#and issues about the allocation of research and funding and support

[in4newz]

To my Asian, European, African, and Canadian friends...do y'all wanna know how the United States found itself under a fascist, Hitler-loving dictator named Donald Trump?

In another post, I started my timeline in 1980. The year I was born. But, it was also a turning point in US politics.

First, let me share my credentials.

- Bachelors of Arts - History

- Juris Doctor - Public Interest Law (Critical Race Theory)

- Masters of Philosophy (research degree) - Sociology (Race, Ethnicity, Conflict)

Just recently, we buried President Jimmy Carter, who was the president, when I was born. Jimmy was from Georgia, like my grandmother, and he came from a Southern Baptist background. Southern Baptists are known for being very conservative Christians who did not support abortion.

Jimmy, despite that background, actually supported LGBTQ rights by lifting a federal ban. He supported Roe v. Wade which protected access to abortion. And, he established the federal Department of Education.

However, Jimmy had an antagonistic relationship with Congress, and that alienated several Democrats, including Ted Kennedy, who was the brother of John F. Kennedy, a president who was assassinated.

The Kennedy family has an established name brand due to JFK and Robert F Kennedy (another brother and JFK's attorney general who was also assassinated). Ted was the younger, drunken brother who caused the accidental death of a college friend.

In 1980, Ted challenged Jimmy for the presidency even though they were both Democrats. Jimmy has the incumbent shouldn't have faced a challenge from his own party, but he had just been that bad.

So, this internal strife weakened the Democratic Party entering the 1980 election. In that same year, Jimmy boycotted the 1980 Olympics in Russia due to Russia's invasion of Afghanistan. Furthermore, there was a recession.

The Republican Party nominee was a former Hollywood actor turned politician named Ronald Reagan. Ronald was the governor of California and was trailing Jimmy in the polls until a presidential debate in which Ronald used his acting skills to make Jimmy seem incompetent.

Ronald believed in "trickle down economics." He believed that if the wealthiest people were taxed less, then they would spend more, thus boosting the economy and allowing prosperity to "trickle down" to the working & Middle class.

He also believed in increased military spending as this was the height of the Cold War with Russia. My own parents voted for Reagan because my dad was in the military.

Instead of trickling down, the wealthy just grew wealthier. Republicans continued to lower taxes for these individuals and businesses, so the money never trickled down. Social services were underfunded & unemployment increased. Reagan's response was to blame Black "welfare mothers" for abusing the system.

Republicans latch onto this. They implement work requirements for government assistance and make it harder for folks to pull out of poverty. As a result, a wealth gap separated white folk from the rest. White folk felt their hard earned money was supporting lazy white & Black folk, so they continued to constrict welfare programs.

[Section added] During Reagan's term, an unknown illness is killing young, gay Black & Latino men. It's AIDs. Reagan deemed it a gay disease that only affects gay people, so no funding is allocated to study this disease. It's viewed as retribution for their homosexua lifestyle. However, overtime, they learn about HIV once non-gay men were infected. Children die from the disease because blood is not tested for it, so some are born from it through their mothers while others were given transfusions.

Under Reagan, the Fairness Doctrine ends. Under this doctrine, news agencies had to report both sides of an issue. Because of this, television stations can now present one side. Fox News opens as a conservative network.

Ronald is well-loved by white folk. He gets elected to two terms. By the end of his term, the economy has recovered, and white folk are prospering. Then, his VP, George H.W. Bush, is elected.

Under George I, the Cold War ends, but we have the Gulf War in Kuwait. He signs trade agreements that result in several American companies, namely the auto industry, to shutter their doors and build factories overseas. This is due to a change in tariffs!

Millions of Americans lose their jobs as factories close. Detroit, as the leading auto manufacturer city, is devastated. Back in the 90s, Detroit was the 4th largest US city after Chicago. These factory closures hit the Midwest, especially hard.

This makes Bush unpopular. He is challenged by a young, charismatic Democrat named Bill Clinton.

Bill was a southerner like Jimmy, but Bill was a very well-known ladies' man. Bill appeals to Black Americans, though, and that allows him to defeat George.

Bill continues expanding trade agreements. He's a fiscal conservative despite being a Democrat, and under Bill, military spending is reduced.

[Section added] The rise of AIDs leads to further hate directed at the LGBTQ. During the 90s, several queer people are murdered. One such kid was Matthew Shepard. A college kid in Wyoming, he is beaten by a gang of white men. His family was terrorized so much, that they couldn't bury him because of fears his grave would be desecrated.

[A white woman Bishop in DC invites Shepard's parents to bury him in their graveyard. That Bishop is Marian Edgar Budde, the same Bishop who gave Trump his inaugural sermon this past week. She pleaded for Trump to have mercy on the queer community because she was the Bishop who buried Shepard!]

Bill is a popular president. The economy is booming, but he's still a lady's man, and he gets in trouble with a college intern.

This scandal adversely impacts the last few years in office so much so that his VP, Al Gore, loses the presidency to George W. Bush.

George Bush won the Electoral College while Al Gore won the popular vote. There was such a tiny margin that there were numerous recounts because of faulty ballots (hanging chads). Eventually, the Supreme Court intervenes and tells them to stop the count and certify George as president.

George II is the son of George I.

George II is a popular Texan with swagger. He wants to build up the military once again.

Clinton left a surplus of money, so what did George II do? He implemented tax cuts for the wealthy. That damned "trickle down economics" again. The wealthy get wealthier, increasing the wealth gap between white folks and everybody else.

They cut taxes while cutting social services. One of his biggest "achievements" was a restructuring of our educational system called "No Child Left Behind."

NCLB emphasizes test scores. School administrations are penalized if they don't meet these standards. They lost funding, so electives such as home economics, art, Music, etc are trimmed to make room for these test standards. By this time, my dad has retired from the military and is a school principal, and I remember the stress of trying to meet these standards.

These standards emphasize STEM at the expense of liberal arts. This is happening just as the internet becomes available to all.

Amazon opens as an online used book store. Facebook is started as a college message board. There's a tech boom, so everyone is being pushed into tech fields. Liberal arts education was devalued.

During his term, 9-11 happens. We declare war on Afghanistan. Islamophobia spikes. Fox News helps drive this narrative. Christianity is now being pushed into schools, whereas schools were previously secular.

[Section added] In 2004, the assault rifle ban was lifted. Now we are seeing a dramatic spike in school shootings. The Far Right embraces the expansion of the 2nd Amendment.

Then, we go to war in Iraq.

We aren't quite sure why we're at war with Iraq. We overthrow Suddam Hussein (from the Gulf War). George declares victory, then terminates the Iraqi Army.

This triggers an insurrection. Massive casualties are coming out of Iraq. The war in Afghanistan is overshadowed.

George serves two terms, but his VP is so unpopular that he doesn't run for president. Instead, the Republican nominee is John McCain.

Two Democrats fight for the nomination. Hillary Clinton, the wife of Bill, and Barack Obama.

Barack was a young, biracial Senator from Illinois. I attended law school in Illinois, and one of my classmates had been his legislative aide. I met Barack twice while a student. The first time, he had come to campus to propose a college-savings account. After his press conference, I latched onto his arm and refused to let go until he heard me, and I explained that his proposal was unrealistic because it assumed that a single mother would have the resources to save for an education when it was more likely her money would go towards groceries & rent or other immediate needs. (Fast forward two-three years, and the dude is repeating my line during the State of the Union! I had changed his mind!)

Barack beats Hillary for the nomination. He defeats McCain and is sworn in as the 1st black (not Black) president.

Obama is popular and well-loved by most Americans. Under his tenure, gay marriage is legalized.

Fox News triples down on their hatred.

Their network booms. They push Islamophobia 24/7. Highlight the fact that Obama's father was Muslim and that his middle name was Hussein.

Older Americans are watching program after program of this negativity. A movement starts called the Tea Party movement, which positions itself as a fiscally conservative movement. A bankrupt slumlord with a reality TV show gains popularity with these folks.

I wrote my master's dissertation on the Tea Party movement. It's called "Jesus and the White Man."

Donald Trump

Donald latches onto the Islamaphobia. He calls Barack by his middle name and questions his birth certificate. Donald grows popular with older Americans.

At the end of Obama's term, the son of VP Biden dies. This devastated Biden. He had lost his infant daughter & first wife in a car accident. He decides not to run for president.

Obama supports Hillary.

It is now Hillary v. Trump.

Trump pushes misogyny and Islamaphobia. Hillary is Bill's wife and a woman. She is the most qualified presidential candidate to ever run (at that time).

During Obama's last year in office, Justice Antonin Scalia* dies. Obama has the privilege to nominate that next Justice, but Mitch McConnell stalls through the election.

But older white Americans were barely okay with a black president. They were not about to let a woman serve as President. At the same time, an organization called Cambridge Analytica began to fine-tune an ultra conservative agenda.

With the help of Russian intelligence, they use Facebook ads to try to persuade voters to support Trump. They succeeded with white folk, but they did not succeed with the Black vote.

Russians used African bot farms in order to try to persuade Black Americans to support Trump. We rejected him at 90%.

Donald wins the Electoral College but not the popular vote.

Donald is a corrupt and ineffectual president. He tried to bribe foreign leaders and shared US intelligence with Russia.

However, as a populist, he latches onto the Christian Right. He nominates 3 Supreme Court Justices who lie during their confirmation hearings. These Justices will ultimately vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.

The Christian Right love this. But then COVID hits and the incompetence of Donald leads to millions of deaths. These Christian folk refuse to get vaccinated or wear masks.

Donald is an unpopular president and ranks as the worst president of all time.

Biden challenges him and wins.

Donald refuses to accept that he lost, so he organized an attempted coup. January 6th.

He's impeached. Twice.

McConnell refuses to take the step to have him permanently barred from office.

Biden takes office when COVID is still rampant. The Christian Right continue to push their agenda, seeking to remove protections for the LGBTQI.

Right wing media generates a lot of money. Podcasters jump on the bandwagon. Red pill content spills into the mainstream.

Kids who were isolated during COVID are now at home watching Joe Rogan & Theo Von. They spend hours upon hours on TikTok.

But unbeknownst to these kids is the history of Russian interference.

Schools emphasize STEM. They don't emphasize liberal arts or social sciences such as history or literature. The literacy rate plummeted to an all-time low. The average white American's reading level is at the 4th grade. They aren't able to engage in critical thinking.

They don't know the history of the Spanish Influenza. They don't know the history of a trade war that triggered the Great Depression. They don't know that our government has imprisoned citizens in internment camps. They don't know Hitler's rise to power.

In fact, Fox News frequently features individuals who deny the Holocaust.

Russia move their troll farms from Facebook to TikTok, where the algorithm serves as an echo chamber. Uneducated, illiterate folks gobble up 30-second videos but can't be arsed to watch anything over 5 minutes so complex issues are stripped down to sound bites.

