InsideSources

President-elect Donald Trump built his campaign on protecting American workers against an increasingly global economy, but there may be ways to embrace globalization without hurting the working class.

Businesses and consumers have had increased access to the global economy over the years. New technologies, trade deals, and immigration have eliminated many barriers that once existed in the international markets. The growing global economy, however, has been met with opposition over its impact on certain industries.

“If you look at the most recent election, there’s been a lot of focus on workers in manufacturing and there’s some justification for that,” Cornell University Prof. Eli Friedman told InsideSources. “If you look at workers who have been most affected by the processes of globalization it’s probably been those in manufacturing.”

Trump has been highly critical of trade agreements and immigration because of its impact on domestic workers. Nevertheless, he may have several policy options that will allow him to keep his promise to the working class without preventing the country from benefiting from globalization. One popular solution has been training programs.

“What does go over better is just having federal retraining schemes and making sure those that are clearly going to be impacted by globalization, by losing their jobs, can then be helped into other industries,” University of New Haven Prof. Patrick Gourley told InsideSources. “Those programs right now are pretty small but they can be made bigger.”

Gourley adds that the training programs have had mixed results thus far, but a trial and error process can help policymakers figure out which ideas work best. There is also room to make sure trade deals are more friendly to the working class.

“When we do trade deals the overwhelming focus is on trade, is on intellectual property,” Friedman said. “You can imagine doing trade deals where it was about mutual benefit to both countries and the way that benefit gets defined is that it’s going to improve things for workers.”

Trump promised to renegotiate trade deals so that they do benefit American workers. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), for instance, has been denounced by critics for allowing jobs to be more easily outsourced. Gourley notes policymakers should inform workers in at-risk industries and phase in trade deals so there is time for them to adjust.

“I think the biggest thing, as I already mentioned, is just educating people so they know it’s coming and then possibly phasing in trade deals,” Gourley said. “Maybe it would be more useful to have a planned phase-in where you’re lowering tariffs steadily over a number of years.”

Friedman adds protecting workers has become an afterthought for many trade deals as opposed to a primary focus. He notes another thing policymakers could do is help workers in industries that have had stable employment. The manufacturing sector has lost a lot of jobs but other industries like the service sector still have a lot of opportunities.

“Most of the jobs that people have are in the service sector,” Friedman said. “If you really want to have a conversation about helping the working class we should be talking about those jobs, and to be honest, I didn’t really see either candidate talking about it during the election and I think that’s something we should think about.”

Friedman adds that deliberate policies, like increasing the minimum wage, might help in improving those jobs. The Fight for $15 movement was even started by service workers and unions back in 2012. The movement has been at the forefront of the minimum wage debate ever since.

“The obvious thing is to pay them more, it’s not all that complicated as a proposal,” Friedman said. “Getting it through and making sure workers get paid is a lot more difficult.”

Economists have had varying views on whether increasing the minimum wage is more helpful or harmful. The policy does increase wages but may also lead to decreased employment opportunities and increased prices. Friedman notes the debate tends to be driven by ideology.

“Certain camps of economists say this is going to hurt job growth and other economists say no, increases in the minimum wage, that money gets put back into the economy, it creates a positive cycle,” Friedman said. “Everyone has a position on it, and I think it’s usually formed by ideology rather than analysis.”

Friedman adds that service jobs are more difficult to outsource but that there is still a risk of automation. Automation is the process by which employers use robots and computers to complete tasks commonly done by workers. Foreign labor and automation both pose a risk to domestic workers, which means they may need an improved safety net to fall back on.

“The need for a safety net will become much more obvious over the next decade,” Ivey Business School Prof. Niraj Dawar told InsideSources. “Automation and AI will impact the labor force even more than they have in the past decade. Just driverless vehicles could eliminate 5 million jobs.”

Policymakers can also help workers adjust to globalization by making sure domestic employment growth is as robust as possible. The employment rate has been good but there is still a lot of room for improvement. The employment rate, for instance, doesn’t track those that have dropped out of the labor market.

