Share:
More Americans want Congress to prioritize plastic waste problem: poll
Nearly a quarter of Americans surveyed in a new opinion poll identified plastic waste pollution as an issue that Congress must address in the next two years, according to the World Wildlife Foundation (WWF).
This figure — 23 percent — marked a sharp rise from a similar poll taken in 2020, when just 16 percent of respondents considered plastic waste pollution a priority matter for lawmakers, the poll found. Meanwhile, more than 75 percent of respondents said they believe that none or only a small portion of the plastic waste generated in the U.S. actually gets recycled.
“On a daily basis, nearly all Americans interact with plastic and create waste, in some form – making it one of the most tangible environmental issues we face today,” Erin Simon, the WWF’s head of plastic waste and business, said in a statement.
“This polling shows that not only are Americans in tune with the scope of our plastic waste problem in the U.S., they’re also ready and willing to take action and think companies and policymakers should do the same,” Simon added.
The WWF published these results, produced by Denver-based research firm Corona Insights, ahead of Wednesday’s World Oceans Day.
The poll — which surveyed 1,028 people across the U.S. from various demographics and political affiliations — found that 85 percent of Americans were either very or moderately frustrated that plastic waste in the U.S. often ends up in the ocean.
A large majority of respondents likewise expressed dissatisfaction with the country’s insufficient recycling capacity, and with the fact that many items deposited for recycling do not actually end up recycled, according to the survey.
Democratic-leaning respondents were more likely to indicate that such circumstances were “very frustrating” than their Republican-leaning peers, the poll found.
While survey respondents across the board expressed a willingness to decrease the amount of plastic waste they produced, they also voiced concern that their efforts might be in vain, according to the poll.
Three-quarters of respondents said that they would like to recycle more of their plastic waste, while 78 percent noted a preference for plastic products that can be reused and 75 percent for items with minimal plastic packaging, the survey found.
But more than 50 percent of respondents said they believe that their actions would have no impact on the overall amount of plastic waste in the U.S., the results showed.
When asked to select groups that they believe should be responsible for reducing plastic waste, 90 percent of the respondents chose businesses that produce or sell plastic as having such a duty — up four percentage points since 2020, according to the poll.
More than half of respondents — 53 percent — said they believe that such businesses represent the group most responsible for reducing plastic waste, which is a six percentage-point jump from 2020, the survey found.
While the percent of respondents citing plastic waste pollution as a high-priority issue rose significantly in the past two years, the matter remained less pressing than many other concerns.
Trumping plastic waste pollution as a top-five issue was affordable healthcare, with 60 percent of respondent support; strengthening the economy, with 55 percent; fixing the immigration system, with 42 percent; and addressing climate change, with 40 percent.
Also above plastic waste was improving education, with 39 percent; reducing disparities between the wealthy and the poor, with 35 percent; addressing racism, with 32 percent; defense from terrorism, with 31 percent; reducing the budget deficit, 31 percent; and safer gun policies, 28 percent.
But with almost a quarter of respondents deeming plastic waste a primary concern, the WWF said policymakers must take action to fix this problem.
In a separate policy guidance document, they offered various recommendations for transitioning from what the authors described as “a linear to a circle economy” — or one “that is restorative and regenerative, where materials are recycled and reused to their fullest extent.”
Their guidance advocates for “harmonized policies across borders,” as well as clear targets for recycling, recovery and reuse set in legislation, so that producers can be held accountable to make progress.
“Americans are frustrated and want to find ways to solve our plastic waste crisis,” Anthony Tusino, senior program officer for plastic policy advocacy at the WWF, said in a statement.
While policymakers may be aware of the problem, they will need to implement policies that overhaul the management of plastic waste, according to Tusino.
“Together we can identify solutions and create a future where plastic no longer ends up in nature.” he added.
In response to the WWF poll, Joshua Baca, vice president of plastics at the American Chemistry Council — a trade group that includes major plastic manufacturers — agreed “that more must be done so plastics remain in our economy and out of our environment.”
