‘Look at me when I’m talking to you!’: Crying protesters confront Jeff Flake in Capitol elevator
‘Look at me when I’m talking to you!’: Crying protesters confront Jeff Flake in Capitol elevator
After Sen. Jeff Flake’s announcement that he would, in fact, vote to confirm Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court, the emotional debate over the confirmation spilled into the halls...
After Sen. Jeff Flake’s announcement that he would, in fact, vote to confirm Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court, the emotional debate over the confirmation spilled into the halls of Congress — on live television — as two women loudly and tearfully confronted the Arizona Republican in an elevator Friday, telling him that he was dismissing the pain of sexual-assault survivors.
“What you are doing is allowing someone who actually violated a woman to sit in the Supreme Court,” one woman, who said she had been sexually assaulted, shouted during a live CNN broadcast as Flake was making his way to a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting. The Center for Popular Democracy, a left-leaning advocacy organization, later identified her as the group’s co-executive director, Ana Maria Archila.
“This is horrible,” she told Flake. “You have children in your family. Think about them.”
Read the article and watch the video here.
Housing Rights Group Says HUD Program Helps Wall Street, Hurts Homeowners
Truthout - October 5, 2014, by Rebecca Burns - After learning that his home was in foreclosure in July 2013, James Cheeseman received an even more unpleasant surprise when he showed up in court...
Truthout - October 5, 2014, by Rebecca Burns - After learning that his home was in foreclosure in July 2013, James Cheeseman received an even more unpleasant surprise when he showed up in court the following January. He was told that his mortgage loan had been sold by JP Morgan Chase and purchased by a company he had never heard of before - LVS Financial.
Cheeseman had already applied for a loan modification from Chase and says he was still awaiting a response when the loan sale occurred - a move that he and his attorney argue violates New York State foreclosure laws. Cheeseman says that the new servicer, BSI Financial, then required him to fill out a whole new loan modification application. In mid-September, he learned that he had been denied.
Though he is asking the court for another shot at a modification, this curveball has caused considerable distress for Cheeseman, 47, and his mother Constance, 75, who have resided in the New York home that they co-own for five years.
"I was shocked; I thought that [the resale of bundles of bad loans] was over," he says. "That's what got the country into trouble in the 2008 [mortgage crisis]. But lo and behold, it's still going on."
Legal advocates, however, say that significant abuses by servicers may already have taken place.
In fact, the Cheesemans and their attorney believe that the sale of their loan was part of a recently expanded federal program ostensibly intended to provide relief to homeowners on the brink of foreclosure. Though foreclosure rates have been falling nationwide, 2 million homeowners are still behind on their mortgages and headed for foreclosure and another 10 million are underwater on their mortgages and at risk of the same in the future. About half a million of those seriously delinquent loans are insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), representing a drain on the agency's taxpayer-backed insurance fund.
In 2012, the FHA expanded a program to auction off pools of "nonperforming loans" - those on which homeowners are at least six months delinquent on their mortgage payments - to both for-profit and nonprofit bidders. To date, nearly 100,000 loans have been sold through the Distressed Asset Stabilization Program (DASP), bringing $8.8 billion into the FHA's coffers. The agency asserts that the program can also help reduce foreclosures, as private loan-buyers not hemmed in by the same restrictions as the government agency should be able to pursue a wider range of avenues to keep residents in their homes.
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of DASP is where loans sold through it are ending up. HUD's own data reveals that 98 percent of these loans were purchased by private investors.
But citing stories like Cheeseman's, some housing-rights organizations are telling a different story about DASP. They contest that the program has deepened the pain of homeowners and tenants by handing their fates over to hedge funds and investment groups that often have no interest in pursuing loan modifications or other options that would allow residents to remain in their homes. On September 9, community groups in more than 10 cities nationwide protested at local offices of the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which oversees the FHA and DASP. Noting that, by HUD's own numbers, private investors - including private equity firms, hedge funds, specialty servicers and single-family rental companies - have won bids on close to 98 percent of all loans auctioned through DASP, many housing advocates are calling for a halt to the program until it can be overhauled.
Asked about criticisms of DASP, HUD told Truthout that it is exploring several changes to the program. But on September 30, the FHA proceeded with the sale of another pools of loans totaling $2.3 billion in unpaid principal balances.
The Devil's in the Details
HUD did not release data on DASP to the public until August, though housing advocates have for some time been requesting information on the program's outcomes. In its first report on DASP, HUD concluded that the loan-sales program has "met its intention" of mitigating losses to the FHA, thereby minimizing risks to taxpayers. The agency touts sales made through DASP as a way to stabilize its taxpayer-backed insurance fund, which, following losses of more than $50 billion on mortgages it insures, required a federal subsidy of $1.7 billion for the first time in its 80-year history. HUD projects that in the coming years, DASP and other loss-mitigation strategies will add $5 billion to the FHA's insurance fund.
"By selling homes to private equity giants and vulture capitalists, DASP is fueling the rise of the Wall Street landlord."
The report concludes that DASP may be beneficial for homeowners as well, citing the fact that, while about half of the loans sold had not yet been resolved, of those that had, 34 percent of homeowners were able to avoid foreclosure. In a statement provided to Truthout by HUD, FHA Commissioner Carol Galante said:
We consider the Distressed Assets Sales Program to be very successful in accomplishing what we intended it to do. This program not only achieves significant cost savings for FHA's insurance fund, but offers borrowers a final opportunity to avoid foreclosure, which they wouldn't otherwise have. The results speak for themselves. Based on our initial data, an encouraging share of families are now re-performing and others have achieved a graceful exit from an unsustainable mortgage. It's important to note that all these families would be foreclosed upon if not for this program, which, in one way or another, has offered many of these borrowers another path.
But community groups say that this characterization lumps together dramatically different outcomes for homeowners. A September report released by the community groups Right to the City Alliance and Center for Popular Democracy (CPD) notes that of loans that were counted as having avoided foreclosure, many had been sold to a third party or resulted in a short-sale. Though homeowners were able to avoid foreclosure in 34 percent of loans resolved to date, they were able to gain modifications or otherwise begin making payments again in just 10.9 percent of the resolved cases.
"What we want to see is people being able to stay in their homes. And this category of 'foreclosure avoidance' includes a lot of outcomes in which [they] were absolutely not able to stay in their homes," Connie Razza, CPD's director of strategic research and author of the report, titled "Vulture Capital Hits Home: How HUD is Helping Wall Street and Hurting Our Communities," told Truthout.
Homeowners Claim Abuses
That's not the only bone housing activists have to pick with the program. Only loans that are not eligible for standard FHA loss mitigation - those, that, for example, have failed to qualify for loan modifications or other measures - are supposed to be included in the program. But some legal and housing advocates believe that mortgage servicers, for whom a quick insurance payout may be more attractive than a lengthy foreclosure process, could be flouting this requirement.
"When speculators heat up the market for 'distressed mortgages' they make it harder for anyone who acquires them - whether for profit or nonprofit - to make win-win deals that preserve homeownership and stabilize communities."
For example, James Cheeseman says he was beginning a settlement conference with Chase Bank, a step required under New York law to determine whether a modification, short sale or other alternative agreement can be reached before a lender proceeds with foreclosure, when his attorney learned that his loan had been sold in January. Cheeseman says that he was never notified of the sale - instead, he says, his attorney noticed the change during the discovery phase of the settlement conference.
"Our suspicion is that once [Chase] found out that [the foreclosure] was going to be an extended process, they sold their note," says Cheeseman. "The've been hit with fines for shady practices in the past, but they’re still doing it. But HUD is a government agency - it's like we're paying for those shady practices."
James and Constance Cheeseman's house went into foreclosure in 2013 after James was laid off from his job as an auto claims examiner. He says that he and his mother fell victim to a loan-modification scam at the hands of the Templeton Group, against whom the New York District attorney recently filed a suit over such abuses. But the Cheesemans applied for another modification last year, hopeful that the result would be different, given that James had found work again, and they also had additional income through a renter. They believe that the loan's sale has restricted their options: After purchase by an investor, the Cheesemans' loan was no longer insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), disqualifying them from the federal Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). BSI Financial, the loan's new servicer, is attempting to continue with the foreclosure.
Nonprofits have been unsuccessful in buying loans through DASP after being outbid by for-profit competitors.
Banks selling loans to the FHA for auction through DASP receive an insurance payout equal to the unpaid principal balance of the loan. Housing-policy advocates fear that this could create an incentive for mortgage servicers to cut through judicial red tape by simply selling loans to the FHA for auction through DASP. Another report, released in September by the progressive think-tank the Center for American Progress (CAP), notes that roughly 76 percent of the loans auctioned through DASP between 2013 and 2014 were sold off by Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, or Wells Fargo - three banks that have become notorious for loan-servicing abuses.
