During a hearing Tuesday on President Trump ’ s travel ban , Ninth Circuit Judge Michelle Friedland asked a question .\nWas the Trump administration arguing that the president could do what he wanted on national security matters and the courts had no authority to step in ?\nThe lawyer representing the Justice Department paused , and then answered : “ Yes . ”\nThe answer was shocking to some legal watchers : Since Marbury v. Madison in 1803 , the judiciary has served as the ultimate arbiter of the law and a check on the other branches of government .\nBut in other ways , the answer was simply stating the reality of much of the past century . Until recently , the courts have deferred when asked to check the steadily expanding power of the executive branch . That was a matter for the president to work out with Congress , the legal thinking went .\nBut now there are signs that the judiciary may be increasingly willing to pull back on the reins – at least a bit . And regardless of whether Mr. Trump ’ s individual executive order is upheld or not , the high-profile legal battles over it seem to be drawing more public – and judicial – attention to how executive power has expanded , and its potential consequences .\n“ We need to be aware that the decisions the courts are making , and the assertions the Trump administration is making in these cases , are going to apply not only to these cases but to assertions of executive authority in the future , ” says Steven Schwinn , an associate professor at the John Marshall Law School in Chicago .\nThe growing willingness to scrutinize executive power can be traced at least partly to the recent rise in legal challenges , experts say . As George W. Bush and Barack Obama pushed the limits of executive authority , legal pushback has grown .\n“ The Supreme Court has reined in the more extreme claims of executive authority that we have seen in the last two presidential administrations , ” says Professor Schwinn .\nThere was widespread litigation , particularly from civil liberties groups , over many of Mr. Bush ’ s actions responding to the 9/11 attacks , and Republican state attorneys general systematically challenged many of Mr. Obama ’ s executive actions .\nNow Trump is issuing a flurry of his own executive orders , including the one currently before a panel of the Ninth Circuit . It bars citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States for 90 days . It also prevents entry for all refugees for 120 days and indefinitely halts the admission of Syrian refugees .\nThe Ninth Circuit is considering whether to uphold a federal judge ’ s decision to block the order . Its ruling is expected within days , and the case is considered likely to end up at the US Supreme Court . In a sign of the keen public interest , more than 2.6 million people listened to the hearing , which was streamed live .\nThe Constitution doesn ’ t actually endow the president with much unilateral authority . Coming out of a monarchy and wary of concentrating power in an individual , the Framers granted the president only one independent power : the ability to issue pardons and reprieves .\n“ Obviously that has changed significantly over time , ” says Mark Rozell , dean of the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University and an expert on presidential power .\nMost scholars trace this expansion to Franklin Roosevelt , who entered the White House at the nadir of the Great Depression and launched an aggressive , executive-driven agenda to revive the country . His flurry of actions during his first 100 days in office transformed Americans ’ views and expectations of what the president should do .\nThere is now an “ underlying assumption ” that a president should do as President Roosevelt did , says Dr. Rozell , author of “ Executive Privilege : Presidential Power , Secrecy , and Accountability . ”\nSpecifically , a president is expected to come in “ with a bold vision , an activist agenda , and a plan to bulldoze it through Congress , ” he adds .\nThere may be valid reasons for broadening executive powers , says Ernest Young , a constitutional law professor at Duke University School of Law .\nThe executive branch is inherently the most nimble branch , and can respond quickest to crises and emergencies . As the branch has grown , it has also accrued more expertise on subjects from housing and water quality to space travel and terrorism .\nBut presidents haven ’ t been the only ones to expand executive powers . Most of presidents ’ current powers have been delegated by Congress and upheld by the federal court system .\nPart of Trump ’ s justification for his order , for example , is that the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act , passed by Congress , gives him the power to suspend the entry of “ any class of aliens ” into the US if it “ would be detrimental to the interests of the United States. ” ( Opponents disagree with this interpretation . )\nCongress has also enacted laws giving the president broad discretion in war , national security , and foreign policy . The legislature has also expanded the executive branch itself , creating agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency ( in 1970 ) and the Department of Homeland Security ( in 2002 ) .\nThe court system has largely played along . Part of this stems from the judiciary ’ s fundamental role in government – to not be a rulemaking body , but to assess the legality of rules enacted by Congress and the president . Yet the judicial branch has also arguably facilitated the decades-long expansion of executive power .\nThe Chevron doctrine , for example , originates from a 1984 Supreme Court case . It holds that , if Congress passes an ambiguous law , the executive branch regulatory agencies should be able to interpret those laws – unless the agencies ’ interpretations are unreasonable .\nMeanwhile , for the past 80 years , the high court has essentially ignored the doctrine that there are constitutional limits – to be determined by the judiciary – on the legislative powers that Congress can delegate to the executive . Since 1935 , the court has never found a delegation of power by Congress to the executive unconstitutional .\nEssentially , the court “ has been upholding any and all delegations of power to the president ” since 1935 , says Professor Young .\nBut the increased attention has seen the courts begin to check executive power a bit more .\n“ I ’ m not sure the courts are interested in particular in reining in executive power , but I do think [ they ] are taking a closer look at these cases , ” says Schwinn .\nFurthermore , a number of judges and scholars – including Neil Gorsuch , Trump ’ s nominee to the Supreme Court – have become increasingly critical of the Chevron doctrine . While that doctrine is unlikely to come up in any travel ban litigation , it is another sign that the judicial tide could be turning against the expansion of executive power .\nFor now , Trump ’ s executive orders appear to be drawing even more public attention – and judicial scrutiny – to how executive power has expanded .\n“ Sometimes those delegations [ of power ] are made on the assumption that this power is never going to be exercised by someone who you ’ d worry what they ’ d use it for , ” says Young .\n“ I would love to see one legacy of this be that Congress takes a look at some of these very broad delegations and narrows them . ”


