Future Hindsight

After listening to this episode, try deep canvassing yourself! Click HERE to read the step-by-step guide. We'd love to compare notes and see how you did. After you've canvassed, tell us about your experience by leaving a message at (929) 262-0752. Thank you! Deep Canvassing Deep canvassing was developed to better understand voters in response to California's Prop 8 legislation, which outlawed gay marriage. Sharing personal stories and active listening techniques establish common ground, even among voters with totally different opinions. These kinds of meaningful exchanges lead to constructive, positive dialogue that can change minds and achieve political results at a higher rate than traditional canvassing. How to deep canvass Start with the change you seek. Put together a list of people to talk to. Recruit a buddy. Before the call, think about someone you love and why you love them. On the call, genuinely listen to people and ask meaningful questions based on what they say. Share a personal story with a loved one where decency and kindness -- instead of judgment -- was extended. Connect the issue with that person's real lived experience. Reconnect with the buddy and compare notes. Voting is Personal Voting is both a political and a personal act. Thinking about voting as a gift to our loved ones is a powerful way to make clear what the stakes are around voting and the world we live in. Deep canvassing taps into the real lived experience of how we treat each other, connecting the dots to why we vote and who we vote for. Find out more: David Fleischer is the Director of the Los Angeles LGBT Center's Leadership LAB. The Center's carefully honed method of "deep canvassing" delivered the first empirically tested and proven process where a single conversation decreases prejudice in a long-lasting way. Developed after the shocking 2008 win for Prop 8, which made gay marriage illegal in the state of California, Fleischer was motivated to figure out why, in this seemingly open-minded state, people voted against gay and lesbian people who wanted to marry. To find out, he and the Leadership LAB organizers and volunteers went to the neighborhoods where they had lost the worst; 15,000 one-on-one conversations later, they had learned several universally actionable pieces of information. You can learn more about David and his work here, and you can follow the LA LGBT Center on Twitter @LALGBTCenter

Culture Informs Politics The Alt-Right believes politics is downstream from culture. They operate in this meta-political sphere where changing American politics must start with changing culture, discourse, and language. The internet allowed the Alt-Right's ideology to proliferate through memes, in online communities, and finally into mainstream culture. After the 2016 election collapsed the timing between culture and politics, the internet continues to serve as a platform to disseminate their cultural values. Conversely, de-platforming prominent Alt-Right voices like Gavin McInnes and Alex Jones has reduced their ability to gain new adherents. Gateway to Extremism The Proud Boys, McInnes's group, is a gateway to right-wing extremism. They often claim plausible deniability by saying anti-Semitic or transphobic memes are jokes and using seemingly harmless initiation rituals to lure young white men into their orbit. They attempt to "red-pill" their followers and decry modernity, liberalism, egalitarianism, and feminism. They would like America to re-embrace a "traditional" natural order in which white men are at the top of the pyramid, one of the central ideas of white supremacy. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, groups like The Proud Boys are often the first step toward white nationalism. Countering the Alt-Right We must support democratic uses of social media to create a fair online environment. Pressuring companies like Facebook and YouTube to call out and remove hate; exposing the farce of nostalgia for a dominant white culture; and pushing back against tribalistic tendencies, especially among teenagers online, is critical. The Alt-Right is focused heavily on gender norms, so supporting transgender and LGBTQ+ rights is an actionable way to promote and support an inclusive society. Further, we should infuse our public discourse with a positive and racially pluralistic message. Find out more: Alexandra Minna Stern is Carroll Smith-Rosenberg Collegiate of History, American Culture and Women's and Gender Studies and Associate Dean for the Humanities at the University of Michigan. She also directs the Sterilization and Social Justice Lab housed in the Department of American Culture. Her research has focused on the history of eugenics, genetics, society, and justice in the United States and Latin America. Through these topics, she explored the dynamics of gender, sexuality, race, ethnicity, disability, social difference, and reproductive politics. Her book, Proud Boys and the White Ethnostate: How the Alt-Right is Warping the American Imagination, applies the lenses of historical analysis, feminist studies, and critical race studies to deconstructing the core ideas of the alt-right and white nationalism. You can learn more at her website: http://www.minnastern.com/.

Conservative media activism Beginning with the America First Movement, conservative political activists also became conservative media figures. In addition to writing conservative books and hosting radio or television programs, these activists also created civic organizations and worked on political campaigns from Eisenhower to Goldwater and Reagan. Media is an important part of their political activism, and not a separate, objective endeavor. Politics of Ideas Conservatives believe political change starts with ideas. They build political power through spreading and popularizing their ideas through their own media outlets where ideology trumps facts on the ground. Conservative audiences -- primed only to right-wing views -- believe that only their sources are right, both factually and ideologically. Hence, conservative voices became the only ones telling the truth. Epistemological divide We are experiencing an epistemological divide where liberals and conservatives have fundamentally different understandings of the truth. This divide is partly born out of the rise of conservative media, which is based on faith claims, or claims of personal authority and knowledge, rather than observable facts. Because many conservatives believe what conservative media and political personalities tell them, they are often impervious to fact-checking and the promotion of truth. Find out more: Nicole Hemmer is a professor and political historian specializing in media, conservatism, and the far-right. She is the author of Messengers of the Right: Conservative Media and the Transformation of American Politics. In addition to being an associate research scholar with the Obama Presidency Oral History Project, she is also co-founder and co-editor of Made by History, the historical analysis section of the Washington Post, and co-host of the Past Present podcast. Hemmer's historical analysis has appeared in a number of national and international news outlets, including the New York Times, Washington Post, Atlantic, Politico, U.S. News & World Report, New Republic, PBS NewsHour, CNN, NPR, and NBC News. You can follow her on Twitter @pastpunditry.

Ethical Communication Ethical communication involves respect and civil discourse. Taking time to listen to other sides and treating lawmakers with civility are key to a healthy democratic process. Respecting procedures that bolster the institutions of democracy and working together can help us achieve a better America. The truth is click bait The truth is not boring. We can be clever about presenting truth and facts. Presenting the truth in a click bait format—with catchy headlines, good photos, and a listicle—is possible. Ethical communication doesn't have to be dry, like eating our vegetables. Improving the media The media can and should cover politics in a way that encourages citizens to be engaged participants in a democracy, instead of spectators. Recognizing robust and ethical leadership in our lawmakers will encourage a high bar of communication among all politicians. Supporting substantive reporting through subscriptions is imperative. Find out more: Peter Loge is the founding director of the Project on Ethics in Political Communication and an Associate Professor in the School of Media and Public Affairs at The George Washington University, as well as a strategic communication consultant. He has served in senior positions for Senator Edward Kennedy, for three members of the US House of Representatives, and in the Obama administration. Loge has led and advised a range of campaigns and organizations, put the first Member of Congress on the internet, lobbied for "America's Funniest Home Videos," served as a Senior Policy Advisor for health care in the US House during the debate over the Affordable Care Act, and was a Chief of Staff in the House of Representatives during the Clinton impeachment proceedings. You can follow him on Twitter @ploge.

Who Gets Fact-Checked? PolitiFact finds statements of "fact" by American politicians that can be verified and are highly visible, or pertinent, to a current national conversation. This is the reason why high-ranking officials such as Members of Congress, Senators, Cabinet members, and the President are at the top of the list. The President gets checked a lot—and fails nearly 70% of the time! The Fact-Checking Process PolitiFact looks for evidence to support that a statement is accurate or less than entirely accurate: scouring independently verifiable information from sources like the Bureaus of Labor Statistics or Economic Analysis; turning to experts in a given field; and also asking the person who made the statement to provide whatever information they used. Once all of the facts have been checked, the rating of the statement is determined on the Truth-O-Meter. It has six ratings in decreasing levels of truthfulness from true to pants on fire. Speaking Truth to Power PolitiFact's reason to publish is to give citizens the information they need to govern themselves in a democracy. One of the most rewarding ways PolitiFact sees its work in action and check power is in the White House Press Room. Often reporters will confront the President or the White House Press Secretary with PolitiFact analysis. Challenging a person in power with the facts is an essential way to get the truth out and keep America more honest at the highest levels. Find out more: Jon Greenberg is a senior correspondent with PolitiFact. He was part of the PolitiFact team during the 2012 presidential election and was one of the fact-checkers who launched PunditFact in 2013. Prior to that, he was executive editor at New Hampshire Public Radio and a Washington reporter for National Public Radio. He has twice won awards from the Society of Professional Journalists for investigative reporting. You can follow him on Twitter @JonZGreenberg.

Conspiracism A functional conspiracy theory uses facts and rational arguments to prove that things are not as they seem. Conspiracism is a conspiracy without the theory. Conspiracism takes the form of a bold assertion without any evidence, even fake evidence, to back it up. It's an assault on common sense. Prominent examples are "climate change is a hoax!" and "the election is rigged!" Conspiracy claims spread quickly because they require no explanation and are impossible to counter. Moreover, they ring "true enough" by playing into an emotional narrative of fear or hatred. When the president engages in conspiracism, such as the press being the enemy of the people, he imposes his reality on the nation, with violent consequences. Dangers of conspiracism One of the most devastating side effects of conspiracism is the delegitimation of democratic institutions, such as the party system. The notion of a loyal opposition party is key to democracy; without it, democracy ceases to exist. Republicans rely heavily on this delegitimating tactic to hold power, and it's growing more rampant. Birtherism towards Obama and painting Hillary Clinton as a criminal mastermind are examples of this. By equating Democrats with traitors, as the president has explicitly done, he implies they are not a loyal opposition but enemies of the state. Once delegitimated, violence against them becomes acceptable. This is an old tactic, but one we're seeing for the first time in the US. Protecting Reality and enacting democracy Conspiracism is destructive, delegitimating, and disorienting. However, it has no program, no policy, and no ideology. Conspiracism is now mainly used by conservatives, but it can easily travel across the political spectrum. In fact, conspiracism has already replaced ideology as the dominant political tool in the US. It is critical to speak truth to conspiracism—not for the person spreading it, who is unlikely to be persuaded—but for yourself and others. For starters, it is morally right. Speaking truth also reinforces reality, shows other truth-seekers they are not alone, and creates solidarity. Equally important is voting for politicians who emphasize facts and explain how and what their actions are accomplishing. Lawmakers help sustain democratic norms when they are transparent and make acts of government open and legible. Find out more: Nancy Rosenblum is the Harvard University Senator Joseph S. Clark Professor of Ethics in Politics and Government emerita. Her field of research is historical and contemporary political thought. She is the co-author of A Lot of People Are Saying: The New Conspiracism and the Assault on Democracy, among other books. Prof. Rosenblum is Co-Editor of the Annual Review of Political Science and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Science. She has served as the President of the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy, Vice-President of the American Political Science Association, Board Member of the Russell Sage Foundation, and Chair of the Department of Government from 2004 to 2011.

Viral Model Trammell created a viral disease model to mimic how fake news spreads. People must come in to contact with the fake information in order to be infected, just as with a virus. The more people are exposed, the more it spreads. The research shows that individuals who claim to be online for more than 10 hours a day are more susceptible to fake news. Flattening the curve of false information requires countermeasures on multiple fronts. Counter Measures Fake news is likely here to stay, but it is possible to mitigate its spread and efficacy. France effectively employed a "pre-bunking" strategy in its last presidential election. The government warned citizens that fake news would be coming from Russia, and preemptively distributed factual information to counter false narratives. Other necessary counter measures are aggressively attacking fake accounts (bots), building a reputation system to identify bad actors and reliable sources, educating schoolchildren to be vigilant consumers of the news, and cultivating a habit in citizens to never rely on a single source for information. Future of Fake News Artificial Intelligence is revolutionizing the fake news frontier. The rise of Deep Fake videos is an alarming trend because they are virtually unidentifiable as fake, and humans are much more likely to believe audio or video. AI can also glean audience predispositions and specifically target fake news to susceptible users, like Google targets ads. Coupling Deep Fakes and AI targeting with "nuanced" fake news—information that is mostly true with only certain key details changed—will make fake news a more and more trenchant problem in the months and years ahead. Find out more: Lieutenant Colonel Travis Trammell is a career U.S. Army Officer with operational experience in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Egypt. At Stanford, Travis is a Ph.D. Candidate with the Management, Science and Engineering Department, inside the Engineering Risk Research Group and a Predoctoral Fellow with the Program on Democracy and the Internet. His research focuses on quantitative risk analysis of nation state promoted fake news and influence campaigns. Dr. Marie-Elisabeth Paté-Cornell is the Burt and Deedee McMurtry Professor in the School of Engineering and Professor and Founding Chair (2000-2011) of the Department of Management Science and Engineering at Stanford University. Her specialty is engineering risk analysis with application to complex systems (space, medical, offshore oil platforms, etc.). Her recent work is on the use of game theory in risk analysis with applications that have included counterterrorism, nuclear counter-proliferation problems, and cyber security. She is the author of more than one hundred publications, and the co-editor of a book on Perspectives on Complex Global Problems (2016).

