Tag Archives : Build House

How states can fight back against the climate emergency

California is on fire. In Florida, the ocean is expected to rise another six inches in the next 15 years, destroying countless homes and lives. And in the Midwest, more frequent heatwaves have led to drought, reduced crop yields and the death of thousands of livestock. 

Climate change is not on the horizon; it is already here. And it is impacting American lives every day. The most important tools we have to address the growing concerns around climate change are knowledge, education and preparedness — all of which can be fostered and advanced through the creation of viable green career pathways. Armed with these tools, we can ensure that all Americans are well-informed and well-prepared to tackle this once-in-a-lifetime challenge.

More than 80 percent of parents and teachers support teaching about climate change and its impact in schools. Unfortunately, little time is being spent in the classroom discussing the topic, and many teachers do not have access to the necessary resources and professional development to effectively teach it. This is why state and local dollars should be allocated for providing resources and professional development opportunities to educators around climate change — particularly as new content standards, such as the Next Generation Science Standards become more popular. Of course, education alone won’t be enough to fix our warming planet — tackling climate change must become a national priority.

My home state of Iowa understands the power of investing in green energy and renewable energy jobs. The Hawkeye state is the largest producer of green energy in the United States, producing over 58 percent of its electricity from primarily wind turbines. In 2019, these turbines provided over $69 million in lease payments to Iowa landowners and produced more than $61 million in taxes for the state and local governments, while simultaneously reducing carbon dioxide emissions equal to 2.7 million cars.

Iowa’s “green economy” currently employs over 13,000 workers, and is expected to grow nearly 20 percent in the next five years. Thus, the economic argument for addressing global warming is clear: Climate change education and green career pathways benefit state bottom lines. However, growing our workforce to meet the rising demand for renewable energy will require laser-like focus and a national commitment to addressing the impacts of climate change.

Investment and alignment at every educational level will be critical for providing green industries with a highly skilled workforce pipeline, as many require career-specific competencies such as renewable energy, energy efficiency, green manufacturing and conservation. Career and technical education programs and community college systems are uniquely positioned to help students enter these careers.

In North Carolina, the state’s Clean Energy Youth Apprenticeship Program provides high school and community college students with opportunities for on-the-job training, necessary coursework and workforce internships to enter in-demand green careers. And in Iowa, community colleges, often in partnership with energy manufacturers, are offering wind energy-specific programs such as degrees and certifications in turbine technology, sustainable energy technology, and applied engineering technology — wind turbines. State and local leaders must think critically about the industries that are growing in their region, and then develop programs to support students with the resources to enter or reskill into those industries. For instance, nearly 420,000 potential workers in Iowa, from a variety of industries such as transportation, retail and construction, could be easily reskilled into green jobs.

As the former governor of Iowa and a former high school educator who, today, consults clients who are involved in renewable energy and infrastructure initiatives, I understand just how substantial the benefits of investing in renewable and green energy industries can be, not only for our planet but for the state. During my time in office, we were the only state to have its entire bipartisan congressional delegation vote in favor of wind production tax credits. Perhaps it is time for leaders across the country, regardless of party, to rally around climate change initiatives and green energy. Just look at what it did for Iowa — these credits saved Iowa taxpayers and businesses money while incentivizing job creation, particularly in rural communities, where the majority of wind farms are located. Today, these Iowa communities continue to thrive thanks to our over $20 billion historic investment in renewable energy, while unfortunately other communities across the country who have doubled down on fossil fuels continue to struggle.

Climate change can be a highly contentious and political issue that arguably poses the most significant threat to the next generation of Americans. But it is also a threat that, with proper preparation, investment and bipartisan support, we can face head-on. 

As a former educator, I understand that one of our most effective tools in the battle against climate change is our schools. By equipping millions of teachers and young people, who are already passionate about this issue, with the skills, knowledge and information necessary to address climate change, and through the creation of clear, accessible green career pathways, we may be able to stem the growing tide and ensure our children and grandchildren have a healthy and safe planet for millennia to come.

Chet Culver is the founder of the Chet Culver Group, a renewable energy and infrastructure consultancy. He was the governor of Iowa from 2007 to 2011.  

Source: TEST FEED1

Arkansas judge's body found at bottom of lake after family vacation

Authorities discovered the body of an Arkansas judge at the bottom of a lake after he apparently ventured off alone during a vacation with family and friends over the weekend.

The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office said on Sunday they discovered the body of Arkansas County Northern District Judge Jeremiah Bueker, 48, after his family conducted their own unsuccessful search and called 911.

