Due to the change in population counts and subsequent reallocation of House seats, all states must redraw their legislative district maps, a process that is known as redistricting. Following the results of the 2020 Census, redistricting is well underway in state legislatures across the nation–but the process can be contentious. 

Even though redistricting is a battle primarily fought in the halls of state legislatures, it has national implications. For young people, the results of this process are extremely significant, as many of these maps will stay in place for a decade until the next Census and redistricting process occurs in 2030. Learning about how we can take action to combat some of the nefarious partisan activity that impacts redistricting will help us to advocate for a more fair and representative democracy.  

Challenges to Fair Redistricting  

1. Redistricting Committees Work To Diminish the Power of Communities of Color.  

Gerrymandering, a term for the manipulation of legislative district"s boundaries to give one political party an advantage, can greatly influence which party has more electoral power in the state"s Congressional delegation. All too often, it robs power from non-white voters by "cracking and packing" communities of color. States may "crack" communities so that voters of color constitute a small percentage of many districts and don"t hold a majority in any district. Conversely, states may also "pack" voters of color into one district, resulting in people of color making up a large majority of one or two districts, with white people making up a slimmer majority (but a majority nonetheless) in all other districts. 

The Texas congressional maps are an example that has drawn widespread attention, as the state is gerrymandered on every level, from the State Board of Education to U.S. House Districts. Texas lawmakers used gerrymandering to pack Hispanic voters into fewer districts and dilute the presence of Black communities in other districts. 95 percent of Texas"s population growth since 2010 was due to people of color, and Texas added eleven new Hispanic residents for every new white, non-Hispanic resident. Despite this, Texas lawmakers managed to add a majority-white congressional district and eliminate a majority-Hispanic district. Texas lawmakers also cut the state"s only majority-Black district in the 2020 redistricting process.  Only 39.8 percent of the Texas population is white, yet white people constitute the majority in 59.3 percent of legislative districts. 

Maps like the ones from Texas reinforce systemic racism by giving white voters control of more districts, which ultimately comes with the political power to choose the majority of the representatives in Congress. This disproportionate allocation of power also results in voters of color having less opportunities to elect representatives who are committed to solving issues faced by communities of color, slowing down progress on racial justice. 

2. College Campuses Are Targeted by Right-Wing Politicians. 

College campuses have a high concentration of young people in a small geographic area. Because young people are more progressive on average than older generations, many college campuses are surrounded by large blocks of progressive, student voters, making them a prime target for partisan gerrymandering. College campuses are sometimes cracked and diluted into surrounding districts, while other states may opt to pack multiple colleges into a single district. Both outcomes result in college-age populations having less political power.  

Additionally, minority-serving institutions are nearly twice as likely to be gerrymandered compared to institutions that primarily serve white students. Until 2020, North Carolina A&T State University, the country’s largest historically Black university, had a congressional line drawn through the middle of campus, dividing the college into two different House districts. Before a court decision required the campus to be contained into one congressional district, students would frequently cross the district line on the walk from their dormitory to the lecture halls.

3. Prison Populations Are Used To Decide District Populations–Even Though Most Incarcerated People Can"t Vote. 

Prison gerrymandering occurs when the Census Bureau includes prison populations in population counts for congressional districts, meaning incarcerated people’s "usual place of abode" is defined as the prison or jail where they are incarcerated. However, many incarcerated people cannot vote due to practical or legal barriers, and many serve sentences as short as six months, meaning their location in the jail was only temporary when officials conducted the Census.  

 Prison gerrymandering primarily harms people of color and young people, two groups that are disproportionately jailed. Before the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau asked the public for feedback on its residency definitions. The Bureau received nearly 78,000 public comments about prison populations, and 99.9 percent said incarcerated people should be counted in the community they call home, not the place they are incarcerated. By not counting incarcerated people as residents of their home community, prison gerrymandering disproportionately shifts power away from over-policed communities of color and to the permanent residents of prison towns, who tend to be white. In sixteen states, over 75 percent of the incarcerated population is incarcerated in a disproportionately white county. Many of these districts have more Black Americans who are incarcerated than Black Americans who are not. 

