Uncategorized Archives - Page 108 of 347 - Progressive Policy Institute

Asian Imports of Dirty Russian Natural Gas Fail to Cut Emissions, Finds New Report from PPI; Cleaner Sources of LNG Needed to Achieve Climate Goals

Posted on August 3, 2022 by The Progressive Policy Institute

A new report authored by the Progressive Policy Institute’s Paul Bledsoe and environmental economist Clayton Munnings finds that China and other Asian nations are rapidly moving toward natural gas to displace coal — but their efforts will not yield significant climate benefits if they don’t cut imports of high-methane leaking Russian gas. The report, which is the second in a series of papers on natural gas, is entitled “The Role of Natural Gas in Reducing Asia’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions.”

PPI argues Asian countries can reduce coal by substituting cleaner-burning liquefied natural gas (LNG), but must acknowledge that Russian gas piped to China emits higher emissions than Chinese coal. Thus, any pretense by China that using Russian gas reduces its overall emissions is false. This warning comes as Russian President Putin and Chinese President Xi announced a new proposal for a gas pipeline from Russia to China, called the “Power of Siberia 2.”

United States LNG delivered to China has, on average, 30% lower lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions than Chinese coal. The report authors argue that Asia should purchase LNG imports from the U.S. and other lower methane emitting sources, rather than sourcing dirty natural gas from Russia. Current purchases of oil and gas by China, India and other Asian countries are a major source of revenue for the Kremlin’s war on Ukraine.

“Not only are China and India funding Putin’s war machine by purchasing natural gas from the Kremlin,they are also increasing climate emissions, since Russian gas has higher lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions than coal due to massive Russian leaks of methane,” said Paul Bledsoe, Strategic Adviser for the Progressive Policy Institute. “It’s time the global climate community held China, India and other buyers of Russian gas accountable for the huge geopolitical and climate costs of their continuing purchase of Putin’s gas.”

“Asian countries importing gas should purchase liquified natural gas from the United States rather than piped natural gas from Russia based on comparative greenhouse gas emissions alone. This superior climate performance of liquified natural gas will increase if the United States continues to focus on measuring, verifying, and reducing methane emissions,” said Clayton Munnings.

Select key policy recommendations from the report include:

1. Asian governments should phase down and then halt the importation of Russian gas based on climate change, humanitarian, and geopolitical grounds.

2. Asian nations should also suspend and cancel the construction of natural gas pipelines from Russia since they increase lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions and are therefore inconsistent with climate goals.

3. In particular, China should cancel a proposed new gas pipeline from Russia (the so-called “Power of Siberia 2”) given its high lifecycle emissions.

4. Asian nations should construct LNG infrastructure to facilitate imports from countries with lower methane emissions, including the United States.

5. Asian countries that have carbon prices (including China, Japan, and South Korea) should, in time, consider adding a greenhouse gas import tax that regulates natural gas imports based on their lifecycle methane emissions. Carbon prices can and should be redesigned to give priority to low leakage natural gas.

6. Major greenhouse gas emitting Asian countries, especially China and India, who have not already done so should join the U.S., EU, and over 100 countries in the Global Methane Pledge to cut methane emissions from all national sources by 30% by 2030. It is notable that Russia has not joined this Pledge.

7. U.S. lawmakers and regulators (at the federal and state levels) should continue improving management of methane emissions — including measurement, validation, and policy frameworks — to work toward achieving the lowest leakage rates of any gas-producing and gas-exporting country in the world. U.S. regulators should specifically improve measurements of methane emissions by incorporating new methods, including satellites and other airborne measurements. A strong national inventory will bolster the effectiveness of any policy aimed at reducing methane emissions. U.S. regulators should pay special attention to ultra-emitters among oil and gas producers, including small producers and those in the Permian Basin.

Read and download the full report:

Mr. Bledsoe’s first report, published prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in December 2021, focused on the European Union’s huge reliance on high-methane emitting Russian gas, which undermines the EU’s climate goals and provides the Kremlin a financial and political upper hand against the EU and its allies. Read the first report here.

Paul Bledsoe is a strategic adviser at the Progressive Policy Institute and a professorial lecturer at American University’s Center for Environmental Policy. He served on the White House Climate Change Task Force under President Clinton, at the U.S. Department of the Interior, as a staff member at the Senate Finance Committee and for several members of the U.S. House of Representatives. Read his full biography here.

Clayton Munnings is a widely published environmental economist with over three dozen scholar articles and policy papers focused on carbon pricing and methane emission policies. He currently serves as Strategic Advisor to the International Emissions Trading Association, Expert to Perspective GmbH’s International Initiative for Development of Article 6 Methodology Tools, and Board Member at Eartshot Now. He operates a consulting firm that provides advice to countries, corporations, and startups abating greenhouse gas emissions through carbon pricing, climate finance, and carbon offsets.

The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C., with offices in Brussels and Berlin. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.

Follow the Progressive Policy Institute.

###

Lewis for the Chicago Tribune: The government has no place in building, operating its own broadband

Posted on August 1, 2022 by The Progressive Policy Institute

By Lindsay Mark Lewis

Friedrich Nietzsche’s famous quote that “what doesn’t kill you only makes you stronger” is only true, at least in politics, if you learn from your mistakes. And last year was a teachable moment for Democrats.

Democratic leaders missed huge opportunities on election reform (including the all-important Electoral Count Act), climate change, police reform, the right kind of immigration reform and much else, all because their eyes were too big, packages were too ambitious and most of all because they refused to say “no” to the extremist purity tests of the party’s hard left. Build Back Better was sacrificed on that altar.

Success requires tapering untested grandiosities and selling commonsense ideas to the 70% or so of the public that reject the extremes of the hard right and the hard left.