One factor that seems to be consistently true across states with the most and the least benefits is the political climate .\nPoliticians Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan recently introduced a plan to fight poverty by transferring more responsibility to the states . While the federal government offers various assistance programs to U.S. residents in need — anything from unemployment benefits to food stamps — the states provide additional services and benefits .\nRight now , the states already bear a substantial burden . They pay for public pension plans , unemployment insurance , education , Medicaid , and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program ( TANF ) , among other benefits . However , while most states fund many of these social programs , the amounts and levels they spend vary widely . 24/7 Wall St. identified the states that guaranteed the most benefits in these five categories , and the states that guaranteed the least .\nFor the most part , states that spent the most in one program tend to spent the most overall . Rhode Island , which ranked as the top-spending state this year , spent in the top 15 in all five measures we considered . Similarly , states that were close to the bottom of our list for doling out benefits and services spent less than average in nearly every spending category .\nHowever , this was not always the case . States like New York , which spent the most in the country on education per pupil and second-most in the country on Medicaid per enrollee , paid the fourth-lowest weekly unemployment benefits relative to lost wages .\nThe reasons some states spend more than others on benefits and programs is complicated . One factor that seems to be consistently true across the top and bottom spenders is the political climate . Of the 10 states that ranked as the most generous , nine voted Democratic in the last presidential election , with Alaska as the exceptions . Of the 10 states that spent the least on their social programs , all but one — Florida — voted Republican .\nThe political climate can also influence how much a state collects in taxes , with Democratic states collecting more than Republican states . States that spent more on benefits were also more likely to have higher median incomes , which mean that tax bases were also higher . In fact , all five of the states with the highest median income are among the top spenders on social programs . Most of the least generous states have among the lowest median incomes in the country .\nThere does not appear to be a relationship between the relative needs of a state 's residents for social programs and the state 's spending . Of the states that spent the most on weekly TANF cash assistance , for example , the vast majority had among the lowest poverty rates in the country .\nIn an interview with 24/7 Wall St , Michael Leachman , director of state fiscal research at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities ( CBPP ) , explained that it 's hard to explain why states that have a greater need for public assistance spend less , while states with better-off populations spend more on benefits . `` You wonder if it is n't to some extent a case of chicken-and-egg , '' he said . `` In the states that have urban , higher income populations… there 's money there , and the politics have evolved to encourage spending on public programs . But it is a difficult question to answer . ''\nIn order to assess how much or how little a state guarantees in benefits and services , 24/7 Wall St. examined spending by each state on a number of different programs . We considered average pension benefit payments per beneficiary as well as per pupil spending , both published by the Census Bureau for the 2011 fiscal year . Pension benefits include both state and local pensions , while per pupil spending reflects the total from all sources of funding .\nThe Department of Labor 's Employment & Training Administration provided unemployment insurance figures , calculated over a 12-month period ending in the third quarter of 2013 . Information on TANF figures is from the CBPP . Medicaid payments per enrollee for fiscal 2010 are from the Kaiser Family Foundation . While states receive partial federal funding for TANF and Medicaid , they have considerable discretion over how to implement these programs . All data used were for the most recent available year .\nVermont collected more taxes per resident in fiscal 2011 than all but three other states . At $ 8,988 per capita , the high tax revenue may help explain the state 's generous benefit programs that year . High state tax revenue — $ 8,988 per capita — may have helped account for Vermont 's generous benefit programs that year . In 2012 , just 6.5 % of Vermont 's population did n't have health insurance , less than half the national rate . And with Vermont officials pushing for universal coverage , health coverage in the state may improve even more . In 2011 , Governor Peter Shumlin signed into law Green Mountain Healthcare , a single-payer plan . The plan is expected to be fully implemented by 2017 .\nHawaii 's unemployment insurance system was the most generous in the country . Unemployed workers received an average benefit of nearly $ 423 , or 52.5 % of the average weekly wage , as of the third quarter of 2013 — both more than any other state . By either measure this was more than any other state . Hawaii also has a two-tiered system of TANF benefit levels , depending on the ability of a family member to work . Even the lower benefit level places Hawaii among the most generous states . Last year , the state also eliminated its asset limit , which had previously left many families unqualified for TANF due to their savings and other assets . Opponents of asset limit believe this discourages saving for emergencies .\nMaryland was one of the wealthiest states in the nation in 2012 , when a typical household earned more than $ 71,000 , the highest of any state . That year , just 10.8 % of residents lived below the poverty line , less than in all but four other states . Like most states , Maryland 's pension program took a hit during the recession , losing 20 % of its value in 2009 . As of the middle of last year , however , the fund had recovered substantially , exceeding $ 40 billion in value .\nBeneficiaries of Pennsylvania 's unemployment insurance program received more than $ 357 per week on average in 2013 , among the most in the country . Since the start of 2014 , Pennsylvania 's unemployed may have a rough time because federally funded unemployment compensation is ending for nearly 90,000 Pennsylvania residents . Pennsylvania was also a top spender on education as of fiscal 2011 . Total per pupil spending was $ 13,467 that year , nearly $ 3,000 more than the national average spending .\nNew Jersey was among the nation 's highest spenders on education as of fiscal 2011 , spending close to $ 16,000 per pupil . This was more than $ 6,000 per student above the national rate . On a per-student basis , the state was also among the highest spenders on both teachers and school system workers . That same year , the average state or local pension beneficiary received more than $ 29,000 per year , one of the largest average benefits in the U.S. During his tenure , Governor Chris Christie has pushed through reforms in both teacher tenure and pension spending . Christie recently began his second term as governor with a `` State of the State '' speech , in which he pushed further reforms to both education and state pensions . New Jersey was also a leader in Medicaid spending per enrollee , ranking third in the nation in fiscal 2010 .\nAlaskans paid more state taxes than any other state in 2011 . Considering their high incomes and the state 's low poverty rate , Alaska residents may have been able to afford it . Median household income in the state was $ 67,712 in 2012 , higher than all but two other states . Due in part to high taxes , the state 's revenue in 2011 was $ 17,630 per capita , by far the highest in the nation that year . During the 12 months through the third quarter of last year , however , Alaska 's unemployed received $ 250 per week , on average , relatively small compared to the rest of the U.S. Additionally , more than one in five people in Alaska did not have health insurance in 2012 , more than nearly any other state . Overall , however , Alaskans have access to very generous benefits . For families living in poverty , the federal food stamp program , together with Alaska 's welfare system , can cover families for more than 80 % of the federal poverty level and the highest combined benefit as of 2013 .\nMassachusetts had $ 6,832 per person in state revenue as of fiscal 2011 , more than all but eight other states . Much of this likely went to support the state 's various social safety net programs . Per pupil spending on K-12 schools was the seventh highest in the nation that year , while the average annual benefit payment to state and local pension beneficiaries was ninth-highest in the U.S . The state was also a high spender on Medicaid , paying $ 6,841 per enrollee as of fiscal 2010 , 12th most in the nation . However , this may have been in part due to the high cost of health care in the state . As of the most recent quarter , only care in Alaska was more expensive , according to MERIC . Despite the high health care costs , just 3.9 % of the state 's population did not have health insurance in 2012 , the lowest % age of any state . The state 's 2006 health care reforms , often considered a model for the ACA , are likely the reason for the high coverage rates in the state .\nConnecticut pension beneficiaries received generous payments in 2011 of more than $ 35,000 on average — the highest in the country . Connecticut was among the highest spenders on education in 2011 , spending more than $ 5,000 more per pupil than the national average . Teacher salaries and benefits were among the highest at that time as well . Connecticut residents were also among the wealthiest in the nation as of 2012 , with more than 11 % earning $ 200,000 or more per year , the highest proportion nationally .\nNew York was one of the top benefit spenders in the nation on a wide range of state programs . New York spent $ 8,910 per Medicaid enrollee in fiscal 2010 , trailing only Alaska . In 2012 , Governor Andrew Cuomo petitioned the federal government to allow the state to keep some of the billions of dollars its Medicaid redesign saved . However , a decision on whether to allow the state to reinvest this money within its own health system is pending . In addition to its high Medicaid expenses , New York also led the nation in per pupil spending as of fiscal 2011 , at more than $ 19,000 . TANF benefit levels were among the highest in the nation as well last year , due in part to a state program that includes a number of different components , including a variable amount for rent that well exceeds what some states give in TANF benefits . Of course , New York must also raise enough taxes to be able to provide these services . The state collected $ 3,500 in fiscal 2011 , eighth-most in the U.S .\nRhode Island was one of just six states to pay pension beneficiaries more than $ 30,000 in fiscal year 2011 ; the state paid $ 31,548 on average . In November 2011 , state legislators enacted the Retirement Security Act , which introduced considerable reforms to the state 's pension program . The act was designed to lower the state 's overall pension liabilities , which were projected to increase under the previous system . Rhode Islanders received another relatively generous benefit . The jobless received unemployment checks worth nearly 40 % of the typical weekly wage on average over the 12 months through the third quarter of last year , among the best compensation nationally .\nCLICK HERE : for a list of the 10 states with the least government benefits\n24/7 Wall St. is a ███ content partner offering financial news and commentary . Its content is produced independently of ███ .


I remember Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ’ s 2018 victory well . I sat at a table in my old Chicago apartment , beer in hand , toggling back and forth between Twitter and the New York Times ’ NY-14 election results page . Then the first returns rolled in and showed a wide AOC lead that never faltered as the night went on . For progressives generally , the reaction was euphoric : “ she did it , she beat the Democratic machine , if she can do it anyone can , hurrah hurrah , etc. ” That night , anything felt possible for the Left .\nIn the 2020 election cycle that followed , the number of candidates trying to be AOC 2.0 skyrocketed . All were looking to punch above their weight against longtime incumbents , win with grassroots energy and limited funds , and go from random nobodies to members of the U.S. Congress . We had dozens and dozens of Left candidates , some of them open socialists , running everywhere .\nThe results have been less impressive than we might have hoped .\nShahid Buttar , Nancy Pelosi ’ s challenger , is entering round two of California ’ s jungle primary with 13 percent to her 74 percent , a margin that could easily mean a victory for Pelosi in November . Anthony Clark , backed by DSA , lost with 13 percent of the vote in his second try at the March IL-07 primary—ditto for Heidi Sloan , who unfortunately brought in 30 percent for her first shot at TX-25 on Super Tuesday .\nOne semi-official group of candidates emerged from this cycle as a perfect representation of the AOC-inspired “ everyone run for Congress anywhere , you never know what will happen ” mentality . Calling themselves The Rose Caucus , this informal slate of candidates ran as socialists in 21 congressional seats total . So far , none of these candidates has won . Some of their percentage vote shares : 23 percent , 22 percent , 13 percent , 8 percent , 4 percent , etc . The trend of defeats looks to continue .\nAnother progressive electoral organization , Justice Democrats , tried a highly pragmatic and selective approach to their endorsements this cycle . They gave the nod to nine challengers , all of whom they clearly vetted early-on for their fundraising capacity and established presence in-district . It proved to be a decent strategy , nabbing a narrow win for IL-03 ’ s Marie Newman ( her second time running for that seat ) and a nail biter loss for Jessica Cisneros in TX-28 , the kind of close defeat that can be turned into a win in 2022 . And in OH-03 , Morgan Harper brought home just 31 percent of the vote .\nThere are still plenty of contests to go ; votes are being cast for Mckayla Wilkes in MD-05 right this very moment . Justice Democrats and DSA-backed candidates might still be able to eke out a House seat or two more this cycle even under a pandemic that prevents grassroots canvassing and rallies . But we can all see this style of victory will be scarce and momentous , not the reliable , consistent victories that we might have envisioned back in 2018 . While many of these unsuccessful runs galvanize organizers and give local Left groups the ability to build and grow , the fact remains that going from regular citizen to Congressperson in one leap is a tremendous feat , and it doesn ’ t constitute a reliable model for building long-term Left electoral power .\nAOC is the most famous member of the Squad because her victory was the most romantic and impressive—a working class Latina went from bartender straight to the U.S. Congress , “ knocking down the House ” and refusing to wait for change one day longer . It ’ s a shame that a similar focus isn ’ t on the victories of fellow Squadmates Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib . The latter would describe herself as a democratic socialist , and both are arguably to AOC ’ s left . Both ran for and won their congressional seats , not as longshot upstarts with no political background , but as established and well-known community members occupying seats in their respective State Houses . Their wins represent a much more boring but reliable path for future Left congressional candidates to follow .\nWithin the confines of electoral politics , this is what a sustainable , serious , long-term strategy for building the Left in the U.S. will look like—not trying to focus only on Congress with political newcomers every cycle , hoping for miracle after miracle—but contesting local and State seats seriously so we have a real bench to push towards higher office in the decades to come . We ’ ll do it like the runup to the Reagan Revolution , starting with school boards and city councils before moving up to the State level and beyond . Municipal and state seats are cheaper to contest than Congress , the win-numbers are smaller , and the incumbents aren ’ t as heavily-guarded by Party establishment figures and powerful lobbies ( although there is still plenty of that ) . The career of Bernie Sanders is actually instructive here : after running for the Senate and failing , Bernie ran for mayor of Burlington—and won . Local office was the springboard to state office , which in turn led to a national presidential campaign .\nOf course this doesn ’ t mean leftists should never consider congressional bids . Especially when a seat opens suddenly and no other leftist candidate can mount a bid , like Samelys López ’ s current campaign for NY-15 , or when a case can be made that the incumbent is truly out of touch with their constituents in one obvious respect or another . And the occasional , high-energy longshot candidate can be a good thing . If a socialist Congressional candidate with no prior electoral background wins in every few dozen races we run , that still remains an astounding feat that can have an outsized impact on the country—look no further than how much AOC has changed the conversation even as a freshman Representative . But if we ’ re in this fight for the long haul , we need to get fired up about the State House too . Having a deep bench of municipal and State officials can turn our activist campaigns into a real movement , and have a tremendous impact on local policy while we ’ re at it . The decision to run for Congress and ask for scarce Left resources should not be taken lightly , especially if there are city and State level seats ripe for the taking in your area .\nThere is cause for Left optimism on the local and state level . New York DSA State Senate candidate Jabari Brisport has outraised his competition nearly twice over and , if he wins , will be joining existing socialist NY State Senator Julia Salazar . In Minnesota , socialist State Senate insurgent Omar Fatah has somehow received the official backing of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party over the sitting incumbent , and in Pennsylvania , socialist State Senate candidate Nikil Saval is endorsed by Bernie Sanders , DSA , The Sunrise Movement , and ( most importantly ) a slew of local unions and elected officials . DSA already has State Reps. in Connecticut , Rhode Island , Pennsylvania , New Hampshire , Vermont , Virginia , Montana , Massachusetts , Maryland , Maine and Hawai ’ i . And who can forget that 12 percent of Chicago ’ s city council seats are now filled by open socialists who took office just a year ago ?\nBernie Sanders is thinking like I am about the far down ballot . While he still might make another round of congressional endorsements , last week he instead chose to back a fresh slate of eight additional State level candidates with upcoming primaries , telling his email list that bringing about transformative change in the U.S. will require “ electing more progressive candidates and advancing progressive policies at the state and local level . ”\nThese smaller wins are where the Left can build power in a sustainable long term way , and we need way more of them . From a bench of municipal and State seats , we will find the Ilhans and the Rashidas of the future . They ’ ll become politicians with an existing voter base and record , well-known and liked by their constituents . They ’ ll be able to run for Congress by melding a locally established reputation with grassroots energy . They ’ ll win the enthusiasm that we know outspoken progressive and open socialist congressional candidates can get . Such leftist congressional candidates will have an easier time establishing themselves as “ serious ” than our current upstarts , consolidating support from local progressive-minded organizations and unions , particularly when they get the chance to run for open seats . And even if they never run for Congress , these lower-level Left officials can provide endorsements and lend public legitimacy to grassroots , movement candidates that otherwise they would never receive . Building towards these future campaigns is the work of a generation , not just a few years .\nThis argument may seem clear and obvious . But I fear we ’ ll see another election cycle in 2022 much like this year ’ s : Progressive and socialist challengers will emerge from obscurity all over the place to plead for scarce resources , endorsements and volunteers in longshot bids for Congress that ultimately net roughly 20 to 30 percent of the vote . All the while likely right-wing and more-easily-beatable State Representatives will face weak challenges .\nAOC taught us that anything is possible for us , but sadly , that doesn ’ t mean anything is probable . We are building a movement that can hold its own and grow for decades . If you are thinking about running for office next cycle , follow Ilhan ’ s footsteps , and run locally before aiming for Congress .