Take Action 

In 32 states, the state legislature controls redistricting, which can be problematic because the party in power may choose to draw a map that is more favorable to them. But it doesn"t have to be this way! Some states use non-partisan or independent commissions, which prohibit incumbent politicians and party officials from making redistricting decisions. While we should continue to work towards broader redistricting reform that includes criteria to prohibit partisan gerrymandering, there is still action you can take right now to promote fairness during redistricting. 

1. Pass the Freedom To Vote Act 

The Freedom To Vote Act (FTVA) would increase transparency and accountability by requiring redistricting commissions to publish the data used to create maps. States would be required to use computer modeling to assess a map"s partisan impact and decide its fairness using formal criteria. Legal challenges to partisan gerrymanders would automatically be referred to a federal district court in Washington D.C. 

The FTVA would also apply, even retroactively, to all maps drawn after the 2020 census, meaning it isn"t too late to reverse the gerrymandered maps that states have already produced. Tell Congress to pass the Freedom to Vote Act today! 

2. Testify 

Most states take public testimony into consideration when redistricting. Preparing written or spoken testimony about the redistricting process is a great way to engage with your legislators and represent your community. 

Testifying is your opportunity to explain to mapmakers how their decisions will directly impact you and your community members–and young voices need to be heard in this process. Check out the FiveThirtyEight project to learn more about redistricting in your state, including how to testify. 

The post Redistricting Is Already Underway–Here’s How To Make it Fair appeared first on Generation Progress.

 they"ve made accessing care harder for everyone

In Mississippi, abortion may soon be outlawed after 15 weeks of pregnancy. This law is the basis of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case that the Supreme Court heard on December 1, 2021. If a majority of justices rule in favor of the law, the precedent set by Roe would be overturned–and our constitutional right to abortion would be decimated. In Mississippi, all abortion clinics but Jackson Women’s Health Organization have closed, making it nearly impossible for people to access safe, legal abortion care in the state. 

Sadly, Mississippi isn"t the only state where abortion access is a problem. Depending on where you live, there may be a 24- or 48-hour waiting period between a consultation appointment and when you can get your abortion. You may be forced to undergo a medically unnecessary ultrasound before you can terminate. Your nearest clinic may be miles away and/or backlogged. Lack of insurance coverage may result in unaffordable costs. Laws may dictate your timing of, if, and when you can get an abortion. You may also be given false information from anti-abortion volunteers posing as health care workers at crisis pregnancy centers. Anti-abortion laws and policies may supersede your decision-making and autonomy. 

Our abortion rights have been in danger for a long time, but this year it"s only gotten worse. In 2021, more states have passed abortion restrictions that can cause significant challenges to receiving care than any other year. This is the erosion of reproductive rights and justice in America.

Earlier this year, Texas enacted S.B.8–a law that bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy and authorizes ordinary people to sue anyone who helps someone get an abortion past that point. Six weeks of pregnancy is only two weeks after a missed period, a time when most people don"t yet know they"re pregnant. Regardless of this fact, the Supreme Court refused to block the law in September, forcing hundreds of people to travel out-of-state to get care and others to continue with a pregnancy they do not want. If Roe is overturned, this situation could be the new reality for birthing people across the country.

We have to protect our constitutional right to abortion and push legislators to go above and beyond it. If Roe is overturned, abortion would immediately be banned in 24 states as a result of insidious trigger laws that are designed to take effect the moment the abortion is no longer protected. These people would have to drive an average of 4.5 hours to get an abortion, and the impact would fall hardest on people of color, rural people,  young people, LGBTQI+ people, people with disabilities, immigrants, and those struggling to make ends meet. Abortion access is an issue of racial equity and economic justice. It"s a simple, essential, health care service that allows individuals to have control over their future. While it could be months before the Court releases its decision on Dobbs, we won"t give up this fight.

