#policy reform

[ivygorgon]

👨‍👩‍👧‍👦Out with Incest Laws: Reconsider Blood Quantum Laws in Native Reparations

An open letter to State Governors & Legislatures

1 so far! Help us get to 5 signers!

I am writing to express profound concerns about the continued reliance on Blood Quantum Laws, or Indian Blood Laws, in Native Reparations Programs. These laws, established by federal and state governments as far back as 1705, define Native American status based on fractions of Native American ancestry, perpetuating harmful consequences for tribal communities and some, alarmingly, terminating before just 5 generations.

The use of Blood Quantum Laws has led to detrimental effects on Native American families and communities. It has incentivized harmful family planning practices, compelling individuals to marry within close kin networks to maintain "pure bloodlines." This practice not only violates individual autonomy but also jeopardizes genetic diversity and the long-term viability of tribal populations.

Of utmost concern is the declining population within many tribal communities, with some nearing critical thresholds of fewer than 1000 individuals. This situation is further exacerbated by the principles of population biology, particularly the 50/500 rule, which underscores the need for a minimum population of 500 individuals to reduce genetic drift and ensure sustained viability. It is troubling to note that these laws inadvertently encourage cousin marriages, posing additional risks to community health and resilience.

Moreover, Blood Quantum Laws impose an arbitrary expiration date on government-funded reparations and jeopardize the cultural continuity of these communities. By tethering Native American status to ancestry thresholds, these laws undermine the diversity and autonomy of tribal enrollment criteria.

I urge policymakers to urgently reconsider the use of Blood Quantum Laws in Native Reparations Programs and advocate for a more inclusive and sustainable approach to reparations. This approach should prioritize the cultural and social integrity of Native American communities, safeguarding their continued existence and resilience for future generations.

Our villages were razed by colonizers, our ancestors were genocide survivors, and, as ever, our children bear the enduring impacts of historical injustices.

Thank you for considering these critical issues and taking decisive action to address them.

Source:

📱 Text SIGN PBDXGL to 50409

🤯 Liked it? Text FOLLOW IVYPETITIONS to 50409

[lavender-and-wheat]

I love when someone's responds to, "We should give homes to the homeless," with, "Well they're drug addicts." It tells me so much about you. There is some sort of funny leap of judgement you're arriving at:

1. So if you're someone that uses drugs, you deserve to have your home or shelter be taken away from you. Let's see, so like, millions and millions of people including your favorite celebrities, entertainment stars, politicians, and athletes should also lose their shelters. Yep, all of them deserve it if they're going to "mess with that kind of stuff."

2. Obviously while there are definitely more dangerous substances than others medically and chemically speaking, "drugs addicts" is a term used more by the general public to describe a broad, vague spectrum of people who use drugs that are not prescribed or use drugs outside of OTC instructions or doctor's advice. People who actually help provide aid, resources, and recovery for people who use substances do not refer to them as "drug addicts." They usually call them people with substance use disorders (SUD) or people with drug/substance dependence. There is a negative social connotation that society has applied to "drug addict" that suggests that they are morally inferior to people who do not use drugs.

3. Let alone that addictions are a mental illness, many homeless people experience other kinds of mental illness. And somehow, that should mean that if the express any amount of symptoms of mental illness, they should be kept out of a home or shelter? Even a mentally well person who suddenly experiences the loss of their shelter would immediately be confronted with the beginnings of mental illness. (Having to find safety from extreme heat/cold, having to find safe food to eat, having to find somewhere safe to close their eyes to rest or sleep, having to be careful in who they speak to and trust, having to keep their belongings close to their body or in sight at all times before someone else tries to steal them or destroy them, having to find clean water, having to find water facilities to wash themselves and their belongings. Literally having to go into urban survival mode, that is if you even live somewhere urban or suburban.) All of these new stresses take a toll on mental health, like no shit homeless people will experience mental illness.