"Servicers stand to make out very well from this program," says Sarah Edelman, a researcher at CAP and one of the authors of the report.
HUD tells Truthout that, in response to concerns from CAP and other housing advocates, it has recently changed the process through which it verifies that servicers have fully exhausted loss-mitigations options. Previously, servicers were permitted to self-report that they had completed all the mandatory steps, and HUD program officers conducted checks on a sample of the loans submitted for auction. In advance of the auction on September 30, according to HUD, program officers checked all loans and removed a small number for which loss mitigation records were unclear.
Legal advocates, however, say that significant abuses by servicers may already have taken place. In May, the National Fair Housing Alliance, together with several other consumer and legal-aid organizations, wrote a letter to Commissioner Galante to express concern with "significant servicer noncompliance with HUD loss mitigation protocol" and call for stronger protections for homeowners affected by DASP. The letter detailed several cases in which homeowners had already been accepted for FHA-HAMP modifications and were making trial payments when new servicers stepped in and said they were no longer honoring the modifications. In several cases, like the Cheesemans, homeowners say they received no notice that their loans had been sold.
Under current policy, community organizations that have a real interest in preserving affordable housing often get the least help in acquiring distressed properties.
Vicente and Guadalupe Salgado, residents of Chicago's Albany Park neighborhood, believe they may be one more such case. After the couple fell behind on their mortgage in 2011, they fell victim to a mortgage modification scam and entered foreclosure. Since then, they say that they have applied for FHA loan modifications several times and were awaiting a response in July 2014 when they were contacted by a new servicer, who told them that they had been denied. The Salgados say they were told that they could not apply again unless they could pay one-third of the remaining principle balance up front, which amounted to $22,000.
"If I had that much money, I'd just find a new place to live," says Guadalupe Salgado.
The Salgados were among the homeowners who protested at HUD offices nationwide to call for an end to the resale of FHA loans, and they are seeking a meeting with HUD to try and determine whether the loan was, in fact, sold through DASP.
HUD says that in cases where a loan has been sold through DASP erroneously, the agency is able to return the mortgage note to the original lender and reverse the insurance claim. However, the agency says that this has been discovered in post-sale reviews of records, rather than through complaints by borrowers, and has happened in a very small number of cases.
Rise of the Wall Street Landlord
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of DASP is where loans sold through it are ending up. HUD's own data reveals that 98 percent of these loans were purchased by private investors; just three investment and private-equity firms - Lone Star Funds, Bayview Asset Management, and Serene Investment Partners - won nearly half of all loans.
The market for distressed loans isn't the only asset class to emerge from the ashes of the foreclosure crisis. During the past two years, investors have bought up more than 200,000 mostly foreclosed homes. After scooping up properties at bargain-basement prices, groups such as Invitation Homes, a subsidiary of private-equity giant the Blackstone Group, have built a new industry specializing in the rental of single-family homes, and even begun securitizing tenants' rental payments to sell billions of dollars in "rent-backed securities,"a financial product similar to mortgage-backed securities that taps tenants' rent checks as an income stream for investors.
Critics of DASP worry that the program may, for some investors, amount to little more than another means of acquiring cheap rental properties. At least two DASP buyers also operate single-family-home rental firms. The Blackstone Group - which through its subsidiary Invitation Homes is now the largest owner of single-family homes nationwide - owns a controlling stake in Bayview Asset Management, which has won nearly 20,000 loans through DASP.
"By selling homes to private equity giants and vulture capitalists, DASP is fueling the rise of the Wall Street landlord," says Kevin Whelan, national campaign director of the National Home Defenders League, which helped coordinate the September protests against DASP.
There's another troubling trend associated with DASP: The accelerating sale of bad loans has helped give rise to a "distressed-mortgage securities market." At least 11 buyers who have won loans through DASP have securitized some or all of the loans purchased through the program, and analysts estimate that investors will trade roughly $60 billion in distressed mortgage assets by the end of 2014, compared with just $25 billion in 2013, according to the report by the Right to the City Alliance and the Center for Popular Democracy. CPD's Razza also notes that firms that securitize distressed loans may be most likely to continue winning them in the future - according to her report, securities have enabled for-profits to bid 15 - 20 percent higher on loans than their competitors.
This trend is undermining DASP's ostensible goal of helping homeowners and "contributing to a new speculative housing bubble," says Whelan, noting that the price of distressed mortgages has been driven upward by investor demand. "When speculators heat up the market for "distressed mortgages" they make it harder for anyone who acquires them - whether for profit or non-profit - to make win-win deals that preserve homeownership and stabilize communities."
Community Groups Left Out
Indeed, though DASP was initially billed as a means of involving more community organizations with a solid track record in foreclosure prevention, nonprofit organizations have won just 2 percent of loans sold through the program, according to the Center for American Progress’ report.
HUD stresses that because all of the loans sold through the program were headed for foreclosure, DASP is a last shot for homeowners to achieve an alternative outcome. But Whelman says this amounts to a "beggars-can't-be-choosers" rationale that does not necessarily bear out. "HUD's own figures show that the vast majority of families whose loans are sold off to investors lose their homes, whether via foreclosures, short sales, or other mechanisms," he says. "But there are nonprofits that can buy these loans that have a track record of keeping more than half the families in deeply distressed loans in their homes."
Several such nonprofits have been unsuccessful in buying loans through DASP after being outbid by for-profit competitors. New Jersey Community Capital (NJCC), a community-development group, has successfully purchased loans in New Jersey and Florida through DASP's "Neighborhood Stabilization Outcome" (NSO) pools, which are area-specific and require that buyers achieve a set of goals that enhance community stability - including reperformance of a loan wherein a borrower is able to begin making payments again, or a property's rental to a borrower - in at least half of loans purchased.
In an email to Truthout, NJCC said that it had been able to modify 45 percent of the loans in owner-occupied homes, a rate much higher than the industry standard. Nevertheless, the organization has been unable to scale up its purchases through DASP - in June, it was outbid on an NSO pool of loans in New Jersey by a for-profit investor. Even in NSO pools, nonprofits have won just 12 percent of loans, but outcomes are slightly better, with nearly 25 percent of residents able to remain in their homes.
NJCC and other nonprofits are calling on HUD to enable the participation of more mission-driven nonprofits, including by expanding the NSO pools, which currently constitute just 20 percent of DASP sales, or creating nonprofit specific pools. "This could be a very effective program, if FHA can get loans in the hands of buyers who are committed to neighborhood stabilization - that's if," says CAP's Edelman.
In a statement provided by HUD, Galante said: "HUD is also exploring every option to increase nonprofit participation in our program, including allowing more time for these organizations to perform the necessary due diligence and to assemble sufficient capital." The agency also told Truthout that in an upcoming November DASP auction, it will offer more NSO pools, including several that are smaller and more geographically concentrated.
But other housing-rights organizations believe that even farther-reaching measures are needed. The Chicago-based Autonomous Center of Albany Park, which is working with Guadalupe and Vicente Salgado to help fight their foreclosure, also operates Casas del Pueblo, a 501(c)3 community land trust that holds titles to properties and believes that federal policy should require more banks and investors that profited from the mortgage crisis to donate properties to community organizations outright.
Donation to a land bank is one option that buyers of loans in NSO pools may take to fulfill their obligations to the program's requirements, and some banks have chosen to donate properties to nonprofits in small number to receive a tax write-off. But Antonio Gutierrez, housing coordinator at Casas del Pueblo, says that under current policy, community organizations that have a real interest in preserving affordable housing often get the least help in acquiring distressed properties. The land trust, for example, is currently in negotiations with Fannie Mae to purchase the home of a domestic violence survivor who went into foreclosure after her abusive husband left the home and has been fighting to remain in it for four years. Though DASP buyers can obtain properties at an average of between 40 and 60 percent of the remaining principal balance on a mortgage, Fannie Mae has asked Casas del Pueblo to pay the full market value of $250,000 to obtain their member's home, even though she had already made a decade of mortgage payments on her mortgage.
"The DASP program isn't really providing neighborhood stabilization, it's actually contributing to the displacement of existing communities" when investors buy loans with the intent of foreclosing on properties and finding higher-income renters, says Gutierrez. Even the loan modifications provided by commercial banks and investment groups may merely be "prolonging the process of foreclosure," he says. "If we want a permanent solution and true neighborhood stabilization," he says, "we need federal policies that say that principal reductions, buybacks and donations to community land trusts are not optional. They need to be priorities."