“We should be running full employment policies,” Dean Baker, co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, told InsideSources. “There’s a big argument on how tight the labor market is and how much tighter it can be. I very much believe we could have a much tighter labor market.”

Trump also put currency manipulation at the forefront during the campaign. China and other countries have been accused of keeping their currency artificially low to boost exports which in turn undermines domestic products. Currency manipulation occurs when a country sells its own money while buying up foreign reserves. It allows countries to peg their currency to a foreign reserve as opposed to letting it fluctuate freely in foreign exchange markets.

“If we did move to address the currency imbalances, that would help reduce the trade deficit,” Baker said. “It’s not going to get back the six million manufacturing jobs we lost in the last fifteen years but maybe it will get us one or two million.”

Trump has also proposed policies that might not be as helpful as some think. He suggested increasing tariffs to discourage companies from outsourcing by making it more expensive to import their products. The policy, however, could yield little benefit while also being harmful by increasing prices and preventing trade.

“You can put a 35 percent tariff on China,” Friedman said. “My guess is it’s not going to save many jobs and probably the damage it would do to our economy and to the Chinese economy would more than cancel out any potential benefit.”

Lawmakers can also go beyond policy in helping the working class transition into the global economy. They can improve their messaging to better explain what about globalization is good. More so, they can be honest with workers about its downsides so they can be better prepared.

“I think we get too focused on factory jobs because people get nostalgic for the 1970s or whatever when a factory job was a ticket to the middle class,” Friedman said. “It would be difficult for a politician to get up there and be honest with people, and the truth is most of those factory jobs are not coming back.”

Friedman adds a lot of those factory jobs aren’t as glamours as they are often portrayed. It’s hard work and often comes with few benefits. While jobs may be lost to globalization the potential benefit is the national workforce transitions into a newer economy, and those lost jobs get replaced with something much better.

Follow Connor on Twitter

The Donald Trump transition team came to the defense of its labor secretary pick Thursday after receiving a barrage of criticism.

Trump and his team have been hard at work filling the upcoming administration since winning the presidency. CKE Restaurants President Andy Puzder has received harsh criticism since being nominated Dec. 8 to lead the labor department. The Trump team, however, is standing by their choice.

“Andy Puzder was nominated to lead the Department of Labor thanks to his extensive experience creating jobs and fighting for smart policies that promote growth,” a spokesperson for the transition team tells InsideSources. “CKE, a company he helped save while creating thousands of jobs in the process, has a strong record despite being burdened by over-regulation and is fully transparent with a myriad of reporting and filing requirements.”

CKE Restaurants owns the franchise chains Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr. Puzder was named the president by the company board of directors in 2000. He helped the company some years earlier recover from major financial difficulties while still practicing law.

“When it comes to rethinking existing policies, Andy’s focus will be on protecting the best interests of American workers and businesses,” the spokesperson also said.

Puzder has faced criticism from lawmakers, progressive advocacy groups and labor unions. Trump campaigned on a promise to help working class people. Democratic Sen. Patty Murray and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka argued during a call with reporters Thursday the pick violated that promise.

“Trump campaigned on a promise he would put working families first but it’s pretty clear he and his Republican Party are planning to do the exact opposite,” Murray said during the call. “The selection of Andrew Puzder for labor secretary is, in particular, I believe, a dangerous and alarming example of him rigging his cabinet against working families.”

Labor unions generally have also been highly critical of the nomination. They have denounced his opposition to increasing the minimum wage, recent labor regulations and the Affordable Care Act. The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) argued the pick shows the president-elect is out of touch with the working class.

Vox Media and other outlets have denounced Puzder for sexism within days of his nomination. Carl’s Jr. has run television commercials featuring models eating hamburgers in sexually suggestive ways. Salon argued the nomination reflects an already misogynistic administration.

Puzder has also been denounced for his lack of political experience. He has never held a federal position before but he has been very active in the political sphere. Puzder has been a vocal critic of recent labor policies and even testified before several congressional hearings on behalf of various business coalitions.

