JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
U.S. Department of Justice Brings Voting Rights Lawsuit in Arizona
Brief #192 – Civil Rights
By Rodney A. Maggay
In March 2022 Arizona’s Republican Governor Doug Ducey signed into law HB 2492. The law is scheduled to go into effect in January 2023. The law included a number of voting restrictions that the Arizona Legislature wanted to implement.
Brittney Griner’s Trial in Russia
Brief #141 – Foreign Policy
By Reilly Fitzgerald
The WNBA is the premier basketball league in the world for professional female basketball players and has been at the center of American media attention due to the trial of Brittney Griner in Russia. Brittney Griner, an American basketball player, who plays for the WNBA’s Phoenix Mercury.
Griner was arrested quickly after the Russian invasion into Ukraine; with critics of the Putin regime and war suggesting that she was arrested as a political pawn, however, her charges are regarding the use of hashish oil which is illegal in Russia.
Biden-Harris Administration Pushing Back on Abortion Rights
Brief #156 – Health & Gender Policy
By Stephen Thomas
Striving to be proactive in reinstating abortion rights that the U.S. Supreme Court curtailed June 24, the administration of President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Kamala D. Harris is taking steps to safeguard a right that the high court established in Roe v. Wade in 1973.
With Roe v. Wade Overturned, Some States Fight Back
Brief #157 – Gender and Health Policy
By Geoffrey Small
According to the Pew Research Center, the total number of abortion providers in the United States has decreased since 1982. The recent Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe V. Wade may lead to further decreases and declining accessibility.
The Ukraine Crisis #10
Brief #141 – Foreign Policy
By Abran C
As fighting continues to rage in Ukraine’s East, Russian President Putin on Monday, July 4th, 2022 declared victory in the region of Luhansk, only one day after Ukrainian forces withdrew from their last remaining bastion of resistance in the province, the city of Severodonetsk, which is now in Russian hands.
SCOTUS Tightens its Noose Around Another Federal Agency: the EPA
Brief #144 – Environment Policy
By Todd J. Broadman
The recent SCOTUS decision in the West Virginia vs. EPA case, though not unexpected, is further support for a clear ideological direction underway at the Court. The case was brought by several Attorney Generals along with mining industry plaintiffs from major coal producing states. The 6-to-3 decision in favor of the plaintiffs applies directly to the EPA’s authority to regulate the carbon emissions of power plants under the (Obama) 2015 Clean Power Plan.
Representative Boebert’s “Separation of Church and State
Brief #191 – Civil Rights
By Rodney A. Maggay
On June 26, 2022, Representative Lauren Boebert (R-CO) made remarks at the Cornerstone Christian Center in Basalt, Colorado about the role of religion and government in the United States. Representative Boebert stated, “The church is supposed to direct the government. The government is not supposed to direct the church.
Future of Abortion Medication and Women’s Equality: Look to Europe
Brief #154 – Health and Gender
By Geoffrey Small
On June 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the landmark ruling and protections for abortion rights , Roe V. Wade. Recent polls indicate that the majority of U.S. citizens oppose this ruling, because it infringes upon women’s equality and their right to choose. This Supreme Court decision has made a seismic impact on accessibility to procedures that were previously available for generations of women.
It’s Time to Declare Independence from America’s Two Political Parties
U.S. Resist News Op Ed
John Halpin
The parties insist everyone must toe the line and hold the same ideological views. If the parties won’t change, then voters in the middle should just reject them.
How Race Has Emerged in Recent Redistricting Cases Months Before the 2022 Midterms
How Race Has Emerged in Recent Redistricting Cases Months Before the 2022 Midterms
Civil Rights Policy Brief #182 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | February 16, 2022
Header photo taken from: FiveThirtyEight
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more civil rights policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Well News
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
For the first few months of 2022 reports emerged on the status of redistricting efforts in a number of states. Some of those battles have not been definitively resolved with one case even reaching the U.S. Supreme Court. Here is an update on those cases that are still ongoing and an analysis of the common themes found in the cases.
- On February 7, 2022 the United States Supreme Court refused to allow a federal district court order to redraw Alabama’s congressional map to go forward. The federal district court had ruled that the map drawn by the Republican controlled state legislature was likely in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act’s prohibition against vote dilution based on race.
- On February 8, 2022, arguments were wrapped up in an Arkansas State House redistricting case before U.S. District Court Judge Lee Rudofsky. The case is similar to the Alabama case in that the plaintiffs are challenging the recently drawn state maps as likely being in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because of their weakening of Black Arkansans voting power. In the last decade Arkansas gained 30,000 black persons. But the new state House map reduced the number of black majority districts from twelve to eleven out of a total of 100 state House seats.
- On February 14th, 2022, the ACLU of Kansas and the Campaign Legal Center jointly brought suit to block Kansas’ new congressional map that had been drawn by the Republican controlled state Legislature. The map appears to have been intentionally drawn to defeat Representative Sharice Davids who is currently Kansas’s only Democratic member of Congress.
- In Georgia, Judge Steven Jones heard arguments as to whether Georgia’s new state legislative maps discriminate against Black voters in the state. Registered Black voters in Georgia increased 500,000 over the last decade and plaintiffs believe the maps were drawn to dilute the voting power of black voters in the state.
- On February 11, 2022, the NAACP of South Carolina filed a lawsuit against proposed congressional and state legislative district maps on the grounds that the new maps dilute Black voting power in a number of congressional and three state legislative districts.
Policy Analysis
According to former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, currently the chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, thirty – nine (39) states have completed their redistricting maps for Congress. Those states comprise 337 congressional districts. There are eleven states whose congressional redistricting has not been completed because of challenges to maps that had been drawn and submitted for approval. While some states such as Georgia and South Carolina are still debating new district maps for their state legislatures, there has been no comprehensive information on how many states have completed their state district maps for their state legislatures.