In the meantime, the Autonomous Center is part of a national coalition calling on HUD to halt DASP outright until it can be overhauled. The Center for Popular Democracy, the Home Defenders League and other housing organizations say they gathered 11,000 signatures on a petition calling for an end to sales through DASP, and are planning further protests if they don't receive a response. Among those watching HUD's next move are the Salgados, who believe their house could be auctioned later this year.
"I'm waiting and trying to investigate who owns the loan," says Guadalupe Salgado. "But this is my house, because I've fought for it."
Source
What Does Black Lives Matter Want? Now Its Demands Are Clearer Than Ever
One commonly asked question about this moment in black-led organizing—what some broadly refer to as the Black Lives Matter movement—is what its participants want. What are BLM’s goals and why,...
One commonly asked question about this moment in black-led organizing—what some broadly refer to as the Black Lives Matter movement—is what its participants want. What are BLM’s goals and why, some critics ask, is the movement so reactive, only vocal and visible in response to police violence against black people?
Starting today, anyone with such questions can refer to the Vision for Black Lives, a document that lays out six demands and 40 corresponding policy recommendations to paint a picture of what today’s black activists are fighting for. At both the Democratic and Republican national conventions last month, there were plenty of indications that the current movement to end anti-black racism has made it to the national stage. The “Mothers of the Movement”—women whose children were killed by police or vigilantes or who died while in police custody—shared their stories at the DNC, making the case that their fights for justice would be in good hands with a Clinton presidency. At the RNC, meanwhile, Milwaukee County’s Sheriff David Clarke, a black man, tried to calm the nerves of the largely white audience, assuring them that Donald Trump can restore law and order and put an end to the “anarchy” that BLM inspires.
The platform released today emphasizes the movement’s independence from party politics and its desire to prioritize solutions that address root causes over the quick fixes more likely to win a presidential candidate’s support or move through an obstructionist Congress. For example, the nearly 40 policy recommendations include the following (quoting the group’s August 1 press release):
Demilitarize law enforcement, end money bail, end deportations, and end the systematic attack against Black youth, and Black trans, gender non-conforming and queer folks.
Immediately pass state and federal legislation that requires the U.S. to acknowledge the lasting impacts of slavery, and establish and execute a plan to address those impacts.
“Democrats and Republicans are offering anemic solutions to the problems that our communities face,” said Marbre Stahly-Butts, a member of the eight-person Movement 4 Black Lives leadership team that steered the collaborative research and writing process over a year-long period. “We are seeking transformation, not just tweaks.”
Recommendations such as those above may strike some as too broad, too pie-in-the-sky. But the vision statement offers greater depth for readers who want to know how to translate the words into on-the-ground action. The section on demilitarization of law enforcement links to more information on bills in New Jersey and New Hampshire that could be used as model legislation for other states. There’s advice on how to use federal law to demand that local elected officials reject military-grade equipment for police departments and that university presidents do the same with regard to campus police. What may seem at first glance like dreamy rhetoric that lacks the teeth to ensure real change is actually a toolkit for anyone ready to do the long-term work of running local or state-based advocacy campaigns.
Some such campaigns are active but unknown to people newer to organizing and activism. The collaborators behind this project want to change that by highlighting existing campaigns on the newly launched Movement 4 Black Lives website alongside the vision statement. More than two dozen black-led organizations, including Black Youth Project 100 (BYP100), the BlackOut Collective, the Center for Media Justice, the Million Hoodies Movement for Justice, and Southerners on New Ground, co-authored the vision statement through the year-long process, said Stahly-Butts, who is also a policy advocate at the Center for Popular Democracy. “Those of us who have been inside this movement have seen there’s work happening across the country,” she said. Together they set out to answer the question: “How do we amplify what’s already happening?”
Authors of the Vision for Black Lives say policy is just one of many necessary tactics. Protest, direct action, advancing conversations that critique norms around race, gender, and sexuality are all part of the movement’s work as well, said Thenjiwe McHarris, another member of the eight-person leadership team that guided the process. But articulating a set of demands then advocating for those demands to be met is critical too. Throughout their collaboration, the co-authors referred to earlier policy statements, such as the Black Radical Congress’s Freedom Agenda and the Black Panther Party’s 10-point platform in an effort to better understand similar black-led policy efforts that had come before.
“It builds on the legacy of the black radical tradition,” McHarris said of the document released today.
By DANI MCCLAIN
Source
Activists invite St. Louis Fed president on north St. Louis bus tour
Activists invite St. Louis Fed president on north St. Louis bus tour
Activists with a group pushing for changes at the Federal Reserve asked St. Louis Fed President James Bullard to accompany them on a bus tour of some of the poorest communities in St. Louis.
...Activists with a group pushing for changes at the Federal Reserve asked St. Louis Fed President James Bullard to accompany them on a bus tour of some of the poorest communities in St. Louis.
About a dozen activists delivered an invitation for the tour to a St. Louis Fed official at the regional Fed headquarters downtown. An equivalent number of police watched.
“You’re very removed when you’re in that rarified air of the Federal Reserve,” said organizer Derek Laney.
The group is affiliated with the national Fed Up campaign, which is pushing for more diversity on regional Fed boards and wants the Fed to put more emphasis on keeping unemployment low rather than controlling inflation. Laney is affiliated with Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment, a local activist group that speaks out on issues such as policing and coal companies.
The activists’ demonstration coincided with the Fed’s Open Market Committee meeting Wednesday, where Fed officials decided, as expected, to again hold off raising its benchmark interest rate.
Still, some expect the Fed could signal another small rate hike at the end of the year, similar to a small increase in December 2015 that was the first hike in almost 10 years.
Even discussing an increase will still affect market interest rates and economic growth — an unnecessary move while many people are still trying to benefit from the tepid economic recovery, said Nick Apperson, an executive from downtown tech firm LockerDome who participated in the demonstration.
“While it’s likely they’re not raising interest rates in this meeting, … they’re hinting that they’re going to, which will have a similar effect,” he said.
Laney said the group also wanted to call attention to comments Bullard made last month at the annual conference attended by Fed officials and other top central bankers in Jackson Hole, Wyo. Fed Up activists attended the event to speak with officials, and during an interview with CNBC, Bullard said that one of the group’s funders, Facebook co-founder, Dustin Moskovitz, should have come in person rather than sending “all these people.”
“If Bullard wants to walk back those comments he made at Jackson Hole, he needs to walk our streets and talk to our folks,” Laney said.
By Jacob Barker
Source
One vote will turn America’s path away from liberal socialism
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17, 2015 – What difference will my vote make? Too many will say: I am only one person. When asked why they do not exercise our constitutional...
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17, 2015 – What difference will my vote make? Too many will say: I am only one person. When asked why they do not exercise our constitutional right to vote for our governmental representatives they wonder if their one vote makes a difference.
But that is foolish as history has shown that “one person” can prevail.
It was one brave soldier standing alone during a mass protest who stopped a column of armed tanks in China on Tiananmen Square in 1989; one frail man named Mahatmas Gandhi who was the driving force behind banishing the British Empire from India; one conservative, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, who was the black community’s conscience when it needed someone to articulate the horrors inflicted upon blacks by a racist Democratic South.
Even before these 20th century [peaceful] activists, back in the 1860s, there was one conservative black Frederick Douglass. Douglas stood out as a champion of an enslaved people, the fight for their civil rights.
Frederick Douglass made it his life’s mission to rally others to join in with him in the liberation of his oppressed people. Born a slave, he died a millionaire in today’s terms.
Other men and women of courage, conviction and destiny have made a difference: Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, Booker T. Washington, Thaddeus Stevens, Charles Sumner.
Today America is in need of such sons and daughters, born of virtue, courage and conviction to take the smallest action. They need to vote.
Many see that the United States is drifting towards the edge of ruination. At the helm is a president who happens to preside over our moral and economic collapse while pressing on relentlessly with the left-wing agenda. Same-sex marriages, illegal aliens, an under-employed America and a potential $19 trillion deficit do not bode well for our future and this country’s stability.
Barack Hussein Obama has met with numerous world leaders, many of them not so friendly to this country, either then or now.
Yet, in his adopted home city of Chicago, where gangland shootings take place regularly, where body bags fill up, by the hour, where black on black crime runs rampant, this president has yet to seriously address the issue.
As the first black president, he could have met these gang leaders at a presidential sponsored summit to appeal to them on a personal level, and to impress upon them how dangerous and detrimental their life of crime is impacting their own neighborhoods in a negative way.