His supporters are hopeful he will help bring balance to federal workplace regulations. President Barack Obama and his administration have done a lot to change labor law through the labor department. Those opposed to his reforms believe they have benefited unions at the expense of employers and workers.

Puzder still has to get his nomination approved by the Senate. He is likely not to face too much opposition with the Republican majority.

Follow Connor on Twitter

A leading Senate Democrat and union president sharply criticized President-elect Donald Trump over his choice for labor secretary.

CKE Restaurants President Andy Puzder was nominated Dec. 8 to become the next secretary of labor. He has faced fierce opposition in the weeks since as some have questioned his views on the minimum wage and other issues. Democratic Sen. Patty Murray said during a call with reporters that the nomination betrays what the president-elect promised workers.

“Trump campaigned on a promise he would put working families first but it’s pretty clear he and his Republican party are planning to do the exact opposite,” Murray said. “The selection of Andrew Puzder for labor secretary is, in particular, I believe, a dangerous and alarming example of him rigging his cabinet against working families.”

Murray adds the other nominations and proposals thus far underscore the problem. The senator is currently the ranking Democrat on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka echoed her concerns that the president-elect has already started to go back on his promise to workers.

“The American economy works best when it works for working people,” Trumka said during the press call. “That ideal was a central theme for Mr. Trump’s campaign for president. Sadly, his selection of a fast-food CEO, who routinely violates labor laws, as head of the labor department betrays the spirit of his campaign.”

Puzder would have vast influence over workplace regulations if his nomination is approved by the Senate. The Department of Labor is the primary federal agency for enforcing and issuing workplace policies. President Barack Obama, for instance, initiated much of his economic agenda through labor department regulations.

“By nearly every measure Andrew Puzder appears to be a uniquely unqualified choice and stands against the very mission of the department he’s been selected to lead,” Murray said. “Workers deserve a secretary of labor whose priority is higher wages and good jobs.”

Those in support of his nomination are hopeful he will help bring balance to the labor department. Current Labor Secretary Thomas Perez has been accused by critics of pushing an overly political agenda. Some believe his reforms have benefited unions at the expense of employers and workers.

“The consequences for our economy and U.S. workers have been disastrous,” America Rising Squared Communications Director Jeremy Adler told InsideSources. “This smear campaign against one of America’s most distinguished business leaders is shameful, but we wouldn’t expect anything more from big labor and their cronies.”

America Rising Squared is a nonprofit research group that promotes conservative policies. Murray, Trumka and other participants on the call demanded that Puzder have his business operations and franchise contracts released publicly so he can be properly vetted.

Follow Connor on Twitter

Software firm Oracle asked the Federal Communications Commission this week to reconsider tougher new rules for internet service providers it says give Google an unfair market advantage.

The Silicon Valley-based database, cloud and business software giant, second in sales to Microsoft, filed a petition with the FCC Wednesday requesting a rollback of the rules passed in October. The rules placed new limits on how broadband providers like AT&T and Comcast can collect data from subscribers and monetize it using targeted advertising.

“The [privacy] order correctly recognizes that protecting consumer privacy online is ‘fundamental,’ but completely undermines that goal by handing Google the market to the obvious detriment of consumers,” Oracle wrote in an agency filing.

The rules bar providers from collecting virtually any information from subscribers without their permission, including web browsing history or app usage, but only apply to companies providing internet connectivity. Edge providers like Facebook and Google, the dominant forces in targeted advertising, are outside of the FCC’s jurisdiction and subject to less stringent Federal Trade Commission rules.

“Google already has the ability to track virtually every movement of a consumer’s day through an Android phone or tablet,” the Oracle petition reads. “It has created a proprietary Android world to derive substantial economic benefit from advertising and – perhaps even more importantly – obtain access to huge amounts of personal data through search, location tracking, and other activities.”