Truth sandwich George Lakoff invented a construct called the Truth Sandwich in order to effectively frame the truth and negate a lie. In it, true statements act as "bread," and the lie is the "filling." A truth sandwich always starts with the truth because framing first is an advantage. Next, indicate the lie and state that it is a lie. Return immediately to the truth. The truth must always be repeated more than the lie. Simply negating a lie without first stating the truth helps liars because it highlights the lie first. The Truth Sandwich formula of truth-lie-truth is key to combatting lies and fake news. Truthful Reporting Democratic societies depend on newspapers and the media overall to lead with the truth in their reporting and to root out lies. Everyday citizens are ill-equipped to fact-check every piece of media they consume. We need capable editors and reporters to fact-check, call out lies, and point to the consequences of the lie versus the truth. Reporters and editors should use the Truth Sandwich model to convey factual information and debunk lies to the public. High quality and truthful journalism is critical to a functioning democracy. Values Our morals depend on how we understand ourselves, our families, and our politics. Republicans and Democrats have different ideas about morality, and give their loyalty to the party they think most likely to defend their values. Illegal conduct, lies, and other usually "immoral" actions are tolerated when they are deemed as furthering a specific set of goals and morals. As long as the party is carrying out the values of its constituents, the party faithful will keep their values. Find out more: George Lakoff is Director of the Center for the Neural Mind & Society and is now retired Distinguished Professor of Cognitive Science and Linguistics at the University of California at Berkeley, where he has taught since 1972. He previously taught at Harvard and the University of Michigan. He graduated from MIT in 1962 (in Mathematics and Literature) and received his Ph.D. in Linguistics from Indiana University in 1966. He is the author of the New York Times bestseller The All New Don't Think of an Elephant!, among other works, and is America's leading expert on the framing of political ideas. You can follow him on Twitter @GeorgeLakoff.

Post-Truth Post-truth is the political subordination of reality. It is not a failing of knowledge, but one of politics. Authoritarians use post-truth to corrupt our faith in the truth. The end goal is not to make citizens believe lies, but to make them so cynical and uncertain, they think they can never know the truth. Once this control over the information stream is achieved, leaders begin to have direct control over the populace. Post-truth marks the beginning of the descent into fascism for this reason. Fake News Fake news is intentionally false news. It's a key tool in the pursuit of post-truth because it muddies the waters of reality. Once misinformation is in the public sphere, it is impossible to remove. The more fake news saturates the information market, the more jaded the target population becomes. Authoritarians can further confuse people by labeling the truth as fake news; they deny facts and demonstrate their control over their country's information stream. Propaganda Propaganda is the most potent weapon in a post-truth leader's arsenal. It is not designed to simply fool a population. Instead, it exists to demonstrate the government's command of truth and that the truth is subordinate to the will of the leader. It shows the government's ability to lie with impunity. Even if the population doesn't believe the lie, it overwhelms their defenses, making them easier to rule. Find out more: Lee McIntyre is a Research Fellow at the Center for Philosophy and History of Science at Boston University and an Instructor in Ethics at Harvard Extension School. Formerly Executive Director of the Institute for Quantitative Social Science at Harvard University, he has also served as a policy advisor to the Executive Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard and as Associate Editor in the Research Department of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. McIntyre is the author of several books, including Post-Truth and Respecting Truth: Willful Ignorance in the Internet Age. Other work has appeared in such popular venues as the New York Times, Newsweek, the Chronicle of Higher Education, the New Statesman, the Times Higher Education Supplement, and The Humanist. You can follow Lee on Twitter @LeeCMcIntyre.

COVID & Authoritarianism COVID-19 has created an excuse for authoritarians around the world to consolidate power. Repressive regimes such as China have jailed political prisoners, and citizen journalists reporting on the pandemic have disappeared. Russia clamped down on free reporting to protect powerful warlords. Free speech is under attack in the U.S., as was the case when Captain Brett Crozier was fired for expressing concern about COVID-19 onboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt, a Navy nuclear powered aircraft carrier. Long term danger of surveillance Under the guise of public safety, governments are increasingly collecting our data, such as through contact tracing. It might make sense to share our personal information at this time. However, once these habits become established, they are hard to break. We could soon be subject to temperature or blood checks at border crossings, airports, or even public buildings. If governments obtain and track our medical histories, they will know much more about us than whether or not we have COVID-19. Seeing Through Trump's Response The U.S. federal government's response to COVID-19 utilizes the authoritarian playbook. Scientists like Dr. Fauci are muzzled while Trump spews angry rhetoric, total fabrications, and rewritten narratives to make himself look better. Trump can usually avoid repercussions for his lying, but a mounting virus death-toll is one fact-check he cannot shrug off. In time, the truth about his management of the crisis will come out thanks to media reporting, whistle-blowers, and congressional investigations. Find out more: Thomas O. Melia is Washington Director at PEN America. Previously, he served in the Obama Administration as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, responsible for Europe and Eurasia, south and central Asia, and the Middle East, and as Assistant Administrator for Europe and Eurasia in the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) until January 2017. Melia is a monthly columnist for The American Interest and chair of the board of the Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED). He was also a Fellow with the Human Freedom Initiative at the George W. Bush Institute, helping to lead a bipartisan initiative to reinvigorate American leadership in defense of human rights and democracy at home and abroad. PEN America is a non-profit organization working at the crossroads between human rights and literature. They champion free speech around the world, celebrate creative expression, and defend the liberties that make it possible. You can follow Tom on Twitter @thomasomelia and PEN America @penamerica.

Recently, Mila sat down with other podcast hosts from our podcast network The Democracy Group, to discuss the impact COVID-19 is having on our democracy, vulnerable populations, and more. "COVID, the pandemic … has really brought to bear not just the inequities and the inequalities, but also the necessity to have a much more active sense of democracy as a verb — democracy as an action that we can all be part of." — Juleyka Lantigua-Williams, 70 Million Host: Richard Davies, Co-host, How Do We Fix It? @DaviesNow Guests: Mila Atmos, Host, Future Hindsight @milaatmos Juleyka Lantigua-Williams, Founder and CEO of Lantigua-Williams and Co., Creator and Executive Producer, 70 Million @JuleykaLantigua Carah Ong-Whaley, Associate Director at James Madison Center for Civic Engagement at James Madison University, Co-host, Democracy Matters @CarahOng Lee Drutman, Senior Fellow at New America, Co-host, Politics in Question @leedrutman

ExxonMobil's Knowledge Beginning in 1959, ExxonMobil became scientifically aware of the dangers of human-caused climate change. By the 1970s-80s, they had a detailed, precise understanding of climate change. Their peer-reviewed and well-respected internal research gave them access to government meetings and academic conferences. In turn, knowledge about the status of the science and policies helped guide and inform business decisions. Internal memos show that in response to the scientific evidence, executives chose to publicly spread uncertainty and denial. Advertorials ExxonMobil invented the advertorial, a paid advertisement that is written and presented like an editorial. This content ran every Thursday on the New York Times Opinion page beginning in 1972. Its longevity and proliferation make it one of the largest propaganda campaigns in history. Approximately 80% of the company's advertorials denied, obfuscated, or encouraged skepticism about climate science. During the same time that these public climate denial ads ran, the company's peer-reviewed academic literature accepted and acknowledged that global warming is real, human-caused, and solvable. Scientist-Activist Supran is a scientist and an activist, calling for MIT to divest from fossil fuels and organizing the first major scientist protest against the Trump administration. He believes that speaking truth to power about climate change is his civic duty, especially because he is a scientist. He quotes Einstein, who would agree: "Those who have the privilege to know, have the duty to act." Due to a long history of interest group pushing academics and scholars to be impartial, many scientists are reluctant to be activists. The stakes are too high for silence. Trustworthy climate news sources: Climate Feedback InsideClimate News The Guardian - Environment The New York Times – Climate and Environment Find out more: Geoffrey Supran is a Research Associate in the Department of the History of Science at Harvard University. Working alongside Professor Naomi Oreskes, he investigates the history of global warming politics; particularly the climate communications, denial, and delay tactics of fossil fuel interests. He is also a Postdoctoral Affiliate with Professor Jessika Trancik at the Institute for Data, Systems and Society at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Supran's academic publications include the first ever peer-reviewed analysis of ExxonMobil's 40-year history of climate change communications, which demonstrated that the company has misled the public. It was the seventh most talked-about climate change article of 2017, with global news coverage reaching a potential audience of half a billion people, and it was cited by Anderson Cooper during CNN's 2019 U.S. Democratic presidential Climate Town Hall. Supran has briefed U.S. Senators and Governors, testified as an expert witness to European (EU) Parliament and the Philippines Commission on Human Rights, and co-authored several amicus briefs in support of climate litigation. You can follow him on Twitter @GeoffreySupran.

Legacy of Secrecy Nuclear technology has a long history of secrecy, cover-up, and deceit from military officials and government leaders, starting with the creation of nuclear weapons. Secrecy has hampered scientists in conducting rigorous research and data collection. They are often faced with studying the effects of radiation after an accident, which means they lack baseline data for comparison. This is most notable in Chernobyl, where the surrounding exclusion zone is now teeming with wildlife. Scientists disagree whether the detected DNA changes in the animals are due to radiation or to natural evolution, and how harmful it is. A combination of disinformation, a lack of understanding, and fundamental disagreements about the danger posed by radiation feeds public skepticism of nuclear technology. Dangerous Waste Nuclear technology's longest-lasting legacy is radioactive waste. It produces plutonium, a highly radioactive isotope that takes thousands of years to decay. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that the world currently has about 550 tons of plutonium. Most of the waste sits in silos designed for temporary storage, which is expensive. We still need to find a way to treat, move, and bury it in a permanent storage space that is deep underground. The immense cost of waste management is one of the main reasons that nuclear reactors are being decommissioned. After deciding to abandon nuclear power, Germany is now struggling with its waste. Some of it is stored in salt mines that are not secure enough in the long term, and some is in the UK for treatment. It's unclear if Germany will take back the nuclear waste that is overseas. How the world will eventually safely maintain nuclear waste is an open question. Nuclear Disarmament The heart of Pearce's opposition to nuclear energy is the danger of nuclear proliferation. The creation of nuclear weapons is a Faustian pact that poses a vast and unnecessary risk to the world. The hydrogen bombs that were developed after WWII would kill millions of people instantly, which are now in silos all over the world, ready to be deployed. He argues that nuclear weapons are not a security measure, but instead create global insecurity. Every year they lie dormant, the chances they fall into the wrong hands increases. Nuclear weapons disarmament needs to be our highest priority, and should be achievable in the next 30 – 40 years. The only way to do so is by eliminating atomic technology, which also means eliminating nuclear power. Find out more: Fred Pearce is a freelance author and journalist based in London. He has reported on the environment, science, and development issues from 88 countries over the past 30 years. Trained as a geographer, he has been an environment consultant of New Scientist magazine since 1992. He writes regularly for The Guardian newspaper, including the weekly Greenwash column, and published a 12-part investigation of the 'Climategate' emails affair at the University of East Anglia. He is also a regular contributor to Yale University's prestigious e360 website. Fred is the author of numerous books, including Fallout: Disasters, Lies, and the Legacy of the Nuclear Age, and The Last Generation: How Nature Will Take Her Revenge for Climate Change. His books have been translated into at least 14 languages.