4. There is nobody (except maybe people who decide to be cartoonishly evil) that WANTS to suffer through the hardest, most painful, or most dangerous parts of substance abuse. Literally no one mentally well ever has thought to themself that, "Ah yes, what a fine day, I think I would like make all of my skin peel off and rot my teeth out. Yeah, that sounds great. I would love the sensation of bugs crawling in my veins every day and to never enjoy the pleasure from a cookie ever again. Let's see what I got under the sink." Literally no one. People turn to drugs to try to get away from all the of extreme stresses and pain of being homeless. They want to stop feeling pain and misery, and nobody is helping them get to a safe place of security to get back to living in a long-term home.

I don't know how to tell you that you should be kind and caring to the people around you, including some of the most vulnerable people in your immediate community. I don't know how to tell you that everyone in your community deserves basic human needs to be met, and not have to live in constant survival.

The next time you want to respond with, "But they're a drug addict," you should be prepared to either argue how that makes them an inferior person, how that giving a homeless person shelter impacts you negatively, or how more people should be homeless.

[afracturedfacade]

AI Seems Scary, but it Will Likely do More Good Than Bad

Just venting my personal opinions all over this post, which few if any people will see anyway. Call it organizing my thoughts I guess? AI is here to stay, and that's not a bad thing, or at least it doesn't have to be. Back in the day there were doomsayers, many of them well known and respected personalities, all over the place touting the dangers of the Internet and you know what? They weren't entirely wrong. They were also more wrong than right. So-called experts have an unfortunate tendency to make wrong predictions about the future, especially in regards to emerging and novel technologies. A couple of centuries ago, there were publications on expert opinions about how it wouldn't be possible to travel at high speed (like 50kph+) because it would lead to asphyxia.

The internet is a modern mainstay, nearly as important as electricity. Without it, much of what we count on day to day will grind to a halt. Putting aside personal devices like desktops, tablets, etc. that are usually internet-connected, there are a lot of other things that rely on it. Credit card machines are internet connected and without it our increasingly cash-less society will grind to a near halt. Many companies, especially larger ones, need to 'check in' with some central sever somewhere to function effectively. That'd be gone too. A lot of information will be lost outright, or at least isolated where it isn't terribly useful. The impact of internet on both personal and business productivity is in the trillions per year. It saves time, sometimes a lot of it, and 'time is money', as they say. This is to say nothing of how much power it puts in the hands of the average person with internet access. It can empower people to find better opportunities, and advocate for themselves. It is a jumping point for learning new skills, often for free.

I see AI as much the same. If you consider its growth and accessibility, it is a lot like the internet. At first it was used mainly by governments, corporations, and in research. Institutions, in other words. The internet back in the day was mostly used by the same groups. So at first it was mainly the people that work at these places that experienced it. Then enthusiast tech-heads started getting their hands on it for personal use, experimenting with what it can do. Then there was limited public access in the form of AI assistants like Siri, Google Assistant, Alexa, Bixby, etc. Those could be sort of useful, sometimes. Now we're at the point where it's getting better, and at an increasing pace. It has 'blown up' with the introduction of Chat-GPT and the like. Sure, it's still awkward, and it can be abused, but the same is true of the internet. There will always be those that abuse useful tools to exploit others and cause harm and mayhem for either personal gain, to further their extreme goals, or just to watch the world burn. Protections will evolve to try and keep pace, though they won't be perfect, and the average person will have to learn to take some pains to protect themselves as well.

And yes, AI is going to take jobs away and that will cause a lot of people problems, and while that is unfortunate it is also perfectly normal for new technologies. With that change comes new opportunities. The tools will be there for you to use to your advantage, just like the internet.

Or maybe you'll just amuse yourself by trying to get your AI to do something lewd. Probably that.

