Recent investigations have revealed that many rail companies systematically neglect crucial maintenance and push back against regulations that would mandate more rigorous safety checks and infrastructure investments. (Photo: Thomas WInz/Getty Images)

Policy, politics and progressive commentary

As ambitious rail projects like Brightline West push forward, Nevada stands at a critical crossroads in terms of infrastructure growth and rail safety. It’s been a year since Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoed Assembly Bill 456—a bill that aimed to strengthen rail safety protocols—and the risks that haunt our tracks are not just lingering; they are intensifying. In a state known for its high stakes, gambling with rail safety seems a perilous bet we continue to make.

In addition to Amtrak trains already operating through our state, the Brightline West project will transport the most precious cargo carried by rail: people. With this fact in mind, we simply cannot continue to gamble with rail safety—the stakes are too high.

AB 456 was designed as a comprehensive response to the escalating dangers in our rail systems, featuring crucial measures like train length limitations, improved defect detection, and provisions to clear blocked crossings. These are not mere regulatory tweaks; they are lifesaving necessities, underscored by a series of derailments in and around Nevada. Each incident serves as a grim reminder of what is at stake: fiery derailments and blocked crossings that jeopardize lives and fracture communities.

Recent investigative reports, including those by ProPublica, have highlighted a national crisis in rail safety, detailing systemic failures that lead to catastrophic accidents. These investigations have revealed that many rail companies systematically neglect crucial maintenance and push back against regulations that would mandate more rigorous safety checks and infrastructure investments.

In Nevada, the situation is dire. U.S. Congressman Mark Amodei, echoing the frustrations of many Nevadans, has criticized Union Pacific for its abysmal communication and negligence, particularly around the issue of blocked crossings. These blocked crossings are not just inconvenient; they are dangerous, preventing emergency responders from reaching crises swiftly, which could be the difference between life and death.

Furthermore, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) recently had to suspend its safety assessment of Union Pacific—one of the nation’s largest railroads—after uncovering that the company coached employees on how to respond to safety interviews. This coaching was widespread across Union Pacific’s 23-state network, which includes Nevada, severely undermining the authenticity of safety culture assessments. Such deceit not only skews the data that regulators rely on to assess and enhance safety but also indicates a deep-rooted culture of complacency and manipulation underpinning corporate operations.

As railroads continue to boast of rising profits amidst declining revenues—the unsustainability of this is a topic for another discussion—their repeated appearances in the halls of Nevada’s government expressing cries that they cannot afford to invest more in safety are both intolerable and unacceptable.

The pervasive influence of rail lobbyists is a significant barrier to safety improvements. Their sway in stifling regulation is powerful, as evidenced by the stalled reforms even after high-profile derailments that have captured national attention. The lobbyists’ efforts ensure that profits continue to override public safety, keeping essential safety measures like AB 456 from becoming law.

As we observe the somber anniversary of AB 456’s veto, it’s crucial that we confront the reality of our legislative landscape. Nevada must not only reinstate measures proposed in AB 456 but also champion new initiatives that place safety at the forefront of rail operations. Our state should lead by example, showing that despite its reputation for gaming, it does not gamble with the safety of its citizens.

Looking ahead, particularly with the Brightline West project, Nevada has a unique opportunity to redefine rail safety standards. We must implement a proactive approach to safety, not just for Nevada but as a model for the nation. This means extensive oversight, transparent operations, and a legislative backbone strong enough to stand up to corporate pressure.

As the tracks of progress are laid down, let’s ensure they are not only fast and efficient but also safe and secure. Nevada has the chance now to place a winning bet on the lives and safety of our residents. It’s time for a shift in priorities—from corporate profits to public safety—and for Nevada to establish itself as a leader in rail safety innovation.

The post Rolling the dice on rail safety: Nevada’s high-stakes legislative gamble appeared first on Nevada Current.

(Photo: Hugh Jackson/Nevada Current)

Policy, politics and progressive commentary

A current employee at Vegas PBS has filed a discrimination complaint against the station, saying she’s risking her job because she wants to bring attention to “a culture of retaliation and racism.”

Vegas PBS Director of Marketing Terry Chi in September filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Nevada Equal Rights Commission (NERC) alleging systemic racism, retaliation against a whistleblower and workplace mobbing, or collective abuse from managers to force people out of work. She said she also contacted multiple departments at national PBS, including the diversity council, who have declined to become involved.

Vegas PBS is a public television station that reaches 400,000 weekly viewers in four Nevada counties, as well as portions of Utah, California and Arizona. It is a member station of the Public Broadcasting Service and receives public funds under the federal Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, whose mission includes creating “programs addressing the needs and interests of minorities.”

Vegas PBS’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) broadcast license is held by the elected members of the Clark County School District Board of Trustees. Vegas PBS employees are employees of the school district, though the station operates mostly independently.

In 2023, Vegas PBS had a roughly $15 million budget, including $1.7 million in unrestricted federal grants, $8.3 million from local government appropriations, $109,000 from state funds and $32,000 from federal sources.

Chi, who is Chinese American, said the opportunity to work at a PBS member station was a “dream” because shows such as “Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood” and “Sesame Street” shaped her childhood and helped her learn English. But it quickly transformed into a “nightmare” that led to a vertigo diagnosis and daily heart palpitations.