Read the full piece in the Chicago Tribune.

Marshall for The Hill: How to Stop Putin in Ukraine

Posted on July 29, 2022 by The Progressive Policy Institute

By Will Marshall, President and Founder of PPI

Six months after invading Ukraine, not much has gone right for Russian strongman Vladimir Putin. But it’s dangerous for despots to admit defeat, so he’s doubling down on death and destruction in hopes of salvaging something he can call a win.

Having failed to topple Ukraine’s government or overwhelm its highly motivated defense forces on the ground, Putin is settling into a grinding war of attrition, featuring World War II-style leveling of cities and terror attacks on civilians.

His aim is to seize more land along Ukraine’s eastern and southern borders that adjoins territories already contested by pro-Russian separatists following Putin’s 2014 incursion. U.S. officials expect Moscow to declare its intent to “annex” the conquered terrain, just as it did with Crimea.

In this way, Putin would have something to show Russians for the horrendous butcher’s bill he’s running up. CIA director Bill Burns last week estimated that 15,000 Russian soldiers have been killed so far and as many as 45,000 have been wounded.

Since Ukraine is fiercely resisting its piecemeal dismemberment and occupation by Russia, the fighting could continue indefinitely. Putin shows no interest in negotiating an end to the war, either because he still believes he can break Ukraine, or, more likely, because he thinks a military stalemate works in his favor.

This calculation rests on unflattering assessments of the West’s strategic stamina. As long as the NATO countries keep supplying Kiev with weapons and financial support and enforcing suffocating sanctions on Russia’s economy, Ukraine probably can hold out against its bigger and heavily armed neighbor.

Read the full piece in The Hill.

PPI Statement on Final Passage of Chips and Science Act

Posted on July 28, 2022 by The Progressive Policy Institute

Dr. Michael Mandel, Vice President and Chief Economist and Taylor Maag, Director of Workforce Development at the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) released the following statement on the passage of the Chips and Science Act:

“PPI applauds the Biden administration and Congress for the bipartisan passage of the Chips and Science Act. This historic legislation will bolster domestic semiconductor manufacturing and provide targeted support in science and technology innovation to strengthen our global competitiveness. This bill will be essential as the U.S. moves into a future with less dependence on Chinese chip production.

“Chips not only impacts America’s self sufficiency and national security but it also impacts the American workforce. This policy will create jobs in key industries, support American supply chains and grow America’s highly skilled science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) workforce. PPI supports federal policymakers’ commitment to creating education and training opportunities while diversifying STEM talent pipelines.

“PPI congratulates President Biden and Congress for working across the aisle and securing a win for American manufacturing.”

Dr. Michael Mandel is Vice President and Chief Economist at the Progressive Policy Institute in Washington DC and senior fellow at the Mack Institute for Innovation Management at the Wharton School (UPenn).

Taylor Maag is the Director of Workforce Development Policy at PPI. Taylor focuses on developing policy solutions that strengthen our nation’s workforce, ensuring employers have the talent they need to remain competitive and people have the skills and critical supports necessary to succeed in today and tomorrow’s economy.

The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.

Follow the Progressive Policy Institute.

Find an expert at PPI.

###

Media Contact: Tommy Kaelin – tkaelin@ppionline.org

PPI Statement on Reconciliation Breakthrough

Posted on July 28, 2022 by The Progressive Policy Institute

The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) released the following statement on the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022:

“PPI applauds Senator Joe Manchin and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer for returning to the negotiating table and agreeing on a historic reconciliation bill that would invest in clean energy, lower the cost of health care, and modestly reduce federal budget deficits. This bill advances precisely the kind of pro-growth, innovative climate policy that PPI has been calling for throughout the process and that America needs. It will not only spur new investments, create jobs, reduce emissions, and critically lower the cost of living for millions of Americans, but also strengthen our country’s economic future for generations to come.

“This deal is a major step forward for Congressional Democrats and the American people, and while it does not include as many legislative priorities as the original framework, PPI is encouraged to see a few well-funded programs that will result in transformational change rather than a broad progressive wish list. We are also encouraged that the deal includes a plan for taking up additional legislation to reform federal permitting processes later this year, which has long been a PPI priority.

“This package isn’t perfect. It doesn’t close the Medicaid coverage gap, or permanently fix the ACA subsidy cliff. More deficit reduction would have strengthened the legislation’s inflation-fighting potential. But the perfect cannot be the enemy of the good, especially when Democrats have an ideologically diverse caucus with no votes to spare in the Senate. Democrats should take the win now and continue to work on making further progress in these areas next Congress.

“Together with the CHIPS and Science Act and the bipartisan infrastructure law, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 will cement President Biden’s legacy of the largest increase in domestic public investment in modern history. Democrats in both chambers should act quickly and decisively to advance these bills and secure a stronger future for all Americans.”

Follow the Progressive Policy Institute.

Find an expert at PPI.

Digital Documents as a Tool for Inclusion

Posted on July 28, 2022September 18, 2024 by The Progressive Policy Institute

Photo identification is necessary for modern life. However, more than 21 million Americans do not possess valid ID, and those without home addresses cannot register for state driver’s licenses. Without that physical license, a person can’t get a job, receive aid or health care, vote, or represent themselves in court. Luckily, IDs aren’t the only way to prove identity. Those born in the US have official paper trails through birth certificates and social security cards. To lose these documents and to obtain new copies require paying a fee or appearing in court. How can legislators ensure documents are accessible and protected? The City of Austin Innovation Office’s LifeFiles initiative offers a unique and scalable approach to inclusive documents.

