SEARCH

Criminal Justice Policy:   Early career (2004 - 2011: San Francisco DA) Back on Track: 2005  - Launched “Back on Track” program , offering first-time (nonviolent) drug offenders a chance to avoid prison if they enrolled in education/ job training for 12 to 18 months. In 2009, the program reported that less than 10% of its participants re-offended (the program only had about 300 participants from 2005 to 2009). California’s overall re-offense rate (or recidivism) was 50-60%, so the program was seen as having a positive effect on drug offenders. Critics of the program point to limited independent studies and long-term evaluations of the program, which calls into question its effectiveness.  Attorney General of California (2011 - 2017) Assembly Bill 109: 2011 - Harris backed Assembly Bill 109 , an effort to relieve the population burdens on Californian state prisons. To achieve this, county prisons were directed to imprison criminals from their counties who were guilty of minor (nonviolent and non-sexual). Counties received money to help manage the extra prisoners in their jails and create programs to help reduce recidivism. However, county jails reportedly became overburdened, resulting in reduced sentences. County jails suffered from inadequate infrastructure to properly house long-term stays. Some counties had better rehabilitation programs than others, leading to unequal outcomes.   2012 -  Established the Human Trafficking Task Force  and Privacy Enforcement Unit  in California.  Proposition 47: 2014 - Harris backed Proposition 47 , which reclassified nonviolent crimes (like drug possession and petty theft) from felonies to misdemeanors. This reduced state prison populations, which also led to reduced costs for prisons in California. Savings from these costs have reportedly been awarded to fund the “Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Fund” and the Board of State and Community Corrections grant program. Critics of Proposition 47 stressed that lighter sentencing on crimes such as drug possession, property crime, and theft results in communities having higher crime rates. Additionally, Proposition 47 has been blamed for contributing to high homeless populations, the rationale being that homeless offenders remained unincarcerated for offenses once deemed as felonies. Assembly Bill 953: 2015 - Harris backed Assembly Bill 953 , which addressed racial profiling by requiring Californian agencies to collect and report data on stops, searches, and arrests to achieve transparency and accountability within police departments. Critics argued that this additional spending to collect data would remove resources from policing duties.  U.S. Senator from California (2017–2021) Justice in Policing Act: 2020 - Harriss co-sponsored the Justice in Policing Act  after the death of George Floyd. This sought to ban police from using chokeholds and made it easier to hold officers accountable for misconduct by doing away with “qualified immunity.” Qualified immunity protects officers from certain lawsuits. Additionally, a database similar to Assembly Bill 953 was proposed. This bill was not passed.  Environmental Policy: U.S. Senator from California (2017–2021) Green New Deal: 2019 -  Harris co-sponsored the Green New Deal , proposing a federal effort to combat climate change while creating jobs. A primary goal of the resolution was to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The net-zero goal has been an ongoing global goal in recent years and is frequently discussed at such meetings as the World Economic Forum. The Green New Deal pushed for - A transition to 100% clean energy. Decarbonizing transportation, building infrastructure, and agriculture. Protecting and restoring ecosystems through sustainable agriculture, land use practices, and reforestation to improve biodiversity The Green New Deal was not passed.  Criticism-  The Green New Deal faced criticism in these regards. . .  Overreach  -  Posed as an environmental action, the Green New Deal also included healthcare, affordable housing, and a federal job guarantee. With these policy inclusions, the resolution was seen as too politically broad, leaning more ideological than pragmatic. This gave opponents ammunition to deem the bill an unrealistic attempt to overhaul the entire economy rather than focus on climate change. Further, the resolution was more about government control over private enterprise.  Cost  - Estimates surrounding how much required funding ranged from $50 to $90 trillion. As there were no clear funding mechanisms, the Green New Deal never outlined how such large-scale programs would be paid for. It was implied that funding would come from increased taxes on the wealthy, borrowing, and/or public investment. This made it hard to defend the GND as a financially viable option. Social Justice  - The Green New Deal attempted to push correcting historic wrongs done to low-income POC communities. This included job creation, urban environmental cleanup, and funding to combat climate crises by building protective infrastructure. However, critics argued that the resolution placed heavy emphasis on these urban areas, while advocates gave less attention to the needs of rural workers, particularly in fossil fuel-dependent industries, despite the deal's promise of broad opportunities. Advocates primarily highlighted the positive impacts the deal would have on urban POC communities, which became a central part of the public messaging.   