of low – income communities and encourage businesses and other organizations to expand opportunities for all individuals. Included in organizations that are eligible for these grants are faith – based organizations (FBO).
The Center Lane is Wide Open
U.S. Resist News Op Ed
By John Halpin
New polling shows that Americans are unique in viewing their political leaders as ideological extremists.
What to Expect During the First January 6th Committee Open Hearings
Brief #37 – Elections and Politics
By Maureen Darby-Serson
On Thursday June 2nd, the January 6th committee announced when it would hold its first round of public hearings. The first open hearing will be Thursday, June 9th at 8pm. Primetime. No other details were released, but more information would be made available next week. For example, no witness list was published.
Is Your Drinking Water Safe?
Brief #143 – Environment Policy
By Roarke Cullenbine
Water pollution is a serious epidemic in the US, impacting hundreds of thousands. With the US ranking twenty-third in the world for tap water safety, great progress is necessary to keep citizens out of the hospital from consuming either lead, diesel, or pathogens in their water supplies. With few additions to the dated 1972 Clean Water Act, impurity of America’s drinking water is not improving.
Guns Now Leading Cause of Death for Children
Brief #152 – Health & Gender Policy
By Lynn Waldsmith
It’s a shocking statistic that should make every American pause and reflect: guns are now the leading cause of death for children in the United States.
Let that sink in. According to the CDC, firearms became the leading cause of death for kids one and older in 2020, marking the first time that motor vehicle crashes have not been the number one cause of death.
FTC initiates Crackdown on Deceptive Earnings Claims
Brief #137 – Economic Policy
By Stephen Thomas
There is an adage which, simply put, means that if a deal appears too good to be true, then it probably is. The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has seen so many consumers misled by so-called deceptive earnings claims that the agency is developing a regulation to crackdown on the practice. The solution is composed of two phases.
A Draft Leaked Opinion Puts the Supreme Court’s Impartiality into Question
Brief #36 – Elections and Politics
By Maureen Darby-Serson
Late on Monday May 2nd, 2022, a draft of an opinion written in February 2022, in the upcoming US Supreme Court case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was leaked to the press. This is one of a handful of leaks, in general, since the US Supreme Court established itself in 1789. The Dobbs case is having the Court revisit the right to an abortion.
Who’s in Charge When it Comes to Making COVID 19 Regulations?
Brief #151 – Health and Gender Policy
By Alexandra Ellis
On April 19, 2022, U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle in Tampa, overturned the mask mandate for interstate travel. The CDC’s interstate mask mandate for plane, trains, and buses, was first issued in May 2021, and was extended to May 2022. Before the mask mandate was set to expire this May, a U.S. District Court declared it unconstitutional. The Biden administration has been relatively quiet on COVID concerns since March of 2022, when the Center for Disease and Control and Prevention (CDC) released the community guidance standards.
The Economics of an Aging Population
The Economics of an Aging Population
Economic Policy Brief #144 | By: Rosalind Gottfried | January 9, 2022
Header photo taken from: Princeton University
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more economic policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Global Risk Insights
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The aging of the baby boom generation will continue to change the shape of the American labor force. Curremtly,16.5% of the US population of 328 million, or 54 million, are over the age of 65. By 2030, the figure will be 74 million and the fastest growing group are those over 85. Additionally, the fertility rate is lower than in past generations, hovering at about 1.78 (2022) and that figure represents a failure to replace the population. By 2035, the US population will have more people over the age of 65 than under the age of 18. Ostensibly, this will result in an insufficient number of workers to support the needs of an aging dependent population.
The outlook is not as dismal as it seems, at first sight, due to two factors: the increased well-being and affluence of the aging boomers and the contribution anticipated from immigration. Ninety percent of the increases in employment between 1998 and 2019 emanated from workers 55 and older, and the trend is slightly more pronounced among women than men in the 65-69 age group. People 55-64 account for 26% of new entrepreneurs (2017) up from 19% ten years earlier. Overall good health has contributed to a trend of longer workforce participation though the United State ranks 9 in countries surveyed regarding workers’ employment over the age of 55. Americans over 65, and professionals ages 45-64, are the wealthiest groups and comprise a sizable portion of consumers, especially as their needs for products and services grow as they age.
Immigrants are also an essential element of the demographic changes in the US. The Trump administration’s policies reduced legal immigration and that has damaged the health of the economy and the growth of the labor force. The US needs immigrants to boost both of these and also to replace its aging population. Immigrants not only contribute to the economy by labor and consumption but increase the birthrate as well, though not by enough to guarantee the replacement of the current U.S. population.
Policy Analysis
President Biden has been trying to pass aid which would increase the Medicaid budget by 400 billion dollars over ten years. These funds would support home caregivers for the elderly and disabled and increase in-home workers’ wages. Increasing the aid by this amount, as introduced in March 2021, does not seem politically viable though some measures will have to be taken or the aging population will be severely underserved.
Alternative programs would consider extending retraining to adults in their 40s-70s and/or having employers provide partial retirement where workers could continue in jobs but at less than 40 hours a week. Additionally, immigration policies introduced by the Biden administration, would increase legal immigration by 28%, yielding a significant increase in the labor force and providing more consumers.
Photo taken from: Los Angeles Times
(click or tap to enlargen)
As the Baby Boomers age, the direst predictions of population decline are not at all inevitable since this generation is the healthiest, wealthiest and most long lived to date.
The impact of the pandemic on the long-term participation of boomers is not yet clear but policies regarding support for the workforce are essential. Boomers may not be parents but likely they are helping their adult children stay in the labor force by providing care to their grandchildren; this trend adds urgency to the need for better childcare policies, as well.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
The silver economy is coming of age: A look at the growing spending power of seniors
Secret Unit in U.S. Customs and Border Patrol Agency Raises Freedom of the Press Issues
Secret Unit in U.S. Customs and Border Patrol Agency Raises Freedom of the Press Issues
Civil Rights Policy Brief #179 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | January 5, 2022
Header photo taken from: POGO
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more civil rights policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: PIX11
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
On December 11, 2001 investigative journalist Jana Winter published an explosive article on Yahoo News that exposed a secret unit within the Counter Network Division of the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agency. At the heart of the disturbing story is that a CBP employee staffed to the secret unit was authorized to investigate a national security journalist named Ali Watkins with regards to her confidential sources for the source of her work. However, Ms. Winter’s investigation revealed that the procedures of the unit were not entirely clear. The unit was permitted to use sensitive government databases to “vet” targets and construct a “contact tree” to look for hidden and illegal networks based on a target’s “personal connections.”
