Mediaboss Marketing

The For The People Act, Democrats' sweeping election and voter reform bill, is expected to collapse in the Senate on Tuesday much to progressives' chagrin, Politico writes.

The left is reportedly "steaming" that President Biden neglected to employ his "bully pulpit" to encourage a deal within Congress or further the bill's progress. Democrats want to know, Politico reports, how leaders can say "in one breath that democracy is in jeopardy and in the next let [the For The People Act] crash and burn."

Progressive activist Ezra Levin criticized Biden's lack of activism surrounding the bill, highlighting how former President Barack Obama debated "with House GOP on the [Affordable Care Act]" or how former President Bill Clinton "gave 18 speeches on NAFTA" because that is "what legislatively successful presidents do!" As protestors mobilize and state legislators call on Congress to pass the bill, Levin simply wants to know, "Where is the president?"

Added Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), if Congress fails to "meet the moment": "We are going to lose the opportunity to basically enact legislation for the people for a decade, or decades, to come." It's, as he puts it, "very, very, very bleak." Read more at Politico.

7 scathingly funny cartoons about Democrats' Joe Manchin problem

Bernie Sanders wants to know if cannabis reporter is 'stoned' right now

'No one will be spared': Georgia election workers have reportedly received a 'torrent' of threats from Trump supporters

Originally posted here:
'Where is the president?': Progressives lament Biden's approach to the likely doomed For The People Act - Yahoo News

The California flag waves in the breeze in Huntington Beach on May 23, 2020. (Los Angeles Times)

To the editor: The common theme in the responses to your "Reimagine California" series is that we, individually or corporately, are not making choices that will create a more "equitable" society, and that more government action is needed.

While the "reimagine" exercise can yield insightful options, reimagine does not mean "do-over." Whatever is proposed will have to navigate or modify existing structures.

Will the resulting government and economic structures be capable of producing the technical, scientific, cultural and economic achievements equal to those produced by the previous model? There is little evidence to support an affirmative response.

The pursuit of a more "equitable" society will only enable and benefit the government class. Everyone else will be disappointed.

Scott Perley, Irvine

..

To the editor: Thank you for the "Reimagine California" letters. They were diverse, reflective and at times moving. The letters reminded me that unless we embrace our shadow sides the pain, suffering and trauma around the pandemic and the election hope and renewal are illusory.

For me, the shadow sides are not about the other, but about that trauma and pain that I carry within me, bound up together with others. So it was with great sorrow that I witnessed the Trump administration's self-destructive attacks on science, public health and expertise.

Similarly, there's a deep shadow side as well to the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. It's terrible to lose and to be a loser. That said, I hope that we can turn away from the self-destructive and dangerous lies about the election.

I pray that we Americans can open our hearts to this trauma of losing and realize that the protections of our voting process remain totally nonpartisan. Let our hearts and minds become open so we reject the Big Lie that our election was flawed and corrupt.

Stanford Searl, Culver City

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

See more here:
Letters to the Editor: Progressives want to 'reimagine California.' What about the rest of us? - Yahoo News

Democrats and Republicans in Washington may have finally found an issue they can both support. Earlier in June, the U.S. Senate passed the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (USICA) which proposes significant changes to science and technology policy with an eye to U.S. China policy. Approved by a surprisingly bipartisan 68-32 vote, the bill merges Senate Majority Leader Chuck SchumerChuck SchumerThe Innovation and Competition Act is progressive policy Infrastructure deal: Major climate win that tees up more in reconciliation bill Democrats seek to calm nervous left MOREs (D-N.Y.) Endless Frontier Act and Sen. Robert MenendezRobert (Bob) MenendezThe Innovation and Competition Act is progressive policy Schumer says Senate will vote on repealing 2002 war authorization The Hill's Morning Report - Biden-Putin meeting to dominate the week MOREs (D-N.J.) Strategic Competition Act. President Joe BidenJoe BidenTrump calls Barr 'a disappointment in every sense of the word' Last foreign scientist to work at Wuhan lab: 'What people are saying is just not how it is' Toyota defends donations to lawmakers who objected to certifying election MORE has urged speedy passage of the bill in the House, where its headed next.

Progressives in the House should support and advance this $250 billion bill, which contains strong provisions that will smartly make the U.S. more competitive, through investments in communities, innovation, improving racial and gender justice and income equality. The bill authorizes the most extensive investment in U.S. innovation infrastructure in a generation, building technology hubs in disadvantaged areas, increasing federal funding for both fundamental and applied research, increasing STEM scholarships and modernizing U.S. technology policymaking. The bill introduces measures to combat systemic sexism in the scientific community and targets minority-serving institutions (MSIs) for additional grants, scholarships and support. The bill also makes strides in recognizing and funding climate change mitigation measures, including clean energy development and conservation mechanisms. Most notably, it expands the definition of STEM to include energy and environmental studies, which will refocus a range of federal policies on these fields. The bill also prioritizes clean technologies for inclusion in the regional technology hub program.