Harris opposed offshore drilling and has co-sponsored bills to prevent new offshore oil drilling in federal waters.  Harris pushed for regulations on PFAS chemicals in drinking water. She pushed for higher standards to protect communities from PFAS contamination and for the EPA to regulate these chemicals under the Clean Water Act .  Healthcare Policy: U.S. Senator from California (2017–2021) Medicare for All  - Harris co-sponsored Bernie Sanders’ ‘Medicare for All’ bill. First introduced in 2017, there have been evolving revisions of the same bill over recent years. The bill proposed providing healthcare to Americans via a government-run program. The program would cover visits, hospital stays, prescription drugs, mental health services, and more. The core principle was that the premium a person usually paid for insurance premiums would be baked into taxes, effectively eliminating private insurance. Harris’s view has evolved today to include an avenue for private enterprise to exist alongside a government option.  Maternal CARE Act   2018 - Harris introduced the Maternal CARE Act to fund implicit bias training for healthcare providers to reduce racial bias in the treatment of pregnant women. In improving the outcomes for at-risk mothers, the core principle was to reduce racial disparities in maternal health outcomes. Racial bias relates to patient concerns being disregarded/ downplayed by health professionals. An example of racial bias - Serena Williams, the world-renowned tennis player, developed a life-threatening pulmonary embolism (blood clot in the lungs) after giving birth via C-section. Having a history of blood clots, Williams recognized her symptoms and immediately alerted her medical team. However, her concerns were initially dismissed by the nurses, who suggested she was confused due to medication. It is proposed that because of her race, medical professionals disregarded her worry.  Foreign Policy: Vice President (2021- Present) Harris gained the majority of her foreign policy experience during her time as Vice President. This includes - As Vice President, Harris was tasked with addressing migration from Central America, and her efforts involved fostering economic development in Northern Triangle countries (El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras) to address the root causes of migration. She gave a direct address during one of these visits, which became her famous “Do Not Come” speech.  Promoting human rights in China and countering Chinese influence in the Indo-Pacific region. Harris has been vocal about countering China's influence, especially in cybersecurity and technological competition. Advocacy for the Ukrainian war against Russia. In support of providing Military aid to Ukraine and sanctions on Russia.  Immigration Policy: Early career (2004 - 2011: San Francisco DA)  As the DA of San Francisco, Harris abided by San Fran’s “sanctuary city” status, this meant law enforcement did not cooperate with federal immigration authorities in detaining or deporting undocumented immigrants for immigration violations alone. Her time as DA overlapped with a prominent case - the 2008 murder of Tony Bologna and his two sons. They were killed by an Edwin Ramos, who was undocumented and had had previous encounters with law enforcement but was not deported due to sanctuary city status. This sparked debate over sanctuary status, but Harris maintained that it was necessary.  Attorney General of California (2011 - 2017) DACA: 2012 -  Harris supported DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) . This program protected undocumented young people who were brought to the U.S. as children. They could stay in the country, work legally, and avoid deportation for a renewable period.  California TRUST Act: 2013 - Harris backed the California TRUST Act , which limited the legal limits of local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration authorities. It prevents local police from holding undocumented immigrants for deportation unless they are convicted of a serious crime. Education Policy:  Early career (2004 - 2011: San Francisco DA)  2006  - Truancy action initiative: This tried to reduce absenteeism in San Francisco public schools. Harris believed absenteeism correlates with future criminal behavior. The program targeted parents of regularly absent children, holding them legally responsible for their child’s attendance. The program provided early intervention to families of these children via social services, including counseling, housing assistance, and support for mental health and substance abuse issues within the home. Based on limited result data provided, there was a 30% reduction in truancy, as reported by Harris in 2010 when she was running for California Attorney General. The program expanded once she was elected to Attorney General. Some parents did receive charges, but fines and warnings were reportedly the ‘go-to’ punishment. Policy critics point to a disproportionate impact on low-income minority families, which stresses individual responsibility in the face of systemic issues.  Civil Rights Policy: Early career (2004 - 2011: San Francisco DA)  2004 -  Harris opposed capital punishment as a violation of civil rights. In her first year as San Francisco DA, she faced scrutiny when she did not seek the death penalty for David Hill, who had killed a San Fran police officer named Isaac Espinoza. She would seek a life sentence without parole as an alternative to the death penalty. Proposition 8: 2008  - Harris opposed Proposition 8 , which was an initiative to ban same-sex marriage by defining marriage as between a man and a woman in the state constitution.  