Of the eleven states remaining, a common theme has emerged to explain why these states have not completed their congressional maps and in some cases their state district maps. The proposed maps are being challenged on the basis of race and the state’s attempts to dilute the voting power of Black communities. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 explicitly prohibits voting practices that discriminate on the basis of race and color yet some states continue to ignore this prohibition especially when it comes to drawing new state legislative and congressional districts.
In Alabama, the claim that there was no racial gerrymandering was so weak that two Trump appointed judges ruled that there was an illegal gerrymander and Chief Justice Roberts even opined that the maps should not be allowed to go into effect. The case in Arkansas is just as stunning as Alabama as the Black population in Arkansas went up yet the number of majority Black districts redrawn in the proposed maps went down.
Photo taken from: MSNBC News
(click or tap to enlargen)
The theme in these states is to try and dilute the voting power of Black communities lest the states have to relent and concede a seat. And with many minority communities voting Democrat than Republican the redrawing of state legislative and congressional districts to accommodate another majority Black district would in essence be flipping a likely Republican district to one that would probably end up Democratic.
This is power politics being played at the expense of the Black community in many states, challenging their ability to participate fully in the democratic process. With the future of legislative proposals and elections being defeated by very slim margins , it is imperative that the selection of our representatives not be determined by the exclusion of a bloc of voters.
The representatives who cast their votes in state legislative house and Congress on issues that affect the lives of every citizen should be selected because they heard what their constituents have to say and not because only a selected few live in a particular district. The remaining eleven states can help to remedy this problem by choosing state maps that are not based on trying to exclude a selected minority community. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, 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
United States Department of Justice (DOJ) – guidance on enforcement of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
National Democratic Redistricting Committee (NRDC) – non – profit group head by former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to combat gerrymandering and redistricting abuses.
The 2022 Wage-Gap Spiral: State and Federal action to Cap Nurses’ Pay
The 2022 Wage-Gap Spiral: State and Federal action to Cap Nurses’ Pay
Economic Policy Brief #135 | By: Alexandra Ellis | February 15, 202
Header photo taken from: Nurse.org
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more economic policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Dallas Morning News
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
As the pandemic comes to its third year, state legislatures across the US are looking to cap nurses’ pay. States are calling for local and federal regulation of nursing agencies who employ nursing home nurses and travel nurses. Proponents of capping agency nurses pay suggest there has been a significant increase of hourly wage for agency nurses.
They claim the agencies are “price gouging.” However, they ignore the fact that (1) inflation plays a role and demand is created by (2) regular staff at hospitals being overworked and underpaid for their time. Yet, regular staff are expected to work overtime during surges in unsafe conditions. During the pandemic, regular nurses are subjected to a very high staff to patient ratio.
Policy Analysis
Currently two states cap nurses’ pay: Massachusetts and Minnesota. During the pandemic, both states addressed inflation and demands by increasing their caps by 35 percent. For example, in Minnesota, legislators increased the cap to a max of 58.08/hour per hour and 99.90/hour for holiday pay.
Other state legislatures are advocating for limiting travel nurses’ wages. Connecticut, New York, and Pennsylvania are among these states. During the pandemic, Connecticut forbid profiteering off the COVID-19 emergency. A joint conglomerate in New York state including, New York State Health Care Facilities Association (NYSHFA) and New York State Center for Assisted Living (NYSCAL), tried to introduce legislation to limit state budget expenses available to pay nurse staffing agencies but failed.
In November of 2021, Pennsylvania Representative Timothy R. Bonner wrote in an open letter to the public showing intent to introduce legislation that caps travel nurses pay. This legislation proposal has the support of Pennsylvania Health Care Association (PHCA). The memorandum cites concern that nursing homes are struggling to afford agency personnel, such as travel nurses.
Nursing homes have lost many of their regular staff due to the demand from the COVID-19 pandemic. Regular staff cite unsafe working conditions for both patients and nurses as their main concern. Nursing homes and hospitals have had to additionally rely on agency health personnel because of employee burnout.
Representative Boomer asserts that nursing homes and hospitals were charged substantially more for agency personnel during the pandemic, taking advantage of Medicaid and Medicare reimbursements.
Photo taken from: WBFO, an NPR member station
(click or tap to enlargen)
As wages mushroomed, Representative Boomer argues that staffing agencies have depleted the Medicaid budget. Instead of addressing unsafe conditions for both patients and nurses, Representative Boomer thinks the best way to solve the problem is to cap wages. This argument ignores public health needs and inflation.
On the federal level, many individuals and health care groups are soliciting White House intervention. One letter sent to the White House had over 200 individuals demanding regulation of health personnel staffing agencies. Another letter involved groups like the American Health Care Association (AHCA), National Center for Assisted Living, LeadingAge and a coalition of long-term care and senior living organizations. Their letter to White House officials seeking Congressional reform to cap travel nurses’ pay. Like Representative Boomer, they cite price gouging as their main concern. Most recently, the AHCA contacted the Federal Trade Commission to help regulate and cap travel nurses’ pay.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
A petition on Change.org has been circulating social media and nursing blogs. This petition was created by Nurse Jane and Impact in Healthcare. It currently has over half-a million signatures with the goal of a million. The petition calls for safe staffing for patients and healthcare workers. They plan to send this letter to the Joint Commission. See link:
Impact in Healthcare, a nonprofit group, also has a GoFund me to help support educating people about what patients and nurses are experiencing during COVID-19:
https://www.gofundme.com/f/donate-impact-in-healthcare-to-keep-up-the-fight.