“WWF’s public opinion polling on plastic and waste management reinforces the need for Congress, state and local governments and the plastics value chain to do more to address waste and foster a circular economy,” Baca said in a statement, noting that plastic makers last year released a “5 Actions” plan backing this goal.
Baca acknowledged that “Americans are skeptical of recycling and want businesses to take more action in reducing plastic waste,” adding the 5 Actions plan would require a 30 percent recycled plastic standard by 2030 for all U.S. packaging.
“We hope to work collaboratively with Congress, WWF and other stakeholders to pass meaningful legislation to accelerate a circular economy for plastics,” Baca said.
Source: TEST FEED1
Share:
Yellen: ‘Virtually impossible to insulate ourselves’ from soaring gas prices
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said American consumers will be at the mercy of oil companies this summer as crude oil is expected to reach $160 a barrel, according to an analysis released Monday by Goldman Sachs.
Speaking to the Senate finance committee Tuesday, Yellen took heat from both Republicans and Democrats for inflation that’s near 40-year highs, with gasoline prices up almost 50 percent over the last year.
In May, a gallon of gas cost more than $4.50, according to a national average compiled by U.S. Energy Information Administration. It’s now at $4.86 a gallon, up 25 cents in just one week.
In California, gas is now more than $6.30 per gallon, and it’s above $5 a gallon in 10 states.
Crude oil is trading now at more than $117 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, up nearly 70 percent from around $70 a barrel this time last year.
“Given the global nature of these markets, it’s virtually impossible for us to insulate ourselves from shocks like the ones that are occurring in Russia that move global oil prices,” Yellen said.
The former Federal Reserve chair received criticism last week when she said during an interview on CNN that she had been “wrong” about the trajectory of inflation — which many analysts had deemed “transitory” — but has proven to be a much more persistent feature of the economy in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic.
Inflation has caused the most pain at the gas pump, where consumer energy prices have risen more than 30 percent in the last year. This figure is more than three times the increase in consumer prices generally, according to the latest measure by the Department of Labor.
Those hikes in the energy sector aren’t showing any signs of letting up, according to the most recent forecast from investment bank and research firm Goldman Sachs.
“Updating our supply and demand expectations, we now forecast that Brent [crude] prices will need to average $135 [per barrel]” for the second quarter of 2022 through the first quarter of 2023, “up $10 [per barrel] vs. prior forecast,” Goldman researchers wrote in a June 6 note.
“This represents summer retail prices reaching levels normally associated with $160 [per barrel] crude prices (due to strong refining utilization, gas prices and USD),” the note said.
Despite high gas prices, “people are still fueling up,” said Andrew Gross, a spokesperson for auto service AAA. “At some point, drivers may change their daily driving habits or lifestyle due to these high prices, but we are not there yet.”
This is a developing report and will be updated.
Source: TEST FEED1
Share:
Here's a list of the people who have been subpoenaed by the Jan. 6 committee
The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol will hold a primetime hearing on Thursday as it seeks to bring its findings to the public.
While many people have sat down with the committee voluntarily, it has also issued more than 100 subpoenas to lawmakers, internet and communications companies, Trump White House officials and others.
Here’s a list of who the committee has subpoenaed so far, and why the committee says their testimony was necessary.
TRUMP FAMILY
The fiancee of Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., Guilfoyle spoke at the Jan. 6 rally on the Ellipse. After the rally, where former President Trump also spoke, a mob of Trump’s supporters marched to the Capitol, which was later invaded.
Lawmakers certifying the results of the 2020 election were evacuated as the effort was suspended. It was resumed after the building was cleared.
Guilfoyle is the only member of Trump’s family known to have received a subpoena directly, but multiple members have cooperated with the committee voluntarily, including Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter, her husband, Jared Kushner, and Donald Trump Jr. The committee has also reportedly subpoenaed Eric Trump’s phone records.
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Biggs’ lawyers last week requested additional information on the “rationale” for the subpoena.
Brooks spoke at the Jan. 6 rally on the Ellipse. Brooks said last month that he would refuse to testify if it was in private or before his Senate primary runoff election later this month.