Attorney General of California (2011 - 2017) Proposition 36: 2012 - Harris backed Proposition 36 , which adjusted California life sentencing law. A person convicted of three felonies, regardless of severity, would automatically receive a life sentence. Prop 36 ensured nonviolent or less serious third offenses received more proportional sentences.  Vice President (2021- Present) For the People Act: Harris has pushed the ‘For the People Act’ with no success. It is a bill posed to enable voters by implementing automatic voter registration and same-day registration, allowing past felons to vote, and allowing early voting + voting by mail. It mandates that political ads must state who they are being funded by and that campaigns must provide funding transparency. Lastly, it pushes to set up an independent commission to draw congressional lines and prevent gerrymandering.  Gun Control Policy: Attorney General of California (2011 - 2017) 2013 - Harris advocated for $24 million in funding to enhance the Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS), which tracks and removes firearms from individuals no longer legally allowed to possess them.  2014 -  Supported the Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVROs) law, which allowed family members and law enforcement to temporarily remove firearms from individuals deemed a danger to themselves or others.  U.S. Senator from California (2017–2021) Harris supported lifting the 1996 Dickey Amendment , which was a law passed that prohibits federal money from researching gun violence. Before the Dickey Amendment, the CDC funded research into gun violence as a public health issue. Dickey was pushed successfully by pro-gun lawmakers and NRA backers in the name of conducting neutral scientific research. However, overall research has been effectively chilled as it can not receive adequate funding.  2020 Presidential Campaign Harris proposed using executive action within her first 100 days if Congress did not pass gun reform legislation.

Black Monday, or Manic Monday, was an event that significantly impacted global markets on August 5, 2024. It was a worldwide mass sell-off that impacted major indexes. Japan’s Nikkei was especially affected, dropping 12.4% (the second biggest drop in its history). The U.S. S&P dropped 3%. European indexes like FTSE 100 (U.K.), DAX (Germany), and CAC 40 (France) fell by about the same percentage.  These drops came with additional shockwaves, as the VIX (Volatility Index - this measures implied volatility via options placed by investors. If there is a broader spread of the estimated movement, implied volatility is higher ergo the VIX is higher) increased to 42, where moderate VIX ratings are 15-20. In comparison, the Pandemic generated a VIX of 82. Higher VIX ratings highlighted how volatile Monday was for the market. Shares in major banks were sold off. JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Citigroup were among the major banks most affected. Concern surrounding interest rates (which have closed three regional banks so far—Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, and First Republic Bank) mounted in the market. Shaky investors sold off shares amidst the panic.  From July 24 to August 5, the yield on the 10-year Treasury note slipped from 4.28% to 3.78% . Yields represent the return investors expect from holding these bonds, where higher yields typically indicate "higher risk, higher reward." Treasury notes are essentially loans made to the government, with investors receiving regular interest payments in return. When the market value of these notes goes down, they still pay the same interest rate, making them an attractive buy. However, during times of fear or uncertainty, investors flock to Treasury notes because they are considered safer investments with a lower risk of default. This increased demand drives up the price of the notes, causing the yield to slip lower. Multiple factors converged to create a perfect financial storm on Black Monday. The most apparent factor was the instability in the U.S. market, driven by the Federal Reserve’s hesitation to cut rates, rising unemployment, and fears of a looming recession. This uncertainty led to nervous investors becoming increasingly risk-averse. Massive tech sell-offs were unsurprising in this downturn, given widespread skepticism about valuations in the sector, especially as spending on AI development has significantly cut into profits. Notably, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang sold $323 million of Nvidia stock before the decline, raising questions about the timing. Yen arbitrage also played a significant role through its “unwinding.” Investors who borrowed yen when it was weak against other currencies used it to buy assets. However, Japan’s counter-inflation efforts, including hiking interest rates, strengthened the yen. This made the borrowed yen more expensive when converted to other currencies, forcing borrowers to sell off assets to cover the increased costs. This massive sell-off contributed to a sharp dip in the Japanese stock market and created a feedback loop: as yen demand increased, its value rose further, compounding losses for the borrowers. Geopolitical tensions added another layer of uncertainty. Investors, already skittish about the violent geopolitical landscape, became more inclined to sell off assets related to global trade, energy, and defense, further destabilizing the market.