Calls to defund or abolish police departments have become the signature demand of protesters who have taken to the streets in cities across the country over the last few weeks to denounce police violence against Black people . Proponents of such policy measures argue that the U.S. should reallocate much , or even all , of the money spent on law enforcement for anti-poverty initiatives , education , and other public services in order to more humanely address the underlying societal ills that lead to crime in the first place . Implicit in this proposition is the argument that cities spend a disproportionate percentage of their budgets on police departments , to the detriment of other services . Indeed , funding for mental health , education , affordable housing , and other programs has been steadily declining .\nAlready , local officials in cities like Minneapolis and New York have been making plans to slash their police budgets and shift the savings and certain social service responsibilities to other departments.In addition , officials and activists have been scrutinizing whether enough of those police budgets is going toward nonviolent intervention programs . The New York Times additionally found that , over the last 40 years , the average expenditures across 150 large cities for the police have risen 1.2 percentage points—amounting to millions of dollars annually in each of these places .\nTo get a better sense of just how much cities are spending on their police departments , and where within each department that money is going , I pulled the 2020 budgets for Minneapolis ; Los Angeles ; and Dallas—three cities in separate regions of the country with varying population sizes and demographic makeups . In Los Angeles , as in many places , policing makes up the largest chunk of the budget . Elsewhere , other expenses outpace it . For example , Dallas spends slightly more on water .\nSince at least the late 1980s , every mayor of Los Angeles has sought to grow the LAPD ’ s budget—just from 2010 to 2020 , appropriations for the department rose from $ 1.17 billion to $ 1.73 billion . For decades , the city ’ s goal had been to build a force of 10,000 officers , a benchmark that former Democratic Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa eventually passed in 2013 . Even then , Los Angeles officials were still committed to continuing to add to the force . Current Democratic Mayor Eric Garcetti included a $ 120 million increase for the LAPD in the city ’ s 2020 budget . The killing of George Floyd and the unrest that followed , however , has prompted current Garcetti to subsequently push for a $ 150 million budget cut for the LAPD , which could lead to downsizing for officers and other personnel . The savings would go toward a $ 250 million fund for youth jobs , health initiatives , trauma healing centers , monetary damages for people who ’ ve experienced discrimination .\nLos Angeles has a population of roughly 4 million people ; the police department has nearly 10,000 officers .\nThe Minneapolis Police Department has been at the forefront of the nation ’ s debate around defunding and disbanding law enforcement after one of its officers killed George Floyd by kneeling on his neck for 8 minutes and 46 seconds . And even before this brutality , police misconduct complaints in the city had risen more than sevenfold from 2008 to 2018 . A veto-proof majority of the Minneapolis City Council vowed to dismantle the police department on June 7 . Though many of the specifics haven ’ t been worked out yet , this decision will likely mean that police funding will be diverted to services like mental health and drug addiction treatment ; a smaller force might remain , but will handle far fewer cases . Prior to the current upheaval , the department had been pushing in recent years to recruit more officers to bring the total number to at least 1,000 . The number of officers in Minneapolis has been falling since 2008 due to the financial crisis and a general desire from the city council to reduce the size of the department .\nThe population of Minneapolis is roughly 430,000 people ; its police department has around 800 officers .\nFrom 2010 to 2014 , Dallas had an incredibly high per-capita rate of police-involved shootings , outpacing New York , Chicago , and Los Angeles . Around 2012 , following a high-profile incident in which an officer killed an unarmed black man , the department began undergoing extensive reforms to improve transparency and implement nonviolent community policing practices . Both crime and excessive force complaints plummeted in the ensuing years .\nWhen devising the 2020 budget for the city , the Dallas City Council resolved to pour more funding into the Dallas Police Department as the number of officers in the force had fallen by 700 since 2011 . Local activists accused council members at the time of prioritizing law enforcement over funding for anti-poverty and other social services programs . On Wednesday , the council voted to delay approval for a $ 6.5 million budget increase in the wake of the current police brutality protests .\nThe population of Dallas is roughly 1.3 million people ; its police department has about 3,600 officers .


It was one of the most absurd stories of California ’ s lunacy . In the midst of one of the worst droughts in the state ’ s history , state and federal wildlife officials were depleting a large reservoir in the Sierra foothills to save ( by increasing river flows ) a handful of hatchery-born fish that had virtually zero chance of making it to the Pacific Ocean alive . At a water-board meeting I attended , local farmers and residents were incredulous at officials ’ refusal to prioritize humans over critters .\nThis week ’ s news gives that story a run for its money . California ’ s rat population has been exploding because of post-drought environmental reasons , the spread of filth caused by the growing homeless population , and the refusal of some cities to deal with the problem . If you ignore disease-carrying rats , it won ’ t take long to have more disease-carrying rats . A recent survey of pest-control companies found virtually all of them reporting dramatic increases in rat infestations .\n“ The state is seeing a troubling resurgence of rodents , which can carry a wide array of diseases that have been around since the Middle Ages , ” the Sacramento Bee reported . “ The metropolis of Los Angeles County , for one , has seen skyrocketing cases of one such disease , typhus. ” In fact , the rat infestation had gotten so bad that rats had forced the California EPA to shut down its playground out of fear that workers ’ kids would contract diseases .\nThe agency had first planned to step up the use of pesticides , but after environmental groups objected , the director promised to find ecologically safer alternatives . This is ironic , as the Bee noted , because the building also houses the state Department of Pesticide Regulation . So even when the bureaucrats ’ own offspring are in potential danger , the demands of the environmental lobby always take precedence over the concerns of regular citizens .\nTypical rat poison is effective , but it ’ s an anticoagulant that of course causes internal bleeding . State wildlife officials have found some of its residue in virtually all of the mountain lion carcasses the state has tested . It has also been found in owls and weasel-like creatures around the northwestern marijuana grows . And the Bee further reports that “ In 2017 , a San Francisco coyote died from internal bleeding caused by the toxins. ” Predators are poisoned when they eat poisoned rats , but typically the toxin levels build up but rarely kill the secondary animal .\nThe points made in the above paragraph are interesting from an ecological perspective . In an ideal world , it might be troubling that a coyote died from internal bleeding or that cougars become mangy from eating poisoned rats . Then again , we ’ re talking about coyotes and cougars . When I lived by a canyon in the San Gabriel Valley , the coyotes so regularly feasted on cats and Chihuahuas that wildlife officials ended up exterminating ( via gunshot ) dozens of them .\nBut however sad it is that a male mountain lion kitten with a tracking collar was found dead not long ago , it would be even sadder for a human child to contract typhus — a horribly painful disease . Other diseases , including some that are life-threatening , can be caused by rodent feces or bites . We ’ re all familiar with rabies and , you know , the plague .\nBeyond state officials limiting the use of rat poison around their properties , the Legislature is considering a measure , Assembly Bill 1788 , that would vastly limit the use of these types of pesticides . It would mostly ban powerful second-generation rodenticides . It would also forbid the use of first-generation anticoagulants , which are less likely to kill wildlife after a single feeding of a poisoned rodent , on state-owned land barring a public-health or agricultural rationale .\n“ [ S ] ince the 1980s , and even as most recently as this week the Department of Fish and Wildlife have been warning about the impacts rodenticides are having on all wildlife in the state , ” argued its author , Assemblyman Richard Bloom , D-Santa Monica . The bill passed overwhelmingly in the Assembly . Its clear goal is to protect wildlife . By contrast , opponents were focused on — get this — the impact of rodent-spread diseases on the human population .\nThe environmental community doesn ’ t offer much of an alternative for restaurants , farms , and homeowners affected by the rat crisis . “ Environmentalists say there are other options to manage the state ’ s pests , such as making cities more sanitary ( rodents are often drawn to the trash from the state ’ s growing numbers of homeless encampments , some experts say ) and by using pesticides that are less likely to contaminate wildlife , ” according to that Bee article .\nThat sounds so reasonable , until you follow public debates about the homeless situation . California officials don ’ t have a clue what to do about it , with most of them viewing it as a failure of public spending rather than a complex mishmash of issues involving addiction , poverty , mental illness , and housing regulations . I ’ d bet that an outbreak of the bubonic plague will come well before lawmakers and local governments get any sort of handle on homelessness . And those less-toxic approaches also are generally less effective .\n“ Sustainable control can only be achieved by reducing the rodent carrying capacity of the environment , principally by reducing food and harborage , ” according to the Barn Owl Trust . That also sounds great , but how many typhus outbreaks do we want to endure as we await for the environment to reduce its rat-carrying capabilities ?\nNo wonder California ’ s rat crisis has joined a host of other intractable California crises . And no wonder we ’ re still seeing regular news stories about Californians high-tailing it to Utah or Texas . When your state government places the welfare of coyotes over your children , what more do you need to know ?