In the course of mapping out connections, the unit’s work led to troves of private and personal information of hundreds of Americans that included members of Congress, their staffers, other journalists and members and staffs of non – profit groups. This info was compiled about each person even though the person was not suspected of any crime. No warrant was used as the basis for the database search of ordinary citizens through government databases such as CBP’s Automated Tracking System (tool used to compare travelers to law enforcement and intelligence data), TECS (used to monitor people entering and exiting the country), the Treasury Department’s FinCEN (tool to detect financial crimes) and the State Department’s consular database (to examine details of a person’s passport application).
On December 31, 2021 Ms. Winter published a follow – up article which details the steps that the CBP are taking in response to Ms. Winter’s original article. CPB spokesman Luis Miranda said that “[a] review is underway…to prevent an incident like this from taking place in the future.”
Policy Analysis
When the story was first revealed by Ms. Winter in early December 2021 it raised a significant red flag concerning the free speech rights of journalists. The U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agency is the federal department tasked with “securing America’s borders” and so it was somewhat curious that the whole incident detailed by Ms. Winter began with queries about forced labor abroad in other countries regarding international trade.
Jeffrey Rambo was the CBP staffer who was tasked with reaching out to reporters with expertise in forced labor and yet his investigation ended up reaching out to a national security journalist named Ali Watkins. That led to the revelation of her affair with a senior Senate intelligence committee staffer named James Wolfe. Wolfe was later convicted of lying to FBI agents about his relationship with Ali Watkins.
What is deeply concerning about this whole episode is the implication that this secretive unit at CBP was used to illegally conduct personal and private information searches on a reporter in order to probably intimidate or blackmail the reporter into divulging her confidential sources because of her affair with an intelligence staffer thirty years her senior. Simply by getting her name as a starting point Jeffrey Rambo was able to run her name through sensitive government databases although there was no inkling that she had committed a crime. This allowed him to construct a list of her contacts and then to also search for her contacts in those same databases. There were no established procedures and safeguards as well as no oversight over the CBP unit’s secretive work. All in all, more than twenty journalists in addition to Ms. Ali Watkins were searched as well as numerous members of congress, government officials and well known non – profit officials.
Photo taken from: Yahoo News
(Jeffrey Rambo, agent running background checks on journalists)
Reporters should be free to put together articles and write pieces that they believe are in the public interest even if it may be embarrassing to the government. However, in this case it appears that the CBP may have been used to spy on reporters, track their movements and maybe find out who their confidential sources are based on people they may have traveled with or contacted by phone or e-mail. This instance of government intrusion into the personal and private affairs of people with no suspicion of having committed a crime raises concerns that there was no legitimate or legal basis for having their name searched in sensitive government databases.
And it makes one wonder if the search of Ali Watkins’ name and contacts, as well as other national security journalists, was done in retaliation for an unflattering article or to even try and intimidate the reporters, thus chilling their free speech rights as journalists. CBP has opened an internal investigation as well as have the House Homeland Security Committee and the Senate Finance Committee into the actions of this secretive unit to clarify what exactly this unit does and if there are enough safeguards in place to prevent invasions of privacy of a citizen or reporter in the future.
While getting some answers will take some time, it probably would be best if the unit suspend their likely illegal invasions of privacy government searches in sensitive government databases until the internal probe and the two congressional committees finish their inquiries. LEARN MORE
This brief was compiled by Rod Maggay. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief, please contact Rod@USResistnews.org.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – group’s infopage on privacy and surveillance issues.
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) – group’s infopage on use of government databases in regards to surveillance.
Understanding The Crisis in Ukraine
Understanding The Crisis in Ukraine
Foreign Policy Brief #138 | By: Abran C | January 6, 2021
Header photo taken from: India Today
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Reuters
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Ukraine and Western allies are concerned about a Russian troop buildup near its border that may signal a plan for a further invasion into Ukraine. As a former Soviet republic, Ukraine shares deep social and cultural ties with Russia and, in certain parts of the country, Russian is widely spoken. It borders both the EU and Russia, and won its independence in 1991 during the break up of the USSR. Since its independence it has moved away from Russia, and has sought closer ties with the West. During the last two decades Ukraine has undergone two revolutions in 2005 and 2014, both times rejecting Russia’s domination over it and pursuing a path to join the EU and NATO. In 2014 Viktor Yanukovych, the Kremlin-friendly Ukrainian President rejected an association agreement with the European Union in favor of closer ties with Moscow which sparked mass protests that eventually led to his removal from office. Russia responded to his ouster and the possibility of Ukraine deepening its ties to the West by annexing the Crimean Peninsula and backing a pro-Russian separatist insurgency in Ukraine’s Eastern region known as the Donbas, and reigniting war on continental Europe.
In 2015, Germany and France helped broker a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine but failed to reach a political settlement. Over 13,000 people have died as a result of the fighting, and about 1.5 million people have been internally displaced. In the final days of 2021 U.S. intelligence determined that Russia has amassed an estimated 100,000 troops stationed along various points near Ukraine’s border. The military build-up drew criticism and condemnation from the West and sparked fear of an invasion in early 2022. On December 7, 2021, President Biden held a video call with Russian President Vladimir Putin to warn against further aggression and encroachment in Ukraine. Russia denies it is planning an invasion and has dismissed the claims as alarmist. It claims its moves are purely defensive and has warned NATO against expanding further eastward to avoid war.
Policy Analysis
So what does Russia want? The Kremlin has warned the West not to cross “its red lines”, and expand NATO further eastward. It also wants NATO to halt military activity in Eastern Europe which would include pulling out troops from Poland and the Baltic republics. Russia is clear that it is willing go to war in order to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, while Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is actively seeking a timeline from the alliance for membership.
Another factor in the conflict is Putin’ s declining approval ratings brought on by economic hardships, the COVID-19 pandemic and the jailing of opposition candidate Alexi Navalny. During Russia’s annexation of Crimea Putin’s approval ratings with the Russian public reached almost 90% and he may try to use similar tactics to revive dwindling support.
The Russian troop buildup on the Ukranian border may also be a demonstration of force that showcases the lengths Russia will go to in order to convince the West of abiding by Russia’s demands. The U.S. and other NATO allies have condemned Russia’s provocation but have also suggested they would not go to war to defend Ukraine. President Biden has indicated to Putin that any further aggression will be met with harsh sanctions and that the U.S. and allies would send further military equipment to assist Ukraine.