LifeFiles distinguishes itself from global digital ID programs in its decentralized administration and accessibility. In its initial prototype funded by Bloomberg, LifeFiles sought to help people experiencing homelessness gain autonomy over identity documents by creating an official, digital repository of documents like birth certificates. Using a web application, the program was designed for all levels of tech literacy and access: First, by making it accessible from any computer and second, by offering multi-modal sign in methods, password, biometrics, social attestation, or a security question to unlock the documents. Initial testing enabled official free notarization of uploaded documents using blockchain so the digital repository could be used in government settings like applying for a driver’s license or for food and social welfare benefits.

LifeFiles is open source and never collects user data. It uses a combination of blockchain and encryption to secure user documents. Blockchain technology creates an encrypted hash to ensure secure notarization. Then, public-private key infrastructure shares documents, giving an identity verifier the ability to check the blockchain ledger to guarantee authenticity. Decentralized identifier technology (DID) allows these official documents to be accessed via web browser without having a record of identifying information saved in that browser. Technological alternatives to LifeFiles without DID are less secure.

Though piloted as an inclusion tool, digital documents are universally advantageous. User-controlled release of identifying data and encryption make LifeFiles secure and private. The system may also lessen the paperwork burden for individuals and governments through official, centralized, digital storage of essential documents. LifeFiles researchers concluded the program may eventually lower the costs of administering IDs.

The city of Austin’s Chief Innovation Officer, Daniel Culotta, suggests the program could function nationally. Without further grant funding, LifeFiles halted its testing of prototype documents, but the code is still publicly available for replication and scaling. If the government administers the program, onboarding is as simple as volunteer-led document uploading clinics.

This pilot has potential to be adopted by many states and localities. Currently there are 47 states including Washington DC where digital notarization is legal. Eventually, widespread adoption of digitized records will save money, and digital copies of birth certificates at the time of birth will prevent the loss of important records later on, all with users’ autonomy over their identities.

LifeFiles is an open-source response to the difficulties citizens face when they lose important documents. If states fully support this approach, it could aid more than 20 million Americans in controlling their identity and accessing services.

PPI’s Trade Fact of the Week: Digital bank accounts help Cambodian garment workers stay safe and earn more from their wages

Posted on July 27, 2022September 18, 2024 by The Progressive Policy Institute

FACT: Digital bank accounts can help Cambodian garment workers stay safe and earn more from their wages

THE NUMBERS: Estimated monthly data flows over the internet, worldwide* –

2022 396 exabytes
2020 254 exabytes
2015 76 exabytes
2010 3 exabytes
1998 0.0001 exabytes

* Estimates from Cisco’s Visual Networking Index, 2017 and earlier reports.

WHAT THEY MEAN:

It is a quarter-century since WTO members approved a “moratorium” on applying tariffs to electronic transmissions, at “MC-2” — the second Ministerial conference — in the spring of 1998. Last June, a quarter-century later, the twelfth Ministerial conference extended this once again, with another decision point at the 13th Ministerial conference likely in late 2023. In the intervening years:

The world’s internet user community has grown from 147 million (of whom 77 million were American) to 5.3 billion or two-thirds of the world’s people in mid-2022.
The digital economy has grown to about 15.5% of global GDP, equivalent to $16 trillion, a figure close to the $18 trillion Chinese and EU economies.
The scale of information flowing across telecom networks, according to estimates in Cisco’s now-slightly-dated Virtual Networking Initiative, rose about 4-million-fold, from 100 terabytes to a likely 396 exabytes per month.
The cost of transferring information has dropped by a likely 99%, as fiber-optics replaced copper submarine cables and low-altitude satellites proliferated.
Debate over the “moratorium” this spring centered on growth, development, and taxation: How does the economic and social value of rising information flows match up against the revenue poor-country governments could take by taxing these information flows (while in doing so slowing their growth). Here is a small human case for the choice WTO members have made so far:

Cambodia’s 800,000 garment workers, mostly young women from rural towns and villages, have been the country’s engine of industrial development over the past generation. At the national minimum wage for garment factories, they earn $194 and up monthly, which is about 50% above Cambodia’s $1,591 per capita income at paycheck time. But they lose some of this, and assume personal risks that workers in middle-income and rich countries don’t, because they are mostly paid in cash and have great difficulty finding safe places to put their money.

Visiting factories around Phnom Penh a decade ago, the Trade Fact series editor noticed that almost all the line workers at sewing machines were wearing silver necklaces, earrings, and bangles. Experts and factory managers explained that this was not a fashion choice, but the best among a poor set of savings options. Since rural Cambodia lacked an effective birth certificate or ID system, workers could not open bank accounts and took wages in cash. To avoid carrying lots of paper money around, or trying to hide it in their (usually shared) apartments, they would visit pawn shops and buy small pieces of jewelry, essentially ‘wearing’ their savings until the holidays. Then they would resell the jewelry at a small loss in order to bring remittance money and presents to their families. In financial-services jargon, this is a negative-interest savings account, but the best choice available since it is physically safer than others.

World Bank researchers now see the falling cost and eased availability of financial information transfer — the ability to move data cheaply and securely, combined with worker’s widespread adoption of smartphones with low-cost monthly data plans — beginning to change this system. For a one-time fee of $5,900, a Cambodian garment factory can contract with a bank or telecom company to replace cash payouts with automatic digital deposit that workers can access through phones and ATMs with unique pins. This in turn will enable a worker to earn interest and develop credit rather than losing part of her wages to pawnshops, and send remittances home digitally rather than carrying a purseful of cash on a bus.