The algorithm pushed right-wing fascist talking points. They rehabbed Donald while shifting Gen Z to the far right. They do not know how to verify information for themselves, so they gobble up misinformation and disinformation.

If a TikTok creator has millions of followers with thousands of views and likes, these kids assume that that info is factual. They do not vet shit for themselves.

Russia pushed anti-American propaganda that posed as pro-American talking points. Pushed isolationism. Pushed anti-democratic rhetoric. In fact, one of their greatest accomplishments is convincing Gen Z and uneducated, white Millennials into thinking we aren't a democracy.

We are a fucking Democratic Republic. Our constitution begins with: "We the people".

So, because of TikTok, Trump won.

That's why Biden was pushing for it to be banned before the election. The algorithm was being corrupted. But folks couldn't part from their addiction.

Folks who had been anti-Trump just 5 years ago are suddenly Trump supporters. They were brainwashed.

So, how did we get here?

We got here because most Americans are fucking STUPID.

Source

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from Canary Media:

The Trump administration has ordered federal agencies to ​“immediately pause the disbursement of funds” under the landmark federal climate and energy laws passed during the Biden administration, a move that will throw tens of billions of dollars of lawfully designated federal funding into limbo — and one that is likely to be challenged in court.

The pause on disbursing funds appropriated through the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is laid out in a section of a broader executive order on ​“Unleashing American Energy,” entitled ​“Terminating the Green New Deal.”

The order calls on federal agencies to halt all disbursements under the two laws while they ​“review their processes, policies, and programs for issuing grants, loans, contracts, or any other financial disbursements of such appropriated funds for consistency with the law.” It gives federal agencies 90 days to report to the director of the Office of Management and Budget and the head of the National Economic Council on how the frozen spending aligns with the administration’s overall energy goals.

Incoming administrations often call for temporary freezes and reviews of federal agency actions ordered by their predecessors. But it is far less common for executive orders to make federal agencies halt spending on programs mandated in laws passed by Congress.

The order is likely to cause significant confusion for the many government entities and private-sector companies that have been awarded funds, Alex Kania, director of equity research at Marathon Capital, an investment banking firm focused on clean infrastructure, wrote in a Tuesday research note.

“This would obviously stop any unappropriated funding, but the halt on any disbursement suggests a broader move, such as stopping payment of funds that had already been approved and previously contracted,” Kania wrote. ​“Bottom line, these executive orders inject a lot of uncertainty into federal clean energy policy, and a turn to the courts seems likely.”

Kania noted that the executive order is unlikely to impact tax credits created by the Inflation Reduction Act.

Tax credits — not loans, grants, and contracts — make up the majority of the hundreds of billions in federal spending expected to flow from the Inflation Reduction Act, which Trump has called for rescinding entirely. But Republicans in Congress and many industry groups have warned that ending the tax credits would undermine the economic development and job growth the incentives have spurred largely in Republican districts.

Industry observers have been expecting the Trump administration to halt spending that federal agencies have yet to allocate, but the text of the executive order leaves unclear whether the freeze will also target spending that has already been ​“obligated,” or legally committed under contract. A Biden administration official told reporters on Friday that $96.7 billion in clean energy grants, or about 84 percent of grant funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, has been obligated.

That includes tens of billions in loans and loan guarantees issued by the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office, which under the Biden administration supported electric-vehicle and battery factories, battery-mineral mining, processing, and recycling facilities, distributed solar and battery deployments, EV-charging projects, alternative aviation fuel operations, clean hydrogen production plants, and nuclear reactors. Of the approximately $107.57 billion Biden’s LPO awarded across across 53 deals, just under $60.62 billion consists of loans and guarantees that have been finalized and obligated, according to a Friday update from the DOE.

Obligated funding also includes the $27 billion for so-called ​“green bank” programs created by the Inflation Reduction Act, which help fund climate projects that struggle to secure private-sector loans; about $3 billion of a $5 billion grant program for electric and zero-emissions school buses; and around $5 billion in Climate Pollution Reduction Grants for states, local governments, tribes, and territories to finance plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution.

Other grant-funded projects at risk include the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law’s $7 billion clean hydrogen hub program, for which only a fraction has been obligated, and the more than $22 billion in grants to fund power grid projects across the country, of which more than $10 billion has been awarded to utilities, companies, and state, local, and tribal governments but just a smaller slice has been obligated. Only portions of the IRA’s $8.8 billion in home-efficiency and electrification rebates and incentives and a $9.5 billion rural electrification program have been obligated.

The executive order also singles out for immediate pause the $7.5 billion in EV-charging infrastructure grants created by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

Of the $5 billion segment of those grants earmarked for large charging hubs along major highways and transit corridors, ​“my guess is about two-thirds of those are under contract with states,” said Loren McDonald, chief analyst of EV-charging data firm Paren. ​“And I would assume that those that are under contract could not be clawed back. How could you basically promise money for an applicant, they start construction, and then you pull it back?”

And in general, analysts say it would be difficult for Trump to undo obligated awards made by the Biden administration.

[mariacallous]

The Farm Bill is a critical piece of legislation that reauthorizes the country’s agricultural and nutrition programs about every five years—and the 2024 version is now on legislators’ desks, with some major changes. 

Originally designed to support farmers, the Farm Bill has evolved over time to prioritize nutrition assistance, with the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) now comprising 76% of the budget—projected to increase to 84% in the current version. This shift underscores the growing emphasis on addressing food insecurity among low-income Americans, as SNAP currently serves over 42 million individuals, or about 12% of the population.

The 2024 Farm Bill will fund SNAP, agriculture subsidies, and crop insurance through 2029, at a projected cost of $1.5 trillion. However, as the first Farm Bill to exceed $1 trillion, it faces heightened scrutiny as both parties clash over the allocation of funding between SNAP, subsidies, and other key programs.  

The current version of the bill, introduced by the Republican-led House Agriculture Committee, has sparked controversy by proposing a $30 billion cut to SNAP funding over the next decade. This reduction would be achieved by limiting adjustments to the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP)—a low-cost, standardized estimate of the minimum cost of a nutritious diet, used to determine SNAP benefit levels—to inflation rates only.  

The TFP is reevaluated every five years to reflect current food costs. In 2021, the Biden administration reevaluated the TFP to respond to high food costs due to COVID-19 and supply chain issues in the global food industry, resulting in the largest-ever increase in SNAP benefits, totaling $256 billion. Now, Republicans are seeking to restrict future adjustments to reflect only inflation costs, marking the largest SNAP reduction in nearly three decades. But Democrats and researchers argue that such a restriction could have significant impacts on the 42 million SNAP recipients, including 17 million children, 6 million older adults, and 4 million people with disabilities.

Americans face rising food insecurity and barriers in accessing nutritious diets  

The proposed cuts, along with provisions to outsource program operations, could undermine SNAP’s ability to effectively combat food insecurity. This is especially concerning given that food insecurity rates rose to 13.5% of U.S. households in 2023, affecting 18 million families—a statistically significantly increase from 2022, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Food insecurity rates are notably higher for single-parent, female-headed households; Black and Latino or Hispanic households; and households in principal cities and rural areas. In addition, voters are growing increasingly worried about inflation and high food costs, with 70% citing food prices as a major concern. This view is especially pronounced among younger voters, who have been hit hard by a 20% surge in food costs since 2020, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.  

In addition to concerns surrounding food insecurity and rising costs, the TFP debate risks being a superficial fix that overlooks deeper, more critical challenges low-income families face in accessing nutritious diets. A USDA study found that 88% of SNAP participants encounter challenges in maintaining a healthy diet, with 61% citing the high cost of healthy foods as a key barrier. Other reasons include a lack of time to prepare meals at home and transportation difficulties in accessing healthy foods.  

Access barriers—combined with broader economic factors such as regional variations in real food prices and other costs of living, shifts in food composition data, changing consumption patterns, and updated dietary guidance—significantly impact low-income households’ ability to maintain affordable, nutritious diets. Addressing such factors is crucial for creating a more sustainable and impactful SNAP program, yet they remain sidelined in favor of quick, inflation-focused approaches that do little to address systemic barriers to healthy food access for vulnerable families.

The proposed $30 billion cut to SNAP funding over the next decade by restricting the USDA’s authority to adjust the TFP beyond inflation rates will have serious and multidimensional challenges for these low-income, food-insecure households. In addition, the bill’s proposal to outsource core SNAP operations to private entities could create complications in the application process and eligibility criteria, while also increasing federal costs by $1 million.  

Notably, the current version of the bill proposes to expand SNAP’s purpose to include the prevention of diet-related chronic diseases. Critics, such as the HEAL (Health, Environment, Agriculture, Labor) Food Alliance, argue that this risks diverting attention away from SNAP’s core mission of reducing food insecurity, and instead shifts the focus to diet-related concerns facing low-income populations. Yet these diet-related concerns are often a result of multifaceted challenges such as stress (or “bandwidth poverty”), food insecurity, and other factors such households face. The current version of the bill also proposes to cut climate-focused conservation efforts introduced by the Inflation Reduction Act. 

Proposed changes to agricultural subsidies have sparked equity concerns 

The proposed Farm Bill aims to reallocate funds by raising price floors for key agricultural commodities such as corn, wheat, and soybeans, while cutting SNAP funding. A large portion of the increased spending is directed toward farm programs and crop insurance—raising concerns about equity and the disproportionate benefits to large, wealthy farms. 

A report from the American Enterprise Institute highlights this disparity, revealing that the top 10% of farms receive 56.4% of all crop insurance subsidies, with the top 5% receiving 36.4%. Since these subsidies are not means-tested—and the level of subsidies is directly proportional to an agri-business’s production levels—the wealthiest and largest businesses capture the most significant share of these benefits. Research from the Environmental Working Group confirms evidence on the concentration of these subsidies toward the wealthiest agri-business owners. They found that between 1995 and 2021, the top 1% of recipients received 27% of the total $478 billion in farm subsidies—underscoring the disproportionate benefits to large-scale, wealthy farmers. Moreover, these subsidies favor a narrow range of commodity crops such as corn, soybeans, wheat, and cotton, which accumulates benefits to white, wealthy farmers while farmers of color receive little support. This inequitable allocation of resources raises important questions about the Farm Bill’s broader social and economic implications.  

The Government Accountability Office and Congressional Budget Office have proposed reforms to the current inequitable structure of these subsidies. Such reforms have the potential to reduce the fiscal deficit while protecting rights of farmers, ensuring food assistance to low-income populations, and maintaining price levels of key commodities. Reforms include implementing income limits on premium subsidies for wealthy farmers, adjusting compensation for insurance companies to reflect market rates, and reducing taxpayer reimbursements for administrative costs.