“When I started, I was for several months the pet,” she said. “But quickly after a few months, I could start feeling the daggers in my back.”

‘Dismissed, disrespected, discounted, marginalized’

Chi was hired by Vegas PBS as director of marketing by President and General Manager Mary “Mare” Mazur in early 2022. 

Now Chi points to Mazur as the main reason she is speaking out. Over her roughly two years with Vegas PBS, Mazur issued Chi 15 disciplinary write-ups and multiple negative performance reviews, called three investigative hearings in front of the Clark County Association of School Administrators and Professional-Technical Employees (CCASAPE) union and CCSD Human Resources. She said Mazur also barred her from the Vegas PBS annual fundraising gala and “all major donor events,” which was followed by a 5-day suspension without pay.

Chi alleges the acts were in retaliation for questions about taking on extra work outside of her job description, such as membership department duties, and for objecting to racist comments.

“I didn’t work this hard in my life to be dismissed, disrespected, discounted, marginalized,” Chi said, who prior to joining Vegas PBS worked in the private sector for three decades. “I didn’t do anything wrong.”

On May 19, 2022, Chi gave a presentation to the Southern Nevada Public Television (SNPT) Board, the appointed board that helps the station secure financial and volunteer support. It was later relayed to Chi, through Mazur, that in response to her presentation, Kim Walker, the board treasurer, said “Terry’s presentation was great… I wouldn’t want to meet her in a back alley.”

Chi said she immediately construed the remark as “loaded with unconscious bias, [that was made] because she is a smart, articulate Asian woman.” She said the concern was ignored by Mazur who told her to take the remark made by Walker as a compliment. 

When Chi refused to do so, she said Mazur retaliated against her through write-ups and punitive work actions. 

Walker and Mazur, who were college roommates, declined to participate in this story. Mazur was also elected to the SNPT Board last year.

According to CCSD policy, “offensive and unwelcome jokes” constitute unlawful discrimination or harassment. It also states that the CCSD Human Resources Department of Diversity and Affirmative Action is responsible for ensuring that “all persons can … work in dignity and security and are not required to endure insulting, degrading, harassing or exploitative treatment.”

Chi said after she called out what she believed was racism within the organization, things quickly began to go downhill.

“Vegas PBS and the Clark County School District has been the most racist and discriminatory environment I’ve ever experienced,” Chi said.

She filed a 35-page complaint with CCSD that documents more than three dozen allegations, including six claims of racism, two dozen accusations of retaliation, four claims that allege CCSD has enabled illegal work actions, including against a whistleblower, and one instance in which she was pressured to feel unwelcome by colleagues at a “non-work related luncheon.” Chi also wrote in the complaint that her name was removed from an award submission for “The Great Vegas Recipe” program that she produced and won an Emmy for.

Chi’s name was reinstated after the Emmy Board of Directors opened an investigation.

CCSD declined to comment on the allegations and as to whether there is an investigation into the claims.

“The workplace mobbing and the dehumanization of people of color whose lives and livelihoods are ruined without conscience is what racism looks like in the workplace,” Chi said.

Before coming to Nevada, Mazur was general manager at Arizona PBS. Ebonye Delaney, a former assistant production manager who worked under Mazur in Arizon, said Mazur interacted with her in a “drastically different” tone than with another Black woman on staff: “With me, she was very short and seemed to, just not particularly care for my dress or my appearance.”

Delaney is dark-skinned and wears her hair naturally, later transitioning into dreadlocks. She said on multiple occasions Mazur micro-aggressed by highlighting “our socio-economic differences” and dredging up “uncomfortable cultural conversations.”

“She’s not gonna outright call you a name,” Delaney said. “But it’s in her interactions with people – how she treats people, as she talks to them.”

Workplace mobbing

Chi alleges Mazur does not extend contracts beyond the probationary period for directors of color. Instead, she retained or promoted only white workers whom she identifies with.

“She surrounded herself with people who are like her,” said one former Vegas PBS employee who requested anonymity out of fear speaking publicly would affect their career. 

They said Mazur “rules by fear” and restructured the chain of command so that directors report to two directors, instead of the general manager.

Jennifer McGrew Shell, a former Vegas PBS project manager for the educational media services department, echoed allegations of retaliation and bullying at Vegas PBS. She is a white woman who worked under a director.

McGrew Shell said she was the victim of retaliation and workplace bullying which led her to file a 200-page grievance alleging a hostile work environment to CCASAPE, in March 2022, after working there for nearly three years. She said after filing a complaint with human resources in December 2021, she received a write-up once a month until her contract ended in June and her evaluations went from above average to unprofessional.

McGrew Shell wrote in the complaint to the union that her director created a culture of “fear, oppression and hostility” in the workplace. According to emails, the union determined McGrew Shell was dealing with “supervisory professionalism” rather than a hostile work environment, and told her the issue had to be “addressed by those who are within you/your supervisor’s chain of command.”

“It is the worst situation I’ve ever experienced – as a 60-year old woman – in my life,” McGrew Shell said.

Chi, who serves on the CCSD Superintendent’s Anti-Racism, Equity and Inclusion Advisory Committee, believes part of the solution has to include changing the policy at CCSD regarding probation periods for Vegas PBS administrators.