Jordan demanded the panel turn over the bulk of the information it has collected on him as he weighs how to respond. The committee responded by extending his subpoena deadline and laid out eight topics of its inquiry, including efforts by Jordan to reach then-Attorney General William Barr the day before the 2020 election.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.)
McCarthy responded to his subpoena by questioning the panel’s legitimacy late last month. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had rejected two of McCarthy’s initial picks for the committee. The panel has taken interest in conversations between McCarthy and Trump surrounding the attack. McCarthy has said in press interviews on Jan. 6 and after that he had talked to Trump and asked him to speak to the public to stop the attack.
Perry, the chairman of the Freedom Caucus, is slated to meet with Trump on Tuesday with other members of the caucus as the committee’s prime-time hearings approach.
WHITE HOUSE, ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS
Clark the former acting civil division assistant attorney general, reportedly floated an idea for the Justice Department to send letters to state legislators proposing they postpone their election certifications while the Justice Department hosts a press conference to declare it was looking into claims of voter fraud.
Judd Deere, deputy White House press secretary
Special assistant to the president for legislative affairs who reportedly accompanied Trump to the rally at the Ellipse
Former Vice President Pence’s national security adviser
Senior counsel in the division led by Trump DOJ official Jeffrey Clark
White House deputy chief of staff who was reportedly at the White House on Jan. 6
Trump’s personal assistant who was reportedly present in the Oval Office the morning of Jan. 6
Kayleigh McEnany, White House press secretary
John McEntee, White House personnel director
The former White House chief of staff provided thousands of documents to the committee before he stopped cooperating. The panel held him in contempt of Congress last December, but the Department of Justice has indicated in recent days it will not charge Meadows.
Molly Michael, special assistant to the president and Oval Office operations coordinator
Former White House staffer who served on both of Trump’s presidential campaigns. Miller won a GOP primary for a House seat in Ohio last month.
The former White House senior adviser played a major role in many of Trump’s policies on the border and immigration.
Navarro, a White House trade adviser under Trump, filed a lawsuit last week against the committee and the Department of Justice after revealing he received a separate grand jury subpoena by the U.S. attorney for D.C.
Kash Patel, chief of staff to acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller.
Peede reportedly met with Trump in his private dining room on Jan. 4 to discuss plans for the Ellipse rally.
Congress voted to hold Scavino, the White House deputy chief of staff for communications, in contempt in April, but the Department of Justice has indicated in recent days it will not charge him.
Pence’s chief of staff reportedly warned Pence’s head Secret Service agent on Jan. 5 about concerns for the vice president’s safety as his relationship with Trump soured over the election.
Ben Williamson, deputy assistant to the president and senior adviser to Meadows, Trump’s chief of staff
Brian Jack, White House director of political affairs
CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS, TRUMP ALLIES
Bannon, the White House chief strategist and senior counselor to Trump for the first seven months of his presidency, defied the committee’s subpoena and was indicted in November. He is expected to go on trial this summer.
Gary Michael Brown, Trump campaign deputy director of election day operations
Eastman is a conservative lawyer who served as a key legal adviser to Trump. He crafted two memos outlining a strategy to contest the election, including one that included Pence bucking his ceremonial duty to certify the election results. Pence ultimately refused to execute the strategy.
Ellis, a Trump campaign attorney, publicly promoted assertions that the election was stolen alongside Sidney Powell and other legal advisers.
Boris Epshteyn, Trump campaign strategic adviser
The former Trump national security adviser was reportedly present at an Oval Office meeting on Dec. 18, 2020 about the seizure of voting machines.
Trump’s personal lawyer became a central figure in the former president’s efforts to overturn the election. Giuliani reportedly sat with the committee for a virtual interview that lasted more than nine hours last month.
Angela McCallum, Trump campaign national executive assistant
Jason Miller, Trump campaign senior adviser
Powell was a member of Trump’s legal team. The committee cited Powell’s effort to tell Trump to seize voting machines as reason for its subpoena. Powell independently filed election-related lawsuits and lost legal battles across four states. In Michigan, one judge dismissed her case as frivolous.