In a ruling hailed as historic for wildlife conservation in America , a US judge on Monday ordered that the world-famous grizzly bears living in and around Yellowstone national park be returned to the endangered species list .\nThe move means that a controversial sport hunt of grizzlies in Wyoming and Idaho – outside the boundaries of the park – will be canceled indefinitely , extending protections against hunting that have lasted 44 years .\nTim Preso of the environmental law firm EarthJustice , who served as lead attorney in a case challenging the removal of protection for bears , was ecstatic when reached at his office in Bozeman , Montana , after word arrived of the decision .\nHe called the ruling “ momentous ” , given the high profile of grizzlies and growing threats to their survival in the 21st century , including climate change , which has affected a key grizzly bear food , the seeds inside whitebark pinecones .\nJudge Dana Christensen , who sits on a district court in Montana , had “ had done a huge amount of homework , as was evident by the questions he asked when we presented our case , and , because of that , we were hopeful ” , Preso said . “ This is a case that he will be known for and it ’ s an important part of the legacy of American conservation . He did what a judge does – apply the law without being prejudiced by politics . ”\nThere are four other grizzly populations in the northern Rocky Mountains in the US , only one of which is significant in size . Saving grizzly bears from near-extinction in the Yellowstone area is considered one of the greatest wildlife success stories . Numbers of bears have rebounded to more than 700 from a low of about 135 three decades ago .\nAs such , the three states of Wyoming , Montana and Idaho have aggressively pushed to have bears removed from federal protections .\nA key argument made by Preso and his colleagues is that as an island population of grizzlies , isolated and cut off from other clusters of bears , the Yellowstone bruins face ongoing challenges .\nGoing on a bear hunt : the animal activists signing up to 'shoot ' grizzlies Read more\nTrue biological recovery , as spelled out in the Endangered Species Act , the judge said , means reconnecting the population of greater Yellowstone bears with others in the Lower 48 . That hasn ’ t happened . In fact , the judge labeled the rationale behind the government ’ s case for delisting the bears arbitrary and capricious .\nWildlife officials in the states expressed disappointment . Leaders of the Wyoming game and fish department were eager to authorize the first hunt of bears in two generations , which would have allowed up to 22 to be “ taken ” this year . That plan was met with fierce public resistance , including some 650,000 comments from people across the country and around the world who were overwhelmingly opposed to the sport killing of creatures that have become synonymous with Yellowstone , America ’ s first national park .\nPreso said he expects that lawyers for the states will appeal against Christensen ’ s ruling and will probably be joined by pro-hunting groups such as Safari Club International .\nThe superintendent of Yellowstone national park , Dan Wenk , who is stepping down after 43 years , expressed concern last weekend at his retirement party about the safety of grizzlies that wander beyond park boundaries and could be killed by hunters , like the infamous case of Cecil the lion in Zimbabwe .\nIn an interview in Wyoming last week , the celebrated naturalist Jane Goodall also spoke out in support of the bears .\n“ We should not be killing any animals for fun . We should be celebrating grizzlies being alive not rushing to shoot them . ”


Ken Klippen lives in Philadelphia , but he 's trying to save egg farmers in the Midwest from a ballot measure in California .\nAs the president of the National Association of Egg Farmers , Klippen says that Proposition 12 on the ballot in California this November , will cause `` some major changes in the way eggs are produced . ''\nThe measure , which Klippen calls `` precedent setting , '' is titled the Farm Animal Confinement Initiative . It would ban the sale of eggs in California that come from hens raised in small cages . It would do the same for pigs and calves .\nThat means most farmers who sell their produce in the state of California will either have to change their farming practices or lose one of the biggest markets in the country . The Association of California Egg Farmers and National Pork Producers Council both oppose the measure .\nFox News spoke with a third-generation egg farmer , Chris Nichols of Chino Valley Ranchers , who also opposes Prop 12 .\n`` I would say the people who do suffer in the end are the consumer , '' Nichols explained , `` because your price is going up . ''\nCage-free eggs can cost as much as twice as regular eggs . Some worry that this measure will take away consumer choice , if it passes .\nJosh Balk of the Humane Society of the United States , the group that supports the proposition , disagrees . Balk said that `` everyone from Walmart to McDonald 's to Safeway to Denny 's to IHOP are all switching to cage-free eggs . ''\nKlippen said that although the Humane Society pretends to be a shelter organization , it is simply pushing a secret national agenda : getting people to stop eating meat altogether .\n`` Not only meat , '' Klippen added , `` but stop [ drinking ] milk and stop eating eggs . So , meat , milk and eggs , that 's their agenda . ''\nWhen asked about this assertion , Balk replied that `` everyone from vegans to meat eaters can completely agree , that animals should not be confined in cages . ''\nCages that are often too small to move an inch .


Hindu worshippers have begun slaughtering thousands of buffalo as part of a religious ritual held every five years in southern Nepal , despite efforts to end the practice considered the world 's biggest sacrifice of animals at any one site .\nThe Gadhimai Festival - a two-day festival in honour of the Hindu goddess of power - kicked off in the early hours of Tuesday amid tight security , with the ceremonial slaughter of a goat , rat , chicken , pig and pigeon . A local shaman then offered blood from five points of his body .\nFollowing that , some 200 butchers with sharpened swords and knives walked into a walled arena bigger than a football field that held several thousand animals as excited pilgrims climbed trees to catch a glimpse .\n`` The sacrifices have begun today ... We had tried not to support it but people have faith in the tradition and have come here with their offerings , '' Birendra Prasad Yadav from the festival organising committee told AFP news agency .\nThousands of worshippers from Nepal and neighbouring India have spent days sleeping out in the open and offering prayers ahead of the event in Bariyarpur village , close to the Indian border .\n`` I believe in the goddess . My mother had asked her for the good health of my son , '' one of them , Rajesh Kumar Das , 30 , told AFP , holding a goat in his hand .\nSabu Sahani , 25 , who travelled with his family for a day from India 's Bihar with a goat offering , said he was `` happy to be here '' . `` The goddess listened to me . We did not have children , but my wife has now given birth to a daughter , '' Sahani told AFP news agency .\nAn estimated 200,000 animals , ranging from goats to rats , were butchered during the last Gadhimai Festival in 2014 .\nA volunteer controls a crowd using a stick before the sacrificial ceremony of the 'Gadhimai Mela ' festival at Bariyarpur [ Navesh Chitrakar/Reuters ]\nMany were hopeful the centuries-old tradition would end after temple authorities announced a ban in 2015 and Nepal 's supreme court directed the government to discourage the bloodshed a year later .\nBut animal rights activists say government agencies and temple committees have failed to implement these rulings .\n`` The officials have let their personal beliefs rule over the court orders , they did not do enough to discourage the slaughters , '' animal rights activist Manoj Gautam said .\nLocal priest Mangal Chaudhary , the tenth generation of his family to serve at the temple , did not comment on whether the temple supports this year 's mass sacrifice but said that the numbers in attendance are increasing .\n`` We will follow our traditions and perform the rituals in the temple . But what the devotees do outside is their own wish , '' he said .\nIndian border authorities and volunteers have in recent days seized scores of animals being brought across the frontier by unlicensed traders and pilgrims but this has failed to stop the flow .\nAccording to legend , the first sacrifices in Bariyarpur were conducted several centuries ago when the goddess Gadhimai appeared to a prisoner in a dream and asked him to build a temple for her .