How bad is it in Chicago? Just over the Fourth of July weekend of this year, alone, 10 people were killed and 55 wounded by gunfire. Shootings rose by about 40 percent during the first three months of this year, according to March statistics released by Chicago Police Department. The mayor, Rahm Emanuel, seems clueless on how to decrease these figures.
Make no mistake; this is largely black on black crime. Yet, when a white person, or a white cop, kills a black anywhere in America, the president cannot get to the podium fast enough to denounce it; neither can race baiters such as Jackson and Sharpton.
This is when the clueless come out with signs chanting “Black Lives Matter.” They ignore the subject of innocent black fetuses being aborted, thanks largely to the efforts of Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger and uninformed blacks who work for and support this organization.
Though serving his last year in office, the president has opted to focus on, and press for, immigration reform. This is an agenda that will further impact the black community in a negative way in terms of employment opportunity.
African-Americans who have achieved higher-education degrees, a key investment leading to the middle class, still find themselves more likely to face long-term unemployment than their white, Hispanic and Asian counterparts, according to the Center for Popular Democracy.
Some believe the president’s end game is granting amnesty for over 30 million illegals and resettling hundreds of thousands of Muslims here in the United States. Not surprisingly, his party supports this president’s efforts while the Republican leadership does not.
And the Supreme Court — they have been missing in action for the past three years when it comes to defending, preserving and upholding the United States Constitution and the laws of the land.
So you ask, What can we do about it?
Americans can express their dismay and anger by voting in the next primary and election. Only then can we make a difference. History has shown that one man can effect positive change. Conservatives in this country number around 45 million strong, so if all would step up and vote, there’s immense power in those numbers.
Up until now, politicians, Sunday morning news pundits and Washington bureaucrats have an open microphone to sway voters, thanks to 24-hour news programs.
It’s time for Americans to really listen to what is being said and recognizing what is unrealistic, not sell low-information voters a bad bill-of-goods.
Forbes writes (We’ve Crossed The Tipping Point; Most Americans Now Receive Government Benefits):
..perhaps 52 percent of U.S. households—more than half—now receive benefits from the government, thanks to President Obama. And Mr. Entitlement is just getting started. If Obamacare is not repealed millions more will join the swelling rolls of those dependent on government handouts.
Conservatives have long dreaded the day when the U.S. crossed the halfway mark because of all the implications for individual and fiscal responsibility. As Benjamin Franklin reportedly said, “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” They learned that from the 2008 election and turned out in big numbers again in 2012.
One popular agenda being pushed by Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton is free college tuition – Bernie wants it at every academic institution, Clinton is calling for free public colleges.
Remember what Franklin said above:
“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”
And college tuition is off the charts, most can agree. So maybe free college tuition is a great idea; however, no one is explaining who is going to pay for the professor’s salary, buildings, campus maintenance, food, books and the necessary technology infrastructure necessary to support a child seeking the college experience.
Look at the reasons parents choose private over public schools. They want a better eduction, higher test scores, smaller class size and more. If parents see that many [not all] public schools fail their children, why would we want to see college follow that same model?
And how many of those students taking that free college will be looking not for education but a continuation of the high school experience and a delay of entering the work force. College should be something a student works for with grades, service participation, sports and learning to be a well-rounded person – a lesson that begins in the home.
Now it is our turn to voice our opinions at the ballot box, for conservatives, independents and libertarians to band together to make a difference in saving this republic. Even if the person presented by the GOP is not the person you want over others,
…we still need to vote for the party otherwise, liberals and progressives continue to rule the day.
The path will not always be smooth and easy. Most things worthwhile ever are. Just remember this.
As former military men, George Washington fought the good fight, Andrew Jackson fought the good fight, Ulysses S. Grant fought the good fight and Theodore Roosevelt fought the good fight while serving in the armed forces.
Professional military leaders such as Adm. Chester Nimitz and Gen. George S. Patton fought the good fight, as well, and all of these men did it against overwhelming odds and all of them prevailed.
Some say, and truly believe, that the American political system is rigged, that the powers that be, like powerful fathom puppet masters, have often manipulated the results of elections so that it does not matter what the voter does, they still pull the strings.
It doesn’t matter who the president is when Valerie Jarrett is pulling the strings.
There is some truth in every urban legend, but it will take voters to weed out these myths and uproot these puppet masters and make the necessary changes to insure the integrity of our political system and our republic. We must all make a stand.
This is a nation with a history of breeding courageous fighters, and right now America needs fighters.
The next generation is counting on you showing up at the polls. including your children and grandchildren. Your decision to get involved and vote will impact their future in many ways.
That is why now is the time America. Not next time, but now!
Unless conservatives from all corners vote to change the ownership of the White House, there may not be a next opportunity to save America.
Source: Communities Digital News
Overnight Finance: Obama huddles with Yellen; Puerto Rico bill markup Wednesday
Overnight Finance: Obama huddles with Yellen; Puerto Rico bill markup Wednesday
TRADING NOTES: President Obama met with Federal Reserve Board Chairwoman Janet Yellen, but interest rates were apparently not on the agenda.
Obama did not plan to...
TRADING NOTES: President Obama met with Federal Reserve Board Chairwoman Janet Yellen, but interest rates were apparently not on the agenda.
Obama did not plan to discuss interest rates with Yellen, according to White House press secretary Josh Earnest. He argued such a conversation could undercut the chair's independence in setting monetary policy.
"I would not anticipate that, even in the confidential setting, that the president would have a conversation with the chair of the Fed that would undermine her ability to make these kinds of critical monetary policy decisions independently," Earnest told reporters ahead of the meeting.
The closed-door discussion is instead an opportunity to "trade notes" on broader economic trends in the U.S. and abroad, as well as on a new set of regulations on Wall Street financial firms.
Obama and Yellen talked about the growth outlook, "the state of the labor market, inequality and potential risks to the economy," the White House said after the meeting. The Hill's Jordan Fabian has more: http://bit.ly/25VuzIZ.
HOUSE TO MARKUP PUERTO RICO DEBT BILL: The House Natural Resources Committee will begin on Wednesday to mark up legislation aimed at saving Puerto Rico from a massive debt crisis.
Lawmakers have been working to make significant changes to the measure, which is expected to unveiled as early as Monday night, since the panel released a discussion draft on March 29.
The Puerto Rico measure, which put the island's finances under federal oversight and authorize a restructuring of some of its debt, will need to strike a balance and attract bipartisan support and the backing of the White House to move forward.
LEW MAKES CASE FOR GLOBAL ECONOMIC LEADERSHIP: Treasury Secretary Jack Lew on Monday made the case for the United States to continue its global economic leadership as the administration faces criticism from Donald Trump and other presidential candidates.
"We know that the global landscape of the next century will be very different than that of the post-war era," Lew said in a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations. "And if we want it to work for the American people, we need to embrace new players on the global economic stage and make sure they meet the standards of the system we created, and that we have a strong say in any new standards."
"The worst possible outcome would be to step away from our leadership role and let others fill in behind us," he added. The Hill's Naomi Jagoda fills us in: http://bit.ly/1qjTIwe.
GOLDMAN SACHS SETTLES MORTGAGE PROBE FOR $5 BILLION: Goldman Sachs will pay more than $5 billion to settle charges that it engaged in "serious misconduct" when selling risky mortgages leading up to the 2008 financial collapse.
The $5.06 billion civil settlement also saw the Wall Street giant admit it failed to properly inform investors of the risks in the subprime mortgage securities the bank was selling.
"This resolution holds Goldman Sachs accountable for its serious misconduct in falsely assuring investors that securities it sold were backed by sound mortgages, when it knew that they were full of mortgages that were likely to fail," acting associate attorney general Stuart Delery said in a statement.
One of the government charges, which Goldman has now acknowledged, was that the bank kept internal concerns about the strength of the mortgage market hidden from potential investors. Here's more from The Hill's Peter Schroeder: http://bit.ly/1qjTJQQ.
SANDERS SAYS GOLDMAN'S BUSINESS 'RIGGED': Bernie Sanders charged Monday that the settlement proves Goldman Sachs's business is "based on fraud."
The Justice Department announced Monday that the Wall Street giant would pay over $5 billion to settle charges it sold risky mortgage investments in the lead up to the financial crisis, and didn't tell investors enough about it.
Sanders, who has built his presidential campaign in large part on big bank bashing, said the settlement proves his point.
"What they have just acknowledged to the whole world is that their system ... is based on fraud," he told supporters in New York.
Sanders also complained that the civil settlement did not include any criminal charges, proving the "corruption of our criminal justice system." http://bit.ly/1TNk2Lm
HAPPY MONDAY and welcome to Overnight Finance, where we're wondering why Herbert Hoover gets to join the racing presidents. I'm Sylvan Lane, and here's your nightly guide to everything affecting your bills, bank account and bottom line.