The main problem I see in future isn't the singularity. No, I'm worried that countries will fail to make appropriate policy changes to reflect the increasing automation that AI and robotics technology together, eliminating most menial labour whether it's manual or data-processing related. We could end up with a large percentage of the population that can't find work, let alone work that pays all their bills. With the increasing productive capacity of countries it should make it very much possible to sustain the population as a whole even if a large percentage aren't producing any work. It would simply not be sane to let society proceed down a path of dystopia, as the burden of a large and dissatisfied homeless and overworked population would result in civil unrest and possible violence, and more to the point such a society would be costly. It is literally cheaper to provide a basic level of housing and resources to someone who would otherwise be homeless, than it would be to deal with a homeless population.

Similarly, I can't see a world where a large fraction of the population having no purchasing power would be good for international trade. If much of the population of every country, including the wealthy ones, have no purchasing power, trade of finished consumer goods like electronics, processed foods, media, clothing, etc. would stagnate. It seems it would be more healthy to have some surplus wealth circulating through the population to keep both the country, and international trade of goods, healthy.

I don't know, it just seems like the future will become a policy choice between 'dystopia' and 'increased free time', all because of the near elimination of unskilled and low-skilled work. Low wage and low skilled workers are already prone to being treated like garbage that doesn't deserve to make enough to live on, and unless policy changes to match the times, this will only get worse.

tl;dr - There will definitely be some growing pains with AI, but it doesn't have to end in an 'AI Destroys Humanity' scenario, and likely won't. Policy changes not being made to reflect a rapidly diminishing need for menial labour is a far more pressing concern, in my mind.

[willowstea]

I hope i become some old bald car-corp guy's nightmare

[iclegalnz]

Strengthening Immigration Law Enforcement with New Tools

Explore the latest measures enhancing employer compliance in immigration law enforcement. INZ introduces infringement notices from April 11, 2024, targeting immigration non-compliance and protecting migrant workers. By strengthening deterrence against those who exploit migrants, this initiative addresses lower-level immigration non-compliance.

[spartanmemesmedical]

Access to Abortion Care: A Human Rights Perspective

Introduction:Abortion remains a contentious issue globally, with complex implications for public health, human rights, and social justice. This assignment delves into the multifaceted aspects of abortion care, emphasizing its significance in promoting comprehensive healthcare, human rights, and gender equality. Overview:The World Health Organization (WHO) defines health as a state of complete…

[nerdykeith]

Trans women have been mistreated in prisons for a very long time. What this woman had to go through was nothing short of a disgrace. At least there is a silver lining and this is triggering a policy reform. Hopefully this will lead to a step in the right direction 

[navree]

Incorrect, the fact that Biden has dropped out and a candidate with history of supporting medicare for all and being more receptive to a ceasefire in the I/P conflict has made me go from "I cannot morally support the Democratic nominee" to "I am voting for the Democratic nominee despite the fact she isn't perfect in every respect." I'm really happy this played out. The Dems for the most part abandoned the old Obama platform and it feels like its possible an actual progressive agenda could come to pass in my lifetime.

Kamala 2024!

If you weren't going to vote Democratic in this election before Biden dropped out you're a dorkass loser who does not care about any of the issues you're yammering about here and also a fundamentally bad person, and I hope you get run over by a bus.

But you got one thing right in all of this gibberish, Kamala 2024.

[racefortheironthrone]

Which federal laws and policies would you get rid of or modify in order to help the American labor movement.

I was looking through the labor law tag on my blog and your ask reminded me I haven't actually written a comprehensive post about this on Tumblr. (Indeed, you'd have to go back to my old, old policy blog from 2009...it's been a while.)

One silver lining of the Sisyphean struggle to restore American labor law that's been going on since the 1970s is that the labor movement and their allies in Congress, academia, think tanks, and progressive media have been thinking through this very issue of "what reforms would make a real difference" for a long time. I'm not going to say it's a solved question, but the research literature is pretty robust.

For the purposes of this post, I'm going to focus on the three most recent reform packages: the Employee Free Choice Act that was the main vehicle during the Obama years, Bernie Sanders' Workplace Democracy Act (which was introduced repeatedly between 1992 and 2018), and the Richard L. Trumka Protecting the Right to Organize Act (PRO Act) that is the current proposal of the Democratic legislative caucuses. There's going to be quite a bit of overlap between these proposals, because it's very much an iterative process where allies in the same movement are trading ideas with one another and trying to stay abreast of new developments, but I'll try to tease out some of the similarities and differences.