SNAP benefits aren’t keeping up with the true costs of a healthy diet 

A critical aspect of SNAP that is often overlooked in fiscal policy debates is the economic adequacy of the program’s benefits. There is a growing body of research suggesting that SNAP benefits in their current form are insufficient to cover the “real” cost of a healthy diet. 

In other words, the TFP might not truly reflect the real value of food costs low-income households face. The TFP was originally intended to represent the minimum food expenditure basket that would allow low-income households to avoid food insecurity. It is not necessarily based on the most recent scientific methodologies that factor in food prices, accessibility, and dietary needs.  

Recent evaluations have shown that the TFP often underestimates the cost of a nutritious diet, particularly in areas with higher living costs. An Urban Institute study found that despite food price inflation moderating in 2023, SNAP benefits remained inadequate for covering food costs: By the end of 2023, the average modestly priced meal cost $3.37, which was 19% more than the average maximum SNAP benefit of $2.84. Families with zero net income faced a shortfall of $49.29 per month by the end of the year, with urban areas experiencing a 28% gap between meal costs and SNAP benefits, compared to 17% in rural areas. In the five counties with the largest gaps, the shortfall exceeded 70% throughout the year. 

Recent economic research indicates that current SNAP benefits often fall short of covering the actual cost of a low-budget, healthy diet, with significant variations in benefit adequacy across U.S. regions. Researchers have found that these geographic variations in SNAP purchasing power significantly affect welfare outcomes such as child health and food insecurity. Despite deductions for housing and child care, many regions face much higher real costs of food, and SNAP dollars do not go far in such high-cost areas. To ensure equitable support, social scientists have put forth proposals to index SNAP benefits to local area food prices.   

Therefore, the proposed cuts to SNAP funding risk exacerbating systemic and multidimensional challenges low-income populations already face. Concerns about food insecurity and diet-related chronic diseases are symptomatic of deeper systemic challenges related to health insurance access, stress and bandwidth poverty, access to healthy foods, the higher cost of healthy foods, and structural oligopolies in the American food industry. Research suggests that SNAP inadequacy is linked to worse health outcomes, such as increased risk of obesity, diabetes, and hypertension. Yet instead of focusing on deeper systemic issues, the current Farm Bill proposes a quick fix, Band-Aid solution by proposing to cut SNAP funding further.

Policy recommendations for a stronger Farm Bill 

Despite proposing massive cuts to SNAP, increasing inequitable farm subsidies, and cutting climate funding for conservation efforts, the 2024 Farm Bill does lay out some positive measures. These include raising the income cutoff for SNAP eligibility (the Earned Income Deduction) from 20% to 22% of income, which will ensure more households just at the margin of earned income now have access to SNAP benefits. It proposes to give benefits access to individuals with drug-related convictions, who were previously excluded. Further, it proposes to extend the age limit for high school students on SNAP from 18 to 22 years, allowing students to work without disincentivizing income for eligibility. However, despite these positives, the proposed cuts and other changes could undermine the Farm Bill’s effectiveness in addressing food insecurity and equity concerns in agricultural subsidies.  

The proposed cuts based on restricting SNAP increases to only reflect inflation diverge significantly from academic research underscoring that the TFP should be updated regularly to factor in food prices, consumption patterns, and nutritional guidelines. While this measure could save $29 billion between 2025 and 2033, it will further dampen SNAP’s purchasing power as food costs continue to rise and vary across regions. 

The polarization of the Farm Bill reflects a broader ideological divide over the role of welfare in American society. Republicans have historically advocated for limited assistance and stricter work requirements for SNAP recipients. In contrast, Democrats have historically perceived welfare programs such as SNAP as essential tools for reducing poverty and inequality, and advocated for expanded benefits and more coverage.  

Politicians need to look beyond this ideological gap and focus instead on creating a more equitable and effective Farm Bill that addresses society’s economic and welfare needs. A zero-sum approach that pits agricultural interests against the needs of food-insecure, low-income consumers is not proving to be effective.  

What follows are key policy recommendations for crafting an inclusive and equitable Farm Bill that addresses the economic and welfare needs of vulnerable populations, including low-income households and underrepresented farmers. 

Evidence-based SNAP adjustments: Use scientific methodologies to measure the TFP’s adequacy and issue frequent and regular updates to SNAP benefits. Factors that impact the TFP beyond inflation include other costs of living, regional variations in SNAP adequacy, food consumption patterns, and healthy diet guidelines. 

Index benefits to reflect local economic conditions: Implement regional cost-of-living adjustments to SNAP benefits, which can address disparities in food costs and improve equity across geographic regions.  

Expand access to healthy foods: Invest in initiatives that improve access to healthier food options, such as affordable farmers markets, community gardens, and incentives for retailers in underserved areas to improve food access and support local economies.  

Rebalance agricultural subsidies: Impose income limits on farm subsidies and expand efforts to improve subsidy access for small-scale and BIPOC farmers.   

Integrate climate goals: Allocate funding for climate-resilient agricultural practices and provide financial assistance and incentives to small-scale and BIPOC farmers to invest in such technologies.  

Foster bipartisan collaboration: Encourage cooperation across party lines to create a Farm Bill that balances agricultural support with food assistance—recognizing their interdependence rather than treating them as competing interests. 

Engage stakeholders: Involve farmers, nutrition advocates, and SNAP recipients in the legislative process to ensure policies reflect the needs and realities of those directly impacted. 

The 2024 Farm Bill represents a critical opportunity for Congress to craft a more equitable and inclusive policy that addresses the dual needs of supporting agricultural production as well as nutrition assistance. However, as it currently stands, proposals such as the $30 billion cut to SNAP funding, the shift in focus toward preventing diet-related diseases, and the continued expansion of agricultural subsidies that disproportionately benefit white, wealthy farmers and a limited number of commodity crops risk undermining SNAP’s response to food insecurity and worsening inequality in the agriculture sector. 

Policymakers must look beyond zero-sum dynamics that pit agricultural subsidies against nutrition assistance, when the fundamental issues farmers and low-income households face are symptomatic of deeper systemic inequalities in the economic and welfare structures of fiscal policy. Therefore, rather than continuing to concentrate support in the hands of wealthy, large-scale agricultural producers, the Farm Bill should prioritize uplifting smaller, diverse farmers and ensuring low-income households have the resources they need to access nutritious food. Encouraging small-scale and low-income BIPOC farmers to invest in green technology is also essential, as this would foster more sustainable agricultural practices while supporting communities’ economic growth. At the same time, Congress must ensure that commodity prices remain stable and affordable, preventing further economic burdens on consumers. 

An equitable and welfare-focused Farm Bill would embrace a broader vision—one that balances the needs of both rural farming communities and urban, food-insecure families. By aligning agricultural subsidies with sustainable practices and expanding SNAP’s effectiveness, Congress can craft a policy that not only strengthens food security, but also builds a more just, resilient, and environmentally responsible food system for all Americans. 

[globalnewscollective]

Your Health, Your Life: What Happens When the Government Hides Critical Medical Data?

Imagine going to a doctor, only to find out they can’t properly diagnose or treat you because the government has erased vital health data. This isn’t a plot from a dystopian novel—it’s happening right now under the Trump administration.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has quietly removed crucial health statistics from its public database, making it harder to track issues like obesity, suicide rates, and other critical public health crises. These removals aren’t just bureaucratic decisions; they are calculated moves to suppress inconvenient truths that don’t align with the administration’s narrative.

What Data Is Being Erased?

Obesity Statistics: The U.S. has an obesity crisis, with millions at risk of diabetes, heart disease, and other severe conditions. Removing obesity data makes it harder to allocate resources to fight this epidemic.

Suicide Rates: Suicide is one of the leading causes of death in the U.S., especially among young people and veterans. Eliminating this data hinders suicide prevention efforts and mental health advocacy.

Gun Violence and Public Safety Data: Many CDC studies on gun deaths and injuries have vanished, making it harder to understand and combat firearm-related deaths.

Reproductive Health and Maternal Mortality Rates: Women’s health data, particularly concerning pregnancy-related deaths, is disappearing, erasing evidence of the crisis facing mothers in America.

Medical Treatment Guidelines: The CDC has also deleted treatment guidelines for doctors, including protocols for treating sexually transmitted infections (STIs) like syphilis and chlamydia. This means that doctors may lack up-to-date recommendations, leading to misdiagnoses and inadequate care.

Why This Matters to You

Health data is not just numbers on a spreadsheet; it determines funding, policy decisions, and life-saving medical research. Without accurate statistics:

Doctors and researchers can’t properly study health trends, leading to misdiagnoses and inadequate treatments.

Lawmakers won’t have the information needed to craft policies that protect public health.

You and your loved ones may not receive critical services because the crisis isn’t being documented.

Journalists and advocates lose a key tool to hold the government accountable for public health failures.

The Bigger Picture

This is not an isolated incident. The Trump administration has systematically erased or altered data across multiple federal agencies, from climate change research to economic inequality reports. The goal? To control the narrative and eliminate evidence of policy failures. If there’s no data proving a problem exists, the administration can pretend it doesn’t.

By removing statistics on obesity, suicide, and other health crises, the government is not solving these problems—it’s hiding them. And when problems are hidden, they grow worse.

What Can You Do?

Demand transparency: Call your representatives and insist that public health data be reinstated.

Support independent research: Organizations like the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Guttmacher Institute work to provide accurate health data despite government censorship.

Speak out: Share this information on social media and educate others about how data erasure affects everyone.

Vote for leaders who prioritize science, public health, and government transparency.

We can’t afford to let critical health data disappear. The consequences could be deadly.

[youroriginalsublimecupcakestuff]

They're some unspoken rules if you want to survive in no longer human corporation either as a client or a worker.

Try to ignore dazai osamu if he flirt with you or try to convince you to do a double suicide with him, all complaint are to be sent to the Dazai Osamu damage control department.

All ex of dazai should not be given access to the buildings and should be personally relocated to the dazai osamu support group by secretary nakahara, head of accounting kunikida doppo is welcome in the meeting, the same could not be said about dazai.

A special fund should be reserved for any damage caused by secretary nakahara chuuya as well as akutagawa ryuunosuke and yosano Akiko.

The lawyer department should be well funded and be contacted should any problem arise especially if it's damage caused by the like of Yosano Akiko or head of science department kajii motojirou.

You should learn to ignore any stalking, i mean lovingly watching over them by higuchi ichiyo or tayama katai toward one of the akutagawa siblings, likewise the inapropriate behavior of the tanizaki siblings should be ignored for the sake of your sanity.

No one should get hurt in front of Yosano Akiko, the company health inspection should be avoided at all cost.

A fund should be allocated for head of research Edogawa Ranpo sweet craving, the room of the research department should be well furnished with various snacks everyday .

