On Feb. 25, the House of Representatives passed the Equality Act, a landmark piece of legislation that would strengthen and expand the existing Civil Rights Act of 1964 to broaden its range of sex discrimination to protect LGBTQ people. 

This Act makes it explicit that existing federal statutes prohibiting sex discrimination also prohibit sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination. In many state and local governments, there is discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, public accommodations, and receiving federal financial assistance. 

The bill is currently awaiting Senate approval, where 60 votes are needed for its passage. That means every Democrat, and at least 10 Republicans must vote in favor of this act. 

Currently, there are no federal anti-discrimination laws for LGBTQ people. At least 27 states lack a state anti-discrimination law, something that is sorely needed. A 2020 survey from the Center for American Progress found that 1 in 3 LGBTQ Americans, including 3 in 5 transgender Americans, experienced discrimination in just the past year alone. 

In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in a landmark case, Bostock v. Clayton County, that it is illegal under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to not hire, fire, or plainly discriminate against individuals based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. The Equality Act would solidify this interpretation into the country’s civil rights laws by defining existing sex discrimination protections that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. 

Under the act, the Fair Housing Act (FHA) would also be amended to clearly classify sexual orientation and gender identity protections, firmly prohibiting housing discrimination against LGBTQ people. This would include the prohibition of differential treatment in renting, selling, pricing, eviction, and other activities.

Within federally funded programs, like shelters, schools, community health centers, adoption agencies, and law enforcement, LGBTQ individuals face a higher amount of discrimination in these programs. The Equality Act would protect LGBTQ people and women from discrimination, mistreatment, and or refusal by any of these programs. 

The act would also benefit LGBTQ students in federally funded schools, ensuring that students have the right to use sex-segregated facilities and participate in sex-segregated activities in keeping with their gender identity. It also adds protections for transgender and nonbinary students from the widespread misgendering and harassment that many face. 

The Equality Act would establish provisions that businesses, such as restaurants and pharmacies, would face accountability if they were to discriminate against, mistreat, or refuse service to LGBTQ people. Women would also no longer be charged higher prices than men for the same services or be denied service by institutions that provide health care. The expansion of public accommodations under the Equality Act would ensure protections for race, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity in public spaces. 

While on the campaign trail, President Biden championed this bill, saying it would be one of his top priorities for his first 100 days in office. However, he has since fallen short of that goal. During his first joint speech before Congress on the eve of his 100th day of presidency, Biden urged Congress to pass the Equality Act to protect LGBTQ people against discrimination. 

“I also hope Congress will get to my desk the Equality Act to protect LGBTQ Americans,” Biden said. “To all transgender Americans watching at home, especially young people who are so brave: I want you to know your president has your back.”

A report from the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) found that a survey of more than 10,000 Americans shows strong support for LGBTQ protections — more than 80% of Americans — against discrimination in jobs, public accommodations, and housing across every subgroup of Americans. Even groups least likely to support nondiscrimination protections show majority support — 62 % of Republicans and 62% of white evangelical Protestants support nondiscrimination policies. 

While the bill has received a lot of public support, many Republican representatives fear the bill may infringe on religious objections. The bill explicitly states that it overrules the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which gives people the right to air their grievances against something that infringes upon their religious freedom. 

Under the Equality Act, the RFRA could not be used to challenge the act’s provisions, nor could it be used as a defense to a claim made under the act. Ensuring that religion cannot be weaponized as a permit to discriminate — including against people of another religion. 

Opponents of the Equality Act fear that it would threaten businesses or organizations with religious objections to serving LGBTQ people, forcing them to choose between operating their business or following their beliefs. 

Utah Sen. Mitt Romney told the Washington Blade that he won’t support the Equality Act, citing religious liberty. 

“Sen. Romney believes that strong religious liberty protections are essential to any legislation on this issue, and since those provisions are absent from this particular bill, he is not able to support it,” his spokesperson told the Blade.

Previous arguments against the notable Equal Rights Amendment in the 70s argued that the adoption of the bill would undercut existing legal protections for girls and women, echoing a similar sentiment to the Equality Act. 

However, advocates for the LGBTQ community praised lawmakers for extending legal protections to include LGBTQ individuals around the nation. 

GLAAD called the House passage of the Equality Act “a victory for all Americans and for our country’s core values of equal treatment under law,” continuing to say, “ This landmark civil rights law secures those protections for every LGBTQ person, to live without fear of discrimination.”