This combination photo shows Brian Wilson performing at the Rosemont Theatre in Rosemont , Ill , on Oct 6 , 2017 , left , and Mike Love at `` Howard Stern 's Birthday Bash '' in New York on Jan. 31 , 2014 . Wilson , a co-founder of The Beach Boys , has denounced a performance of Beach Boys music at the Safari Club International Convention in Reno , Nev . The concert is being led by The Beach Boys ’ co-founder , lead singer and chief lyricist Mike Love . ( AP Photo )\nThis combination photo shows Brian Wilson performing at the Rosemont Theatre in Rosemont , Ill , on Oct 6 , 2017 , left , and Mike Love at `` Howard Stern 's Birthday Bash '' in New York on Jan. 31 , 2014 . Wilson , a co-founder of The Beach Boys , has denounced a performance of Beach Boys music at the Safari Club International Convention in Reno , Nev . The concert is being led by The Beach Boys ’ co-founder , lead singer and chief lyricist Mike Love . ( AP Photo )\nNEW YORK ( AP ) — One of the co-founders of The Beach Boys has joined a boycott of his own music to protest it being used by another band member at an animal hunting convention .\nBrian Wilson has denounced a performance of Beach Boys music on Wednesday at the Safari Club International Convention in Reno , Nevada . The concert is being led by The Beach Boys ’ co-founder , lead singer and chief lyricist Mike Love .\nIn a tweet , Wilson said he and band member Al Jardine are “ emphatically opposed ” to trophy hunting . He then pointed to a Change.org petition that calls for a boycott of Beach Boys ’ music until the performance is canceled . The petition had garnered more than 100,000 signatures by Tuesday afternoon .\nThe annual Safari Club convention has drawn protests by animal rights groups such as the Humane Society of the United States for profiting from the hunting of endangered animals and promoting unethical hunting practices . This year ’ s keynote speaker is Donald Trump Jr .\nIn response , Love offered a statement to Pitchfork magazine : “ We look forward to a night of great music in Reno and , as always , support freedom of thought and expression as a fundamental tenet of our rights as Americans . ”\nThe Beach Boys are known for sunny harmonies in such songs as “ California Girls , ” I Get Around , ” “ Fun Fun Fun , ” “ Good Vibrations ” and “ Kokomo . ”


Animal conservation activists said Donald Trump Jr. might have violated a federal wildlife anti-trafficking law when he killed a rare sheep during a recent trip to Mongolia and imported parts of the animal back to the U.S ( Tom Williams/CQ ███ file photo )\nThe U.S . Fish and Wildlife Service said it will review allegations that Donald Trump Jr. , may have illegally killed a rare sheep during a recent trip to Mongolia and imported parts of the animal back to the U.S .\nAnimal conservation activists said President Donald Trump 's eldest son may have violated a federal wildlife anti-trafficking law after ProPublica reported last week that he shot and killed an argali sheep without proper permits during a personal trip in August . The Mongolian government issued a permit for hunting the sheep after the fact , and it ’ s unclear what happened to the animal after it was killed , according to the report .\n[ Spotted : Donald Trump Jr. mistakenly heading toward Pelosi ’ s office in search of McCarthy ]\nA spokesperson for Trump Jr. on Tuesday provided a statement to CQ ███ denying allegations of wrongdoing related to the hunting permit . In the statement , which was also provided to ProPublica , the spokesperson said the hunting trip was purchased in 2015 at a National Rifle Association auction before his father announced his presidential campaign and all permits were secured through a third party hunting group .\n“ Mr . Trump paid for his trip to Mongolia on his own , flew commercial and timely applied and secured all required permits through a third party outfitter — as is standard in the industry , ” the spokesperson said .\nTrump Jr. ’ s spokesperson declined to comment on whether any argali animal parts were imported to the U.S .\nThe Center for Biological Diversity , in a Dec. 13 letter , asked FWS law enforcement to evaluate whether the reported hunt and retroactive permit violated any U.S. or Mongolian laws . Under the Lacey Act of 1900 , it is illegal to import animal trophies in contravention with foreign laws and individuals found in violation can be subject to fines and prison time .\nIn its letter the group also asked if there were any permits pending to import the animal that Trump allegedly killed and noted the argali sheep population in Mongolia is protected under the Endangered Species Act and a 1975 international treaty governing wildlife trafficking .\n“ We urge you to ensure that the protections in place for argali — including from hunters and poachers — are enforced and special access is not provided for wealthy , white hunters from the West , even if their father is the U.S. president , ” the letter reads .\nFWS spokeswoman Christina Meister said in a Dec. 16 email that the agency “ has received the Center for Biological Diversity ’ s electronic letter and is in the process of reviewing this matter . ”\n[ Man to Plead Guilty to Sending Threatening Letters to Trump Jr. , Stabenow ]\nSeparately , the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington said it requested records on Dec. 13 from the Interior Department for all licenses to import argali sheep granted to Trump Jr. or Kevin Small , a Republican donor who was reportedly also on the trip . CREW also filed requests for information to the Department of Homeland Security and State Department related to the reported hunt , including communications between U.S. and Mongolian officials and any costs incurred to taxpayers .


Hilary Hoynes is a University of California at Berkeley economist who wrote a particularly notable paper last year . Instead of increasing dependency , as conservative critics have repeatedly claimed , Hoyen 's paper showed that , for women at least , food stamp use during pregnancy and early childhood has exactly the opposite impact of what conservatives allege : It actually increases economic self-sufficiency when children grow up , in the next generation .\nThat was just one of two main results reported in “ Long Run Impacts of Childhood Access to the Safety Net , ” which Hoynes co-authored with Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach and Douglas Almond . As stated in the paper 's abstract , access to food stamps for women leads to `` increases in economic self-sufficiency ( increases in educational attainment , earnings , and income , and decreases in welfare participation ) . ” Hoynes and her colleagues took advantage of the fact that food stamp programs were established county-by-county over a period of years , creating a sort of “ natural experiment ” beginning half a century in the past .\n“ Hoynes ’ work has been timely , innovative and revealing , ” said Arloc Sherman , a senior researcher at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities , which has highlighted Hoynes ' work this year as food stamps and the SNAP program have become a major subject of controversy . “ Hoynes and her collaborators have really broadened our understanding of how programs like food stamps not only relieve hardship in the moment but can trigger long-lasting gains in participating children ’ s later health and education . The implications of the research are considerable . In this long view , such assistance is not only helping struggling families to scrape by , it ’ s a good investment in the next generation of citizens and workers . ”\nHoynes herself said , “ This work indicates that there are important benefits of the safety net that to date have been ignored . They predict that a more generous safety net can reduce health disparities . More generally , the emerging evidence points to an important role for investments in early life -- and those investments generate important returns in terms of better health and economic outcomes in adulthood . ”\nIt 's a startling result in light of the onslaught of conservative claims to the contrary , but it 's somewhat less startling — though still quite illuminating — in light of what 's actually known about the impacts of hunger on childhood development back in the “ reality based community , ” where population-based studies of hunger impacts date back to the 1970s , when researchers first began reporting on the long-term , adult impacts on children born during and shortly after the so-called Dutch “ Hunger Winter , ” a period from November 1944 through May 1945 , when a large part of the Netherlands was subjected to drastically reduced rations under Nazi occupation .\nBut to really appreciate the significance of this research , one must also appreciate two other aspects of Hoynes ' recent research , which combine to provide a three-pronged counterattack on the right 's “ culture of dependency ” narrative . First , she has done previous research establishing short-term benefits — not just for food stamps , but also the for the earned income tax credit — specifically , a reduction in low-birthweight babies , a significant indicator of well-being . This research alone is sufficient to show that safety net programs are achieving the goals of bettering people 's lives , adding more weight to the already well-established statistics on poverty reduction . Second , she has done research into safety net program utilization over the course of economic recession and recovery , research that shows that the current levels of food stamp and other program use are in line with past history , and not a sign of any alleged “ explosion ” in a “ culture of dependency ” under Obama , as the right-wing noise machine would have it .\nThus , Hoynes ' work provides powerful evidence for a three-pronged counterattack against this conservative narrative , which has come to play a dominant role in Republican politics in the post-Bush/Obama/Tea Party era : 1 ) The safety net works in the short term , producing measurable improvements in newborn health ; 2 ) it works in the long term , improving health for both men and women , and reducing dependency among women in the next generation ; and 3 ) it works currently in much the same manner as it has worked in the past . The long-term effects findings are clearly the most remarkable , which is why they 're worth looking into more closely . But it 's the overall combination of evidence — along with the work of others working on other aspects of the safety net — that provides a robust picture of what the real-world safety net actually does to build better lives , pushing back against the onslaught of right-wing lies .\nIn July , for example , when House Republicans were first threatening massive food stamp cuts , the CBPP released a report , “ SNAP Enrollment Remains High Because the Job Market Remains Weak. ” It 's common sense , of course . As the report stated in its very first sentence , “ The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program ( SNAP , formerly known as the food stamp program ) historically has been the most responsive federal program after unemployment insurance in assisting families and communities during economic downturns , ” so it stands to reason that our notoriously bad job market would keep tens of millions of people on food stamps . CBPP began its analysis by citing Congressional Budget Office projections that “ as the labor market recovers , SNAP costs will decline markedly . CBO projects that by 2019 , SNAP costs will fall all of the way back to their mid-1990s level , measured as a share of gross domestic product ( GDP ) . ”\nBut as CBPP continued , they supplemented CBO data with the more detailed research that Hoynes took part in : “ In a new piece of research , economists Hilary Hoynes and Marianne Bitler examine the relationship between poverty and fluctuations in economic activity since 1980 and the historical responsiveness of SNAP , UI [ unemployment insurance ] , and other safety net programs over the business cycle . If SNAP had increased more in proportion to the unemployment rate over the past few years than it has historically , that would provide support to critics who claim that SNAP should have come down as the unemployment rate has declined . But that is not what the research shows . Hoynes and Bitler found that ' [ T ] he safety net programs receiving the most attention through the Great Recession ( Food Stamps and UI ) exhibit adjustments very consistent with their behavior during previous historical cycles . ' ”\nThat research is vital for deflating claims of an expanding culture of dependency — and thus for holding the line against deeper cuts to SNAP . But it 's the long-term impacts research that holds the promise of informing a proactive , pro-safety net economic populism that can do more than just respond reactively to the Tea Party . And , indeed , CBPP 's president , Robert Greenstein , cited that research in his testimony to the Senate Budget Committee in February this year . Her research has gotten more attention in the last six months or so than it ever has before , Hoynes said — but if it 's to have the kind of impact that it deserves , this should only be the beginning .\nWhat Hoynes and progressives interested in building on her work are up against is almost 20 years in which empirical data has been relentlessly marginalized . In 1995 , in his first year as speaker , Newt Gingrich dismantled the Office of Technology Assessment ( which had repeatedly dissed Reagan 's “ Star Wars ” missile defense ) , and imposed other internal changes — such as defunding House committee staff — which radically undermined the role of sound information in shaping the nation 's laws . As conservative iconoclast Bruce Bartlett put it , “ Gingrich did everything in his power to dismantle Congressional institutions that employed people with the knowledge , training and experience to know a harebrained idea when they saw it. ” Although Gingrich quickly burned out as speaker , the fact-free culture he promoted has only grown more virulent since then .\nWhile all this was going on in Washington , Hoynes was producing a body of work about the safety net that no longer seemed to matter to those calling the shots in Congress . “ My work , coming from the background and typical approaches of economics , had mostly focused on how ... different kinds of programs [ welfare versus the earned income tax credit , food stamps vs. cash welfare ] lead to differences in employment decisions , poverty outcomes , family structure decisions , how it influences the propensity for kids to be living with 2-parent vs. 1-parent families , you know , these kinds of questions. ” In short , Hoynes was empirically studying the very sorts of outcomes that self-absorbed politicians were busily pontificating about .\nAbout five years ago , Hoynes said , her interests began to shift toward “ calculating the benefits of programs , rather than spending a lot of time talking about the costs of programs . ”\n“ I got interested in thinking about how we could measure how these programs affect well-being of children in the households , or the households more broadly , ” Hoynes said . “ It came from a broader interest in evaluating potential benefits of the safety net , which … had sort of never been thought about before — the sort of cream on the top , if you will. ” It was n't just a new direction for her , she noted , “ There really was n't a whole lot of work on this . ”\nThere was one exception , however : the child health impacts of Medicaid expansion , covering families higher up the income distribution . Of course it makes sense that expanding health insurance would impact children 's health ; that 's the whole point . But Hoynes took things beyond the obvious . “ I sort of thought , 'Well , here are these measures of health and well-being , can we demonstrate that a more cash-based safety net , general redistribution [ program ] can be quantified in terms of effects on health outcomes ? ' So that 's sort of where I was coming from . ”\nHer research agenda has focused on “ the two programs that are the most important programs for low-income families and that is food stamps/SNAP and the earned income tax credit , ” she explained . Her first projects looked at impacts on “ a very common robust important measure of child health , which is their weight at birth . ”\nThis is where she first used the county-by-county rollout approach . “ When food stamps come into your county , we can use the full census of births in America , ” she said , “ comparing women across counties from one year to the next , using the full census of births from the birth certificate data ; we can then look at the weigh of children at birth , their propensity to be a low-birth weight birth and how this varies when food stamps is available versus not. ” This is the short-term food stamp research referred to above . She and her co-authors found a statistically significant reduction in the risk of low birth weight , which tended to concentrate in high poverty counties .\nHer paper on the earned income tax credit used a conceptually similar approach , but instead of using a county-by-county rollout structure for the “ natural experiment ” design , she used changes in the tax law , which changed the incentives involved during the 1990s “ as we reformed welfare and moved away from AFDC/TANF and toward the EITC , as a main way to provide cash assistance to low-income families . ”\nThis is not how Washington understands welfare reform , of course . The decline of AFDC/TANF funding and the expansion of the EITC somehow live in completely separate boxes , and the “ success ” of welfare reform — primarily defined as the reduced number of recipients — has nothing to do with expansion of the EITC , which has helped keep so many millions afloat . But what about the real world ? How did expanding EITC compare to the rollout of food stamps more than a generation earlier ? “ Amazingly , we found very similar results , ” Hoynes said . “ If you provide more assistance through the tax system , using this good variation across a different kind of natural experiment , as it were , we found reductions in low birth rates , more so for families that you would expect to be affected by the EITC , you know , lower education levels , single woman versus married .\n“ I would say it 's a very fertile area right now , that people are interested in trying to quantify these longer-term effects . And now , decades have passed , since that time period and the populations that are affected by them are sufficiently mature that we can really dive in and ask some questions that we had n't be able to do before . ”\nWith all that data out there , and researchers like Hoynes starting to make sense of it , one has to ask if it is n't time for a reality-based political movement to start using what they 're learned to shape a better future .\nIt might seem like a pipe dream now . But it was actually more or less like that before Gingrich “ reformed ” the House . As late as 1992 , authors Fay Lomax Cook and Edith J. Barrett found strong support for the welfare state and its programs , despite negative views of welfare in their highly detailed survey , Support for the American Welfare State : The Views of Congress and the Public . One key factor in Congress was that Republicans in committee leadership positions , who were much more familiar with how programs worked , showed significantly more support than Republicans as a whole . That was how things were before Gingrich went to work . It 's a good indication of what Speaker Pelosi should have undone when she held power from 2007 to 2011 . The next time Democrats do gain control of the House , they will need to prioritize making it friendly to the likes of Hilary Hoynes and her reality-based colleagues . It 's the only way , ultimately , to make it friendly to all the rest of us as well .