You should ignore the scolding by head of accounting kunikida doppo to CEO dazai Osamu when the later is skipping work or doing his usual shenaningan like edogawa ranpo's snack, kunikida doppo stationary should be well furnished a fund have been alocated to this pursharse.

a well trained group of clerc should be assured that kunikida doppo and nakahara chuuya came to their anger management class and do their meditation assignment , another have to be assigned to osamu dazai and akutagawa ryuunosuke as well as others worker who should go to therapy, a fund have been assigned for any mental scarring or others issue caused to the therapist.

Edgar Allan Poe as well as lucy maud Montgomery should be given access to the building, edgar allan poe in particuliar is given access to the research department, any concern with the company the guild should be adressed to them.

Cat are allowed and encouraged in the office, dog however are not much to secretary nakahara disagreement.

No one under any circumstance should flirt or confess to secretary nakahara for the sake of their financial and mental health.

Foods especially beef should be well stocked for intern miyazawa Kenji as well as sweet especially crepe for intern izumi kyouka and chasuke should be served in the company self service for intern nakajima atsushi as well as curry for oda sakunosuke ( warning as his curry is super spicy it's advised that no one else should touch it).

Co Head of the IT department who share this post with rokuzō taguchi , tayama katai should be allowed to work from home if need came to be, he's also allowed to come with his futon yoshiko in the office.

But what baffle the most anyone who heard or come accross the company isn't even the quirks of the workers but that the company still manage to make records profits in only a few years, it managed to be amongst the leading company in japan and worldwhile.

When the company started to be known others company tried to poach the workers especially kunikida doppo who seem to be done with dazai most of the time, the more shocking refusal was by dazai's hyper competent secretary nakahara chuuya, it's a well known fact that dazai and nakahara are rival and can't stand each others but no matter how much you will offer him he will refuse it .

Both founded the company together and are coined as soukoku in the business world a legendary duo but everyone found that it's best for the sake of your safety and braincell to not wonder about their relationship no one know if they're dating or try to murder each others ( everyone choose to ignore dazai talk about nakahara being his dog for life as well as nakahara virulent talk of hatred because you don't kiss someone that you hate seriously chuuya-san.)

One things is sure is that nakahara is either a miracle worker or have serious problem to be able to support and to be with someone like dazai.

[eretzyisrael]

by Stacy Gittleman

Tlaib repeatedly used the term genocide — a term originally coined to describe the murder of 6 million Jews in the Holocaust — when describing the tragic deaths of Gazan civilians. All casualty figures from the now eight-month war come from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Ministry of Health. Leading urban war experts, including West Point’s John Spencer, repeatedly stated that the precautions Israel has taken to prevent civilian harm during this war not only surpasses that of any military in history, including the United States, but also go above and beyond what is required by international law, according to reporting from Tablet magazine.

According to reports from the Israel Defense Forces, 12,000 Hamas terrorists have been killed and most of these are men.

Tlaib also repeatedly delivered a message that providing Israel with military aid takes away from funding social issues that are important to her progressive constituents. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, the federal government allocated about 1% of total spending to foreign aid. This is consistent with trends over the past 20 years.

According to the Congressional Research Service, the United States committed over $3.3 billion in foreign assistance to Israel in 2022, with $8.8 million allocated to the country’s economy and the rest toward the Israeli military.

All current military aid to Israel is part of the 10-year, $38 billion Memorandum of Understanding signed with the U.S. in 2016. The MOU supports updating the Israeli aircraft fleet and maintaining the country’s missile defense system. The agreement commits $500 million in missile defense funding and $3.3 billion in other military funding each year from 2019 to 2028.

In February, Congress passed an emergency package of military aid to Israel to the tune of $14 billion. To this, Tlaib decried the decision as “funding genocide.”

To the responses of “shame” from the audience, Tlaib said: “I watched my colleagues, one by one voting yes to send $14 billion to the apartheid regime. All I kept thinking is that the United States is the primary investor and funder of genocide. We are literally co-conspirators.”

Getting it wrong

Of local interest was Tlaib’s misleading claim that there is currently no lead-free drinking water for Detroit’s schoolchildren.

In 2018, lead and copper were detected in water from drinking fountains in many Detroit Public Schools Community District buildings. All drinking fountains were disabled and covered with garbage bags.

In 2019, according to Chalk-beat, over 500 water hydration stations were installed at every district school with built-in filters to purify the water from any lead or copper. The project was made possible by $3 million in donations from companies, foundations, organizations and individual donors. No taxpayer money was on the project.

Additional funding signed into law by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in February 2024 provided $50 million in state funding to install lead-reducing water stations at schools and childcare centers throughout the state.

All state public schools and childcare centers must test their drinking water every two years, according to the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy.

[yuri-for-businesswomen]

I feel like many of the defenders of prostitution don’t actually know/have known women who were/are prostituting themselves or being sold. Someone very close to me was trapped in the cycle and used drugs to cope since she was a young adult, which ultimately killed her. She was robbed of her life at every turn, even from childhood.

Ignorance allows people to be blind to the reality of these women and benefit from their struggle. There’s few things more dehumanising than that, imo.

so true! they dont actually do any research into numbers, statistics and patterns, or read between the lines and investigate the factors that push and pull women into prostitution.

they hear „im a prostitute and im against the nordic model“ and leave it at that without asking why. they hear „criminalisation harms prostitutes“ but they dont ask how. this is how we get people who think that full legalisation is the only option without considering the inherent issues with prostitution that cant be regulated away, and without considering that legalisation increases demand which increases harm, and without considering that there are ways to reach and help women under the nordic model if the right measures are implemented.

instead of advocating for the government to allocate funds on institutions, social workers, coaches, psychologists, etc who support prostituted women under the criminalisation of sex buyers they choose an easy and superficial „fix“ through the legal system while simultaneously claiming that the nordic model fails precisely because its a legal measure. they say „the nordic model doesnt fix the issues“ but they dont advocate for further changes such as the change of immigration law and enhancement of protection for single mothers.

then they scream bodily autonomy which is also stupid because bodily autonomy stops when someone else is doing the harm, in this case the sex buyer.

its all superficial but thats what liberalism is: it starts and ends at the individual. ironically then they dismiss every individual (ex) prostitute who is against prostitution because „your experiences are not universal“ - okay but consider that paying for sexual consent is universally detrimental to sex positivity and womens rights in a patriarchal world.

im so sorry to hear about your friend, may she rest in peace!

[beardedmrbean]

Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser distributed thousands of dollars to low-income moms with no strings attached as part of an "equitable economic recovery strategy" to offset the costs of childcare. In at least one case, the taxpayer dollars were used to fund a lavish trip to Miami. 

The direct cash payments were part of a pilot program to determine whether the flush of cash could demonstrate "economic improvements among participants." "Additional cash has allowed women to achieve further financial stability, financial security, food security, and health insurance coverage," Bowser's office had claimed.

But an economic policy expert told Fox News Digital the policies were a misdirection of funds that should otherwise be used for public safety and education. 

All 132 mothers who participated in the program were able to choose whether to receive monthly payments of $900 or to get $10,800 in a lump sum, which was "a unique feature of D.C.’s pilot," according to The Washington Post. 

"Quite often these handouts actually trap people in a cycle of poverty," Joel Griffith, an economic research fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told Fox News Digital. "This is not helping people build long-term wealth and to have long-term economic prosperity."

One recipient – Canethia Miller – told The Post that she took the money and spent most of it on a lavish trip to Miami. 

"Some of it I just left alone. The other side is, I wanted to blow it. I wanted to have fun," Miller said. "[My kids] got to experience something I would never have been able to do if I didn’t have that money."

Miller blew it on a "five-day, $6,000 trip to Miami," which included "a boat tour [that] exposed them to million-dollar homes and luxury yachts." 

"In what she called a rare moment of self-indulgence, Miller spent $180 ahead of the vacation to get her own hair and nails done," The Post reported. She also took her kids shopping and got them new outfits and toys for the trip.

Griffith said that the D.C. mayor would have been better off spending money on reducing crime.

"Spending money on what effectively is a lotto for city residents is the wrong thing to be doing. I think what parents want, whether single moms, single dads or married couples, is a safe city," he added. "What the mayor could do is take these resources that they're going to be distributing randomly to single moms. And you could hire, by my calculations, 25 full-time police officers. That would go a long way in some of these neighborhoods where you can't even walk safely at night." 

In January 2022, Democratic Mayor Bowser allocated $1.5 million to a direct cash transfer pilot program called "Strong Families, Strong Future DC" that was intended "to support maternal health and advance economic mobility." 

"This program is about supporting new and expectant moms with cash so that they can have the autonomy and flexibility to make the best choices for them and their baby," Bowser said. 

The Strong Families, Strong Future DC pilot was at "the heart of our equitable economic recovery strategy," Bowser added.

But some of the issues arose when the mothers were uncertain about how to spend the cash.

Building generational wealth generally requires a solid educational background, which in D.C. is lackluster, Griffith said. 

"[As a resident of D.C.], you're likely to graduate with a subpar education. And we're talking about sometimes an inability to do basic math and basic reading comprehension. And those are the core skills that in a work ethic that allow people to succeed in this country, even if they don't come from a wealthy family," he added. 

Miller seemed to share a similar sentiment when she told The Post, "A lot of communities in my area don’t know the financial gain of credit, saving for your kids; that’s why we’re broke, that’s why we don’t have nothing to pass down or no house to give down. I’m trying to get to the level where I’m passing something down that really matters, so I can be set and my kids can be set, and they don’t need to push so hard like I’m doing now."

Altogether, Miller saved $50 from the program.

"She opened up a savings account, aiming to keep at least $50 in it. She used the remaining $4,000 or so from the pilot in a matter of months, mostly on bills and a used car," The Washington Post reported.

[mayamidnightmelody]

Stop Bullying 🛑🤝

StopBullying #Respect #Empathy #Inclusion

Bullying, a pervasive issue in schools, workplaces, and online spaces, inflicts deep wounds on individuals and communities. Its detrimental effects range from psychological distress to academic or professional underachievement, and in severe cases, it can lead to self-harm or suicide. Recognizing the urgency of this matter, concerted efforts must be made to eradicate bullying and foster environments of respect, empathy, and inclusion.

First and foremost, education serves as a potent tool in combating bullying. Schools and communities must implement comprehensive anti-bullying programs that educate students about the different forms of bullying, its consequences, and strategies for intervention and prevention. By integrating these programs into the curriculum and promoting open discussions, students can develop a deeper understanding of empathy and respect for others.

Moreover, fostering a culture of inclusivity is crucial in addressing the root causes of bullying. Embracing diversity in all its forms—whether it be racial, cultural, religious, or sexual orientation—creates an environment where individuals feel valued and accepted. Schools and workplaces should actively promote diversity initiatives, celebrate multiculturalism, and provide support networks for marginalized groups, thereby mitigating the conditions conducive to bullying behavior.

