Daily-Dose

Contents

From New Yorker

From Vox

While Senate Democrats promised to continue pushing for a $15 federal minimum wage, they ultimately dropped that provision from the Covid-19 relief package, complying with MacDonough’s ruling.

If MacDonough decides the immigration reform legislation isn’t relevant to the upcoming reconciliation package and Democrats don’t force the issue, it could be a death knell for immigration reform’s chances in a 50-50 Senate.

A Senate rule from the ’80s could determine the fate of immigration reform

The Senate parliamentarian’s involvement in the budget reconciliation process stems from something called the Byrd rule. Named for Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, the rule limits what can be included in reconciliation packages.

As Vox’s Dylan Scott explained earlier this year,

Byrd proposed and the Senate codified constraints on what can be passed through budget reconciliation, to make sure the process was actually used for matters affecting the federal budget. Those constraints are now colloquially called the Byrd Rule.

Under the rule, reconciliation bills can’t change Social Security. They can’t be projected to increase the federal deficit after 10 years. They must affect federal spending or revenue — and their effect on spending or revenue must be “more than incidental” to their policy impact.

While the Budget Act of 1974 does include criteria for determining what counts as an extraneous measure, whether a proposal fits that criteria is still open to interpretation by the presiding officer.

On immigration, Republicans argue that the legislation Democrats have put forth isn’t strictly related to the budget; Democrats say that it is a budgetary concern, since immigration affects matters like benefits, spending, and the economy.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s immigration panel, tweeted his criticism of the Democrat’s strategy on Friday, saying they “persist in pursuing partisan bills rather than bipartisan immigration reform.”

Ds never fail to fail when it comes to immigration reform even when they control the White House, Senate and House. They persist in pursuing partisan bills rather than bipartisan immigration reform, starting with bills like our Bipartisan Border Solutions Act. https://t.co/m58RTllR6e

— Senator John Cornyn (@JohnCornyn) September 10, 2021

Despite reconciliation’s limits, however, the strategy has clear advantages in a polarized Senate — unlike a standalone immigration reform bill, the budget reconciliation process isn’t subject to the filibuster, and can pass with only a simple majority.

Even if MacDonough signs off on immigration provisions in the reconciliation bill, the broader measure still faces a potentially rocky future in the Senate. While he hasn’t taken issue with immigration specifically, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), a frequent thorn in the side of progressive Democrats, told CNN on Sunday that he would not support a $3.5 trillion reconciliation measure. Sen.  Krysten Sinema (D-AZ) has also signaled that she she won’t support the full $3.5 trillion in proposed spending.

Sen. Joe Manchin on CNN says he will not vote for the $3.5 infrastructure bill pic.twitter.com/Czhm7KpStX

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 12, 2021

Draft legislation for the reconciliation bill is due Wednesday, before the September 27th vote on a separate, bipartisan infrastructure bill.

On Sunday, Manchin accused his colleagues of holding the infrastructure bill hostage to the reconciliation package in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos; Senate Budget Committee chair Bernie Sanders (I-VT), however, told Stephanopoulos that both bills are urgently needed.

“I happen to think that Joe Manchin is right, physical infrastructure is terribly important,” Sanders said on Sunday. “But I happen to think that the needs of the human beings of our country, working families, the children, the elderly, the poor are even more important, and we can and must do both.”

In an evenly split Senate, Democrats would need every member of their caucus to support the package for it to pass, with Harris as the tie-breaking vote in her role as president of the Senate.

Biden has repeatedly called for a path to citizenship

If Democrats succeed in passing immigration legislation as part of the reconciliation package, it will be a major achievement for the party. Biden and congressional Democrats have previously proposed a pathway to citizenship as a standalone bill, and a July court decision declaring the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program — better known as DACA — unlawful also raises the stakes of the issue.

In February this year, shortly after he took office, Biden’s US Citizenship Act of 2021 was introduced in the House. The bill proposes an eight-year process to grant US citizenship to young people brought to this country illegally by their parents before January 1, 2021, as well as people here under Temporary Protected Status, a designation that safeguards people fleeing for humanitarian reasons from countries like Haiti, Myanmar, and Syria. Agricultural workers and other essential workers would be subject to the legislation, too.

The House Bill on immigration reconciliation is out! Here’s a on what it says—but first, a BIG caveat. This is NOT the final version.