To learn more about the current wage-gap spiral from the Wall Street Journal Podcast:
Situation Update: The Ukraine Crisis
Situation Update: The Ukraine Crisis
Foreign Policy Brief #143 | By: Abran C | February 15, 2022
Header photo taken from: The Telegraph
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: The Independent
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Tensions and the threat of war in Europe remain high in the ongoing crisis in Ukraine. On February 10th Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and British Secretary of State Lizz Truss held talks in Moscow to air grievances and attempt to engage in diplomacy. The talks were unfruitful and the exchange between the two foreign ministers was described as “icy”. The Russian Foreign Minister even stated at one point to reporters “I’m honestly disappointed that what we have is a conversation between a mute and a deaf person”.
On the same day, Russia and Belarus (which shares a 1084 mile border with Ukraine) began war games which are scheduled to last for 10 days. Both countries insist that the drills are for training purposes and are not a threat. On February 11th White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan instructed Americans in Ukraine to evacuate within the next 48 hours as the war games have escalated fears of an imminent invasion. The UK, Japan, India, Norway, Estonia, and Latvia have also urged their citizens to leave Ukraine as soon as possible.
On February 12th thousands of Ukrainians marched in the capital Kyiv to present unity against Russian aggression. On February 15th German Chancellor Olaf Scholz headed to Moscow in a high-stakes diplomatic effort to avert war and reiterated that sanctions would be imposed in the event of an invasion. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has called for a “Day of Unity” to take place on February 16th in response to the day some foreign media saw as the possible day of a Russian invasion.
Kyiv released a decree calling for all villages and towns in Ukraine to fly the country’s flags on Wednesday, and for the citizens of the nation to sing the national anthem.
At a meeting with President Vladimir Putin, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov signaled Monday that Russia was ready to continue talking to the West about the grievances that have led to the crisis to avoid a widespread conflict.
Photo taken from: Thai PBS World
(click or tap to enlargen)
President Biden also spoke directly with Russian President Vladimir Putijn warning that Russia would face severe consequences if it invaded Ukraine. He encouraged Putin to engage in talks with the US and Europe on the future of European security.
The U.S. House Select Committee Investigation of the January 6 Attack on the Capitol: Part 8
The U.S. House Select Committee Investigation of the January 6 Attack on the Capitol: Part 8
Social Justice Policy Brief #32 | By: Erika Shannon | February 11, 2022
Header photo taken from: Newsweek
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more social justice policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Los Angeles Times
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The investigation into the events that unfolded in our nation’s Capitol has been underway for several months and the Committee has interviewed hundreds of people and subpoenaed dozens. The Committee has also amassed tons of information; from text messages to data from social media sites. There is much to sort through. While the committee’s five teams work to sort through the information collected, the House Select Committee itself continues to subpoena persons of interest to figure out exactly what happened on January 6, 2021, and how they can help prevent something like it from happening again.
The most recent person to be subpoenaed by the committee is former White House trade advisor Peter Navarro. According to public reports and his own book, Navarro was involved in the efforts to delay Congress’s certification of the 2020 election and attempt to change the election of results. He also reportedly worked alongside Steve Bannon and others to develop and implement a plan to change the election’s outcome; in his book, Navarro refers to this plan as the “Green Bay Sweep.” He alleges that former President Trump was onboard with the plan. Since Navarro has not shied away from speaking about his role in delaying the certification of 2020 election results, the committee is hoping he will willingly come forth and testify along with the more than 500 people who have given information already.
The House Select Committee has also subpoenaed fourteen “alternate electors” for former President Trump from seven states. The states include Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The fourteen individuals are alleged to have met on December 14, 2020 in the seven aforementioned states (that were carried by President Biden) and submitted bogus slates of Electoral College votes for Former President Trump. They then transmitted the purported Electoral College certificates to Congress
Policy Analysis
Multiple people advised former President Trump to try to justify delaying or blocking the certification of the election during the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021 based on the actions of these alternate electors. The individuals subpoenaed include Nancy Cottle, Loraine Pellegrino, David Shafer, Shawn Still, Kathy Berden, Mayra Rodriguez, Jewll Powdrell, Deborah Maestas, Michael McDonald, James DeGraffenreid, Bill Bachenberg, Lisa Patton, Andrew Hitt, and Kelly Ruh.
The January 6th Committee continues to face its share of obstacles as the investigation carries on. Besides dealing with people refusing to comply with subpoenas, they have also faced criticism along the way. Recently, U.S. Representative Jim Jordan came out and questioned why the Committee has more than a dozen former prosecutors on its panel when it is not a criminal inquiry; Jordan is saying that the congressional probe is reaching too far. The Representative himself is currently refusing to cooperate with the panel after being asked to voluntarily describe the nature of his conversations with the former President ahead of the January 6 riots. While the Committee has not yet commented on his allegations, Jordan may be trying to draw focus away from his role in the delaying of the certification of the 2020 election results and Capitol riot.
Photo taken from: The Washington Post
(click or tap to enlargen)
The Committee has been able to get access to Presidential documents and records that Trump took with him when he left office. By law these documents should have been turned over to the National Archives. Because they were not the Archives had to send a team to Trump’s winter home – Mara Lago – and reposes these records. Trump also is said to have torn up many documents and records while in the White House, according to eye witnesses.
The Committee is still waiting on certain people to come forth and give information, such as the former President’s daughter Ivanka Trump and talk show host Sean Hannity.
It is likely more people will be subpoenaed in the coming months as we wait for the investigation to eventually come to a head. It is clear that figuring out the truth will not be an easy feat, but the Committee is comprised of experienced representatives who have pledged to take an unbiased approach to this investigation.
The events that occurred on January 6, 2021 were unprecedented and posed a threat to our democracy here in the U.S. It’s important that the panel ascertains how to prevent an occurrence like this in the future.