On July 13th, the U.S. had its first assassination attempt of a presidential candidate since 1981 when John Hinckley Jr. shot Reagan. During a rally in Butler, PA, at the Butler Farm Show fairgrounds. Trump spoke in front of three barns, two of which had sniper teams (positioned on sloped roofs). The shooter, Matthew Crooks, shot at and missed Trump, killing an audience member and wounding two others. Crooks had a limited online presence and no manifesto (that has been found). His phone contained pictures of political leaders and schedules for the Trump rally and Democratic National Convention, alluding to his intentions to attend both events. He had no clear political leaning. Being a registered Republican, he also donated to the left-wing group ActBlue’s “Progressive Turnout Project” on the day Biden was inaugurated. The Progressive Turnout Project focuses on pushing Democrats who vote infrequently to vote in upcoming elections. This highlighted either a shift in political views or that he was possibly a “never-Trump” Republican.  Secret Service Director Cheatle said in an interview with ABC that the building’s sloped roof, where Crooks shot from, was too steep, posing a risk to officers placed upon it. The Secret Service then assigned local law enforcement to secure the building. The local District Attorney for Butler, PA, Richard Goldinger, stated that their personnel had communicated with the Secret Service that they didn’t have enough resources to secure the building properly.  Reportedly, the sniper teams behind Trump had caught Crooks acting strangely, looking up at the building about an hour before the shooting. They then lost sight of him in the crowd, but officers kept looking for a suspicious individual after the initial sighting. He was later spotted on the roof with a range finder roughly 20 minutes before the shooting, along with attendees noticing that Crooks was on top of the building - to varying degrees of pre and post-awareness. Local law enforcement securing the building went up to check out the figure on the roof. When they got up there, Crooks pointed a gun at them. They fell back - then moments later, Crooks opened fire.  Director Cheatle is now called to provide testimony before the House Oversight Committee and House Homeland Security Committee next week.

American unemployment has risen to 4.1%, the highest since November 2021, when we first adjusted to COVID-19 regulations (November 2021 was directly after the labor market recovered from the massive spike in unemployment). For additional comparison, 4.1% was the same rate in December 2017, which was a 13-year low at the time. This may incline you to believe that the current unemployment rate isn’t a cause for genuine concern, yet we have seen a steady increase in unemployment month over month this year.  With a job market seemingly under duress, the Federal Reserve may cut interest rates to inspire market growth. This would counter the ‘soft landing’ approach the U.S. has been enacting in the face of global economic upheaval. ‘Soft landing’ is simply a term used to describe the state of forcing the control of inflation by slowing the growth of the markets (an example of this forced slowing would be maintaining high interest rates). However, it may be necessary for the Federal Reserve to relax these measures to combat the current lack of job availability/hiring slows.  From the most recent June ‘Employment Situation’ report  from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, job losses were mostly in retail, such as furniture, home furnishing, electronics, and appliance retailers - while warehouse clubs, supercenters, and merchandise retailers gained jobs. Additionally, there was a drop in employment for professional and business services, classified “temporary help services” (firms that provide temporary staffing solutions to other businesses). Professional, scientific, and technical services trended upward.  From the above mentioned report (on page 7) it is uncertain if undocumented immigrants were factored into survey results, as workers surveyed are not required to verify citizenship. The report even goes so far as to say, “It is likely that both surveys include at least some undocumented immigrants. However, neither the establishment nor the household survey is designed to identify workers' legal status.” Some economists think the rise in unemployment is business as usual. This is rationalized by the ‘soft landing’ approach, where pain points were foreseen as necessary shifts to regulate the economy. That may mean that the current unemployment rate is within the bounds of the Federal Reserve and that rate cuts may not actually come in September. If that were to be the case the Federal Reserve would seek to reduce inflation growth with manageable unemployment.