The bill will first be marked up, and then be reconciled in conference with the Senate version—and the parliamentarian still needs to approve. pic.twitter.com/5OYAcDeJOa

— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@ReichlinMelnick) September 11, 2021

All told, according to Vox’s Nicole Narea, that bill offers a comprehensive plan for the approximately 10.5 million undocumented immigrants currently in the US to become citizens:

Initially, immigrants would be able to obtain a work permit and travel abroad with the assurance that they would be permitted to reenter the US. After five years, they could apply for a green card if they pass background checks and pay taxes. Immigrants covered by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and Temporary Protected Status, as well as farmworkers, would be able to apply for green cards immediately, however.

That bill also proposes to address issues in immigrants’ home countries, like violence and dire economic problems, which help drive immigration to the US from Central America.

Immigration reforms included in the reconciliation bill could be narrower, according to the Hill, with a focus on allowing immigrants to apply for legal permanent residence — a green card — but no direct mention of citizenship.

Still, the measure would extend legal status to four categories of non-citizens, according to the New York Times: DREAMers, Temporary Protected Status recipients, almost one million farmworkers, and millions of “essential workers.”

There’s particular urgency when it comes to protecting DREAMers. Though the program has acted as a shield for many young immigrants since it was established in 2012, allowing them to work, pursue higher education, and sometimes access benefits like in-state college tuition and state-subsidized health insurance, depending on where they live, its future is uncertain.

Specifically, DACA is in jeopardy — again — after a federal judge in Texas ruled it unconstitutional earlier this year, freezing the program’s ability to accept new applicants and leaving hundreds of thousands of immigrants vulnerable. The Department of Justice filed an appeal in that case on Friday.

Now, with the Biden administration’s DACA appeal headed to the deeply conservative 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals and hundreds of thousands of DREAMers in limbo, lawmakers say there is more urgency than ever to passing immigration reform.

“If we don’t move, there’s a very real chance these people will be subject to deportation,” Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) told the New York Times.

In most American cities, particularly in the suburbs, that’s not the case. And when the efficient movement of cars is considered paramount over the safety of any other mode, accidents and fatalities occur. The car- centric transportation system is contributing to a consistent yearly uptick in pedestrian casualties; they rose 21 percent in 2020, according to the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA).

“The problem is, the minute you leave the local [road], you probably enter an environment in which it’s not safe to bike because the bike lanes aren’t separate,” Speck said.

By adding protected bike lines — separated from car lanes by a barrier for safety — biking becomes a safe, accessible alternative to shorter drives. Essentially, bike lanes have to be set apart by something other than “a scrap of paint,” said Ralph Buehler, the chair of Urban Affairs and Planning at Virginia Tech. This is something that became clear during the first year of the pandemic: the GHSA found that 2020’s uptick in pedestrian deaths came despite traffic decreasing by up to about 42 percent at the peak of the pandemic. Reducing traffic alone doesn’t make biking and walking safer; the streets themselves need to be redesigned with safety in mind.

This sort of redesign also incentivizes walking and biking. Speck’s research has found converting 12- to 14-foot-wide driving lanes into 10-foot-wide lanes slows average car speeds from 40 miles per hour to 25 miles per hour and creates room to either add bike lanes or street-side parallel parking, which better protects the sidewalk from traffic.

And relatively inexpensive changes like turning one-way streets into two-way streets or lowering the curb radius so that cars slow down more when they make right turns are also proven to reduce crashes and injuries, Speck said.

Studies conducted in cities that have made such changes have found marked decreases in car use. Oslo has redesigned its roads in high pedestrian traffic areas, such that 91 percent have speed limits under 40 miles per hour, while expanding its system of bike lanes. It saw a 77 percent increase in bike traffic between 2014 and 2020.

There are American examples too. In Philadelphia, an investment in miles of protected bike lanes led to a nearly 70 percent increase in the number of people who biked to work from 2010 to 2017, even as congestion and public transit use worsened.

Buehler added that for such changes to be successful, there also needs to be connectivity across areas. If you’re taking a shorter trip to pick up takeout or grab a few groceries, much of it may be bike- or pedestrian-friendly — except for a critical highway juncture. To promote walking and biking, cities need to ensure that routes exist for human-powered transportation to every place the average person needs to go.