This local case has analogues throughout the low-income world as data flows grow cheaper and reach more countries: financial inclusion for informal-sector workers, telemedicine for rural areas, weather and soil bulletins for farmers, and other support for the poor. More generally, World Bank researchers believe that raising access to mobile digital service by 10% in low-income countries raises per capita income by 2% (and in sub-Saharan Africa by a somewhat higher 2.5%). The WTO members will be arguing these matters as they prepare for “MC-13” sometime late in 2023 or early 2024. Arguments for slowing this growth by taxing it, however attractive to accountants in Finance ministries, need to be weighed against larger-scale potential loss in development and daily life.

FUTURE READINGS:

Digital growth and policy

What does “grow from 100 terabytes per month in 1998 to 396 exabytes in 2022” mean? A “byte” is eight binary digits, enough information to form one letter. Prefixes run as follows: kilo represents 1,000, mega 1 million, giga 1 billion, tera 1 trillion, peta 1 quadrillion, exa 1 quintillion, and zetta 1 sextillion. Yotta comes next, but has not yet been achieved by anything human. Thus, the 396 exabytes thought to be transmitted each month this year are about 4 million times more information than the 100 monthly terabytes of 1998. By analogy, the ratio of digital information flows in 1998 to those of 2022 is about the same as the ratio of the 2 million trees in and around Washington D.C., to the 3 trillion trees thought to be alive and growing on Planet Earth.

Cisco’s most recent Annual Internet Report, with counts of users, devices, and speed for the world and regions.

The WTO looks to another debate on electronic transmissions, tariffs, finance, and development in its next Ministerial conference.

Data flow, development, and the garment worker

The World Bank examines the role of digital information and inclusion in low-income country development.

… and looks at the transition from cash payments to digital banking for Cambodian garment workers.

The International Labour Organization has a wide-scale take on life and work in Cambodia’s garment and shoe factories.

And a look back:

The White House electronic commerce report, from the Clinton administration in 1997, argues that “Unnecessary regulation of [Internet-based] commercial activities will distort development of the electronic marketplace by decreasing the supply and raising the cost of products and services for consumers the world over. … Accordingly, governments should refrain from imposing new and unnecessary regulations, bureaucratic procedures, or taxes and tariffs on commercial activities that take place via the Internet..

CNN recalls the world’s Internet user community as of 1998.

And the WTO’s 1998 Declaration on Electronic Commerce.

ABOUT ED

Ed Gresser is Vice President and Director for Trade and Global Markets at PPI.

Ed returns to PPI after working for the think tank from 2001-2011. He most recently served as the Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Trade Policy and Economics at the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR). In this position, he led USTR’s economic research unit from 2015-2021, and chaired the 21-agency Trade Policy Staff Committee.

Ed began his career on Capitol Hill before serving USTR as Policy Advisor to USTR Charlene Barshefsky from 1998 to 2001. He then led PPI’s Trade and Global Markets Project from 2001 to 2011. After PPI, he co-founded and directed the independent think tank Progressive Economy until rejoining USTR in 2015. In 2013, the Washington International Trade Association presented him with its Lighthouse Award, awarded annually to an individual or group for significant contributions to trade policy.

Ed is the author of Freedom from Want: American Liberalism and the Global Economy (2007). He has published in a variety of journals and newspapers, and his research has been cited by leading academics and international organizations including the WTO, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund. He is a graduate of Stanford University and holds a Master’s Degree in International Affairs from Columbia Universities and a certificate from the Averell Harriman Institute for Advanced Study of the Soviet Union.

Read the full email and sign up for the Trade Fact of the Week

Digital Privacy in America: How does the ADPPA fit into global privacy legislation?

Posted on July 27, 2022September 18, 2024 by Alyssa Brown

Earlier this month, a bipartisan group of representatives and senators released a discussion draft of a federal digital privacy bill: the American Data Privacy and Protection Act. It has now moved out of committee and, if passed, would create new legal rights for all Americans regarding the collection, access, and security of their personal data.

This is not the only consumer privacy bill considered by Congress, and there may be others. As written, this bill would align the United States with other nations, such as the European Union, that have thus far set global standards for digital privacy. Introduced in 2018, the European Union’s digital privacy law filled an important gap in regulating consumer privacy. Four years on, the data revealing how the law interacts with innovation and whether it succeeds in its goal of protecting consumers is still unclear. This should give US lawmakers pause to potentially explore more creative solutions for digital privacy.

The Progressive Policy Institute released a comparative report providing a general framework for analyzing privacy legislation across three separate but interrelated layers: legal access, security, and innovation.

Legal access defines what rights individuals have to see, access, update, and delete their data. Security describes the technical responsibilities for protecting collected data. And the third level, innovation, addresses how the laws interact with economic growth.

How does the new bill fit into these layers?

1. Legal Rights

If passed, the ADPPA would codify a set of data collection and access rights for all Americans who share data with private companies. It’s important to note that ADPPA does not apply to government collection or storing of personal data. As noted in PPI’s report analyzing countries’ privacy legislation, Canada, the European Union, and the United Kingdom put some controls on government use of data, but China did not.

ADPPA requires firms that collect consumer data to gain clear “affirmative express consent.” Consent for data disclosure is firmly rooted in the European Union’s landmark data protection law, the General Data Protection Regulation. It is typically solicited via checkboxes on web pages, and the bill requires clear, plain language description of data collection needs. Specifically highlighted in the bill is the right for consumers to opt-out of targeted advertising and a prohibition of targeted advertising to children.

Once the data is collected, ADPPA states that individuals have the right to access, correct, delete, and transfer data about themselves, with private companies; China and the European Union provide similar access rights to citizens. How to exercise these rights must be clearly stated in easy-to-read privacy policies.

Overall, the bill provides very similar data rights as other countries.

