Vilas Dhar

Anti-democratic forces often co-opt those with vast wealth. That is starting to happen in America, creating a two-tiered economy of those tight with politicians and those trying to run real businesses. One casualty will be press freedom. My analysis:

23

2 Comments

As written up in POLITICO's Massachusetts Playbook by Kelly Garrity today, we have compiled a database of lobbying data for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. You can read it in full and access the data below. Some highlights: - There are a lot of lobbyists in the state. For every legislator, there are about 8 registered lobbyists. - Most of them are paid as lobbyists full-time - the median earnings are only $16,160. - Those who are full-time lobbyists can do very well for themselves. Some earned more than half a million dollars in 2023. - It raises significant questions about how long we can keep talented people in elected office or staff positions when they could earn much more lobbying. There are 75 people who earn more from lobbying contracts than the salaries from every elected official in the state. How long can we expect talented people to stay in a tough job, with perhaps a difficult commute, when every day they see people walking around the State House who used to be in their shoes and are now in a higher tax bracket? https://lnkd.in/e4-2U4mV

5

A new report produced by the Center for New York City Affairs in partnership with the Institute on Race, Power, and Political Economy at The New School and the Center for Community Uplift The Brookings Institution reveals racial and economic inequities in New York City’s public transportation subsidies. Examining subsidies across the city’s ten transit systems by race and income, the report finds inequities between subsidies for the NYC Ferry service compared with the Fair Fares program for the MTC’s subway and bus riders, and underscores the importance of assessing policies and budgets through a #racialequity lens. Read the report: https://lnkd.in/ekE6Y-R9 #FairFares #TransitEquity #NYCSubsidies #EconomicMobility #TransportationEquity

39

Deborah Elms Calls Out USTR Katherine Tai for “Willy-Nilly Shifts on Trade” In her latest post for Hinrich Foundation Deb Elms chronicles how she perceives Katherine Tai's struggles over USTR's trade agenda. She writes how Amb Tai, “who got a free pass from Congress for most of the last three years, has been facing an escalating storm of criticism in recent months over her office's willy-nilly shifts in US data policy, unprecedented omissions in the USTR's annual trade report to Congress, and her private communications with antitrade groups.” Deb summarizes how Amb Tai was called to a bipartisan Congressional account for a wide range of issues, including USTR’s turnaround from longstanding US policy supporting digital trade; disclosures under the Freedom of Information Act that showed Tai’s voluminous communications with antitrade special interest groups; and, USTR’s lack of interest in seeking more market access abroad for US trade. As always, a must read for those following trade in the region.

11

I recommend this insightful article by someone I deeply love, admire, and respect—my very dear friend Daniel Sachs, who is like a brother to me. His latest piece in POLITICO explores the evolving landscape of mainstream political parties and the rise of radical centrism. Key Takeaways: 1. Radical Centrism: This emerging trend sees traditional parties adopting a more extreme centrist stance, aiming to appeal to broader voter bases. 2. Populist Mimicry: Many mainstream parties are now echoing populist rhetoric to win over disillusioned voters, blurring the lines between traditional and populist politics. 3. Electoral Strategy: The article delves into how these strategies could reshape upcoming elections and potentially redefine political dynamics. This analysis is a must-read for anyone interested in the current political climate and the shifts happening within it. Read the full article here (https://lnkd.in/eykAtf7Y) #PoliticalAnalysis #RadicalCentrism #Populism #Election2024

4

1 Comment

Check out this new research from my Center on Terrorism, Extremism, and Counterterrorism colleague Beth Daviess!

10

"Developed and piloted in 2019, the CCEI model helps places “grow from within” by leveraging cross-sectoral resources to invest in local assets that generate positive economic and public health outcomes." Ellavoz.com is a #placebased #valuecreation #sharedvalues #taxefficient #impactinvestment advisor which is 1 of the 4 essential pillars of CCEI

5

We are on an individual and collective transformation at PolicyLink. A revolution of the soul…

57

1 Comment

We have a design and the expertise for a US-Mexico collaboration that would help multi-solve four crises: climate migrations, unwelcome immigration, climate, and ecological collapse. Help populations-in-need turn catastrophe zones into ecosystem restoration zones that will both accelerate local economies, mitigate climate change, and restore bio-climatic processes that cool and stabilize the climate. By offering the right solutions to receptive and needful populations at the right time, we accelerate adaptation and mitigation, and turn catastrophes into opportunities to avert future disasters. Can you put us in touch with the right people?