Vegas PBS employees have a 3-year probation period, which Chi thinks is excessive and harmful to workers, especially Black and brown people. Under Nevada statute, workers do not “have a right to employment” during the probationary period.

She hopes to work with lawmakers for the next several years until the policy is changed.

“The unions say, ‘We can’t protect you. You’re on probation,’” said Chi. “Well… Why are we paying you dues if you can’t protect our jobs?”

According to Jeff Horn, head of CCASAPE, all union members get equal protection while paying dues: “There is not a lot of protection during the probationary period,” he said via email. “However … if a probationary administrator is non-renewed without discipline or ineffective evaluation, CCASAPE would challenge.”

Chi’s contract will terminate at the end of June based on poor performance reviews.

The post Vegas PBS whistleblower alleges workplace retaliation, racism appeared first on Nevada Current.

(Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)

Policy, politics and progressive commentary

Parents in Nevada will have to wait until September to receive benefits from a popular free food program designed to cover kids during summer vacation.

Earlier this year, Nevada signed up for the first new federally funded nutrition program in decades, which established a permanent summer nutrition assistance program for children out of school for the summer.

The new federal nutrition program, known as Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (SEBT), will provide families with $40 in food benefits per eligible child, per month, for the three month summer period. 

But those summer benefits won’t make it to Nevada households until September, according to the Nevada Division of Welfare and Supportive Services, which runs the program.

State health officials said the program was delayed until September, because the agency has not yet secured the state funding needed to run the program. However, the Nevada Division of Welfare and Supportive Services said they are confident the $6 million needed to cover the program’s administrative costs will be approved by lawmakers during the Interim Finance Committee in June. 

“We just need to get our funding approved first,” said Kristle Muessle, a public information officer for the Nevada Division of Welfare and Support Services. “Once we have that, we’ll be able to get the system updates going, and get those contracts going.”

Although the program is largely funded by the federal government, states need to pay half the cost of administering the program.

Payments will be distributed in one lump sum to eligible households with children from Pre-K through the 12th grade. State health officials estimate that 350,000 children in Nevada will be eligible for the summer food benefits program.

The first round of summer benefits starting in September will automatically be distributed to children living in households already participating in other income-based federal assistance programs, like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), or Nevada Medicaid.

Households with children identified by the Nevada Department of Education (NDE) as eligible for the free and reduced lunch program will also automatically receive benefits in the first round of payments in September.

Those benefits will be deposited on existing SNAP or TANF cards as part of a household’s monthly benefits. State officials noted that not all children will receive their benefits at the same time.

For families who do not receive SNAP or TANF benefits, pre-loaded SEBT cards will be sent by mail starting in mid-September. SEBT cards will be mailed to the last known address the parent or guardian provided when enrolling their child in school. 

Parents who have recently moved will need to contact the school their child is currently enrolled in, prior to June 10, 2024, and provide them with a current address or mailing address to ensure they receive the summer food benefits when they are finally available in September, warned the Nevada Division of Welfare and Supportive Services.

Children in households that are not already participating in other income-based federal assistance programs will receive their summer benefits at a later date. However, that later date has not been determined yet, according to the Nevada Division of Welfare and Supportive Services.

Nevada also has several nutrition food programs for families who need assistance over the summer.  The Clark County School District (CCSD) announced it will serve breakfast and lunch meals to all students through the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) at several locations throughout southern Nevada. A list of locations can be found here.

Summer meals served by CCSD schools will be available from May 21 to June 14, before returning from June 17 to July 17. Due to the terms of the CCSD Summer Food Service Program, all meals provided by CCSD must be consumed on-site. 

The Food Bank of Northern Nevada’s also offers free breakfast and lunch meals  to children 2-18 years old throughout summer break. A list of locations can be found here. 

The Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (SEBT) is a much needed boost for states that have seen food insecurity rise in recent years. 

Earlier this month, data released by Three Square Food Bank revealed that food insecurity in Clark, Nye, Esmerelda and Lincoln counties rose from 12% in 2022 to 14.7% in 2023. An estimated 14.6% of Clark County residents were food insecure, up from 12% the previous year. 

The highest rates are among Esmeralda and Nye counties, at 18.4% and 17.3% respectively. Both counties had a 13.9% rate the previous year.

The report also found that rates among children spiked from 17.8% in 2023 to 22%. Roughly one in five children, about 115,000 children, live in food-insecure households.

While Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoed a bill in 2023 that would have provided universal free lunch for K-12 students, the SEBT program will provide much needed additional funding for childhood nutrition programs.

Last month, Democratic lawmakers also criticized Lombardo for pressuring the legislature to fund the states administrative costs related to the SEBT program from an emergency contingency account, rather than reallocating unspent American Rescue Plan Act money.

Using the emergency contingency fund for the EBT programs’ $6 million administrative needs would leave the fund with an $11 million balance–considered too low by lawmakers.

During the legislative session, $9 million in ARPA funding was set aside for the universal free lunch program, which was ultimately left unspent after Lombardo vetoed the free school lunch bill. 

Lawmakers said they intended to use part of the $9 million in unspent ARPA funds to cover the $6 million needed for administrative costs related to the SEBT program.

The post Summer EBT won’t go out until September appeared first on Nevada Current.