Tonight's highlights include securities fraud charges for Texas's attorney general, a trillion-dollar national pension gap and a Tax Day delay.
See something I missed? Let me know at slane@thehill.com or tweet me @SylvanLane. And if you like your newsletter, you can subscribe to it here: http://www.thehill.com/signup/48.
ON TAP TOMORROW:
Senate Finance Committee: Hearing on examining cybersecurity and protecting taxpayer information, 10 a.m
Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services: Hearings to examine proposed budget estimates and justification for fiscal year 2017 for the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission., 10:30 a.m.
House Rules Committee: Business Meeting: H.R. 2666: No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act; H.R. 3340: Financial Stability Oversight Council Reform Act; H.R. 3791: To raise the consolidated assets threshold under the small bank holding company policy statement and for other purposes.
Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act expected to be released.
"Getting Her Money's Worth: What Will It Take to Achieve Equal Pay?" discussion featuring Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), 11:45 am.
BERNIE FANS LEFT'S FLAMES AGAINST FED: Liberal activists are putting a target on the Federal Reserve for the 2016 elections, much to the delight of the Bernie Sanders campaign.
Denouncing an agenda that they say tilts toward Wall Street, members of the "Fed Up" coalition on Monday unveiled a set of reforms that would alter how the central bank does business.
"No longer are we focused only on fixing the Fed's monetary policy and internal governance positions," said Ady Barkan, the group's campaign director. "We are now beginning an effort to reform the Federal Reserve itself. Peter Schroeder breaks down the fight: http://bit.ly/23yMSBH.
YOU HAVE THREE MORE DAYS TO PROCRASTINATE: For most people, tax returns are due one week from today.
This year's due date for filing federal individual income tax returns is April 18, not April 15. This is because the District of Columbia is observing Emancipation Day on April 15, which falls on a Friday, according to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
People living in Massachusetts and Maine have until April 19 to file their tax returns because those states observe Patriots' Day on April 18.
Those who are serving in combat zones or contingency operations or become hospitalized due to injuries from their service can have additional time to pay their taxes. Those affected by federally declared disasters might also have more time, the IRS said: http://bit.ly/1Q3tzHk.
AG GROUPS PUSH FOR PACIFIC TRADE DEAL: The nation's farmers and ranchers are putting their weight behind efforts urging Congress to pass a sweeping Asia-Pacific deal this year.
In a letter to congressional leaders on Monday, 225 food and agricultural groups called on lawmakers to move forward on the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership before President Obama leaves office.
"The TPP presents a valuable opportunity for U.S. agriculture; one that we cannot afford to miss," the groups wrote. The Hill's Vicki Needham explains why: http://bit.ly/1S5QCFD.
SEC CHARGES TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL: The Securities and Exchange Commission on Monday charged Texas's top law enforcement official with civil securities fraud for allegedly deceiving investors in a computer company.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) received 100,000 shares of Servergy, a Nevada-based technology company, to pitch investors on a server it was selling between 2011 and 2013, according to the SEC complaint. Servergy officials allegedly marketed the server with incorrect information, and Paxton allegedly did not disclose to investors that he would be paid a commission: http://bit.ly/1RPHyG0.
US PUBLIC PENSIONS FACE $3 TRILLION HOLE: The nation's public pension system is facing a $3.4 trillion funding hole that may force cities and states to either cut spending or raise taxes to cover future shortfalls.
The deficit in pension funds is three times more than official figures and is growing, and without an overhaul could weigh on state and local budgets and lead to Detroit-like bankruptcies, according to research reported by the Financial Times.
Joshua Rauh, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution who put together the report, told the FT that "the pension problems are threatening to consume state and local budgets in the absence of some major changes."
"It is quite likely that over a 5- to 10-year horizon we are going to see more bankruptcies of cities where the unfunded pension liabilities will play a large role." Here's more from Vicki Needham: http://bit.ly/1Su85op.
CONSERVATIVES FIGHT ENERGY TAX BREAKS IN FAA BILL: Conservative groups that oppose a proposal to include energy tax breaks in the long-term reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration are vowing to take their fight to the House if the Senate moves ahead.
Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Partners said Monday that if the Senate ends up attaching energy tax provisions to the FAA bill, the organizations will ratchet up pressure on lawmakers across the Capitol to oppose the language or pass a clean-extension of FAA.
"If the Senate isn't going to do anything to stop this, we're going to put pressure on the House," Andy Koenig, senior policy advisor at Freedom Partners, said on a press call. "The House is under no obligation to take up a bunch of energy subsidies if they don't want to." The Hill's Melanie Zanona walks us through the battle: http://bit.ly/1RPHrKH.
DEMS CALL FOR GREATER NONBANK MORTGAGE OVERSIGHT: Two Democratic lawmakers are calling on the nation's top consumer protection agency to ramp up its oversight of nonbank mortgage servicers.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Rep. Elijah Cummings (Md.) asked the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) on Monday to identify all of and collect more data on the growing number of financial institutions other than banks that service mortgages.
Warren and Cummings pointed to recommendations from a non-partisan government watchdog report published Monday. Warren, a long-time financial industry watchdog, and Cummings, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, requested the Government Accountability Office (GAO) study. I'll fill you in on the rest here: http://bit.ly/1Sc3ldc.
Did you know 67% of all job growth comes from small businesses? Read More
NIGHTCAP: Five Starbucks locations in DC will start serving alcohol and "small plates," which is millennial for paying more money for less food: https://www.washingtonian.com/2016/04/08/5-dc-starbucks-will-sell-beer-wine-small-plates-next-week/.
By Sylvan Lane
Source
A New Front On Immigration: NY Legislation Would Let Undocumented Vote, Drive
Buzzfeed - June 16, 2014 by Adrian Carrasquillo - New York Democrats announced Monday new legislation that would grant state citizenship rights to undocumented immigrants.
The...
Buzzfeed - June 16, 2014 by Adrian Carrasquillo - New York Democrats announced Monday new legislation that would grant state citizenship rights to undocumented immigrants.
The bill could represent a bold new advocacy strategy: using states’ rights to secure legal protections for the undocumented.
York state senator Gustavo Rivera and assembly member Karim Camara’s bill would allow undocumented immigrants to vote, drive, receive professional licenses, run for civil office, and receive Medicaid as well as in-state tuition in New York by making them New York state citizens.
“It’s up to New York to figure out who it’s political community is,” said Peter Markowitz, professor at the Cardozo school of law, who made the legal case for the legislation through the country’s dual-sovereign structure. “New York gets to decide who is and who isn’t a New Yorker. The federal government may not interfere.”
The prospects for federal changes to U.S. immigration law took a hit last week after House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s primary election loss, attributed by some as directly the result of attacks by Cantor’s opponent on his immigration record.
Flanked by activists in front of the Statue of Liberty Monday, Rivera struck a positive tone about the bill, called the New York is Home Act.
Immigrants would be eligible to become state citizens if they show proof of identity, proof of three years of New York State residency and proof of three years of New York State tax payments; the bill also requires a commitment to abide by state laws and uphold the state Constitution, and a willingness to serve on New York juries and to keep paying state taxes.
Rivera said the idea has been in the works for two years and called the legislation “bold,” not because of the pieces themselves, but because they are all in one bill.
“This is unlike SB1070,” Rivera told BuzzFeed after the event. “Arizona said, ‘We can do this and affect things on a federal level.’ No, you can’t. But the conversation we need to have is: What rights do we have in a state?”
Spokespeople for Mayor Bill de Blasio and City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito, the first Latina in the role, said Monday they were reviewing the legislation.
“In light of inaction at the federal government, the administration is interested in learning about local initiatives to increase equality among immigrant communities,” de Blasio deputy press secretary Maibe Ponet said.
“Given congress’s failure to address immigration reform, people are obviously becoming increasingly frustrated, a spokesman for Mark-Viverito said. “[The speaker] is supportive of increasing voting rights and will be reviewing the legislation.”
Cesar Vargas, a DREAMer who has been fighting for the right to practice law as an undocumented immigrant, would benefit from the portion of the legislation that would give licenses for professions like lawyers, doctors, dentists, midwives and others. He said he is set to work with the mayor and the city council speaker to “see how they can support undocumented lawyers.”
“As we stand in front of the Statue of Liberty, we’re reminded of the American Dream, and I’m reminded of the dream of my mother for me to be a lawyer,” Vargas said.
Many sought to draw a parallel between the fight for marriage equality — and its stops and starts over the years.