This brief is part of an ongoing series in the Select Committee’s investigation; further updates will be provided as the investigation continues.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
To read subpoenas and access other committee news, visit their media page
New Study Shows Americans are Dying Early from Air Pollution
New Study Shows Americans are Dying Early from Air Pollution
Environment Policy Brief #135 | By: Jacob Morton | February 9, 2022
Header photo taken from: Newsweek
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more environmental policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Air Purifier MD
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
A new study published by the Health Effects Institute shows that Federal air pollution regulations are not doing enough to protect our elders from serious illness and death. The Health Effects Institute (HEI), is a non-profit corporation established by Congress in 1980 as “an independent research organization to provide high-quality, impartial, and relevant science on the health effects of air pollution.” HEI states that it “typically receives balanced funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the worldwide motor vehicle industry. Other public and private organizations periodically support special projects or certain research programs,” including funding from fossil fuel companies,” as reported by the New York Times. The recent report published by HEI shows that Americans 65 and older are still at risk of death from exposure to fine soot pollution in the air, even at the levels allowed by the Federal government.
Soot is a byproduct of the incomplete burning of carbon-containing materials. The fine black or brown powder that characterizes soot and often referred to as particulate matter or PM 2.5 (because its width is 2.5 microns or less), “may contain a number of carcinogens, including arsenic, cadmium, and chromium.” Typically, the general public can be exposed to soot through engine exhaust, furnaces, fireplaces, and particulate emissions from any combustion source, including industrial smokestack emissions.
The study found that if the Federal limits on allowable soot pollution had been just slightly lower, “as many as 143,000 deaths could have been prevented over the course of a decade.” In 1990, Harvard University’s “Six Cities” study found that “living in heavily polluted cities can shave two to three years off a person’s life.” The tiny particles in soot can enter the lungs and bloodstream to affect lung function, exacerbate asthma, and trigger heart attacks and other serious illnesses. It has been found that exposure to airborne PM 2.5 potentially contributes to roughly 20,000 deaths each year and has long been linked to respiratory illness and impaired cognitive development in children.
However, this new study published by HEI is the first in the United States to document the negative health impacts of air pollution from soot on people who live in rural areas and towns with little industrial activity. The study, led by Harvard professor of biostatistics, Francesca Dominici, over the course of four years, examined health data from 68.5 million Medicare recipients across the United States. The age requirement to qualify for Medicare is 65 years or older, and as such, this study documents the negative impacts of soot pollution specifically on older Americans.
Currently, the national standard for allowable pollution levels of PM 2.5 is set at a yearly average of 12 micrograms per cubic meter, a level higher than that recommended by the World Health Organization. The Biden administration has, however, considered strengthening those regulations. Dominici and her team of researchers concluded that 143,257 deaths could have been prevented between 2006 and 2016 if the standard had been tightened to 10 micrograms per cubic meter.
Every five years, the EPA is required, by law, to review the latest scientific findings on the health impacts of soot pollution, and to update the national standard for soot and PM 2.5 accordingly. Despite the growing scientific evidence available when the most recent review was conducted, the Trump administration chose not to strengthen the standard. However, HEI noted that “emissions of traditional pollutants like PM 2.5 have dropped significantly since the 1970s because of the use of cleaner automobile fuels and the rise of natural gas in power generation instead of coal.”
Policy Analysis
Hazel Chandler, a 76-year-old living in Phoenix, Arizona and a consultant to the non-profit group, Moms Clean Air Force, says she is a prime example of someone living with the cumulative effects of more than 40 years of air pollution. Chandler says, “I can tell by the pressure in my lungs and in my chest, the amount of coughing … I can tell if I wake up with a really bad cough, it’s probably a high pollution day.” Chandler says she moved to Phoenix when she was about 30 years old “and it still has impacted my ability to breathe.” She says, “If it’s affecting older people, what is it going to do to the children who are living here and breathing this their whole life?”
Jennifer L. Peel, head of epidemiology at Colorado State University’s Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, says there is an inherent challenge in studying areas that are not well monitored, such as rural communities and non-industrial towns, because it can be difficult to validate levels of exposure to pollution. However, Dr. Peel, who was not part of the Harvard research team and independently reviewed the study, called it an “amazing first step” and said, overall, the study was the most comprehensive she had seen.
Despite the data, some are not convinced that stronger regulations are the best solution. Lawyer and energy lobbyist, Jeffrey Holmstead, who served under both Bush administrations, including as assistant administrator for Air & Radiation for the EPA, and is now a Partner and head of the Environmental Strategies Group at Bracewell LLP (formerly Bracewell & Giuliani, the international law firm of Rudy Giuliani), says, “It’s a question of how much.”
Holmstead warns that a significant reduction in allowable limits would be “very costly” for companies, and notes that “in communities that do not have major industrial centers, much of the fine soot pollution comes from automobiles, making it difficult for state governments to regulate.” He says, “At what point do you say we’re going to prohibit any kind of combustion engines because everything contributes to PM 2.5?” Holmstead argues, “If you set a level that is overly-stringent, you basically prohibit any new economic development in certain parts of the country.”
Photo taken from: The New York Times
(click or tap to enlargen)
As we find ourselves at a critical juncture, deciding how best to mitigate an impending global climate disaster while trying to balance what policy analysts call the “Three E’s of sustainable development: Economy, Ecology, and Equity,” we must ask ourselves, what are we willing to sacrifice for economic development? Further, how can we reimagine economic development as we transition away from a fossil fuel dependent society? Other studies have already linked fine soot pollution to higher death rates from COVID-19, and we have seen that Black and other communities of color are at greater risk because they are more likely to be located near highways, power plants and other industrial facilities.