This isn't the first time the Lombardo team has claimed credit for the results of Biden's policies. (Photo of Lombardo campaigning in 2022 by David Becker/Getty Images)

Policy, politics and progressive commentary

“I’m pleased to announce the allocation of $250 million towards Middle Mile Infrastructure,” Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo said in a statement released by his office this week. “This significant investment will enhance internet connectivity in communities across Nevada that have struggled with inadequate internet access. By addressing these critical gaps, we are ensuring that all Nevadans have the opportunity to benefit from reliable and fast internet service.”

“We” are ensuring? Who’s the “we”?

In other words, where did the $250 million come from?

The press release from Lombardo’s office left that part out.

Later in the press release, Lombardo’s office notes that the middle mile infrastructure – thousands of miles of fiber optic lines, basically – is part of a larger investment, and “Over the next four years, over $900 million will be dedicated to broadband infrastructure and digital equity and adoption initiatives.”

Where’s the $900 million coming from?

The statement from Lombardo’s office neglected to say.

Perhaps because everyone already knows.

Or should.

A presentation from the Governor’s Office of Science, Innovation and Technology (OSIT) indicates that of the $250 million Lombardo was “pleased” to announce this week, $87 million is provided by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), more commonly known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure bill, introduced by the Biden administration and passed by Congress in November, 2021.

Despite the law’s bipartisan passage, only 13 members of the U.S. House of Representative who, like Lombardo, are Republicans, voted for the bill. Nevada’s Mark Amodei wasn’t one of them.

According to the U.S. Department of Treasury, another $74 million of the $250 million was also provided under the infrastructure bill. The OSIT presentation indicates that money was assigned to the capital projects fund under the American Rescue Plan Act. ARPA passed both houses of Congress in March, 2021 without a single Republican vote in either the House or the Senate.

Those two tranches of funding comprise about two-thirds of the $250 million. As for where the other third comes from, as of late Thursday neither the governor’s office nor OSIT could provide a detailed breakdown.

But during a legislative interim committee meeting last month, OSIT Director Brian Mitchell said there were several sources of broadband funding for Nevada – 12, to be exact, Mitchell said.

He provided legislators with a graphic to illustrate those 12 sources. 

Every one of them is federal:

As the size of the bubbles indicate, the overwhelming majority of broadband funding to be provided to Nevada is the result of either the bipartisan infrastructure bill or ARPA, one of which passed with only minority support from congressional Republicans and the other with no Republican support at all.

Lombardo must be torn.

It was only a few weeks ago Lombardo wrote Biden a letter demanding the president “embrace free market principles that rely on supply and demand and rein in excessive federal spending.”

So why doesn’t Lombardo reject all that federal spending provided – over Republican opposition – by the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress, and just let free market principles provide broadband to rural and other underserved communities? 

Yes, the free market has had decades to do that, and failed. But surely the free market will get around to it eventually, no matter how many more decades it takes, right? 

In the meantime, Lombardo could be at ease knowing he had adhered to his faith in free market principles.

But Lombardo contains multitudes.

Just a couple weeks after telling the president how to do his job and demanding that Biden rein in “excessive federal spending,” there Lombardo was, celebrating the groundbreaking of a high-speed train that has received $6.5 billion in federal grants and financing – again thanks to the bipartisan infrastructure bill that most members of Congress from Lombardo’s party opposed.

And this week he is “pleased to announce” all that federal funding for broadband.

For some reason Lombardo and his office did not feel obligated to tell the public where the broadband funding was coming from. Maybe his faith in free market solutions wouldn’t let him.

Nevada Democratic Sen. Jacky Rosen’s office issued a statement noting she helped include the $74 million for middle mile funding when the infrastructure law passed.

The Nevada media largely acquiesced to the governor’s narrative, however, reporting the press release from Lombardo’s office under Lombardo-friendly headlines like “Gov. Lombardo allocates $250 million to improve state internet infrastructure,” and “Lombardo announces $250 million for better internet to 40,000 Nevadans,” and even “Governor Lombardo Providing $250 million for Internet Access.”

This isn’t the first time Lombardo has claimed credit for the results of Biden administration policies. 

His political action committee is fond of touting how many straight months of employment growth have occurred “under Joe Lombardo’s leadership.” Lombardo’s PAC always neglects to note that all of those consecutive months of employment growth, in addition to about twice as many more, have occurred under Joe Biden’s leadership.

Construction of fiber optic networks to underserved/unconnected Nevada communities is indeed a development worth celebrating. 

But Lombardo, Steve Sisolak, your last ride share driver… federal broadband funding would be coming to Nevada no matter who the governor was.

So Nevadans who applaud broadband funding may want to consider saying something Lombardo should but won’t: Thanks, Biden.

The post Lombardo tries to hog credit for Biden administration achievements (again) appeared first on Nevada Current.

(Photo by Sean Rayford/Getty Images)

Policy, politics and progressive commentary

Next year, when key provisions of President Trump’s 2017 tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations expire, we have an opportunity to get our money back.

I’m not just talking about all the foregone tax revenue we’ve lost because the rich have paid so little since 2017 — though we should get that back, too. I’m talking about the money families have lost to corporate price gouging.

Let me explain.

In 2017, Republicans slashed the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent, giving massive corporations their biggest tax windfall since Ronald Reagan was president. A few years later, as Americans emerged from a global pandemic, these same corporations drove up prices for families.

While inflation hamstrung workers and families, it didn’t make a dent in corporate profits. In fact, as many CEOs boasted themselves, it’s been a boon. Companies simply passed rising costs along to consumers — and then some, bringing in record profits as a result.

All told, corporate profit margins skyrocketed to 70 year-highs. And by the end of 2023, when Americans were beyond fed up, after-tax corporate profits hit an all-time record high of $2.8 trillion. My organization, Groundwork Collaborative, recently found that corporate profits drove over 50 percent of inflation in the second and third quarters of last year.

But why would a change in the corporate tax rate unleash the kind of rampant corporate profiteering we saw in the aftermath of the pandemic? Simple: It’s a lot more fun to gouge customers when you get to keep more of what you pull in.

Look at Procter & Gamble, which has raised the price of everything from toothpaste to diapers. Last year, the company pulled in more than $39 billion in profit.

If they had to pay the 35 percent statutory tax rate, they would have sent nearly $14 billion to Uncle Sam. Instead, they paid a 21 percent rate and, using loopholes, got to keep an extra $10 billion — which helped with their combined $16.4 billion worth of dividends and stock buybacks for shareholders.

Corporations did well from Trump’s corporate tax cuts, with executives getting big raises and shareholders receiving big buybacks. But the real bonus came when inflation hit. Corporations used the cover of supply chain issues and broader inflation to hike prices more than their higher input costs justified — and they didn’t have to worry about their tax bill.

Our tax code is exacerbating some of the worst corporate excesses, effectively “subsidizing corporate price gouging,” as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) described it recently. But it’s not only that low tax rates incentivize companies to overcharge. Rock-bottom tax rates also make collusion more profitable, as we saw with Pioneer Oil.

Recently, the Federal Trade Commission barred former Pioneer Oil CEO Scott Sheffield from joining the board of ExxonMobil following their merger, because Sheffield allegedly colluded with OPEC to raise oil prices. As families struggled with higher energy costs, the oil and gas industry banded together to keep prices high, which according to one analyst accounted for 27 percent of inflation in 2021.

When the reward is higher with lower corporate taxes, executives like Sheffield are more willing to take the risk. Higher corporate taxes are both crucial for accountability and for ensuring that there’s far less incentive for executives to squeeze as much as they can from their customers.

Wall Street tycoons and CEOs didn’t take the heat of inflation — they fanned its flames and families got burned. It’s no wonder people overwhelmingly favor a tax code that’s no longer rigged for corporations, especially as they struggle with high prices.

Congress raising the corporate tax rate in 2025 is an opportunity to recoup some of the truly obscene profits corporate America raked in during this period of economic upheaval for American families. It’s time Americans got their money back.

This commentary was originally published in Otherwords.org

The post Trump’s corporate tax cuts paved the way for inflation appeared first on Nevada Current.

Hundreds of BYD vehicles wait at a port in Suzhou, China, to ship out. (AFP via Getty Images)

Policy, politics and progressive commentary

In June 2019, then-presidential candidate Joe Biden tweeted: “Trump doesn’t get the basics. He thinks his tariffs are being paid by China. Any freshman econ student could tell you that the American people are paying his tariffs.”

Fast-forward five years to May 2024, and President Biden has announced a hike in tariffs on a variety of Chinese imports, including a 100% tariff that would significantly increase the price of Chinese-made electric vehicles.

For a nation committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, efforts by the U.S. to block low-cost EVs might seem counterproductive. At a price of around US$12,000, Chinese automaker BYD’s Seagull electric car could quickly expand EV sales if it landed at that price in the U.S., where the cheapest new electric cars cost nearly three times more.

As an expert in global supply chains, however, I believe the Biden tariffs can succeed in giving the U.S. EV industry room to grow. Without the tariffs, U.S. auto sales risk being undercut by Chinese companies, which have much lower production costs due to their manufacturing methods, looser environmental and safety standards, cheaper labor and more generous government EV subsidies.

Tariffs have a troubled history

The U.S. has a long history of tariffs that have failed to achieve their economic goals.

The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 was meant to protect American jobs by raising tariffs on imported goods. But it backfired by prompting other countries to raise their tariffs, which led to a drop in international trade and deepened the Great Depression.

President George W. Bush’s 2002 steel tariffs also led to higher steel prices, which hurt industries that use steel and cost American manufacturing an estimated 200,000 jobs. The tariffs were lifted after the World Trade Organization ruled against them.

The Obama administration’s tariffs on Chinese-made solar panels in 2012 blocked direct imports but failed to foster a domestic solar panel industry. Today, the U.S. relies heavily on imports from companies operating in Southeast Asia – primarily Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam. Many of those companies are linked to China.

Why EV tariffs are different this time

Biden’s EV tariffs, however, might defy historical precedent and succeed where the solar tariff failed, for a few key reasons:

1. Timing matters.

When Obama imposed tariffs on solar panels in 2012, nearly half of U.S. installations were already using Chinese-manufactured panels. In contrast, Chinese-made EVs, including models sold in the U.S. by Volvo and Polestar, have negligible U.S. market shares.

Because the U.S. market is not dependent on Chinese-made EVs, the tariffs can be implemented without significant disruption or price increases, giving the domestic industry time to grow and compete more effectively.

By imposing tariffs early, the Biden administration hopes to prevent the U.S. market from becoming saturated with low-price Chinese EVs, which could undercut domestic manufacturers and stifle innovation.

2. Global supply chains are not the same today.

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in global supply chains, such as the risk of disruptions in the availability of critical components and delays in production and shipping. These issues prompted many countries, including the U.S., to reevaluate their dependence on foreign manufacturers for critical goods and to shift toward reshoring – bringing manufacturing back to the U.S. – and strengthening domestic supply chains.

The war in Ukraine has further intensified the separation between U.S.-led and China-led economic orders, a phenomenon I call the “Supply Chain Iron Curtain.”

In a recent McKinsey survey, 67% of executives cited geopolitical risk as the greatest threat to global growth. In this context, EVs and their components, particularly batteries, are key products identified in Biden’s supply chain reviews as critical to the nation’s supply chain resilience.

Ensuring a stable and secure supply of these components through domestic manufacturing can mitigate the risks associated with global supply chain disruptions and geopolitical tensions.

3. National security concerns are higher.

Unlike solar panels, EVs have direct national security implications. The Biden administration considers Chinese-made EVs a potential cybersecurity threat due to the possibility of embedded software that could be used for surveillance or cyberattacks.

U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo has discussed espionage risks involving the potential for foreign-made EVs to collect sensitive data and transmit it outside the U.S. Officials have raised concerns about the resilience of an EV supply chain dependent on other countries in the event of a geopolitical conflict.

BYD targets EV sales in Mexico

While Biden’s EV tariffs might succeed in keeping Chinese competition out for a while, Chinese EV manufacturers could try to circumvent the tariffs by moving production to countries such as Mexico.

This scenario is similar to past tactics used by Chinese solar panel manufacturers, which relocated production to other Asian countries to avoid U.S. tariffs.

Chinese automaker BYD, the world leader in EV sales, is already exploring establishing a factory in Mexico to produce its new electric truck. Nearly 10% of cars sold in Mexico in 2023 were produced by Chinese automakers.

Given the changing geopolitical reality, Biden’s 100% EV tariffs are likely the beginning of a broader strategy rather than an isolated measure. U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai hinted at this during a recent press conference, stating that addressing vehicles made in Mexico would require “a separate pathway” and to “stay tuned” for future actions.

Is Europe next?

For now, given the near absence of Chinese-made EVs in the U.S. auto market, Biden’s EV tariffs are unlikely to have a noticeable short-term impact in the U.S. They could, however, affect decisions in Europe.

The European Union saw Chinese EV imports more than double over a seven-month period in 2023, undercutting European vehicles by offering lower prices. Manufacturers are concerned. When finance ministers from the Group of Seven advanced democracies meet in late May, tariffs will be on the agenda.

Biden’s move might encourage similar protective actions elsewhere, reinforcing the global shift toward securing supply chains and promoting domestic manufacturing.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post History says tariffs rarely work, but Biden’s 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs could defy the trend appeared first on Nevada Current.

A volunteer packs food at Three Square Senior Hunger Campus. (Photo courtesy Three Square of Southern Nevada)

Policy, politics and progressive commentary

Food insecurity climbed across Southern Nevada last year with an estimated one in five children uncertain where their next meal is coming from, according to the latest findings from Three Square Food Bank.

Data released Thursday as part of the Feeding America’s 2024 Map the Meal Gap Study comes after food pantries and services providers warned in 2023 that end of pandemic era benefits on top of rising costs could increase the number of people relying on food assistance programs.

“The surge in food insecurity underscores pressing challenges Southern Nevadans face,” Beth Martino, the president and CEO of Three Square Food Bank, said in a statement. “Inflation and rising living expenses, especially grocery prices and rent, are causing financial strain for too many of our neighbors.”

The report, which includes data from Clark, Nye, Esmerelda and Lincoln counties, all within Three Squares service areas, found 341,480 people, or one in seven, were deemed food insecure.

Combined food insecurity rates for all four counties increased from 12% in 2022 to 14.7% in 2023. An estimated 14.6% of Clark County residents were food insecure, up from 12% the previous year.  

The highest rates are among Esmeralda and Nye counties, at 18.4% and 17.3% respectively. Both counties had a 13.9% rate the previous year.  

The report also found that rates among children spiked from 17.8% in 2023 to 22%. Roughly one in five children, about 115,000 children, live in food-insecure households.

The fear that more people might need to rely on food banks began last year after the supplemental allotment for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, ended. The additional monthly payment began during the pandemic. 

Martino spoke to state lawmakers at the interim joint Committee for Health and Human Services April 8 about the rise in demand the nonprofit has seen.

“Most recently from September through the end of February we saw a 23% increase,” she said. “What’s unique about what we see now in the data is not as many new people are coming into food pantries but people who were food insecure in the past are becoming repeat customers.”

Three Square, which provides food with the assistance of 150 community service providers, distributed more than 43 million pounds of food last year throughout Southern Nevada and anticipates the amount to grow this year.

Martino cited a report earlier this year that found “Nevada has the second highest grocery prices in the country,” and said that coupled with skyrocketing rent prices has added to the strain.

“Those earning minimum wage in Nevada at $11.25 an hour, potentially without health insurance, need to work 82 hours a week in order to afford a one-bedroom apartment,” she noted. 

Martino encouraged lawmakers to revisit universal free school lunches in the next legislative session as a way to keep “children well fed and nourished so they can learn and ultimately live their best lives.”

Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoed a bill carried by Democrats in 2023 that would have provided universal free lunch for K-12 students. 

“Having universal access to free school breakfast and lunches is something that can make a meaningful difference in the life of the child, but also to a family as a whole who may be struggling to put food on the table,” she said. 

The post Southern Nevada food insecurity increased last year, Three Square says appeared first on Nevada Current.

(Getty Images)

Policy, politics and progressive commentary

Listening recently to a local political candidate denigrate public education in Nevada was very disheartening. Not because of character flaws or perceived inability of the candidate. He, like most voters, believes that national and state school rankings based on standardized test scores accurately measure school quality and effectiveness.

Improving public education seems to be on the agenda of each local, state and national political candidate; even though they are powerless to do so. Their prescribed remedies for curing the ills of public schools are more harmful than helpful.

Those disaffected with public schools are misled by the illusion that individual differences in academic ability are due to school quality. There is no valid evidence that school environments or instructional practices are responsible for gaps in reading ability or standardized test scores.

Simply put, schools and districts with higher standardized test score averages have students that have higher test scores. The primary difference remains the composition of the student body. Since their inception, standardized test results have always favored wealth over poverty when comparing different populations of test-takers.

There is nothing more fallacious than national rankings from media sources such as U.S. News and World Report. U.S. News proudly proclaims, “Since 1983 they have provided education rankings and helped parents and students find the perfect school.”

This should be interpreted as: Buy a home in an upper-middle class or wealthy neighborhood and surround your children with high achieving students or send them to more selective private or charter schools that are more adept at excluding low achieving students, and your children will be in schools with higher test scores.

School ranks remain largely unchanged over the past four decades and consistently reflect the socio-economic demographics of student populations. Suburban schools outperform inner-city schools in every metropolitan area. Some regular public schools have been supplanted by magnet and theme schools that have siphoned-off higher achievers within their districts.

Common levels of performance are not attainable in any field. Statements whining about low proficiency rates in particular schools or districts demonstrate the desire to dismantle public education. Parents and many educators have been hoodwinked into accepting standardized test scores as effective measures of learning and academic success.

Editorial and opinion pieces stating that Henderson or Summerlin schools “outperform” Las Vegas or North Las Vegas schools are made based on state test score averages. Instructional differences between schools have little or no impact on test score averages. Demographics determine averages.

There are no proven instructional methods or academic interventions that overcome disparate academic outcomes when comparing student populations. Schools across the valley mirror the situation in other metropolitan communities.

Poverty has a major influence on test score averages. Other socio-cultural and non-educational factors, such as the number of English learners and special education students, and parent education levels influence test score averages.

About 70% of Nevada students reside in Clark County, so CCSD largely determines test score averages for the state. Because of disproportionality of the previous factors, Nevada will always be near the bottom when compared to other states.

Using the nationwide teacher shortage as an excuse for poor academic performance of schools with large numbers of students in poverty is misleading. Universal instructional methods would be in place if common outcomes were possible.

Teachers with reasonably sized classrooms can have a profoundly positive effect across many measures in education, but little impact on individual standardized test scores. Low test scores are not a valid reason to question the funding of public schools. About 80% of a public school budget is the cost of personnel.

Competitive salaries are a good first step in attracting and retaining quality personnel, but more aggressive and creative solutions are needed. Suggestion: Create a local pipeline of educators for CCSD by expanding partnerships with institutions of higher education across the valley to effectively and cooperatively train PreK – 12 teachers and other educational personnel.

It is important to stress the importance of funding preschool programs. Preschool education may be our last best hope to improve all academic outcomes, including test scores. Academic success for individual students is largely determined prior to entering kindergarten.

The issue is not just the misperception that standardized test scores are an accurate measure of school quality. Educators also need to stop pretending that they largely influence individual test scores. The public needs to stop pretending that the only policies that might improve academic performance are educational ones.  

The post Standardized testing is a flawed yardstick for assessing educational success appeared first on Nevada Current.

A sales representative shows prospective customers a BYD Dolphin electric car at a BYD dealership on April 05, 2024 in Berlin, Germany. BYD, which stands for Build Your Dreams, is a Chinese manufacturer that went from making solar panels to electric cars. (Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

Policy, politics and progressive commentary

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration is doubling and in some cases tripling tariffs on Chinese-made products, like steel and electric vehicles, in a move aimed at easing economic pain in battleground states, though senior administration officials say it isn’t political.

National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard told reporters on a call Monday ahead of the announcement that the steep increase to several tariffs would help address the Chinese government “flooding global markets with exports that are underpriced due to unfair practices.”

“We know China’s unfair practices have harmed communities in Michigan and Pennsylvania and around the country that are now having the opportunity to come back due to President Biden’s investment agenda,” Brainard said, mentioning two crucial swing states ahead of November’s election.

President Joe Biden’s decision to increase several tariffs, Brainard said, ensures “that American businesses and workers have the opportunity to compete on a level playing field in industries that are vital to our future, such as clean energy and semiconductors.”