Photo taken from: Gazprom
(click or tap to enlargen)
The German Foreign Minister, Annalena Baerbock, has also clarified that if there were to be any further Russian escalation, then the Nord Stream pipeline that would provide Germany with Russian gas would not come into service, taking away a huge new source of revenue for Russia. U.S. and Russian officials have scheduled talks for January 10th to discuss the rising tensions.
Putin’s actions and demands show that his true goal is to stop NATO’s advance into Eastern Europe and revive Russian dominance over its former satellite republics rather than conquering all of Ukraine. There still looms the threat of war over the region and we will wait to see what comes out of the scheduled talks in order to avoid further escalation.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
NATO– NATO is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes. If diplomatic efforts fail, it has the military power to undertake crisis-management operations.
U.S. Department of State– The U.S. Department of State leads America’s foreign policy through diplomacy, advocacy, and assistance by advancing the interests of the American people, their safety and economic prosperity.
Record Numbers of People Quitting Jobs But Employment Remains High
Record Numbers of People Quitting Jobs But Employment Remains High
Economic Policy Brief #133 | By: Rosalind Gottfried | January 6, 2021
Header photo taken from: SHRM
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more ecomic policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Fox 59
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The number of people quitting or switching jobs reached a record high of 4.5 million in November, the fourth episode of record setting in 2021. As seen in previous assessments, the biggest changes are in lower paying occupations such as restaurant/bar and retail staffs. Wages increased 12% in leisure and hospitality over the past year. This indicates that employers in those lower businesses need to make their jobs more attractive or they will suffer the labor shortages that many owners and consumers are complaining about. There are 10.6 million jobs to fill. Pre-pandemic there were 2.4 unemployed people for every job. Extending another trend seen earlier in the year, the workers switching jobs are getting better pay raises than those staying in their jobs.
Data show that 3% of the labor force left their jobs in November; the figure was 6.1% in the hospitality industry. Total hires for the month were 6.7 million, reflecting similar increases in recent months. Unemployment claims were down for the week ending Nov 22, marking the lowest level of claims since 1969. The number of workers increased by 1.1 million in November and the number of people not looking for work or not working fell by 473,000. The percentage of working persons 25-54, the prime work years, increased by.5% to78.8 moving towards the level of 80.4 level in the pre-pandemic months, a figure expected to recur early in this year. In considering all adults, the percentage of workers was 61.8% in November, down from the 63.3% pre-pandemic level. It is unclear what portion of this demographic may have taken early retirement.
Policy Analysis
It is clear that low wages workers have gained leverage in demanding better wages and benefits; some report salary increases of up to $5 an hour though it is essential to note that these workers represent some of the most exploited members of the labor force. There is some speculation that increased wages and benefits will not be as important as the nature of the corporate culture for some of the people considering a job move. However, there have been reports that show that the sharp rise in inflation is hurting many workers whose incomes are not keeping up with the swelling cost of living.
The consumer price index rose by 6.8% in November while average hourly earnings increased by 4.8%. Only 17% of workers had raises matching the inflation rate. Nine in 10 persons surveyed say that they are somewhat or very concerned about inflation and these responses cut across political lines.
Photo taken from: CNBC
Consumer confidence is at a five-year low and only 21% reported that their finances were better than a year ago, down from 26% in the previous annual survey. It seems that if the businesses in the service industries want to avoid consumer attrition, and potential business failure, they will have to manage to lure workers with living wages and attractive working conditions.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
More quit jobs than ever, but most turnover is in low-wage work.
Why the November Jobs Report Is Better Than It Looks
https://www.marketplace.org/shows/marketplace-morning-report/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/01/04/job-quits-november-2021/
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/04/economy/us-job-openings-november/index.html
Federal Laws Versus States Rights Re-Visited
Federal Laws Versus States Rights Re-Visited
U.S. RESIST NEWS EDITORIAL
By: U.S. RESIST NEWS Reporters
(Scout Burchill, Ron Israel, Tim Loftus, Rod Maggay and Lynn Waldsmith)
January 1, 2022
Header photo taken from: Attorneys Worldwide
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more U.S. Resist News editorials from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Pew Research Center
Introduction
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The United States has a democratic federal form of governance with law-making responsibilities divided between the federal government and our 50 states. The U.S. Constitution, written in 1789, seeks to provide a framework for areas of governance that belong to the states and those that belong to the federal government. The way in which the Constitution was written reflects a compromise between mostly urban-based advocates of a strong central government, led by Alexander Hamilton, and the mainly rural-based part of our country led at the time by Thomas Jefferson.
Throughout the course of U.S. history the role of the federal government, in relationship to states rights, has shifted- from weak to strong and back to weak again. This shift in the locus of power has taken place in response to the changing historical/economic and social circumstances in which the country finds itself. The federal government tends to play a larger role in times of social and economic upheaval and a lesser role during periods of peace and calm.
Today is a time of upheaval as civil discourse is disappearing, misinformation is widespread, and old forms of conduct and democratic institutions are under attack. If we stay together as a nation there is a need for our federal government to assert itself, bring us together, and play a strong leadership role.
U.S. RESIST NEWS asked members of our reporter team to make the case for greater or lesser federal governance in key public policy areas during the times in which we live. Here is what they wrote:
Civil Rights
The big issue today in civil rights, maybe even the entire country, is voting rights. It is one of the few issues that makes headlines across the U.S. when Congress debates reforms at the federal level and individual states pass new voting rights laws.
The Constitution in Article One, Section Four, Clause One actually gives each state legislature the power over the time, place and manner of elections but qualifies that grant of power by stating that Congress may “make or alter such Regulations.”
photo taken from: The Guardian
The focus of the argument shouldn’t be a simple choice between state power and federal power. It should be on whether access to the ballot box is being unduly burdened and if either the state or the federal government can do anything about it. Recently, in line with former President Trump’s false claim that the election was stolen from him, a number of states have enacted laws that have made it harder to cast a ballot. While new absentee ballot restrictions was an easy target for new laws, it can be said that some of the new restrictions were not necessary and were only passed in response to President Trump’s unfounded claims of fraud.
In this instance, the federal government can step in and offer ways to counter some of the misplaced efforts going on in the states – they can pass new laws that every state must follow and offer new guidance and minimum standards.