Russia announced Thursday that it had banned imports of meat , fish , milk and milk products and fruit and vegetables from the United States , the European Union , Australia , Canada and Norway .\nRussian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev announced the import ban on orders from the country 's president , Vladimir Putin , in response to sanctions imposed on Russia by the West over the crisis in Ukraine . The ban has been introduced for one year .\nThe decision shows that Putin has no intention of bowing to Western pressure over Ukraine and will instead try to strike back at the West . It also demonstrated that the Kremlin is ready to inflict damage on Russia while pursuing its course in Ukraine .\nMedvedev also said that Russia is considering banning Western carriers from flying over Russia on flights to and from Asia -- a move that would significantly swell costs and increase flight time . He said the decision on that has n't been made yet .\nRussia may also introduce restrictions regarding imports of planes , navy vessels and cars , Medvedev said , but added that the government will realistically assess its own production potential .\nThe move follows the latest round of sanctions against Russia imposed by the EU last week , which for the first time targeted entire sectors of the Russian economy . The U.S. and the EU have accused Russia , which annexed Ukraine 's Crimean Peninsula in March , of fomenting tensions in eastern Ukraine by supplying arms and expertise to a pro-Moscow insurgency , and have imposed asset freezes and loan bans on a score of individuals and companies .\nMedvedev argued that the ban would give Russian farmers , who have struggled to compete with Western products , a good chance to increase their market share . But experts said that local producers will find it hard to fill the gap left by the ban , as the nation 's agricultural sector has continued to suffer from poor efficiency and shortage of funds .\nWhile the government claimed it will move quickly to replace Western imports by importing more food from Latin America , Turkey and ex-Soviet nations to avoid empty shelves and price hikes , analysts predicted that it will further speed up inflation .\nRussia depends heavily on imported foodstuffs — most of it from the West — particularly in the largest and most prosperous cities such as Moscow , where imported food fills an estimated 60-70 percent of the market . Food and agricultural imports from the U.S. amounted to $ 1.3 billion last year , according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture , and in 2013 the EU 's agricultural exports to Russia totaled 11.8 billion euros ( $ 15.8 billion ) .\nMedvedev made it clear that Russia hopes that the sanctions will make the West revise its policy and stop trying to pressure Russia with sanctions .\n`` Until the last moment we hoped that our partners would understand that sanctions only lead to a deadlock , and no one needs them , but they did n't , '' he said . `` We hope our partners will put a pragmatic economic approach above bad policy considerations , and they will start thinking instead of trying to scare us . ''