The Women’s Health Protection Act would protect abortion rights by establishing a statutory right for health care professionals to provide abortion care and patients to receive it. It also eliminates some key barriers to abortion access, including mandatory waiting periods, biased counseling, two-trip requirements, and mandatory ultrasounds. The bill was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives, but it still has to get through the Senate to become law. 

We have to transform how abortion is treated in this country, especially for those whose abortion rights have been most obstructed."¯Tell your elected officials to protect abortion access and ask your senators to pass the Women"s Health Protection Act. This is how we can save Roe and go even further.

The post Abortion Rights Are on the Line–Here’s What You Need to Know appeared first on Generation Progress.

Here are just 5 examples of how putting communities first can make communities safer:

1. Hospital-based violence interruption programs (HVIPs) are programs that reach victims at their most vulnerable. HVIPs are located in trauma centers and emergency rooms to reach victims the moment they reach the hospital. Case managers engage survivors, while also working to prevent retaliation. (Learn More)

2. Group Violence Intervention involves collaboration between social service providers, community members, and law enforcement. These programs are intended to increase trust between law enforcement and the communities they police. (Learn More)

3. Violence Interrupters or Street Outreach programs are led by interventionists that live in the community. The programs focus on building relationships, supporting survivors of violence, and implementing restorative justice solutions to gun violence. These programs are immediate crisis responses and also long term support. (Learn More)

4. Cure Violence programs aim to change the norms about community violence and create pathways for young people involved in gun violence. This model trains community members to detect and interrupt violence, identify and treat individuals at the highest risk of violence, and mobilize the community to change norms. (Learn More)

5. Community-driven crime prevention through environmental design are programs where communities reduce crime and violence by using architecture and urban planning to create or restore public spaces where the community can gather and feel a sense of safety. Restoration of vacant lots and investing in a community"s physical environment has been proven to reduce crime and gun violence. When communities look safe, people feel safe. (Learn More)

CVI programs make sense. Slowly, our government has been recognizing this and providing resources and opportunities for the expansion of CVI programs; just this year the Build Back Better Act included a momentous $5 billion in funding for local initiatives to combat gun violence. By providing resources and training to the people that live in communities most impacted by violence, we are giving communities an opportunity to heal from the inside by establishing greater trust in their neighbors and changing community norms about violence. Tens of thousands of people are victims of gun violence each year in the U.S., and that violence is concentrated in underserved Black and Brown communities. Investing in proven community-based solutions is a no brainer.

The post Five Examples of Community Violence Intervention Programs That Work appeared first on Generation Progress.

Gerrymandering 

Gerrymandering is the manipulation of electoral districts to give an unfair advantage to a political party or politician. It is often done to consolidate power and reduce the influence of voters who politicians expect to oppose them. One party may earn the majority of the votes in a state, but depending on how the districts are drawn, the other party could receive the majority of district seats. For example, in 2018, North Carolina Democrats won 51.2 percent of the votes for the state House of Representatives and 50.5 percent for the state Senate. But due to gerrymandering, North Carolina Republicans won majority control of both chambers. Similar things have happened in states throughout the country, giving an advantage to either party based on how the districts are drawn. Considering that 53 percent of all Americans and 81 percent of Democrats support stricter gun laws, gerrymandering does not allow fair representation of the democratic process. The Freedom to Vote Act would completely ban partisan gerrymandering, not allowing either party to take advantage of the redistricting process. The bill would also ensure transparency in the redistricting process.

Dark Money In Politics

Large corporations and special interest groups have power and money that ordinary voters don"t. These organizations spend their considerable resources on campaign donations, political advertising, and lobbying to persuade elected officials to act in their best interests. The special interest groups that have a vested interest in preventing gun violence prevention measures from becoming law, including the National Rifle Association (NRA), have been particularly successful.