Within the EU, all 27 of the countries within the union hold elections, which take place every five years. This year, 2024, was an election year, with countries casting votes through June 6 - 9. Reps elected to the EU parliament make decisions related to European legislative, budgetary, and supervisory powers. With that, election results in 2024 showcased a rise in right-wing favorability, potentially leading to significant changes in legislative decisions. As there are multiple parties within the EU, the seven parties that comprise the parliament exist on a spectrum from left to right ideologies. This spectrum is divided by the two opposing centrist parties, the ‘Socialist & Democrat’(left-leaning) and the ‘European People’s Party’ (right-leaning). Throughout the EU's history, left-wing parties have had the majority rule in parliament. With the 2024 election results, this majority has shifted in favor of right-wing parties for the first time. This allows right-aligned parties to generate majority agreements on legislation, thereby influencing European governance.  This shift towards right-leaning parties is thought to be the result of lax immigration policies, green energy backlash, and the undermining of rural/working-class populations. A call for tighter immigration restrictions has led to the elections of nationalistic representatives across Europe. Given the nature of their politics, each will have a separate agenda when discussing policy in parliament. This type of nationalism is common among right-wing European politicians, to the detriment of the overall European right-wing, as it creates fragments of policy voters instead of a favorable unionized majority.  Green energy backlash stems from new measures implemented to shift citizens towards green energy sources, creating higher costs for the struggling middle class in Europe.  Environmental policy doesn’t stop at prodding the use of green energy. European farmers are also taking a heavy hit. Policies are increasing production costs while heavy constraints on their livelihoods are becoming harder and harder to comply with. On top of these aspects, the government has resorted to importing products from foreign competitors, leaving farmers dumbfounded as the same constraints do not apply to the foreign products being bought.  The legislation produced by the new EU parliament is not expected to be a drastic departure from regular policy. This is primarily due to the previously mentioned fracturing of individuals within right-wing parties, where nationalistic interest is more regarded. However, the swift shift from a left majority to a right-leaning one highlights a European population disengaged with its traditional governance. Some countries have even resorted to electing protest (or perhaps genuine) officials who were online personalities before being elected. Countries like Cyprus, Czechia, and Spain have all elected “influencers” to shake up their political systems.

Donald Trump was convicted of 34 counts of falsifying business records, Penal Law 175.10. This charge could result in up to four years in prison (per count). Other sentences like probation, community service, and fines are also possible. A person is guilty of this charge if the burden of proof has been met that financial records have been tampered with “an intent to defraud that includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof, that person: makes or causes a false entry in business records of an enterprise.” You can read the charges here. The prosecution needed to prove intent to commit another crime by falsifying business records to convict. In the public records, the only charges brought to the court were falsifying business records. It’s possible the evidence for the implied crime of intent may be weaker and was not brought to the court to be tried, as it could have negatively impacted the business record charges. Separately, the prosecution may want to try those charges later, with lower stakes in producing a conviction. The law the prosecution successfully implied intent to violate was the Federal Election Campaign Act. This Act limits the amounts received by candidates running for federal offices and imposes a standard of record-keeping for incoming and outgoing streams of money attached to these campaigns. Ultimately, paying hush money to Stormy Daniels showcased an intent to violate the Federal Election Campaign Act because of a technicality. This payment could have been legal if done correctly by the law. Since an individual can fund their campaign without a limit, a person (in this case, Donald Trump) could have used his money through the campaign to pay off Daniels. However, since the burden of quality record keeping falls on managing the campaign books, the transactions must be accurately recorded. The payments to Daniels were recorded as “legal expenses,” but under the law, since they were being paid to help Trump's candidacy, they should have been recorded as "campaign expenses.” Therefore, proving, at the very least, an intent to defraud and proof of falsifying records.