Direct government subsidies for farmers have shrunk in recent years . | Graphic by Julia Haslanger Senate advances farm bill\nA new five-year farm bill advanced toward final passage Tuesday , after a strong bipartisan Senate vote Monday night to limit further debate and expedite action .\nThe 72-22 vote caps two years of struggle that badly split the old farm and food coalition . The final product represents a landmark rewrite of commodity programs , but even now , all eyes are returning to corn prices and three sets of numbers that will tell a lot about the topsy-turvy world facing the new law before spring plantings .\nIndeed , never before has there been a farm bill with such a robust crop insurance program combined with a price-sensitive commodity title , all in a period of changing prices .\nThe first data dump could come as early as Tuesday morning when the Congressional Budget Office will release its updated budget forecast , which many expect will show an increase in costs under the old policies of the 2008 farm bill .\nThe second will follow quickly in early March , when crop insurance premiums will be set for Midwest corn states for the coming 2014 crop year . And third , CBO will come back weeks later with an updated baseline that will project the costs of the new farm bill once it has been signed into law by President Barack Obama .\nHow much CBO will make public Tuesday is still unclear — coming just hours before the Senate ’ s scheduled afternoon vote on passage . But its numbers are expected to show a spike in commodity program costs because of the drop in corn prices over the past year .\nAt one level , this is an academic exercise since much of the increase is attributed to higher participation in the ACRE revenue protection program which is now expiring . But because ACRE is a forerunner of the corn-backed Agriculture Risk Coverage or ARC program in the farm bill , the numbers are a harbinger of troubles that could lie ahead .\nAt the same time the crop insurance premium for corn — which represents close to 40 percent of the total premium for all crops — will almost certainly go down this year with the lower price for corn . That will in turn reduce the cost of taxpayer subsidies in that title of the farm bill .\nFor the Midwest Corn Belt , these annual premium calculations are based on the February average of prices on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange for futures contracts for corn delivered in December at the end of the year .\nIn 2013 , that average was $ 5.65 per bushel and the premium $ 4.7 billion . But futures contracts for December 2014 are now running close to $ 4.50 per bushel for corn , a 20 percent drop that should produce a reduced premium since the insured assets will be that much less .\nAll this makes the March CBO forecast more challenging , but it also illustrates an important new dynamic in the farm bill .\nThe new commodity title reflects a landmark rewrite , making the bill much more an engine of countercyclical aid to farmers . The nearly 18-year-old system of direct cash payments — tied to the land not markets — is ending . Instead , producers must choose between two replacement options that will trigger only when prices decline .\nAt the same time , the crop insurance title is shielded from major changes and only grows in size with the addition of new products tailored to cotton and farmers looking for a lower cost supplement based on countywide losses . Even organic crops have a small piece of the action .\nThe end result is a decided shift . Just a few years ago , when CBO projected spending for the next five years , 2014-2018 , the commodity title was still an equal match for crop insurance . The picture now is one in which the crop insurance title is almost double the level of spending for commodity programs .\nThis creates two levers that can counterbalance one another to some degree . Crop insurance premiums go up with rising prices and down when prices fall . The new commodity title is the opposite , costing less when markets are good but much more when prices fall .\n“ Farm program taxpayer costs go up when prices go down , but crop insurance costs go down when prices go down , ” said Keith Collins , former chief economist for the Agriculture Department and now an adviser to the crop insurance industry . “ The new safety net means these offsetting effects may result in more stability for the taxpayer on safety net costs . ”\nThis is not a small change . For sure , target prices and countercyclical programs were standard fare for many farm bills before the current system of direct cash payments began in 1996 . But nothing like today ’ s crop insurance existed then , and in many cases , it wasn ’ t even a separate title in the farm bill .\nIn 1997 , for example , the total premium for corn was $ 461 million compared with $ 4.7 billion in 2013 . Even when adjusted for inflation , that ’ s a sevenfold increase .\nAfter subtracting what the farmer pays on the same premium , the net indemnities distributed on crop insurance policies are now a big part of the farm safety net .\nThis can be seen by breaking down the traditional government commodity and conservation subsidies versus net crop insurance indemnities as a percentage of net cash income for farmers .\nThe old-style subsidies have fallen as a rule and are dramatically less than past years like 2000 and 2001 . But in 2012 and 2013 , the net indemnities paid on crop insurance were almost as big as the traditional commodity and conservation payments .\nFor example , data collected by the Agriculture Department show that $ 10.6 billion was paid out directly by the government in 2012 but an additional $ 9.2 billion came in net indemnities on crop insurance policies . In 2013 , the government paid $ 11.4 billion , while the net indemnities on crop insurance were $ 11 billion .\nAdverse weather and drought conditions are part of this picture . But the numbers underscore the magnitude of crop insurance now as part of the farm safety net . And to the extent premiums are tied to crop prices , this can be some counterweight to the new countercyclical programs in the commodity title .\nInstead of direct cash payments , producers will have two options linked to real market losses . But they will lock themselves into one path for each crop in their base production for five years , a big decision that will most likely mean consultation with bankers whose operating loans are needed each spring .\nARC is the first option and promises a temporary cushion for growers once prices fall at least 14 percent below the rolling average for the prior five years . In this regard , its design is like ACRE and is a formula that ’ s very advantageous to corn given the fat years growers have enjoyed amid the ethanol boom .\nThese high prices mean the threshold now at which ARC payments will be triggered for corn in 2014 is near $ 4.55 per bushel . Cash sales are already running 40 cents per bushel below that marker , and it seems almost certain that some subsidies will flow in 2014 .\nIf prices fall to about $ 4.35 per bushel , the farmer would get something close to the current direct payments . But if corn were to drop to $ 4 per bushel , ARC subsidies could be twice what corn receives now per acre in direct cash payments .\nThe catch is that if corn prices were to stay at $ 4 per bushel , the ARC payments could run out in the space of three years . The idea is that this window buys time for the farmer to make adjustments . But it could also lead nervous growers to take a look at the second option known as price loss coverage or PLC .\nThis approach fits the more classic countercyclical model of fixed , government-set target prices — not a rolling market average . In the case of corn , prices would have to drop to $ 3.70 per bushel before any assistance is provided . But unlike ARC , PLC promises a more permanent floor to try to cover a farmer ’ s production costs .\nThe corn lobby and its soybean allies actively promoted the ARC approach , suggesting most of their growers will go in that direction . But wheat farmers are sure to be more divided , and rice growers lean toward price loss coverage .\nFor example , the PLC target price for wheat is $ 5.50 per bushel , about 22 cents below the ARC threshold but a much smaller gap than seen in the case of corn and soybeans .\nFor growers of medium-grain rice in California , the numbers break more in favor of PLC but will still mean that farmers must absorb a much larger price drop than corn .\nBecause of higher production costs , California growers get an extra 15 percent adjustment , which gives them a target price of $ 16.10 per hundredweight . And for a farmer to recoup what he is now getting in direct payments , the California Rice Commission estimates that prices would have to drop to $ 14.24 .\nThat means a roughly $ 5 per hundredweight loss compared with current market prices . For a 750-acre farm that would mean a revenue loss of more than $ 310,000 to get a PLC payment of $ 115,000 .


LISTEN TO ARTICLE 3:03 SHARE THIS ARTICLE Share Tweet Post Email\nTerms of Trade is a daily newsletter that untangles a world embroiled in trade wars . Sign up here .\nChina and the U.S. agreed on the text of a phase one trade deal that includes the removal of tariffs on Chinese goods in stages , Vice Commerce Minister Wang Shouwen said , as President Donald Trump confirmed that some levies will be reduced and said the next round of talks will start immediately .\nChina will increase imports from the U.S. and other countries , Wang said at a briefing in Beijing Friday . Vice Chairman of the National Reform and Development Commission Ning Jizhe added that the specifics of agricultural purchases would be released later , as the text of the agreement is still under review .\nThe comments were China ’ s first response to a deal signed off by Trump on Thursday that would halt higher tariffs planned for Dec. 15 and represent the first phase in defusing the trade war that ’ s shaken the global economy .\nTrump tweeted , “ we have agreed to a very large Phase One Deal with China . They have agreed to many structural changes and massive purchases of Agricultural Product , Energy , and Manufactured Goods , plus much more . The 25 % Tariffs will remain as is , with 7 1/2 % put on much of the remainder ... ”\nWe have agreed to a very large Phase One Deal with China . They have agreed to many structural changes and massive purchases of Agricultural Product , Energy , and Manufactured Goods , plus much more . The 25 % Tariffs will remain as is , with 7 1/2 % put on much of the remainder .... — Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) December 13 , 2019\nBy keeping much of the existing tariffs in place , Trump told reporters later Friday that the U.S. would have leverage in the next round of talks .\n“ We ’ ll use them for future negotiations on the phase-two deal , ” Trump said , adding that his administration was planning to wait until after the 2020 election for the next step . “ They ’ d like to start them sooner than that , and that ’ s OK . ”\n..... The Penalty Tariffs set for December 15th will not be charged because of the fact that we made the deal . We will begin negotiations on the Phase Two Deal immediately , rather than waiting until after the 2020 Election . This is an amazing deal for all . Thank you ! — Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) December 13 , 2019\nU.S. stocks initially rallied , with the S & P 500 Index jumping to a record , but were little changed after the announcements . The world ’ s two largest economies have been in a trade war for about 18 months involving nearly $ 500 billion in products shipped between the two nations .\nThe deal text , which comprises nine chapters , includes sections on intellectual property , forced technology transfer , food and agricultural products , finance , currency and transparency , boosting trade , bilateral assessment and dispute resolution , according to Chinese officials .\nBoth sides agreed to finish the final stages such as legal review and translation as soon as possible and work on arrangements for the final signing , said Wang .\nFirst announced by Trump on Oct. 11 , the interim deal with China offers a short-term political victory for the president and will allow him to claim that his tariffs have paid dividends , at the risk of being accused of postponing tougher issues like China ’ s industrial subsidies . Unfolding along with the trade news on Friday was the House Judiciary Committee ’ s recommendation to impeach Trump .\nRead More : Trump Impeachment Advances as Historic Vote Sends Case to House\nFor Beijing , reducing even some of the tariffs that have been imposed since last year represents a win for President Xi Jinping , who is also facing pressure to not give in to the other side .\n“ Without doubt , to implement the agreement , our imports of American agricultural goods will increase significantly , ” Vice Agriculture Minister Han Jun said .\nTrump told reporters he thought Chinese purchases of agricultural goods would hit $ 50 billion “ pretty soon . ”\n— With assistance by Lucille Liu , Miao Han , Sharon Chen , James Mayger , Josh Wingrove , and Katia Dmitrieva


While the Obama administration has been working overtime to push their sequestration-scaremongering campaign , all about how $ 85 billion in cuts means that we won ’ t be able to afford White House tours or as many border patrol agents , it is amazing to me that stuff like this somehow never even gets a mention . Hey , how about the federal government stops playing sugar daddy to a bunch of entrenched special interests and tries allowing the free market to function like it ’ s supposed to , maybe ? Is that too radical , do you think ?\nThe U.S. Department of Agriculture runs a whole host of farm-and-rural programs and subsidies that in practice function as little more than corporate welfare for agribusiness , but one of the most onerous results of the government ’ s persistent interference is that the American sugar market now operates like a federally-sponsored racket , to the benefit of a handful of farmers but the detriment of the economy at large . The feds have piled on complex loan programs , import barriers , and production quotas , all of which are specifically meant to help keep domestic sugar prices artificially high — which means that not only are Americans ’ taxes being devoted to protecting domestic sugar producers from free-market competition , but that consumers across the country are paying higher prices , too .\nBut of course , government interference reliably begets still more interference . Behold , the unnecessarily complicated and self-defeating vicious cycle that is the federal government ’ s unwavering support of the U.S. sugar market , via the WSJ :\nThe U.S. Department of Agriculture is likely to buy sugar in the domestic market this year in order to drive prices up and prevent defaults on loans made to sugar processors , according to a USDA economist . The USDA estimates it would need to buy 400,000 tons of sugar to boost prices to an “ acceptable level , ” said Barbara Fecso , an economist at the department . A purchase of 400,000 tons would amount to about 4.4 % of projected U.S. sugar production in the marketing year that ends Sept. 30 . … To entice ethanol producers to buy the sugar , the USDA ’ s Commodity Credit Corporation is expected to sell it at a loss of about 10 cents a pound , or $ 80 million total , Ms. Fecso said . “ If we acquire [ sugar ] in a down market , we have to get rid of it because we don ’ t want to own sugar , so we ’ re going to lose money , ” Ms. Fecso said . “ No matter how we dispose of it , there ’ s going to be a loss , so if we sell it [ to ethanol producers ] , at least we ’ re getting something in return for it . ”\nGee , thanks . It ’ s really too magnanimous of you to determine exactly what an “ acceptable level ” of sugar prices looks like on our behalf , the economic ripple effects be damned .