Michael A. Roman, Trump campaign director of election day operations
William Stepien, Trump campaign manager
TIED TO JAN. 6 RIOT
A far-right group accused of calling for violence ahead of the attack on the Capitol. Dozens of the group’s members have been indicted in connection with the storming of the Capitol. Prosecutors charged five Proud Boys leaders with seditious conspiracy on Monday.
Leader of the the alt-right “America First” or “Groyper” movement subpoenaed for being at the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Leader of the the alt-right “America First” or “Groyper” movement subpoenaed for being at the Capitol on Jan. 6.
A far-right group accused of helping plan and participate in the attack on the U.S. Capitol. More than a dozen members have been indicted in connection with the storming of the Capitol.
Elmer Stewart Rhodes, president of the Oath Keepers
The chairman of the Proud Boys was not in D.C. on Jan. 6 but is accused of helping the group prepare for the events that unfolded at the Capitol.
RALLY AND EVENT ORGANIZERS
The panel has taken interest in the planning for the Jan. 6 rally on the Ellipse and other scheduled demonstrations that preceded the Capitol riot. The subpoenas include individuals connected to a group called Women for America First, which hosted the Ellipse rally.
The committee also demanded information from people connected to “Stop the Steal,” with one organizer having said the group intended to direct Ellipse rally attendees at the event’s conclusion to a separate, permitted event on Capitol grounds, advertised as the “One Nation Under God” rally.
Ali Alexander, Stop the Steal organizer
Listed on a permit for the Jan. 6 Ellipse rally as its “on-site supervisor” tied to a private security firm.
Reportedly managed an advertising campaign for the Jan. 6 Ellipse rally and now serves as a Trump spokesperson. Budowich sued the committee, seeking to block his bank records from the panel even as he said he was cooperating. A federal judge rejected the effort in January.
Listed on a permit for the Jan. 6 Ellipse rally as its “project manager”
Submitted the Jan. 6 Ellipse rally permit on behalf of Women for America First
Founder of Moms for America, a group that planned rallies on Jan. 5 and Jan. 6 in D.C.
Founder of InfoWars who attended the Ellipse rally. Jones, who has said he was told by the White House he would lead a march from the rally to the Capitol, has claimed he invoked the Fifth Amendment almost 100 times during his testimony.
Amy Kremer, Co-founder of Women for America First
Kylie Kremer, Co-founder of Women for America First
Reportedly assisted Women for America First in planning rallies leading up to the Capitol attack
Listed on the “One Nation Under God” rally permit scheduled for outside the Capitol on Jan. 6
Chair of the 1st Amendment Praetorian, which provided security at multiple events leading up to Jan. 6
Ed Martin, Stop the Steal organizer
Listed on the “One Nation Under God” rally permit scheduled for outside the Capitol on Jan. 6
Listed on a permit for the Jan. 6 Ellipse rally as its “VIP lead”
Former Trump spokesperson who assisted Women for America First
Listed on a permit for the Jan. 6 Ellipse rally as its “operations manager for scheduling and guidance”
Republican strategist who reportedly communicated with Kimberley Guilfoyle and Donald Trump Jr. about the Ellipse rally
Right-wing organization tied to a permit for a Jan. 6 rally on Capitol grounds
Assisted Women for America First in planning rallies leading up to the Capitol attack
Listed on a permit for the Jan. 6 Ellipse rally as its “operations manager for logistics and communications”
Republican operative who reportedly spoke at a Jan. 5 rally and used Oath Keepers members who were involved in the Capitol attack as personal security guards
Republican strategist who reportedly communicated with Kimberley Guilfoyle and Donald Trump Jr. about the Ellipse rally
Listed on a permit for the Jan. 6 Ellipse rally as its “stage manager”
Former Trump White House official who helped draft the former president’s speech on the Ellipse
Listed on a permit for the Jan. 6 Ellipse rally as its “VIP advisor”
TIED TO EFFORTS TO OVERTURN THE ELECTION
The committee has subpoenaed a range of people involved in efforts to send slates of fake alternate electors to disrupt the certification of the election in Congress. Each state involved in the scheme had indicated a chair and secretary on the slates.