The Pacific Ocean is Safe After the Fukushima reactor accident, radiation leaked into the Pacific Ocean, sparking global worry. In the months after the accident, levels were high, but not high enough to cause marine life die-off. For the last five years, all fish caught off Japan has been below the radiation thresholds for consumption. Radioactive cesium levels have been low since 2014, and levels of radiation off the California coast are lower today than they were in the 1960s when the US detonated hydrogen bombs in the Marshall Islands. Swimming in the Pacific for eight hours every day is less risky than one dental x-ray. Our Radioactive Ocean A crowdsourced science campaign called Our Radioactive Ocean was created to measure ocean radiation at various points in the Pacific. Interested citizens collected ocean samples and sent them to Woods Hole to be analyzed. The campaign became a hit, and more than 300 data points have been plotted up and down the West Coast. More than 1 million people have visited their site. Once citizen scientists got involved in the project, they wanted to learn more and engaged their communities. Communities, like Laguna Beach, began to band together to pay for samples. The data used is credible and has resulted in at least one scientific paper. Thanks to the public nature of the effort, new data points are continuing to be analyzed today. Radioactive World Radiation is a naturally occurring phenomenon, and we live with it every day. Even without human interference, the ocean still has radiation because of dissolved radioactive agents found in salt. Radiation in small doses is natural and perfectly healthy. Living at a high altitude exposes you to cosmic radiation and flying from New York to Japan gives you a dose of radiation much higher than background levels. Living in New England exposes you to elevated levels of radiation thanks to the large amounts of granite, which releases it. Many foods, like bananas, have trace amounts of radiation. Getting a dental x-ray or CAT Scan gives you a dose of radiation. We live with radiation and should not be afraid of it, except in extremely high doses. Find out more: Ken Buesseler is a marine radiochemist who studies the fate and distribution of radioactive elements in the ocean at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. His lab has also been active in response to radioactivity released from disasters such as the impact of radioactivity released from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant, and from earlier sources such as Chernobyl or atomic weapons testing at the Marshall Islands. He created the Our Radioactive Ocean project, which uses citizen scientists to measure radiation levels on the West coast of United States. He also leads WHOI's Café Thorium, which analyzes marine samples for both natural and artificial radionuclides. You can follow him on Twitter @cafe_thorium.

Nuclear Power is Impractical Building nuclear power plants is extremely costly and time-consuming; projects are often plagued by cost overruns and construction delays. Between permitting, planning, and construction, it takes 10-19 years for a plant to become operational. To meet our climate goals, we need to transition 80% of our energy to carbon-free solutions by 2030. From a logistical standpoint, nuclear cannot become our carbon-free energy source because it will arrive too late. In addition, aging nuclear power plants become more expensive to maintain and operate, which necessitate additional subsidies. Maintenance requirements shut down the whole plant and energy production goes to zero during that time. Nuclear Technology Risks In addition to the practical barriers of building a nuclear grid, nuclear technology has inherent risks. Some of the radioactive nuclear waste takes hundreds of thousands of years to decay, posing long term problems for safe maintenance. The technology can and has been used for weapons proliferation. The catastrophic risk of a nuclear reactor meltdown is currently at 1.5%, which is astronomical. In comparison, we would not accept a 1.5% chance of planes crashing. The cost of cleanup for the Fukushima disaster alone has exceeded $500 billion, or more than $1 billion per reactor worldwide, which makes nuclear much more costly than many acknowledge. Electrifying our lives with renewable energy Transitioning to clean renewable energy and electrifying all sectors of the economy can achieve a savings in energy demand of 57%. The heating and cooling of buildings can be achieved through heat pumps; electric cars can replace fossil fuel models; high-temperature electric processes can be used in heavy industry. Clean energy electricity can be generated through large concentrated solar farms, offshore wind power, geothermal, and hydroelectric power. Sources like solar and wind can come online much faster than nuclear, cutting emissions more quickly and stay clean forever. Once electrification is widespread, it becomes easier to store excess power with batteries, hydroelectric reservoirs, and gravitational storage. Find out more: Mark Z. Jacobson is Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Senior Fellow of the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, and Director of the Atmosphere/Energy Program at Stanford University. His career has focused on better understanding air pollution and global warming problems and developing large-scale clean, renewable energy solutions to them. Toward that end, he has developed and applied three-dimensional atmosphere-biosphere-ocean computer models and solvers to simulate air pollution, weather, climate, and renewable energy. He has also developed roadmaps to transition countries, states, cities, and towns to 100% clean, renewable energy for all purposes and computer models to examine grid stability in the presence of high penetrations of renewable energy. You can follow him on Twitter @mzjacobson.

Stephen Pimpare is a nationally recognized expert on poverty and U.S. social policy. Hedebunks the idea that COVID is the great equalizer, and explains why immediate cash transfers are critical to mitigate the effects of the pandemic on the poor. Joe Huston is Managing Director of GiveDirectly, the first and largest non-profit organization that gives cash directly to people in poverty. He shares how they are reaching the needy and providing thousands with critical funds right now. Maria Foscarinis is the Founder and Director of the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty. We talk about successful strategies to house the homeless and give them cash, as well as special funding to address homelessness in the CARES Act. Robin Steinberg is the founder and CEO of The Bail Project. Her organization is doing the immense work to release as many Americans held on bail as possible at this time, what states are doing to help, and how decarceration is now quickly gaining traction around the country. Find out more: Stephen Pimpare is a nationally recognized expert on poverty, homelessness, and U.S. Social policy. He is also a Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire and teaches courses on American Politics and Public Policy. His most recent book is Ghettos, Tramps, and Welfare Queens: Down & Out on the Silver Screen, a history of poverty and homelessness in the movies. Follow him on Twitter @stephenpimpare. Joe Huston is the Managing Director of GiveDirectly, the first and largest non-profit organization that gives cash directly to people in poverty and that works to reshape the way we think about international donations. Follow GiveDirectly @GiveDirectly and Joe @JHust Maria Foscarinisis the founder and executive director of the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty, and has advocated for solutions to homelessness at the national level since 1985. Follow her on Twitter @MariaFoscarinis. Robin Steinberg is the founder and CEO of The Bail Project, an unprecedented national effort to combat mass incarceration by transforming the pretrial system in the U.S. Follow The Bail Project on Twitter @bailproject.

Green Power Nuclear energy offers large amounts of power, produces no carbon dioxide, uses a comparatively small amount of land, and runs around the clock. Although nuclear power produces hazardous waste, the amount of material and risk to civilians is small. The risk is hugely outweighed by the risk posed by climate change. According to Goldstein, nuclear power represents the best source of carbon-free energy available to us as we transition from fossil fuels. In the span of one decade, Sweden cut its emissions in half while also growing its economy, thanks to a large-scale nuclear program. Nuclear Waste or Air Pollution? Air pollution kills millions of people world-wide every year because of the particulate matter that coal-powered plants emit freely into the atmosphere. What people should be afraid of is coal, but what people are afraid of is nuclear power. The fear of radiation is exacerbated by disasters like Chernobyl and Fukushima, as well as generational trauma about the potential use of nuclear weapons in the 1950s to the 1970s. Although large amounts of radiation are fatal, we actually live safely with small, naturally occurring amounts every day. The stigma against nuclear power caused Germany to shutter its plants in favor of solar and wind. They replaced one green fuel source with another instead of replacing coal with a green fuel. Unfortunately, because Germany's renewables are not meeting demands for electricity, they are now burning more fossil fuels to fulfill that need. Small Modular Reactors Instead of giant nuclear plants, which can take decades to build, the future lies in small modular reactors. These new, pre-fabricated, transportable, and scalable reactors are in current development by the US and China. They are projected to be operational in the middle of the coming decade. These smaller reactors can be mass-produced and distributed to high-need areas. In addition, small modular reactors carry less stigma because of their size. The Chinese model can sit on a barge, be towed to a location, and immediately begin producing power. Find out more: Joshua Goldstein is professor emeritus of international relations at American University and a research scholar at University of Massachusetts, Amherst. He researches, writes, and speaks about global trends including war and society, economic forces, and world energy trends and climate change. Goldstein co-authored A Bright Future, How Some Countries Have Solved Climate Change and the Rest Can Follow. You can follow him on Twitter @GoldsteinJoshua.

What is Ecocide? The crime of ecocide is the "extensive loss, damage, or destruction of ecosystems such that their inhabitants can no longer enjoy life peacefully." Ecocide happens on a large scale; examples include the ravaging of the Brazilian rainforest, the consequences of widespread fracking, and toxic erosion from strip-mining. Corporations perpetrate almost all ecocide and millions of people are devasted by ecocide's effects every year. Currently, there is no legal pathway to compel corporations to stop committing ecocide. Criminalizing Ecocide The International Criminal Court oversees the prosecution of four crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression. During its inception, the crime of ecocide was proposed but never codified thanks to pushback from countries like the US, UK, France, and the Netherlands. All of them hold significant nuclear and fossil fuel interests. Since the ICC operates on a "one nation, one vote" policy, it is conceivable for small nations directly impacted by climate change to work together and criminalize ecocide, even if larger, fossil fuel burning countries oppose it. Criminalizing ecocide on an international level holds the world's worst polluters to account. Shifting Public Opinion Once something is outlawed, social stigma is quick to follow. Banning ecocide internationally, or even publicly considering doing so, leads to a shift in public opinion. As entire cultures become aware and fight against ecocide, many corporations will change their business models to meet public outcry. We already see this phenomenon around the world. Recently, the CEO of Siemens wrote a letter outlining the ways his company became greener but noted his legal duty was to his shareholders. Making ecologically devastating practices illegal will ensure that corporations change their polluting behavior. Find out more: Jojo Mehta is the co-founder and director of Earth Defense Integrity (EDI). EDI's international team is working with climate- and ecocide-vulnerable states which have the power to propose an Ecocide amendment to the Rome Statute, the governing document of The ICC. The International Criminal Court's annual Assembly in December is the critical forum for advancing this work. They have accompanied Small Island ("Great Ocean") Developing State representatives and helped amplify their voices and concerns there for four consecutive years, as the nations most impacted by climate emergency. You can follow her on Twitter @Jojo_Mehta.

Fighting for Climate Policy Dismantling the energy system is crucial to breaking the energy crisis. Implementing clean energy policies is the most effective way to change our current energy system and undo the playbook of the fossil fuel and utility industries. Citizens need to demand legislators to support green policies because a policy problem can only be fought with policy solutions. Mass public pressure, such as the youth protests led by Greta Thunberg, can disrupt the status quo and compel lawmakers to act. Policy Feedback Policy feedback is the idea that once policies are enacted, they reshape the next generation of politics. In the case of clean energy, the implementation of policies would kick start new industries and create jobs. As these industries become entrenched, they would defend the policies that created them and promote additional policy aimed at more green energy. Once this path dependence is created, a totally clean and renewable energy future is the result. Policy Retrenchment Fossil fuel and utility companies have immense power in state legislatures to reverse clean energy policies. Utilities around the country know how to run profitable power plants that burns fossil fuels and thus do not have incentives to switch to renewables. They fight against decarbonization by resisting implementation; rolling back existing guidelines for retrenchment; and even challenging pro-renewable candidates in primary races. Find out more: Leah Stokes an Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science and affiliated with the Bren School of Environmental Science & Management and the Environmental Studies Department at the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB). She is the author of the forthcoming book Short Circuiting Policy: Interest Groups and the Battle Over Clean Energy and Climate Policy in the American State. She works on energy, climate and environmental politics. Within American Politics, her work focuses on representation and public opinion; voting behavior; and public policy, particularly at the state level. Within environmental politics, she researches climate change, renewable energy, water and chemicals policy. She completed a PhD in Public Policy in the Department of Urban Studies and Planning's Environmental Policy & Planning group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT); received a masters from MIT's Political Science Department; and completed an MPA in Environmental Science & Policy at the School of International & Public Affairs (SIPA) and the Earth Institute at Columbia University. You can follow her on Twitter @leahstokes

Climate Justice Many low-income communities bear the brunt of industrial pollution or the harshest consequences of climate change. In order to address global warming in a meaningful way, we must also address systemic inequality. The Green New Deal offers a solution to both: transitioning to clean energy while also ensuring low-income communities get the funding they need, and blue-collar workers get good-paying jobs. Promoting Policy Climate Change is a global collective problem, and individual actions alone are not going to suffice to combat it. Currently, only the Democratic Party in the US is willing to acknowledge this reality and work towards enacting durable decarbonization policies. Therefore, voting for Democratic leaders is paramount in this year's election. Organizing, activism, and raising awareness should support and prioritize policy-making success. Indigenous Wisdom Indigenous peoples have deep insights as to how we can relate to the environment, such as in the management of fisheries and – more profoundly – in surviving a loss of their world. Colonization was an apocalyptic experience for them, yet many of these indigenous communities have endured, and some are even resurging today. As the climate crisis poses an existential threat, learning the history of First Nations people might help us understand what it means for humans to live through catastrophic destruction. Find out more: Julian Brave NoiseCat is Vice President of Policy & Strategy at Data for Progress; Change Director at The Natural History Museum; and a Fellow at Type Media Center & NDN Collective. The belief that Indigenous peoples can contribute to understanding and solving the world's most pressing challenges inspires his work. In 2019, NoiseCat helped lead a grassroots effort to bring an Indigenous canoe journey to San Francisco Bay to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the 1969 Alcatraz Occupation. He has been published in The New York Times, The New Yorker, Harper's, The Paris Review, The Guardian, and The Nation, among many others. Previously, he led 350.org's US policy work and was an Urban Fellow in the Commissioner's Office of the NYC Department of Housing Preservation & Development. He studied history at Columbia University and the University of Oxford, where he was a Clarendon scholar. He is a proud member of the Canim Lake Band Tsq'escen and a descendant of the Lil'Wat Nation of Mount Currie. You can follow him on Twitter @jnoisecat