This isn’t the first time Oracle’s gone after Google with specific regard to Android. The software developer lost a years-long lawsuit to the search giant in May. At the time it tried to sue Google for using Java application programming interfaces (APIs) in its Android OS. Oracle acquired the Java copyright in 2010.

“The Android license required to be obtained by [original equipment manufacturers] as a condition precedent to manufacture includes significant demands that severely constrain developers,” the filing states. “Moreover, because Google controls the distribution mechanism for apps, competition and consumers are further harmed. Google is largely outside the FCC’s authority, and now the commission has handed Google a new regulatory gift in the form of imbalanced burdens on ISPs [internet service providers].”

Oracle is likely to fair better against Google this time than it did in the courts. Democratic FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, who passed the rules as an addendum to net neutrality along a 3-2 party line vote, will leave the agency in January along with another Democratic commissioner. Afterward Republicans will take the majority at the FCC under the Trump administration.

Both have already announced their intention to roll back net neutrality rules they previously opposed. Commissioner Ajit Pai, the favorite to take over as acting chairman, leveled criticism echoing that of Oracle before voting against the privacy rules.

“Search engines log every query you enter. Social networks track every person you’ve met. Online video distributors know every show you’ve ever streamed. Online shopping sites record every book, every piece of furniture, and every medical device you browse, let alone purchase,” Pai said in May. “And yet the FCC only targets one corner of the marketplace.”

“Selectively burdening ISPs confers a windfall to those who are already winning big in the world of online advertising,” he added.

The letter comes a week after executives from Google, Oracle and other top tech firms met with President-elect Trump in New York. Oracle co-CEO Safra Catz, who attended the meeting, has since joined the Trump transition team.

“I plan to tell the president-elect that we are with him and will help in any way we can,” Catz said before the meeting. “If he can reform the tax code, reduce regulation and negotiate better trade deals, the U.S. technology industry will be stronger and more competitive than ever.”

Follow Giuseppe on Twitter

Trump International Hotel reached an agreement with two local unions Wednesday putting an end to a long stalemate at its Las Vegas location.

The Culinary Workers Union Local 226 and the Bartenders Union Local 165 have tried to unionize the location for over a year but hotel management has resisted. Management even ignored a successful union vote December 2015. The union in response launched numerous protests but the bitter fight looks to be coming to an end.

“This agreement is the result of tremendous efforts of the parties’ leadership teams,” Local 226 said in a press release. “Both the Culinary Union and the Trump International Hotel Las Vegas extend their congratulations to each other and each look forward to a mutually productive and peaceful labor-management partnership.”

The four-year union contract includes annual wage increases, a pension, family healthcare and job security. The two locals are both part of the national union Unite Here which also achieved a major victory at another Trump hotel. The newly opened Washington D.C. location also reached an agreement with the union Wednesday.

“The agreement speaks volumes about the hotel’s commitment to its employees and the value they place on their relationship with our organization,” Unite Here Local 25 President John Boardman said.  “We look forward to pursuing a mutually productive partnership with Trump International Hotel Washington, D.C.”

The Washington D.C. hotel agreement is just preliminary since workers have yet to have a vote. Hotel management does promise to allow for an orderly organizing campaign as part of the agreement. The agreements mark a likely end to what had become a bitter labor dispute.

Hotel management even faced federal pressure for ignoring the earlier union vote. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled the election was valid and management needed to recognize the union. Management, however, continued to resist the organizing effort.

Donald Trump throughout the dispute was running for president which the union was able to leverage. Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton attended one of the union rallies in October 2015 while campaigning. She spoke in support of the union effort during the rally. Trump would eventually go on to win the presidency.

“Union workers at Trump International hotels are an inspiration to working people everywhere,” AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said in a statement. “In two different ways, they have proven we can take on the powerful and win, even when the boss is running for President of the United States.”

The hotel has also been accused of trying to illegally silence workers who supported the unions. The NLRB has filed complaints against the hotel that includes allegations of physical assault, verbal abuse, intimidation and threats to silence union supporters.