Bill Bachenberg, Pennsylvania chairperson on alternate slate of electors
Kathy Berden, Michigan chairperson on alternate slate of electors
Christina Bobb, One America News Network host
Chesebro circulated a memo suggesting Pence recuse himself as the presiding officer on Jan. 6
Nancy Cottle, Arizona chairperson on alternate slate of electors
Laura Cox, chair of the Michigan GOP
James DeGraffenreid, Nevada secretary on alternate slate of electors
Mark Finchem,Arizona state lawmaker.
Finchem is running in the Arizona secretary of state GOP primary and was endorsed by Trump.
Friess is a lawyer who was reportedly involved with the voting machine seizure campaign. She sued the panel to prevent them from obtaining her phone records, arguing it would violate attorney-client privilege.
Andrew Hitt, Wisconsin chairperson on alternate slate of electors
The former New York Police Department commissioner was reportedly involved in the Jan. 5 meeting at the Willard Hotel.
Phill Kline, former Kansas attorney general
Deborah W. Maestas, New Mexico secretary on alternate slate of electors
State lawmaker from Pennsylvania who helped arrange for an alternate slate of electors. Mastriano won the Pennsylvania governor GOP primary last month.
Michael J. McDonald, Nevada chairperson on alternate slate of electors
Lawyer who helped the Trump campaign file a lawsuit challenging Georgia’s election results.
Lawyer who reportedly spoke with Trump multiple times on Jan. 6.
Lisa Patton, Pennsylvania secretary on alternate slate of electors
Loraine B. Pellegrino, Arizona secretary on alternate slate of electors
Jewll Powdrell, New Mexico chairperson on alternate slate of electors
Mayra Rodriguez, Michigan secretary on alternate slate of electors
Kelly Ruh, Wisconsin secretary on alternate slate of electors
David Shafer, Georgia chairperson on alternate slate of electors
Shawn Still, Georgia secretary on alternate slate of electors
Waldron circulated a PowerPoint laying out the Trump campaign’s plans for contesting the 2020 election.
The chair of the Arizona Republican Party sued the panel after she was subpoenaed.
COMPANIES
The committee has subpoenaed multiple companies as part of its investigation, primarily seeking to examine the use of social media in organizing the Jan. 6 attack.
Parent company of YouTube, where users relayed communications about the Jan. 6 attack
The committee reportedly subpoenaed phone records for more than 100 people.
Parent company of Facebook, where users relayed communications about the Jan. 6 attack
Platform where users relayed communications about the Jan. 6 attack
Provided services to Trump’s reelection campaign and the Republican National Committee
Platform where users relayed communications about the Jan. 6 attack
Source: TEST FEED1
Share:
Environmental groups sue EPA over California, New Hampshire smog
Two environmental organizations on Tuesday filed a lawsuit alleging the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has failed to properly address smog pollution in Los Angeles, Sacramento and New Hampshire.
In the lawsuit, the Center for Environmental Health and the Center for Biological Diversity allege that the EPA has failed to act on smog levels above the 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards in those areas.
In 2017, the lawsuit notes, the EPA published a final rule identifying 15 states and the District of Columbia that had not properly submitted implementation plans for compliance with the standards.
The finding became effective that March, with a March 2019 deadline for the EPA’s own responsibility to put federal implementation plans into effect. The agency has yet to do so for New Hampshire and three California areas: Los Angeles-San Bernardino Counties (West Mojave Desert); Sacramento Metro (Sacramento); and Sacramento Metro (Yolo-Solano), according to the lawsuit.
“The EPA is simply not doing its job to protect people and the environment from dangerous smog pollution,” Camilla Getz, a law fellow at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement. “Regulators can’t turn their backs on the reality that smog pollution is a driver of catastrophic global warming and the loss of biodiversity, two of the greatest threats to human health and life on Earth as we know it.”
Current EPA Administrator Michael Regan, who is named as a defendant in the lawsuit, has emphasized addressing environmental justice issues and the impact of air pollution on quality of life during his tenure. However, as recently as late April, the EPA took the first step in maintaining smog standards that have not been updated since the Obama administration after the Trump administration also declined to update the standards.