The NRA, which is funded in part by gun manufacturers, have spent decades blocking life-saving gun violence prevention legislation through a coordinated campaign to exert political and financial pressure over candidates and elected officials. The most staunchly anti-gun reform politicians have more than likely received numerous contributions to their campaigns from groups like the NRA. The Freedom to Vote Act would help put an end to this. The bill would require super PACs, 501(c)4 groups and other organizations spending money in elections and on judicial nominations to disclose donors who contribute more than $10,000, create a 6-1 matching system for smaller donations to give ordinary people a stronger voice, and overhaul the Federal Election Commission to ensure that the agency does its job and investigates violations of the law.

Voting Accessibility

Decades of gun violence in our schools and communities have shifted the public opinion on guns, and it"s now clear that the majority of Americans want laws that will help prevent gun violence. Voting is one way for Americans to make their views and priorities known, but rampant voter suppression efforts that disproportionately affect young people and people of color mean that the freedom to vote has been eroded to the point where many Americans aren"t able to cast a ballot. The Freedom to Vote Act would create a national standard for voting rights protections and make voting more accessible to all Americans. The bill would require all states to offer an early voting period at least two weeks before election day and expand vote-by-mail, giving voters more flexibility to cast their ballots in a way that works for them. The bill would also standardize voter ID laws, which currently vary greatly on a state-by-state level, meaning that people will have a clearer idea of what they need in order to vote. These provisions are especially important to young voters, who face disproportionate barriers to registering to vote and voting. 

Conclusion

When the people have the power in our democracy, we get better public policy. Through a number of insidious laws and policies, the democratic process has slowly been chipped away and people"s voices have been silenced. Extremist politicians have introduced over 400 bills nationwide to suppress our votes, and they are gerrymandering states to disenfranchise millions of American voters. The Freedom to Vote Act would begin to undo these policies and allow the people to vote for legislation that they support. The Freedom to Vote Act would not only have lasting ramifications on gun violence prevention, but would also impact policy across many different areas, including climate change, reproductive rights, and more. It is critical that the Senate pass this bill to strengthen our democracy and put the power back in the hands of the people.

The post Protect Our Vote, Protect Our Communities appeared first on Generation Progress.

The PSLF program was designed to encourage college graduates to enter the public workforce by promising to forgive what was left of their student loan debt after they make qualifying payments for 10 years. Since the first cohorts of borrowers reached forgiveness eligibility in 2017, however, the failures of the PSLF program have been lamented by borrowers, advocates, lawmakers, and government officials alike. Congress and the U.S. Department of Education are overdue to make the improvements needed to deliver the debt forgiveness that was promised to thousands of American public sector workers.

In this letter, we identify PSLF"s chief problems and offer possible solutions. To do so, we draw on ideas from the Center for American Progress" past work on this subject, as well as from the work of other policy experts, Congressional bills, and comments from members of the public made during the Department"s recent hearings on negotiated rulemaking. If Congress and the Department work together to make these legislative, regulatory, and administrative improvements, borrowers will be better positioned to pay off their debt, continue serving the public, and reap the benefits of a college education.

The above excerpt was originally published in Regulations.gov. Please click here to view the full comment letter.

The post Comment on FR Doc # 2021-15831 appeared first on Generation Progress.

In May 2021, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed into law a piece of legislation that effectively bans abortion care after six weeks. Activists and advocates managed to prevent the law from taking effect initially, but now that the Supreme Court has refused to grant an emergency request to block the ban, it has proceeded to be implemented. Here"s what you need to know as the law takes effect in Texas.

How does the Texas abortion ban work?

Like many abortion bans, this law prohibits abortion care as soon as early cardiac activity can be detected, around the sixth week of pregnancy. While six weeks may sound like a long time, the clock begins on the date of a person"s last menstrual period–so for many people, the sixth week of pregnancy may be just two weeks after a missed period. For this reason, most abortions don"t take place until after this window closes. In Texas, at least 85 percent of abortions take place after the sixth week of pregnancy.