The National Black Justice Coalition also applauded the Equality Act, adding that “it also fills in significant gaps within existing civil rights laws for women, people of color, immigrants, religious groups, and those of us who live at the intersections of those identities.

The Green New Deal aims to reduce greenhouse gases and slow the acceleration of climate change while also addressing economic inequality and racial injustice. It was first introduced by Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) in 2018. The bill recognizes the need to create a more sustainable society to combat climate change and improve the quality of life for everyone. 

Human activity is the leading cause of climate change over the past century, as reported by the Fourth National Climate Assessment. The bill asserts that climate change “constitutes a direct threat to the national security of the United States,” as it impacts the economic, environmental, and social stability of many communities, not just in the United States but worldwide. 

Climate change has led to extreme weather patterns, rising sea levels, and an increase in wildfires. It disproportionately affects indigenous people, communities of color, low-income communities, women, youth, and elderly people. 

The Green New Deal acknowledges that the United States is experiencing several other related crises besides climate change. Such as a trend of wage stagnation, deindustrialization, and anti-labor policies, as well as the greatest income inequality since the Great Depression. White families, on average, have 20 times more wealth than Black families, epitomizing a large racial wealth divide. 

The United States is also experiencing a decline in life expectancy and inaccessibility to basic needs, such as clean air and water, healthy food, health care, housing, transportation, and education to many marginalized communities. 

The Green New Deal calls for securing clean air and water, food security, and a sustainable environment for all people of the United States for generations to come and promoting justice and equity by stopping current, preventing future, and repairing historical oppression of disenfranchised communities. 

The bill will aim to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, to meet “100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources,” as well as creating millions of new high-wage jobs, ensuring economic growth and security for all people of the United States, and investing in infrastructure to meet the needs and demands of the 21st century. 

The ultimate goal of the deal is to stop using fossil fuels entirely and transition away from nuclear energy. The bill aims to be completed through a 10-year national mobilization to reduce carbon emissions in the United States. 

“We’re going to transition to a 100 percent carbon free-economy that is more unionized, more just, more dignified, and guarantees more health care and housing than we ever have before,” Ocasio-Cortez said at a news conference. “Do we intend on sending a message to the Biden administration that we need to go bigger and bolder? The answer is absolutely yes.”

However, many Republicans have denounced the resolution, calling it “a socialist super-package.” Rep. James Comer (R-Ky), a ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, claims that the deal “will only saddle hardworking taxpayers with debt and displace millions of Americans from their jobs.” 

The bill is a nonbinding resolution meaning that if it were to pass, it cannot be made into law or create any new programs. The Green New Deal is more of a proposal of what the United States should do to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions and a more sustainable future. 

Currently, carbon emissions rates are rising at a high rate. The United States emissions rate rose by 3.4 percent in 2018 and rose globally by 2.7 percent. By continuing on our current path with no real measures done to combat climate change, we risk irrevocably damaging the earth in ways we cannot come back from.

On Feb. 23, the Berkeley City Council voted unanimously to adopt sweeping police reforms aimed at reducing racial disparities in policing. “Low-level” offenses, such as failing to wear a seat belt or driving with expired license plate tags, will now be eliminated, and the city’s Police Department will now require written consent for police searches. 

A working group gathered by Mayor Jesse Arreguín, composed of academics, activists, city and police officials, formulated the 202 page reform proposal over the last year to address the racial discrepancies in policing documented in Berkeley and around the country. 

Under the proposal, the city will deprioritize traffic stops and low-level offenses that don’t impact public safety. Police will also be required to obtain written approval for all consent searches and commit fewer warrantless searches of people on probation and parole. 

In a series of tweets, Mayor Arreguín said these new reforms will “free up public safety resources enabling police focus on priorities like violent crime.”

The proposal will strengthen the Early Intervention System that is already in place, which helps identify officers who may be on a path of regular misconduct. This system assigns points to an officer based on their conduct. A certain number of points will trigger the system and prompt a review. The plan will also fire officers for racist posts made on social media. 

As part of the reform package, the city plans to create a new Specialized Care Unit to respond to mental health calls instead of police officers, and the creation of a Department of Transportation (BerkDOT) where trained civilians would handle traffic enforcement duties instead of officers. These initiatives are a part of the city’s upcoming work launched to Reimagine Public Safety.

This package comes after a report by the Center for Policing Equity found that Black people are 6.5 times more likely to be stopped by the Berkeley Police Department than white people while driving and 4.5 times more likely to be stopped while on foot. 

The proposal also comes after increasing demand for police reforms across the country, following the police killing of George Floyd last May, and the countless lives people of color have lost at the hands of police officers.

In an Op-ed piece about defunding the police, Arreguín acknowledges his responsibility as a mayor to ensure the safety of his citizens and to invoke change when demanded. 

“Like many progressive leaders, I feel the sense of urgency, and I hear the calls for systemic change. We must heed these calls and innovate for reform, and we must do so both thoughtfully and safely.”

The council’s vote drew criticism from the Berkeley Police Association, which said they were not consulted about the proposed reforms. The union even urged the City Council “to reject the proposed recommendations,” claiming the new policies will jeopardize public safety. 

“These so-called reforms will result in more and more paperwork, reducing police work that keeps our community safe and keeps officers connected with citizens,” said Sgt. Darren Kacelek, President of the Berkeley Police Association.

Founder of Amazon, Jeff Bezos, announced on Feb. 2 that he’d be stepping down as CEO of Amazon later this year to become its executive chair. Bezos explains his decision to focus his energy on his projects in a letter to his employees, including his $10 billion pledge to fight climate change through the Bezos Earth Fund. 

The Bezos Earth Fund, first launched last February, will be used to combat the effects of climate change by providing grants to fund scientists, activists, and other nongovernmental organizations in an attempt to “amplify known ways and to explore new ways of fighting the devastating impact of climate change.”

In November, Bezos announced in an Instagram post the first 16 recipients of the Earth Fund, committing to “protect Earth’s future.”

The initial recipients will receive $791 million from Bezos’s donation of $10 billion, accounting for only 7% of the allotted fund. 

Four of the most established environmental groups in the country — the Nature Conservancy, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the World Wildlife Fund, will be receiving $100 million from Bezos’s fund. 

Most grantees are being awarded money for specific projects, while others have been allowed to re-grant money to other nonprofits. “[World Resource Institute (WRI)] is pleased to announce that it has been selected to receive a grant from the Bezos Earth Fund for two major initiatives in support of global climate action,” says the company in a news release. 

The WRI announced on Mar. 9, its President and CEO, Dr. Andrew Steer, will be stepping down to become President and CEO of the Bezos Earth Fund. In a series of tweets, Steer offered up a few more details about the Earth fund, including that Bezos’s “goal is to spend it down between now and 2030.” This means that the Earth Fund will award about $1 billion a year for the next decade.

The WRI ($100 million), a global sustainability-research organization, will develop a satellite-based system that monitors carbon emissions and captures changes in the world’s wildlife. 

The Bezos Earth Fund has also awarded $151 million, so far, to groups that are dedicated to environmental justice. Those include; The Climate and Clean Energy Equity Fund ($43 million), Dream Corps Green For All ($10 million), The Hive Fund for Climate and Gender Justice ($43 million), NDN Collective ($12 million), and The Solutions Project ($43 million). 

The rest of the grantees are ClimateWorks Foundation ($50 million), Eden Reforestation Projects ($5 million), Energy Foundation ($30 million), Rocky Mountain Institute ($10 million), Salk Institute for Biological Studies ($30 million), and Union of Concerned Scientists ($15 million). 

Bezos’s Earth Fund comes after ‘ongoing concerns’ about Amazon’s environmental policies. Amazon has long faced pressures from within the company and others to address concerns surrounding its contribution to global carbon emission. 

In Sep. 2019, the company signed a climate pledge amid employee activism, asking for more comprehensive environmental policies. Amazon committed to being carbon neutral by 2030, 10 years earlier than the deadline set by the Paris Climate Accord. Amazon plans to operate with 100% renewable energy by 2025. The company will also invest $2 billion in technologies that will reduce carbon emissions. 

Amazon Employees for Climate Justice, a group of workers concerned with Amazon’s business within the oil and gas industry, praised Bezos Earth Fund and Amazon’s climate pledge- but said there’s still more to do in addressing the climate crisis. 

“We applaud Jeff Bezos’ philanthropy, but one hand cannot give what the other is taking away,” the activist group said in a statement on Feb. 17. “The people of Earth need to know: When is Amazon going to stop helping oil & gas companies ravage Earth with still more oil and gas wells?”

On Nov 9th, the drugmaker Pfizer announced that Phase 3 of their coronavirus vaccine trial yielded positive findings and was effective in preventing Covid-19.

In July, Pfizer and its partner, the German company, BioNTech, conducted a late-stage clinical trial on the coronavirus vaccine. Half of the people in the experiment received the vaccine, while the rest received a placebo of the vaccine. Out of the 44,000-plus participants in the study, only 170 of them contracted the coronavirus.

An independent board of experts analyzed the data and found that the vaccine is at least 95% effective. Vaccines can typically take up to ten years to be fully researched and manufactured. However, in an unprecedented manner, Pfizer was able to fast-track the vaccine, alongside some other drug companies, Moderna and AstraZeneca.

Alfonso Alvarado, Chabot’s immunization coordinator, explained that in order to create a vaccine, scientists and manufacturers must first figure out the components of a virus and what the body needs to fight it. Vaccine trials are done in controlled clinical studies and are limited to a specific age group.

The Pfizer vaccine didn’t include pregnant women or children in their studies meaning they excluded these populations in the findings, which could impact the coronavirus’s effective rate down the road.

Pfizer’s current findings show that the vaccine is 95% effective when it’s second shot is administered after three weeks. Without the booster shot, its efficiency goes down to 52%. The yearly influenza shot is typically around 50%-60% effective.

According to Alvarado, the coronavirus vaccine effective rate could stay at 95% or it could drop lower, because we haven’t immunized everyone so we don’t know the response.

The flu vaccine has a lower effective rate because the virus mutates at a much faster rate and the flu strains change more frequently than the coronavirus. The influenza virus has millions of billions of different strains, so it’s difficult to figure out the type of strain that we’re exposed to, Alvarado clarified.

Herd immunity, a phrase being thrown around a lot more recently, is when most of the population is immune to a disease, and provides indirect protection against it. And in order for that to be achieved, at least 70% of the world population needs to be vaccinated.

“To end the pandemic, we need to end the transmission of the virus, and to do that we need to develop some kind of population-wide immunity,” said Dr. Katy Stephenson, a physician-scientist who specializes in infectious diseases and HIV immunology and does vaccine development at Harvard.

However, Alvarado stressed that it usually “takes a couple of weeks to get immune, depending on the vaccine. Once you’re actually in contact with that virus and you’re exposed to it, you may be protected against the most malignant part of the virus. But some patients build immunity from the vaccine and some don’t.”

Alvarado says that once people receive the vaccine, they should still follow CDC guidelines, meaning to continue to social distance and wear masks. He explains that just because people are given the vaccine, it doesn’t mean they have full immunity.

Pfizer’s chief executive says that it could have between 15 to 20 million doses of the vaccine available by the end of the year. Those who qualify for the initial dose have not been announced, however, those at a higher risk of infection or those more susceptible, are likely to have higher priority. This could include health care workers, like nurses and doctors, and older Americans who live in long-term care homes.

As of Tuesday, Dec. 8, a portion of people in the United Kingdom have already been administered the first shot of the Pfizer vaccine. Britain is trying to roll out the vaccination of tens of millions of people against Covid-19 in just a matter of months.

The U.S. could begin the rollout of the Pfizer vaccine as early as Dec. 14. Roughly 327,000 doses are expected to be available during the first round of vaccines that’ll arrive in California as early as Dec. 15. On top of that, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced that the state of California could receive a little more than two million doses of the vaccine by the end of December from both Pfizer and Moderna.

This comes at a time where 51 out of 58 of the counties in California are in the ‘purple-tier’, the most restrictive level on the state’s reopening tier system.

The likelihood of schools reopening in California for the 2020-2021 school year seems unlikely. As cases continue to go up, many counties are holding off on announcing the reopening of schools. It’ll also take some time for the majority of Californians to receive the vaccine, even then safety measures will still most likely be in place.

Coming to a neighborhood near you, Google is looking to build a new, town-like campus near its headquarters in Silicon Valley, called Downtown West. The new project was announced on Sept. 1, though it may take a couple of years for the project to come to fruition.

On Sept.1, the company unveiled its proposal for their new town in the city of Mountain View. The proposition would renovate Middlefield Park, a 40-acre site, into a “mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented neighborhood.” According to Business Insider, the new town would include a park’s network, retail space, office space, and even a public pool and sports field.

Google also plans to add residential housing, adding as many as 5,000 residential units. The company aims to make at least 25% of the units affordable housing. This follows Google’s $1 billion pledge made last year to develop at least 20,000 new homes over the next decade in the Bay Area.

Google will maintain most of the ownership but plan to set aside half the site for residential and public use, such as multiple parks, a recreational center, and an aquatic center. At least 15 acres of the proposed plan are dedicated to parks, plazas, and green space.