It should not be surprising that USICA has received support from a broad range of stakeholders, including many progressives. The Thurgood Marshall College Fund voiced support for the bills $750 million grant program to build research capacity at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and MSIs. The American Association of Universities, a group of 66 leading research universities, also praised the bill, calling it an important step in renewing our countrys commitment to federally sponsored scientific research to better position the United States for a healthier, more secure, more prosperous future. The bill also contains many of the policy recommendations from the Human Rights Watch regarding international responses to the Chinese government genocide of Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities in Xinjiang province.

So, whats not to like? As USICA moves to the House, some progressive groups have voiced concerns about framing these investments around competition with China. But competition with China is not synonymous with conflict. We should ensure that we are building better, rather than racing to the bottom. That is precisely how this legislation is crafted. A competitive policy toward China that strengthens America should be welcomed by progressive, and all, policymakers.

Competing with China to innovate, provide international development aid and secure supply chains can result in positive-sum and highly progressive policies, pushing American innovation to greater heights and supporting a thriving economy for the American people. This bill is an opportunity to show the strength of democracy and deliver public goods domestically and abroad. This type of competition is not about China-bashing or xenophobia; rather, it provides an opportunity to address problems in the U.S. that need to be fixed. It creates space for healthy competition in areas where American strength and opportunity have atrophied and where we are being outpaced by China. Confronting the Chinese governments human rights abuses, poor labor conditions, military excursions and instances of predatory aid are all fundamentally progressive positions that reinforce American values.

There are a few key areas of this bill that could benefit from more progressive activism in the House. The current bill expands research security initiatives and the role of the FBI in China policy without addressing systemic racism in these initiatives and institutions. It also authorizes $52 billion in economic aid to semiconductor manufacturers without assuring that the money is used for real investment and does not go to stock buybacks and other financial maneuvers. The bill can and should go further in protecting human rights in China. Progressives should advocate for inclusion of the main provisions of the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act and the Hong Kong Safe Harbor Act in this legislation, both of which have strong bipartisan support.

Ultimately, passing a bill with such significant bipartisan support is, in itself, a win for the American people. This type of cooperation demonstrates to Americans and our allies that democratic governance is viable, that no matter how stark our differences, we can come together to expand economic progress and increase security.

Nina Palmer is a senior fellow on the National Security and International Policy team at the Center for American Progress, and was the attach for the U.S. Department of Energy in Beijing.

Read more:
The Innovation and Competition Act is progressive policy | TheHill - The Hill

MAYFIELD VILLAGE, Ohio Love your current employer, but look across the office and wish you had a different position within it?

At Progressive Insurance, if employees see something else theyd like to try, theyre encouraged to make a move.

Having the chance to experiment with ones career path has worked well at retaining talent: the average Progressive employee has been with the company nine years, while more than 15,000 employees -- or roughly one-third -- have more than a decade of tenure.

Progressive grabbed second-place honors among large Northeast Ohio workplaces for 2021. The publicly traded company has more than 42,000 employees across the country, with more than 12,000 of them stationed at the company headquarters in Mayfield.

The insurance giant has been named as one of Northeast Ohios Top Workplaces for 12 consecutive years. It ranked fourth in 2020.

For the 2021 Top Workplaces list, cleveland.com and the Plain Dealer have compiled 175 stand-out Northeast Ohio employers, based on employee surveys. Weve focused on their responses and adaptations during the coronavirus pandemic.

Lori Niederst, chief human resources officer for Progressive says internal promotions have been a fabric of the company for decades, with about 80 percent of promotions made from within the organization.

In fact, Niederst began her career with Progressive 23 years ago as an analyst in the finance department, but has transitioned through the ranks as a process manager, audit director, business leader of compensation & benefits, to her current position in HR.

I was mid-way through a career when I was encouraged to apply for the HR department, she said. This was never a role I saw for myself, but managers and other employees may see something in someone and push them in the direction they may not see in themselves, she said.

So, when hiring from the outside, Niederst now looks for smart, good leaders who have the basic skills, but more importantly for people who can grow a career, are not just looking for a job.

Progressive values personal drive and recognizes translatable skills. Because of that, in 2019 about 5,000 Progressive employees changed positions within the company.

Often, we want someone to try new roles because the more sides of the company you see, the more capable you are for making long-term strides for the company, as a whole. It really rounds someone to be the very best they can be.