What makes this law uniquely egregious is how it is enforced. Unlike similar laws, the Texas abortion ban doesn"t rely on state officials. Instead, the law authorizes private citizens to sue anyone who helps a person obtain abortion care after six weeks. Anyone can be sued, from doctors to rideshare drivers to friends and family. In addition, the law offers a $10,000 reward to those who win their lawsuits. The result is a bounty system that incentivizes anti-abortion vigilantes to interfere with abortion care.

How does the Texas abortion ban impact young people?

Young people are especially impacted by the Texas abortion ban. Already, young people are more likely to need abortion care and less likely to be able to access it for logistical and financial reasons. Even before this ban, Texas already had a myriad of abortion restrictions in place such as parental consent and notification requirements, biased counseling to discourage and shame those seeking an abortion, mandatory and medically unnecessary ultrasound requirements, limited coverage of abortions under private and public insurance, and a 24 hour waiting period. The Texas abortion ban adds to the burden young people face by making it so that nearly anyone seeking abortion care after the sixth week of pregnancy must travel out of state, imposing a huge cost in terms of money and time that many young people are unable to afford. The Guttmacher Institute estimates that because of S.B. 8, the average one-way driving distance to an abortion clinic would increase from 17 miles to 247 miles, more than 14 times the distance for care. Young people from Black, Latinx, rural, undocumented, and low-income communities are even less likely to be able to make the journey.

What"s next?

While the Supreme Court"s decision not to block the Texas abortion ban is a major blow for reproductive rights, the battle isn"t over yet. In early September, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Texas over the new abortion ban. The Department of Justice is seeking a judgment declaring the Texas abortion ban invalid, as well as a “preliminary and permanent injunction against the State of Texas–including all of its officers, employees, and agents, including private parties” involved in enforcing the abortion ban.

Texas offers us a lesson: fighting for abortion rights on the state level is necessary, but isn"t enough. If we want to protect abortion rights in America, we need action at all levels of government, especially at the federal level. Join us in calling for lawmakers to adopt a proactive abortion agenda and secure the right of every American to safe abortion care.

The post Four Things You Need to Know About the Texas Abortion Ban appeared first on Generation Progress.

, which has already been passed by the Senate, and the Senate"s

, which will set the stage for a budget reconciliation bill. Taken together, these two pieces of legislation represent significant progress on President Joe Biden"s Build Back Better agenda, and–if passed–would provide

at a scale we"ve never seen before.

Young people care about the climate crisis, and have been on the frontlines of fighting for action on this issue from the local level all the way to the federal level. We care about the climate crisis because we, along with Black, Brown, Indigenous and low-income communities, will be impacted the most by its harmful effects. In part because of this, young people turned out in unprecedented numbers in the 2020 election to vote for leaders that will treat the climate crisis with the seriousness it requires. 

Despite broad consensus among scientists and national security experts that the climate crisis is real and poses an extreme threat to the United States, some members of Congress have resisted the critical climate investments put forward in President Biden"s Build Back Better agenda. But Congress can and should look to states for inspiration when enacting ambitious climate policy. Many states and localities have passed legislation that aims to cut their greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero by 2050 or earlier–a benchmark that scientists say is imperative to addressing the climate crisis. 

Across the country, states have paved the way for progressive and ambitious climate policy. These climate policy wins have come about due to tireless advocacy from community groups, workers, environmental justice activists, and other key stakeholders. The lessons learned from state-level advocacy and policymaking can be a guide for effective federal policy. 

Below are examples from three states that have passed ambitious climate policies, with the goal of drastically reducing greenhouse gas emissions and creating good-paying jobs in the sectors of our future. 

Washington

Washington state has been a national leader on progressive climate policy. In May 2019, Gov. Jay Inslee signed the Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA) into law. The law requires the state to stop use of all coal-fired power plants by 2025 and transition to carbon-neutral energy by 2030, while transitioning the state to 100 percent carbon-free energy by 2045. By adopting 100 percent clean energy, CETA will create new jobs as new clean energy infrastructure is built. 