How do we respond when Daniel Greenbaum, president of the Health Effects Institute, reports that, “We found a risk of dying early from exposure to air pollution, even at very low levels of air pollution across the United States”? As far as professor Dominici is concerned, the new data is “highly significant” and “is important evidence for the EPA to consider.” Dominici says, “If we were to reduce PM 2.5, we would be saving a substantial amount of lives.” According to a spokesperson for the EPA, the agency is expected to propose a draft rule for a new national standard for fine soot pollution and PM 2.5 by summer and to issue a final rule by the spring of 2023.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Clean Air Task Force (catf.us): Through technology innovation, policy change, and thought leadership, Clean Air Task Force drives impact to prevent catastrophic climate change through pragmatic solutions.
Health Effects Institute (healtheffects.org): A nonprofit corporation chartered in 1980 to provide high-quality, impartial, and relevant science on the health effects of air pollution. HEI has funded more than 330 research projects in North America, Europe, Asia, and Latin America, which have been published in more than 260 reports.
Moms Clean Air Force (MCAF): A community of over one million parents united against air and climate pollution to protect our children’s health. MCAF fights for Justice in Every Breath, recognizing the importance of equitable solutions in addressing air pollution and climate change.
Writer’s Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Even low levels of soot can be deadly to older people, research finds. The New York Ledger. (2022, January 26). Retrieved February 8, 2022, from https://thenyledger.com/business/even-low-levels-of-soot-can-be-deadly-to-older-people-research-finds/
Friedman, L. (2022, January 27). Minor soot levels linked to older American deaths, study finds – The Boston Globe. BostonGlobe.com. Retrieved February 8, 2022, from https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/01/26/nation/minor-soot-levels-linked-older-american-deaths-study-finds/
Health Effects Institute. (2022, February 7). Assessing adverse health effects of long-term exposure to low levels of ambient air pollution: Implementation of causal inference methods. Health Effects Institute. Retrieved February 8, 2022, from https://www.healtheffects.org/publication/assessing-adverse-health-effects-long-term-exposure-low-levels-ambient-air-pollution-0
Soot – cancer-causing substances. National Cancer Institute. (2019, February 20). Retrieved February 8, 2022, from https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/substances/soot
Mental Health Needs of Children and Youth Escalate During COVID-19 Era
Mental Health Needs of Children and Youth Escalate During COVID-19 Era
Education Policy Brief #69 | By: Yelena Korshunov | February 9, 2022
Header photo taken from: TBA
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more education policy briefs from the top dashboard
Author’s Photo
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, everybody said that Greg was an exceptional basketball player. He was a leader of his middle school basketball team. He shot a basketball at the school court with his friends every single day after class, unless it was pouring rain. When the COVID-19 tsunami came, Greg had to quarantine, as did all of his friends. Both Greg’s parents lost their jobs and struggled to pay daily expenses. Though unemployment and economic impact payments were a great support for the family, their dinners became modest.
Greg spent time mostly in his room chatting with friends, attending remote lessons, and playing video games. There was no basketball anymore – playgrounds and courts were shut then. Greg’s parents stayed home day by day watching the news on TV. And through the closed door of his room Greg heard tensive voices of TV reporters speaking about COVID cases, ventilators, and deaths. Greg didn’t notice the moment when a sticky fear started to shadow him. One day his mom opened Greg’s door calling him for dinner. Greg jumped up from his chair and slammed the door. “Don’t enter my room! No one will enter my room anymore! Never! Just leave your dinner near my door!”
According to the US Department of Education report — Supporting Child and Student Social, Emotional, and Mental Health Needs —emergency department visits related to mental health increased 24% for 5–11-year-olds and 31% for 12–17-year-olds between January and October 2020. Between March and June of 2020, more than 25% of American parents reported that their child experienced declines in mental health and 14% reported increases in behavior problems. In a survey conducted in April and May 2020, one in four youth of ages 13–19 reported an increase in sleep loss due to worry, feeling unhappy or depressed, feeling constantly under strain, and loss of confidence in themselves. A CDC report found one quarter of respondents ages 18–24 had contemplated suicide in the 30 days prior to completing the survey.
Many young people continue to struggle with mental health challenges even upon return to in-person learning. They exhibit poor participation, academic challenges, and behaviors. In young children, mental health issues refer to the developing child’s ability to form relationships with peers and adults, handle and express emotions, explore the environment, and learn. Researchers have found that all children’s experiences, even in infancy, directly affect their social, emotional, and behavioral development.
Policy Analysis
Researchers and educators are developing tools that will rapidly meet the needs of kids and youth who experience mental health issues during the pandemic. Their strategies can be applied, not just to COVID-19 behavioral issues, but to help meet the mental health needs of all children.
For example, supporting students’ social, emotional, and behavioral development at early ages may prevent the need for long-term services and continuous therapy. Efficient therapists apply strategies that parents and caregivers are also encouraged to use for supporting young kids’ proper social-emotional development. Some of these strategies are listening to a child actively and empathetically, speaking with a calm voice, making yourself available when a child wants to talk to you or interact with you (e.g., play, walk, cook together), helping child to understand a consequence of behavior, establishing rules, modeling positive talk and adequate reaction to unpleasant issues, teaching a child to express frustration by words instead of crying or having behavior.
Preventative strategies should also be a priority. School counselors, psychologists, social workers, teachers, and school leaders need to be especially farsighted and extremely attentive to children’s and students’ behavioral change, attitude, and performance. Schools should integrate social-emotional learning in a curriculum, train staff to recognize mental health indicators and properly react to students’ behavior and emotional misbalance, review discipline policy to ensure equity, have zero tolerance for bullying, be culturally responsive, build safe and supportive environment sin the school building, and extend extracurricular activities to meet interests of diverse students’ population.