1

Yesterday, International Center for Law & Economics and the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation filed an amicus in the 8th Circuit opposing the FCC's new "digital discrimination" rules. "The Order will not only stifle new deployment to unserved areas, but also will delay network upgrades and maintenance out of fear of alleged disparate effects." A summary of our arguments are on Truth on the Market. https://lnkd.in/gu3d3jKC

10

Few questions are more important for any society—alongside government, religion, and the arts—than the health and welfare of the family. Yet despite the significant number of stay-at-home parents and their essential role in the family unit and in our communities, U.S. public policy (particularly child care policy) largely ignores them. This oversight is startling given the millions of families involved and the historic norm of the family home as a center of caregiving, leisure, and economic activity. To help rectify this oversight, I am delighted to present Invisible Labor, Visible Needs: Making Family Policy Work for Stay-At-Home (And All) Parents by our colleagues Ivana Greco and Elliot Haspel. This new research sheds light on the diverse demographics, challenges, and needs of stay-at-home parents in today’s society. Contrary to traditional perceptions, stay-at-home parents represent a broad spectrum of individuals differing by race, income, political affiliation, and their reasons for remaining home. Notably, a growing number of stay-at-home parents are male, and nearly half of the stay-at-home parent population consists of people of color. One of the most striking findings is the overwhelming desire for support from stay-at-home parents. Over 80% of those surveyed expressed a need for government action, specifically in health care support, drop-in child care services, and direct cash stipends. Nearly 60% have external child care needs monthly or more frequently. The division between stay-at-home parents and “working” parents is unhelpful, and this report demonstrates why all parents benefit from a functional external child care system. Furthermore, the research highlights the bipartisan potential for family policy reforms that could benefit stay-at-home parents, suggesting an opportunity for collaboration across political lines. Ivana and Elliot—from different ideological backgrounds—have put forth a series of concrete policy recommendations that could be taken up immediately. I hope that the needs and aspirations of America’s stay-at-home parents might be more significantly prioritized as our representatives gather in Washington for the 119th Congress next January. In doing so, may our family and caregiving policies be more inclusive of all Americans moving forward. https://lnkd.in/dngJ6J_q

19

2 Comments

𝗜 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆, 𝗵𝗮𝗱 𝗮 𝗱𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗿 𝗰𝗿𝘂𝘀𝗵. I witnessed what a genuine equitable relationship between a donor and its grantees are. Beyond the buzzwords. The hashtags. The incessant talks (but limited action). The head of a family philanthropic foundation I met in NYC described to me how her foundation supports social entrepreneurs in Sub-Saharan countries. I asked her how entrepreneurs are selected. She described a few selection stages, before reaching to the compliance/due diligence review process. “We then take 2 weeks for due diligence to assess their capacity and to ensure they are aligned with our vision,  expectations, and ways of working.” Business as usual until now. “And then we give them two weeks so that they can review us (the foundation), assess our capacity, so they can ensure our foundation aligns with THEIR vision and expectations. 𝗪𝗲 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗻 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗯𝗼𝗼𝗸𝘀 (𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗯𝗼𝗼𝗸𝘀) 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗱𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗲𝗲 𝗶𝗳 𝗪𝗘 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗮 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗳𝗶𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗠.” It sounds simple. Almost easy. But it is not. Believe me. I have been in this ‘humanitarian business’ for almost 2 decades, and I have never seen nor heard of a donor using such a practice. And that was just one of the many examples she gave me to describe how she intuitively works with partners. Like in any business relationship, grantees are perceived as horizontal equal partners. Before entering into a new partnership, everyone should be able to assess the capacity and the way of working of all actors involved. And what stroke me even more was her humility. When I told her we must showcase these good practices, she was very surprised. For her it was not a “good practice” that should be highlighted as something exceptional. It was simply her normal, intuitive way of working with partners. And the results are FANTASTIC. These are the kind of funders we want to work with at Mindset-PCS (People-Centered Solutions) because they do not only embody what we advocate for, but they actually and naturally act towards the systemic changes we are so desperately longing for. 𝗦𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗱𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗯𝗲 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗴𝘂𝗶𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘀. With people like her, we can push for more effective, meaningful, and impactful donors-partners relationships, and ultimately improve programmatic and systemic outcomes in our dear sector. Eliana Summer-Galai | Natalie Silverlieb | Karen Pinto