CETA also establishes tax incentives to boost clean energy projects that meet certain labor requirements, including procuring contracts from woman- or veteran-owned businesses, hiring locally, and compensating workers fairly (as determined by their collective bargaining agreements). The law also requires that all utilities in the state provide energy assistance to low-income households, which is not limited to just bill reductions, but also includes weatherization, energy efficiency and "direct customer ownership in distributed energy resources," requiring addressing energy burden at 6 percent. Additionally, CETA requires the development of a Cumulative Impact Analysis that will identify communities disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution, and requires that the benefits of the Act are distributed equitably. CETA also requires utilities to work with community boards, which are required to include representatives from impacted communities, to develop plans, provide oversight, and ensure transparency. It is also important to note that the law states that all customers, "benefit from the equitable distribution of energy benefits and reduction of burdens to vulnerable populations and highly impacted communities," which is critical for the implementation of environmental justice.

More recently, Gov. Inslee signed the HEAL Act into law, which will prioritize environmental justice by requiring state agencies to consider the impacts of their work on frontline communities, including both harms and benefits, as well as create an environmental justice council to collaborate with these agencies on their environmental justice priorities.

New York

In New York, the state legislature passed the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA), which became law in July 2019. The bill directs the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, with the remaining 15 percent to be offset by other methods. It also requires that the state gets 100 percent of its electricity from clean energy sources by 2040. In addition to decreasing greenhouse gas emissions, CLCPA enhances labor standards and worker protections, ensuring that these jobs are not only safe, but also pay a good wage. 

CLCPA"s passage was predicated on the passage of a separate environmental justice bill, New York State Senate Bill S2385, which created a permanent environmental justice advisory group that will ensure the actions of state agencies will not disproportionately burden any communities with pollution. CLCPA recognizes that frontline communities are the most impacted by climate change, and advances environmental justice in the state by requiring that these communities receive at least 35 percent of all investment benefits in clean energy. Environmental justice groups in the state celebrated the bill, but acknowledged that it is not perfect.

New Mexico

In March 2019, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed New Mexico"s Energy Transition Act (ETA) into law. It transitions New Mexico away from fossil fuels through interim targets, requiring that 50 percent of the state"s electricity is renewable by 2030, 80 percent renewable by 2040, and 100 percent renewable by 2045. The ETA provides workforce support for communities that will be directly impacted by this transition away from fossil fuels by training workers for the construction and development of renewable energy infrastructure. The law also provides better protections to consumers and economic relief to the communities that will be impacted by the closure of coal-fired power plants.

The good news is that the Biden administration has already incorporated a lot of the solutions above into its strategies for addressing the climate crisis. Environmental justice, job creation, and transitioning to clean energy feature prominently in the administration"s Build Back Better policies. However, now it is time for Congress to act.

This is why it is up to Congress to follow the example set by these three states and make significant investments in climate on the federal level. The planet and our communities can"t wait any longer. 

The post Congress Could Learn A Few Things About Climate Action From These States appeared first on Generation Progress.

funny. The problem is, I can"t even joke about it. Every summer, I get a case of climate anxiety that would make the most seasoned therapist cringe. My evening dog walk inevitably spirals into doomsday scenarios, panicking over rising temperatures, rising sea levels, and the rising urgency of our situation.

we"re done for.

Climate anxiety, at the most basic level, is the fear many of us feel regarding the looming problem of climate change. It"s more than simple concern, though–it"s a feeling of horror and apprehension as we attempt to grapple with an existential threat far larger than anything our minds are equipped to handle. Climate anxiety is a natural response to the helplessness that many people, especially our generation, feel as we watch our planet burn.

To a certain extent, climate anxiety is a rational response. We"re in a terrible situation that"s only getting worse.  Earlier this month, the UN published a report warning that we are likely to overshoot the 1.5 degree Celsius tipping point that major climate initiatives like the Paris agreement hoped to prevent. We"re already seeing the effects: 9.8 million people were displaced because of climate change in the first half of 2020. And those are just the statistics. We don"t need numbers to know that the recent heatwave in the Pacific Northwest wasn"t normal. The deep freeze in Texas this year wasn"t normal. California"s 2020 wildfire season, the worst ever recorded, was not normal. The climate crisis isn"t coming–it"s already here. 