The Environment
Other natural resources, such as wildlife, are left largely to states to manage with their own set of regulations. Here, federal law essentially establishes a threshold of minimum species existence below which the federal Endangered Species Act takes over to set the rules for species recovery.
photo taken from: US Fish and Wildlife Service
Marine fisheries management on the other hand is largely a federal responsibility, but one that involves regional management councils and interstate commissions. States are allowed to manage within the first three miles of their coastline before the federal role triggers for management within the three-200 nautical mile from coastline, U.S. exclusive economic zone.
In most of these cases where the resources are seen as common-pool rather than private property, federal law sets a minimum standard of resource protection and leaves it to states to manage resources at or above those standards. Federal law in effect acts as a guide for states that are free to “improve” on federal guidance for the betterment of the resource or society, but states cannot regulate at levels that ignore federal guidance. Marine fisheries management is more nuanced and cooperative in practice.
The judicial branch of federal government plays a crucial role in interpreting the laws as they are either upheld or ignored by states and/or other entities (e.g., private individuals, corporation, federal agencies charged with implementing law.) The matter of environmental protection, therefore, is neither a solely federal oversight nor a strictly states’ rights issue, but rather a cooperative venture in joint governance with mediation provided as necessary by the court system. An informed citizenry also has a role to play in ensuring that laws and rulemaking at both levels remain current and effective.
Healthcare
Although healthcare is not included in the U.S. Bill of Rights, it is included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United States and 191 other countries. Health care as a basic right has become part of the lexicon of many U.S. politicians on both sides of the aisle.
photo taken from: Forbes
However, with few but noteworthy exceptions (e.g., Medicare) federal legislation has failed to support the widespread belief in health care as a human right. The U.S. public health system is fragmented with the federal government limited in what it can prescribe and with states having the ability to enact their own regulations in many areas vis-à-vis the prevention and treatment of disease.
However, illness and disease, like climate change, know no political boundaries. The current Covid 19 global pandemic is testimony to that assertion. The Covid 19 virus will not be contained in any single country until people in all countries are fully protected from the virus; nor in any one U.S. states until people in all 50 states are fully protected.
Unfortunately progress in stopping Covid within the United States has been slow because many states for political reasons refuse to enact vaccination and mask mandates, and because many citizens believe that such mandates are an infringement of their civil rights. The politics of Covid are perhaps the first time in U.S. history when public health has become so politicized. In a public policy arena greatly in need of federal leadership and management, the cry of states’ rights and individual citizen rights are being used to mitigate our ability to keep people healthy.
Education
The federal government has a limited role in education. This is mainly because public schools are mostly funded at the local and state level, while states fund state universities and private organizations establish schools and colleges as well.
This myriad of institutions leads to a variety of curricula and educational standards throughout the country.
photo taken from: Center for American Progress
While local and state school systems should and do have the right to teach students in their jurisdictions as they see fit, the federal government historically has intervened when necessary.
For example, when Southern states refused to educate former slaves after the Civil War, Congress created federal schools to do so. In the early 20th century, Congress funded vocational education programs to train immigrants for employment. In the 1950s and ’60s, after the Soviet Union launched a satellite into space, Congress funded major new efforts to improve the teaching of science and mathematics. And the passing of Civil Rights laws eventually made it possible for Black students to receive access to the same education as their white peers.
Education in the U.S. is a complex system and the federal government should try to stay out of decisions that are best left to governors, state legislators, school boards, superintendents, and teachers. However, when local leaders are unable or unwilling to provide for all children’s needs, federal policy makers have an obligation to become involved.
The federal government should focus its educational efforts on these four areas:
Universal Pre-K
A wealth of research shows that high-quality preschool programs tend to be extraordinarily effective in helping kids succeed in school, but access to pre-K is painfully inadequate in most of the country, especially for children from low-income families.
Teacher quality
Teacher recruitment, preparation, and retention were already problems before the pandemic. Meager wages, lack of respect, poor working conditions and burnout have been exacerbated during the Covid-19 crisis, leading to teacher shortages.
Funding
The funding of public education needs to be overhauled. Local property taxes continue to be a major source of educational funding in most states, which allows affluent communities to allocate more money per pupil. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the American approach to school funding is one of the most dysfunctional systems in the world: “[The] vast majority of [advanced] countries either invest equally in every student or disproportionately more in disadvantaged students. The U.S. is one of the few countries doing the opposite.”
Safety
School shootings are every parent’s worst nightmare and the country is reeling from far too many of them. Given the gun violence epidemic in this country with student anxiety and depression at all-time highs, occasional active shooter drills are simply not enough. The federal government needs to adopt and enforce proactive and proven safety measures at every school in the U.S.
Social Justice
Social justice issues in the U.S. are ever-growing. From voting rights to racial injustice to gun violence in America, there is a demand for the federal government to act on behalf of its citizens.
Social justice issues should be addressed at the federal level through various types of legislation and organizations dedicated to reforming the issues that matter.
photo taken from: Harvard Gazette – Harvard University
In the past, we have seen the U.S. government pass laws regarding some of these issues. For example, there have been small efforts by the new administration to reform gun control – however, these laws are usually not far-reaching enough to make an impact. What is needed is a government who is willing to pass laws that will not only prevent tragedies and social injustice but prosecute those who willingly harm other people to ensure they cannot do it again.
This is not something that can be achieved solely at the state level. There are states that are unwilling to pass laws to protect their citizens, believing the 2nd Amendment has priority over the safety and security over their residents. This calls for the federal government to step in and draft laws that will help address things like gun violence and racial injustice. Mass shootings are on the rise in the U.S., and we are lacking the legislation (and cooperation) to protect our citizens from tragedy. Something must be done by lawmakers to curb violence in all states and make America a safe place for people to live again.
Technology
Almost two years into a pandemic, the power of technology to shape our societies, economies and everyday lives is clearer than ever.
From Zoom-schooling, meme-stocks and Twitter-driven political discourse to skyrocketing inequality, cyberwarfare, surveillance capitalism and disinformation, the nation needs a bold and unifying vision that addresses the issues of our exponential age. Unfortunately, when it comes to our nation’s leadership, clarity of purpose is blurry at best.
photo taken from: The New York Times – “Ohio’s battle to classify Google as a public utility”
Too often, our nation’s politics are purely reactive, lacking in foresight and beset by petty political in-fighting. Systems only adjust, if ever, after damage is done. In the rapidly emerging sphere of digital governance, this state of affairs has us barreling toward an uncertain future as technology rapidly alters the fabric of our society, and our ability to proactively shape its influence is stymied by political morass, big money interests and a loss of faith in our own institutions’ ability to govern.