2. Security

Global privacy laws typically address security as a principle and design feature, the U.S. bill follows this trend. Without being overly prescriptive, as digital security is highly technical and evolving, it directs data collectors to implement a risk-based approach depending on the level of sensitivity of the data collected. High-risk data includes biometric or genetic information, passport or social security numbers, and private communications like text messages or email.

In line with other data privacy laws around the world, ADPPA requires large data collectors to appoint a data protection officer and to first conduct a data protection impact assessment, which is a plan for data security and risk.

Additional security and privacy measures recommend data minimization (an essential pillar of the GDPR), or restricting data collection to specific uses and deleting data after use. Data minimization is important because if data is not collected or not stored, it can’t be improperly used or exposed. (they direct not recommend, and i write measures and only add one additional measure. Is this bill simply a copy of the GDPR, does it try to be the same thing in the American context. How it relates to the ADPPA discussion.)

3. Innovation

It’s challenging to predict how a privacy law like ADPPA will impact digital innovation. Crucially, a federal privacy law will provide clear guidance for online companies that serve Americans across multiple states. In the current system, where states are passing digital privacy laws only for their residents, a federal law would ease compliance burdens on firms.

Similar to the GDPR, the bill exempts researchers, journalists, and small data holders except for those who derive 50%of their revenue from data sales. However, it does not clarify whether research conducted by big firms for platform improvements or marketing is exempt. The bill’s right to opt-out of targeted advertising and data transfers, which include data sales, may negatively impact certain industries like advertising and data brokers. Additionally, the bill recommends a study for a universal opt-out portal, which could be an innovation, but also could bankrupt the industries that rely on that data.

These provisions have broad implications for the data economy and should be evaluated carefully. Notably missing from the bill are recommendations for studies of other privacy-preserving technologies or security technologies. To assess the full impacts on innovation it requests an economic impact study five years after the enactment of the Act.

Conclusion

This draft bill is the newest of many privacy bills to be considered by Congress. Many of its provisions mirror the GDPR, as many global privacy laws do, with a major exception that this law does not apply to government data collection.

A key point of consideration for American legislators as they consider this bill is that it replicates many statutes from the GDPR. Enacted in 2018, we still don’t yet know the full impact of regulations like the GDPR on long-term digital innovation or whether its consumer protections are effective, but more information is coming out all the time. A new study from the University of Oxford in 2022 found that small business profits were most affected by the GDPR regulation. A National Bureau of Economic Research study found that the GDPR decreased the number of apps on the Google Play app store and depressed new entrants into the app market. As of the writing of this post, this author found no data detailing the state of data breaches since the introduction of the GDPR.

It’s undoubted that consumers deserve enhanced transparency and protection of their personal data online. If ADPPA passes, it would provide new data collection and protection rights for Americans which is an essential step toward digital privacy. But remember that the United States has a unique and strong innovation culture that is not necessarily well-reflected in the GDPR and other similar global privacy legislation. Those approaches shouldn’t be the only model being considered by lawmakers to enhance digital privacy. Congress has the opportunity to use existing research and data on alternative privacy-protecting technologies and ideas to set new global standards.

‘Building a Better America’ Requires Stronger Tools for Implementation and Accountability

Posted on July 25, 2022September 18, 2024 by Alyssa Brown

The passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) in November marked the first large investment in American infrastructure in decades. The $1.2 trillion law includes over $550 billion in sorely needed new spending for areas including broadband, transportation, and sustainability. The Biden administration has prioritized quick implementation, but tools for accountability and efficiency have been lacking. To prevent misuse or wasting of funds, more centralized sources of information about current projects should be available to public entities, private sector investors, and citizens. Actions to increase accountability and efficiency will improve public confidence in the administration and ensure funds are being used for their intended purposes.

So far, around $110 billion in funding has been released and over 4,000 infrastructure projects are underway. Two recent projects include the Airport Terminal Program, which just announced $1 billion for improving terminals in 85 airports nationwide, and the Internet for All initiative, which provides funding for broadband infrastructure. The rapid action taken to implement the IIJA reflects the White House’s awareness of the law’s transformative potential. Mitch Landrieu, White House Senior Advisor and Infrastructure Implementation Coordinator, told CBS, “If we can … learn how to do big things again, which we are confident that we can do, it’s gonna be a wonderful thing to see.”

The Biden administration has demonstrated a desire to improve accountability and efficiency after the rapid dispersal of COVID-19 relief funds resulted in waste and fraud. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a guidance memorandum to executive branch agencies directing them to work closely with Inspectors General and OMB during IIJA implementation. This collaboration should result in the evaluation of risks in implementation plans to reduce the potential for costly disruptions. In May, the White House released a Permitting Action Plan outlining the administration’s strategy for making sure environmental reviews and permitting processes are effective, efficient, and transparent, illustrating the administration’s determination to accelerate permitting processes to avoid expensive delays.

The White House has also created a Permitting Dashboard to allow the public to keep track of approved projects, adding another level of accountability. Additionally, in May, the administration released the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Technical Assistance Guide to help communities and entities across the country access and employ infrastructure funding. These actions are good first steps for promoting transparency and efficiency because they show the American people what actions have been taken and provide resources to streamline implementation.

But there is still room for improvement. A main goal of the administration should be to centralize information about how IIJA funding is being spent and what funding opportunities are currently available. This interactive map released by the White House for the six-month anniversary of the law’s passage is useful for cursory examinations of funding outlays, but only provides information about total funding for each state and the percentage of funding spent on each of three main categories: Transportation; Climate, Energy, & Environment; and Other.