The U.S. livestock market is about to simmer with new business – and more competition .\nIn what they hope to be the first of many deals that would further open the world ’ s largest market of middle-class consumers , President Trump and his trade team , led by Commerce secretary Wilbur Ross , began taking steps to settle two prominent trade disputes with China that have stumped the American livestock business for years .\nU.S. announces trade progress with China in 10 key areas\nStarting later this year , U.S. cattle ranchers will be able to sell their beef in China , which has refused American imports since the mad cow disease breakout in 2003 . Trade bans of U.S. beef around the world , including China , contributed to the value of U.S. beef exports falling from $ 3 billion in 2003 to $ 1.1 billion in 2004 , according to trade publication Food Safety News .\nThe U.S. beef industry has been lobbying for years to reopen the Chinese market . A breakthrough came in September when China announced its intent to lift the ban without specifying a time period , and further negotiations on technical details began .\nThe push to reopen the Chinese beef market likely was aided by the U.S. approval to allow fully-cooked Chinese chicken to enter the U.S. , a deal that was also announced Thursday . Chinese chicken has been banned in the U.S. due to sanitary and health concerns .\nLivestock industry officials welcomed the announcement . U.S. beef producers will sell more to Chinese customers who are increasingly willing spend on foreign meats , including Australian and Brazilian imports .\nAllowing Chinese chicken to be sold in the U.S. would mean more global competition , but it could lead to the end of a ban on U.S.-produced chicken in China , says Jim Sumner , president of USA Poultry & Egg Export Council , an advocacy group . China stopped accepting American chicken imports in 2015 due to fears of bird ( avian ) flu . “ It ’ s more important for us get that market back , ” Sumner says .\n“ We ’ re making a lot of progress ” on China , he says . “ We can ’ t produce enough chicken wings to satisfy demand here . So it ’ s all good . We ’ re glad to see it happen because our industry believes in free , open trade . ”\nChinese chicken farmers got a huge break last year when Agriculture Department inspectors completed a review of China ’ s poultry slaughterhouse inspection systems and concluded that its sanitary and food safety standards were adequate .\nSumner says opening the U.S. chicken market is gradual . Fully cooked chicken from China won ’ t be sold directly in grocery stores and are used mostly by restaurants and pre-packaged food manufacturers as ingredients for other meals , such as soup , he says . “ Any imports from China would be very limited and ( serve ) special variety niche markets , ” he says .\nSome critics of imports say concerns about Chinese chicken processors are valid . Outbreaks of the avian flu have been frequent in the country , and its labeling standards are lagging , they say .\nStill , accepting Chinese chicken imports -- a top priority of Chinese officials -- likely was in exchange for lifting China 's ban on U.S. beef , Sumner says . And American beef producers are eager for more business .\n“ China has really become a major importer of beef over the last few years . We certainly missed out on that without having access , ” says Kent Bacus , director of international trade and market access for the National Cattlemen 's Beef Association . “ This is something we ’ ve been working on for the last 13 years . ”\nAsian consumers tend to favor certain cuts that aren ’ t as popular in the U.S. – chuck roast , tongue , stomach , short ribs and heart – and demand for these items in China could help raise the value of U.S. cattle , he says .\nWith more Chinese consumers seeking western restaurants , U.S. beef producers also are hoping to see their beef in steakhouses in Beijing and Shanghai . “ We ’ re going to get better prices , ” Bacus says .


Advertisers are grappling with a stark realization : After spending years courting U.S. consumers with aspirational images of upscale urban living , they may have misjudged the yearnings of much of their audience .\nIn the wake of Donald Trump ’ s election as U.S. president with a wave of support from middle American voters , advertisers are reflecting on whether they are out of touch with the same people—rural , economically frustrated , elite-distrusting , anti-globalization voters—who propelled the businessman into the White House . Mr. Trump ’ s rise has them rethinking the way they collect data about consumers , recruit staff and pitch products .\nA few days after the Nov. 8 election , the chief executive of the ad agency giant McCann Worldgroup summoned top executives to discuss what the company could learn from the surprising outcome . One takeaway for him and his staff was that too much advertising falsely assumes that all U.S. consumers desire to be like coastal elites .\nMore Marketing Coverage Facebook Reaches Proposed Settlement in Video Measurement Lawsuit\n“ Every so often you have to reset what is the aspirational goal the public has with regard to the products we sell , ” said Harris Diamond , McCann ’ s CEO . “ So many marketing programs are oriented toward metro elite imagery. ” Marketing needs to reflect less of New York and Los Angeles culture , he said , and more of “ Des Moines and Scranton . ”\nSome marketers , concerned that data isn ’ t telling them everything they need to know , are considering increasing their use of personal interviews in research . Meanwhile , some ad agencies are looking to hire more people from rural areas as they rethink the popular use of aspirational messaging showcasing a ritzy life on the two metropolitan coasts . One company is also weighing whether to open more local offices around the world , where the people who create ads are closer to the people who see them .\n“ This election is a seminal moment for marketers to step back and understand what is in people ’ s heads and what actually drives consumer choice , ” said Joe Tripodi , chief marketing officer of the Subway sandwich chain .\nEven as many ad agencies try to improve their gender and racial diversity , industry executives say they also need to ensure their U.S. employees come from varied socioeconomic and geographic backgrounds .\nA diversity hire “ can be a farm girl from Indiana as much as a Cuban immigrant who lives in Pensacola , ” said John Boiler , chief executive of the agency 72andSunny , whose clients include General Mills Inc. and Coors Light . The agency plans to expand its university recruitment programs to include rural areas .\n“ [ A diversity hire ] can be a farm girl from Indiana as much as a Cuban immigrant who lives in Pensacola . ” —John Boiler , chief executive of the agency 72andSunny\nGiven how polling underestimated Mr. Trump ’ s support , the election underscores the limitations of “ research methodologies that even in the era of big data are subject to human bias , ” said Antonio Lucio , the chief marketing officer of HP Inc .\nAs a result HP , the personal computer and printer arm of the former Hewlett-Packard Co. , is re-evaluating its reliance on research techniques like online polls and seeing if it needs to increase its use of personal interviews and ethnography , which is when researchers try to understand how people live by visiting them in their homes or work environments .\nDavid Sable , global chief executive of Y & R , a creative agency owned by WPP PLC , said the election is a lesson for marketers and agencies that have become too infatuated with big data . Mr. Sable said that Y & R will “ double down ” on its eXploring program , which involves spending time with consumers in their own habitats . For example , the agency has in the past done laundry with families in London as part of its research for a packaged-goods company .\n“ If you want to understand how a lion hunts you don ’ t go to the zoo , you go to the jungle , ” he said .\nDavid Droga , creative chairman and founder of Droga5 , whose clients include Yum Brands Inc. ’ s Pizza Hut and J.P. Morgan Chase , said the election validated its immersive approach . The shop this year sent employees to Johnsonville headquarters in Wisconsin to interview many of the sausage company ’ s employees for an ad campaign . “ We really want to make sure we not just understand our demo , but the mind-set of our demo right now , ” Mr. Droga said . ( Droga5 also did work for Hillary Clinton , including a TV spot that depicts her fighting for children throughout her public life . )\nAdvertising executives also said the surprising outcome to the election would likely hamper advertising spending next year , as marketers try to figure out what implications the new administration ’ s decisions will have on businesses .\n“ I believe there will be a slowdown ” in the first quarter as marketers take a “ wait and see ” approach to Mr. Trump ’ s policies , said Maurice Lévy , chief executive officer of Publicis Groupe SA .\nWPP ’ s GroupM , the largest ad buying firm in the world , had been anticipating U.S. ad spending would grow 3 % to $ 183.9 billion next year . Kelly Clark , global CEO of GroupM , now said he anticipates ad spending growth in the U.S. will likely decline a few percentage points over the next six months . “ We do believe that investment decisions will be delayed , ” said Mr. Clark .\nIf agencies internalize the societal changes the election reflected , the content or tone of advertising could change , some ad executives predicted .\n“ The election will have spooked the liberal elite away from high concept , ‘ make the world a better place ’ ” advertising to “ a more down-to-earth ‘ tell me what you will do for me ’ approach ” said Robert Senior , worldwide chief executive of Saatchi & Saatchi , a creative firm owned by Publicis Groupe .\nMr. Senior said the change will likely manifest itself in less use of fantastical imagery and escapism and more real world and real people in ads .\nMr. Tripodi of Subway says marketers are too focused on aggregating people into broader groups and painting them with the same brush . He said global marketers such as Subway should try to do more local marketing and advertising that can better reflect the concerns of specific communities .\nMr. Diamond of McCann says the ad industry ’ s move to have regional hubs servicing large patches of the world is now out of sync with movements in many countries—the U.S. , U.K. , and China , for example—where citizens seem frustrated with aspirational globalism . He said McCann , which has offices in about 90 countries , had been moving toward more regional hubs . It now wants to beef up its local creative teams .\nIn a world “ demanding local distinctiveness , you have to have creative that reflects that , ” Mr. Diamond said .\nSome advertisers weren ’ t caught off guard . Susan Credle , global creative chief of ad agency FCB , relayed a conversation she had before the election with a marketer who felt that an aspirational message would hurt its business .\n“ If we were having that conversation today , it would be an even stronger point , ” she said .