Furthermore, the role of adults, including parents, teachers, and employers, is paramount in combating bullying. Adults must serve as positive role models, demonstrating empathy, kindness, and assertive communication skills. They should actively listen to the concerns of those who have been bullied and take decisive action to address the issue. Additionally, fostering strong connections between adults and youth can create a supportive environment where victims feel empowered to seek help and bystanders feel compelled to intervene.

In the digital age, where cyberbullying has become increasingly prevalent, it is imperative to promote digital literacy and responsible online behavior. Educating individuals about the impact of their words and actions in virtual spaces, as well as implementing robust measures for reporting and addressing cyberbullying, are essential steps in safeguarding the well-being of all individuals, particularly adolescents who are most vulnerable to online harassment.

Ultimately, eradicating bullying requires a multifaceted approach that involves collaboration between schools, communities, and policymakers. Legislation should be enacted to enforce strict penalties for bullying behavior and provide adequate resources for victim support and mental health services. Additionally, funding should be allocated to research initiatives aimed at understanding the underlying factors contributing to bullying and developing evidence-based interventions.

In conclusion, stopping bullying necessitates a collective effort to cultivate respect, empathy, and inclusion in all facets of society. By prioritizing education, fostering diversity, empowering individuals, and implementing robust policies, we can create environments where bullying is not tolerated, and every individual feels safe, valued, and respected. Together, we can build a future free from the shadows of bullying, where kindness and compassion prevail.

[weather-usa]

Texas requires funding to ensure continuous electricity supply during severe weather conditions. As a result, it is allocating more resources to support fossil fuels.

Ensuring continuous electricity can mean the difference between life and death, a reality underscored this week in Houston. As temperatures soared, hundreds of thousands endured brutal heat without air conditioning.

The city faced consecutive severe storms: first, a powerful derecho in May shattered skyscraper windows and plunged downtown Houston into darkness. Then, an early-season Category 1 hurricane, Beryl, knocked out power for over 2 million customers.

See more:

Texas's electric grid struggles to keep pace. Downed trees and strong winds toppled local power lines, and the May derecho even twisted massive transmission towers into mangled metal. Despite these challenges, instead of bolstering grid resilience to maintain lights and A/C during increasingly extreme weather, Texas is investing billions in new natural gas-fired power plants.

Doug Lewin, a Texas energy expert, acknowledges the necessity of adding electricity capacity due to rising demand. However, flooding the grid with fossil fuels won't fortify power lines against severe storms. "Large-scale gas generation offers no help in hurricane scenarios," Lewin explained to CNN. "The issue lies with transmission capacity. Having surplus power means nothing if it can't reach those in need."

This push for natural gas plants follows the devastating February 2021 deep freeze that claimed over 200 lives and left millions without power or heat. Despite political rhetoric against wind energy, it was natural gas plant failures that caused most outages.

Recent mass outages, including those from downed lines, highlight vulnerabilities. "The weak link has always been the wires and poles," noted Michael Webber, an energy expert at the University of Texas at Austin. "Yet, the state prioritizes natural gas power over grid hardening."

Just months before Beryl struck, Houston's Centerpoint Energy projected needing $2 billion to weatherproof its system against worsening weather extremes. Since 2015, the city has weathered multiple hurricanes, tropical storms, and other severe weather events, stressing its infrastructure.

Weather Forecast For 05446 - Colchester VT:

Joshua Rhodes, an energy research scientist at UT Austin, pointed out the cumulative toll on aging infrastructure from successive storms. "This region has endured three major events recently," Rhodes said. "Each storm leaves its mark, potentially compromising infrastructure still recovering from previous hits."

In essence, while Texas faces mounting weather challenges, its focus on natural gas expansion over grid fortification raises concerns about its readiness for future storms and extreme conditions.

According to Rhodes, much of Texas's electrical infrastructure dates back to the 1970s and 1980s, a time when weather conditions were less severe. A significant portion of the electrical poles are constructed from wood, which becomes increasingly brittle under extreme heat and subsequent flooding. With Texas now experiencing consecutive storms, this infrastructure is showing signs of strain.

"It's not surprising that infrastructure designed for milder weather is failing more frequently," Rhodes noted. Some utilities are beginning to replace wooden poles with stronger fiberglass materials, while others are considering the costly option of burying electrical lines underground.

CNN's conversations with experts highlighted another issue among Texas officials: a reluctance to acknowledge the significant impact of a warming climate on intensifying storms.

State authorities have mandated that utilities like Centerpoint draft weather resilience plans but have provided limited financial support to implement these improvements.

Climate and Average Weather Year Round in 44067-Northfield-OH:

https://www.behance.net/gallery/200370647/Weather-Forecast-For-44067-Northfield-OH

"Since Texas's political leadership does not acknowledge climate change, utilities can discuss extreme weather events but cannot explicitly tie them to climate change or outline proactive measures," explained Alison Silverstein, an independent energy consultant in Texas. "Addressing these challenges requires substantial investment, ultimately funded by customers."

Lewin emphasized one potential solution: microgrids powered by a combination of solar energy and natural gas. These smaller, independent power networks can supply critical facilities such as nursing homes and hospitals during major events like hurricanes.

Despite being allocated over $1 billion alongside funding for natural gas plants, Lewin highlighted that these funds have remained untapped at the Texas Public Service Commission.

"We must ensure that vulnerable populations, like elderly individuals during extreme heat, have continuous access to power," Lewin stressed. "This is non-negotiable. Anything less than complete reliability is unacceptable."

See more:

https://weatherusa.app/zip-code/weather-80013

https://weatherusa.app/zip-code/weather-80014

https://weatherusa.app/zip-code/weather-80015

https://weatherusa.app/zip-code/weather-80016

https://weatherusa.app/zip-code/weather-80017

[rollercoasterwords]

coed schooling or activities are actually often detrimental to girls, forcing them into support roles for their male peers. you can idealize that everyone is hurt under gender and patriarchy, but they are not hurt equally.

i'm assuming this is in response to the tags on the question i answered about girl scouts/girl guides? because other than that post i have not talked about sex-segregated schooling at all on this blog as far as i'm aware lol. but sure, whatever, let's get into it

coed schooling or activities are actually often detrimental to girls, forcing them into support roles for their male peers

right off the bat, if this is something you wanted to have a real conversation about, i'd ask you to refine what you're referring to--"or activities" is an incredibly broad category. are we talking about coed sports teams? summer camps? playdates? choirs? i'd probably have different thoughts depending on how you refine this category, so i'm going to table that part of your ask right now and focus only on schooling in my response.

the idea that girls perform better in sex-segregated schools is something i've heard before. but the actual research, as far as i'm aware, is inconclusive. here's an aclu article giving a brief overview of the disagreement within the research. i don't personally have the time to undertake a literature review of the field just to answer a tumblr ask, but one thing i'd say it's important to be aware of--in studies making this claim, what is their sample size? how are they measuring "achievement"? and, importantly, what other factors could be influencing their results? it's impossible to have two schools that are completely identical in every way except sex segregation, so we need to look at possible mitigating variables. is the sex-segregated school being studied a private school in a wealthier area? are the class sizes smaller? are the teaching methods different? do the students have more stable home lives? considering that there will always be these other variables to take into consideration, i'm not particularly compelled by any study making a sweeping claim that girls will always do better in sex-segregated environments, especially considering the conflicting research that already exists on the subject.

that being said, i do think it's important to discuss how sexism pervades school environments and how socializing children to fit certain gender roles from a young age impacts the ways they interact with each other. but even to the extent that young girls feel pressured to take on a "support role," i don't think segregating schools based on sex is a particularly useful solution. it may treat some of the symptoms of sexism, sure, but it doesn't treat the underlying cause: the gender roles these children have been socialized to conform to in the first place. (also, like--if the solution here is "all schools should be sex-segregated," do you honestly think that would result in an equitable allocation of resources amongst those sex-segregated schools?) personally, i think it would be more useful in most cases to actively work with kids to break those gender roles, rather than dividing them into "boys" and "girls" in a way that reifies the idea that such roles are inescapable. additionally, there are plenty of other factors that could be affecting girl's educational achievement that wouldn't be addressed simply by removing boys from the equation; things like how much funding their schools get, the size of classes, the teaching methods, etc. i don't think sex-segregation is a particularly wholistic approach to addressing this issue. not to mention the ways in which it fails to account for trans and intersex children.

you can idealize that everyone is hurt under gender and patriarchy, but they are not hurt equally

i'm not sure how intentional your word choice is here, but i'm not "idealizing" anything. saying that everyone is harmed by gender essentialism and patriarchy is a statement of fact. i have never argued that that harm is "equal," so i'm really not sure where you're getting that impression from; i think i'm usually pretty intentional about focusing on the fact that material harm varies under patriarchy and that different people will have varying investment and gain varying power from the institution. in fact, it's because this harm varies so greatly that i tend to be wary of sweeping generalizations about what all girls/all women/etc will experience under patriarchy--i think when we make those kinds of generalizations, we tend to end up privileging one certain kind of experience, and that one certain kind usually tends to be white, wealthy, cis, etc.

at the end of the day, when it comes to addressing problems with sexism, i think that any solution which reifies gender essentialism will not lead to liberation. that is a pretty fundamental stance to everything i talk about on this blog, and if that's something you're in absolute disagreement with then you probably shouldn't be here.

[nirmala7210]

Charity Donations: Transforming Lives and Communities

Charity donations, also known as philanthropic contributions, are voluntary acts of giving that aim to support a cause or organization deemed worthy of assistance. These donations can be in the form of money, goods, or services, and they play a vital role in addressing societal challenges, promoting social justice, and empowering individuals and communities.

The Significance of Charity Donations

In a world grappling with complex issues ranging from poverty and hunger to environmental degradation and healthcare disparities, charity donations stand as a beacon of hope, providing a means to alleviate suffering, promote sustainable development, and foster a more equitable society.

Charitable giving extends far beyond the immediate impact on beneficiaries. It serves as a catalyst for positive change, inspiring individuals and organizations to collaborate in addressing critical societal issues. The collective power of charity donations can drive innovation, mobilize resources, and amplify the voices of marginalized communities.

The Impact of Charity Donations

Across diverse sectors and causes, online donations have a profound impact on lives and communities. Here are a few examples:

Education: Charity donations support educational initiatives, providing scholarships, funding teacher training, and expanding access to quality education for underprivileged children.

Healthcare: Donations fund medical research, support healthcare infrastructure, and enable access to essential healthcare services for those in need.

Environmental Protection: Charitable contributions support conservation efforts, promote sustainable practices, and raise awareness about environmental issues.

Disaster Relief: Donations provide immediate assistance to communities affected by natural disasters, offering food, shelter, and medical aid.