When I lived in Madrid, I could walk or take transit practically everywhere without ever crossing a highway that had no pedestrian infrastructure. I would take 30-minute walks home in the middle of the night from clubs, when the Metro was not running. Even in the dark, there were no crossings where I was unprotected as a pedestrian.

Examples of similar connectivity can also be found in the US, Buehler said, most commonly with respect to schools.

“There’s a safe-route-to-school program that tries to design safe routes to school,” Buehler said. “You can also think about that to community centers. The main point is designing networks.”

Safe routes to school are a start, but to really promote biking and walking, cities need to develop safe routes to other places, like drugstores and restaurants, as well. There’s a very large obstacle to doing this at the moment, however: zoning.

End single-family zoning to encourage mixed-use development

On its face, single-family zoning is a housing policy that creates quiet, uncrowded neighborhoods by restricting the development of apartments, townhouses, or any other dwelling that’s not a freestanding home. It’s incredibly prevalent in the US (75 percent of residential land is single-family zoned), and, as my colleague Jerusalem Demsas points out, it is incredibly harmful. It has had a racist impact, having been used to exclude people of color from certain neighborhoods, and it overall increases the cost of housing by limiting supply.

Another problem with single-family zoning is that it encourages car usage: In areas zoned for single families, there can be little development; the idea is people live in one area and then access workplaces, leisure activities, and stores via car.

“We zoned and created bento boxes,” said Brian Jencek, the director of planning at HOK, a planning and design firm. “Never let the gravy and rice touch. … Now we want stew, but we have to undo over a century of American planning.”

The best way to make that stew is to create mixed-use development, which facilitates what Jencek calls the 20-minute city, meaning you’re never more than a 20-minute walk from everything you might need, from jobs and schools to pharmacies and clinics to community centers and parks. In a mixed-use city, that’s possible. But in most American suburbs, single-family zoning does not allow for it.

Going back to my Madrid example, mixed-use development meant that nearly everything was within walking distance. From my neighborhood, I could walk to school, stop at a bakery along the way, get any beauty services at a salon on the way home, and meet my friends for dinner at night. I walked or took public transit everywhere.

Compare that to my grandparents’ house, in West Bloomfield, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit. Due to single-family zoning, the only activity we can walk to is to see my cousins who also live in the suburb. Any restaurant, appointment, or shopping has to be a car trip.

Razing West Bloomfield and rebuilding it as a 20-minute city isn’t really feasible. But one change that could encourage the development of walkable cities over time, Speck said, is eliminating single-family zoning in areas that are within walking distance of transit stops. Doing so would encourage the development of commercial spaces, which would benefit residents in the area; and those not living near the new services would be able to access them via public transit, lessening the need for a car.

Upzoning near transit also means that homeowners could add accessory dwelling units, or granny flats — a detached housing unit — on a lot, Speck said, helping to situate middle- and low-income people near transit, easing the housing crisis and putting more people in walkable and transit-accessible communities.

While increased development is often associated with rising property values and gentrification, Jencek said mixed-use development, done with community input, can create the economic benefits of development without pricing people out. The end result of rezoning would look different in different neighborhoods but does not necessarily mean a complete overhaul of a community. It could just mean adding a one-acre community park to a neighborhood without recreation access or creating a network of safer, slower streets to invite restaurants to expand their outdoor seating.

The idea is simple: Add a new land use to a neighborhood, creating an activity or business site that is accessible without a car.

Make drivers pay the costs of driving

The first two solutions focused on making driving less necessary. But people don’t always drive because they need to — they often do so because it is convenient and cheap.

It’s true that the upfront cost of a car is high, and there is gas and insurance. But drivers’ other costs — road maintenance, traffic lights, and policing, for instance — are heavily subsidized. Speck said estimates place the subsidization of driving at $10 for every dollar a driver spends as opposed to $1.50 for public transit.

Much of that subsidization comes in the form of taxes, which people pay whether they drive or not, but there are a lot of indirect costs as well: In higher-income households, people use highways but do not have to pay for the noise and emissions in the low-income neighborhoods that highways run through, for example. And the climate costs of mass driving affect everyone, regardless of car ownership.