To amplify the benefits and reign in the harms of technology, the federal government needs to rise from its slumber and rediscover its raison d’etre – to serve, protect and guarantee the rights of all Americans. Currently there are no federal laws on the books protecting our data privacy from ravenous data brokers or enshrining our digital rights. As the vague distinction between our online and offline worlds grows more indistinguishable, the federal government’s lack of action imperils us all.
This has pushed states to take matters into their own hands, resulting in some interesting experimentation in the areas of digital governance. Some examples that come to mind are: Ohio’s battle to classify Google as a public utility, Vermont’s stringent data protection laws, the 40 states that came together to file an anti-trust suit against Facebook, and even Florida’s half-cocked attempt to stop Big Tech censorship.
No doubt, some of these initiatives can produce good models going forward, but more often than not, the overall result is a fractured patchwork of states pushing and pulling in various directions. Furthermore, state initiatives that truly take on the concentrated power of Big Tech are almost bound to fail given that tech interest groups tend to have far more patience and much deeper pockets than most state attorneys and legislatures.
There will be no unified vision, no concerted effort, without the federal government leading the charge. States may try to forge their own paths, but without the leadership and vision of a determined federal government, the odds are squarely stacked against them.
Conclusion
Our Reporters make a strong case for stronger federal legislation in most of the public policy issues covered by this Editorial.
The arguments for stronger states’ rights and individual liberties lose their luster at a time when so many issues like climate change cannot be contained just at the state level; when the importance of public health and safety take precedence over the behavior of people who believe they have the right to purchase an AK 47 or not to wear a mask in the midst of a pandemic.
photo taken from: Cincinatti.com
The Politics of Heating Buildings
The Politics of Heating Buildings
Environmental Policy Brief #132 | By: Todd J. Broadman | December 29, 2021
Header photo taken from: The BBC
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more environmental policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Yahoo Finance
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Seventy million American homes and businesses depend on natural gas, oil, or propane on-site for heating, hot water, and cooking. The annual carbon dioxide generated is 560 million tons or 40% of total US emissions when you include the carbon used in building construction. The amount of methane, a far more potent CO2 gas, that routinely leaks as part of the gas distribution process, is equivalent to all US vehicle emissions.
There are a number of new policies to address the use of gas in buildings and the legislative efforts are split along party lines. Noteworthy are California, New York, and Illinois: combined they represent almost 25 percent of all US greenhouse gas emissions from buildings. Local governments are taking action, yet in the larger scope their new rules will not be sufficient to cut US emissions in half by 2030 as the Biden administration has targeted.
On the local front, the city of Berkeley, California is the first municipality to step up; in 2019 they passed a new building code that requires all new buildings to be constructed use only electricity for heating, hot water, and cooking. This example has been followed by nearly 50 cities in California. Ithaca, New York, took it a step further by banning the use of natural gas in all buildings — not just new ones. The New York City Council voted in favor of similar legislation prohibiting the use of gas-powered stoves, space heaters and water boilers in new buildings. The law will take effect in December 2023 for buildings less than seven stories and in 2027 for taller buildings. The rule does not apply to hospitals, commercial kitchens and laundromats, and residents who currently utilize natural gas in their homes will not be impacted. Salt Lake City and Denver have also made plans to move toward electrification.
Anticipating these local actions, the gas industry has focused their lobbying efforts at the state level – in Republican states: at least a dozen states have now passed laws prohibiting cities from restricting gas hookups in new construction. As EVP of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, Garrick Taylor’s comments are fairly typical of such efforts: “We wanted to get ahead of what we viewed as an economically damaging trend, and stop it before it could gain a foothold here.”
Even with rules in place at the local level though, for CO2 reductions to take hold the electric grid itself must truly be carbon-free. For example, 85 percent of New York City’s electricity is generated from carbon. There is a plan in place to take that down to 30 percent by 2030.
Policy Analysis
Following an aggressive trend, 20 states have already passed “preemption” bills – preventing municipalities from taking action, the result of lobbying efforts that follow a playbook written by the American Gas Association. The industry appeals to economic and “consumer choice” advocates. The carbon industry is “under siege from environmental regulation.” The industry’s Chair stated that municipalities who want to ban natural gas are, in effect, “removing energy choice for communities and limiting or prohibiting customer access to natural gas.” In addition to the states that have passed bills, currently there are bills pending in three other states: Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Michigan.
The state-by-state preemption playbook was written by the tobacco industry; their aim was to limit smoking regulations in the 1990s and 2000s. The same strategy was picked up by the National Rifle Association to restrict gun regulations in cities. Over the years, conservatives have used state preemption to target local bans on plastic bags, plastic straws, and fracking, as well as local efforts to increase the minimum wage.
Bruce Nilles, the executive director of the Climate Imperative project at Energy Innovation, says the natural gas industry “is now facing an existential threat. As coal disappears, they know they are next.” University of Virginia law expert Richard Schragger went as far as to claim that the industry’s strategy is an “attack on American cities.”
Photo taken from: Vox
(click or tap to enlargen)
The industry rationale is weak according to David Pomerantz, Director of the environmental group at Energy and Policy Institute. “A building’s energy source is not usually an individual’s decision to start with, because the infrastructure that’s available depends on policies in their zip code.” In spite of gas industry lobbying efforts, New York may become the first state to ban natural gas in new buildings at a state-wide level.
Even if the net CO2 reductions from local restrictions may not amount to a significant overall cut, the shift in mindsets within communities can be seen as positive as it leads to a wide range of sustainability programs at the local level. Just as the gas industry posits individual choice is a value worth fighting for, communities are in their own way applying that argument in proposing and implementing sustainable non-carbon energy choices.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
https://energyinnovation.org/ is a non-partisan energy and climate policy think tank.
https://www.energyandpolicy.org/ is a watchdog organization that exposes attacks on renewable energy.
https://reason.com/ independent journalism on civil liberties, politics, technology, culture, policy, and commerce.
How YouTube Stokes Political Division
How YouTube Stokes Political Division
Technology Policy Brief #67 | By: Erik Pillar | December 29, 2021
Header photo taken from: NBC News
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more technology policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Mozilla Foundations
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Social media algorithms, political echo chambers, and more are feeding into an ever-increasing disparity between rightwing-leftwing political perspectives.
According to the Pew Research Center, in a 2020 survey, the disparity between party-based opinions on topics such as the handling of Covid-19, voting rights, and even how the future may appear were Trump or Biden to be named president was more at odds than any other similarly compared nation. More recent Pew studies show that trend continuing with an increased percentage gap in issues such as abortion, economic issues, racial disparity, and more.