The Hill has reached out to the EPA for comment.
Source: TEST FEED1
Share:
Should the US temper its expectations of India?
India is reprising its Cold War-era strategy of walking the tightrope between Russia and the United States. During the virtual summit between President Biden and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in April, as well as the in-person Quad leaders’ summit in Tokyo in May, Biden requested India’s support on Ukraine. India has refused to stop purchasing oil from Russia, even if it has cancelled some Russian arms contracts.
India’s neutrality over Ukraine has dampened the enthusiasm even of those Americans who have projected India as the key American partner in its competition with China. Indians argue that they are only acting in their national interest and that even though their long-term interests remains tied to the U.S., they cannot forego the short-term advantage of neutrality towards Russia.
Instead of voicing frustration with India over its continued friendship with Russia, U.S. policymakers and commentators would do better to revise their expectations of India. The rhetoric about India being as important in U.S. plans for Asia as Great Britain was for standing up to the Soviet Union in Europe after World War II ignores India’s changing view of itself and the world.
Under Modi and his ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, India is in the process of redefining its nationalism, away from the legacy of Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. India’s rising Hindu nationalism (which has overtaken the secular nationalism of India’s early years) is centered on reviving India’s ancient Hindu glory. Ancient India was notoriously insular and not particularly interested in partnering with distant peoples.
While Modi’s India still wants to be recognized globally with respect, it hopes to earn that respect through celebration of an International Yoga Day, not through confrontation with China or Russia. That fundamentally different view of what is entailed in India becoming a global great power makes partnership with the West in accordance with Western expectations unlikely.
India’s economy is not growing at a rate that would position it to be China’s competitor. The expansion of India’s middle class has slowed down. Americans hoping to tap India as the next market of more than 1 billion consumers will have to wait to see that dream become a reality, both on account of its slower economic growth and its over-regulation.
Disappointment will be even greater for those expecting India to field its large military forces against China. Declining investment in military capabilities have made India’s military rather inefficient and inadequately modern. India might be able to face off against Pakistan, but it is still far from being in China’s league.
Around 60 percent of India’s military equipment is of Russian origin, and while India plans to purchase more equipment, it is keen on boosting indigenous capability and having a diverse basket of suppliers. That runs contrary to American expectations of being India’s supplier of choice.
Meanwhile, the U.S. expectation of an influx of orders for American-made nuclear reactors from India, which formed an important basis for the 2008 civil-nuclear deal, remains unfulfilled.
India wants to trade and acquire technology with the U.S. on its terms, which it believes are mutually beneficial. But is not about to become the western partner that successive U.S. administrations and many scholars have imagined.
Instead of investing in human capital, nuclear and renewable energy, or health care, the focus of Modi’s government has been on “correcting” history textbooks to change the portrayal of India’s Muslim and Western-colonial rulers while extolling the virtues of the ancient Hindu era.
Hyper-nationalism has also led to a new wave of protectionism and regulation, which impedes economic expansion. India has also lost the glow of being a success story for democracy and individual political rights. In 2021 and 2022 Freedom House downgraded India to “partly free,” citing attacks on religious minorities, suppression of media and weakening of institutions.
Comments by American officials about India’s direction inevitably attract charges from Indians of unwarranted interference in India’s internal affairs. Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently released the State Department’s 2021 Report on International Religious Freedom and spoke about “rising attacks on people and places of worship” in India. He was widely criticized in the Indian mainstream and social media.
Blinken also described India as “the world’s largest democracy, and home to a great diversity of faiths,” reminding everyone that the image of India as a pluralist and open society might be its great strength in external relations. That image, and the hope that India would be a global great power once it realizes its full economic and military potential, have suffered because of the ideological obsessions of India’s current leaders.
But what is unpopular in the U.S. is popular in India. Modi and his party have been repeatedly rewarded at the ballot box for talking about their civilization’s glorious past. As India postpones building a modern future or chooses to do it at its own pace and on its own terms, western cheerleaders for India’s rise may have no choice but to modify their expectation that India will help fight alongside the world’s democracies against totalitarian China or Russia.