EFCA

While EFCA contained a number of provisions that sought to close various loopholes in U.S labor law, the three main provisions largely target the flaws that have made it extremely difficult to win a union through the National Labor Relations Act process devised in 1935 that has turned into a Saw-style gauntlet thanks to the professionalization of union-busting and the Federalist Society's strategy of death-by-a-thousand-cuts:

"Card check." Probably the most common pattern of union-busting in the workplace today is a war of attrition by management waged by an industry of specialized law firms. Generally what happens is that the union files for election with a super-majority of ~70% workers having signed union cards, then management delays the vote as long as possible to give their hired "union-avoidance" firm to systematically intimidate, surveil, propagandize, and divide workers, up to and including illegally firing pro-union workers pour encouragez les autres. Over several months, what happens is that the initial 70% of pro-union support starts to erode as workers decide it's just too dangerous to stick their necks out, until the vote happens and the union loses either by a squeaker or a landslide.

Card check short-circuits this process by just saying that if the union files with a majority of cards, you skip the election and the union is recognized. And for all the pearl-clutching by the right, this is actually how labor law works in many democratic countries, because the idea of a fair election that lets management participate is an oxymoron.

Arbitrated first contract. In the event that enough workers keep the faith and actually vote for a union, management's next move is to draw out collective bargaining for a year or more. After a year, the original vote is no longer considered binding and employers can push for a "decertification" vote, which they usually win because workers either give up hope or change jobs. So this provision says that if the two sides can't reach an agreement on a first contract within 120 days, a Federal arbitrator will just impose one, so that at least for two years there will be a union contract no matter what management wants.

Strengthening enforcement. As I said above, one of the problems with existing labor law is that there are basically no penalties for management knowingly breaking the law; companies literally just budget in a line-item and do it anyway. This provision would allow unions to file an injunction against employers for unfair labor practices or ULPs (at present, injunctions are only required for violations done by unions), and would add triple back pay for illegal firings and fines of $20,000 for each ULP. This would make union-busting much more expensive, because companies routinely rack up hundreds and hundreds of them during a campaign.

Workplace Democracy Act

Sanders' proposal includes the main proposals from EFCA, and adds a bunch of additional reforms, like mis-classifying workers as independent contractors, banning captive audience meetings, making "joint employers" liable for labor law violations by franchisees, legalizing secondary boycotts, and requiring employers to report to the NLRB on all anti-union expenditures during a campaign and barring anyone convicted of an unfair labor practice from being hired for anti-union campaigns and making "union-avoidance" consultants liable for fines for ULPs (which would kill the "union-avoidance" industry, because they commit ULPs for a living).

PRO Act

The PRO Act is very much an updating of the previous efforts we've talked about. It bans captive audience meetings, allows for secondary strikes and boycotts, massively increases fines and allows for compensatory damages, ends mis-classification, speeds up the election process, etc.

It also contains a couple new and ambitious proposals:

it allows unions to sue management in court instead of having to complain to the NLRB, which opens management up to a very expensive legal proceeding and discovery.

it bans "right-to-work" as established by the Taft-Hartley Act.

it requires that any worker who's fired for pro-union activity be immediately reinstated while their unfair labor practice process or civil lawsuit is going through the process. This would be enormous just on its own, because it changes the entire veto structure of illegal firing. As it stands, employers fire people and maybe maybe have to pay some back wages in a couple years when the worker has found another job and is unlikely to come back. This would reverse the balance of power, such that the worker is immediately back and other workers can see that they can speak up without getting fired, which makes illegal firings a giant waste of time and money for management.

In terms of stuff that's not on this list that I would add, I would say that an enormous difference could be made by simply making it illegal for management to lock-out their workers or hire scabs. You do that, and unions can win almost every strike.

[illegalpeople]

One of the most insidious lies of both major political parties is that there's any difference between the two parties.

Hopes for a just immigration policy from Democrats - from Clinton to Obama, to Biden, and now Harris - have all been unfounded. Construction of a border wall was started under Bill Clinton. Obama deported more people than any other previous president in history then passed the Dream Act at the end of his term by executive order. Pretending he had no choice, Biden continues construction of "Trump's" border wall. If elected, Harris will continue to build that border wall - wasting those billions of dollars, stealing more citizens' property, and causing environmental destruction.

We are ruled with a duopoly and they win our support with mutual lies and theatrics.

[squishymochithethird]

My mom was going on and on about how “far left” and “radical” Tim Walz is and I finally listened to some of his points and.

He’s one of the most reasonable politicians I’ve heard in a very long time. I’m surprised she doesn’t like him tbh, he’s kind of the perfect democrat for someone like her??

[fosterwhat]

Huh. Just found out that they reopened my home a while ago and never told me. This is totally foster care.

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Officers working for Gov. Greg Abbott’s border security initiative have been ordered to push small children and nursing babies back into the Rio Grande, and have been told not to give water to asylum seekers even in extreme heat, according to an email from a Department of Public Safety trooper who described the actions as “inhumane.”

The July 3 account, reviewed by Hearst Newspapers, discloses several previously unreported incidents the trooper witnessed in Eagle Pass, where the state of Texas has strung miles of razor wire and deployed a wall of buoys in the Rio Grande.

According to the email, a pregnant woman having a miscarriage was found late last month caught in the wire, doubled over in pain. A four-year-old girl passed out from heat exhaustion after she tried to go through it and was pushed back by Texas National Guard soldiers. A teenager broke his leg trying to navigate the water around the wire and had to be carried by his father.

The email, which the trooper sent to a superior, suggests that Texas has set “traps” of razor wire-wrapped barrels in parts of the river with high water and low visibility. And it says the wire has increased the risk of drownings by forcing migrants into deeper stretches of the river.

The trooper called for a series of rigorous policy changes to improve safety for migrants, including removing the barrels and revoking the directive on withholding water.

“Due to the extreme heat, the order to not give people water needs to be immediately reversed as well,” the trooper wrote, later adding: “I believe we have stepped over a line into the inhumane.”

Department of Public Safety spokesman Travis Considine did not comment on all the contents of the trooper’s email, but said there is no policy against giving water to migrants.

Considine also provided an email from DPS Director Steven McCraw on Saturday calling for an audit to determine if more can be done to minimize the risk to migrants. McCraw wrote troopers should warn migrants not to cross the wire, redirect them to ports of entry and to closely watch for anyone who needs medical attention.

In another email, McCraw acknowledged that there has been an increase in injuries from the wire, including seven incidents reported by Border Patrol where migrants needed “elevated medical attention” from July 4 to July 13. Those were in addition to the incidents detailed by the trooper.

“The purpose of the wire is to deter smuggling between the ports of entry and not to injure migrants,” McCraw wrote. “The smugglers care not if the migrants are injured, but we do, and we must take all necessary measures to mitigate the risk to them including injuries from trying to cross over the concertina wire, drownings and dehydration.”

The incidents detailed in the email come as Abbott has stepped up efforts in recent weeks to physically bar migrants from entering the country through his Operation Lone Star initiative, escalating tensions between state and federal officials and drawing increased scrutiny from humanitarian groups who say the state is endangering asylum seekers. The most aggressive initiatives have been targeted at Eagle Pass.

The state has also now deployed a wall of floating buoys in the Rio Grande, which triggered complaints over the weekend from Mexico.

Federal Border Patrol officials have issued internal warnings that the razor wire is preventing their agents from reaching at-risk migrants and increasing the risk of drownings in the Rio Grande, Hearst Newspapers reported last week.

The DPS trooper expressed similar concerns, writing that the placement of the wire along the river “forces people to cross in other areas that are deeper and not as safe for people carrying kids and bags.”