One solution to this is congestion pricing, where drivers must pay a fee to drive in high-traffic areas or during peak hours. Central London imposes congestion pricing, and New York City has plans to do so, though they may not materialize. Another idea is to increase the gas tax, so that actual drivers are paying the costs of car infrastructure rather than general taxation. Both of these price controls could disincentivize driving.

But many experts believe making driving less convenient would do more to limit car usage, and one easy way to do this is to reduce the supply of parking.

Every mode of transportation needs a terminal. Planes have airports and boats have seaports, both of which require travelers and companies to pay. But for cars, parking “is capitalized into the costs of the goods you buy,” Brian Taylor, the director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles, said. Think about your local grocery store — the parking lot is often larger than the actual commercial space, and it’s free. The grocery store is expected to pay for the parking lot through the revenue it generates from sales.

“We treat that as sacrosanct,” Taylor said. “The default is that the storage of private vehicles tends to get priority if you look at how we’ve allocated curb space. And that creates all sorts of problems.”

Delivery vehicles and rideshares that need to pull up on the curb have no space, so they halt traffic. Traffic is generated by people circling and looking for parking, knowing they can park on the street for free instead of paying for a garage. And because city governments mandate parking requirements for most types of development, commercial development — and therefore connectivity — is stunted by the need for parking.

Most American cities require parking minimums, meaning new apartment buildings and developments have to cordon off a certain amount of space for people to leave their car, either for free or for a rate much lower than the market price, considering how valuable that space is.

If cities removed their minimum parking requirements for developers, there would be far less incentive to provide free parking. A private developer would likely still build some off-street parking — but they would charge for it.

In Los Angeles, for example, Taylor said the real cost of an underground parking space might be $60,000. So a condo that costs $520,000, and comes with two underground parking spaces, could instead be sold at $360,000, with owners offering parking at its real cost of $60,000 per space. In that scenario, a family might forgo a second car and get an electric bike instead.

To disincentivize street parking, Taylor suggested municipalities raise the price at meters, manage curbs differently, or remove parking altogether in some areas and only allow loading, unloading, and scooter and bike traffic.

These are all strategies that would need to be rolled out in tandem with expanding connectivity, particularly with public transit. It is easy to imagine a situation in which gas taxes and expensive meters begin to primarily hurt low-income communities with zero access to public transportation, for instance. But once other options are in place, imposing the costs of parking on drivers would make driving more like going to a restaurant for dinner, Taylor said: You don’t do it every night, but it’s enjoyable when you do.

“If people were more responsible, in one way or another, for those costs, they’d be much more judicious of their use,” Taylor said. “Instead of being the default of every trip, it would be one among an array of choices that have advantages and disadvantages.”

What’s in the way of reducing car usage?

The free market did not create car supremacy by itself, though the government played a big role. The government has the power to change how city-dwelling Americans use their cars, but doing so on the scale needed to truly combat climate change isn’t easy.

City planners contend with regulations that promote driving, and politicians who want to change those are often met with pushback from constituents. In overcoming this, it’s important to remember that not every change needs to be a grand one — yes, a gas tax hike might help but so will more popular measures like bike lanes. And incremental advances, like new zoning regulations rolled out a few neighborhoods at a time, for instance, could have a large impact in the long run.

Also, a multimodal city does not mean cars will be obsolete. Some trips, like to a hardware store, will always necessitate vehicles, and there’s a role for ridesharing as well. But policies are needed to ensure other modes receive a fair shot. It’ll make us safer, maybe happier, and will give our planet a better chance of survival.

Americans are still lagging behind other wealthy countries in vaccine uptake, and only 52.76 percent of eligible Americans are fully vaccinated, according to the New York Times. Only about 700,000 vaccine doses are being administered each day in the US — about 300,000 fewer than Japan’s vaccination program is currently reporting, despite Japan’s smaller population.

Currently, the US is averaging nearly 146,000 new Covid-19 cases per day, compared to less than 12,000 new cases per day at points in June this year. At the pandemic’s peak this winter, the country was reporting more than 250,000 cases per day on average.

But a new movement toward stricter vaccine requirements coincides with a seven percent decrease in daily reported Covid-19 cases over the past two weeks, according to the New York Times. Testing is also up 21 percent over the same period, with an average of more than 1.6 million tests being administered per day.