Management filed a lawsuit October 2015 alleging the two locals knowingly lied in a flyer about Trump staying at an unionized hotel. The flyer was to show even Trump prefers hotels with unionized staff despite not letting his own workers organize.

Trump has faced significant opposition from the labor movement throughout the election. The Las Vegas hotel dispute seemed to only fuel that resentment. The AFL-CIO declared him its loser of the week multiple times throughout his campaign. The union cited the hotel labor dispute as one of the reasons.

Unite Here also used its national influence to put further pressure on hotel management. It held a protest outside the newly opened Washington D.C. location Oct. 13 to show solidarity with the Las Vegas workers. Other unions joined in to show support.

Hotel management did not respond to a request for comment by InsideSources.

Congress released its long-awaited first report on criminals and terrorists “going dark” online via encryption this week, and its conclusions may set the stage for another battle between legislators and President-elect Donald Trump.

The report released late Tuesday by a bipartisan working group of lawmakers refutes calls by FBI Director James Comey and Trump for what are essentially “back doors” into encryption platforms from Apple, Android, WhatsApp and others to surveil the communications of criminals and terrorists.

“Congress should not weaken this vital technology because doing so works against the national interest,” the report reads. “However, it should not ignore and must address the legitimate concerns of the law enforcement and intelligence communities.”

Lawmakers from the House Judiciary and Energy and Commerce Committees including Republican Reps. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, Fred Upton of Missouri, Darrell Issa of California and Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin worked alongside Democratic Reps. Yvette Clarke of New York and Zoe Lofgren of California to draft the report.

Its findings highlight the criticisms raised by privacy advocates, experts and firms behind the tech that back doors make encrypted platforms more vulnerable in a world of increasing cyber threats. Lawmakers also pointed out the current legal landscape and global availability of encryption products make it difficult to seek warrants for data and easy for bad actors to transition from one service to another — little incentive for weakening U.S. products technically and competitively.

“Encryption technology is free, widely available, and often open source,” the report states. “Law enforcement stakeholders acknowledged to the EWG [Encryption Working Group] that a congressional mandate with respect to encryption — requiring companies to maintain exceptional access to data for law enforcement agencies, for example — would apply only to companies within the United States. The consequences for such a policy may be profound, but they are not likely to prevent bad actors
from using encryption.”

The report comes 10 months after the FBI tried to sue Apple to break into the iPhone of one of the shooters involved in the ISIS-inspired shooting in San Bernardino last December that left 14 dead. Apple refused, and the FBI dropped its lawsuit after hiring a third party to crack the phone’s encryption.

In the midst of the debate Trump blasted Apple on the campaign trail, saying the company should unlock the phone for authorities and calling for a boycott of Apple products until the company complied with the FBI request.

“Apple ought to give the security for that phone, okay,” Trump said in February. “What I think you ought to do is boycott Apple until such a time as they give that security number. How do you like that? I just thought of it. Boycott Apple.”

“The phone’s not even owned by this young thug that killed all these people,” he continued. “The phone’s owned by the government, OK, it’s not even his phone. But [Apple CEO] Tim Cook is looking to do a big number, probably to show how liberal he is. But Apple should give up, they should get the security or find other people.”

Cook was one of a number of tech leaders to huddle with Trump at Trump Tower in New York last week, where he expressed a desire to help Silicon Valley succeed.

The Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), which represents several other companies in attendance at the meeting including Amazon, Facebook, Google and Microsoft, signaled support for the report’s findings.

“This report is welcomed news for those who care about personal, economic, and national security,” CCIA CEO Ed Black said in a statement. “We are glad that after close examination of the security and technical issues, these leading lawmakers understand the considerable stakes and support strong encryption. Deploying weakened forms of encryption in online services and consumer devices is shortsighted and would play directly into the hands of those who would do us harm.”

While Comey’s years-long campaign asking Congress to intervene failed to convince lawmakers or the Obama administration to weigh in, Trump’s comments suggest he may have a more sympathetic White House after Trump takes office on January 20.

The comments also suggest a second point of contention between Trump and a bipartisan group of influential lawmakers, many of whom are calling for a special investigation into Russia’s interference in the recent presidential election — a notion Trump has repeatedly dismissed.

Follow Giuseppe on Twitter

Democrats lost many of their working class supporters in the recent election to a populist campaign by Donald Trump, and now the question has turned to how the party traditionally known for blue-collar support can win back these voters.

Republicans were able to secure the presidency during the Nov. 8 election while also maintaining congressional control. Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton lost several states that had been blue in previous election cycles. Republican president-elect Donald Trump was able to win working class districts in those states.

“I think Democrats are going to have to reach out, particularly to those voters, even though they are a much smaller size of the electorate,” American Enterprise Institute scholar Karlyn Bowman told InsideSources. “Clinton had clearly lost a lot of those voters, many of whom had voted for Barack Obama twice, particularly in the industrial Midwest.”

Bowman adds Democrats didn’t even bother putting much effort in strongholds like Wisconsin. Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa all moved to the right this election. Democrats will likely have to readdress their messaging and leadership if they hope to win the working class districts in those states back.

“The people who are the leaders of the party are no longer coming from these places,” Trinity College Prof. Kevin McMahon told InsideSources. “[They need] both new leadership and new leadership that is representative of the diversity of America and not just diversity in terms of race, ethnicity and gender but in terms of geography.”

McMahon adds the Democratic Party has essentially become the party of big cities. Working class voters might have also been concerned with how some Democratic policies have impacted the economy. The Affordable Care Act, for instance, has received a lot of criticism because of its impact on job creation and the price of health insurance.

“Voters on election day said they thought the Obamacare act had gone too far but at the same time they don’t want to repeal it,” Bowman said. “I think in many of those communities that lost a lot of jobs people were particularly sensitive to the effect a very substantial new government program will have on job creation.”

Michigan State University Prof. William Allen adds the issue isn’t necessarily the policies in itself but how the party addresses the concerns. He notes voters want to see that politicians care and are trying to fix the problems. Democrats seemed to almost ignore when their agenda negatively impacted the working class.

“Democrats have to deal with the reality that Obamacare had some pernicious consequences,” Allen told InsideSources. “They need to accept that, accept responsibility for that and participate in correcting them.”

Democrats have also had a particular focus on identity politics like race and gender. Their most recent party platform further instilled that sentiment. The message helped to bring in more progressive support but it may have also alienated white working class voters who felt they were being blamed for inequality.

“I think particularly the emphasis on identity politics and specific groups was an issue,” Bowman said. “Many working class Americans feel marginalized so I think they should do less of that going forward.”

Allen adds many in the white working class likely felt betrayed by President Barack Obama because of his focus on race. They may have hoped his candidacy would be a chance to move beyond racial politics but felt that never happened.

“You can pretty much embrace the platform of the Democratic Party if you stripped from it the specific content that focuses on race,” Allen said. “You can have general policies of a social safety net addressed to the country and not addressed to people based on their differences.”

McMahon notes identity politics can be part of the message but it can’t be the main focus. Younger and more progressively-minded voters care a lot about those issues and want to see politicians address them. The challenge for party leadership may be finding a balance between the two constituencies.

“Any coalition you put together you’re going to want to deal with the leading concerns of subgroups within the coalition,” McMahon said. “They need to craft a message where some of those issues are part of the discussion but they don’t seem like they’re dictating the message.”

Bowman notes its possible for the left to build a bridge between socially-minded progressives and traditional working class voters. Democrats should be more deliberate in discussing issues that concern the working class even if they don’t appeal to other constituencies.

“That’s obviously the clear goal and that’s what they’ll try and have to do particularly if the white working class continues to be a substantial share of the electorate,” Bowman said. “Trade may not be as great a concern for millennials and urban areas overall but I think they need to continue to talk about that.”

Clinton might have also been the wrong candidate to address the unrest among workers. Trump built his campaign on an economic populist message that blamed the political establishment for working class struggles. Clinton, in many regards, was the very symbol of the establishment.

“I think there was something about her candidacy,” Bowman said. “Perhaps it was the big dollar speeches, perhaps it was her ties to Wall Street, perhaps it was that she had been in government for so long, and people felt distant from her overall.”

Washington and Lee University Prof. Mark Rush notes the election and populist sentiment underscores a bigger issue. He adds many in the working class have clearly rejected what is perceived as a globalist economic agenda. Trump was much more critical of policies like immigration and trade because of their impact on domestic workers.

“It was a rejection of the Democratic presidential candidate in regard to what could be perceived as too strong a swing towards globalization at this point,” Rush told InsideSources. “So the Republicans have a nice shot but if the Republicans don’t address this either then I can’t predict honestly what’s going to happen in four years.”

Rush adds politicians don’t necessarily have to reject globalization but they should make sure it’s not hurting workers. He says it’s an issue that both parties have to address and find a balance. Bowman notes it may also be helpful for the Democrats to find areas of compromise where they can.

“They can try to find areas of compromise so they can work together on both of those issues because Obamacare and immigration are very hot button issues, as is trade,” Bowman said. “Democrats can continue talking about those issues and negotiating trade agreements that are truly fair and I think that will be important going forward.”

Republicans now have the burden of responsibility to prove their economic agenda will help workers. Trump also faces an uphill battle since his win came from the electoral college and not the popular vote. His success may come down to whether he can turn his economic message into real results for workers across the country.

Follow Connor on Twitter

Executives from the biggest tech firms in the U.S. met with President-elect Donald Trump at Trump Tower in New York Wednesday, where Trump appeared to extend an olive branch to the industry he criticized throughout the campaign season, and in reaction donated heavily to his opponent Hillary Clinton.

Apple CEO Tim Cook, Google parent company Alphabet’s Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt and Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg, who were all vocal Clinton supporters, were among those invited to huddle with Trump, Vice President-elect Mike Pence, members of the Trump family and venture capitalist and Facebook board member Peter Thiel, the early and seemingly only support Trump received from Silicon Valley.

They represented three of the top four Silicon Valley firms to donate pennies on the dollars to Trump versus Clinton, with Alphabet donating $1,315,545 to Clinton and $21,924 to Trump, Apple $572,350 to Clinton and $4,366 to Trump, and Facebook $418,986 to Clinton and $3,965 to Trump, according to Open Secrets. The fourth was Microsoft with $710,334 to the former secretary of state and $31,372 to the president elect. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella was also in attendance at the meeting with Trump.

Trump thanked executives for attending and inquired rhetorically whether they were enjoying the “Trump bounce” in the stock market, referring to the Dow’s record-breaking approach to 20,000 points following his election win and despite the Federal Reserve’s announcement to raise interest rates .25 percent.

“Everyone is this room has to like me at least a little bit,” Trump said in a meeting room video broadcast by CNN. “I’m here to help you folks do well. You’re doing well right now.”

Others at the meeting included Alphabet CEO Larry Page, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos whose company gave $330,895 to Clinton and $3,112 to Trump, IBM CEO Ginni Rometty with $319,714 to Clinton and $28,225 to Trump, Oracle co-CEO Safra Catz with $178,444 to Clinton and $12,880 to Trump, Cisco CEO Chuck Robbins with $157,427 to Clinton and $13,662 to Trump, Intel CEO Brian Krzanich with $146,444 to Clinton and $11,862 to Trump and SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, whose electric car manufacturer gave $19,689 to Clinton and $250 to Trump. Executives from Uber and Airbnb were invited but unable to attend.

Combined, the companies with representatives in attendance gave $131,618 to the Republican president elect and $4,169,828 to his Democratic opponent.

Trump said his door was open to hear suggestions from executives, and that his administration would have their backs in improving trade and generally trying to help them succeed.

“You call my people, you call me — it doesn’t make any difference — we have no formal chain of command around here,” Trump said.