Carbon Tax The climate crisis is a global collective problem that requires a collective global solution. Robust and bipartisan public policy must be at the center of any effort. Taylor argues that we can harness capitalism to mitigate global warming, and proposes a combination of legislation together with a carbon tax on producers. Taxing carbon at $45 a ton creates serious incentives for cities, corporations, and individuals to cut emissions. A carbon tax is a swift fix because it can pass more quickly than substantial regulations that may take years to go into effect. Changing Public Opinion Changing public opinion starts with changing the minds of thought leaders. Elite Republicans are thought leaders for their party, so it is paramount to convince them that risk-management on climate change is essential for human survival on Earth. Many conservative leaders acknowledge reality, but there is currently no political window for change. Taylor and the Niskanen Center are working behind the scenes to ensure Republicans and Democrats will pounce when the opportunity presents itself with a new administration in the White House. Facts Over Ideology Climate denial is mostly a psychological argument in the face of overwhelming facts and scientific consensus. It is a reaction to left-leaning environmental activists, who many on the right believe are anti-industry, anti-fossil fuel, and anti-consumerist. Deniers believe that the climate change movement exists to attack the free market instead of to mitigate global warming. Accepting the facts and evidence of a warming planet is critical for passing bipartisan climate change legislation. Find out more: Jerry Taylor is the President of the Niskanen Center. Prior to founding the Center in 2014, Taylor spent 23 years at the Cato Institute, where he served as director of natural resource studies, assistant editor of Regulation magazine, senior fellow, and then vice president. Before that, Taylor was the staff director for the energy and environment task force at the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Over the past two decades, he has been one of the most prominent and influential conservative voices in energy policy in Washington. He is also the author of numerous policy studies and has testified often before Congress. You can follow him on Twitter @Jerry_JTaylor

Use Your Purchasing Power Corporations only care about their bottom-line, so boycotting stores you don't believe in does make a difference. Taking responsibility for your purchases is one of the most powerful non-violent tools available. Naysayers argue that individual actions have no effect, but these actions reverberate and impact the decisions of others. Recently, clothes giant H&M found itself with a $4.3B surplus, thanks in large part to changing consumer demands. As purchasers become more environmentally friendly, they moved away from fast fashion en masse, forcing the retail chain to change their behavior. H&M now operates clothing recycling centers in many of its store in a bid to appear more environmentally friendly. While this is only once instance, consumers can apply this action to a wide variety of stores and businesses and enact change in them. The Impact of Fast Fashion Fast fashion relies on the same business model as fast food: a high volume of cheap product for a low cost. Cheap textiles and materials as well as cheap labor come at the expense of exploited workers and the environment. To grow the cotton for one white t-shirt requires 713 gallons of water; leather tanneries use toxic metals like mercury and lead to dye their materials; cheap synthetic materials leech plastic microbeads into our water-system and food sources, eventually finding their way into our bodies. On top of this, the amount of oil used to create plastic hangers, bags, and other plastic accessories coupled with the carbon created during transportation creates a significant impact on the environment and climate. The actual cost of production, which should include pollution and other hidden costs, are not included in the price of fast fashion items. Stay Small and Local Unfortunately, there is no way to be entirely carbon neutral. Producing waste is inherent to life. The problem of pollution is essentially one of scale: the bigger you or your company are, the more pollution you produce, regardless of whether you use sustainable practices. Resource distribution is incredibly unequal throughout the world, so it's important to use only what you need and not more. This way, we can ensure our resources do not go to waste and that others have access to what they need, as well. Staying local is also important to fighting climate change. A huge amount of carbon is produced in the transportation of goods. Consider using a local store to purchase new goods, instead of Amazon or eBay. Find out more: Jussara Lee has developed a small scale business operation in which luxury fashion and sustainable practices work in tandem. After graduating from the Fashion Institute of Technology, she launched her own label, which was embraced by prominent international retailers. For the past 18 years, she has worked to scale back the company to focus on making the best-fitting custom-made clothes with the gentlest impact on the environment. Hand-tailoring, local production, biodegradable materials, natural dyes form the core of her brand. The addition of mending services and a collection of transformed vintage clothes are part of her efforts to fit into a circular economic model, where the least amount of resources are consumed and waste is given a new purpose. You can follow her on Twitter @JussaraLeeNYC

Sustainable Food Supply We can create a sustainable food supply for future populations with technology and a change in diet. We cannot feed the world the way we feed North America because 40% of the world's arable land is currently used for food production. Most of that land is used to feed the animals that we then eat ourselves. Animal protein takes 10 times the amount of resources to grow than plant protein. We could reduce beef consumption by 70% if we replace hamburgers with artificial meats like the "impossible burger." Doing so would be a huge step for the environment. As technology improves and becomes less costly, artificial meats will become the norm. In addition, we need to focus on efficient, crop-specific farm practices, and shifting farm subsidies to vegetables instead of sugar. Mismanagement Humans have been mismanaging their food supplies for thousands of years. The Roman equivalent of vanilla, a plant called silphium, was prized so highly that Emperors hoarded it, yet it went extinct very rapidly due to mismanagement. Roughly two millennia later, clouds of billions of passenger pigeons ruled the American Midwest but went extinct in a short timespan because of overeating. More recently, the Canada's Atlantic Cod stock disappeared, again thanks to mismanagement. Humans struggle with large scale, long term management efforts to ensure that our foods survive. This is a skill we desperately need to learn in order to ensure that our food supplies do not disappear. Protecting What We Have Think of the natural world as a library where each species is a book. Thanks to our current environmental and agricultural practices, we are burning these books; and once a species is gone, we can't get it back. We need to focus on protecting what we have and managing our food supplies in a sustainable way. Ocean life is now most at risk from warming, pollution, and overfishing. A lot of ocean species travel in flocks like passenger pigeons, which makes them easy to kill. We need to stop eating the mega-fauna of the sea, like bluefin tuna and other big fish. Instead, we should focus on farmed fish and shellfish, like lobster and shrimp. Anyone who has an acre or two of land, should put in bee-friendly landscaping and avoid using chemicals that kill bees. Find out more: Lenore Newman holds a Canada Research Chair in Food Security and Environment at the University of the Fraser Valley, where she is an Associate Professor of Geography and the Environment. Her opinion pieces on the future of farmland use and other food-related issues have been published widely, including in The Globe and Mail, the Vancouver Sun, and Georgia Straight. She holds a PhD in Environmental Studies from York University. Her current research focuses on three main areas: (1) Technology and the future of food, including the evolution of the food system including bioengineering, cultured meat, dietary trends and indoor agriculture; (2) Agricultural land use policy, including agricultural land preservation, agriculture on the rural/urban fringe, and global land use patterns; and (3) Place making through food and agriculture, including direct marketing, edge city zoning, and culinary tourism experiences. In 2014, Lenore was inducted into the Royal Society of Canada's College of New Scholars, Artists, and Scientists. She has authored over forty academic papers and reports in her areas of research. She is particularly proud of her work on foraged foods and on the impact of climate change on cuisine. You can follow Lenore on Twitter @DrLenoreNewman.

Nonviolent Social Movement Through non-violent social movements, we can demand meaningful change in the political and economic calculus for polluters. Climate strikes, extinction rebellions, and concerted efforts to stop devastating environmental policies have inspired a new generation of activists. The successful opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline showed that people could stand up to oil companies, and win. By stopping or delaying new fossil fuel projects, renewables have a better chance to take hold and in the meantime the technology has time to get cheaper and better. The divestment movement is another key piece of non-violent activism. Divestments from fossil fuels now total more than $12 trillion, and has become a material risk for those businesses. Reducing Our Carbon Footprint We must all address our individual carbon footprint in order to solve climate change. One Vermont family reduced their carbon footprint by 88% overnight. With the help of Green Mountain Utility, they fully insulated their house and installed high-efficiency air source heat pumps and solar panels. Even after including the costs of new appliances and insulation, their energy bills were still lower than before. We can all do similar makeovers because this technology is widely available at places like Home Depot. The technology and science to move toward carbon-neutrality already exist, we just need to use them. What if? Oil giant Exxon knew as early as the mid-1980s that climate change was real and man-made. Exxon was so aware of the impending crisis that they started building their offshore drilling rigs to compensate for the rise in sea levels that they knew was coming. Instead of telling the public, they hid their findings and denied climate change. McKibben wonders what the world would be like if they had been honest and had been part of the solution. His hypothesis is that the price of renewables, such as solar panels and wind turbines, would have fallen much earlier; new oil and gas exploration would have stopped; homes would be better insulated; and that a modest price on carbon would have been enacted. The result? A dramatically less polluted planet and a much different economy. Had we started earlier to combat warming, course correction would have been both easier and less costly. Find out more: Bill McKibben is a legendary environmentalist, author, and educator whose 1989 book The End of Nature is regarded as the first book for a general audience about climate change. He has written dozens of books, is a staff writer at The New Yorker, and founded 350.org, the first planet-wide, grassroots climate change movement. The Schumann Distinguished Scholar in Environmental Studies at Middlebury College and a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, he was the 2013 winner of the Gandhi Prize and the Thomas Merton Prize, and holds honorary degrees from 18 colleges and universities. Foreign Policy named him to their inaugural list of the world's 100 most important global thinkers, and the Boston Globe said he was "probably America's most important environmentalist." In 2014, he was awarded the Right Livelihood Prize, sometimes called the 'alternative Nobel.' A former staff writer for the New Yorker, he writes frequently for a wide variety of publications around the world, including the New York Review of Books, National Geographic, and Rolling Stone. He lives in the mountains above Lake Champlain with his wife, the writer Sue Halpern, where he spends as much time as possible outdoors. In 2014, biologists honored him by naming a new species of woodland gnat — Megophthalmidia mckibbeni — in his honor. You can follow Bill on Twitter @billmckibben and 350.org @350.

The UN's Sustainable Development Agenda The United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda for 2030 lists 17 goals designed to improve human well-being, while also managing the Earth's resources for the future. We have been moving further from completing our environmental goals every year because well-being comes at the expense of the global environment. The sustainable development goals are a set of tools to maximize human well-being and minimize the negative effects of increased development. For instance, making sure everyone in the world has access to electricity is a well-being goal, and making sure that energy is clean is an environmental goal. Resources as Money We currently undervalue the use of natural resources because our economic model is designed to maximize profits, not protect the environment. Prices need to accurately reflect the reality that these resources are finite and must be used as efficiently as possible. No one uses more money than necessary to purchase a good or service, but all of us use more resources than necessary to maintain our lifestyle. We are able to regulate a global economy; we should also be able to regulate the global commodities market of resources. Tipping Points There are two types of tipping points in the climate change debate: environmental and social. Environmental tipping points include scenarios like losing all of the ice on the North Pole, which makes climate change much worse. There are also tipping points in social systems, such as the dramatic fall in smoking, or the use of seatbelts in cars. People can change, and consequently, societies can change very quickly. If we can manifest social tipping points around climate change that impact governance, our economic systems, our behavior, and our technology, we can mitigate the damage caused by climate change, and hopefully avoid the most devastating tipping points in our environment. Find out more: Katherine Richardson is the Leader of the Sustainability Science Centre at the University of Copenhagen and ​​​a Professor of Biological Oceanography at the Center for Macroecology, Evolution, and Climate. She is also a member of the 15-person panel that wrote and delivered the 2030 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. You can follow her on Twitter @KRichardsonC.