Social Welfare: Charity donations support organizations working to combat poverty, provide food assistance, and promote social welfare programs.

Types of Charity Donations

Charity donations can be made in various forms, each with its own advantages and considerations:

Monetary Donations: The most common form of charitable giving, monetary donations provide organizations with the flexibility to allocate funds to their most pressing needs. Online donation platforms have made it easier than ever to make secure and convenient monetary donations to a wide range of causes.

In-Kind Donations: Donations of goods, such as food, clothing, and medical supplies, can provide direct and tangible support to those in need. In-kind donations require careful coordination and logistics to ensure they reach intended beneficiaries effectively.

Volunteerism: Volunteering time and skills is a valuable form of charity donation, providing organizations with human resources and expertise. Volunteer opportunities exist in diverse areas, from mentoring and tutoring to fundraising and event management.

80G Tax Benefits in India

In India, charity donations are recognized for their positive impact on society and are encouraged through tax incentives. Donations made to specified charitable organizations are eligible for tax deductions under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act.

80G deductions reduce an individual's taxable income, thereby lowering their tax liability. This tax benefit serves as an incentive for individuals to contribute to charitable causes, supporting social development and empowering organizations to make a difference.

Making a Difference Through Charity Donations

Every act of charity, no matter the size, contributes to a larger movement of compassion and collective action. Individuals and organizations can make a difference by:

Choosing Reputable Charities: Researching and selecting reputable charities with a clear mission, transparent operations, and demonstrated impact.

Donating What You Can: Contributing what is financially feasible, whether it's a small monthly donation or a one-time gift.

Spreading Awareness: Encouraging others to donate and support causes they care about, amplifying the impact of charity.

Volunteering Time and Skills: Sharing time and expertise to support organizations directly, making a personal contribution to the cause.

Conclusion

Charity donations, in their diverse forms, are a powerful tool for positive change. By supporting worthy causes, individuals and organizations can contribute to a more just, equitable, and sustainable world. The act of giving, whether through monetary contributions, in-kind donations, or volunteering, is a testament to the inherent compassion and collective spirit that drives positive transformation. As we navigate the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century, online donations will continue to play a pivotal role in shaping a brighter future for all.

[mariacallous]

The federal government is reconsidering how the census collects race and ethnicity information from U.S. residents. While this might not capture many national headlines, it is an important process that many social science researchers—including education researchers—are paying close attention to. This is because decisions over how we collect race/ethnicity data are both highly consequential and inherently subjective. These decisions have direct implications for the allocation of public resources and shape how we understand what is happening in U.S. schools and society. Yet, there is no “correct” set of racial and ethnic categories, which leaves a wide range of outcomes for these decision-making processes.

In this piece, I describe how the process for identifying race/ethnicity categories works, why it matters, and what I believe the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) should ultimately recommend to the U.S. Census Bureau to ensure that this revision process is a success.

The federal government takes another look at racial/ethnic categories

Race and ethnicity are sociopolitical constructs, with categories that are not natural, neutral, given, or static. As such, the process of choosing categories should mirror how we as individuals and as a society change over time. However, OMB and the U.S. Census Bureau have only occasionally taken up the issue (i.e., in 1977 and 1997). As a result, the current categories are outdated and not reflective of our diverse multiracial society.

How the census collects race/ethnicity data sets the precedent for all state and local agencies to follow. School districts, for example, are required by the U.S. Department of Education to collect race data using categories that closely align with those used in the census: Hispanic, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, white, and two or more races. In education, the decision to use these broad racial categories limits our ability to identify unmet needs, ensure services are accessible to all racial/ethnic groups, improve access to services, and advocate for an adequate and fair distribution of resources and funding. Although agencies can take initiative and gather their own more nuanced racial/ethnic data—as the Portland Public Schools and Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction have done—these agencies have been the exception, not the norm.

As a first step, OMB convened a Federal Interagency Technical Working Group on Race and Ethnicity Standards, consisting of 14 principal statistical agencies and 25 other federal agencies. It held virtual public listening sessions beginning in late 2022 (which I participated in). Those conversations informed the Working Group’s suggestions for how the census should revamp its collection of race/ethnicity data. The Working Group has suggested changes that are aligned with our changing society. For example, they proposed eliminating the use of the terms “majority” and “minority,” removing “Negro” from the Black or African American description, replacing “Far East” with “East Asian,” and removing “Other” from “Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander.”

What’s missing from OMB’s race/ethnicity data collection recommendations

I support OMB’s recommendations. If these changes are implemented, they would create a new status quo in how government agencies approach racial/ethnic data collection. I also have thoughts on how we could further improve our processes for collecting these data:

First, race and ethnicity should be merged into one question allowing individuals to mark all that apply: “What is your race or ethnicity?” The status quo—with separate questions about race and ethnicity—results in  an estimated undercount of Latinos by five percent and overcounting of white individuals. This is especially concerning for school districts or state departments of education using this approach, given that Latinos represent 14.1 million K-12 students (or 28% of the public school population). A five percent undercount translates to hundreds of thousands of students potentially being misidentified. It’s important to note that two-thirds of Latinos consider “Latino” to be their race. Despite the fact that concepts of ethnicity and race are sometimes conflated, ethnicity is not the same as race, as it encompasses multiple dimensions, including language, culture, religion, and nationality. Since Latino is not an option for the race question, many feel forced to select “white” even if they do not identify this way and are not offered the privileges of being white in America. For Afro-Latinos, who constitute 12% of the Latino population, having separate questions has allowed them to mark Latino as their ethnicity and Black as their racial identity. The merge option would still allow them to mark both.

Second, the federal government should also consider collecting disaggregated race/ethnicity data. This would mean adding follow-up questions to the merged race/ethnicity question to allow respondents to provide more detailed data on how they self-identify. That is, after asking a merged race/ethnicity question, a follow-up question with additional subcategories would appear. The OMB working group has already proposed something along these lines—suggesting that the census also collect information on countries of origin as subcategories for each racial group (See Figure 1 below).

Collecting disaggregated data upfront would allow analysts to use aggregated data, if needed, but also examine subcategories to identity patterns or needs that might otherwise have gone unnoticed. For example, the Asian community is often treated as a monolith, but when examined further, Southeast Asians are dropping out from high school at higher rates and enrolling in college at lower rates compared to South and East Asians. The same data also defies the myth that Latinos are one big group, similarly, showing Central American students dropping out of high school at higher rates and enrolling in college at lower rates compared to other Latino subgroups. Our awareness of, and response to, these patterns require a nuanced understanding of them.

A potential approach to pilot would add an additional layer by asking for subcategories by region first, followed by specific countries of origin. For analysts and researchers disaggregating data, this option may prove useful since sample sizes may become too small for any meaningful disaggregation by country. For example, after selecting “Latinos,” there could be a drop-down list that could include the following subcategories: Puerto Rican, Mexican, Central American, Caribbean American, South American, Spanish, and/or Afro-Latino, followed by subgroup questions of countries of origin. Adding the Afro-Latino option under the Latino and Black subcategory is important to ensure that individuals who are Latino are still prompted to elect their Black identity (a concern expressed in the OMB listening sessions).

Third, for collecting data on Indigenous peoples, the options in the census form in Figure 1 should be guided by direct consultations with Native nations. The U.S. government has not collected Indigenous data accurately for centuries, leading to undercounting Native people and a way of seeing Indigenous communities through a deficit lens (e.g., using “Indian” until 1950). Here, it is important to note that the census relies on individuals’ self-identification of their racial and ethnic identities, whereas Native nations rely on tribe membership. Put another way, as Native writers have stressed, Native American is not a racial identity but rather a political one. This fundamental difference in identification has led to inaccurate data collection, undercounting, and potentially a masking of inequities.

Advocates and scholars argue for the decolonization of Indigenous data by repositioning the authority back to Indigenous peoples. In education, this means directing resources, data infrastructure, and investment in personnel capacity to tribally controlled schools and to the Bureau of Indian Education to give Native nations Indigenous data sovereignty–the right for each U.S. Native tribe to collect, own, and use its own tribe’s data.

By following these proposed changes, the federal government will set a model for other local government agencies to follow, and lead in a more accurate, nuanced, and respectful collection of data on race and ethnicity. Rather than convening every 30 or so years, OMB and the U.S. Census Bureau should have a standing working group to regularly gather feedback from communities to continuously improve data collection. These efforts will help us understand the inequities in our society, identify solutions to remedy these inequities, and make changes in our policies and institutions to address the effects of systemic racism. While thoughtful data collection is not sufficient for these pursuits, it is certainly necessary—and long overdue.

[ngoinfo]

Writing Successful Grants and Proposals for Nonprofit Growth

For nonprofits, securing funding is essential to their mission. Grant Writing For Nonprofits plays a critical role in obtaining financial support from governments, foundations, and private donors. A well-crafted grant proposal can make the difference between a thriving program and one that never gets off the ground. The key is knowing how to communicate need and impact.

Understanding the Basics of Grant Writing

Grant Writing for Nonprofits begins with research. Organizations must identify the right funders whose priorities align with their mission. Once identified, the next step is crafting a compelling narrative that explains who you are, what you do, and why your work matters. Clear goals, measurable outcomes, and a realistic budget are essential components.

The Power of Structured Proposal Templates

To streamline the process, many organizations turn to Proposal Writing Templates for NGOs. These templates provide a structured outline, guiding writers through each required section. From problem statements to budget summaries, templates ensure no important element is overlooked. They also promote consistency across multiple submissions, saving time and improving efficiency.

Why Storytelling Matters in Grant Proposals

A proposal that reads like a dry report often fails to engage. Grant Writing for Nonprofits should incorporate storytelling techniques that bring your mission to life. Real stories about people helped by your organization humanize your work. When funders feel an emotional connection to your cause, they are more likely to support it.

Avoiding Common Mistakes in Proposal Writing

Even the most passionate NGOs can stumble in the grant writing process. Errors such as vague objectives, inflated budgets, or lack of clarity can weaken your application. Using Proposal Writing Templates For NGOs helps minimize these issues by keeping the writer focused and organized. Templates serve as a checklist for success.

Tailoring Each Proposal to Its Audience

While templates are helpful, Grant Writing For Nonprofits is not one-size-fits-all. Each funder has unique guidelines, values, and interests. It’s vital to adapt your proposal to match these specifics. Researching the funder’s past projects and preferred language allows your application to stand out as relevant and aligned with their mission.

Building Capacity Through Grant Readiness

Successful Grant Writing for Nonprofits doesn’t start with writing—it starts with preparation. Organizations should have essential documents in place: mission statements, financial reports, and detailed program plans. Proposal Writing Templates For NGOs can help collect this information in advance, making the actual grant writing process faster and more effective.

Using Data to Strengthen Your Case

Funders want to see proof that your programs work. Including recent statistics, evaluation results, or research findings strengthens your credibility. When using Proposal Writing Templates For NGOs, it’s important to allocate space for this type of data. Numbers, when presented clearly, can support your story and add legitimacy to your claims.

Learning From Rejections and Refining Your Approach

Not every proposal will be successful, and that’s okay. Rejections offer a chance to improve. Reviewing feedback and updating your Grant Writing For Nonprofits strategy is part of the growth process. Revisiting your template and modifying weak areas ensures that future proposals are stronger and better aligned with funder expectations.

Conclusion: 

For nonprofits seeking growth, mastering the art of Grant Writing For Nonprofits and utilizing effective Proposal Writing Templates For NGOs is a vital step. These tools help clarify your message, structure your request, and connect with funders in a meaningful way. For trusted resources and guidance in your funding journey, visit ngoinfo.org to access helpful materials and expert insights.

[mounianjali]

SAP PPM Training – Real-Time Scenarios & Hands-On Practice

In these days’s rapid-paced enterprise international, powerful mission and portfolio management is important for corporations to align their operations with strategic goals. SAP PPM (Project and Portfolio Management) is a effective module inside the SAP atmosphere designed to assist groups effectively control complicated initiatives, assets, and portfolios. As the call for for skilled SAP PPM specialists continues to develop, arms-on and sensible schooling has grow to be important for career development. That’s wherein SAP PPM Training with real-time eventualities and palms-on exercise comes into play.

Why SAP PPM?

SAP PPM allows agencies manipulate assignment lifecycles from start to complete—right from planning and budgeting to execution and analysis. It presents strong gear for:

Portfolio structuring and prioritization

Project tracking and scheduling

Resource allocation and ability making plans

Budget and fee control

Risk and issue monitoring

Integration with modules like SAP PS, FICO, HCM, and extra

SAP PPM allows records-pushed selection-making, ensuring that the right projects get funded and brought on time with maximum performance.

What Makes Real-Time Training So Valuable?

While theoretical expertise is vital, it’s the actual-time application of SAP PPM that gives experts a aggressive facet. Employers are seeking out applicants who now not only understand the ideas but can also implement them in stay environments.

That’s why exceptional SAP PPM schooling includes live scenarios, business use cases, and system-based totally sporting activities. These practical additives assist you increase trouble-fixing competencies and benefit confidence in real-global SAP PPM implementation.

Core Topics Covered in SAP PPM Hands-On Training

A structured education path targeted on real-time exercise commonly covers:

Portfolio Management

Portfolio hierarchy and bucket configuration

Item management and scoring fashions

Capacity planning and approvals

Integration with monetary planning

Project Management

Creating and structuring tasks

Scheduling and milestone tracking

Time and attempt tracking

Integration with SAP PS and HR modules

Resource Management

Resource pool creation and skill mapping

Demand vs potential evaluation

Role-based totally resource project

Reporting & Analytics

KPI dashboards

Progress monitoring and variance reviews

Custom reporting with SAP BI integration

Key Benefits of Hands-On SAP PPM Training

Practical Experience: Learn by doing through a live SAP device. Practice every concept without delay, from portfolio setup to challenge execution.

Real-World Use Cases: Training based on industry-precise case research enables you recognize how SAP PPM is used in real corporations.

Scenario-Based Learning: You’ll address usual business challenges and learn how to resolve them the use of SAP functionalities.

Certification & Career Support: Good training packages offer assist with SAP PPM certification coaching and activity interview steerage.

Confidence to Implement: Hands-on mastering ensures you’re ready to take part in purchaser tasks or internal SAP rollouts optimistically.

Who Should Take This Training?

SAP Beginners or Freshers inquisitive about a career in task control or SAP consulting

Functional Consultants who need to extend their capabilities to project and portfolio management

Project Managers and Team Leads searching for to digitize and streamline assignment monitoring

IT Professionals and System Analysts worried in SAP implementations or support

Conclusion

If you're aiming to focus on undertaking and portfolio management within the SAP panorama, SAP PPM schooling with actual-time eventualities and fingers-on exercise is your gateway to achievement. It goes past conventional getting to know through placing you in the driver’s seat of practical, outcomes-oriented training.

With the proper path, you may advantage not just theoretical understanding, but additionally the self belief and competence to use SAP PPM in real commercial enterprise environments. From managing worldwide venture portfolios to optimizing resources and expenses, SAP PPM abilities can elevate your professional profile and open doorways to excessive-value roles in top agencies.

info@proexcellency.com, +91-9148251978,+91-9008906809use this Promocode you have discount PROROJA

[realyoungdarius]

Policy analysis paper

Not just doing affordability . Doing access to care, quality of care, health outcomes, equity, high costs, lack of universal coverage, fragmentation of the system

Take out part about duplicate parts

Take out stuff that is irrelevant

Alternatives already? Am I talking about access to health care?

Good policy should be relevant, coherent, effective, efficient, impactful, and sustainable, according to the OECD. Impact categories can be broadly classified into economic, social, environmental, and institutional impacts, with the specific categories and indicators tailored to the policy's goals. 

Consider criteria for good policy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Equity

Compliance

Consider Impact categories

These categories can be categorized as: health outcomes -

Defining Health Outcomes (might just focus on outcomes)

* Health outcomes refer to the effects of a healthcare service or intervention, encompassing various aspects like patient health status, quality of life, and population health. 


* Examples include:

* Mortality rates: A measure of the number of deaths in a population. 


* Patient safety: The extent to which patients are free from harm during care. 


* Readmission rates: The likelihood of patients returning to the hospital after discharge. 


* Patient experience: The patient's perception and satisfaction with their care. 


* Effectiveness of care: How well interventions achieve their intended goals. 


* Timeliness of care: The speed and efficiency with which care is provided. 


* Efficient use of resources: Optimizing the utilization of healthcare resources. 


* Data transparency: Making information about healthcare outcomes available to the public. 


* Equitable access to care: Ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to receive needed healthcare services. 


* Reduced healthcare disparities: Addressing differences in health outcomes among various populations. 


* Improved quality of life: Enhancing overall well-being and functioning. 


2. Role of Health Outcomes in Policy Analysis:

* Evaluation of Policy Effectiveness: 
Policy analysis uses health outcomes to assess the effectiveness of interventions, such as new regulations, funding mechanisms, or public health campaigns. 


* Identifying Areas for Improvement: 
By comparing actual outcomes with intended goals, policymakers can pinpoint areas where policies are falling short and identify strategies for improvement.



* Guiding Resource Allocation: 
Understanding the impact of different policies on health outcomes can help policymakers allocate resources effectively, prioritizing interventions with the greatest potential to improve public health. 


* Promoting Evidence-Based Policymaking: 
Health outcomes data provides evidence for informed decision-making, ensuring that policies are based on the best available research and data. 


* Facilitating Comparative Policy Analysis: 
Comparing health outcomes across different jurisdictions or over time can help policymakers identify effective strategies and practices that can be adapted to their own contexts. 


* Supporting Implementation and Evaluation: 
Health outcomes are used to monitor the implementation of policies and to evaluate their impact on the target population. 

Might not focus on these:

economic impacts -

Economic issues in healthcare include rising costs, limited access due to affordability, and the impact of inflation on both providers and patients. Additionally, issues like labor shortages, supply chain disruptions, and reimbursement challenges further complicate the economic landscape of the healthcare industry. 

Elaboration:

* Rising Costs: 
Healthcare spending continues to increase, outpacing inflation and economic growth. This includes higher drug prices, medical procedures, and hospital stays. 


* Affordability and Access: 
Many individuals struggle to afford healthcare, leading to delayed or forgone care. This impacts both individuals and the healthcare system, as undiagnosed or untreated conditions can escalate into more expensive and complex problems. 


* Inflation: 
Inflation affects the entire healthcare ecosystem, from the cost of medications and supplies to wages and salaries of healthcare workers. Hospitals and health systems face pressure to manage expenses while providing quality care. 


* Labor Shortages: 
A shortage of healthcare workers, including nurses and doctors, adds to the financial strain on healthcare providers. Higher wages and increased competition for scarce resources further exacerbate this problem. 


* Supply Chain Disruptions: 
Disruptions to the supply chain, such as shortages of medications or medical equipment, can lead to delays in care and increased costs. 


* Reimbursement Challenges: 
Hospitals and health systems often receive inadequate reimbursement for complex and costly services, leading to financial strain and potential compromises in care. This is further complicated by administrative burden and denials from insurance companies. 


* Social Determinants of Health: 
Factors like poverty, lack of access to healthy food, and inadequate housing can also impact health outcomes and contribute to higher healthcare costs. 


* Competition: 
Competition from alternative care providers, such as telemedicine and urgent care centers, can also create economic challenges for traditional healthcare providers. 


* Regulation and Legislation: 
Regulations and legislation can have both positive and negative economic impacts on the healthcare industry, influencing costs, access, and quality of care. 

research and policy influence,

and environmental impacts?

Introduction

How do I include criteria for good policy like:

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Equity

Compliance?

All of these areas could involve health outcomes?

Just like every other person in the United States, health care is an issue, if not a problem, that everyone has to address in some way; even if it is just primary care. The US often ranks near the bottom among developed nations in terms of overall healthcare system performance. Despite having the highest healthcare spending per capita, spending reaching upwards of $4.5 trillion (13,493 per person), the US lags behind other high-income countries in various key areas like access, quality of care, equity, and health outcomes.  

Here's a more detailed look at the US's healthcare ranking:

 

1. Overall Ranking:

* The US has consistently ranked last among 10 other high-income countries in terms of overall health system performance, as determined by the Commonwealth Fund. Health Care by Country 2024 Report | Commonwealth Fund

* This ranking considers factors like access to care, quality of care, equity, and health outcomes. 

*  

* Status quo

*  

2. Key Areas Where the US Lags:

* Access to Care:

The US struggles with providing equitable and accessible healthcare for all, particularly due to high costs and the absence of universal coverage. 

* Quality of Care:

While some aspects of US healthcare are highly advanced, the country performs poorly in terms of preventing deaths, managing chronic diseases, and ensuring patient safety. 

* Health Outcomes:

The US has lower life expectancy and higher rates of preventable and treatable deaths compared to other high-income countries. 

* Equity:

Disparities in healthcare access and outcomes exist based on race, ethnicity, income, and geographic location. 

 

3. Factors Contributing to Poor Rankings:

* High Costs:

The US has the highest healthcare costs per capita in the world, but this doesn't translate to better health outcomes. 

 

* Lack of Universal Coverage:

A significant portion of the population lacks comprehensive health insurance coverage, leading to financial barriers to accessing care. 

* Fragmentation of the System:

The US healthcare system is complex and fragmented, with a patchwork of public and private programs, which can make it difficult to navigate and coordinate care. 