The sheriff’s office said Bueker’s death is being investigated as an accidental drowning but that they are sending his body to the state’s medical examiner for an autopsy.

“I truly pray that the successful recovery of Judge Bueker’s body by our deputies and Arkansas Game & Fish Wildlife Officers brings some sense of closure to the Bueker Family and those who knew him best,” Sheriff Lafayette Woods Jr. said in a statement. 

“The scour of emotions they must feel right now is devastating,” he added.

Bueker was vacationing with family and friends over the weekend near Mud Lake and at some point ventured off alone, authorities said. His family and friends noticed he was missing and soon began a search before calling authorities.

Officials from local and state agencies conducted a ground and water search that began just before midnight on Saturday evening, and the search was later temporarily suspended due to low visibility. 

Soon after the search resumed just after sunrise on Sunday, sonar technology revealed Bueker’s body at the bottom of the lake.

“The boats used were equipped with side-scan sonar, which provides a birds-eye view of the water,” Woods said.

Source: TEST FEED1

Pentagon announces additional $1B in lethal aid to Ukraine

The United States has greenlighted the largest military assistance package to Ukraine thus far, preparing to send $1 billion in ammunition for advanced rocket systems, vehicles and explosives to help the country beat back the Russian invasion.    

The new assistance package will include ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS), as well as 75,000 rounds of 155 mm artillery ammunition and 50 armored medical treatment vehicles, according to a Pentagon statement released Monday.  

“It is the largest single drawdown of U.S. arms and equipment utilizing this authority, and this package provides a significant amount of additional ammunition, weapons, and equipment — the types of which the Ukrainian people are using so effectively to defend their country,” according to the statement 

The U.S. government has now approved nearly $10 billion in security assistance for Ukraine over the course of 18 packages since August 2021. 

The latest weapons tranche coincides with a newly announced $4.5 billion in humanitarian aid for the Ukrainian government, the Treasury Department announced Monday. That funding will be given to Ukraine in batches, beginning with a $3 billion disbursement this month. 

The administration has periodically released assistance to the Ukrainians since Russia launched its attack in late February. The last military assistance package, totaling $550 million, was announced Aug. 1 and included ammunition for HIMARS, a rocket system that allows Ukrainian forces to strike targets from longer distances. 

The latest lethal aid package will also include 20 120 mm mortar systems and 20,000 rounds of 120 mm mortar ammunition; munitions for National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems; 1,000 Javelin and hundreds of AT4 anti-armor systems; claymore anti-personnel munitions; C-4 explosives, demolition munitions, and demolition equipment; and medical supplies, according to the Pentagon. 

Source: TEST FEED1

GOP physicians in Congress: Drug price control in reconciliation bill will impact patient care

A group of Republican physicians in Congress are voicing their “strong opposition” to the prescription drug pricing control policies that were included in Democrats’ massive reconciliation package that cleared the Senate over the weekend.

“We write to express our strong opposition to the government drug price control policies in your reconciliation package,” the lawmakers wrote in their letter to Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), which was shared on Monday by Rep. Scott DesJarlais (R-Tenn.). “As medical providers and Members of Congress, we are deeply concerned with the harm these provisions will cause to patients across the country.”

The members of the GOP Doctors Caucus cited concerns from health care providers that the policies would result in limited access to care as well as a drastic drop in provider reimbursement.

The letter was written on Friday.

The legislative package that addressed tax, health care and climate change issues was passed by the Senate on Sunday along 50-50 party lines, with Vice President Harris breaking the tie. The Democratic-controlled House is expected to take it up later this week.

The $740 billion bill included $288 billion for prescription drug pricing reform. Throughout the weekend, the drug pricing legislation shrunk somewhat after the Senate parliamentarian struck down a provision that would have limited drug companies to increase their prices at only the rate of inflation.

While this provision was struck down, other key measures were allowed to stay, including allowing Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices on some drugs for the first time.

The GOP Doctors Caucus said the plan would result in patients who “could die waiting for new drugs and cures that will no longer be developed in their lifetimes. Government price controls have consequences.”

“We can and should work on a bipartisan basis to lower drug costs without sacrificing the cures and treatments that will provide for a healthier future,” they added.

The Republican lawmakers who signed the letter included Sens. Bill Cassidy (La.), John Barrasso (Wyo.) and Rand Paul (Ky.), as well as Reps. Andy Harris (Md.) and Mariannette Miller-Meeks (Iowa).