Husain Haqqani is director for South and Central Asia at the Hudson Institute. He served as Pakistan’s ambassador to the U.S., 2008-11. Aparna Pande is fellow and director of the Initiative on the Future of India and South Asia at the Washington-based Hudson Institute.
Source: TEST FEED1
Share:
US unemployment insurance system at 'high risk' for waste, fraud: GAO
The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) warned on Tuesday that unemployment insurance systems were at “high risk” for fraud, waste and mismanagement.
The unemployment insurance system, which is already scheduled to be updated next year, has “critical weaknesses” in terms of how it “carries out its mission and also includes options panelists suggested for transforming the system,” the office said.
The office also said that the recent “unprecedented demand” for unemployment assistance prompted a need for the systems to be enacted quickly, causing “serious challenges for states and a greater risk of improper payments, including those due to fraud.”
“The widespread problems plaguing the Unemployment Insurance system are extremely troubling,” Gene Dodaro, who heads the GAO, said in a statement on Tuesday.
“Not only is the system falling short in meeting the needs of workers and the broader economy, but the potential for huge financial losses could undermine public confidence in the stewardship of government funds,” Dodaro added.
Meanwhile, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, told The Washington Post that the GAO report confirms that the unemployment system is “broken.”
“While expanded jobless benefits saved millions of families from financial ruin during the pandemic, the GAO’s reports make clear the unemployment system is broken — both in terms of program administration and benefit policy,” Wyden said.
“The historic action Congress took — expanding benefits and covering gig and part-time workers — papered over deep problems that need to be addressed before the next economic downturn,” he added.
The office’s report comes after the Labor Department’s data last week showed that the U.S added 390,000 jobs and the unemployment rate held even at 3.6 percent in May despite high inflation.
Source: TEST FEED1
Share:
IRS warns scammers still using pandemic to steal Americans' money, identities
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) warned Tuesday that potential scammers are still using various types of pandemic-related scams to steal money and identity from U.S. citizens.
The IRS in March said its investigators had uncovered more than $1.8 billion in fraudulent activity related to federal COVID-19 stimulus funds. And a tsunami of fraudulent unemployment claims have cost states and the federal government tens of billions of dollars.
In a statement on Monday, IRS noted that scammers are sometimes using fake job offers and stimulus checks and to gain access to victims’ information to file false unemployment claims or tax returns.
“Scammers continue using the pandemic as a device to scare or confuse potential victims into handing over their hard-earned money or personal information,” IRS Commissioner Chuck Rettig said in a statement. “I urge everyone to be leery of suspicious calls, texts and emails promising benefits that don’t exist.”
“Any text messages, random incoming phone calls or emails inquiring about bank account information, requesting recipients to click a link or verify data should be considered suspicious and deleted without opening,” the agency said. “This includes not just stimulus payments, but tax refunds and other common issues.”
The agency also said criminals are using the promise of pandemic Economic Impact Payments (EIP) to target individuals. It noted that criminals also use fake charity schemes to steal information from would-be donors.
“Caution and awareness are our best lines of defense against these criminals,” Rettig added Tuesday. “Everyone should verify information on a trusted government website, such as IRS.gov.”
Individuals that missed out on their COVID-19 stimulus payments or got less than the full amount are eligible to claim a Recovery Rebate Credit for their 2020 or 2021 federal tax returns, the agency noted.
Source: TEST FEED1
Share:
Warnock presses Schumer to hold vote on bill to lower insulin costs
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) is pressuring Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to hold a vote on legislation to lower the cost of insulin.
Warnock faces a tough reelection race this year and has made lowering the cost of insulin a central part of his message.
The timeline on the legislation has slipped, though.
“I am deeply disappointed the Senate was not able to vote on this critical legislation before Memorial Day,” Warnock wrote in a letter to Schumer dated Monday.
“The time is now to finally act on this critical issue, and we can’t afford to wait any longer,” he wrote.