But it"s important to find ways not to give into climate anxiety.  Climate anxiety can have a serious impact on our mental health–we all have enough to worry about without a massive existential threat on the horizon, and the psychological impact of climate change is well-documented. Even worse, it can be an all-too-easy to slip from anxiety to despair. It"s tempting to say that it"s already too late. It"s easy to give up and let ourselves finally relax. But climate despair isn"t the answer. If we give up now, we give up any chance we do have at saving ourselves. Climate despair is the ultimate failure.

Just like with any type of fear, the solution to climate anxiety is to take action. We have to prove to ourselves that we"re not helpless. Luckily, we"re not alone. All over the U.S., people are coming together to stop climate change before it"s too late, and our generation is leading the way. This June, youth climate justice organization the Sunrise Movement marched 400 miles to first occupy Senator Ted Cruz"s lawn, and then protest outside the White House. Their demands? Immediate action from the Democratic Party, a meeting with President Biden, and full funding for the Civilian Climate Corps, a program that would employ over 1.5 million Americans in jobs fighting climate change. Youth climate justice group Zero Hour is currently working to educate communities across the country about the intersections of climate injustice with racism, sexism, capitalism, and colonialism in hopes of building support for the Green New Deal. The climate justice movement is young and rising. We know what it will take to solve the climate crisis.

And the best part? We"re winning. This January, climate activists convinced President Biden to revoke a key permit from the Keystone XL oil pipeline, halting construction and eventually leading to the project"s recent shutdown. This April, New York passed legislation setting a goal to conserve at least 30 percent of land in the state by 2030, helping to protect biodiversity. And in June, Oregon passed a bill to eliminate emissions from power suppliers by 2040. Young people are pressuring elected officials to make the right choices about our future, and it"s working. 

It"s easy to feel discouraged when bad news keeps coming in. Most of the discussion around climate justice focuses on just how many ways climate change can kill us all. But we can"t give up now. There are people out there working every day to build a more sustainable future, and they need our help. It"s time to take our climate anxiety and channel that energy into something useful. It"s time to join our generation in the movement for climate justice.

Phoebe Suh is the Generation Progress Summer 2021 intern and a student at Harvard University. 

The post A Letter to Gen Z: It's Time to Put Our Generation's Climate Anxiety to Work appeared first on Generation Progress.

As a current college student, I am acutely aware of the many costs associated with getting an education. One of the first things most students and their families consider when weighing their college options is price, including how much they"re being offered in financial aid and scholarships. I live in a single parent household, and am incredibly lucky that my mother has taken on extra jobs and summer work (like the superwoman she is) just so that she could afford to send me to the schools of my choice. 

Over the past few years though, the intensification of extreme weather has been a source of further financial stress for me and my family. We have had to sacrifice some of the money that was meant for my tuition to repair damages to my home caused by thunderstorms, hurricanes, and tornadoes. At times, I have lost power, lost connection to my classes, have not been able to turn in my assignments on time, have been unable to contact my professors, lost my ability to take my online exams–the list goes on. This has been especially challenging during COVID-19 pandemic, when my classes have shifted online, and my education now depends on reliable electricity and a safe home environment.

Determining effective solutions to large-scale problems like the climate crisis or college affordability and student debt requires understanding how different issues connect and overlap with one another. The issues facing our country don"t exist in siloes, and being impacted by one problem can lead to additional struggles with other–even seemingly unrelated–problems. It is important for policymakers to take an intersectional approach when creating policy because, oftentimes, it isn"t possible to solve one issue without addressing the implications of another. 

Climate change and student debt are two issues that are often not seen as related, but looking at the ways that these issues disproportionately impact the same people and communities can provide insight into the types of solutions that are needed to solve both of them. In order to achieve environmental justice, policymakers must consider that the communities most impacted by the climate crisis are often the same communities that disproportionately struggle with student debt. 