Synopsys is an American company in Sunnyvale, California; it provides its EDA (Electronic Design Automation), which assists customers in developing chips for products in numerous industries. Just some industries they service are transportation, medical, and manufacturing. Their EDA software suite even has AI-boosted assistance that helps make the design process easier for their partners to navigate. They have recently agreed to buy another American company named Ansys for a cash and stock acquisition of $35 billion, making this deal one of the largest in tech history. Ansys is headquartered in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, with a multinational presence in India, France, the UK, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, and Japan. Ansys provides simulation technology to their clients so that they can test real-world scenarios on their products to enhance their designs. Ansys’s tech also has an AI-boosted component, adding directional synergy between the two companies. Synopsys and Ansys have been partnering for years to develop Ansys’s services. CEO of Synopsys, Sassine Ghazi, provided his rationale for why the new acquisition was necessary in his talk with CNBC. He has rationalized that the trend in AI will require further demand for chip/silicon design development and that partners will need more in-depth analyses of their designs. Synopsys has established partnerships with companies like Microsoft and Apple to assist in chip development and analysis for their products. With the acquisition of Ansys, Synopsys would further its capabilities by providing more in-depth analysis and functional design modifications by utilizing Ansys’s scenario simulation tech. Even though both American companies have agreed to the deal, Chinese regulators have a say in the deal's finalization. Synopsys generated 15.20% of its revenue from China in 2023 (data provided by the Bloomberg Terminal) – Ansys does not have a sizeable revenue from China. Mergers of this magnitude can impact global competition, which makes these huge deals liable to regulatory scrutiny by the markets affected. In this instance, Synopsys’s sizeable dealings in China give Chinese regulators approval authority over the acquisition. China has previously broken up other American deals, such as the Qualcomm & NXP Semiconductors deal in 2018. This was a $44 billion buy approved by eight other international regulators. Chinese regulators disapproved, and the deal was not finalized. There is speculation that China made this move due to growing trade tensions that have not dissipated today. The question is whether China will also write off the Synopsys & Ansys deal to prevent such a competitive company from forming in the United States. The deal has a closing deadline within the first half of 2025, which may indicate that the companies foresaw potential pushback. There is also speculation that the deal may be pushed to the beginning of 2025 to close under a Trump presidency that would be more lenient on M&A deals.

Truong My Lan was accused of bribing Saigon Joint Commercial Bank staff, appraisers, and Vietnamese government officials to approve and cover up $42 billion in fraudulent loans to shell companies under her control. There is still $27 billion in bank deposited funds that are outstanding, as she used bank funds to purchase hotels, condos, and office/retail spaces for her company. She was sentenced to death on April 11, with additional charges for bribery and violation of lending regulations - amounting to 40 years. Some believe the harshness of this sentence is to pressure Lan to provide the remaining $27 billion yet to be returned. She oversaw the merger of First Bank, TinNghiaBank, and Saigon Bank, forming SCB in 2012. Claiming a modest 4.9% of SCB shares on paper, she then utilized a web of shell corporations, business associates, and personal connections, including her husband, to amass a staggering 91.5% of SCB’s shares, a move that went unnoticed for years. She then strategically appointed individuals within the bank, granting them authority to authorize loans to the various entities she used to amass the 91.5% stake in SCB. Alongside Lan, 86 additional individuals, including 18 agents from Vietnam’s bank inspection agency, were implicated in this scandal. Lan made these moves while former Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung was in office from 2006 to 2016. Infamously, under his control, Vietnam had a surge in corruption, which made the 2012 establishment of SCB susceptible to this kind of fraud. Under the current leadership, the Communist Party Leader, Nguyen Phu Trong, has been making anti-corruption efforts. Coined the “Blazing Furnace” campaign, Trong is going after long-standing officials and private sector individuals he and his party believe pose a risk and may have ties to the Tan Dung era of Vietnam. The escalation in anti-corruption efforts stems from the need for political and financial stability within Vietnam and making the country more attractive to Western allies with whom they would like to do business. If successful, Vietnam wants to be considered a stable trading partner over China.