Source: TEST FEED1

Congress needs to take its role in inflation seriously

The last time inflation was this high, interest rates climbed over 19 percent. Chairman Paul Volcker and the Federal Reserve took a lot of political heat for the high rates, but the Fed’s response brought down inflation. Theory and experience have shown that active monetary policy can keep inflation in check. But to tame the current inflation without a repeat of the early 1980s, Congress will need to adjust fiscal policy to work with the Fed.

Inflation is well above the Fed’s 2 percent target. The most recent reading of the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index, the Fed’s preferred measure, showed a 6.8 percent increase over the past year, with a 1.0 percent increase in just the last month.

High inflation is a natural result of excessive deficit spending and money printing. Congress spent trillions of dollars on pandemic-related programs, and the Fed covered that by issuing new money. Of the $6.7 trillion in new federal debt held by the public since the end of 2019, $3.6 trillion is now held by the Federal Reserve.

The Fed has responded to rising inflation by winding down its asset purchases and raising interest rates. We’re already seeing the effects of the Fed’s rate hikes in two quarters of negative real GDP growth. If lawmakers leave the Fed to do all the work, it will require larger interest rate increases that will put the brakes on economic growth.

But the problem is bigger than just the next turn in the business cycle. The Fed can hold inflation down only temporarily if Congress insists on spending more than it takes in. Debt held by the public is now 98 percent of GDP. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) expects debt to climb to 185 percent by 2052 as outlays grow faster than GDP.

Eventually, the market will believe that Congress will never run the surpluses needed to pay back the debt, leading either to crushing interest rates, outright default or the Fed needing to inflate the debt away. If Congress wants 2 percent inflation, it must run deficits consistent with that goal.

Senate Democrats have proposed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) as their way to bring down inflation. The bill establishes a corporate minimum income tax and a new excise tax on drug manufacturers. It also increases tax enforcement through the IRS. About half the new revenues are spent on subsidies for climate change and ObamaCare. Tax revenue over the next 10 years would go up about 1.3 percent, while spending would increase by about 0.5 percent, based on CBO figures.

Yet, despite the bill’s name, multiple experts predict that the law will have no effect on inflation. The Penn Wharton Budget Model estimates that the effect on inflation will be statistically indistinguishable from zero. Moody’s estimates the law will reduce the Consumer Price Index by 0.33 percent nine years from now — an average reduction in the inflation rate of 0.03 percent. The CBO says it might lower the inflation rate by as much as 0.1 percent — or raise it by the same amount.

This is because of the inherent contradictions in the bill. It reduces the deficit, which should reduce inflation by reducing the need to print money. However, it reduces the deficit by raising taxes instead of cutting spending. That discourages production and leads to higher prices, counteracting the deflationary effect of a smaller deficit. Reducing government spending would reduce final demand, reinforcing the bill’s deflationary effects. For maximum effectiveness, the IRA should cut spending.

If the bill were serious about reducing inflation, all its provisions would either increase taxes or reduce spending. However, about half the tax revenue projected to be raised is used to finance additional spending on items from the Green New Deal agenda.

The Fed has raised rates by 75 basis points over its last two meetings, but Congress can’t sit back and expect the Fed to do all the work. High interest rates with large deficits will lead to explosive growth in debt. The Inflation Reduction Act fails to live up to its name and does nothing to address the excessive spending that is driving the federal government’s structural deficit.

Parker Sheppard is the acting director of The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis.

Source: TEST FEED1

After a long wait, it’s still a struggle to get young kids vaccinated against COVID

The headlines are blaring once again about COVID vaccine hesitancy, lifting up a new Kaiser Family Foundation survey that found that 40 percent of parents don’t plan to vaccinate their children under 5 years old. By focusing attention on that group of parents, they’re leaving out a critical part of this story. After anxiously waiting for vaccines to become available for young children, most parents are eager to vaccinate our kids against COVID-19. Despite those years of experience with this pandemic, United States public health and health care institutions are leaving parents struggling to navigate a frustrating and confusing process. 

I’m a white, highly educated researcher who studies health care access and is on the faculty of a medical school. Before becoming a researcher, I spent five years working at a community health center helping people access needed health care. I’ve successfully navigated vaccine scheduling for myself, my older child, and other friends and family. Even with all of this knowledge and privilege, it’s been very challenging to get my young child vaccinated.

