Millennials Aren’t Getting Jobs, But Unqualified, American Leaders Are

Author: Mary Grace Donaldson, Current Events/Politics

It’s no secret that millennials are looking for jobs, and attempting to forge stable careers, in a difficult market. Just look at the numbers.

As of March 2016, a Generation Opportunity report states that 12.8% of millennials ages 18-29 were unemployed. A May 2017 report from CNBC discusses how millennials are stereotyped as “job-hoppers,” but the reasons are not what they appear on the outside. Almost 90% of millennials indicated that they would stay in a job for more than ten years if promised salary increases, as well as “upward career mobility.” But, seeing as 36% left a job they liked to move on to a company where a better opportunity was offered, it can be deduced that collectively, we millennials aren’t getting those increases and mobility that we desire, and deserve.

While millennials continue to struggle in the job market, America has been watching as both elected and appointed leaders, with little to know experience in their respective fields, are essentially taking jobs that they are not qualified for.


Donald Trump 
Ah, the seemingly obvious example. Trump may have talked about hypothetically running for office back in 1987, but he didn’t actively start campaigning, and putting his metaphorical ducks in a row until 2015. In other words, he talked about being President, just as children do when they’re young, but did not prepare himself for the job through acquiring the correct education and training. His lack of foreign policy experience, as well as political experience as a whole, made him a completely unqualified and unfit candidate — not to mention the Twitter rants that took away (and continue to take away) from his legitimacy as a role model for the American people. This tweet kind of sums it up:


Steve Bannon 
While Bannon isn’t part of the “White House Gang” anymore, his appointment as Trump’s Chief Strategist caused many to scratch their heads. He possesses a great deal of political knowledge, but his political resume (you know, where you actually list jobs showing that you have worked in the political sphere) left little to be desired. Prior to Trump’s election, Bannon worked as his campaign manager. After Election Day, his new title was that of Senior Counselor. While Bannon admirably served our country as a naval officer, his true forte came when he “found success in entertainment finance.” What’s Bannon up to now? He’s back at his old gig as CEO of white supremacist news outlet Breitbart. The questions to be raised here? Why any President would appoint a known white supremacist supporter to any position, and why someone who made his success creating political documentaries would be offered the job of Chief Strategist.

Jim Bridenstine 
Trump’s pick for the head of NASA has a bit of political experience. He has served as a Republican congressman representing his home state of Oklahoma since 2012, and also held the job of Executive Director of the Tulsa Air and Space Museum and Planetarium. He has also served our country as a Navy combat pilot, and currently continues his service as a member of the Oklahoma Air National Guard. Not a bad resume, right? But… one would think that the potential head of NASA would have some experience with, well, space. And Bridenstine doesn’t have that. Being a “big fan of the moon” does not a head of NASA make, and neither does reluctance to “study the climate.”

Sam Clovis
Just a tip: the possible Chief Scientist of the United States Department of Agriculture should actually be… a scientist. And Clovis isn’t one. Sure, his credentials are impressive, as credentials generally go — “he holds a doctorate, but it’s in public administration, and not a scientific discipline.” What else is on Clovis’ resume? Creation of a blog that published posts indicating that homosexuality is a choice, and known opposition to farmers, a population that largely relies on the USDA. So, some very bad publicity, as well as a known grudge against what would be a key part of his constituency in this job.


The takeaways? We millennials should all become President because we once mentioned, possibly as children, that we’d like to be President one day. We should put together poorly produced documentaries about our non-inclusive political beliefs, and then, we’d be appointed to a very important office within the Cabinet. We should make it known how much we love something and then should be asked to be the head of a department. And, we should look to be appointed to positions that are very different than our respective backgrounds.

Instead, we are networking through any means necessary, tirelessly revising our resumes, and hoping that one unusual experience will be the thing that will land us the jobs we truly deserve.


Disclaimer: The political views presented in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Not Another Millennial Blog. 


It’s Not Their Fault: What the End of DACA Truly Means, and What We Can Do to Speak Up

Author: Mary Grace Donaldson, Current Events/Politics

September 5, 2017: After weeks and months of hearing about the possibility, AG Jeff Sessions announced the official end of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. New applications end immediately, and those already protected by DACA will lose any related benefits within six months.

What does DACA allow for?
According to the Department of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DACA was first established as an option on June 15, 2012. “The Secretary of Homeland Security announced that certain people who came to the United States as children and meet several guidelines may request consideration of deferred action for a period of two years, subject to renewal,” the department’s website states. “They are also eligible for work authorization. Deferred action is a use of prosecutorial discretion to defer removal action against an individual for a certain period of time. Deferred action does not provide lawful status.” In other words, immigrants who came to the United States as children, with their families, without any knowledge that they were not coming to the country legally, could request time to make their citizenship legal before facing deportation. They could work in the United States without fear, while working toward to get their affairs in order.

Why the apparent need to end DACA?
“Many members of President Trump’s inner circle believe that DACA is unconstitutional,” ThinkProgress states. In his announcement, Sessions indicated that DACA violates immigration laws, that “failure to enforce the laws in the past has put our nation at risk of crime, violence, and even terrorism.”