Deaths, however — which tend to lag spikes in new cases — are currently increasing in the US. As of Friday, the country was averaging more than 1,600 deaths per day from the virus.

While this last statistic is grim, however, there are signs that the delta-fueled surge in cases over the summer is at least leveling off as more people get vaccinated.

Cases in Mississippi, where the virus has strained hospital capacity to beyond its limits, are down by a third over the past two weeks. In Tennessee, which currently has the most cases per capita of any state, the vaccination rate increased by 47 percent from July 12 to August 2, and the rate at which infections are increasing in the state has started to slow.

“Our patience is wearing thin”

As the US continues to struggle with Covid-19, President Joe Biden on Thursday announced that all businesses with more than 100 employees must require either vaccination or weekly Covid-19 testing.

“Many of us are frustrated with the nearly 80 million Americans who are still not vaccinated, even though the vaccine is safe, effective, and free,” Biden said at a press conference on Thursday, decrying what he referred to as the “pandemic politics” of Republican leaders who have downplayed Covid-19, spread disinformation, and fought against measures like inoculation and mask-wearing.

“We cannot allow these actions to stand in the way of protecting the large majority of Americans who have done their part and want to get back to life as normal,” Biden said.

Corporate America is also warming to vaccine mandates, with major companies like United Airlines and Tyson Foods implementing vaccine requirements for their workers. United set a deadline of September 27 for all of its US-based employees to be vaccinated, and it says that more than half of its previously unvaccinated employees have now been vaccinated, according to NPR.

Pediatric Covid-19 cases are on the rise

Despite the significant protection afforded by vaccines, however, not everyone is eligible yet. The Food and Drug Administration has yet to authorize a Covid-19 vaccine for children younger than 12, and pediatric Covid-19 cases are surging as children head back to in-person schooling — particularly in states that have rebuffed mask mandates.

New York City public schools, the largest school system in the country, will test its own Covid-19 policies on Monday as the school year begins. All employees of New York City’s Department of Education are required to be fully vaccinated by September 27.

That’s also the case in Los Angeles, which on Thursday became the first major public school district in the US to mandate Covid-19 vaccines for all eligible students as well as for teachers after an unanimous vote by the school board.

In Florida, where Gov. Ron DeSantis is currently fighting to prevent districts from requiring masks, pediatric deaths from Covid-19 have more than doubled since July. While the number of deaths is still extremely low relative to other age groups — only 17 children have died from Covid-19 in the state since the beginning of the pandemic — seven of those deaths were between March 2020, when the outbreak began in the US, and July 2021, a period of 15 months. The remaining 10 occurred after July 30 this year, Politico reported Thursday.

Additionally, according to Politico, the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights is investigating the Florida public education system’s anti-mask mandate policy. In a letter to Robert Corcoran, commissioner of Florida’s Department of Education, Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Suzanne Goldberg warned that the policy could violate the civil rights of children with disabilities by preventing them from “safely returning to in-person education.”

Given the increase in pediatric cases — and scrutiny of in-school Covid-19 prevention policies — the pressure is on for vaccine manufacturers to determine whether their inoculations are safe for use in children.

According to German news outlet Der Spiegel, BioNTech will share the results of its clinical trials on children ages 5 to 11 this month, seeking global approval of the vaccine for use in this age group.

That could mean the Pfizer- BioNTech vaccine could be authorized for children in that age group as soon as the end of October, Reuters reported Friday.

BioNTech, which has partnered with Pfizer to manufacture its vaccine, also has a plan to seek approval for use in children ages 6 months to 2 years by the end of the year, and Moderna said that it has filled its roster for clinical trials of its vaccine in children ages 6 to 11 and is working on determining an appropriate dosage for children as young as 6 months.

In the meantime, however, Biden officials have emphasized that widespread vaccine uptake among people who are eligible for the vaccine is the best way to keep pediatric Covid-19 cases low.

“That’s why this collective responsibility we have as a society to make sure we are not only taking care of our own health, but reducing the chances we pass a virus on to somebody who’s more vulnerable — that’s why this is so important,” Surgeon General Vivek Murthy said on Friday. “And that’s what the efforts that the President announced yesterday will help us do: reduce transmission, protect lives, and protect our children as well.”

From The Hindu: Sports

From The Hindu: National News

From BBC: Europe

From Ars Technica

From Jokes Subreddit