As the Kaiser Family Foundation survey notes, many parents are confused about the details of vaccination and don’t know where to get a vaccine for their kids. They have concerns about having to take time off work for their kids to be vaccinated, and about getting the shots from a trusted provider. Despite many rounds of vaccine approval and distribution for other age groups, vaccine distribution seemed disorganized and unclear in the days after the drawn-out federal approval process for children under five. A few days after vaccines for this group were approved, I stopped by a drop-in COVID vaccine clinic run by my local public health department at the neighborhood library. They said they wouldn’t have doses for this age group for a couple of weeks and didn’t suggest anywhere else to go.

I spent a couple more days searching for appointments, using state and federal find-a-vaccine websites. These were several days behind in acknowledging that vaccines were approved, then didn’t have any local appointment availability. My employer had a 45-minute wait time when I called to try and schedule an appointment. My child’s primary care provider didn’t update their website for at least a week to acknowledge the approval of vaccines for young kids.

After a few days of fruitless searching, a fellow parent (also white, highly educated, with good health care access) mentioned that her kids’ pediatricians’ office not only had COVID vaccine doses but was scheduling appointments via text, open to anyone. I easily scheduled the appointment and brought my 4-year-old that weekend for his first dose. It was well-organized with an outdoor waiting area and stickers and small toys for kids after vaccination. We ran into two friends. It was quick and easy, I didn’t have to take off work, and they offered follow-up appointments for the second dose. Information about this clinic wasn’t available anywhere I was looking, even though it was open to the public. This office had somehow received vaccines weeks before our public health department. 

Over a month later, vaccine access continues to be disorganized and hard to navigate—despite all we have learned from vaccination of adults and older children. My child’s second dose came due while we were traveling across the country to visit family. In an attempt to find him a timely second dose of the Moderna vaccine, I have tried find-a-vaccine websites in two different states, gone back to the federal site, called two local health care organizations, navigated scheduling websites at six pharmacy chains and called the closest one on the phone, and attempted to schedule at a drop-in site where some other friends took their kids. So far we’ve had no luck. Each of these has said that my child is not eligible, or they don’t have doses, or they are closed for the week, or they haven’t returned my phone calls. My child’s primary care provider emailed offering COVID vaccine appointments but then wouldn’t let me schedule one online. When I emailed, they said they didn’t have Moderna vaccines and didn’t recommend anywhere else to go. Luckily, the pediatric office where my child got the first dose texted me as I was writing this to schedule an appointment for his second dose, a couple of weeks late. 

I’m confident that I’ll get my kid vaccinated soon. But I know that many parents will give up if their initial attempts aren’t successful, because they’re busy, overwhelmed, not fluent in English, or have concerns about vaccination and can’t easily access someone who they would trust to care for their children. Federal, state and local public health departments should recommit to collaboration with trusted community organizations and primary care providers to make COVID vaccination easier for parents of young children and people of all ages. They can make vaccination easy by offering it with and without appointments at places where people already go: schools, daycares, parks, libraries, spiritual communities, grocery stores, and medical offices. All of these agencies have a responsibility to do proactive outreach to families, making sure that every family of young children who wants to vaccinate can do so before the new school year begins.

Ariana Thompson-Lastad, PhD is a medical sociologist and an Assistant Professor at the University of California San Francisco, Department of Family and Community Medicine and Osher Center for Integrative Health.  

Source: TEST FEED1

National average price of gas expected to fall below $4: GasBuddy

The national average price for a gallon of gas fell to $4.01 on Monday and is expected to imminently fall below $4, according to estimates by GasBuddy.

Gas prices have fallen for eight consecutive weeks after briefly peaking at a record high of more than $5 a gallon in mid-June, according to the gas price tracker’s analysis. AAA reported on Monday a nationwide average of $4.059 per gallon.

“The national average is poised to fall back under $4 per gallon as early as today as we see the decline in gas prices enter its eighth straight week,” Patrick De Haan, GasBuddy’s head of petroleum analysis, said in a statement. 

“By the end of the week, one hundred thousand stations will be at $3.99 or less,” he said.

But average gas prices still vary widely by state.

Texas on Monday reported the lowest average gas price at $3.51, closely followed by Oklahoma and South Carolina.

Gas prices in two western states — California and Hawaii — still remain above $5.30, followed by Alaska at $4.97.

De Haan suggested the prospects are for gas prices to continue to fall, though he suggested hurricane season could lead to disruptions.

“The groundwork is laid for a ninth week of decline, with areas of the West Coast soon ditching the $5 per gallon average,” said De Haan. “While I’m upbeat the drop can continue for another couple weeks, we’re starting to see some activity in the tropics, which may increase risk of potential disruption.”