Photo taken from: U.S. Department of Education
(click or tap to enlargen)
Parents and caregivers can prevent kids’ mental health issues by spending time and enjoying activities together, expressing sincere interest in children’s life and hobbies, welcoming children’s friends and monitoring internet interactions, communicating openly and honestly, discussing family plans and values together, supervising children to facilitate healthy decision making, being aware about child’s school life, and being engaged in school activities.
Averting mental health cases is more efficient than long-term therapeutic processes for already existing mental health issues.
The pandemic has highlighted alarming trends in mental health, and without increasing the number of high-quality mental health services, the increased mental health needs of children and youth will not be met. Even prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, 13–22% of school-aged youth experienced a mental health challenge.
Today, schools returning to in-person learning have new resources in the American Rescue Plan’s Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief fund (ARP ESSER) to support their hard work.
ARP ESSER resources are aimed at increasing the number of social workers, school counselors, school nurses, and school psychologists available to support students.
As President Biden has stated, we have an opportunity to “build back better.” One of the ways to build back better is to integrate the current research and evidence on the importance of prevention and intervention practices to address the mental health needs of children and youth.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Learning to Help Your Child and Your Family
US Department of Education. Supporting Child and Student Social, Emotional, and Mental Health Needs
How the U.S. Should Counter Russian Aggression in Ukraine
How the U.S. Should Counter Russian Aggression in Ukraine
Foreign Policy Brief #142 | By: Abran C | February 9, 2022
Header photo taken from: Atlantic Council
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” ]
The crisis and possible looming war in Ukraine have historical implications that include more than just Russia and Ukraine. Though the ties between Russia and Ukraine run far back into history, the conflict also involves the historical involvement of the United States and its NATO allies in Europe. The main issue and the main demand of Russia is the expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe. Ukraine has in the past and continues to seek NATO membership. The U.S. promised during negotiations with the Soviet Union on the reunification of Germany that NATO would not move further Eastward into the Russian sphere of influence.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, multiple Eastern European states and former Soviet satellite countries joined the alliance. In 1999, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic joined amid much Russian opposition. In 2004 Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia entered into the treaty. Followed by Albania, and Croatia in 2009, Montenegro in 2017, and North Macedonia in 2020. As NATO looked further Eastward towards Ukraine and Georgia, Russian anxieties grew. At the 2008 Bucharest Summit, NATO offered Ukraine eventual membership into the Alliance, drawing strong condemnation from Putin. The current crisis began in 2014 when then Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich rejected closer ties to the EU and embraced Russia, angering the Ukrainian public. In the same year, Russia moved to annex Crimea and as of late 2021, has more than 100,000 troops stationed along the Ukrainian border.
Both leaders of Russia and China met on February 4th, the day of the Opening Ceremony for the Winter Olympics in Xi Jinping’s first meeting with a foreign leader since the beginning of the pandemic. The two issued joint statements opposing the enlargement of NATO and their commitment to their “strategic coordination” internationally. At the same time President Biden met with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to present a united front against Russian aggression. The two reaffirmed commitments to combat Russian threats to Ukraine and Europe and the German Chancellor stated he could shut down the Nord Stream 2 pipeline which would supply Russian natural gas to Germany and provide a large source of revenue for Russia, something Germany had been unwilling to do.
Last month Biden approved $200 million of “lethal aid” to Ukraine and more recently ordered 3,000 troops additional to be stationed in Poland and Romania. In a news conference last month Biden stated “I think what you’re going to see is that Russia will be held accountable if it invades. And it depends on what it does. It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do,” Biden said.
Policy Analysis
So then what should the U.S. and NATO do to counter Russia? The situation has continued to devolve. Peace talks so far have not proved substantive, and each side is attempting to solidify unity with their respective allies. Although the actions taken by Russia in Crimea and along the rest of the Ukrainian border violate international law and are clear acts of aggression, Russian anxiety is not inconceivable. Were Russia or China to establish military bases or place weapons in the United States’ sphere of influence, we certainly would not accept this, and rightfully so. NATO itself was created in order to contain the Soviet Union. After its fall, the alliance continued to expand and included former Soviet Republics. This context matters and must be considered when dealing with and analyzing the Ukrainian situation. Still, Russia should not be able to engage in incursions into Ukraine or Georgia as it has in the past, without consequences. So what can be done? The U.S. has already sent military aid to Ukraine and troops to the region. These actions have not at all changed the Russian stance but may have provided reassurances to Eastern European states. Sending more troops to the region will likely only escalate the situation, a build-up for build-up along borders will not ease tensions as we had seen from East-West standoffs throughout the Cold War.
Photo taken from: Financial Post
(click or tap to enlargen)
As military intervention has already been ruled out, even if Russia were to invade Ukraine, the economic domain should be the primary arena for countering Russia. Economic isolation would put pressure on Russia that may not influence its behavior immediately but down the line could become helpful to stopping further incursions. Russian oligarchs who are a pillar of support for Putin should have assets in the West frozen and held. Pressing Germany to go ahead with its cancelation of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline would also be an effective tactic. The EU investing further in green technology and away from Russian gas would help achieve goals of decarbonization as well as diminishing Russian leverage over Europe.
The U.S. could also attempt to impose an export control ban to stop high-tech U.S. technology such as semiconductors, which are necessary for military weaponry, from reaching Russia. Lastly the U.S. and NATO should take into consideration Russia’s demands and try to find some sort of middle ground even if it means making concessions. Similar to when President Kennedy removed Jupiter missiles from Turkey in order to avoid Soviet weapons in Cuba, today’s leaders should take a lesson from the past and remember that diplomacy cannot be a zero-sum game, and sometimes it’s worth giving up a little in order for gain a lot, and what there is to gain is peace.