“This will get a lot of attention for New York,” DREAMer Antonio Alarcon, 19, said. “It will take months to pass, we’re going to be fighting for this like they did for marriage equality.”
“Full equality and inclusion will gain momentum in our time,” said Andrew Friedman, co-executive director of The Center for Popular Democracy.
He said his group is in discussion with four to five other states for similar legislation with the stated goal of putting “another horse in the race” in the way those who fought for marriage equality continued to refine what they were asking for.
Jose Davila, the vice president off policy and government relations at the Hispanic Federation echoed the belief that the legislation comes at an important time for the fight for changing U.S. immigration laws.
“Instead of tear families apart, we should be reframing the debate. What kind of state do we want to be?”
Source
The Fed’s about to try something that almost always has ended in recession
The Fed’s about to try something that almost always has ended in recession
The Federal Reserve‘s looming attempt to shrink its mammoth portfolio of bonds comes with an ugly track record: Virtually every time the central bank has tried it in the past, recessions have...
The Federal Reserve‘s looming attempt to shrink its mammoth portfolio of bonds comes with an ugly track record: Virtually every time the central bank has tried it in the past, recessions have followed.
Over the past several months, the Fed has prepared markets for the upcoming effort to reduce the $4.5 trillion it currently holds of mostly Treasurys and mortgage-backed securities. The balance sheet ballooned as the Fed sought to stimulate the economy out of its financial crisis morass.
Read the full article here.
Newark, NJ Passes Earned Sick Days Bill by 5-0
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 28, 2014
NEWARK CITY COUNCIL PASSES PAID SICK DAYS BILL
...
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 28, 2014
NEWARK CITY COUNCIL PASSES PAID SICK DAYS BILL
IN 5-0 VOTE, NEWARK BECOMES 2ND CITY IN NJ TO GUARANTEE SICK DAYS
Passage of sick day laws in NJ’s two largest cities back to back spells major momentum for the issue statewide
The following statement can be attributed to Andrew Friedman, Co-Executive Director of the Center for Popular Democracy:
“The rapid spread of paid sick days from city to city across the country shows that the public is strongly supportive of policy that improves the lives of working families. Progressive coalitions are leading the way, hand-in-hand with elected officials who are committed to a robust economy that creates good jobs and expands our country’s middle class.”
Contact:
TJ Helmstetter, the Center for Popular Democracy 973.464.9224, tjhelm@populardemocracy.org
Rob Duffey, NJ Working Families Alliance (973) 273-3363, rob@njworkingfamilies.org
Background:
In a move to protect Newark’s public health and bolster its economy the City Council adopted an ordinance that would allow all private-sector workers to earn paid sick days. The legislation passed by a vote of 5-0, and if signed by Mayor Luis Quintana the ordinance will make Newark the 2nd city in New Jersey and the 7th city in the nation to enact an earned sick days law.
“Tonight is a tremendous victory for 38,000 workers who will never again have to choose between their paycheck and their health or the health of their family,” said Kevin Brown, State Director of SEIU 32BJ. “By extending the right to earn sick days to every single worker in the city, Newark’s earned sick days law will be one of the most comprehensive in the nation. Lawmakers in Trenton and around the state should take notice.”
The Newark bill will allow private-sector workers to earn 1 hour of sick time for every 30 hours worked. Those that work in businesses with 10 or more employees can earn 5 paid sick days per year; workers in businesses with nine or fewer employees would be eligible to earn 3 paid sick days per year. In addition, employees directly in contact with the public would be eligible to earn 5 sick days regardless of company size, and the days can be used to care for themselves or family members.
“When I caught the flu last winter I knew I couldn’t go to work and risk infecting my clients,” said Tamika Hawkins a professional home health care provider who lives in Newark and a member of New Jersey Communities United. “But without pay I fell behind on my bills and even received a shutdown notice from the electric company. This law will make a big difference for me and other hard-working people in Newark, and I’m proud that our city is now a leader in this fight.”
Nearly one quarter of adults in the US have been fired or threatened with job loss for taking time off to recover from illness or care for a sick loved one, and the absence of paid sick days disproportionately affects low-income individuals. For a low-income family without paid sick days, going just 3.5 days without wages is the equivalent to losing a month’s groceries.
As of 2010 Newark's poverty rate exceeds 30%.
“Through our community organizing work we are actively engaging residents on the issues they care most about and workplace issues frequently rise to the top of community concerns,” said Trina Scordo, executive director of NJ Communities United. “We have found that low-wage workers in particular fear losing their jobs if they call in sick to take care of themselves or their children. Passing earned sick days is especially important for residents working in direct care, retail, fast food, or any other industry where workers are in frequent contact with the public. There’s no question that paid sick days improves the lives of working families and the fabric of our communities.”
Health professionals praised the legislation for including special public health protections, including ensuring that workers in regular contact with the public are able to earn a full five sick days.
“By passing this legislation, Newark will join Jersey City as a city in our state that looks to protect workers, consumers, families, and the community as a whole from the spread of contagious illness and from ensuing health care costs,” said Elmer, RN and President of the Health Professional and Allied Employees Local 5089. “Providing earned sick days is a modest policy that will have a big impact."
Advocates also touted the economic benefits of the legislation. Last week the Time to Care Coalition delivered a letter from over 20 New Jersey economists to the Newark Council urging them to support the law, saying it will bring tangible benefits to the local economy. On Tuesday a report from the Institute for Women’s Policy Research confirmed that the city and local businesses will actually save money because of the legislation. Studies of earned sick days laws passed in San Francisco and Seattle showed no negative impact from earned sick days on local economies, and both cities outpaced neighbors that lacked earned sick time protection.
“Workers coming to work sick actually costs our nation $160 billion annually, far more than the cost of workers staying at home to recover,” said Karen White, Director of the Working Families Program at the Rutgers Center for Women and Work. “When sick workers stay home, the spread of disease slows and workplaces are healthier and more productive. And by letting workers earn sick days businesses put money in the pockets of low-income workers who go out into the marketplace and spend it on goods and services. It’s a win-win for workers, employers, and local economies.”
Support for the law has been overwhelming. The New Jersey Working Families Alliance delivered 10,000 postcards from Newark voters urging the City Council to pass the law, and earlier today New Jersey Citizen Action delivered a letter from over 60 organizations around New Jersey in support of the legislation. A September poll from Rutgers-Eagleton showed a commanding 82% of Essex County residents supported the policy.
“Working families are looking to their elected officials to show leadership in this fight for what should be a basic worker’s right, and today the Newark City Council stepped up,” said Bill Holland, executive director of the New Jersey Working Families Alliance. “After tonight’s vote there’s no denying it: the national momentum for earned sick days laws has broken through to New Jersey in a big way.”
The legislation comes just two months after Jersey City passed the first earned sick days law in New Jersey. Five other cities – Washington, D.C.; San Francisco; Seattle; New York City; and Portland, Oregon – have taken action to help boost the economy by making sure workers can hang on to critical income when ill. On Tuesday Washington, D.C. expanded their existing paid sick days laws to cover all workers. In New York City, paid sick days legislation was a powerful determinant in the outcome of this month’s Democratic primary for mayor, as voters were less likely to vote for Speaker Christine Quinn after she blocked action on paid sick days for three years. Campaigns for statewide sick days laws are moving forward in Vermont, Massachusetts, Oregon and elsewhere.
Looking forward, advocates pointed to a statewide bill introduced this spring by Assemblywoman Pamela Lampitt and Senator Loretta Weinberg that would cover all of New Jersey’s 1.5 million workers who currently lack paid sick days. The bill is being championed by the statewide Time to Care Coalition.
“While tonight’s vote is a huge victory for working families, there are still over a million New Jerseyans who lack the basic security that earned sick days provide,” said Phyllis Salowe-Kaye, Executive Director of New Jersey Citizen and spokesperson for the Time to Care Coalition. “In the coming year we’re going to build on the momentum from our victories in Jersey City and Newark and make New Jersey a leader in this nationwide fight for fairer, healthier, and more prosperous communities.”
Coalition members that supported earned sick days in Newark and Jersey City include the Time to Care Coalition, Center for Popular Democracy, SEIU 32BJ, the New Jersey Working Families Alliance, New Jersey Communities United, the ACLU of New Jersey, the Committee of Interns and Residents SEIU, the New Jersey NAACP, Health Professionals and Allied Employees, AFT, New Jersey Citizen Action, CWA District 1, and AFSCME Council 1.
Additional reaction to Earned Sick Days Passage:
"A healthier and more productive workforce benefits everyone. This Newark ordinance is a win -win for employees, businesses, and our whole economy," said Corinne Horrowitz, business representative of the New Jersey Main Street Alliance.