83% of employees at Volkswagen’s Chattanooga, TN, factory voted to join the United Auto Workers Union on April 19. This marks the first time a foreign-owned factory in the American South has opted to unionize. Historically the South has been attractive to foreign investors mainly due to their political stances against unionization in the region. The United Auto Workers Union was formed in 1935 in Detroit, Michigan, during the blossoming of the American automotive industry. Americans formed together to seek recognition from the major auto companies General Motors, Chrysler, and Ford. This was due to workers feeling scared for their job security, as the workforce had just experienced widespread unemployment with the start of the Great Depression in 1929, with those effects lingering until 1941 (WWII). Within that same vein, the workforce at Volkswagen Chattanooga, TN, have been scared for their job security and wages. EV production continues to be pushed by corporate and political leaders. EVs are cutting into the revenues of automotive companies, as they cost more to produce than combustion cars. This sparks a fear in workers that the reduction in cash flow will negatively impact them. Not to mention, EVs are reportedly easier to build; Jim Farley, the CEO of Ford, said, “Electric vehicles will require 40% less labor to build than current combustion vehicles.” With these concerns, the employees at the Tennessee plant aligned to push for unionization to secure their hopeful future. The Chattanooga, TN, plant had voted against unionization twice, in 2014 and 2019. Volkswagen and TN Governor Bill Lee denounced these voters. Lee addressed the workforce in 2019, advising the labor body that unionizing was a mistake, leading to an unsuccessful unionization vote. However, in 2024, the employees received neutral feedback from VW regarding unionizing, and political leaders were too slow to deter voters before the Union vote. That did not stop political leaders from Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas from issuing a joint statement against the plant workers' efforts. The full statement is here. Below is an excerpt from the joint statement. “The reality is companies have choices when it comes to where to invest and bring jobs and opportunity. . . Unionization would certainly put our states’ jobs in jeopardy – in fact, in this year already, all of the UAW automakers have announced layoffs. In America, we respect our workforce and we do not need to pay a third party to tell us who can pick up a box or flip a switch. . . we are seeing it in the fallout of the Detroit Three strike with those automakers rethinking investments and cutting jobs. Putting businesses in our states in that position is the last thing we want to do.” With this successful vote, the UAW now looks to represent the Mercedes Benz-Vance, Alabama plant workers, who have an upcoming union vote on May 18. This prompts some to believe that a wave of unionizations may sweep the southern automotive industry.

Nelson Peltz is an American activist investor with a history of working with brands such as Wendy’s, Dupont, and Heinz. An activist investor is someone with a position in a declining stock and attempts to control operations in order to increase that stock's value, leaving with a profit. Peltz took aim at Disney in 2022 after a continued loss in shareholder value, likely caused by the new leadership of former CEO Bob Chapek. Bob Chapek took over the CEO role at Disney from 2020 to 2022. He was chosen by Bob Iger to be Iger’s successor but ultimately failed to fulfill the role. The acting board and Iger rejected Peltz's prospect of launching a campaign to get voted in by shareholders at the next annual meeting. Peltz proposed spending cuts in areas such as labor and production, adding that Disney’s accused ‘woke’ agenda in film affected its bottom line. Iger stepped back in to counteract the proxy battle. Upon returning, Iger made cost cuts, which boosted returns and raised the stock price. Given that the price returned to a favorable level, Peltz backed off from his campaign. In 2023, Disney had a significant drop in share price, hitting a 9-year low of $84 a share. This prompted Peltz to seek a return and launched a campaign for two seats on the board of directors. Peltz’s Trian Partners owned 32.2 million shares of Disney, making them a shareholder that needed to be taken seriously by the acting board and other shareholders. Peltz’s close associate Isaac Perlmutter from Marvel Entertainment gave Trian this position. Perlmutter was ousted by Disney once Marvel was acquired by the company and has been quoted saying he believes the termination was due to differences in opinion regarding the production of Marvel movies. He gave his stock to Trian Partners to push change at Disney through Peltz. Within this struggle for shareholder support, Disney pointed to Peltz’s lack of media experience and strategy as grounds for rejection from the board. Disney called Peltz’s attempt to get on the board “disruptive and destructive.” Of course, Perlmutter backing Peltz adds personal vendetta to the narrative. Peltz / Trian Partners' appeal to shareholders preached cost efficiencies and reiterated concern for a 'woke' agenda at Disney that negatively impacted profits. The current Disney board made even more effort to boost the stock price in order to earn shareholder confidence before the finalized vote on April 3, 2024. See that meeting here. The board brought on new executives such as James Gorman from Morgan Stanley Wealth Management and Jermey Dorroch, the former CEO of Sky (a European media and entertainment company). They even ramped up initiatives, investing in Epic Games, the developer of Fortnite. Their efforts resulted in profitable returns for the first quarter, growing earnings per share by 21% above what was expected. Coming out of April’s 2024 meeting, all 12 current board members, including Bob Iger, were re-elected. Trian Partners believes that they ultimately achieved their goal of boosting the company's performance, though not directly due to their business decisions, but rather their pressure on the company. Peltz said, “We hope that this time will be the last and that the shareholders will not be let down like a year ago.” Disney will now return to focus on settling its succession plan and hopes to build off of Q1’s earnings.