Part of the problem may be in how we interact with social media, and how social media interacts with us. The internet web-browser Mozilla conducted a 10-month long survey, released in 2021, of YouTube users on their video watching habits and the type of content they see show up in their recommended feeds.
The study, called YouTube Regret, regret for when a user regrets watching the content they were recommended by YouTube, found that 71% of all regretted content reported came from recommended video links embedded in the content they were watching.
“YouTube needs to admit their algorithm is designed in a way that harms and misinforms people,” says Brandi Geurkink, a Mozilla Senior Manager of Advocacy, in relation to the study findings, “Research confirms that YouTube not only hosts, but actively recommends videos that violate its own policies.”
YouTube’s community guidelines and policies on harmful content can be found here: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2801964?hl=en
Several examples from the study highlight the issue of unwanted and potentially harmful recommended content. One user reporting watching a video about the U.S military, where he was recommended to watch a video titled “Man humiliates feminist in viral video.” Another watched several Art Garfunkel music videos and was exposed to a recommended video called “Trump Debate Moderator EXPOSED as having Deep Democrat Ties, Media Bias Reaches BREAKING point.”
According to an article from The Atlantic, in a cited Pew survey, 64% of all channel and video recommendations were to videos with more than a million views. Only about 5% of recommendations were to videos with fewer than 50,000 views. In addition, YouTube favors fresh content heavily over older videos. YouTube is also likely to favor channels or videos from creators previously watched that fall within the above parameters.
For example, were a more democrat leaning user to search for information on traditionally left-leaning topics, they would most likely be directed to the channel or videos on the subject with the largest numbers watched that update the most often.
One such a channel might be the left-leaning YouTube news network The Young Turks. Their network is one of the most watched in their category for left-wing topics and stances, and they follow the daily release format YouTube favors. Once a user watches one of their videos, YouTube seeks to keep a user engaged with the website. Their next recommendation is likely to be another Young Turks video, and if not that specifically, a similar network with similar views.
Thus, while a user may start out with a deliberate search for information and is given information that lets him see different perspectives; he then becomes inundated with recommendations for sites that skew towards his or her political bias and no longer has access to opposing points of view.
The same can be said for a user, like those in YouTube Regret, who did not seek out or search for the content to start with. Since YouTube promotes highly watched content, regardless of the relation to what a user may be seeking, a user can end up in a place they did not seek.
Policy Analysis
While the reasoning behind the YouTube recommendation algorithm is understandable, in that it is designed to keep a user engaged for the maximum amount of time -increasing ad revenue- it makes for a problematic discourse on public policy issues.
Very rarely is one side of an argument all right or all wrong. When the public gets their news from one source however, quickly you end up with a population that sees and identifies with only that one source. The Pew surveys show a country more at odds with itself than nearly any other short of outright war.
Adding to the issue is the nature of the sources sites like YouTube funnel users to. Creators on YouTube are businesses, especially when they are seeking to provide a service, such as news or political commentary. These businesses seek to maximize revenue just as YouTube does in their recommendations.
A quick search on YouTube for left and right commentators pulls up many varied creators, but some tend to stand out. One is the previously discussed Young Turks, another is The Daily Wire. The opinions voiced by creators working under these networks could not be more different, however the method for engaging users is very similar.
Both channels adhere to the YouTube system of daily releases, both see large number pulls, and both have a multitude of smaller creators and channels under them to flow user traffic to once an initial video is watched, which YouTube is more than happy to do as it keeps the user engaged.
Photo taken from: audiencegain.net
(click or tap to enlargen)
In addition, both channels monetize their services through subscriptions, creating a link to the channel and the user directly though monetary involvement, and go further to sell merchandise and goods attacking opponents or supporting those they agree with.
While the issue is in part the way in which these networks seek to keep and monetize users, that the platform itself, YouTube, directs and then keeps users seeing such content is the problem.
A user may become hooked by an unwanted recommendation, having watched said recommendation be given more, and over a very short time see mostly only that content. This is a problem, but one not easily solved.
Freedom of speech laws make any form of censorship short of calls to action or hate speech legal and not easily prevented. In addition, where does one draw the line at what should or should not be allowed? It is the goal of a business to make money. When a business legally earns money through legal methods, even if it comes at a cost to public discourse, should they be prevented from doing so?
The answer is one not yet known as politicians and policy setters continually battle over what it means to be a publisher or platform, what is or is not allowed.
One fact is clear, the political divisions in the US are becoming deeper, exacerbated by the business models used by social media providers such as YouTube.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
2020 Pew Research article: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/11/13/america-is-exceptional-in-the-nature-of-its-political-divide/
Mozilla Article Cited https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/mozilla-investigation-youtube-algorithm-recommends-videos-that-violate-the-platforms-very-own-policies/
YouTube Regret: https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/youtube/findings/
The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/11/how-youtubes-algorithm-really-works/575212/
Pandemic Related Mental Health Crisis Hits U.S. Schools
Pandemic Related Mental Health Crisis Hits U.S. Schools
Education Policy Brief #62 | By: Lynn Waldsmith | December 21, 2021
Header photo taken from: WTTW News
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more edcuation policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: The Pew Charitable Trusts
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Therapy dogs. Sensory rooms with comfy furniture, tents and weighted blankets. Playing with sand or building with Legos. These are the kinds of things that many schools throughout the country are making available to students when they need a break or when it just becomes too hard to cope in the classroom. But it’s not about fun and games.
Recently, three major pediatric groups — the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, and the Children’s Hospital Association – announced that the state of mental health of children and adolescents in this country should be considered a national emergency.
Mental health problems among kids have doubled during the pandemic, according to Karestan Koenen, a Harvard professor of psychiatric epidemiology. About one in four children is experiencing depression, and one in five is experiencing anxiety. Teachers are reporting increased behavior problems among younger children and substance use is rising among teens.
Most experts agree that the impact of pandemic-fueled social isolation and family instability is largely to blame, and some children are suffering from COVID-19-related grief. The National Institutes of Health says that more than 140,000 children in the United States lost a primary or secondary caregiver, with children of color being impacted disproportionately.
Some students feel hopeless. The CDC reports emergency department visits for suspected suicide attempts among adolescents jumped 31 percent in 2020 compared with 2019. In February and March of this year, emergency department visits for suspected suicide attempts were 51 percent higher among girls aged 12-17 than during the same period in 2019.