Without DACA, what will happen?
Approximately 800,000 people are protected under DACA. About 300,000 of that 800,000 would lose their status, and right to work, by 2018. Some of those 800,000 will be separated from their families through no fault of their own. Many went to college, received their driver’s licenses, and were afforded opportunities “beyond low-wage jobs where no official paperwork is filled,” according to The Washington PostAs we are discussing 800,000 people, these examples only touch the surface.

Are there other solutions in the works?
House Speaker Paul Ryan issued a statement, in which he addressed the need for a “permanent legislative solution that includes ensuring that those who have done nothing wrong can still contribute as a valued part of this great country.” He indicates that DACA was never meant as a long-term solution to the problem of citizenship status for childhood arrivals.

Is it time to speak up?
While it’s great to hear about the hope of a long-term solution, the fact remains that there are still 800,000 people who arrived in the United States as children, without any knowledge of their citizenship status. Their situation is not, nor has it ever been, their collective fault. And as such, the need to speak up in their defense remains. There’s a reason why we have multiple branches of government, and that’s for the purposes of checks and balances. DACA, and the the establishment of a long-term solution, are not only in the hands of Trump and Sessions — they have to go though Congress. Congress has six months to, as they say, figure it out. And while new applications were stopped, there are still six months to call your Congressman. Tell your elected officials that 800,000 people deserve a chance — whether that chance comes in the form of DACA, or in the form of a new legislative solution.


Disclaimer: The political views presented in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Not Another Millennial Blog.

Photo courtesy of Joe Frazier (Latinx Rally – Defend DACA!) [CC BY 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)%5D, via Wikimedia Commons


“Let’s Not Be Patient Patients”: Protecting the Future of Healthcare Under Trump

Author: Alli Jean, Current Events/Politics

Despite years of lamenting of the catastrophic affects of the Affordable HealthCare Act [ACA], the GOP and Trump yet again failed to repeal and replace it, thanks to a 51-49 vote.

While the ACA will continue protecting millions of Americans for now, there’s another aspect of the healthcare debate that’s been forgotten: the commitment by this administration to expand, and continue to expand, nationally funded research that has been responsible for the eradication and prevention of countless illnesses over the past few decades. The potential healthcare reforms will affect all of us, but the affects on medical research are not at the forefront of the story. Research departments could experience the potential affects of all the proposed budget cuts firsthand, and what happens on the national level has a trickle-down affect.

The impact of cutting funding in Trump’s proposed 2018 budget would affect the National Cancer Institute, which would be hit with a $1 billion cut compared to its 2017 budget. The National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute would see a $575 million cut. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases would see a reduction of $838 million. And to top it off, the administration would cut the overall National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget from $31.8 billion to $26 billion — affecting all aspects of its operation, including grant funding to research departments.

What’s more, these are just a few examples. Not only do these cuts threaten future research, but they could cut vital resources for the millions of patients every year, who now have a prospect of a life without a degenerative illness — and those who experience far less adverse drug reactions and other side effects due to the success of clinical trials. These budget cuts could eliminate the funding for current trial patients, because investigational medications are almost always covered by the sponsor of clinical trials. A funding cut could leave patients with either not getting medication, or waiting until drugs get approved and become commercially available, and then, they would pay astronomically higher prices.

As someone who works for a local Institutional Review Board (IRB) whose job it is to ensure the rules and research regulations are followed, and that investigation ensures that the rights, safety, and welfare of its subjects are protected, this would be devastating to patients who are already a vulnerable population due to their illness. A single treatment of some chemotherapy drugs, with good insurance, costs approximately $3,000; without insurance, that same one-time treatment can cost close to $20,000. From behavioral health, to HIV treatment and prevention, to cardiac devices, cutting this vital funding would be going backwards.

Luckily, the 21st Century Cures Act passed overwhelmingly in both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate with strong bipartisan support, and was signed into law on December 13, 2016.  “This legislation provides the NIH with critical tools and resources to advance biomedical research across the spectrum, from foundational basic research studies to advanced clinical trials of promising new therapies,” the NIH explains. “One of the biggest affects of the Cures Act, will be allocating $1.8 billion dollars over seven years for The Cancer Moonshot to accelerate cancer research aims to make more therapies available to more patients, while also improving practitioner’s ability to prevent cancer and detect it at an early stage.”

While the 21st Century Cures Act is a step in the right direction, Trump is a ticking time bomb, who irradicably and unanimously makes decisions that directly oppose logic and progress. The legislation is only in place for now, and tomorrow is never guaranteed. Now is the time to educate yourself, and if you are able, donate to the NIH to help the life-saving efforts being conducted by nurses, physicians, and clinicians across the country. And be ready to call on Congress to act if research funding is threatened.

At some point, we and our loved ones will be the recipient of life-saving medicine in the specialties of Alzheimer’s, heart disease, oncology, mental health, and countless others. Our future is too important not to protect.


Disclaimer: The political views presented in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Not Another Millennial Blog.

We’re Asking and Telling: Trump’s Trans Ban Stops Progress

Author: Mary Grace Donaldson, Current Events/Politics

September 20, 2011: Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is officially repealed, thanks to legislation passed earlier that July by President Obama. Openly LGBT citizens are permitted to serve our country, without having to hide who they are. An act that encouraged people hiding who they are for 17 years was finally put to bed.

June 30, 2016: Then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter officially ends the ban on transgender people joining the military.

And just over a year later…

July 26, 2017: President Trump announces that transgender citizens will no longer be allowed to serve in the United States Military. Because the “T” in “LGBT” is suddenly silent, or something.

Of course, he made the announcement via Twitter, where he has made a multitude of other announcements and taken several shots at so many others, even respected government officials




And Trump’s newly-appointed communications rep Anthony Scaramucci may have to rethink some of his previous statements.


While it was announced later that the U.S. Military would hold off on the ban for the time being, the fact remains that a) it still could come to pass and b) it was thought about in the first place… by our President. There are a number of questions to be answered surrounding this entire event, and what it represents.

What’s his reason this time?
Trump and his advisors indicate that they have conducted research which states the healthcare costs of having transgender citizens in the military are just too high, and would affect the readiness of the military as a whole. According to a 2016 report by the Rand Corporation, the impact would be “minimal,” as there are so few transgender people in the military to begin with.

Is this even legal?
Trump’s Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders indicated that implementation of the ban would have to be “done lawfully.” But no one seems to want to elaborate further on what “lawfully” is in this case. And what’s more, it sounds a lot like discrimination which is, in fact, illegal — which anyone who has read a workplace discrimination policy would know, let alone the military.

What about Trump’s promise to all LGBT citizens that he made on his campaign?
Apparently, they were “tied to war on radical Islam.” Trump claimed that he could fight and eradicate global terrorism completely, and in turn, protect LGBT citizens from a more global threat. What happens in their own country, by fellow Americans, were just details… or, campaign promises made in an attempt to earn the vote of the LGBT population.

So, what does all this mean for us?
We have truly come a long way as a country, but there’s also a long way to go in order to reach the level of progress that so many of us millennials strive for and fight for every single day. We must continue to encourage Pride celebrations as well as the overall culture that promotes being who you are in spite of what others may think or believe… even when our President falls into that category.

How can we help?
It’s important to remember that anyone who voluntarily wants to serve our country, regardless of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, religion or sexual identity, should be rewarded and commended for his or her efforts and selflessness. These are people who protect our freedoms by risking their lives to do so. Who is anyone to deny them of their freedoms to be who they are? We can help by continuing to raise our voices in support — whether on a large scale by peaceful protest, or a smaller scale just by having a conversation with someone who is in favor of the ban, and reminding them just how great and powerful a sacrifice these citizens are making.


Disclaimer: The political views presented in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Not Another Millennial Blog.

Donald Trump’s Misogyny is Appalling

Author: #NAMB Guest Author, Current Events/Politics

dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women.

In the decades leading up to when he was elected president, Donald Trump’s misogynistic behavior was on display. He mistreated his ex-wife, Ivana, who accused him of rape. He called a breastfeeding lawyer “disgusting.” He insinuated Megyn Kelly was menstruating during a debate. He called a former Miss Universe contestant “miss piggy” and an “eating machine.”

In his most appalling moment (that we know of), he was caught on tape saying he sexually assaults women. Not only saying it, but proudly saying it. That he “grabs them by the p***y.” And then nearly half the country turned around and voted for this walking atrocity.

That brings us to Trump’s recent comments.

Last Thursday, Trump went off on Twitter on Mika Brzezinski of MSNBC, first calling her intellect into question and then saying she was “bleeding badly from a face lift” during a party on New Year’s Eve at Mar-A-Lago.

The response to Trump’s attacks against Brzezinski was swift and came from both ends of the aisle, with many saying it was beneath the office of the presidency. And yet, what is being done about it?

As was the case after his “grab them by the p***y” remarks were leaked, the outrage has been followed by… nothing.

What Trump is doing is spitting on the decades of progress that has been made by women, who are still battling for equal rights that shouldn’t have to be battled for. His thoughts about women and the cringe-inducing ways he expresses them would get most people fired from their jobs. And it’s honestly impossible to fathom how any woman who voted for Trump can look their children in the eye at this point and even attempt to justify their vote.

Trump is not going to get impeached for the revolting things he says about women. The 25th amendment is not going to be invoked because of them. But if you add everything up and take a step back and look at the carnage of word-vomit Trump has left in his wake — both about women and otherwise — it’s fair to wonder if there will be a breaking point for Republicans, when they finally examine the totality of what’s happened and say enough is enough.

Perhaps that won’t happen. Perhaps we’ll have to answer at the polls in 2018, by voting many of Trump’s spineless Republican allies out of office. In the meantime, parents should make it a point to speak to their children about what Trump has been saying about women. To explain that these are hateful and shameful words from an unbalanced man.


Disclaimer: The political views presented in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Not Another Millennial Blog.