The business mogul’s tone marked, at least on the surface, a departure from the barbs he lobbed at Silicon Valley on the campaign trail, where he slammed Apple for refusing to break its own default encryption to aid an FBI terrorist investigation, criticized Amazon for avoiding state taxes, vowed to oppose H-1B visas for skilled workers supported by Facebook and Microsoft, and moved to appoint staunch opponents to net neutrality regulations supported by much of the valley, including Google, which is unlikely to enjoy the same access it had to the White House during the Obama administration.

Particularly on the issue of H-1B visas, Trump initially expressed skepticism with the program for the potential that it displaces U.S. workers. But Trump softened his tone as the campaign continued, reversing himself on several occasions. He said during a debate on March 3, “I’m changing. We need highly skilled people in this country, and if we can’t do it, we’ll get them in. But, and we do need in Silicon Valley, we absolutely have to have.”

A number of tech companies have urged the expansion of the program because there are not enough American workers to fill some highly-skilled positions. Trump’s softening tone on the issue and his outreach to Silicon Valley may be indicators the program is unlikely to be scaled back as Trump stated early in the campaign.

“We want you to keep going with the incredible innovation. There’s nobody like you in the world. There’s nobody like the people in this room,” Trump said. “And anything we can do to help this go long. We’re going to be there for you.”

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey notably was not invited, reportedly for refusing the implement a “crooked Hillary” emoji for the Trump campaign during election season, according to a Hill report.

Follow Giuseppe on Twitter

Andrew Langer has not been a part of the electoral college in years but that hasn’t stopped some from demanding he not vote for president-elect Donald Trump.

Langer was nominated to serve on the electoral college in Maryland eight years ago. The electoral college is a process in which representatives from each state choose the president. Langer started to receive emails demanding he not vote for Trump, from people who were apparently unaware he is no longer in the electoral college.

Langer’s response

“I  will only say this,” Langer responded to critics in an email. “Even if I was an elector…I would be hard-pressed to accede to the unsolicited advice from someone who hadn’t bothered to actually ascertain if I was, in fact, engaged in the particular activity which generated the unsolicited email.”

Langer received three emails thus far and expects more to come. Maryland Republicans nominated him to be an elector just once during the 2008 election. Nevertheless, his one-time entry into the electoral college was enough to put his contact information on a now outdated database.

“None of you took the time to figure out if I was an elector eligible to cast a ballot in the upcoming electoral college vote,” the email went onto say. “You apparently each got your hands on some outdated list, and rather than do the work of actually verifying for yourself whether or not the list was factually accurate vis a vis the 2016 election, you sent an email out to the people on that list.”

Langer wouldn’t have much say anyway even if he had been an elector this year. Electors are nominated by their parties, and they do not vote in the Electoral College unless their party’s candidate wins their state. Langer never cast a vote when he was an elector because then-candidate Barack Obama won the state of Maryland. Likewise, he wouldn’t cast a vote this recent election because Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton won the state.

Langer added the demands highlighted a fundamental problem with politics today. He notes people make demands to others based solely on misinformation. The issue wasn’t even the request in itself but that it was from people who didn’t even bother to figure out whether they were reaching out to the right person.

“I think it’s everyone’s right to reach out to someone who has taken on a public duty,” Langer told InsideSources. “But I think what it underscores is when you do reach out to elected officials or people in positions of responsibility, you need to approach it from some level of actual education. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. No one is entitled to their own facts.”

The founding fathers established the electoral college as part of the U.S. Constitution. It was a system derived as a compromise between those who wanted a congressional vote and those who wanted a popular vote. The system has received fierce criticism this past election since it can undercut the popular vote.

“There are folks that want to see the election results undone by any means necessary and going after the electoral college and attempting to delegitimize the electoral college vote is one of the ways folks are going to do this,” Langer said.

The electoral college consists of 538 electors with a candidate needing a majority of 270 electoral votes to become president. A state is given electors equals the number of members in its congressional delegation. Trump was able to surpass the majority threshold to defeat Clinton.

Follow Connor on Twitter