Policy Analysis
While therapy dogs are nice, actual therapists would be even better. Yet schools across the nation are not only coping with teacher shortages but with shortages of social workers, counselors and psychologists.
The National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) recommends one professional for every 500 students, yet Maine is the only state that meets that standard. The average among all states is actually one school psychologist for every 1,211 students. When the NASP surveyed members this fall, more than half of the respondents said their districts intended to hire mental health specialists. However, the shortage of available professionals has prompted some districts to hire outside vendors for mental health positions, while others are training existing staff.
In an interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Koenen said schools need to screen for anxiety and depression in students, provide resources, and somehow get more counselors. She also recommends that teachers be trained to recognize possible mental health problems in their students, so they can refer them for help.
“You don’t want it to fall on teachers to treat them,” she cautioned. “That is not the teacher’s job.”
Despite the sobering picture of children’s mental health, there are some good things to come out of the pandemic. First, with so much focus being directed at the problem, the stigma surrounding mental health is fading. Schools are openly talking about the importance of mental health with students and staff, a talking point that was essentially only whispered in the halls not too long ago. Many districts, reeling from the exhaustion of road-mapping “the new normal” of in-person learning, have provided students and staff “mental health” days off or extended holiday breaks.
Indeed, mental well-being needs to be the foundation for the recovery from the pandemic, Education Secretary Miguel Cardona has said. Toward that end, another piece of good news is that the pandemic has prompted the federal government to provide historic levels of relief funding for education.
Photo taken from: Future-Ed
(click or tap to enlargen)
Pandemic funding to schools totals $190 billion, more than four times the amount the Education Dept. typically spends on K-12 schools annually. The American Rescue Plan Act and the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund, combined with other 2020 pandemic relief funds for schools, provides education and health grants over the next few years, some of which can be spent on mental health. Local school districts can choose how to spend mental health investments, with most opting for staff training, wellness screenings and curriculum dedicated to social-emotional learning (SEL).
Social-emotional-learning is a teaching philosophy that is designed to help students manage their feelings and show empathy for others. Yet some parent groups oppose SEL and suicide prevention programs, claiming SEL is being used to indoctrinate students and that suicide shouldn’t be “advertised”. In addition, some schools are monitoring student computers while they are at school for distress signals or administering mental health screenings to all students, which has raised some privacy concerns.
The mental health crisis is pervasive on college campuses as well. A March report from the CDC found that 57 percent of adults ages 18 to 29 had recently experienced symptoms of anxiety and depression. Rep. David Trone (D-Maryland) and Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pennsylvania), have introduced a bill to establish a national commission to study mental health concerns at institutions of higher learning.
The Departments of Education and Justice recently released a fact sheet that calls for colleges and universities to develop trauma-informed crisis management procedures, provide access to mental health services, offer policy modifications for individual students when appropriate and train employees to respond to signs of distress. It also reminds institutions that students with mental health disabilities are protected by federal civil rights laws, including the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990.
As children, adolescents and young adults soon embark on their third year of learning during the pandemic, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy said that it would take an “all-of-society” effort to address mental health, and urged action.
“It would be a tragedy if we beat back one public health crisis only to allow another to grow in its place,” Murthy said earlier this month.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Declaration of a National Emergency in Child and Adolescent Mental Health:
Shortage of School Psychologists:
Higher Education Mental Health Act of 2021:
http://trone.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/One-Pager-Higher-Ed-Mental-Health-Act.pdf
CDC Report — Symptoms of Anxiety or Depressive Disorder and Use of Mental Health Care Among Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic — United States, August 2020–February 2021:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e2.htm
Key Substance Use and Mental Health Indicators in the United States — Results from the 2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health:
Dept. of Education report — Supporting Child and Student Social, Emotional, Behavioral, and Mental Health Needs:
Fact Sheet — Supporting and Protecting the Rights of Students at Risk of Self-Harm in the Era of COVID-19:
EPA Strengthens Policy Against Lead in Drinking Water, But Is It Enough?
EPA Strengthens Policy Against Lead in Drinking Water, But Is It Enough?
Environment Policy Brief #131 | By: Katelyn Lewis | December 21, 2021
Header photo taken from: NewsBreak
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more environmental policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: The New York Times
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Federal officials announced Thursday their plan to tighten restrictions on the amount of lead allowed in drinking water in an effort to reduce the health hazards such exposure has caused in poor, often minority communities across the U.S.
“The challenge that we face is, without any question, great,” Vice President Kamala Harris said during the administration’s announcement of its whole-of-government Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan at AFL-CIO headquarters in Washington. “Lead is built into our cities. It is laid under our roads and it is installed in our homes.”
The plan will distribute $2.9 billion to states, tribes, and territories to remove lead service lines in an effort to jumpstart the Biden administration’s goal of eliminating every lead service line across the U.S. It’s the first chunk of $15 billion Congress approved toward lead service line replacement in the federal infrastructure bill passed in November, PBS NewsHour reports.
Lead enters drinking water when plumbing materials that contain lead – such as water main lines, lead pipes, and faucets – corrode, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
Lead is also found in paint, dust, soil, air, and food, and it’s especially toxic for young children, infants, and fetuses, with lower exposure levels being linked to “damage to the central and peripheral nervous system, learning disabilities, shorter stature, impaired hearing, and impaired formation and function of blood cells,” according to the agency.
“The science on lead is settled – there is no safe level of exposure and it is time to remove this risk to support thriving people and vibrant communities,” EPA administrator Michael Regan said in a statement released Thursday.
Lead service lines are usually the most significant source of lead in water, and they’re more often found in older cities and homes built before 1986. As many as 10 million lead service lines continue to deliver water to homes, schools, businesses, and daycares across the U.S., the New York Times reports.
The announcement comes amid rising lead-contaminated water issues in communities across the U.S. and seven years after the crisis in Flint, Michigan, became one of the most serious environmental health blunders related to lead-contaminated water in 2014.
Policy Analysis
The EPA held a series of 10 virtual events across the country this year to discuss updating the federal Lead and Copper Rule for drinking water, The Allegheny Front reports.
Thursday’s announcement was the result of those discussions, with the agency planning to issue guidance – such as best practices, case studies, and templates for lead service line inventories – to assist its partners in implementation of the revised rule and a newly proposed rule to strengthen the regulatory framework.
Two big elephants remain in the room, though.
First, while finally putting weight behind eradicating lead contamination, the allocated $15 billion was a significant reduction from the administration’s proposed $45 billion needed to eliminate all of the lead pipelines in the U.S. Some estimates put the required cost to replace all pipes across the country at $60 billion (see image reference).