This map could be a powerful tool if it contained details about specific programs to assure the public that their taxpayer dollars are being spent wisely. Public accountability is essential and could keep state and local governments on track. For instance, one announced program is the Carbon Reduction Program (CRP), which provides states with funding for projects designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from on-road sources. However, this program allows states to transfer up to 50% of CRP funds to another state apportionment from the Department of Transportation, meaning outcomes from the CRP could vary greatly depending on state priorities. Transparency about each state’s use of CRP funding could ensure governments are held accountable for using this money as it was intended.

The Biden administration should also take steps to centralize information about available funding so eligible entities do not miss opportunities. With programs spanning multiple executive branch departments, it is difficult to track every program being announced. One tool, the Grants.gov database, is not operating as efficiently as it could be. When “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act” is selected in this database, few funding opportunities come up even though there are many more IIJA-funded projects elsewhere in the database. The federal government is therefore running the risk of communities missing out on much needed funding by categorizing projects incorrectly.

While technical assistance is being made available as stated in the White House guide, it is also important that outreach to stakeholders is increased. For instance, individuals and households often qualify for internet service discounts through the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) because they are eligible for SNAP, Medicaid, WIC, Pell Grants, or another assistance program, but there does not appear to have been any ACP information distributed through these programs to participants. Private sector inclusion in project planning and management also needs to be enhanced so the most efficient technologies and construction methods are utilized. Helping communities leverage private sector investment can ensure that even projects that are not part of competitive funding programs meet high standards for future performance.

The IIJA represents a meaningful investment in America’s future, but to reach its full potential, the federal government needs to consolidate information about its implementation. This will allow all stakeholders, from individuals to states, to hold the government and other entities accountable and access opportunities to better their communities.

Monkeypox outbreak demonstrates few lessons learned from COVID-19

Posted on July 21, 2022September 18, 2024 by Alyssa Brown

Monkeypox virus has long been endemic — meaning there is a continuous baseline level of infection — in West and Central Africa. But nine weeks ago, the virus left the continent and began spreading in Europe and now the U.S. There are now at least 13,000 cases across 60 countries and three reported deaths. In the U.S. alone there are almost 2,300 cases and unfortunately, it seems that the public health infrastructure and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are demonstrating some the same pitfalls of the early days of COVID. Experts say that the window to contain the disease is closing.

The monkeypox virus presents itself with fever, body aches, chills, and fatigue, and if it is a more severe infection, rashes, and lesions. It spreads person-to-person through direct contact with the rash, respiratory droplets, and through touching contaminated clothing or linens. It has a long infectious period of roughly 2-4 weeks. Though the symptoms can resolve themselves, it can be highly uncomfortable and is a greater threat to immunocompromised people, children, and pregnant women. There have been no reported deaths outside of Africa but right on the heels of a multiyear, deadly, global pandemic, how is the U.S. repeating several of the same errors as it did during the early days of COVID?

Too little testing: Until recently, monkeypox testing was limited to a small number of government-run labs that are a part of the CDC’s Laboratory Response Network. This meant that providers were required to complete bureaucratic paperwork to receive permission to order a test. This slowed testing in the initial days of the outbreak. However, in recent days, five commercial labs have begun offering monkeypox testing which should help alleviate testing backlogs. Unfortunately, it may be too late to stop the virus from spreading: the virus is already spreading undetected in many communities as indicated by exceptionally high positivity rates — the rate at which those who are tested are positive. And for many of the confirmed cases, health officials don’t know how the person caught the virus. Those infected haven’t traveled or knowingly been in contact with another infected person.

Not enough vaccines: Unlike the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there are two vaccines that are effective (roughly 85% efficacy) at preventing monkeypox. First, there is an older smallpox vaccine which also works against the virus — however, it has a high risk of side effects and can’t be used on people who have HIV or are pregnant. Then there is a newer smallpox vaccine that also works on monkeypox, without the risks of the older vaccine. Though the U.S. has ordered nearly 7 million doses, it has struggled to expedite the acquisition and distribution process. In fact, 1 million doses that have already been purchased have been held up in a manufacturing facility in Denmark awaiting on FDA clearance. The CDC estimates that roughly 1.5 million American men are eligible for the vaccine based on their guidance.

As states and localities have received a slow drip of vaccines, appointments have been gobbled up faster than they can be set up. New York City, learning from lessons of COVID-19, has decided to give as many first doses as they can and worry about the follow up doses later. This goes against FDA guidance but is the type of response that is warranted in an emergency.

Limited access to treatments: An FDA approved smallpox antiviral drug, TPOXX, is presumed to work on monkeypox, but will require physicians to obtain special permission to use it on their monkeypox patients. The bureaucratic application process creates further delays in treating patients suffering from the symptoms of monkeypox: lesions, headaches and sometimes debilitating pain.

It’s important to note that this virus isn’t COVID-19. It’s not a novel, deadly virus without treatments or vaccines. There is no need for widespread masking or shutdowns. Indeed, the United States government has been forward looking enough to order monkeypox/smallpox vaccines and stockpile treatments, but now that the virus has presented itself, the government can’t seem to efficiently deliver on the last mile of getting the therapeutics to patients.

COVID-19 and monkeypox illustrate that the threat of diseases is ongoing — pathogens will continue to emerge and pose a threat to the public. It’s paramount that the U.S. invest in the pandemic preparedness infrastructure to meet demand as I outlined in an earlier paper. It’s time for the government to learn from its missteps and invest in the public health system, such as on the ground clinics, as well as supply chain infrastructure, and to embrace greater flexibility when combating novel threats.