Here are the tariffs that will increase and when the White House will implement those changes:

• Steel and aluminum will move from a 7.5% tariff to a 25% tariff this year.
• Semiconductor tariffs will rise from 25% to 50% before 2025.
• Electric vehicle tariffs will increase from 25% to 100% this year.
• Batteries: The tariff on lithium-ion EV batteries and battery parts will rise from 7.5% to 25% in 2024. The tariff on lithium-ion non-EV batteries will rise to the same level in 2026.
• Solar cells will rise from a 25% tariff to a 50% tariff this year.
• Ship-to-shore cranes will get a 25% tariff this year. They currently aren’t subject to tariffs.
• Medical products: Tariffs on personal protective equipment, including face masks, will increase this year and tariffs on rubber medical and surgical gloves will go up in 2026. Both will be set at 25%. Tariffs on syringes and needles will go from not having a tariff to 50% in 2024.

Senators appealed for tariff increases

A group of seven Democratic U.S. senators wrote to Biden earlier this month, urging him and United States Trade Representative Katherine Tai to “maintain or increase the tariffs to address China’s continued actions to cheat and undermine our national security.”

Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, Bob Casey and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Gary Peters and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York all signed on to the letter.

The senators wrote that tariffs “are an important tool to level the playing field and combat anti-competitive practices from non-market economies and trade cheats, and they must remain in place.”

“China has continued to cheat, circumvent, and manipulate to artificially strengthen its economy and harm the United States,” the senators wrote. “Across sectors like steel, solar products, and electric vehicles, China employs tactics to distort markets and create artificially low prices by illegally subsidizing its industries and producing to overcapacity.”

Tariffs on electric vehicles

A senior administration official, speaking with reporters on background Monday to discuss details of the changes, said the higher tariffs on electric vehicles are necessary to avoid China having an unfair share of the global market.

“If we have a level playing field, we and other countries will have the chance to compete and that’s the kind of dynamic that we think will produce resilient supply chains and clean technology and give us our best chance of meeting our climate goals,” the senior administration official said.

A second senior administration official declined to “speculate” about whether China would set retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods, saying that officials from that country are likely to speak publicly in the coming days.

A third senior administration official on the call said the decision to raise certain tariffs and the timing of the announcement “has nothing to do with politics.”

That official also said there are differences between the production of electric and gas-powered vehicles in China, which is why the Biden administration is raising tariffs on one, but not the other.

“We’ve been thoroughly studying and assessing how the Chinese have been investing in their electric vehicle domestic industry and the range of unfair best practices that are giving them a significant unfair pricing competitive advantage,” the third official said. “So I think that’s the reason why we’re moving towards a significant step up in the tariff rate for electric vehicles.”

The post Tariffs to be sharply hiked by Biden administration on Chinese-made products appeared first on Nevada Current.

A child care center opened in Connecticut during World War II in 1942 for thirty children of mothers engaged in the war industry. It was one of hundreds of "war nurseries" across the U.S., but federal funding for the child care centers ended when the war did in 1945. (Photo by Gordon Parks, US Office of War Information, June 1943. Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, FSA/OWI Collection)

Policy, politics and progressive commentary

In most American families led by couples, both parents are in the workforce. Almost three-quarters of American mothers with children under 18 work. At the same time, nearly 1 in 4 U.S. children are being raised by single moms.

Yet child care is generally unaffordable, and paid leave is not available to most U.S. parents.

Around the world, however, most employed women automatically get paid maternity leave. And in most wealthy countries, they also have access to affordable child care.

These holes in the U.S. safety net are a problem for many reasons, including one I’ve been researching with my colleagues for years: Paid parental leave and child care help women stay in the workforce and earn higher wages over time. This lack of parental leave and child care may explain why the U.S. is no longer a leader in women’s workforce participation.

Maternity leave

The U.S. is one of a handful of countries worldwide that doesn’t mandate paid maternity leave. The others are Papua New Guinea and some small Pacific island nations.

Paid maternity leave, which typically lasts at least three months, needs to be designed thoughtfully. When women can and do take 15 months or more off after having a baby, as they may in a few countries, long leaves can limit mothers’ work experience and lead to discrimination.

The 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act did mandate 12 weeks of unpaid leave with the ability to return to their job afterward for some American workers. Yet most families can’t forgo the income that moms bring home.

Denmark offers what I think is a strong example of a national policy.

There, moms get almost 22 weeks of paid maternity leave and dads get two weeks of paid paternity leave. On top of that, mothers can take another 19 weeks and fathers can take another 11 weeks of paid parental leave. This policy, which includes additional flexibility, grants parents both the time and resources necessary to care for children, without “mommy tracking” mothers.

Child care

In many wealthy countries, child care and preschool are considered a mainstay of the educational system. But in the U.S., only about two-thirds of all children between the ages of 3 and 6 are getting publicly supported child care of any kind, including kindergarten, versus nearly all of the kids that age in France.

High-quality early childhood education programs are associated with many excellent outcomes for children from lower-income families, including higher rates of educational attainment, employment and wages.

In other words, when governments invest in child care and maternity leave, it fosters a more productive, healthy and creative workforce.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post U.S. is way stingier with maternity leave and child care than the rest of the world appeared first on Nevada Current.