GasBuddy’s analysis indicates diesel prices are also dropping, falling 13.1 cents in the last week and now standing at an average of $5.14 per gallon. De Haan said that average will likely soon dip below $5.

AAA attributed some of the recent drop to falling gas demand, citing recent Energy Information Administration (EIA) data showing gas demand last week was in line with levels at the end of July 2020, when pandemic restrictions kept many drivers off the roads.

Higher gas prices have been a major contributor to inflation, which hit 9.1 percent for the year ending in June, the largest price increase in roughly 40 years.

President Biden authorized releases from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve beginning in March to decrease prices at the pump following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

After promising to make him a pariah, Biden also met with Saudi Arabia Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman last month in an apparent attempt for the country to increase its oil production.

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), which includes Saudi Arabia, and other oil producers on Wednesday agreed to boost production in September but at a much slower pace than in previous months.

Source: TEST FEED1

Blinken targets Russia in major African policy speech

Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Monday called out Russia as exploiting instability in Africa, committing abuses with impunity and blamed Moscow for worsening food security on the continent over its war in Ukraine. 

The secretary’s remarks were part of a wide-ranging speech on the Biden administration’s strategy towards sub-Saharan Africa, delivered at the University of Pretoria in South Africa, amid rising competition between Washington and Moscow for influence on the continent.

Still, Blinken emphasized the U.S. “will not dictate Africa’s choices, neither should anyone else,” but that Washington is looking to African nations “to defend the rules of the international system that they’ve done so much to shape.”

“These include the right of every country to have its independence, its sovereignty, its territorial integrity, respected. A principle at stake now in Ukraine,” Blinken said. “We believe that all nations should be able to stand up for the right of a country not to have its borders redrawn by force. For if we allow that principle to be violated anywhere, we weaken it everywhere.”

Blinken’s arrival in South Africa, part of a three-country tour also including the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda.

Many African nations have resisted taking a firm stance on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. At least 17 African nations, including South Africa, abstained in votes during the United Nations General Assembly condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, during his trips last week to Egypt, Ethiopia, Uganda and the Republic of Congo, praised African nations as acting responsibly, and slandered Western democracies’ history of colonial rule on the continent.

“I am sure the overwhelming majority of world countries do not want to live as if the colonial times (have) come back,” Lavrov said in Ethiopia last week. 

The Biden administration has often stressed in its global talks that the U.S. is not forcing countries to “choose,” but that it is a better “choice” for developing nations as a partner, compared to countries like Russia or China, which is also heavily invested on the continent.

But the secretary on Monday delivered direct criticism against Moscow over its invasion of Ukraine and interference in African nations, in particular the mercenary Wagner group.

Blinken said the “Kremlin-backed Wagner group… exploits instability to pillage resources, and commit abuses with impunity,” in particular in Mali and the Central African Republic, where Human Rights Watch has accused the group of carrying out atrocities, such as summary executions, torture and killing of civilians. 

“The United States recognizes that African countries face real security concerns and that countless communities are afflicted by the twin scourges of terrorism and violence. But the answer to those problems is not Wagner, it’s not any other mercenary group,” Blinken said, adding that the U.S. is focused on supporting strengthening democracies to combat instability. 

“African countries can count on the United States to support these efforts,” he said. 

Blinken also blamed Russia for exacerbating poverty and hunger on the African continent, over its invasion of Ukraine.

Only recently have ships stuck under Russian blockade in Ukrainian ports been able to exit with tens of thousands of tons of food stuffs under a joint initiative brokered by the United Nations and Turkey.

Blinken brought up World Bank estimates that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is likely to plunge 40 million more people into food insecurity, requiring humanitarian food assistance, on top of 193 million people already dependent on international aid, adding that “most” of these people are in Africa. 

“The United States is there for African countries in this unprecedented crisis, because that’s what partners do for each other and because helping Africans jumpstart a broad-based recovery and build resilience to weather future shocks is vital to our shared prosperity,” Blinken said.

A senior administration official, speaking to reporters before the secretary’s speech, reiterated that the administration’s viewed China and Russia’s influence on the continent as “very subsidiary from our perspective,” adding the U.S. is focused on “how we can do better to work more effectively with Africans to achieve results in areas that challenge us all.”

The secretary’s speech laid out key priorities for U.S. relations with African nations, including strengthening democracy, governance, peace and security, trade investment, and economic development, while tackling how the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change is worsening already dire circumstances on the continent. 

Blinken said the U.S. is committed to Africa because it views the continent as a “major geopolitical force” and that by 2050, one in four people on the planet will be Africans. 

“They will shape the destiny not only of this continent, but of the world,” Blinken said. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Congress can’t codify Roe: Here’s what it can do

Several days after the Supreme Court held that Roe v. Wade was no longer the law of the land on abortions, President Biden asked the Senate to create an exception to its filibuster rule to allow a vote on a bill to codify Roe.

While the sentiment is understandable, the president should instead refocus his attention on what Congress and the executive branch can do to lessen the devastation that the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling is likely to produce. Indeed, if the president’s filibuster wish came true, it will likely cause more harm in the long run than what will follow from Dobbs.

Although many Americans believe that Congress has the power to enact laws in almost every field, that is a serious misconception. Under our system of government, the states are the basic source of lawmaking, and Congress is limited to the powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Those powers are significant, but far from unlimited, and do not include the ability to make abortions legal. Perhaps the broadest power of Congress is the ability to regulate interstate commerce, but even that was not expansive enough to pass majority muster regarding the individual mandate that was part of the Affordable Care Act, which at least dealt with the commercial subject of the payment for medical services. And since that decision in 2012, the court has become much less willing to support the broad use of federal powers.

For those in Congress and elsewhere who want to protect the right to an abortion in every state, the bad news is that there is no serious legal argument that Congress has that power. The only value in passing such a law is that it would ultimately lead to a decision by the Supreme Court declaring that Congress has no such authority.

Although disappointing in the short run, the good news is that such a ruling would also mean that, if anti-abortionists gain control of Congress and elect a president who would sign a bill banning abortions in every state, that law would also likely be unconstitutional. If Congress cannot codify Roe (however that would be translated into legal language), it should not be able to do the opposite and ban abortions in the states where they are now legal, which would truly be calamitous.

There are, however, several actions that Congress and the president can take that are within their powers and that will prevent anti-abortion states from blocking women trying to obtain legal abortions out of state. The first reaction of pregnant women in Texas when the court refused to enjoin the new six-week ban on abortions was to go to states where abortions are still lawful. The response of Texas and other states with bans or very strict limits on abortions is to try to make it a crime for women to travel to another state to obtain an abortion and also to make anyone who helps them to be guilty as well.

The good news here is that the court, in a decision dating back to 1975, ruled that a state cannot make it illegal to travel elsewhere to have an abortion, a position that Justice Brett Kavanaugh voluntarily embraced in his concurring opinion in Dobbs, which Attorney General Merrick Garland has promised to support and which Biden has directed HHS to address in his recent executive order.

But that may not be enough as states are proposing to enact laws like the one in Texas where the sole means of enforcement is by a private vigilante action seeking money damages, in order to prevent federal courts from enjoying their enforcement. Here is where Congress can step in by enacting a law plainly within its commerce clause power: make it a violation of federal law for any person (including law enforcement officials) to criminalize or impose a penalty on a woman who seeks to travel between states to obtain an abortion, as well as anyone who assists her. The Biden administration attempted to use this approach in the Texas case, but it was not successful because it did not have a law like this to back it up. The Ensuring Access to Abortion Act, which the House recently passed, is just such a law, although Senate passage is unlikely due to an almost certain filibuster.

Another safe haven for women seeking an abortion is to have them performed on military bases, federal prisons and other property under exclusive federal control. States may try to enforce their anti-abortion laws if women who do not live on federal property seek refuge on federal lands, so it would be important to include in the travel statute discussed above a similar provision covering women who have their abortions on federal property or in federal facilities

The Biden administration has already worked to make it easier for women to obtain emergency contraception. It should continue and expand such efforts, but it also should press for a statute that enshrines these changes into law so that future presidents cannot revoke them on their own. And as the president proposed to do in his July 8 executive order, and as his administration has done in suing Idaho for its six-week abortion ban, the federal government should strengthen protections for women who face emergencies in states where physicians question whether the exception for saving the life of the woman applies. He can also do more to push his agencies and Congress to provide protections against prosecutors’ efforts to surveil women through fertility apps and other trackers.

There are many other constitutional actions that federal agencies can take now or that Congress can enact that will alleviate the pain that Dobbs will inflict. But they do not include an effort to codify Roe, which is a good thing, because such efforts will not and should not succeed. More importantly, they will divert attention from the meaningful steps the Biden administration can and should legally take.

Alan B. Morrison is an associate dean at The George Washington University Law School where he teaches constitutional law; Sonia M. Suter is a professor of Law and Founding Director of the Health Law Initiative at The George Washington University.

Source: TEST FEED1