PPI’s Trade Fact of the Week: 4.85 billion people have been vaccinated against COVID-19 worldwide

Posted on July 20, 2022September 18, 2024 by The Progressive Policy Institute

FACT: 4.85 billion people have been vaccinated against COVID-19 worldwide

THE NUMBERS: Vaccination rates for adults, by world income group*

Upper-middle income countries 78%
High-income countries 73%
United States 67%
World 61%
Lower-middle income countries 55%
Low-income countries 19%

Source: Ourworldindata.org for percentages by income level. World Bank definitions for these classifications are above $13,205 in Gross National Income per capita for ‘high-income, $4,206 – $13,204 for upper-middle income, $1,086 – $4,205 for lower-middle income, and under $1,085 for low-income.

WHAT THEY MEAN:

The world’s first COVID vaccine jab, delivered by nurse May Parsons, went to a 91-year-old Margaret Keenan at University Hospital Coventry in England, on December 8, 2020. That was 331 days after the first publication of the coronavirus’ DNA sequence. With another 589 days have gone by since Ms. Keenan’s first shot, where do we stand?

According to the Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Information Center, health care providers like Ms. Parsons have given 11.84 billion vaccine shots worldwide. This has “fully vaccinated” 4.84 billion people, or 61% of the world’s population. (“Fully vaccinated” by JHU’s definition: two mRNA shots or one Johnson and Johnson shot.) A study last month conducted by the British medical journal The Lancet calculates that these vaccinations have cut worldwide COVID-19 deaths by a range from 14.4 million to 19.8 million, in the context of an epidemic of 565 million known cases and 6.4 million known deaths. Each day the total rises a bit, as providers administer about 9 million more shots. This is a remarkable, even stunning, achievement of government and private-sector science, transnational manufacturing and logistics, and health-provider delivery. But it remains an achievement with gaps; and these may grow more important as new variants emerge and immunity conferred through early vaccination fades.

One gap is that of income. People in rich and upper-middle income countries are somewhat more likely to be vaccinated than people in lower-middle-income countries, and low-income countries are far behind both. Low-income countries also appear to be relatively more reliant on Chinese- and Russian-produced vaccines that offer lower levels of protection than U.S./European vaccines. There are also some gaps by region – vaccination rates appear relatively high in South America, East Asia, ASEAN, the Pacific Islands and western Europe, and relatively low in southern and eastern Europe, the Middle East, the Caribbean, South Asia, and Africa. These general patterns have many exceptions — low-income Asian countries including Cambodia and Bhutan are near the top of the vaccination-rate tables, for example — and some countries in very similar circumstances report quite different results. As an extreme case, the world-low vaccination rate in JHU’s table is Burundi’s 0.1% of the population (13,800 of 12 million people); next-door Rwanda is at 65%, essentially the same as the United States.

The U.S. in a way mirrors the international pattern, with vaccination rates by state varying widely, and modestly correlating with state median income levels, political divisions, and larger geography. New England, where vaccination rates are in the 75% to 84% range, is comparable to the rates in Japan, France, and Australia, and taken as a distinct region would be near the top of the high-income spectrum. D.C., Hawaii, Puerto Rico, New York and New Jersey are also in the top ten. The “least vaccinated” group includes Wyoming and a set of deep South states; here, rates are in the 51%-55% range and at par with lower-middle income countries such as Tajikistan, Bolivia, and Honduras (and upper-middle income Russia). Explanations for relatively high U.S. state rates of vaccination may include lower public “vaccine hesitance”, strong outreach from state governments, high health-provider-to-population ratios and low levels of uninsured people. Explanations for lower rates, the reverse.

A table illustrates, with vaccination levels in sample countries and U.S. states drawn from the Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Information Center:

Much, then, achieved. But with 3 billion still unvaccinated around the world, mortality counts still at 15,000 weekly, new variants emerging every few months, and many early vaccination recipients needing booster shots, much still to do.

* Using the District’s own 77% count; JHU has a perplexing 100% rate for D.C.

FUTURE READINGS:

The Lancet calculates that vaccinations have saved between 14.4 million and 19.8 million lives

And the Royal College of Nursing on Parsons, Keenan, and the first COVID shot.

Data on vaccination rates, new cases, death rates by country and U.S. state, etc.

Ourworldindata.org has an interactive site allowing selection of particular countries and regions.

Johns Hopkins U. Coronavirus Information Center reports 6.4 million deaths among 560 million cases since December 2020. The mortality count has diminished to a still-high 12,000 deaths per week worldwide, from levels in the range of 50,000-100,000 deaths per week from mid-2020 through late 2021.

At home:

Rhode Island’s 84% vaccination rate is the highest in the U.S.

Washington, D.C., is at 77% by its own count; the JHU list somehow credits the District with a 100% vaccination rate. Either way, one of the top U.S. vaccination performers. Mayor Muriel Bowser explains vax requirements.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 site.

Overseas:

USAID outlines its COVID aid program in low- and middle-income countries.

The WTO explains the state of debate on intellectual property rules and COVID.

The African Union outlines vaccination trends and policies in Africa.

The Rwanda Biomedical Centre has Q&A on vaccination.

And the OECD reviews the supply chains that produce and deliver vaccines.

ABOUT ED

Ed Gresser is Vice President and Director for Trade and Global Markets at PPI.

Read the full email and sign up for the Trade Fact of the Week

Forging a Transatlantic Dialogue

Posted on July 19, 2022September 18, 2024 by The Progressive Policy Institute

Does Germany struggle with homelessness the same way cities like Denver do? What can the U.S. learn from Germany in regard to improvements to public transportation infrastructure? In the Fall of 2019, the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) partnered with Das Progressive Zentrum (DPZ) and Alfred Herrhausen Gesellschaft (AHG) for a new project titled “New Urban Progress: Transatlantic Dialogue on the Future of Work,

Democracy, and Well-being” which is aimed at fostering metro innovation and democratic renewal in the spirit of transatlantic dialogue. The organizations joined forces and convened a group of fellows consisting of public servants, policy experts, and community activists from Germany and the United States for a collaboration that involves two international tours, four conferences, and ten cities, all while the twenty project fellows study how we can reimagine transatlantic relations and positively impact cities on both sides of the Atlantic.