The trooper’s email sheds new light on a series of previously reported drownings in the river during a one-week stretch earlier this month, including a mother and at least one of her two children, who federal Border Patrol agents spotted struggling to cross the Rio Grande on July 1.

According to the email, a DPS boat found the mother and one of the children, who went under the water for a minute.

They were pulled from the river and given medical care before being transferred to EMS, but were later declared deceased at the hospital. The second child was never found, the email said.

The Governor has said he is taking necessary steps to secure the border and accused federal officials of refusing to do so.

“Texas is deploying every tool and strategy to deter and repel illegal crossings between ports of entry as President Biden’s dangerous open border policies entice migrants from over 150 countries to risk their lives entering the country illegally," said Andrew Mahaleris, Abbott’s press secretary. "President Biden has unleashed a chaos on the border that’s unsustainable, and we have a constitutional duty to respond to this unprecedented crisis.”

The DPS trooper’s email details four incidents in just one day in which migrants were caught in the wire or injured trying to get around it.

On June 30, troopers found a group of people along the wire, including a 4-year-old girl who tried to cross the wire and was pressed back by Texas Guard soldiers “due to the orders given to them,” the email says. The DPS trooper wrote that the temperature was “well over 100 degrees” and the girl passed out from exhaustion.

“We provided treatment to the unresponsive patient and transferred care to EMS,” the trooper wrote. A spokesperson for the Texas National Guard did not respond to a request for comment.

In another instance, troopers found a 19-year-old woman “in obvious pain” stuck in the wire. She was cut free and given a medical assessment, which determined she was pregnant and having a miscarriage. She was then transferred to EMS. The trooper also treated a man with a “significant laceration” in his left leg, who said he had cut it while trying to free his child who was “stuck on a trap in the water,” describing a barrel with razor wire “all over it.” And the trooper treated a 15-year-old boy who broke his right leg walking in the river because the razor wire was “laid out in a manner that it forced him into the river where it is unsafe to travel.”

In another instance, on June 25, troopers came across a group of 120 people camped out along a fence set up along the river. The group included several small children and babies who were nursing, the trooper wrote. The entire group was exhausted, hungry and tired, the trooper wrote. The shift officer in command ordered the troopers to “push the people back into the water to go to Mexico,” the email says.

The trooper wrote that the troopers decided it was not the right thing to do “with the very real potential of exhausted people drowning.” They called command again and expressed their concerns and were given the order to “tell them to go to Mexico and get into our vehicle and leave,” the trooper wrote. After they left, other troopers worked with Border Patrol to provide care to the migrants, the email said.

The trooper did not respond to a request for comment Monday. His email was shared by a confidential source with knowledge of border operations. It was unclear whether the trooper received a response from the sergeant he’d messaged.

Considine acknowledged that DPS was aware of the email and provided the additional agency emails in response. Those emails detail seven other incidents reported by federal border agents in which migrants were injured on the wires, including a child who was taken to the hospital on Thursday with cuts on his left arm, a mother and child who were taken to the hospital on Wednesday with “minor lacerations” on their “lower extremities,” and another migrant taken to San Antonio on July 4 to receive treatment for “several lacerations” that required staples.

Victor Escalon, a DPS director who oversees South Texas, wrote in an email Friday to other agency officials that troopers “may need to open the wire to aid individuals in medical distress, maintain the peace, and/or to make an arrest for criminal trespass, criminal mischief, acts of violence, or other State crimes.”

“Our DPS medical unit is assigned to this operation to address medical concerns for everyone involved,” Escalon wrote. “As we enforce State law, we may need to aid those in medical distress and provide water as necessary.”

[darkeyedghost]

I can't believe Nigel Farage has officially become an MP, for fucks sake

[an-onyx-void]

Disclaimer: I am not the original owner or creator of this content. The source account is listed below.

[the-paris-of-people]

Genuinely since Sunday when the news came out, I feel so... hopeful again? For the first time in a decade?