 

4. Areas Where the US Performs Well:

* Medical Innovation:

The US is a global leader in medical innovation and research, with many advancements originating in the country.

* Access to Specialized Care:

The US has a vast network of highly specialized hospitals and medical facilities. 

In conclusion, while the US has strengths in certain areas, its healthcare system overall performs poorly compared to other high-income nations, particularly in terms of access, quality, and health outcomes. The high cost and lack of universal coverage are major contributing factors to these poor rankings. 

Key Aspects of the Status Quo:

* High Costs:

Healthcare spending is significantly higher than in other developed countries, yet outcomes don't always reflect this investment. 

 

* Limited Access:

Millions remain uninsured or underinsured, hindering access to necessary care, particularly for marginalized groups. 

* Quality Concerns:

While some aspects of care are excellent, there are concerns about the quality of care across the board, particularly for specific populations. 

* Relying on Technology:

The U.S. healthcare system heavily relies on technology to address issues like cost and quality, but these advancements often don't translate to improved outcomes or cost savings. 

* Fragmentation of Care:

The system is characterized by a lack of integration between different parts, leading to coordination issues and potentially impacting patient outcomes. 

* Status Quo Bias:

There's a tendency to resist change and maintain the current practices, even when evidence suggests a need for improvement. 

*  

* Focus on Treatment, not Prevention:

A significant portion of healthcare spending is directed towards treating existing conditions, with less emphasis on prevention and early intervention. 

In summary, the status quo in U.S. healthcare presents a complex picture where high costs and technological advancements are not translating into improved health outcomes and widespread access for all citizens. 

Top 5 Things Washington Can Do in 2022 to Improve Health Care Affordability - ACHP

1. Protect Medicare Advantage consumer benefits

The Medicare Advantage program is in the spotlight – for good reason. CBO projects that a majority of eligible seniors will be enrolled in MA by 2023 and will reach 60% in next decade. Considering its popularity among a diverse group of seniors, now is the time to take it to the next level.

23. Allow health plans to account for audio-only encounters in risk adjustment during the pandemic to ensure patient acuity is accurately and appropriately documented and the needs of these patients continue to be met.

24. Raise the bar on quality to include more accurate health outcome metrics that help better meet the needs of seniors choosing MA.

Consider criteria for good policy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Equity

Compliance

Consider Impact categories

These categories can be categorized as: health outcomes,

economic impacts,

research and policy influence,

and environmental impacts. 

2. Commit to telehealth, making permanent telehealth flexibilities afforded under the PHE

Americans safely and conveniently accessed telehealth in record numbers in 2020 and 2021, clearly indicating that this method of care delivery is here to stay.

25. Congress can move Cures 2.0 and make permanent current telehealth flexibilities – specifically removing geographic restrictions – and prioritize a consistent telehealth experience across all federal programs.

26. The Administration can incent value-based benefit design that supports telehealth.

Consider criteria for good policy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Equity

Compliance

Consider Impact categories

These categories can be categorized as: health outcomes,

economic impacts,

research and policy influence,

and environmental impacts. 

3. Stabilize coverage including in non-Medicaid expansion states

Washington must ensure that every American maintains access to affordable coverage and care, particularly post-public health emergency.

27. Congress must make permanent the increased subsidies available to supplement coverage costs on the individual market.

28. The Administration must streamline the cumbersome Medicaid redetermination process and expand independent navigators and other enrollment assistance.

Consider criteria for good policy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Equity

Compliance

Consider Impact categories

These categories can be categorized as: health outcomes,

economic impacts,

research and policy influence,

and environmental impacts. 

 

4. Make meaningful and targeted investments in underserved communities

With a significant focus on health equity, Washington can make a difference by removing obstacles to equitable care.

29. Congress must advance the maternal health provisions included in the Build Back Better Act as well as bipartisan mental and behavioral health initiatives targeting improved access and care.

30. Incenting and standardizing health data collection across federal programs will help us understand and analyze care gaps as well as inform targeted interventions to improve health equity.

Consider criteria for good policy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Equity

Compliance

Consider Impact categories

These categories can be categorized as: health outcomes,

economic impacts,

research and policy influence,

and environmental impacts. 

5. Find common ground to lower the cost of prescription drugs

In the short-term, it’s critical that Congress pass and oversee implementation of the Build Back Better Act provisions targeting drug pricing.

31. Congress and the Administration can move forward on bipartisan ideas that encourage innovation, improve transparency, stem anti-competitive practices and reform the broken drug patent system.

32. Both removing obstacles to generics reaching the market and allowing formulary flexibility will improve affordability of out-of-control prescription drug prices.

Consider criteria for good policy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Equity

Compliance

Consider Impact categories

These categories can be categorized as: health outcomes,

economic impacts,

research and policy influence,

and environmental impacts. 

 

Conclusion

It might be applicable to have a system where everyone receives adequate health care insurance; even if that involves multiple ways of getting the care that they need. I am basically coming back to the same conclusion that a mixed economic system, in the health care industry, is still better than just relying on command economies and wholly market-based economies.

A policy analysis paper requires a structured approach, beginning with defining the policy problem, researching evidence, identifying policy alternatives, and evaluating them against specific criteria. Finally, a clear recommendation, supported by evidence, should be presented to the intended audience. 

Here's a step-by-step guide:

1. 1. Define the Problem: 
Clearly articulate the policy issue, its significance, and the need for change. 

Key Aspects of the Status Quo:

* High Costs:

Healthcare spending is significantly higher than in other developed countries, yet outcomes don't always reflect this investment. 

 

* Limited Access:

Millions remain uninsured or underinsured, hindering access to necessary care, particularly for marginalized groups. 

* Quality Concerns:

While some aspects of care are excellent, there are concerns about the quality of care across the board, particularly for specific populations. 

* Relying on Technology:

The U.S. healthcare system heavily relies on technology to address issues like cost and quality, but these advancements often don't translate to improved outcomes or cost savings. 

* Fragmentation of Care:

The system is characterized by a lack of integration between different parts, leading to coordination issues and potentially impacting patient outcomes. 

* Status Quo Bias:

There's a tendency to resist change and maintain the current practices, even when evidence suggests a need for improvement. 

*  

* Focus on Treatment, not Prevention:

1. A significant portion of healthcare spending is directed towards treating existing conditions, with less emphasis on prevention and early intervention. In summary, the status quo in U.S. healthcare presents a complex picture where high costs and technological advancements are not translating into improved health outcomes and widespread access for all citizens. 

2. 


3. 2. Research and Evidence: 
Gather relevant data, statistics, and credible sources to support your analysis. 




4. 3. Identify Alternatives: 
Explore various potential policy solutions or options to address the problem. 




5. 4. Establish Criteria: 
Develop a set of evaluation criteria (e.g., cost-effectiveness, equity, feasibility) to assess the alternatives. 

Consider criteria for good policy

6.

7. Efficiency

8. Effectiveness

9. Equity

10. Compliance

11. 


12. 5. Evaluate Alternatives: 
Analyze each policy option against the established criteria, considering potential outcomes, impacts, and trade-offs. 




13. 6. Make a Recommendation: 
Clearly state your preferred policy solution and provide a justification based on the analysis. 

Top 5 Things Washington Can Do in 2022 to Improve Health Care Affordability - ACHP

1. Protect Medicare Advantage consumer benefits

The Medicare Advantage program is in the spotlight – for good reason. CBO projects that a majority of eligible seniors will be enrolled in MA by 2023 and will reach 60% in next decade. Considering its popularity among a diverse group of seniors, now is the time to take it to the next level.

23. Allow health plans to account for audio-only encounters in risk adjustment during the pandemic to ensure patient acuity is accurately and appropriately documented and the needs of these patients continue to be met.

24. Raise the bar on quality to include more accurate health outcome metrics that help better meet the needs of seniors choosing MA.

Consider criteria for good policy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Equity

Compliance

Consider Impact categories

These categories can be categorized as: health outcomes,

economic impacts,

research and policy influence,

and environmental impacts. 

2. Commit to telehealth, making permanent telehealth flexibilities afforded under the PHE

Americans safely and conveniently accessed telehealth in record numbers in 2020 and 2021, clearly indicating that this method of care delivery is here to stay.

25. Congress can move Cures 2.0 and make permanent current telehealth flexibilities – specifically removing geographic restrictions – and prioritize a consistent telehealth experience across all federal programs.

26. The Administration can incent value-based benefit design that supports telehealth.

Consider criteria for good policy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Equity

Compliance

Consider Impact categories

These categories can be categorized as: health outcomes,

economic impacts,

research and policy influence,

and environmental impacts. 

3. Stabilize coverage including in non-Medicaid expansion states

Washington must ensure that every American maintains access to affordable coverage and care, particularly post-public health emergency.

27. Congress must make permanent the increased subsidies available to supplement coverage costs on the individual market.

28. The Administration must streamline the cumbersome Medicaid redetermination process and expand independent navigators and other enrollment assistance.

Consider criteria for good policy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Equity

Compliance

Consider Impact categories

These categories can be categorized as: health outcomes,

economic impacts,

research and policy influence,

and environmental impacts. 

4. Make meaningful and targeted investments in underserved communities

With a significant focus on health equity, Washington can make a difference by removing obstacles to equitable care.

29. Congress must advance the maternal health provisions included in the Build Back Better Act as well as bipartisan mental and behavioral health initiatives targeting improved access and care.

30. Incenting and standardizing health data collection across federal programs will help us understand and analyze care gaps as well as inform targeted interventions to improve health equity.

Consider criteria for good policy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Equity

Compliance

Consider Impact categories

These categories can be categorized as: health outcomes,

economic impacts,

research and policy influence,

and environmental impacts. 

5. Find common ground to lower the cost of prescription drugs

In the short-term, it’s critical that Congress pass and oversee implementation of the Build Back Better Act provisions targeting drug pricing.

31. Congress and the Administration can move forward on bipartisan ideas that encourage innovation, improve transparency, stem anti-competitive practices and reform the broken drug patent system.

32. Both removing obstacles to generics reaching the market and allowing formulary flexibility will improve affordability of out-of-control prescription drug prices.

33.

34. Consider criteria for good policy

35.

36. Efficiency

37. Effectiveness

38. Equity

39. Compliance

40.

41. Consider Impact categories

42.

43. These categories can be categorized as: health outcomes,

44. economic impacts,

45. research and policy influence,

46. and environmental impacts. 


47. Consider Audience: 
Tailor your writing style and language to effectively communicate your analysis to the intended audience. 

Structure and Outline: 
Organize your paper logically, using sections for introduction, problem definition, background, analysis, recommendations, and conclusion. 

Write Clearly: 
Use plain language, avoid jargon, and present your findings in a concise and understandable manner.