Hamilton Bohanan, a claims management associate with 15 years at Progressive, has held various leadership roles at the company, thanks to Progressives open-door networking approach.

Bohanan sees his career path as the same as a professional athlete: the more positions you can play, the more valuable you are to the team.

I have completely taken advantage of the chance to own my career here, he said. I have always been encouraged to spread my wings and keep advancing. The opportunity to grow isnt just empty promises, they provide you with all the tools you need to prepare to make a successful jump.

Progressive provides its employees with an internal database which lists job descriptions; required core competencies and skills; training suggestions -- things to read and do to acquire the skills you need to be competitive when you apply for a new position.

You can approach anyone, who is in the position you desire, and find out what you need to be successful in the new path you wish to pursue, he said. I have never found anyone who is not ready to help you out any way they can.

Neiderst is confident that when she finds a candidate with basic leadership qualities, the team at Progressive can teach the technical skills needed to excel at any position.

Anytime you promote someone you are taking a risk, but when we see the leadership potential in one of our employees, that is much less a risk than taking on someone who doesnt know the company, our systems or the culture. We prefer to give someone the chance who already gets us, she said.

See the original post here:
Ability to experiment with ones career path helps Progressive Insurance retain talent: Top Workplaces 2021 - cleveland.com

Earlier in the day, Heinrich tweeted insufficiently ambitious climate legislation should not count on every Democratic vote, and linked to a POLITICO article in which National Climate Advisor Gina McCarthy acknowledged President Joe Biden might not get all of his loftier climate priorities, such as a clean energy standard, in eventual infrastructure legislation.

Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) was even blunter in a tweet: "No climate, no deal," he wrote.

At the same virtual event, Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) said he was very confident the Senate would ultimately be able to coalesce around an infrastructure package with a major climate title, including a clean energy standard. He added later he "agree[s] wholeheartedly" with Heinrich's sentiment that Democratic votes should not be taken for granted.

In fact, I think that's the only infrastructure bill we can pass out of the Senate, he said of one with sufficiently strong climate provisions.

One of the upper chamber's most vocal climate action advocates, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), said in an interview "it's probably wise not to get too excited about alleged pieces of an unformed bill" but conceded there was much work to do.

"I'm still very anxious and I'm going to stay very anxious until we have a solid 1.5 degree [Celsius] bill and a path to passage," he said, referring to strong enough provisions to limit global temperature increases to that level.

Whitehouse said the breakdown of talks between Senate Republicans and the Biden administration didn't help or hurt prospects for climate action because "that was never going to be the route of a serious climate bill."

After the flood of progressive tweets and comments, McCarthy linked to the POLITICO article and tweeted: "When @POTUS thinks climate, he thinks jobs. Thats why - and let me quote this article - 'the White House [is] fighting to keep every piece' of the American Jobs Plan and deliver 'what is necessary to reach its climate target.' We need to get this done."

Evergreen Action Executive Director Jamal Raad said the administration assuaged some concerns Tuesday evening when his organization spoke with the White House, where Biden officials reiterated support for a clean electricity standard.

Raad said his group and allied progressive outfits had openly warned the administration about dealing with Republicans, worrying that critical provisions like the standard could fall by the wayside a sentiment he said some Democratic senators reflected in growing openness to publicly criticize the White House for perceived trade-offs on climate.

"Senators are bolstering their case but also sending a message that half-measures and compromises on the defining issue of our time are not acceptable," he said.

The escalation comes as several senior Democrats have outlined a plan whereby they would pass a bipartisan package through regular order and come back to do other Biden administration priorities, like climate change, through a reconciliation package.

The more traditional stuff roads, highways, bridges, rail, ports, safety, all that stuff, broadband that would be handled through regular order, Environment and Public Works Chair Tom Carper (D-Del.) told reporters on Tuesday. Then if were unable to also do the other issues that the president has characterized as infrastructure, [wed] come back and do those in a different way.

They must also contend with the fact that some moderate members of the conference, most notably and visibly Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), have expressed reluctance to pass legislation with Democratic votes alone.

Heinrichs comments were amplified and echoed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who suggested progressives in the narrowly-divided House also wouldnt vote for a package without strong enough climate change provisions.

Mitch McConnell and the Koch brothers are not worth setting the planet on fire for, she tweeted. I know some Dems may disagree with me, but thats my unpopular opinion of the day.

Climate hawk Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) also weighed in on Twitter: Just a gentle, friendly reminder that the executive branch doesnt write the bills.

Zack Colman contributed to this report.

Read more:
Progressives draw red line on keeping climate provisions in infrastructure bill - POLITICO