Neel Brown, Managing Director at the Progressive Policy Institute sits down with Maria Willett, Chief of Staff to Mayor Bryan K. Barnett of Rochester Hills, Michigan and Steffen Haake, Senior Consultant at Dataport who are both New Urban Progress fellows and offer their thoughts on what they learned from the fellowship. Learn more about the Progressive Policy Institute and the New Urban Progress project. Learn more about Das Progressive Zentrum. Learn more about Alfred Herrhausen Gesellschaft.

Pankovits for Wall Street Journal: Charter Schools Win a Washington Battle

Posted on July 17, 2022 by The Progressive Policy Institute

By Tressa Pankovits

Congratulations are in order to thousands of public charter-school parents, educators and advocates who lifted their voices in opposition to the U.S. Education Department’s proposed changes to the federal Charter School Program. Thanks to their relentless advocacy, the finalized rules adopted recently are more rational and slightly less burdensome than the bull-in-a-china-shop scheme the department unveiled in March.

Congress established the CSP in 1994 to provide federal support for children who are poorly served by traditional public schools. The CSP benefited from the support of every presidential administration since—until Joe Biden. Although the program represents a minuscule fraction of the federal education budget, the returns on that investment have been high: The millions of dollars in grants the CSP awards each year enable thousands of new public charter schools to open or to add additional campuses. The vast majority of these schools are located in urban centers, where they serve mostly low-income and minority children.

The department’s proposed rules would have required a public charter school seeking a CSP grant to form a partnership with a traditional public school—in other words, with a competitor. The grant-seeking public charter school would also have had to prove the “need” for a new school based solely on enrollment levels in the traditional schools in the district—ignoring that charter schools serve many purposes beyond the relief of overcrowding. The school also would have had to prove its student population would be “diverse.” Never mind that many traditional schools aren’t. This last demand overlooks both the realities of the U.S. housing market and the desire of some minority communities, such as Native Americans, to establish culturally relevant schools that serve specific student populations with unique needs.

Read the full piece in The Wall Street Journal.

PPI Statement on Reconciliation and Innovation Legislation

Posted on July 15, 2022 by The Progressive Policy Institute

Ben Ritz, Director of the Center for Funding America’s Future project at the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) released the following statement:

“Earlier this week, PPI encouraged Congressional Democrats to give high priority to passing the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (USICA) and a reconciliation bill that includes significant deficit reduction and clean energy provisions. Unfortunately, media accounts suggest that both initiatives are shrinking.

“We shared Sen. Manchin’s concerns about the original reconciliation bill’s overreaching and likely impact on inflation. But walking away from a bill with roughly half a trillion dollars of deficit reduction and significant investments in increasing energy supply would squander the best chance Congress has to help the Federal Reserve rein in rising prices. We hope he and Sen. Schumer will not give up on negotiating a compromise on these components of a reconciliation bill.

“Pro-growth Democrats who want to see the United States outcompete China also should be concerned about reports of a plan to vote next week on a bill that only includes funding for semiconductor subsidies. Losing government R&D funds and other key provisions in the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (USICA) would be an enormous setback for America’s innovation and scientific prowess.

“We understand that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s blindly partisan decision to withhold Republican support from a conferenced innovation bill complicates its path to passage. But retreating to a CHIPS-only approach would unnecessarily doom many higher priority pro-innovation policies. Instead, we urge Speaker Pelosi to put the full Senate-passed USICA on the floor for a vote in the House to circumvent McConnell’s obstructionism.

“Democrats must not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.”

Follow the Progressive Policy Institute.

Find an expert at PPI.

###

Media Contact: Aaron White – awhite@ppionline.org

PPI “Investment Heroes” Keep Inflation at Bay with Strong Capital Investment, New Report Finds

Posted on July 15, 2022 by The Progressive Policy Institute

Today, the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) released its annual Investment Heroes report, which shows companies with high and sustained capital investment in the United States have helped hold down price increases in the digital sector throughout the past year of otherwise record inflation. The report, titled “Investment Heroes: Fighting Inflation with Capital Investment” is authored by Dr. Michael Mandel, Vice President and Chief Economist at PPI, and Jordan Shapiro, Data and Economic Analyst at PPI.

Nine of the 11 companies topping this year’s Investment Heroes list are in tech, broadband, or e-commerce. Amazon invested an amazing $46.7 billion in the U.S. in 2021, according to PPI estimates. AT&T and Verizon tied for second place at $20.3 billion, and Alphabet invested $18.7 billion in the U.S. in 2021.

PPI has created a unique methodology using publicly available financial statements from non-financial Fortune 200 companies to independently identify the top companies that were investing in the United States. These companies — our “Investment Heroes” — have helped to create good jobs, boost capacity, and reduce inflation as we recover from the aftershocks of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Policymakers should praise and encourage those companies who invest in the United States, keep prices low, and reduce vulnerability against future shocks. That’s a clearcut win for consumers, workers, and the American economy,” write report authors Dr. Michael Mandel and Jordan Shapiro.

“Conversely, government leaders can’t pursue policies that reduce or discourage domestic capital investment and then complain when we don’t have enough capacity to meet our changing needs at an affordable price, whether it’s energy or semiconductor chips or anything else. In particular, it’s perplexing that Congress is putting so much energy into tech antitrust, when the sector has been a low-inflation, high-investment star performer,” the authors conclude.

See the full list of PPI’s 2022 Investment Heroes: