Business

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Unions benefit all of us’: new Biden plan encourages federal workers to unionize

      by

      ‘Unions benefit all of us’: new Biden plan encourages federal workers to unionizeTaskforce sets recommendations ‘to promote my policy of support for worker power, worker organizing and collective bargaining’ The Biden administration set out 70 recommendations to encourage union membership in the US on Monday, including making it easier for many federal employees to join unions and eliminating barriers for union organizers to talk with workers on federal property.The report, compiled by the White House Task Force on Worker Organizing and Empowerment, reiterates Biden’s robust backing of unions. “At its core,” the report says, “it is our administration’s belief that unions benefit all of us.”Traffic, tickets, gas: rideshare and delivery app workers fight to unionizeRead moreIt adds: “Researchers have found that today’s union households earn up to 20% more than non-union households, with an even greater union advantage for workers with less formal education and workers of color.”The report comes amid a surge in interest in unions in the US and follows a wave of high-profile industrial actions last year.The taskforce, which includes 13 members of Biden’s cabinet and is chaired by Vice-President Kamala Harris, calls for stepping up enforcement to ensure that money going to federal contractors – whether manufacturers, food-processing companies or other contractors – is not spent on anti-union campaigns.The taskforce calls for requiring disclosure of any instances when federal contractors use anti-union consultants or lawyers to persuade employees working on a federal contract not to unionize.While corporations typically prohibit union organizers from setting foot on company property – as Amazon has done recently in Alabama – the taskforce recommends removing many barriers that block union organizers from being able to talk with employees on federal property about the benefits of unionizing. This applies not just to federal employees, but also to employees of private contractors on federal property, such as a grocery store on a military base or in a national park.Biden said the taskforce’s charge was to identify executive branch policies, practices and programs that could be used “to promote my administration’s policy of support for worker power, worker organizing, and collective bargaining”.The taskforce said the range of policies and programs “that can be leveraged is significant”.Its recommendations include making the federal government a model employer in terms of shaping jobs, ensuring that federal employees know their labor rights, and improving labor-management communications. The federal government is the nation’s largest employer, with more than 2.1 million non-postal employees. Of those, 1.2 million are represented by unions, but only 33% of those workers pay union dues – that small percentage limits the power of federal employee unions.Noting that screeners for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) are largely excluded from having the collective bargaining rights available to other non-military federal employees, the taskforce instructed the Department of Homeland Security to issue expanded bargaining rights for TSA’s screening workforce.The report is likely to strengthen the notion that Biden is the most pro-union president since Franklin Roosevelt – and perhaps the most pro-union president in US history. That might help Biden when he seeks to persuade and mobilize union members to vote for Democrats this November. At the same time, the report’s pro-union tone and substance might result in more opposition from business.In its first sentence, the report says: “The Biden-Harris administration believes that increasing worker organizing and empowerment is critical to growing the middle class, building an economy that puts workers first, and strengthening our democracy.” The report catalogues several executive orders and other pro-union steps by the president and his administration.It reads: “Unions have fought for and helped win many aspects of our work lives many of us take for granted today, like the 40-hour work week and the weekend, as well as landmark programs like Medicare.”The report adds that research has shown that increased economic inequality, growing pay gaps for women and workers of color, and the declining voice of working-class Americans in the nation’s politics “are all caused, in part, by the declining percentage of workers represented by unions”.The taskforce calls on the Department of Labor – whose secretary, Martin Walsh, is the taskforce’s vice-chair – to become a resource center that provides materials on the advantages of union representation and collective bargaining.TopicsUS unionsBiden administrationUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 213 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      The Fed is about to raise interest rates and shaft American workers – again | Robert Reich

      by

      The Fed is about to raise interest rates and shaft American workers – againRobert ReichPolicymakers fear a labor shortage is pushing up wages and prices. Wrong. Real wages are down and workers are struggling The January jobs report from the US labor department is heightening fears that a so-called “tight” labor market is fueling inflation, and therefore the Fed must put on the brakes by raising interest rates.This line of reasoning is totally wrong.Trump and his enablers unwittingly offer Democrats the best hope in the midterms | Robert ReichRead moreAmong the biggest job gains in January were workers who are normally temporary and paid low wages: leisure and hospitality, retail, transport and warehousing. In January, employers cut fewer of these workers than in most years because of rising customer demand combined with Omicron’s negative effect on the supply of workers. Due to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ “seasonal adjustment”, cutting fewer workers than usual for this time of year appears as “adding lots of jobs”.Fed policymakers are poised to raise interest rates at their March meeting and then continue raising them, in order to slow the economy. They fear that a labor shortage is pushing up wages, which in turn are pushing up prices – and that this wage-price spiral could get out of control.It’s a huge mistake. Higher interest rates will harm millions of workers who will be involuntarily drafted into the inflation fight by losing jobs or long-overdue pay raises. There’s no “labor shortage” pushing up wages. There’s a shortage of good jobs paying adequate wages to support working families. Raising interest rates will worsen this shortage.There’s no “wage-price spiral” either, even though Fed chief Jerome Powell has expressed concern about wage hikes pushing up prices. To the contrary, workers’ real wages have dropped because of inflation. Even though overall wages have climbed, they’ve failed to keep up with price increases – making most workers worse off in terms of the purchasing power of their dollars.Wage-price spirals used to be a problem. Remember when John F Kennedy “jawboned” steel executives and the United Steel Workers to keep a lid on wages and prices? But such spirals are no longer a problem. That’s because the typical worker today has little or no bargaining power.Only 6% of private-sector workers are unionized. A half-century ago, more than a third were. Today, corporations can increase output by outsourcing just about anything anywhere because capital is global. A half-century ago, corporations needing more output had to bargain with their own workers to get it.These changes have shifted power from labor to capital – increasing the share of the economic pie going to profits and shrinking the share going to wages. This power shift ended wage-price spirals.Slowing the economy won’t remedy either of the two real causes of today’s inflation – continuing worldwide bottlenecks in the supply of goods and the ease with which big corporations (with record profits) pass these costs to customers in higher prices.Supply bottlenecks are all around us. Just take a look at all the ships with billions of dollars of cargo idling outside the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, through which 40% of all US seaborne imports flow.Big corporations have no incentive to absorb the rising costs of such supplies – even with profit margins at their highest level in 70 years. They have enough market power to pass these costs on to consumers, sometimes using inflation to justify even bigger price hikes.“A little bit of inflation is always good in our business,” the chief executive of Kroger said last June.“What we are very good at is pricing,” the chief executive of Colgate-Palmolive said in October.In fact, the Fed’s plan to slow the economy is the opposite of what’s needed now or in the foreseeable future. Covid is still with us. Even in its wake, we’ll be dealing with its damaging consequences for years: everything from long-term Covid to school children months or years behind.Friday’s jobs report shows that the economy is still 2.9m jobs below what it had in February 2020. Given the growth of the US population, it’s 4.5m short of what it would have by now had there been no pandemic.Consumers are almost tapped out. Not only are real (inflation-adjusted) incomes down but pandemic assistance has ended. Extra jobless benefits are gone. Child tax credits have expired. Rent moratoriums are over. Small wonder consumer spending fell 0.6% in December, the first decrease since last February.Many people are understandably gloomy about the future. The University of Michigan consumer sentiment survey plummeted in January to its lowest level since late 2011, back when the economy was trying to recover from the global financial crisis. The Conference Board’s index of confidence also dropped in January.Given all this, the last thing average working people need is for the Fed to raise interest rates and slow the economy further. The problem most people face isn’t inflation. It’s a lack of good jobs.
      Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His new book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com
      TopicsFederal ReserveOpinionUS economyEconomicsUS unemployment and employment dataUS unionsUS domestic policyUS politicscommentReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US appears to shake off Omicron and adds nearly half a million January jobs

      by

      US appears to shake off Omicron and adds nearly half a million January jobsEconomists had predicted dramatic slump in job growth but labor department figures much better than expected The US economy appeared to shake off the Omicron variant in January as employers added 467,000 new jobs, the labor department reported on Friday.Data for the report was collected in mid-January when the Omicron variant was at its peak in the US. While some economists – and the White House – had predicted a dramatic slump in jobs growth, the number of jobs added was far better than expected.The unemployment rate remained low overall at 4%, down from a pandemic high of 14.8% in April 2020 but up from 3.9% in December.The news comes at a sensitive time for the Biden administration and the Federal Reserve. The US economy is wrestling with soaring inflation and signs of an economic slowdown after last year’s strong rebound.Joe Biden celebrated the jobs news in a speech in Washington. “America is back to work,” Biden said. “History’s been made here.”His comments were in stark contrast to those made by White House officials earlier in the week. In a highly unusual move, the White House sought to manage expectations ahead of the latest jobs figure release, cautioning that Friday’s jobs report could be “confusing” because of the timing of the survey and suggesting that the US would add few or even lose jobs in January.Covid infections have fallen sharply across the US since the report was compiled.The government report follows on from a survey conducted by ADP, the US’s largest private payroll supplier, which reported that companies cut jobs in January for the first time in more than a year. Payrolls fell by 301,000 for the month with more than half the losses coming from the pandemic-sensitive leisure and hospitality industries.“The labor market recovery took a step back at the start of 2022 due to the effect of the Omicron variant and its significant, though likely temporary, impact to job growth,” said Nela Richardson, ADP’s chief economist.There were signs that the jobs market is still recovering ahead of Friday’s report. On Thursday, the labor department reported that new unemployment claims fell to 238,000 for the final week in January, dropping 23,000 from the week prior, a second straight week of falls.TopicsUS economyUS unemployment and employment statisticsUnemployment and employment statisticsCoronavirusOmicron variantUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in UK Politics

      Energy price cap: how high will bills rise and what government support is available?

      by

      Energy bills are about to jump significantly after regulators raised the price cap which sets the maximum suppliers can charge.But what does it mean for household budgets?How much will my gas and electricity bills increase?The energy price cap will increase by 54 per cent from 1 April for approximately 22 million customers. Ofgem calculates this means the average household will pay £1,971 for their gas and electricity for the year. That’s an increase of £693.An average pre-payment customer will see an increase of £708 from £1,309 to £2,017 a year.It won’t apply if you are on a fixed-term energy tariff, in which case your existing rate will continue to apply until the deal ends.The price cap sets the top rate suppliers can charge per unit of gas and electricity. It is not a cap on customers’ overall energy bills, which will still rise or fall depending on energy consumption. From 1 April, electricity costs are capped at 28p per kWh for electricity and 7p per kWh for gas. Businesses on commercial contracts are not protected by a cap. Unless wholesale energy prices fall, the cap will increase again in October, with experts forecasting it will hit £2,300.What financial support has the government announced?Rishi Sunak revealed that the government will give an upfront £200 discount to all domestic energy customers from October. It will be automatically taken off people’s bills, with the government loaning the money to suppliers to cover the costs. Pre-payment customers will receive £200 credit.That money will then be repaid in annual instalments of £40 added to customers’ bills over five years from 2023. It means the overall burden on bills will not be reduced but will be paid over a longer period.The government is banking on wholesale energy costs eventually coming down but markets indicate gas prices will remain elevated until at least the end of next year.Based on current prices, experts forecast that the price can will jump to around £2,300 in October when the £200 discount is to be applied, meaning it will cover less than one fifth of the £1,000 increase compared current prices.It is also universal, meaning that it will apply to all households, whatever their financial circumstances. A number of charities and think tanks had called for cash to be targeted at those most in need.Council tax rebatesAround 80 per cent of households will also get £150 off their council tax bill. A rebate will be applied in April to all residential properties in England rated A to D for council tax.Equivalent funding worth £56m in total will be supplied to devolved administrations in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.You do not have to apply for the rebate. It will be applied automatically.While the move will be welcomed, critics have pointed out that it is poorly targeted. Council tax bands were calculated in 1991 and are a poor indicator of people’s incomes. Millions of the UK’s highest earners will pay less tax while many of those in lower income groups will be left out. Those that don’t pay Council Tax (such as students, some tenants and some benefit claimants) won’t get the full package of support either.Campaigners had called for money to be distributed through the universal credit system to ensure the poorest groups benefited most. The government rejected that approach and also declined to cut VAT on fuel bills from 5 per cent to zero, arguing that the measure would have benefitted wealthy households most.Discretionary fundThere is also a £144m discretionary fund which councils in England can allocate to people who are on low incomes but who do not automatically qualify for a rebate because they are not in a band A to D property, or because they don’t pay council tax at all.Speak to your local authority to see if you are eligible.Warm homes discountThe government will go ahead with planned expansion of the warm homes discount which it says will increase the number of people eligible by one third – around 780,000 families.The £140 per year payment for low-income families in England and Wales will increase to £150 next winter. If you are elligible you can apply for the discount through your energy supplier.The Resolution Foundation said the measures do not provide enough help for people on low incomes to deal with price rises.The think tank estimates that, as a result, the number of people struggling to pay for enough energy this year will double to five million this year. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in UK Politics

      Levelling up efforts could fail the poorest, IFS warns

      by

      The government’s flagship levelling up policy risks failing Britain’s poorest by focusing on places, rather than poverty, a leading economic think tank has warned. Regional inequality is persistent and worsening the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said on Tuesday, in an analysis ahead of the government’s delayed policy white paper, expected this week. However, while places are at risk of losing out on economic growth and opportunities, some of the UK’s poorest people also live in the country’s wealthy regions. “It is really important to remember in all this that, while high paid jobs are unevenly spread, low paid jobs, and indeed poverty, are not,” said Paul Johnson, director of the IFS.“A higher fraction of London’s population is in poverty than in any other region. We need to worry about places, but we need to worry about people too”, he added. Wages for the lowest earners in the UK are similar irrespective of location, the IFS found. For those workers in the bottom 10 per cent, by earnings, wages are around £8-9 per hour in every region. In areas where other living costs, such as housing, are more expensive, such as London, that means that workers are more likely to be in poverty. The IFS found that 28 per cent of Londoners were in poverty from 2016-2019 compared to the national average of 22 per cent. Yet while low wages tend to be similarly low across the country, there’s a considerable gap between top earners in different regions – and that is a difference which has persisted for decades, according to the think tank. The top 10 per cent of earners in London were paid 80 per cent more per hour than the comparable group of workers in Scarborough. This effect is shown by comparing tax and population data too, the IFS said: while around one in seven of the UK population live in London, some one in three of the top 1 per cent of income taxpayers live in the city.Beyond wages, in areas such as educational outcomes, there are also stark divides. In Grimsby, in the north of England, fewer than one in five children go on to university, compared to one in three in London. Well trained graduates from other areas are also likely to move to cities where there are already lots of other highly skilled workers: one in two people with degrees in Grimsby move away by the age of 27, the IFS said. The think tank also found that cuts to public spending introduced from 2010 onward exacerbated regional inequalities. This suggests that some of the government’s efforts with levelling up will in part have to be aimed at repairing some of this impact. From 2009-10 to 2019-20, spending on services – not including education fell by an average of 31 per cent for councils in the 10 per cent most deprived areas. That is nearly double the drop of 16 per cent per resident in the 10 per cent least deprived locations, the IFS’ study found. More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Dignity in a Digital Age review: a congressman takes big tech to task

      by

      Dignity in a Digital Age review: a congressman takes big tech to taskRo Khanna represents Silicon Valley and the best of Capitol Hill and wants to help. His aims are ambitious, his book necessary Just on the evidence of his new book, Ro Khanna is one of the broadest, brightest and best-educated legislators on Capitol Hill. A graduate of the University of Chicago and Yale Law School who represents Silicon Valley, he is by far the most tech-savvy member of Congress.Silicon Holler: Ro Khanna says big tech can help heal the US heartlandRead moreAt this very dark moment for American democracy, this remarkable son of Indian immigrants writes with the optimism and idealism of a first-generation American who still marvels at the opportunities he has had.Even more remarkable for a congressman whose district includes Apple, Google, Intel and Yahoo, Khanna is one of the few who refuses to take campaign money from political action committees.Once or twice in a “heated basketball game” in high school, he writes, someone may have shouted “go back to India!” But what Khanna mostly remembers about his childhood are neighbors in Pennsylvania’s Bucks county who taught him “to believe that dreams are worth pursuing in America, regardless of one’s name or heritage”.His book is bulging with ideas about how to transform big tech from a huge threat to liberty into a genuine engine of democracy. What he is asking for is almost impossibly ambitious, but he never sounds daunted.“Instead of passively allowing tech royalty and their legions to lead the digital revolution and serve narrow financial ends before all others,” he writes, “we need to put it in service of our broader democratic aspirations. We need to steer the ship [and] call the shots.”The story of tech is emblematic of our time of singular inequality, a handful of big winners on top and a vast population untouched by the riches of the silicon revolution. Khanna begins his book with a barrage of statistics. Ninety percent of “innovation job growth” in recent decades has been in five cities while 50% of digital service jobs are in just 10 major metro centers.Most Americans “are disconnected from the wealth generation of the digital economy”, he writes, “despite having their industries and … lives transformed by it”.A central thesis is that no person should be forced to leave their hometown to find a decent job. There is one big reason for optimism about this huge aspiration: the impact of Covid. Practically overnight, the pandemic “shattered” conventional wisdom “about tech concentration”. Suddenly it was obvious that high-speed broadband allowed “millions of jobs to be done anywhere in the nation”.The willingness of millions of Americans to leave big city life is confirmed by red-hot real estate markets in far flung towns and villages – and a Harris poll that showed nearly 40% of city dwellers were willing to live elsewhere.“The promise is of new jobs without sudden cultural displacement,” Khanna writes.He suggests a range of incentives to spread tech jobs into rural areas, including big federal investment to bring high-speed connections to the millions still without them. This is turn would make it possible to require federal contractors to have at least 10% of their workforces in rural communities.The congressman imagines nothing less than a “recentering” of “human values in a culture that prizes the pursuit of technological progress and market valuations”. A vital step in that direction would be a $5bn investment for laptops for 11 million students who don’t have them.The problems of inequality begin at the tech giants themselves. Almost 20% of computer science graduates are black or Latino but only 10% of employees of big tech companies are. Less than 3% of venture capital lands in the hands of Black or Latino entrepreneurs.If redistributing some of big tech’s gigantic wealth is one way to regain some dignity in the digital age, the other is to rein in some of the industry’s gigantic abuses. Data mining and the promotion of hate for profit are the two biggest problems. Khanna has drafted an Internet Bill of Rights to improve the situation.Throughout his book, he drops bits of evidence to suggest just how urgent it is to find a way to make the biggest companies behave better.“Algorithmic amplification” turns out to be one of the greatest evils of the modern age. After extracting huge amounts of data about users, Facebook and the other big platforms “push sensational and divisive content to susceptible users based on their profiles”.An internal discussion at Facebook revealed that “64% of all extremist group joins are due to our recommendations”. The explosion of the bizarre QAnon is one of Facebook’s most dubious accomplishments. In the three years before it finally banned it in 2020, “QAnon groups developed millions of followers as Facebook’s algorithm encouraged people to join based on their profiles. Twitter also recommended Qanon tweets”. The conspiracy theory was “actively recommended” on YouTube until 2019.And then there is the single greatest big tech crime against humanity. According to Muslim Advocates, a Washington-based civil rights group, the Buddhist junta in Myanmar used Facebook and WhatsApp to plan the mass murder of Rohingya Muslims. The United Nations found that Facebook played a “determining role” in events that led to the murder of at least 25,000 and the displacement of 700,000.The world would indeed be a much better place if it adopted Khanna’s recommendations. But the question Khanna is too optimistic to ask may also be the most important one.Have these companies already purchased too much control of the American government for any fundamental change to be possible?
      Dignity in a Digital Age: Making Tech Work For All Of Us is published in the US by Simon & Schuster
      TopicsBooksSilicon ValleyDemocratsUS politicsUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesUS domestic policyreviewsReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Share the Profits! Why US business must return to rewarding workers properly | Robert Reich

      by

      Share the profits! Why US businesses must return to rewarding workers properlyRobert ReichThe economy is booming and corporate profits are huge, but American wages still stagnate. History provides the answer According to this week’s release from the commerce department, the US economy has been growing at its fastest pace in almost 40 years. Corporate profits are their highest in 70 years. And the stock market, although gyrating wildly of late, is still scoring record gains.Where egos dare: Manchin and Sinema show how Senate spotlight corrupts | Robert ReichRead moreSo why do most Americans remain gloomy about the economy? Mainly because their real (inflation-adjusted) wages continue to go nowhere.Steeply-rising profits, economic growth and stock market highs – coupled with near-stagnant wages – has been the story of the American economy for decades. Most economic gains have gone to the top.So why not share the profits?Profit-sharing was tried with great success in the early decades of the 20th century but is now all but forgotten. In 1916, Sears, Roebuck & Co, then one of America’s largest corporations with more than 30,000 employees, announced it would begin to share profits with its employees, giving workers shares of stock and thereby making them part-owners.The idea caught on. Other companies that joined the profit-sharing bandwagon included Procter & Gamble, Pillsbury, Kodak and US Steel.The Bureau of Labor Statistics suggested profit-sharing as a means of reducing “frequent and often violent disputes” between employers and workers. Profit-sharing gave workers an incentive to be more productive, since the success of the company meant higher profits would be shared. It also reduced the need for layoffs during recessions because payroll costs dropped as profits did.By the 1950s, Sears workers had accumulated enough stock that they owned a quarter of the company. And by 1968, the typical Sears salesperson could retire with a nest egg worth well over $1m, in today’s dollars.The downside was that when profits went down, workers’ paychecks would shrink. And if a company went bankrupt, workers would lose all their investments in it. The best profit-sharing plans took the form of cash bonuses that employees could invest however they wish, on top of predictable wages.But profit-sharing with regular employees all but disappeared in large US corporations. Ever since the early 1980s when corporate “raiders” (now private-equity managers) began demanding high returns, corporations stopped granting employees shares of stock, presumably because they didn’t want to dilute share prices. Sears phased out its profit-sharing plan in the 1970s.Yet, just as profit-sharing with regular employees disappeared, profit-sharing with top executives took off, as big Wall Street banks, hedge funds, private equity funds and high-tech companies began doling out huge wads of stock and stock options to their MVPs.The result? Share prices and chief executive pay (composed increasingly of shares of stock and options to buy stock) have gone into the stratosphere, while the wages of the typical worker have barely risen.Researchers have found that before the 1980s, almost all the increases in share prices on the US stock market could be accounted for by overall economic growth. But since then, a large portion of the increases have come out of what used to go into wages.Jeff Bezos, who now owns around 10% of Amazon’s shares, is worth $170.4bn. Other top Amazon executives hold hundreds of millions of dollars of shares. But most of Amazon’s employees, such as warehouse workers, haven’t shared in the bounty.Amazon used to give out stock to hundreds of thousands of its employees. But in 2018 it stopped the practice and instead raised its minimum hourly wage to $15. The wage raise got headlines and was good PR – Amazon is still touting it – but the decision to end stock awards was more significant. It hurt employees far more than the increased minimum helped them.Corporate sedition is more damaging to America than the Capitol attack | Robert ReichRead moreIf Amazon’s 1.2 million employees together owned the same proportion of Amazon’s stock as Sears workers did in the 1950s – a quarter of the company – each Amazon worker would now own shares worth an average of more than $350,000.America’s trend toward higher profits, higher share prices, mounting executive pay but near stagnant wages is unsustainable, economically and politically.Profit-sharing is one answer. But how can it be encouraged? Reduce corporate taxes on companies that share profits with all their workers, and increase taxes on those that do not.Sharing profits with all workers is a logical and necessary step to making the system work for the many, not the few.
      Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His new book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com
      TopicsUS economyOpinionEconomicsStock marketsUS domestic policyUS taxationUS politicsAmazoncommentReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Electric cars on show in Washington as Biden pushes for green revolution

      by

      Electric cars on show in Washington as Biden pushes for green revolution Auto show dedicates entire pavilion to electric vehicles but experts say more charging stations are needed for Biden’s goal to be realizedThe Washington DC Auto Show has been showcasing alternative fuel vehicles for 15 years, but this is the first year an entire pavilion was dedicated to electric vehicles, or EVs. In part, you can thank the current occupant of the nearby White House for that.If Joe Biden has his way with his ambitious $2.2tn Build Back Better plan there will be 50% zero-emission vehicles on the road by 2030. The Biden administration also has plans to convert an estimated 600,000 of its fleet to alternative fuels as part of a renewed commitment to combat climate change.There are major issues ahead – the plan is being blocked by Republicans and there are serious equity issues to be addressed as the US transitions away from fossil fuels. But big changes are already happening, and the car show, which ends this weekend, is on it.EVs have now been adopted on a global scale, said John O’Donnell, chief executive of the Washington DC Auto Show, and the show, which focuses on public policy and gives congressional members and auto industry leaders a space to review the latest technology, needed to reflect that.“We’ve had other technologies and declared them a pavilion, but I thought it was very important right now for us to make it larger and more high profile,” said O’Donnell. Not just because of the current debate over EVs in Washington but also to “dispel the myth the US car dealers do not want to sell electric vehicles”.An aggressive transition like the one Biden envisions will require an equally aggressive overhaul of infrastructure. In the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, $7.5bn is dedicated to EV-charging infrastructure and building charging stations along highway corridors. But the industry is concerned about how that money is spent.Matthew Nelson, director of government affairs at Electrify America, said the infrastructure that serves the public must be “future-proofed”. Ultra-fast charging at 350 kW of power, or the equivalent to 20 miles of range per minute, has been his paramount message to government stakeholders. “We think it’s really important that the chargers paid for today are able to charge faster than the vehicles on the market today,” Nelson said. “The vehicles are getting faster and faster every model year. If we design for today’s vehicles it will be outdated in five years.”Electrify America, a sponsor of the EV Pavilion at the car show, has the largest network of DC (direct current) charging stations in the US. Currently, the Electrify America network consists of 800 charging stations, mostly along highway corridors, and the company is planning an increase to 1,800 charging stations with 10,000 chargers by 2026.However, 500,000 charging stations are needed to meet Biden’s goals and Nelson said they should be reliable and non-proprietary. There are 31 different brands of auto manufacturers in the US that use the same non-proprietary standard for charging and Nelson said leveraging the consensus around that single standard is in the public’s interest.Right now, consumers’ biggest concern is their bottom line, and EVs are more cost-efficient than gas-powered cars. An e-gallon – the cost to drive a comparable vehicle the same distance you could go on a gallon of gasoline – currently averages $1.16, compared with gasoline’s $2.85. Because Electrify America offers public charging their prices are a little higher than at-home chargers, but are standard in every state.Recently, Congress amended the Public Utility Regulatory Act (Purpa) that requires each state to consider EV-specific utility rates, giving them the liberty to change rates not suited for EV adoption. These demand charges lead to “extremely high-priced” electricity being charged to the stations, making it difficult to maintain low prices. States such as Colorado, Massachusetts, California, Rhode Island and Connecticut have revised these rates, but Nelson said every state should be on board.And there’s an equity element to charging. Homeowners who charge their cars in their garage do not pay demand rates, but those who charge at commercial charging stations or who live in multifamily dwellings or apartments will pay the demand rate.Incentives to support EV charging infrastructure in multi-family dwellings and more community-based charging infrastructure are important tools to making EV adoption more equitable, said Kellen Schefter, director of transportation at Edison Electric Institute, which leads the National Electric Highway Coalition. He believes the biggest barrier to EV adoption is the lack of charging infrastructure that’s affordable, equitable and reliable.Making sure investments go into those communities that are not traditionally getting those allocations is a large part of the National Electric Highway Coalition’s agenda. “There is such a great need on the infrastructure front,” said Schefter.The right policies will be critical if Biden is to hit his EV goals. O’Donnell said a wider range of tax incentives are needed to persuade the American public to swap their fuel-dependent cars for EVs.“In Build Back Better, they are proposing $12,500 per vehicle purchased, but only if it is built by a United Auto Worker manufacturer. It doesn’t seem like mass-market adoption will be achieved using only union-made vehicles. We think all electric vehicles should qualify for the full $12,500 incentive,” O’Donnell said.But while tax incentives make a difference, chargers are more meaningful said Dilip Sundaram, chief international business officer at Acrimoto, an electric autocycle company. China – the biggest EV market – has about 800,000 chargers and Sundaram said 500,000 chargers in the United States, a car-dependent country, is not enough.“In China, the tax incentive is about $2,500,” Sundaram said. “Accessibility to chargers is what is driving mass adoption. If you remove range anxiety to make sure chargers are available everywhere you will suddenly see the EV adoption increase.”“Biden wants to put the United States in a leadership role instead of a passive role on the issue of climate change, but policies need to reflect the new challenge,” Sundaram said. “So that any new structure whether it be a mall or apartment complex, has chargers.”Despite a lower than usual attendance at this year’s show because of Covid, the line to ride in the new Arcimoto was long. As attendees watched the small autocycle whip around the EV pavilion, others buzzed about the displays for the latest EV models presented by Bentley, McLaren, Polestar, Hyundai and Nissan.The star of the show was the new all-electric Ford F-150, the latest iteration of the US’s best-selling vehicle. The impressive aluminum truck can pull 10,000lb, gets 300 miles on a standard charge, and can generate power for an entire house for three days. And it’s fast – going from 0-60mph in less than five seconds.As the demand for these new high-performing EVs grows, gasoline-powered cars look more and more like relics. But for now, all eyes are on Congress as to how soon the US can transition to mass adoption, and an equitable, EV market.TopicsAutomotive industryElectric, hybrid and low-emission carsUS politicsJoe BidenMotoringfeaturesReuse this content More