The end of welfare Welfare ceased being guaranteed after reform in 1996. Although the safety net for the working class was strengthened through tax credits, the safety net for those who are jobless disappeared. In its current state, the welfare system is overwhelming and underfunded. States are given block grants that they can spend at their discretion. For example, Louisiana spends its money on anti-abortion clinics. As a result, over the course of a year, about 3.5 million children live in households with virtually no cash income for at least 3 months. Cash is king Cash has the ultimate function: it can be used to pay rent, utilities, food, school supplies, and more. Although food stamps (SNAP) and Medicaid help needy families, these cashless forms of assistance cannot address other necessities in life. Access to cash can be pivotal to keeping a job – to fill your car with gas so you can go to work – or a roof over your head while you look for a new job after being downsized. The poor are true Americans America's poor are the very embodiment of American ideals. Living in poverty is incredibly complex, a daily challenge to which the poor rise. They take pride in their work and find purpose at the workplace. They are hard-working, resourceful, and enterprising. Poor families spend their money wisely to keep their children fed and sheltered, and they stretch every dollar to make ends meet. Find out more: Kathryn Edin is one of the nation's leading poverty researchers, working in the domains of welfare and low-wage work, family, life, and neighborhood contexts through direct, in-depth observations of the lives of low-income populations. A qualitative and mixed-method researcher, she has taken on key mysteries about the urban poor that have not been fully answered by quantitative work, such as how do single mothers possibly survive on welfare? Why don't more go to work? She has authored 8 books and some 60 journal articles. $2 a Day: The Art of Living on Virtutally Nothing in America, co-authored with Luke Shaefer, was met with wide critical acclaim. It was included in the NYT 100 Notable Books of 2015, cited as "essential reporting about the rise in destitute families." You can follow Kathryn on Twitter @KathrynEdin

Empowering citizens Many Americans are unsure of how their government works. Civic education is the manual for democracy, which Civics 101 offers in the form of a popular podcast. Over the last hundred years, the United States became more democratic through the activism and litigation of concerned and well-educated citizens. Still, some unfairness in our system prevails. One important holdover from the institution of slavery is the Electoral College, which was originally designed to grant outsized electoral power to slaveholding states. The system continues to give about one third of American voters an advantage at the expense of the majority. Our responsibility is to understand the rules, participate, and empower ourselves to make this democracy work us. Undermining the Press The President is allowed to say whatever he wants about the press as a private citizen because of his First Amendment protections. However, the President cannot use the power of the federal government to exact reprisals against the press. For instance, when the White House revoked press passes earlier this year, it contravened the Constitution. Never before has a President undermined and used retributive action against the press like this, and other countries are taking note. Repressive measures like these come directly from an authoritarian playbook, and according to PEN America, the number of journalists jailed worldwide for "fake news" tripled last year because of it. America was once the moral leader on free speech issues around the world, but the current administration's repressive tactics are withering that leadership. Technology for Democracy Democracy Works remedies some of the most pervasive and mundane reasons we don't vote. TurboVote is a tool that enables online voter registration, sends out election day reminders, and even provides absentee ballots. Those mailed-in ballots are then tracked by the Ballot Scout initiative. The Voting Information Project produces the polling place and ballot data that is then used by Google and get-out-the-vote drives. By using current technology to take the hassle of voting out of our busy lives, the initiatives of Democracy Works are building a more engaged society. Citizens' forum Deliberative mini publics innovate democracy by engaging citizens in constructive dialogue about the issues facing society. While many in parliament assumed citizens would always favor more spending and lower taxes, it turned out that voters who were presented with detailed information came to develop nuanced policy positions. After listening to presentations by experts, they actually favored higher taxes in certain areas and reached complex compromises about government spending. By doing so, they proved to lawmakers and skeptics that ordinary Irish citizens could be trusted with vital policy work. Find out more: Future Hindsight is a weekly podcast that aims to spark civic engagement through in-depth conversations with citizen changemakers. American democracy is a living, breathing mechanism whose well-being deserves to be cultivated and protected, and now more than ever, the need to be an engaged citizen is critical. We explore how each of us has the power to shape our society and fulfill our shared civic responsibility. You can follow us on Twitter @futur_hindsight and our host Mila Atmos @milaatmos

Focus on Violence First Abt's central thesis for solving violence in urban areas is fairly straightforward: focus on the violence—and not other factors—first. Exposure to violence may be the central mechanism that keeps poor children poor because it inhibits their ability to escape poverty. Violence occupies the brain with lifelong repercussions. Studies have shown elevated rates of cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses based on childhood trauma. Trauma also impacts the ability to sleep, focus, and behave, all of which impact academic and job performances. By reducing violence first, we can provide a measure of safety and stability, which makes it easier to improve education, health outcomes, and attract business investments in a community. Focused, Balanced, and Fair Successful urban violence reduction efforts need to be focused, balanced, and fair. Urban crime "sticks" to certain locations, such as a liquor store or a gas station; certain high-risk individuals; and certain behaviors, such as the illegal possession of weapons. Tightly focusing on high risk areas, behaviors, and people, is key to reducing violence. A balanced mix of tactics includes increased policing as well as increased violence prevention programs. This carrot-and-stick method offers success consistent with human nature. Fairness builds trust between law enforcement and marginalized communities. When people don't trust law enforcement and institutions, they're less likely to use them to solve disputes, leading to an increasing cycle of violence. Law enforcement also overburdens many of these communities with constant policing – think stop and frisk – but underserves them because they are still not safe. Targeting Behavior The people who are on the giving or receiving end of violent urban crime are usually heavily traumatized individuals. Constant trauma and violence lead to a condition known as hypervigilance, an elevated flight-or-fight response. Those who are hypervigilant can go from zero to 60 in the blink of an eye, which makes it difficult to function in a normal setting. By targeting trauma-caused behavior through cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), we can help them achieve the results they want. CBT addresses anger management, interpersonal problem-solving, and future orientation issues. It's hard to work with a young man who cannot visualize that actions today might have long ranging consequences when he doesn't believe that he's going to live longer than another two or three years. Once these behaviors are identified and addressed, opportunities such as job placements are easier to utilize, and success is easier to achieve. Find out more: Thomas Abt is a Senior Fellow at the Council on Criminal Justice, and was previously Senior Research Fellow at Harvard University's Center for International Development. He formerly served as Deputy Secretary for Public Safety under New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, Chief of Staff to the Office of Justice Programs at the United States Department of Justice, and founding member of the Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative. Bleeding Out is his first book, focusing on evidence-informed approaches to reduce urban violence. It argues the best way to reduce violence is through direct action against violence first, before treating deeply rooted societal issues like poverty. You can follow Thomas on Twitter @Abt_Thomas

The Cost of Human Capital Meritocracy gives the illusion that we are all equally competing at a level playing field. The reality is that the elite is able to purchase better education, which means they are more qualified when it comes to college admissions and high-income jobs. By heavily investing in education and training, elites build human capital within themselves. They become superordinate workers who are paid enormous wages. The flip side is that human capital enslaves us because we have to yield intensive and alienated labor. In order to maintain status in the elite and reap the benefits of the capital invested in them, meritocrats must work continuously at the highest paying jobs they can find. A member of the elite works punishingly long hours under intense pressure. While meritocracy allows some to become extremely wealthy, they do so at the cost of their own freedom, and ultimately their own happiness. Meritocracy Erodes Democracy Meritocracy erodes democracy in two key ways. First, meritocracy frames the reality of systemic failure to provide economic opportunity as the failure of individuals to measure up in society. It tells the person who didn't get into Harvard or get a job at Google that if only they worked harder or were smarter, they would have succeeded, when in fact they are victims of structural exclusion. This creates deep disaffection among those who are unfairly excluded, who then begin to question the underlying institutions that hold American society together. Populists and nativists are able to harness this sentiment, blame 'the other,' rise to power, and attack democratic norms. Second, meritocracy creates a massively wealthy elite minority who can legally buy influence in media, politics, and even reduce tax obligations. Between the alienation of the middle and lower classes, and the outsized power of the elite, meritocracy has been one of the leading causes of the erosion of democracy. Solving the Meritocracy Trap Meritocracy compounds inequality through unequal access to quality education. Expensive, elite schools prepare those who can afford them for the most selective universities and then high-paying jobs. In addition, because of the way social security tax works, employers now have a huge tax incentive to hire one superordinate worker and robots as opposed to more middle income workers. Markovits proposes two policies to address these problems: expanding elite education and extending the social security tax. Opening up elite institutions will make them less exclusive and more accessible, providing more opportunities to the middle class to higher income. Currently, the social security tax is capped at $137,700, which means that the person who makes $150,000 and the person who makes $2,000,000 pay the same amount in social security tax. Eliminating the cap would raise almost 1.5% of GDP in steady state, which could help fund expanded education. Find out more: Daniel Markovits is Guido Calabresi Professor of Law at Yale Law School and Founding Director of the Center for the Study of Private Law. Markovits works in the philosophical foundations of private law, moral and political philosophy, and behavioral economics. The Meritocracy Trap is his latest book. It places meritocracy at the center of rising economic inequality and social and political dysfunction, and provides solutions to these problems. You can follow Daniel on Twitter @DSMarkovits

Agreeing on the basic fundamentals The need for positive, bipartisan discourse is acute. In today's politically charged environment, it's important to disagree in a constructive and civil way. The first step in good-faith dialogue is to start by finding fundamental policies or values you both agree on and build on them. In fact, most Americans hold the same ideals, but value them differently. Mike and his conservative co-host Jay both value justice and freedom, though to different degrees. Since they both agree justice and freedom are important, fair and rational debate becomes much easier. Equally important are the ability to keep an open mind, and to be able to see and understand other perspectives. The System is Working The Trump Administration is undeniably attacking institutions in a way that we've never seen from the executive branch before. While this is deeply worrying, the good news is that our system appears to be bearing the brunt of his attacks well. For instance, the election process worked in 2018, giving Democrats the House, which in turn led to renewed scrutiny and accountability in the form of impeachment. Many of Trump's promises have not been enacted because parts of our governmental system have worked correctly and stopped them. Trump has been frustrated in many areas, just as his predecessors were. The fact that all presidents cannot achieve all of their goals is a sign that the system is working and continues to work. Returning Debate to the Center Our media landscape often showcases the two political extremes as the dominant modes of American political thought. While this helps ratings, it is not the case. Most Americans fall somewhere in the middle of the political spectrum, where there is much overlap and common ground to be found. They are not deeply ideological, and are not interested in big things, whether that's a massive wall or a complete remaking of the American health care system. Healthy political discourse needs to keep in mind that policy options should serve the majority of the country, and not just the ten percent of extreme voters on either side. By elevating these center-oriented voices, bipartisan debate becomes easier, and solutions are easier to create. Find out more: Michael Baranowski is a political scientist with a Ph.D. from the University of Kentucky. His focus is on American political institutions, public policy, and media. He is a co-founder of the Politics Guys and serves as one of the show's liberal hosts. The Politics Guys is a podcast for bipartisan, rational, and civil debate on American politics and policy. It features independent and bipartisan political commentary, as well as interviews with liberal and conservative experts and policymakers. The Politics Guys strives to balance liberal and conservative voices equally. You can follow the Politics Guys on Twitter @PoliticsGuys

The First Amendment The First Amendment protects four types of freedom of expression: freedom of speech, belief, assembly, and the ability to petition the government for a redress of grievances. It states that "Congress shall make no law" to infringe on these four freedoms. Over time, "Congress" has been extended to include the executive branch, as well as state and local governments. The court's view of the First Amendment is extremely broad, which means that America protects more speech than any other country in the world. Defamation, harassment, and speech that incites imminent violence are the only kinds of speech that are not protected. The First Amendment also does not extend to private institutions such as universities or companies like Facebook. Undermining the Press The President is allowed to say whatever he wants about the press as a private citizen because of his First Amendment protections. However, the President cannot use the power of the federal government to exact reprisals against the press. For instance, when the White House revoked press passes earlier this year, it contravened the Constitution. Never before has a President undermined and used retributive action against the press like this, and other countries are taking note. Repressive measures like these come directly from an authoritarian playbook, and according to PEN America, the number of journalists jailed worldwide for "fake news" tripled last year because of it. America was once the moral leader on free speech issues around the world, the current administration's repressive tactics are withering that leadership. Protected Speech The problems of hateful speech and fake news are uniquely difficult because in most cases they are protected by the First Amendment. While hateful speech is protected by the government, private institutions are allowed to police content on their own platforms or campuses. The ability to share unpopular ideas should coexist in a way that still allows for open debate, but that is not always the case. At dozens of campuses, controversial speakers who are invited to speak about their views were shut down by students. Fake news poses a threat by eroding the facts democracy is based on. We cannot let the government control it by shutting down websites because they may start shutting down legitimate sites—such as climate change websites—based on political ideology. Instead, we can counter it by educating the public about how to identify fake news, and taking steps as a society to disavow propaganda and misinformation. Find out more: Suzanne Nossel is the CEO of PEN America, which she has run since 2013. In that time, she has doubled the budget, staff, and membership. She previously served as COO of Human Rights Watch, Executive Director of Amnesty International USA, and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations. PEN America is a non-profit organization working at the crossroads between human rights and literature. They champion free speech around the world, celebrate creative expression, and defend the liberties that make it possible. You can follow Suzanne on Twitter @SuzanneNossel, and PEN America @PENAmerica.