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
Democrats and Republicans Stake Out Positions In Upcoming Supreme Court Confirmation Fight;
Democrats and Republicans Stake Out Positions In Upcoming Supreme Court Confirmation Fight
Civil Rights Policy Brief #181 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | February 2, 2022
Header photo taken from: Roll Call
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more civil policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Bloomberg
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
In February 2016 Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia passed away. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell later issued a statement stating that there would be no hearing or vote on a nominee submitted by President Barack Obama and that the choice should be left to the next President after the upcoming 2016 presidential election. President Obama eventually nominated Chief Judge Merrick Garland. But with the 2016 election still nine months away the Senate took no action on the nomination. After Donald J. Trump won the presidency, he subsequently nominated Neil Gorsuch to the seat that Merrick Garland had been nominated. Gorsuch was eventually confirmed by the Senate.
On September 18, 2020, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away only six weeks before the 2020 presidential election. Despite the short time period and contrary to Senator McConnell’s reasoning that a Supreme Court Justice vacancy occurring during a presidential election year should be selected by the winner of that election, Senator McConnell vowed that a nominee submitted by President Trump would get a Senate vote. President Donald Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett and McConnell engineered a floor vote only eight days before the 2020 election. On October 26, 2020 Judge Barrett was confirmed 52 – 48.
On January 27, 2022 Associate Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer announced his intention to retire from the Supreme Court at the end of the 2021 – 2022 Supreme Court term. Biden also reiterated his campaign promise to nominate the first Black woman to the Supreme Court. LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis
While nominations to the Supreme Court are always hardly fought battles that often leave both Republicans and Democrats bruised and battered, the announcement that Justice Stephen Breyer would retire from the Court has raised old grudges and even brought a new element to disagree with in the upcoming confirmation hearings.
Democrats are still fuming over the previous three nominations made to the Supreme Court. And now, their frustrations over those prior proceedings could inform how Democrats approach the upcoming confirmation hearings. Democrats still believe that the Republicans “stole a Supreme Court seat” in 2016 by refusing to grant even a hearing or a vote to President Barack Obama’s nominee. This was completely unprecedented. And those frustrations came to the forefront again in 2020 when Senator McConnell went against his own words and reasoning to rush the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett one week before the presidential election. This was to ensure that a Republican president would submit the nomination instead of a Democratic President. Because of the hypocrisy of Senator McConnell, Democrats will likely take an aggressive approach to securing President Biden’s nominee with the thought that a nominee should be confirmed prior to a possible switch to a Republican Senate majority after the 2022 elections. Any delay in confirming Biden’s nominee could lead to more Republican obstruction akin to what they did in delaying and eventually derailing the Merrick Garland nomination for nine months in 2016.
Photo taken from: Goad News
(click or tap to enlargen)
During his 2016 campaign and in order to give his campaign a boost, President Biden made a promise to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court should a seat open up. While it looks like Biden seems intent on keeping that promise, his promise has infuriated many Republicans and conservatives. Many see his campaign promise as an “affirmative action” pick instead of choosing the most qualified candidate regardless of race or gender. While this issue is looking more and more as a likely rallying cry for those opposed to a possible Biden nominee these critics have overlooked an important point in staking out their position. A person of color or a woman chosen as the nominee won’t be chosen only because they are a person of color or a woman. They are almost certain to be just as qualified as any male or white candidate out there.
For Republicans and other critics to oppose this nomination by first insinuating that a person of color or a woman is not qualified – without even knowing who the nominee is yet – shows how out of touch these critics are to what many women and persons of color have accomplished. The first impression when mentioning any candidate should be on the qualifications the candidate possesses and not that they are not qualified simply because they are a woman or person of color.
Names have already been tossed around and among the Black women being mentioned there is a California state supreme court justice (Leondra Kruger), a woman who clerked for outgoing Justice Breyer (Ketanji Brown Jackson) and a woman considered an expert in employment and labor law (J. Michelle Childs).
Clearly, these women are women who have worked hard and are supremely qualified for a seat on the Supreme Court. It would be disappointing to have their candidacies dismissed because of accusations that they are being considered only because they are a woman or a person of color.
President Biden has not revealed whom he will nominate to the Supreme Court yet but it looks like battle lines are being drawn and positions are being staked out to support or oppose the eventual nominee. All that is left now is to find out whom the President will choose and let the confirmation hearings play out. 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 Bar Association (ABA) – guideline on how (ABA) Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary rates federal judicial nominees.
Demand Justice – non – profit group’s webpage on proposal on how to diversify the federal bench.
Two Federal Agencies Clash Over the Rollout of 5G Technology
Two Federal Agencies Clash Over the Rollout of 5G Technology
Technology Policy Brief #68 | By: Salim Rizvi | February 7, 2022
Header photo taken from: Getty Images
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more technology policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Day to News (.com)
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
After weeks of haggling and scrambling over the rollouts of new 5G wireless network services near airports, the federal regulator of airlines operations i.e. The Federal Aviation Administration (F.A.A.) and wireless communication companies have agreed upon a system to fly planes safely even as the new wireless technology is rolled out.
The 5G service was scheduled to roll out in Dec, 2021 but concerns were raised by airlines industry about the interference with the key device in cockpits that helps pilots to land planes safely. The radio altimeter uses the same frequencies as the C-band being used by the 5G wireless technology. There were fears of disruptions of passenger and cargo flights due to the rollouts of 5G wireless services which carry possible risk of interference with the landing equipment of the planes.
As suggested by some airlines, the F.A.A. had restricted the 5G network services from beaming signals within a 2-mile radius of major airports.