"Paid sick days is a human rights issue. Families must be able to take care of their love ones without thinking about how they will pay their bills for taking a sick day off," said Virgilio Oscar Aran, Executive Director of Laundry Workers Center.
"This is a proud day for Newark," said Udi Ofer, executive director of the ACLU of New Jersey. "No one should be forced to choose between protecting their health and their job. This new requirement of paid sick days will give Newarkers fundamental protections to keep their families healthy and their jobs secure. We commend Councilman Anibal Ramos for his leadership and the Newark Municipal Council for its passage of this critically important policy. We look forward to continuing to work with allies and lawmakers across the state to ensure all New Jerseyans have the basic protections Newark workers will now have."
“Low income workers should have the same worker benefits as others," said Raymond Ocasio, executive director of La Casa de Don Pedro. "We all can get sick, and having sick days through the Newark Earned Sick Days Ordinance and access to health care under the Affordable Care Act will only make us all better off.”
“This is a great day for Newark and for its working caregivers. We know that nearly 2 out of 3 workers ages 45 to 74 have caregiving responsibilities for an aging or other adult relative. And caregivers without earned sick days have historically been forced to make some really hard choices. Now, as a result of this measure, if they or one of their close family members get sick, they won’t have to choose between keeping their jobs or taking the time to get well or care for loved ones,” said Dave Mollen, AARP New Jersey State President.
"This Earned Sick Time ordinance is designed for my patients who must choose between taking care of themselves and preventing the spread of viruses or making sure they don't lose a day's wages or even their job," said Dr. Ahmed Yousaf, Vice President for the Committee of Interns and Residents-SEIU. "Because of the realities of urban life, the health of one can very quickly affect the health of all of us. By moving this bill forward, the Council is standing up for the health of all Newarkers."
"Newark's passage of paid sick days reflects a turning point for these policies in this country," said Ellen Bravo, executive director of Family Values @ Work, the national network of 21 city and state coalitions, including the Time to Care Coalition in New Jersey, working on these issues. "In 2013 alone, the number of cities who have passed paid sick days has more than doubled, underscoring the overwhelming public support and momentum for common-sense policies that value families at work. We applaud our member coalition in Newark, which moved quickly to implement legislation that will grant 38,000 workers with access to paid sick days, including 'carving in' workers involved in direct service food, home care and child care, and which will pave the way for similar victories in Trenton and beyond."
###
The New Education Reform Lie: Why Denver Is a Warning Sign, Not a Model, for Urban School Districts
The New Education Reform Lie: Why Denver Is a Warning Sign, Not a Model, for Urban School Districts
Scott Gilpin works in advertising, so he's used to dealing with people in the promotions business. He's just not used to seeing them operating a local public school.
Gilpin lives in Denver...
Scott Gilpin works in advertising, so he's used to dealing with people in the promotions business. He's just not used to seeing them operating a local public school.
Gilpin lives in Denver, where he grew up, graduated from high school and now has two children enrolled in the public school system. Recently, when he decided to get more involved in Denver school politics, he discovered that the most rapidly growing form of school in his community were charter schools. So he determined to check one out.
When he toured his first charter, a school in the Strive Preparatory network, he couldn't help but take note of the school’s staffing structure, which could have supported a mid-sized promotional campaign: his guide was the chief of external affairs for the network, and the school boasted a senior director of development and an associate director of recruitment, too.
Gilpin—who sent his children to the local public school they were zoned for, as his parents had done—wondered, "What kind of local public school needs to recruit its students?"
As Gilpin would learn, lots of new Denver schools are that "kind of school."
Across the city, Denver has opened 27 charter schools in the last five years, and plans to start up six more in the 2016-17 school year – effectively doubling the number of charter schools in the city in less than six years, according to a recent report from the Center for Popular Democracy, a left-leaning research and advocacy organization in Washington, DC. Yet this rush to expand charters is hardly justified by the performance of the ones already in operation.
According to CPD, based on the school performance framework Denver uses to evaluate its own schools, "Forty percent of Denver charter schools are performing below expectations.” And of those schools, 38 percent are performing significantly below expectations.
Nevertheless, numerous articles and reports in mainstream media outlets and education policy sites enthusiastically tout Denver as the place to see the next important new "reform" in education policy in action.
"Reformers are paying close attention to Denver," notes David Osborne of the Progressive Policy Institute in an op-ed recently published by U.S. News & World Report. Osborne declares Denver's education reform effort a success based on evidence of gains in "academic growth" and on-time high school graduation. He says Denver can show the rest of the nation "a way to transform … 20th-century school systems, built on the principles of bureaucracy, into 21st-century systems, built to deliver continuous improvement."
Recent reports from other Beltway-based think tanks, on both the right and the left of the political spectrum, also hail Denver as a model for advancing "school choice" and charter schools that have the power to "transform" the education of low-performing students. Earlier this year, the Brookings Institution named Denver the second-best of the nation's 100+ largest school districts that provide parents with options for "school choice."
But Gilpin and other Denverites tell a different story about Denver-style urban school reform.
Instead of a glowing example, they point to warning signs. Rather than a narrative of success, their stories reveal disturbing truths about Denver's version of modern urban school reform – how policy direction is often controlled by big money and insiders, why glowing promises of "improvement" should be regarded with skepticism, and what the movement's real impacts are, especially in communities dominated by poor families of color.
'Eye Opening' Revelations
Gilpin's initial foray into Denver school politics began in 2011 when he joined in a campaign in support of a new bond initiative to raise new funding for, "school renovations and classroom enrichment programs,” as the Denver Post put it.
The proposals passed in the 2012 ballot, but Gilpin's plunge into citizen involvement brought him up close to the often-unseen inner workings of contemporary urban education reform in Denver.
"What I found was eye-opening," Gilpin tells me in a phone conversation. Among those eye-openers were the intense lobbying and marketing efforts being undertaken to promote charter schools; their powerful and elite corps of backers; and the staggering amount of money, from taxpayers and private donors, that is being funneled to them.
Specifically, Gilpin saw firsthand how bond money intended for renovations and instructional programs was instead used to purchase a 13-story building downtown to house, in part, a new charter school.
Gilpin then learned that the district's chief operations officer, David Suppes, had signed the intent-to-purchase agreement for the new building on August 10, nearly two weeks before the board approved the bond initiative on August 23. Gilpin also saw how school leadership overlapped with the vendors and contractors used by the schools, potentially creating conflicts of interest and cronyism.
As the Colorado Independent reports, two members of the controlling school board majority in 2013, Barbara O’Brien and Landri Taylor, headed up organizations that contracted directly with the city school district. The two consistently voted with attorney Mike Johnson, whose law firm earned $3.8 million from the district during his tenure on an advisory committee before stepping up to the board.
Taylor, who was appointed to the board in 2013 and had the advantage of running as an incumbent in 2015, was well known as a key backer of opening new charter schools. After winning the election in 2015, he abruptly resigned earlier this year for family reasons.
To replace Taylor, the board picked MiDian Holmes who, according to Chalkbeat Colorado, is "an active member in the school reform advocacy group Stand for Children," a pro-charter organization that has made large donations to school board candidates running on a pro-reform platform. (Holmes eventually resigned when background checks revealed she is a convicted child abuser, and the board seat is, at this date, vacant.)
This tight, sometimes hidden, collusion in Denver school governance has led Gilpin to believe Denver reform is the product of "an elite circle" of people with little to no input from the public. Other careful observers agree.
"Forced on Our Community”
"They invite the community to look at plans already being put into place," Earleen Brown tells me about the Denver school board in a conversation over the phone.
An African American grandmother from a Northeast Denver community populated predominantly by non-white, poor families, Brown sees the Denver school reform model from a very different vantage point from where Gilpin sees it. (Denver schools are majority Latino and African American, with 70 percent of students classified as low-income and nearly a third non-native English speakers.) But she shares many of his concerns.
Like Gilpin, Brown's involvement in Denver school politics began with a bond referendum, this one in 2008. In that effort, Brown contends, there was widespread belief money would go toward paying for either a new traditional comprehensive public high school in Northeast Denver or for a substantial renovation of the existing Montbello High School.
In 2009, after the bond passed, district officials approached parents in the Montbello neighborhood, a mostly African American community, with a set of four options for the struggling high school. The options followed guidelines from the Obama administration, which ranged from changing staffing to closing the school. Parents, Brown recalls, created a petition campaign that gathered over 300 names in favor of the option labeled "transformation," the choice generally agreed to be the least disruptive to the school.
