Blog

As the release date of my forthcoming book, Unlearn Power: Strengthening Communities in the Age of Environmental Crisis, approaches, naturally, I've been asked, "What's the book about?" But given the amalgamation of ecological devastation across the planet, with fallout and stakes unevenly felt across socioeconomic lines and underscored by political forces that engage in climate denialism and assaults on democratic institutions, I urge that "Why Unlearn Power?" is the more apropos question.

There are many reasons why Senate Republicans’ recent decision to defy the parliamentarian and repeal California’s Clean Air Act waivers using the Congressional Review Act (CRA) was objectionable. But one objection that hasn’t received enough – any? – attention is how legislative gimmicks like the CRA contribute to the broader problem of congressional dysfunction.

To recognize Hispanic Heritage Month this year, the Center for Progressive Reform asked Latino leaders in the environmental justice and climate movement to share personal reflections about their heritage and their work on a wide range of cross-cutting, intersectional issues that disproportionately affect Hispanic and Latino populations.

When I think about what makes the Center for Progressive Reform the “Center for Progressive Reform,” one name comes to mind: Rena Steinzor. This year, Rena is officially retiring from her “day job” as Professor of Law at the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, so it is a fitting occasion to reflect on what her “side hustle” at the Center meant for the organization and for me personally.

Information is vitally important to our daily lives, yet when it comes to the context of an employment relationship, so often that information travels on a one-way street. Employers, through the hiring process, know everything from our basic information to whatever intimate details that may arise in a background check. Yet, the wealth of information that would be important for employees, prospective hires, and the general public rarely flows in the opposite direction.

The Protecting the Right to Organize Act, or PRO Act, would significantly change the landscape of unionization, strengthen protections and the bargaining position of workers, and create a better balance in the employer-employee relationship. But as it currently stands, the PRO Act's sponsors have not been able to advance the bill beyond the 60-vote threshold needed to defeat a Senate filibuster. Is there a way forward for the legislation?

Nero fiddled, and I really don’t know how white powder made its way into the White House. But I do know that the California Supreme Court just issued an opinion in Kuciemba v. Victory Woodworks that will be incredibly hurtful to the working class during the next pandemic. I wonder how the California legislature will react.

Reeling from workers' gains during the New Deal and Civil Rights areas, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell penned a memorandum that became the playbook for American corporations' domination over workers for the next five decades. He wrote that Big Business was under attack, and to counter what was becoming a more even distribution of gains for labor, industry must “assiduously cultivate…political power” and use it “aggressively and with determination.” Corporations across the country heeded Powell's call.

The U.S. Supreme Court last week agreed to decide a case that could bring on a major weakening of the laws that the United States Congress has put into place to protect public health, safety, and the environment. The Chevron doctrine, as it's known, has never been popular with the regulated industries and conservative think tanks that want to limit the power of federal agencies.