The Department of Education has been attempting a new rollout of FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid) in recent years after the FAFSA Simplification Act passed in December 2020. The new form was presented to the public in December of 2023, which contained technical errors that prevented families from being able to complete applications. The DOE worked to address the technical issues and a backlog of applicants who needed their applications processed formed. Colleges were prevented from providing aid estimates without the data from the DOE. This failure to substantiate a functional new system has led to calls for investigations into the Department’s process of setting up the new FAFSA. The DOE started providing data for the student FAFSA on March 10. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona has recently stated some schools are still not fully prepared to receive this data, as infrastructure such as new “SAIG (Student Aid Internet Gateway) mailboxes” need to be set up by institutions to receive it. The extreme delay of a functional rollout puts pressure on schools to provide timely aid package estimates to students. Where usually, schools have months for these estimates, now will be done within weeks for millions of applicants across the country. To make matters worse, roughly 200,000 estimates provided by the Department of Education to schools were miscalculated. The error affected applicants who accounted for their assets and did not factor in financial savings, which made the calculations faulty. After discovering the error, the Department of Education advised schools to use updated methodology from the department to calculate the aid packages of students affected manually. The DOE has stated it will have to recalculate these packages to verify the amounts but didn’t disclose when it believes it will be able to. This direction from the Department of Education highlights how much it overestimates the resources of collegiate financial departments. These departments can't quickly make these kinds of financial aid estimates manually, which greatly impacts the rate at which these schools can turn around package estimates for the rest of their applicants. College students relying on financial aid estimates to inform their decisions on where to attend are uncertain about their next steps. This may result in prospective students not attending their first college semester, which could affect their returns to college. Some schools are offering merit scholarship students more money in aid to keep them in their freshman classes. Students expect to get their aid figures in mid-April, leaving about two weeks for students to decide where they will be going. Some schools still adhere to the May 1 application deadline, while as many as 190 colleges have already pushed back deadlines by two weeks to an additional month.

Mexico has had a long-standing issue with cartel activity, which has exacerbated. Some point to the passive enforcement policies enacted by the current president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who was previously the Mayor of Mexico City and elected president in 2018 after two failed previous attempts. He started the MONERA party, or “Movement for National Regeneration,” after his 2012 election loss and is still a member of MONERA today. The party is left-leaning and focuses on non-hierarchal leadership with an emphasis on the environment. MORENA has gained youth support through populist priorities such as wealth disparity. His new approach to cartel conflict, known as “hugs not bullets,” introduced passivity in the face of cartel crimes. This quote from Obrador best explains the rationale behind the strategy, “The human being is not bad by nature, circumstances lead them to take the path to antisocial behavior.” This means shifting the focus from law enforcement to prioritizing fighting the hypothetical root cause of corruption and poverty. The ‘“hugs not bullets” strategy is the successor of a previously militaristic approach from 2006 when ​​Felipe Calderón was in office and worked with the U.S.’s war on drugs. Calderón attempted to disrupt the cartel by attacking factions, arresting leaders, and fracturing their forces. Resulting in the cartel ending up in a desperate state where the violence rate inevitably tripled, with an estimated 150,000 deaths from 2006 to the present. The “hugs not bullets” strategy has pulled away from U.S. assistance with the cartel and disbanded the Mexican federal police, installing a national guard in its stead. Standoffs between law enforcement and cartels who are taking territory within Mexico have become notably more lenient. An example of leniency under the new policy was when EL Chapo’s son, Ovidio Guzman, was arrested and then released by Obrador when the cartel showed force in protest of his arrest. Even though the approach intends to tackle corruption, some instances, such as the pardon of General Salvador Cienfuegos, run counter to this goal. The DEA arrested Salvador while he was in the U.S. for assisting the cartel in smuggling cocaine into the country. The Mexican government demanded the return of the General, and America complied to be diplomatic. Once Salvador returned to Mexico, officials threw out the case based on a lack of evidence. Shortly after this event, a new legislature passed to suppress foreign agency investigations within Mexico. Obrador’s term ends this year. Mexico’s 2024 presidential election is on June 2, with the two main candidates being women, a first in Mexico’s history. They are Claudia Sheinbaum and Xochicl Galvez. Sheinbaum is the appointed successor of Obrador and intends to prolong the policy strategies brought in by her predecessor. She is a candidate uniformly accepted by the majority of the MORENA party. Xochicl Galvez is the opposition candidate who seeks to revamp the current cartel strategy. She is a candidate with business experience and indigenous Mexican roots.