Policy Analysis
The airlines industry and the FAA have been at odds with the telecom companies and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) over the risk of interference with the key aviation signals. FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr openly criticized the FAA for restricting the 5G technology roll out..The telecom companies cite the example of some European countries where 5G technology is being used around airports. But the aviation industry points out that in Europe 5G technology uses 3.4 to 3.8 GHz, which is the slower range of spectrum, while US 5G uses C-Band which is from 4.2 to 4.4 GHz, the range that could interfere with the radio frequency of radar altimeters in the cockpit.
Now, with the new understanding, the F.A.A. and the telecom companies seem to be working on a long-term solution. They are working to get the exact locations of the 5G transmitters near airports and to try and mitigate the frequency interference.
The F.A.A. says the telecom companies have shared more information about the locations of 5G transmitters, which it says may help in analyzing the data and the interference risk to the key aviation devices. The airlines industry has been calling for the upgrade of the radio altimeter devices in the planes which ensures safe operations of flights along with the new wireless technology.
Photo taken from: Tech Tip Saz
(click or tap to enlargen)
Why do we need this 5G technology?
This is the fifth-generation technology in which the major telecom companies in US have invested billions of dollars.This new wireless technology is being presented as the technology which guides the future of businesses and communications the world over. The telecom experts say the new 5G wireless technology makes internet access faster which is being touted by the telecom companies as good for both businesses and individual customers, as it improves access to internet.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
FCC – Federal Communications Commission
https://www.fcc.gov/document/carr-statement-biden-5g-delay
FAA – Federal Aviation Administration
https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-statements-5g
Airlines for America – This organization advocates on behalf of the US Airlines industry. The organization includes members like Delta Airlines, United Airlines as well as shipping companies like UPS and FedEx.
A Judge’s Gavel Keeps the Oil Drills from Spinning – for the Time Being
A Judge’s Gavel Keeps the Oil Drills from Spinning – for the Time Being
Environmental Policy Brief #134 | By: Todd J. Broadman | February 2, 2022
Header photo taken from: KCRW
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more environmental policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: CNBC
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
On January 27, the country’s largest ever oil and gas lease sales were canceled by a federal judge. A total of 308 tracts totaling nearly 1.7 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico had been auctioned to thirty-three oil companies – Shell, BP, Chevron and Exxon Mobil among them. $192 million had been paid to the government for drilling rights.
In his ruling, Judge Rudolph Contreras of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, said that the Interior Department “acted arbitrarily and capriciously in excluding foreign consumption from their greenhouse gas emissions.” And by this, Judge Contreras meant that the administration was required to calculate the greenhouse gas impact if the leases were not exercised and foreign oil sources were used as a substitute. Under the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, the federal government must factor-in environmental damage before issuing such leases. The Department of the Interior is responsible for overseeing this process.
Back in early 2020, a pillar of candidate Biden’s campaign had been: “no more drilling on federal lands, period. Period, period, period.” And true to his word, soon after taking office, he signed an executive order that halted the issuance of new leases. In response to that order though, Republican attorneys general from 13 states sued and won on the grounds that lease sales must be held for those with scheduled auction dates (from the previous administration). Rather than face possible contempt of court charges, Interior Secretary Deb Haaland proceeded with the sale.
Prominent environmental organizations brought the lawsuit and are pleased with the outcome. Earthjustice’s counsel Brettny Hardy, said “This is huge, it requires the bureau to go back to the drawing board and actually consider the climate costs before it offers these leases for sale.” Hallie Templeton of Friends of the Earth, added that “We will continue to hold the Biden administration accountable for making unlawful decisions that contradict its pledge to take swift, urgent action on code red climate and environmental justice priorities.”
Over and above a warming climate, the unfolding environmental disaster in Peru underscores the additional ongoing risks of drilling at sea. It is now estimated that approximately 12,000 barrels of oil – equivalent to half a million gallons – spilled near the port city of Callao when tsunami waves triggered by a volcanic explosion caused a rupture of the terminal’s submarine pipeline. Peru’s Foreign Ministry has described it as the worst ecological disaster in recent times.
Policy Analysis
In line with Biden’s pledge, The International Energy Agency has declared that in order to avoid climate disaster, there can be no new major fossil fuel projects. In fact, three congressional Democrats had filed a court brief in support of the environment groups in this case. Raúl Grijalva, chair of the House natural resources committee, said “These leases were a climate disaster waiting to happen.”
The American Petroleum Institute, representing the oil firms whose leases were canceled, see this federal court decision very differently: “We are reviewing this disappointing decision and considering our options. Offshore energy development plays a critical role in strengthening our nation’s economy and energy security,” said their spokesperson.
The ruling means that the Interior Department must now carry out a new environmental analysis that accounts for the greenhouse gas emissions that would result from the eventual development and production of the leases. And once a comprehensive analysis is in hand, the agency will then have the option of again holding a sale for such leases. Meanwhile, the administration has proposed another round of oil and gas sales in Wyoming, Colorado, Montana and other states.
Photo taken from: The Houston Chronicle
(click or tap to enlargen)
The country’s dependence upon fossil fuels will continue to exert pressure upon an administration that is putting in place policies that transition away from carbon. Although this particular win is hopeful, the longer-term tug of war played out in the courts will likely not be won by environmental groups but by economic interests that tie the country’s deep dependence on petroleum to growth and jobs.
Though a step in the right direction, even with a moratorium on new leases on federal lands, Biden’s promised CO2 reduction to over 50% below 2005 levels by 2030, is unlikely to be realized.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
https://earthjustice.org/ wields the power of law and the strength of partnership to protect people’s health, to preserve magnificent places and wildlife, to advance clean energy, and to combat climate change.
https://biologicaldiversity.org/ works to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ provides data-rich, actionable perspectives on key issues shaping the practice of law and preview what to expect across the legal landscape in the year ahead.