“It’s certainly one of the ideas in the Precise Plan to create a mixed-use neighborhood where a lot of the needs and services are within walking distance from where you live and work,” Google’s real estate director Michael Tymoff told Mountain View Voice.

Google also plans to incorporate deep environmental sustainability into the town’s framework, aiming to improve the health of people and the planet. They are committed to green building certification through LEED, Leadership in Energy, and Environmental Design.

Many of the buildings will include biophilic designs, meaning to connect building designs more closely to nature. The buildings will also utilize technology and materials that minimize environmental impact and reduce heating and cooling inside the buildings.

Downtown West would also try to reduce carbon emissions and aim to not result in any additional net emission of greenhouse gases. Google plans to do this by increasing energy efficiency through solar panels and renewable energy sources.

The new town will be designed to promote transit ridership through multi-use trails, public transportation, and creating a micro-mobility environment to encourage walking and biking.

Google had submitted its initial plans for the project last October, but the plans are still in the early stages and still have to go through city approval, which could take until summer 2021.

With a lot of uncertainty during election week, one thing is for sure – voter turnout is at an all-time high. At least 160 million Americans voted in the 2020 election, the largest number of voters in a U.S. presidential election in history. Biden is climbing the popular vote with more than 80 million more votes than any president has ever received.

Over 100 million Americans casted their votes early this year, only shy of 36 million more votes that were casted in 2016. Mail-in and early person voting were consistently popular across the United States this election year, mainly due to COVID-19.

Past elections have shown trends of a lower voter turnout. According to a study done by Pew Research, the U.S. has some of the worst voter turnout rates in the world, ranking 30 out of 35.

In the 2000 election between George Bush and Al Gore, only 110 million people voted, making the voter turnout around 55%. Of that 110 million, only 18 million people from the ages of 18-29 voted in that election.

Besides having some of the worst voter turnout rates, young people consistently vote at a lower degree compared to other age groups.

In the case of the historic 2008 election between Barack Obama and John McCain, voter turnout had soared to new heights not previously seen. It was the most racially and ethnically diverse electorate in U.S. history, with an increase in both the number of and turnout rates of eligible minority voters. With 131 million people voting and a turnout of about 58%. Young voters were higher in this election than in pasts, with roughly 18% of young adults voting.

However, voter turnout decreased once again during the 2016 election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. With only 137 million Americans voting and a turnout of 56%, slightly higher than the 2000 election. While young voters made up 19% of the electorate, at least 8% of them had voted for a third-party candidate.

The voter turnout during the 2020 election reached around 66.7%, the highest it’s been in 120 years. What’s even more inspiring is that 53% – 55% of registered 18 to 29 year-olds voted.

“That may be the highest ever recorded in the modern era of politics,” Simon Rosenburg, the founder of New Democrat Network and the New Policy Institute, told CNBC.

Gen Z, who are currently between the ages of 8 and 23, proved to be Biden’s success in certain key states like Georgia and Pennsylvania. At least 65% of voters between the ages of 18 and 24 voted for Biden- 11% more than other age groups.

A host of issues pushed young voters to the polls; police reform, systematic racism, climate change, COVID-19, and the economy.

Zulaikha Marouf, a college student at Chabot, voted for the first time in the 2020 presidential election.

Issues ranging from climate change, police reform and funding for public education, were some of the driving factors that led Marouf to the polls.

“I voted more against Donald Trump than I did for Joe Biden. I wasn’t really that excited about Biden, he seemed like every other politician in the past,” Marouf said.

Biden’s Green New Deal particularly excited Marouf, “I’m a big believer in climate change, and the environment is really important to me. We need some form of affirmative action against climate change.”

A poll conducted by Change Research in early October found that youth voters were much more enthusiastic about voting after hearing about Biden’s climate plan; an estimate of 41% of voters.

In Georgia, a state that had not voted Democratic in almost 30 years, an estimated 21% of the votes came from young people, who supported Biden over Trump by 18%, gaining Biden 187,000 votes, according to CIRCLE.

Young Black voters played a crucial role in Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania to help President-elect Joe Biden in securing key-swing states. Black youth supported Biden by a wide margin of 90% in Georgia, and 86% nationwide. Young people of color favored Biden significantly more than young white voters.

2020 saw an increase in voter accessibility, from same-day registration, voting by mail and early voting. All of which were able to increase voter turnout substantially, especially for young voters and voters of color.