50

9 Comments

This Op-Ed in The New York Times from The Rockefeller Foundation President Rajiv J. Shah sums up why I joined Rockefeller Catalytic Capital to focus the next few years exclusively on Mission 300 or #M300 -- to bring at least 300 million Africans electricity access by 2030: To End Poverty. In 2013, Rajiv J. Shah called me while I was working for USAID in Ecuador, to invite me to be part of an ambitious effort called Power Africa. The idea was to move development collaboration where it had never gone before (and we did!). How could I say "no" to getting the band back together? This time, though, we all have more experience and a better idea of what needs to be done. We're more of an orchestra than a band. Before agreeing to take on this role, I asked my colleagues at the The World Bank, IFC - International Finance Corporation, Sustainable Energy for All (SEforALL), The Global Energy Alliance for People and Planet (GEAPP), and The Rockefeller Foundation two questions: (1) Are we all at the point in our respective careers where we don't really care what our next job will be, which means we all will focus on breaking through bureaucratic hurdles and on sharing our opinions on how best to achieve results? It was a resounding, "Yes!" (2) Can we agree that we are going to disagree again and again about approaches, but we'll listen to each other and still get along because we're focused on the result? That one often was met with a smile, but always with a "yes!" (in part because I have a LOT of ideas) That's where we are. We all agree that if we want to end poverty, we need to focus on one thing: Energy Access So glad that so many have committed to prioritizing resources in this critical space, but we need more. It works like this: ➡ Concessional financing (e.g., IDA) from the World Bank and the African Development Bank and other donor financing (e.g., DFIs like U.S. International Development Finance Corporation and British International Investment) ➡ along with grant capital and technical assistance from traditional donor countries (e.g., Power Africa, Millennium Challenge Corporation and philanthropies like The Rockefeller Foundation, IKEA Foundation, Bezos Earth Fund through The Global Energy Alliance for People and Planet (GEAPP), ➡ along with resource and policy commitments (i.e., energy compact) from African governments themselves, ➡ will mobilize commercial financing and private investment. Here's an oversimplified formula: Concessional and public financing + donor and philanthropic grant resources + African government resources and reforms ---> (leads to) commercial financing and investment = Energy Access for All ---> (leads to) Poverty Reduction ---> (leads to) an Energy Transition and Cleaner, Sustainable Planet. Thank you The World Bank Group and African Development Bank Group for leading the charge on this bold commitment. We have your back!

161

21 Comments

The work of our coalition, Founders for Kamala, is crucial in this election cycle, and I’m grateful that Jon Chesto at Boston Globe Media has recognized our efforts in today's article, highlighting the power of grassroots movements and the need for diverse voices in shaping our political landscape. While the piece focuses on my role in launching the initiative, this is truly a collective effort—our incredible co-chairs and co-founders stepped up immediately to lead the group, and we have nearly 900 signatories and 270 volunteers from across the U.S. and abroad, showcasing the national affiliation with our message.   As a woman in business, I’ve navigated different expectations and rules compared to my male counterparts throughout my career. We see this dynamic playing out in our presidential race to an extreme degree. As The Economist noted, "If Trump were to win election, Americans would be gambling with the economy, the rule of law, and international peace... Harris's shortcomings, by contrast, are ordinary. And none of them are disqualifying." This disparity highlights that they aren't undergoing the same interview process. Van Jones said it best: "He gets to be lawless; she has to be flawless."   Our voices as entrepreneurs are often stifled by fear—fear of being targeted, fear of losing revenue, and fear of jeopardizing our businesses. The stakes are incredibly high, particularly for the women, minority, and immigrant founders in our group, whose lives could be irrevocably altered depending on the election's outcome. Despite the challenges we face, including personal attacks and backlash against our businesses, our group has steadily grown, collaborating with more than 30 other coalitions for compounded impact. We have volunteered more than 7,000 hours and engaged in over 60 events and activations along with social campaigns, creating a robust platform for dialogue and action. Many of us met through this initiative, and our collective activism has turned strangers from all political ideologies into neighbors. Each day, we rise to advocate for Kamala Harris, knowing that our fundamental rights and our livelihoods hang in the balance.   As we approach the election, I urge everyone to make your voice heard—get out and vote! Your participation is vital for the future we want to create.   👉 Read the article here: https://lnkd.in/eSEDEhG4   #Vote #CivicEngagement #WomenInBusiness #Entrepreneurship #PutAWomanOnIt #SmallBusiness #Founders #GetOutTheVote #Democracy