Warnock has a bill to cap patients’ out-of-pocket costs for insulin at $35 per month. But the main effort on insulin in the Senate is a measure from Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine.), which would include a $35 cap on patient costs while also including other measures aimed at reducing the overall price of the drug.
Schumer gave his support to the talks between Shaheen and Collins in March, and said then that he planned to hold a vote “as soon as possible after Easter recess,” but that timeline has now come and gone.
Shaheen and Collins have unveiled an outline of their bill but have not yet formally introduced it.
Collins said Tuesday that she and Shaheen are “close” to introducing their bill. “We have been waiting for the [Congressional Budget Office] estimate,” she said. “We are in the midst of talking to CBO about the estimate but we are close.”
Even once the measure is introduced, it faces a steep path to passage given that it would need 10 Republicans to get to the required 60 votes.
Only 12 House Republicans voted for the House version of insulin legislation in March, with many calling it “price controls,” though Shaheen and Collins are trying to make their version more bipartisan.
Asked if she had other Republicans she thinks will support the bill, Collins said “I do,” but declined to elaborate.
The push from Warnock adds a political complication, given that the opposing party is always reluctant to give wins to lawmakers facing competitive reelection races.
Source: TEST FEED1
Share:
Tech accountability package: The way to kill privacy legislation
In recent months, the pressure from Congress on tech companies has grown with nebulous, and at times paradoxical, accountability proposals introduced on Capitol Hill. Bills have been proposed to change and regulate the way we protect freedom on the internet, privacy, and platform interoperability and competition.
With elections around the corner, summer recess looming, and a possible flip of the Senate and House in November, there is discussion about combining several or all of these bills together.
Combining these actions into a tech accountability package would be a mistake. Experts point out that seeking competition may come at the expense of privacy and security, and as Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) argued, it is bad policy to weaken national security for the sake of regulating “Big Tech.” Additionally, the proposed bills vary substantially in their importance, bipartisan agreement, and effect on consumers and tech platforms.
Addressing data security and data privacy is the most important priority Congress could address this year, and it should be prioritized. It is the backbone for everything else that happens in our digital life. Questions around the function of platforms are based on the fundamental principles of privacy and data security. In fact, the drafters of the antitrust bills are aware that they are intertwined because they attempt to address cybersecurity concerns by giving carve-outs and security exemptions that attempt to address cybersecurity and privacy in an ad-hoc way. It is reactive instead of proactive. And, although the privacy bill might be an unexpected date to the Big Tech dance, it is the likeliest to pass Congress because it has the broadest support. The news that Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) announced a negotiated compromise on a bill makes it even more likely that this is the one bill likely to pass this session.
The other legislation grouped under the term “tech accountability,” such as Section 230 reform and antitrust legislation are both less popular and provide questionable answers to the challenging questions of platform accountability and speech online. More importantly, they do little to address the underlying problems that a privacy bill should solve first. A recently amended draft of the leading proposed antitrust bill, The American Innovation and Choice Online Act, S. 2992, attempted to fix these problems, but critical issues remain. Passing this legislation would still lead to cybersecurity and national security concerns raised by security experts, which should really be tackled as a primary issue within a privacy bill.
A reasonable, consensus-based privacy bill should be the building block for any other action. As we’ve outlined at R Street, such a bill would reach across both sides of the aisle while upholding privacy and security for Americans. As we argue in our privacy project, “The current lack of federal privacy legislation affects the economy, national security and consumer safety and is—at its most basic level—not a controversial issue for most Americans.”
Bundling all of these challenging pieces of legislation into one omnibus package may be one way to move all of the legislation, but it’s more likely that one provision will be seen as a poison pill that tanks the whole lot. Instead, let’s move data security and data privacy legislation which, unlike other bills, will bolster our cybersecurity posture, improve privacy protections for consumers, and create strong building blocks upon which other Big Tech accountability could be built.
Tatyana Bolton is the policy director for R Street’s Cybersecurity & Emerging Threats team. She crafts and oversees the public policy strategy for the department with a focus on critical infrastructure cybersecurity, data security and data privacy, and diversity in cybersecurity.
Source: TEST FEED1