Law as a Framework Equality creates a framework for how we should treat others, and how we should expect to be treated by others. The institution of laws enforces the rules of equality within that framework. Law helps shape the conversations in public life and in politics about what can, and cannot, be done when dealing with more abstract concepts like fairness, freedom, and equality. Law also acts as dispute resolution when we see our intangible values being infringed upon. It helps create compromises and resolutions to problems that arise from differing values, viewpoints, and ideologies. When the Law Fails Law can fail when judges fail to empathize with someone's complaint about equality, such as in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson. Judges struck down a complaint because they thought the plaintiff was imagining his own discrimination. Their failure was one of empathy, but the legacy was one of racism and segregation. Law also fails when judges ratify policies that make broad judgements about social or racial groups. By doing this, they legitimize incorrect and dangerous ideas. They end up establishing a policymaker's incorrect judgement as law, as though it had been correct. This in turn encourages other people to increase their attacks on these groups, because they see their own views as legitimized by the law. Reframing the Debate When fighting against policies that infringe on equality, consider more than one angle of argument. For instance, Trump's Muslim ban was clearly an attempt to disenfranchise immigrants from Muslim majority countries, but it never actually mentioned Muslims. This made judges uneasy about declaring it discriminatory on the basis of religion. Instead, those opposed re-framed the debate around another American value: fairness. By arguing the ban impacted many residents already in the US with green cards, it violated their right to expect free and fair treatment. This argument was successful enough in court that the Trump Administration had to completely rewrite the ban, leaving out new countries and providing exceptions benefiting hundreds of thousands of people. Find out more: Robert L. Tsai is a Professor of Law at American University. He is also an acclaimed essayist and author, focusing on constitutional law and history. He is the author of three books: Practical Equality: Forging Justice in a Divided Nation (W.W. Norton Feb. 19, 2019), America's Forgotten Constitutions: Defiant Visions of Power and Community (Harvard 2014), and Eloquence and Reason: Creating a First Amendment Culture (Yale 2008). You can follow him on Twitter @robertltsai.

Citizens' forum The Irish Citizens' Assembly was formed in response to the severe social and economic crisis caused by the global financial meltdown of 2008. A group of political scientists, led by Jane Suiter and David Farrell, advocated for citizens to be included in debates about the necessary political reforms to address the failures of the executive. Deliberative mini publics innovate democracy by engaging citizens in constructive dialogue about the issues facing society. While many in parliament assumed citizens would always favor more spending and lower taxes, it turned out that voters who were presented with detailed information came to develop nuanced policy positions. After listening to presentations by experts, they actually favored higher taxes in certain areas and reached complex compromises about government spending. By doing so, they proved to lawmakers and skeptics that ordinary Irish citizens could be trusted with vital policy work. The case of abortion rights The first Citizens' Assembly considered the issue of overturning the ban on abortion in the Irish constitution. Over the course of five weekend-long sessions, everyday citizens heard arguments from impartial experts, medical professionals, as well as activists on both sides. At the end of their deliberations, they produced a series of recommendations, which were sent to the Irish Parliament in June 2017. 64% of the Citizens' Assembly participants recommended that abortion be legalized. In turn, Parliament put the question of legalizing abortion to the Irish public in a nationwide referendum in May 2018. It passed with 66% of the vote. The result indicates that the counsel of the Citizens' Assembly was an accurate and meaningful representation of the Irish electorate. Since then the Assembly has given policy recommendations on issues such as how the state can make Ireland a leader in tackling climate change and how to respond to the challenges and opportunities of an aging population. Ireland is a Beacon for Democracy The Assembly has strengthened trust and communication on both sides of the democratic equation – citizens and politicians – and has bolstered the legitimacy of democracy at a time when democracies around the world are under attack. Through the innovation of using citizens' assemblies, the Irish experience is showing a path to overcome the problems of democracy in decline. Politicians learned about the willingness and capacity of everyday people to make serious, nuanced policy choices for the good of the country. The Assembly has led many in Parliament to consider the advice of constituents in a new way, and to seek advice from their voters. Conversely, Irish citizens see the Assembly as a way to augment their democracy beyond voting. Other countries have noticed this. At the launch of Scotland's Citizens' Assembly earlier this year, the constitutional minister for the Scottish government praised Ireland's success as an example to follow. Find out more: David Farrell and Jane Suiter have been collaborating in research focused on Irish citizens' assemblies for over 10 years. During the economic crisis of 2008-2009, they led a group of political scientists who proposed that citizens should be brought into the heart of debates over constitutional and political reform. This culminated in the establishment of We the Citizens – Ireland's first national citizens' assembly. In 2012 the Irish government established the Convention on the Constitution: David and Jane led the academic advisory group. This was followed, in 2016, by the Irish Citizens' Assembly: David and Jane secured Irish Research Council funding to provide research leadership. David Farrell is Head of the School of Politics and International Relations at University College Dublin. He is also a member of the Royal Irish Academy. He is formerly the research leader of the Irish Citizens' Assembly and currently a member of the Stewarding Group of the Scottish Citizens' Assembly. Jane Suiter is Director of the Institute for Future Media and Journalism at Dublin City University as well as an Associate Professor in the School of Communications. She helped found the Irish Citizens' Assembly (2016-2018) and the Irish Constitutional Convention (2012-2014). She is also a founding member of We the Citizens (2011), Ireland's first deliberative experiment. The Irish Citizens' Assembly is an exercise in deliberative democracy, placing the citizen at the heart of important legal and policy issues facing Irish society. With the benefit of expert, impartial, and factual advice, 100 citizen members have considered the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution (on abortion); making Ireland a leader in tackling climate change; challenges and opportunities of an aging population; manner in which referenda are held; and fixed term parliaments. US-based deliberative democracy projects mentioned in the episode are: James Fishkin, Center for Deliberative Democracy at Stanford University Kevin Este

Responsible Statecraft Responsible statecraft should derive from serious consideration of the public interest, with robust public debate and a strong role for Congress. The Quincy Institute believes that democratizing US foreign policy to include diverse points of view from minority, immigrant, and outsider communities – in addition to foreign policy experts – will lead to more vigorous diplomacy and less military intervention. Responsible statecraft would also require Congress to take its war-making responsibility back from the Executive Branch. US foreign policy should engage the world with peaceful discourse. Military Hegemony In the aftermath of the Second World War, the US and the Soviet Union embarked on a decades-long arms race. During this time, the American military-industrial complex grew to become a vital tool of national security. When the USSR collapsed, the US became the world's only superpower. In order to secure unipolar primacy, America pursued greater military hegemony and dominance over potential rivals. Regional conflicts were viewed as existential threats to American democracy, embroiling us in needless conflict around the world. America's imperial overstretch is a result of its militarized foreign policy that believes dominating a region by force, such as in the Middle East, can lead to stability. Unfortunately, the opposite has occurred. Instability in the Middle East has led to a vicious cycle of violence and built permanent enmities worldwide. Vigorous Diplomacy The American diplomatic corps has been devastated under the current administration, coming at the heels of years-long decline. US foreign policy has repeatedly prioritized military force over diplomacy, espousing the idea of "peace through strength." This rigid and devastating doctrine has resulted in near-endless war. Instead of being neutral, the US is often on one side of a conflict and hence cannot be a mediator. As we face the climate emergency and other transnational problems, the US must prioritize rebuilding the State Department and investing in more vigorous diplomacy. American power and influence should be wielded to resolve conflicts, end wars, and enhance peace. Find out more: Stephen Wertheim is Deputy Director of Research and Policy at the Quincy Institute. He is also a Research Scholar at the Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies at Columbia University. He specializes in the role of US policy on the global stage, from the late nineteenth century to the present. The Quincy Institute promotes ideas that move U.S. foreign policy away from endless war and toward vigorous diplomacy in the pursuit of international peace. It launched on December 4, 2019. You can follow Stephen on Twitter @stephenwertheim and the Quincy Institute @QuincyInst.

Investigations Get Results Since 1957, BGA investigations have uncovered corruption and unfair practices throughout Chicago and the state of Illinois. A recent investigation of police shootings in predominantly African-American neighborhoods of Cook County found that of 113 shootings over seven years, none led to disciplinary action. After the findings were published, a state law was enacted requiring an investigation each time a police officer discharges their weapon. BGA also investigated and exposed the corruption of Alderman Burke in the 14th Ward of Chicago, who is now under federal indictment on multiple charges. When governments are faced with evidence of corruption they must — and usually do — act quickly to correct it. Good governance Advocacy for good governance goes well beyond exposing corruption. The BGA's policy team recommends public policies for more transparency, accountability, and efficiency. Marie Dillon, the Policy Director, participated in the mayoral transition to help newly elected Mayor Lori Lightfoot transition into office and to help her staff develop ethics reform goals. The BGA is also tracking how the new mayor's actions measure up against BGA's agenda. The combination of advocacy for sound public policy and government oversight through investigative journalism makes it possible for BGA to push for effective government reform. Getting People Engaged Voting is still the ultimate tool of accountability. To that end, a big part of BGA's civic engagement effort is to empower citizens to participate in their democracy. The way that government treats its citizens is one of the most important factors in the daily quality of life, from the safety of the roads to the quality of public schools. When citizens have little faith in their government, or see their government as unresponsive to their needs, the social contract breaks down. In the last city-wide election, BGA published stories and candidate profiles, as well as where to vote and how to vote. Good governance helps people see their investment in voting, in paying taxes, and participating in their communities as worthwhile, and become even more engaged. Find out more: David Greising is the President and CEO of the Better Government Association. Greising spent 25 years as a high-profile local and national journalist, and served as the Chicago Tribune's business columnist for more than a decade. He also recently served as the Midwest bureau chief for Reuters. The Better Government Association was founded in 1923 as a voter advocacy and election reform group. Their mission evolved in the 1950s to include investigative journalism. Since then, they have produced hundreds of investigative reports outlining corruption and other government shortcomings, resulting in lasting legislative change in the state of Illinois and city of Chicago. You can follow David on Twitter @dgreising and the BGA @bettergov.