For example, climate change and student debt both disproportionately impact communities of color. When severe weather events occur, air pollution increases, or water is polluted, communities of color, under-resourced communities, and marginalized people are impacted the most. These same communities also are burdened with higher levels of student loan debt and more difficulties repaying that debt than their white counterparts. Black students are more likely to need to borrow, borrow more, and take longer to pay off their loans than white students. On average, Black college graduates owe an average of $25,000 more than their white peers. Four years after graduation, Black college graduates on average accumulate interest such that their balance owed increases by 12.5 percent, whereas white college graduates are likely to have already paid off some debt and have reduced their total balance owed during that same period of time. 

The increase of extreme weather events, such as dangerous heatwaves, freezing temperatures, flooding, and destructive storms, can all be directly linked to human-induced climate change–which means this problem is only getting worse. The average temperature in the United States has been continuously rising since 1901, with the last 30 years showing an increased rate of warming. Eight of the hottest years on record occurred within the last decade. 

The student debt crisis is likewise escalating. One in three young people have taken out loans to afford college, and students and their families collectively hold $1.7 trillion in student loan debt. These individuals and their families are attempting to do what is ultimately impossible for many, financing higher education while staying financially afloat through worsening floods, fires, and droughts. 

In order to end the cycle of climate change and the student debt crisis compounding to cause financial instability for generations of Americans, we need to demand that Congress pass economic recovery legislation with bold climate investments that prioritize the most impacted communities, cancels student debt, and makes college more affordable for students and their families. 

The same communities that have been deprived of the resources and infrastructure necessary to withstand the worst impacts of the climate crisis as a result of systemic racism are often also struggling to afford college for the same reason. President Biden"s Build Back Better agenda would give the country a better chance to build an economy that works for all, while investing in clean energy and infrastructure that protects our communities from pollution and worsening climate change. In addition to the Build Back Better agenda, the administration recently established the Justice 40 initiative, which ensures that 40 percent of all the federal government’s climate investments will go to disadvantaged and over-polluted communities. This initiative codifies environmental justice as a part of each federal agency"s mission.

To make good on President Biden"s commitments in the Build Back Better agenda and the Justice 40 initiative, Congress must fund federal programs that help disadvantaged families with the economic burdens of climate change-induced extreme weather. For example, the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) provides money to families who need assistance with their energy bills, which can spike during periods of extreme heat or cold; and the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) helps medium- and low-income households lower their energy bills by subsidizing energy efficiency technology for their homes. These programs can help people on the frontlines of climate change save money for other important life priorities, like education.

Multiple bills have been introduced in Congress with the aim of reducing or eliminating the cost of tuition and fees at public universities and community colleges, including the Debt-Free College Act, America"s College Promise, and the College for All Act. In addition, President Biden is still exploring his options for canceling some amount of student debt, a promise made during his campaign. 

Racial and economic injustice take many different forms in this country, and racist and unjust policies have resulted in people of color existing on the frontlines of both the climate and student debt crises. It is imperative that the government makes significant investments now to secure environmental and economic justice for all. Our futures, and our families" futures are at stake.

The post Canceling Student Debt Would Help Achieve Environmental Justice appeared first on Generation Progress.

This is a system that disproportionately affects young people, and especially young people of color. Young people–those ages 18 to 35–make up only 30 percent of the U.S. adult population, yet they represent 60 percent of adult arrests and 42 percent of adult prison admissions. The consequences of an arrest or conviction can create lifelong barriers to accessing education, housing, and equitable employment opportunities. The impacts of this fall hardest on Black and Latinx communities and it has had a devastating impact on their long-term safety and stability.

But it doesn"t have to be this way. Your elected state officials control a large portion of what causes mass incarceration, plus they can determine how this system operates. State legislators, along with governors, can have the greatest impact on shrinking the criminal legal system and mitigating its harms.  

Amplify this on Twitter and Instagram.

The post RESOURCE TOOLKIT: Take Action to End Mass Criminalization & Incarceration appeared first on Generation Progress.