139

34 Comments

Practice your #voting skills and help us highlight #regenerativefinance at SXSW!

5

1 Comment

I moderated a lively discussion of whether capitalism can safeguard democracy, at the Milken Global Summit #MIGLOBAL. I left convinced that democracy and capitalism at their best make each other stronger, but that our failure to prioritize making our democracies and capitalist systems as good as they could be, has left them harming rather than mutually reinforcing each other. The coming US election now poses serious risks to the democratic system, that our panel agreed would, among many other costs, in turn have severe consequences for wealth creation. A few suggestions were made for how business leaders could help strengthen democracy in the US this November, including giving workers election day off to vote; encouraging and supporting them to volunteer to staff polling stations; and, more boldly, calling on candidates to publicly promise to respect the result of the election. If any candidates refuse to make that pledge, business leaders should have the courage to call them out on it, loudly and often. There was also general agreement that businesses in democracies everywhere should call out the widespread hypocrisy that has made illegal immigration such a political hot potato, by making the case for improving the systems of legal immigration. In most countries these systems are slow and bureaucratic, and self-harming to economies that desperately need to augment domestic workforces with talent from abroad. The failure of elected politicians to address this challenge honestly is contributing to the falling trust in democratic governments. Thanks to my terrific panel, including former president of Armenia, Armen Sarkissian; Daniella Ballou-Aares of the Leadership Now Project; Lucan Way of the University of Toronto; Maria Teresa Kumar of Voto Latino; and Hein de Haas of the International Migration Institute. You can watch a recording of the discussion here: https://lnkd.in/ejgE2hk2

43

3 Comments

Check out this thoughtful discussion with LA Times journalist Jaweed K. and Josh Good about my new book "Ending Persecution." Thanks Faith Angle Forum hosting!

2

If rights are guaranteed through membership in political community, how are such communities constituted? More specifically, how do communities become, in the words of Sheila Benhabib, rights-bearing? In a time where the effects of climate change are disrupting national and territorial communities, it will be important to think through how communities have historically ensured rights outside existing institutional structures. In my new research article ‘Gilroy’s Black Atlantic diaspora: climate displacement and rights-bearing beyond the nation’ published in Nations and Nationalism this month, I suggest that nationalism studies should look to Paul Gilroy's work on the Black Atlantic diaspora as a community that became rights-bearing through speech. I read Gilroy's work through scholarship in political theory, notably Hannah Arendt’s concept of ‘the right to have rights’ and Benhabib’s discourse-theory, to argue that the Black Atlantic diaspora became a rights-bearing community through vocalising experiences. The Black Atlantic diaspora flourished outside traditional judicial and political institutions, and paying attention to the diaspora perspective and recognising diasporas as potentially rights-bearing communities is important for nationalism studies as the field grapples with the foundational shift of climate change. By bringing scholarship from political theory and cultural studies to the study of nationalism, I hope that the article may encourage creativity in thinking through rights and community in our contemporary moment. The article is based on research I have undertaken as a PhD student at the University of Cambridge Department of Politics and International Studies (POLIS), University of Cambridge, and a member of Corpus Christi College Cambridge. Thank you to my colleagues and my supervisors for aiding me in thinking through these complex issues. The article is published open access and it is available to download at the link below. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

33

2 Comments