Technology for Democracy Democracy Works remedies some of the most pervasive and mundane reasons we don't vote. TurboVote is a tool that enables online voter registration, sends out election day reminders, and even provides absentee ballots. Those mailed-in ballots are then tracked by the Ballot Scout initiative. The Voting Information Project produces the polling place and ballot data that is then used by Google and get-out-the-vote drives. By using current technology to take the hassle of voting out of our busy lives, the initiatives of Democracy Works are building a more engaged society. Partnering for Success Democracy Works collaborates with voters, state partners, and corporations to create more successful elections. Since being founded in 2012, TurboVote has registered over 7 million new voters, with 2.5 million in 2018 alone. Moreover, 63% of them were millennials or younger. Successful voter registration came through heavy reliance on partnerships, including with over 130 universities and Snapchat. When Facebook reminds you to vote, it's because of a TurboVote partnership. The Voting Information Project partnership with Google provides accurate polling locations and ballot information. Partnerships with 46 states help streamline the election and voting processes. TurboVote Challenge The TurboVote Challenge is the premier corporate coalition championing civic engagement in America. Its goal is to reach 80% voter turnout by 2024. In order to achieve record-breaking voter turnout, we cannot rely on the government and politicians alone. Instead, everyone must play a part and treat everyone like citizens and voters. Learning institutions need to register their students; companies need to work to motivate both employees and customers; and everyday citizens need to vote and encourage others to vote as well. Democracy is strongest when we are all participating and voting. Find out more: Seth Flaxman co-founded Democracy Works while studying at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. The Democracy Works' tool TurboVote has been used by more than 7 million Americans to register to vote, and provides a suite of other tools to simplify voting for everyday citizens. Democracy Works also started the Voting Information Project, a widely accessible public information project designed to remove voting barriers by providing easily searchable polling place locations, ballot information, and other official election information. Thanks to a partnership with Google, the VIP is used by millions of voters around the country. Seth earned an undergraduate degree from Columbia University and was student body president there. In 2011, he was honored as one of Forbes magazine's '30 Under 30' in the field of law and policy. Seth is also a Draper Richards Kaplan entrepreneur and Ashoka Fellow. You can follow him on Twitter @Sethflaxman, Democracy Works @demworksinc, TurboVote @TurboVote, and The Voting Information Project @VotingInfo

Protecting our Elections Most Americans take for granted that our elections will be free and fair. However, this would not be the case without the rigorous efforts of dedicated non-profits, citizens, and volunteers. Organizations like the Lawyers' Committee work year-round to protect our elections from internal interference using a variety of tools such as a voter hotline (866-OUR-VOTE), digital outreach, physical field programs, and litigation when states enact unfair or discriminatory voting practices. Legitimate elections are the result of passionate citizens and organized civic engagement. Attacks on Democratic Infrastructure The Lawyers' Committee started its Election Protection program in 2002 in order to combat increasing attacks on election infrastructure at national and state levels. The most notable of these attacks was the 2013 Shelby County v. Holder Supreme Court Case, which struck down a key portion of the Voting Rights Act that had required districts with a history of voter discrimination to seek federal authorization for any changes in voting laws or procedures. Since then, 14 states have instituted new voting restrictions, and more than 1,000 polling locations have closed around the country. Restrictions like this make it harder for many to vote, alienating them and corroding the foundation of our democracy. Restrictions and Interpretations New laws—like Texas's former voter ID law that banned student IDs, but allowed concealed carry permits—are not the only way states can suppress voting. Some states simply interpret existing laws in a new way. The National Voter Registration Act contains a list maintenance provision on how to remove voters who have moved or died, which some states have interpreted as a way to aggressively purge voters who still live in the jurisdiction. In Husted v. Philip Randolph Institute, the Supreme Court ruled that Ohio is allowed to purge voters who have not voted in two years and have not responded to a change of residence notice. Election protection challenges voter suppression in new laws as well as unfair interpretations of existing ones. Find out more: Marcia Johnson-Blanco is the co-Director of the Lawyers' Committee's Voting Rights Project. She manages the Project's programmatic and advocacy portfolios, and also leads the Election Protection Program. The program was started in 2002 to combat voter suppression and disenfranchisement, which includes tools such as the voter hotline (866-OUR-VOTE), on-site election protection services, and litigation against discriminatory laws and tactics. Johnson-Blanco is a widely-recognized voting rights leader, and served as the deputy director of the National Commission on the Voting Rights Act in 2005. She holds degrees from Georgetown and Villanova, and serves as a taskforce co-chair at the US Human Rights Network. You can follow her on Twitter @mfjblanco, and the Election Protection program @866OURVOTE.

Civic education for all Many Americans are unsure of how their government works. Civic education is the manual for democracy, and Civics 101 offers it in the form of a popular podcast. Civic learning is a unifier that promotes democratic ideas and a more connected populace. In fact, listeners of the podcast span across the ideological spectrum, equally motivated to learn all about how they can utilize our democracy. Civics 101 also produces classroom materials for a growing number of high schools around the country. Lasting legacy of slavery The institution of slavery and the needs of slaveholding states were given weighty consideration in the founding days of the nation and were, therefore, baked into the Constitution. One important holdover is the Electoral College, which was originally designed to grant outsized electoral power to slaveholding states. The system continues to give about one third of American voters an advantage at the expense of the majority. Empowering citizens The United States became more democratic as time progressed. Even though the Bill of Rights was adopted in 1791, it was not always considered to be the bulwark of our democracy. The Supreme Court did not even hear a case with the First Amendment until the 1920s. However, over the last hundred years, concerned and well-educated citizens have bolstered and protected it through activism and litigation. Our responsibility is to understand the rules, participate, and empower ourselves to make this democracy work us. Find out more: Hannah McCarthy and Nick Capodice host and produce Civics 101, a production of New Hampshire Public Radio. They work with the Civics 101 team to brainstorm topics, as well as research, write, and record episodes. Each episode explores topics – the secretary of state, the NIH, the vice president, the midterm election – through interviews with experts and teachers. The hosts ask the questions you've been wondering but may be too afraid to ask – what exactly does the vice president do? How do executive orders work? - and stitches them together into engaging narrative stories. Civics 101 is used as a key classroom aide around the country, and episodes have been downloaded more than 13 million times. You can follow Hannah on Twitter @HMcCarthyNHPR, Nick @capodice, and Civics 101 @civics101pod

High-quality civic education Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor founded iCivics in 2009 because she believed that the practice of democracy must be taught and learned anew by each generation. High-quality civic education starts at an early age and teaches how the US system works. The curriculum includes the basics, such as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights; how to think about the complex challenges that face any government by examining past Supreme Court cases; fostering well-informed, civil discourse with people of differing viewpoints; and teaching media literacy. Educating and empowering future engaged citizens about why their vote matters, what their government does, and how they can enact change is the foundation for a strong democracy. Educational Gaming The series of innovative iCivics games and supporting classroom resources make the complex legislative, judicial, and electoral systems come to life. Civic knowledge is taught through active learning instead of through writing answers on worksheets or checking boxes. The games place you in real world civics situations: a constitutional lawyer deciding which cases to bring to trial based on your knowledge of the Bill of Rights, or one of the founders who is working to ratify the Constitution. In this way, students look at how they fit in to their community's civic life and how they can make informed decisions and participate in our democracy. Prioritizing civic education Currently, 25% of young Americans view democracy as a "bad" or "very bad" system of government. This shocking number is both an indictment of the way civics is currently taught, and an urgent wake-up call that we must do better. School curricula are determined at the state level, so parents and legislators need to advocate for and invest in statewide civics programs. States like Florida and Massachusetts, which have rigorous civics requirements in their schools, are excellent examples to follow. Many other states are already invested in civics education, but more needs to be done. iCivics founded CivXNowto help ensure that every young person acquires the necessary civic knowledge for informed and authentic civic engagement. Find out more: Louise Dubé joined iCivics as Executive Director in 2014. She oversees the work that iCivics does in creating video games that transform abstract concepts into real-life problems and in designing a developmentally appropriate civics curriculum. Inspired by a continuing deep commitment to ongoing learning, she has devoted her career to ensuring that all students are prepared for active and thoughtful citizenship and life. Before joining iCivics, Dubé served as the Managing Director of Digital Learning at Boston's WGBH. She is also a co-founder of CASES, a New York alternative-to-incarceration program for youthful offenders where education helped re-shape lives. She holds degrees from McGill and Yale Universities. You can follow her on Twitter @louise_dube.

We Are Our Government In our representative democracy, every citizen of the United States is ultimately a part of the government. One of our civic responsibilities is to be informed about how our elected representatives are working for us and how our tax dollars are being spent. We have the power to hold our representatives accountable when there is corruption or injustice. Our government is of the people, by the people, and we must participate in our society through civic engagement, community activism, or even running for office. Find out more: Mila Atmos is the founder, host, and executive producer of Future Hindsight. She seeks to promote civic values and social engagement through thought-provoking interviews with citizen changemakers. Previous guests include presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke, Eurasia Group founder Ian Bremmer, Indivisible co-founder Ezra Levin, and Robin Steinberg, founder and CEO of The Bail Project. You can follow her on Twitter @milaatmos Myriam Zümbuhl serves as Future Hindsight's associate producer. A veteran reporter and producer at Swiss Public Radio, Myriam recently starter her own media company, Harvest Productions. Skilled in the arts of storytelling and scriptwriting, Myriam is also a passionate chef and gardener. She lives in Zurich, Switzerland.

Passion Informs Engagement Creating a stronger community and society comes through a continuous commitment to civic engagement. Passion about certain issues can motivate and sustain a lifetime habit of being involved. In addition, participating in community life and initiatives are essential for staying engaged. Working together and joining forces with other people yields the best results to shape a society that reflects our values. It is one of the most treasured gifts we can leave to future generations. Find out more: Mila Atmos is the founder, host, and executive producer of Future Hindsight. She seeks to promote civic values and social engagement through thought-provoking interviews with citizen changemakers. Previous guests include presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke, Eurasia Group founder Ian Bremmer, Indivisible co-founder Ezra Levin, and Robin Steinberg, founder and CEO of The Bail Project. You can follow her on Twitter @milaatmos Myriam Zümbuhl serves as Future Hindsight's associate producer. A veteran reporter and producer at Swiss Public Radio, Myriam recently starter her own media company, Harvest Productions. Skilled in the arts of storytelling and scriptwriting, Myriam is also a passionate chef and gardener. She lives in Zurich, Switzerland.

Loss of Agency One of the most important factors in a healthy democracy is the sense of agency. When citizens in a democracy feel they have some agency over their lives, whether it is economic, social, or political, they will work together to create a better future for themselves, their families, and their society. When this sense is taken from them by outside variables such as market forces, they lose this sense of collectivism, and become less likely to work together. This division leaves an opening for bad-faith actors and aggressive populism to take hold in otherwise stable democracies. The Three Dimensions of Freedom There are three ideas that bind and define a successful democracy. They are liberty, equality, and accountability. While liberty is the end-goal of modern democracy, it needs to be acted upon and bolstered by equality and accountability. If a democracy has liberty but not equality, that liberty is little more than privilege. Further, if a democracy has liberty but not accountability, that liberty becomes impunity to act without consequences. Lack of accountability through the loss of individual agency is a major reason why bulwark democracies like the US and the UK are facing crises today. Accountability is Paramount Many of the problems facing Western democracies today are the result of a dearth of accountability on many levels. Market deregulation and the globalization of capital markets have undermined accountability for companies as well as governments from the local to the national level. Executives are now narrowly focused on shareholder return, primarily at the expense of the average worker. Politicians also increasingly represent and serve special interests, resulting in policies that favor a select few and discount average citizens. In order to return to an equitable financial system and democratic process, we must urgently address the lack of accountability. Find out more: Billy Bragg is a well-known songwriter, musician, author, and activist living in the UK. Beginning in the 1980s, Bragg released a series of socially-conscious folk-rock albums focusing on political and romantic themes. Bragg continues to release albums, including 2017's Build Bridges Not Walls, and sells out tour dates around the world. Staunchly progressive, Bragg is a self-proclaimed socialist whose musical career has been paralleled only by his decades of activism. Bragg has written several books, including The Three Dimensions of Freedom, which came out earlier this year. You can follow Billy Bragg on Twitter @billybragg.

Engagement and Representation There are a multitude of ways to become an engaged citizen. Often people think of civic engagement as an overwhelming and high-level concept. In reality, civic engagement can be performed on any level, from lowering the speed limit on your street and participating in a protest, to joining a local advisory council or parent-teacher organization. The important part of civic engagement is not what we do, but that we actually do something to make our voices heard. We can only be represented when we are engaged in our democracy. Find out more: Mila Atmos is the founder, host, and executive producer of Future Hindsight. She seeks to promote civic values and social engagement through thought-provoking interviews with citizen changemakers. Previous guests include presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke, Eurasia Group founder Ian Bremmer, Indivisible co-founder Ezra Levin, and Robin Steinberg, founder and CEO of The Bail Project. You can follow her on Twitter @milaatmos Myriam Zümbuhl serves as Future Hindsight's associate producer. A veteran reporter and producer at Swiss Public Radio, Myriam recently starter her own media company, Harvest Productions. Skilled in the arts of storytelling and scriptwriting, Myriam is also a passionate chef and gardener. She lives in Zurich, Switzerland.

Since the 2016 election, it has become increasingly imperative that we participate in our democracy as citizens. There are many ways to be civically engaged beyond voting and running for office, from being mindful about civic actions to passionately advocating for an issue. Our society and our social contract are only as strong as those participating in them, and the more you can get involved —- and inspire others to do the same -— the more our democracy represents us. Find out more: Mila Atmos is the founder, host, and executive producer of Future Hindsight. She seeks to promote civic values and social engagement through thought-provoking interviews with citizen changemakers. Previous guests include presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke, Eurasia Group founder Ian Bremmer, Indivisible co-founder Ezra Levin, and Robin Steinberg, founder and CEO of The Bail Project. You can follow her on Twitter @milaatmos Myriam Zümbuhl serves as Future Hindsight's associate producer. A veteran reporter and producer at Swiss Public Radio, Myriam recently starter her own media company, Harvest Productions. Skilled in the arts of storytelling and scriptwriting, Myriam is also a passionate chef and gardener. She lives in Zurich, Switzerland.