In addition, administration officials did not set a specific timeline on completion, only stating they wanted to address it as soon as is “feasible,” the New York Times reports.
Photo taken from: Getty Images
(click or tap to enlargen)
Second, the agency did not indicate when it would update the lead contamination levels for drinking water, with a senior administration official only indicating to reporters the goal to finalize it by 2024. There has been no indication yet of what the new standard will be.
“The top priority must be to require removal of all lead pipes within the decade and to set a strict at-the-tap standard, which is the only way to prevent another generation of kids from drinking water through what is essentially a lead straw,” Erik Olson, senior strategic director of health at the Natural Resources Defense Council told PBS NewsHour.
“Good intentions won’t be enough to get the job done,” he added.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
ABC News / Associated Press – New lead testing method could reveal higher levels in water (Nov. 30, 2021) – https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/lead-testing-method-reveal-higher-levels-water-81465676
The Allegheny Front – EPA listens to Pittsburgh leaders at roundtable on lead in drinking water (June 9, 2021) – https://www.alleghenyfront.org/epa-comes-to-pittsburgh-for-roundtable-on-lead-in-drinking-water/
Environmental Protection Agency – Basic Information about Lead in Drinking Water (n.d.) – https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/basic-information-about-lead-drinking-water#getinto
The Hill – The infrastructure bill won’t eliminate lead pipes – which aren’t the biggest problem (Aug. 18, 2021) – https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/568303-the-infrastructure-bill-wont-eliminate-lead-pipes-which-arent-the-biggest
Natural Resources Defense Council – EPA Orders Benton Harbor, Michigan to Protect Residents from Lead-Contaminated Drinking Water (Nov. 2, 2021) – https://www.nrdc.org/media/2021/211102-0
Natural Resources Defense Council – Flint Water Crisis: Everything You Need to Know (Dec. 8, 2018) – https://www.nrdc.org/stories/flint-water-crisis-everything-you-need-know
New York Times – Biden Administration Promises Stricter Regulation of Lead in Drinking Water (Dec. 16, 2021) – https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/16/climate/biden-lead-drinking-water.html
PBS NewsHour – EPA details push to tighten rules for lead in drinking water (Dec. 16, 2021) – https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/epa-details-push-to-tighten-rules-for-lead-in-drinking-water
What is the Significance of the First Union Store at Starbucks?
What is the Significance of the First Union Store at Starbucks?
Economic Policy Brief #132 | By: Rosalind Gottfried | December 21, 2021
Header photo taken from: ABC News
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more economic policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: TradeMap
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The recent union vote, at a Buffalo, NY Starbucks, represents the first success in the company’s 8000 corporate retail outlets. Workers United is the entity representing the workers and is affiliated with the Service Employees International Union. Another area store failed to vote in a union while a third one had a successful outcome which has been contested by both sides. At issue are wages, benefits, and other working conditions such as staffing and scheduling. Speculation surrounds the efforts as to whether this is a harbinger of a coming trend or an anomaly.
Unionization has been markedly down in the past several decades. Although there was a slight gain in membership in 2020, unionization hovers around 11% and, if the public unions are not in the count, the figure is cut in half. Restaurants are the least unionized industry in the U.S. The pandemic seemingly has contributed a boost to unionization and 68% of Americans now support unions; the highest figure since 1965. This surge counters a fifty-year trend of government regulations favoring employers.
Suggestions that the pandemic is promoting a pro union drive are spreading with workers giving more consideration to the conditions of work, especially in the low wage labor force. Almost 9 million workers quit jobs in September and October and there is persistent evidence that workers are not rushing back to work and are holding out for better pay and conditions.
Accusations of unfair labor practices by Starbucks pervade the efforts in the Buffalo areas. Starbucks has allegedly forced workers to attend anti-union meetings; flown in managers and executives from around the country to observe and intimidate workers; threatened losses of benefits; and manipulated the scheduling and hours of the union activities. Starbucks has even temporarily closed area stores. All of these practices, the corporation leadership suggests, are common practices though this assertion is adamantly contested. Hours before the Buffalo vote, Starbucks raised the minimum wage of its workers to $15 an hour and boosted wages for workers with two and five years of experience; the latter maneuver in response to employee criticism that veteran workers were making little more than new employees.
Three more Buffalo outlets, two outlets in Boston, and one in Mesa, Arizona have filed petitions to unionize with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Starbucks fought off union efforts in NYC and Philadelphia. In 2019, The NLRB made a judgement against Starbucks for firing two employees who has been active in a union campaign. Starbucks is appealing that decision. In Canada, there was one successful union vote in a corporate retail outlet.
In November of this year the Labor Board ordered a re-vote of a union effort in an Alabama Amazon warehouse, stating that the corporation had engaged in unfair practices including pressuring warehouse employees to vote against the union, which they had 2:1. Amazon has filed an appeal of the decision. President Biden supported the union effort engineered by the Retail, Wholesale, Department Store Union. Amazon is the country’s second largest private employer with 950,000 employees. The Bessemer, Alabama union drive was the first Amazon union effort since 2014; so far none have been successful in the U.S. though the European Amazon workers are characteristically unionized. The teamsters have made the domestic union effort a top priority.
Policy Analysis
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports 13 strikes this year but they count only organizations with more than 1000 employs so they excluded, for example, the 700 nurses who went on strike in Massachusetts. A research project at Cornell University estimates that there have been 243 strikes this year.
A successful teacher strike in West Virginia, in 2018, led to teacher strikes in multiple states indicating a trend of activism spreading across the country and extending to private companies such as John Deere and Kellogg’s.
In March 2021 the U.S. House passed the Protecting the Right to Organize Act (PRO act) which would strengthen the ability of private sector workers to unionize for collective bargaining; allow gig and contract workers to be represented by unions; maintain tighter restrictions on corporate practices regarding unionization; and levy stronger sanctions for violations of labor practices.
Photo taken from: The Guardian – Biden gives tentative support to Amazon workers in union push
(click or tap to enlargen)
The bill has yet to pass in the Senate. Clearly, the agency of workers has been altered by the present conditions and it remains to be seen how this will play out.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/union-objects-to-results-of-two-starbucks-unionization-votes
https://www.vox.com/recode/22825850/starbucks-union-first-organizing-vote-nlrb
https://www.npr.org/2021/12/09/1062150045/starbucks-first-union-buffalo-new-york