Democracy Reform When American democracy was conceived, the US was comprised of 13 states on the Eastern Seaboard, with a population of just over 2.5 million. The 18th and 19th century version of our democracy was meant for a smaller, less populous, and overwhelmingly whiter nation than the America we live in today. In order to preserve and strengthen our democracy for the future, we must engage in progressive reforms. One example is removing outdated and arbitrary procedures like the filibuster, which enables a slim minority to hold up meaningful policy changes for all. Grassroots Organizing is Key Representative democracy ultimately means governmental power is held by the people, not just those elected to represent them. The most effective way to get your voice heard is to organize like-minded individuals, or join groups that share your values, and set out to make a difference on national, regional, or local issues. When many voices join together to demand change, it's often impossible to ignore. Organized, grassroots activism has the power to sway elections and elected officials in ways that individuals do not. From Anti-Trump to Pro-Democracy At its inception, Indivisible was a direct response to the 2016 election: it was an anti-Trump movement that gained widespread support around the country as a platform dedicated to defeating the Trump agenda. Since then, Indivisible has evolved into a wide-ranging pro-democracy movement. Defeating the Trump agenda is now seen as a facet of progressive democratic reform. The goals have changed into a well-rounded effort to stem anti-democratic practices throughout our government and ensure progressive reforms are made to safeguard a fair and free future. Find out more: Ezra Levin is the Co-Executive Director of Indivisible, which he co-founded with Leah Greenberg in the wake of the 2016 presidential election. The Indivisible Project's mission is to cultivate a grassroots movement of literally thousands of local Indivisible groups to elect progressive leaders, realize bold progressive policies, rebuild our democracy, and defeat the Trump agenda. Previously, he worked as an Associate Director of Federal Policy for Prosperity Now, a non-profit, anti-poverty organization. Before that, he held the post of Deputy Policy Director for Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), and served in the Congressman's election campaign. He is the co-author of We Are Indivisible: A Blueprint for Democracy After Trump, which hits stands on November 5, 2019. Follow Ezra Levin on Twitter @ezralevin

Fourth Amendment The Fourth amendment protects people from unlawful searches and seizures. For example, in the 1970s the Supreme Court ruled that a warrant is necessary in order to listen in on telephone conversations, but not to collect the phone numbers. This is the precedent that allows for big data to collect a vast amount of information about people on the internet. Further, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has determined that the legal analysis for the Fourth amendment is the same, whether the right is applied to millions of people or to just one. Data privacy and literacy The issue with collecting data at scale is that it becomes granular and social. At that point, the data is no longer innocuous but is invasive of privacy. It turns out that our every-day seemingly trivial interactions matter profoundly in the aggregate, and our habit of almost blindly agreeing to arcane privacy policies on the internet is misguided. We need newer forms of transparency that really tell us how the data is being used and how it affects our online profile, as well as a collective effort to prioritize data and technological literacy. We also need to have a conversation about what kind of analyses are and are not allowed. Technological Determinism Technological determinism is a vision of history in which technology leads the way and pushes a narrative that certain changes in technology are inevitable to the point of altering the people's expectations. It's also a reminder that decisions are always being made along the way, whether consciously or not, to yield the current system. We now accept the model of advertising services based on the surveillance of users' everyday interactions, but there were actually technological developments in the 1990s that would have made cash transactions largely anonymous. The internet could have developed differently. Find out more: Matthew L. Jones is the James R. Barker Professor of Contemporary Civilization at Columbia University. He studies the history of science and technology, focused on early modern Europe and on recent information technologies. A Guggenheim Fellow for 2012-13 and a Mellon New Directions fellow for 2012-15, he is writing a book on computing and state surveillance of communications, and is working on Data Mining: The Critique of Artificial Reason, 1963-2005, a historical and ethnographic account of "big data," its relation to statistics and machine learning, and its growth as a fundamental new form of technical expertise in business and scientific research. He was also a Data & Society Fellow for 2017-2018 and authored numerous other papers. Follow Matthew L. Jones on Twitter @nescioquid

Tolerable climate and economic conditions Lamontagne's study defines tolerable economic conditions as follows: the present value of abatement costs would not exceed 3% of gross world product and climate damages would not exceed 2% of gross world product. Current gross world product is estimated to be$80trillion, so 3% of that would be $2.4 trillion. Although this a large dollar amount, it would be a reasonable investment as a percentage of gross world product. Tolerable climate is defined as limiting warming by 2 degrees Celsius by 2100. Robust Abatement Abatement costs that range between 3% and 5% of global world product would be considered both aggressive and yet also uncertain in terms of limiting warming. However, because not taking action guarantees failure, immediate action is the best shot at having a tolerable future. The cost of alternative energy sources and how quickly abatement efforts take placewill determine the eventual, actual cost. In addition, actions that are important for the climate in the near term will not be important fifty or a hundred years on. Whatever climate abatement initiatives we undertake today, and which will surely be expensive, will primarily benefit future generations. Window for Action The study used a model that explored 5.2 million alternative scenarios. Limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius is possible, but only feasible in the most optimistic scenarios. Further, the analysis shows that in order to have at least a 50 percent chance of achieving a tolerable climate and economic future, net zero CO2 emissions need to be reached by the year 2030. The window for action is narrow: time is running out to reduce emissions and avert really significant climate impacts. Find out more: Jonathan Lamontagne is assistant professor of civil and environmental engineering at Tufts University School of Engineering. He researches water resources, decision-making under uncertainty, hydrologic statistics, and integrated global change assessment. His study, Robust abatement pathways to tolerable climate futures require immediate global action,was published in Nature Climate Change. He received his M.S. and Ph.D. in environmental water resources systems analysis from Cornell University. His graduate studies focused on flood frequency analysis and the incorporation of uncertainty in hydropower systems planning. Following his graduate studies, Lamontagne worked as a postdoctoral research associate at Cornell University, studying uncertainty and robustness issues for models of the integrated human-climate system. He joined the Tufts Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering in 2017. Follow Jonathan Lamontage on Twitter @jr_lamontagne and Tufts University School of Engineering @TuftsEngineer.

Education Inequity There is a college completion crisis and access crisis in America: black adults are only two thirds as likely to hold college degrees as whites, and the highest achieving students from the wealthiest families are three times as likely to enroll in a highly selective college as similar students from poor families.Low achievers from high income familieshave a higher chanceof graduating from college thanhighachieving students from low income families. Community College Community colleges provide real opportunities for upward mobility that elite colleges don't. They offer an affordable education, welcome students with open arms regardless of economic background, and are working on transfer agreements to top-notch schools, including to Ivy League universities. More than half of American students attend community colleges. Even with a sizable financial aid package, elite colleges are still very expensive to attend, and low-income families cannot afford to pay the difference. Tuition alone at elite colleges can cost $50,000 or more, whereas community college tuition in New York State costs $5,000 on average. S.A.T. The recent college admissions scandal fully exposed how far wealthy parents will go to ensure their children a spot in an elite college, including cheating on standardized tests. There is a strong correlation between high test scores and high-income families, as they can afford test tutoring to improve scores. The College Board just announced that it would include an adversity score going forward, which would level the playing field. While this might make sense in the near term, it does not address the larger issues with inadequate access to high quality education before college. Find out more: Liz Willen, a longtime education reporter, has been proud to lead the award-winning staff of The Hechinger Report since 2011. Liz got her start in newspapers as feature editor of Northport High School's "The Rag," in Northport, New York and worked at an array of New England newspapers before covering New York City public schools for New York Newsday. She's a graduate of Tufts University and Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism and a board member for the Spencer Education Fellowships at Columbia. Liz is a sought-after moderator at education conferences and events, has been an active New York City public school parent and recipient of the "Above and Beyond," award by the media company City & State for exemplary leadership. She was recently honored for commentary writing by the New York Press Club. In the interview, Liz referenced the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation, The Privileged Poor by Anthony Abraham Jack, and the documentary Personal Statement. Follow Liz Willen on Twitter @L_Willen and The Hechinger Report @hechingerreport.

Social Determinants Good health is the product of access to quality medical care and sound public health policy. Effective policies that improve health outcomes include the Earned Income Tax Credit, supportive housing, and access to good public education. Per capita spending on medical care and social services in America and in European countries is about the same, but the US spends much more on medical care, while Europe spends more on social services. Europeans have longer life expectancy and better health statistics than Americans. Longevity and future medical innovations Disparities exist in life expectancy just as it does in income. The top 20% live 11 years longer than the bottom 20%. Even in comparison to the median, the top 20% are expected to live 4 years longer. This disparity may become even larger with future advances in medical care, such as gene tweaking. They will likely be very expensive, and it's possible that they may therefore only be accessible to the rich. There will be moral and ethical trade-offs to consider whether health insurance should cover these treatments, who is covered and who is not, and whether they are worth the increase in medical care spending in lieu of investing in social determinants. More Health The hallmark of good population health is a world in which people are connected to their communities, have a chance to make good decisions about their health, and have the resources to do so. The perspective in the field of health economics is changing towards focusing on better health outcomes for the population, instead of primarily on providing medical care and how to pay for it. What is a better return on investment? Do healthier lives come from more investments in things like education, income, early childhood, social services, and preventive medicine? Or do they come from more investments in high-tech medical innovations? Find out more: Dr. James Knickman is the Director of the Health Evaluation and Analytics Lab (HEAL), a joint initiative of the Health Policy and Management Program at NYU Wagner and Department of Population Health at NYU Langone. He is also a Senior Research Scientist at the NYU Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service and a Clinical Professor in the Department of Population Health at NYU Langone. Dr. Knickman was previously the president and CEO of the New York State Health Foundation, a position he held since May 2006. The Foundation focuses on high impact interventions to bring about measurable improvements in New York's health system. Prior to that appointment, he was Vice President for Research and Evaluation at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF). He has published extensive research on issues related to the financing of health care and long-term care and improving services for frail elders, homeless families, and individuals with HIV. Dr. Knickman is the co-author of Jonas & Kovner's Health Care Delivery in the United States, a widely used textbook on health policy and management. Follow James Knickman on Twitter @JimKnickman.

The price of freedom Cash bail was initially conceived as a way to incentivize the accused to come to court at their appointed court dates. As the criminal legal system expanded during the tough-on-crime years, cash bail was set at amounts that low income people could not afford. Even though they had yet to be convicted of a crime, they were forced to go to jail because they could not afford bail. One way to get out is to plead guilty to a small offense so that they can go home, but that adds significant complications down the road. The cost to our society Our society pays a steep price from allowing the current cash bail system to continue as it is. American taxpayers spend 14 billion dollars each year to hold people in jail cells who have not been convicted of a crime. The collateral consequences are estimated to be as high as 140 billion dollars per year. Most disturbing is that only 2 percent of the Bail Project's clients actually receive a jail sentence. In fact, when people are fighting their cases from a position of freedom, judges and prosecutors are willing to engage in alternatives to incarceration as sentences. A new system A new system to ensure people appear at appointed court times must come from a perspective of humanity and respect. Over a decade's worth of data in the Bronx shows that effective court reminders do work. Further, the needs of the accused have to be addressed, such as transportation fare or emergency child care, especially for low income people. Most importantly, any new system must involve a presumption of innocence, and can no longer be a two-tier system that favors those who can afford to pay for the price of their freedom. Find out more: Robin Steinberg is the founder and CEO of The Bail Project, an unprecedented national effort to combat mass incarceration by transforming the pretrial system in the U.S. Over a 35-year career as a public defender, Robin represented thousands of low-income people in over-policed neighborhoods and founded three high-impact organizations: The Bronx Defenders, The Bronx Freedom Fund, and Still She Rises. Robin is a frequent commentator on criminal justice issues and has contributed opinion pieces to The New York Times, The Marshall Project, and USA Today. Her publications have appeared in leading law and policy journals, including NYU Review of Law & Social Change, Yale Law & Policy Review, and Harvard Journal of African-American Public Policy, and she has contributed book chapters to How Can You Represent Those People? (Palgrave 2013) and Decarcerating America (The New Press 2018). Robin is a Gilbert Foundation Senior Fellow of the Criminal Justice Program at UCLA School of Law. Follow The Bail Project on Twitter @bailproject.