But when district officials came back with their decision, they had picked a different option: turnaround, generally regarded as a much more disruptive process. And the next year, Montbello parents learned yet another option had been chosen for their school: closure. The last class to graduate from Montbello was in 2014, and the school is now no more.
Now the community has – instead of the traditional, comprehensive high school parents requested – an array of new charter schools. Housed in what used to be Montbello High are two innovation schools (schools that get much of the flexibility of charter schools but are not privately operated). One school has a very specialized program focused on international studies. The other is an arts-focused school that is already being scaled back due to academic distress.
Some of the new schools serving the Montbbello community are well known for enforcing the harshest forms of school discipline disproportionally on students of color. A 2015 report from a Denver-based education justice and civil and immigrant rights organization tracked Denver school discipline incidents – such as out-of-school suspension, expulsion, or referral to law enforcement – and the correlation of those incidents to race.
What the report shows, according to a review in the Colorado Independent, is that students of color in Denver schools are 219 percent more likely to receive harsher discipline than their white peers. The disparity is particularly acute among charter and innovation schools. According to the report, nine of the ten worst offenders in Denver are charter or innovation schools. The schools that replaced Montbello high are numbers five and two on the 10 worst list, with racial gaps in punishment that are 990.9 and 1,361.4 percent wider. (The worst school, a charter with a racial punishment gap of 2,991.2 percent, is now closed.)
The discriminatory treatment toward her community has led Brown to believe the whole Denver reform model has been "forced on our community."
What Big Money Wants
While some parents see the effort to remake Denver’s schools as an agenda controlled by a small circle of local actors, others point to big money and influence coming from outside.
When Emily Sirota and her family moved to Denver in 2007, she and her husband quickly became concerned the schools their children would eventually attend were too focused on test scores and competition, and that leadership was "divorced from the desires of families," she tells me in a phone call. Her concerns motivated her to run for school board in 2011.
The quick lesson Sirota learned about Denver education politics was that connections to big money had more to do with determining opposing forces than traditional party lines.
Sirota, who is a Democrat, aligns politically with many in Denver who participate in education advocacy and serve on appointed education committees and elected boards. But because she did not align with the reform orthodoxy of school closures and charter school expansions (a wave of reform that many trace to Michael Bennet, a former investment banker who was superintendent of the district from 2005 to 2009 and is now a Democratic U.S. Senator for Colorado), she was not on the side of big money.
As The Nation's John Nichols reported at the time, big money lined up with Sirota's opponent Anne Rowe. Rowe, a former owner of a Denver publishing business, has strong ties to the Denver Public Schools' political establishment and was founding co-chair of A+ Denver, an influential advocacy group that backs charter schools and the Denver reform model.
Nichols notes that Rowe received strong financial support from "donors who, in several cases, have ties to groups that promote charter schools and vouchers" across the country, including the Alliance for Choice in Education, Stand for Children, and Democrats for Education Reform.
That funding disadvantage – Rowe out-raised Sirota by more than $90,000 – was "one of the biggest reasons" she lost, Sirota contends. An article for In These Times points out that many of the same donors who funded her opponent also funded two other establishment candidates – Allegra Haynes, who won her race, and Jennifer Draper Carson, who lost hers by just 73 votes.
"Denver school board elections are just the latest examples of elections being bought," says Jeannie Kaplan, an eight-year veteran of the Denver school board. Kaplan, who has lived in Denver for over 40 years and raised children in the local public schools, first ran for school board in 2005 in an open seat contest she won. Kaplan was term-limited out in 2013 and could no longer run. Two years later, deep-pocketed privatizers poured money into the school board race and swept the election to take a 7-0 majority. As Kaplan describes on her personal blog, a key to the election sweep was late money coming into the race to preserve the at-large seat held by the pro-reform Haynes.
Campaign funding reports show that Haynes outspent her opponent Robert Speth by more than 2 to 1.
An article in the American Prospect on the increasing role of big money in school board races reports that Democrats for Education Reform, a PAC founded by hedge fund managers that pushes hard to expand charter schools nationwide, ”contributed a quarter-million dollars to launch the Raising Colorado super PAC, which went on to spend $90,000 running ads and mailing flyers" in support of Haynes and Lisa Flores, another pro-reform candidate who also won. (According to the Center for Media and Democracy, DFER has poured millions of dollars of "dark money" into elections in Colorado and other states to tilt elections to candidates who favor charters and other "reform" measures.)
As Kaplan writes in a blog post,”Public education in Denver, despite what you may have heard or read about in the press, is a system in chaos. It is a system run by a cabal. It is a system where politics, pardon the expression, trumps good policy and the truth."
'Highly Politicized’
So how did education reform in Denver become mostly about politics and power?
"Denver school reform has become highly politicized because the ideas supporting it are highly controversial," Chris Lubienski, an education scholar and a professor of education policy, organization, and leadership at the University of Illinois, tells me over the phone.
From 2011 to 2015, Lubienski and a team of other education researchers conducted a study to ascertain how intermediary organizations (IOs) supported by foundations and philanthropists influence public opinion on education in Denver. These organizations, which “serve a number of functions in school reform, including advocacy, consultation, policy design, alternative teacher and leadership preparation, and research,” tend to promote reforms that "are often highly contested by parents, public education advocates, and teachers unions," the report contends. "In addition, the research evidence on the efficacy of these reforms is similarly unsettled."
"In Denver, reform ideas emerged from a very small handful of people," Lubienski tells me. "Reformers who work there may believe the origin of these ideas is in research and is homegrown,” but he points to influence centers outside Denver, such as Silicon Valley and Washington, D.C., as more likely incubators of these reforms.
Lubienski also questions claims from Denver reform proponents that a democratic process produced their policies. "Their origins are not as democratic as is suggested," he shares. "Having policy decisions result from more of a consensus-based approach is admirable. But in Denver, that consensus is not as well developed as many people say it is."
In Denver, according to the study, only three foundations – the Daniels, Piton, and Donnell-Kay Foundations – fund most of the IOs driving change in the system. "Without this hub of funding," the report concludes, "and alignment around the importance of [these] reforms, it is unlikely that such reforms would have moved forward at the size and scope that we witness in Denver."
The study from Lubienski et. al., also cites the influence of a small number of national foundations, principally the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, that advocate for expansions of charter schools. Other sources, such as the Denver Post, document the influence of the Walton Family Foundation, the philanthropic organization created by the wealth of the family that owns the Walmart retail chain. According to the Post, in 2011, WFF awarded Denver with nearly $8 million in grant money, "more than many of the nation’s largest cities," because of "the strength and profile of [Denver's] charter-school world."
The Problem With 'Portfolio' Reform
Though the evidence that the reforms these foundations are pushing actually work is nowhere near as convincing reformers would have you believe, efforts to root charters deep within Denver’s educational soil continue apace.
The mechanism reformers have used to seed the growth of charters across the city is the "portfolio model” — an approach that “shifts decision-making away from district superintendents and other central-office leaders,” according to the National Education Policy Center. Four strategies form the core foundation of such an approach: “school-level decentralization of management; the reconstitution or closing of ‘failing’ schools; the expansion of choice, primarily through charter schools; and performance-based (generally test-based) accountability.”
In Denver's case, the portfolio approach has led to the rapid expansion of charters while closing supposedly failed public schools. As Osborne writes in his U.S. News op-ed, "Since 2005 [Denver] has closed or replaced 48 schools and opened more than 70, the majority of them charters." Of Denver's 223 schools, 55 are charters and another 38 are "innovation schools" which Osborne describes as being "like charters."
To feed the system's numerous new charter schools, Denver has implemented an enrollment process that gives parents the opportunity to list up to 5 schools for their children to attend rather than simply relying on proximity. To help guide parents in making their school choices, the district uses a school ranking system with color-coded labels for schools – blue at the top (for "distinguished), green, yellow, orange, and red (for "accredited on probation") at the bottom. The rankings are used not only by parents, but also by the district to determine which schools need interventions and closure.
As Chalkbeat notes, Denver also has "enrollment zones" where students "are given a preference at the schools in the zone and are guaranteed a spot at one of them, though not necessarily their first pick. The zones are set up to encourage — some would say force — families to participate in the choice process."
But research experts are skeptical the portfolio approach alone will yield good results.
In an op-ed for Education Week, Montclair State University professor Katrina Bulkley joins with Columbia Teachers College professors Jeffrey Henig and Henry Levin to caution, "The portfolio-management approach to urban education is a work in progress."
NEPC adds further caution, writing, "There exists a very limited body of generally accepted research about the effects of portfolio district reform."
NEPC managing director William Mathis, one of the report’s authors, tells me that it is, in particular, the combination of reforms that confounds research into portfolio results. "There are so many factors at play that describing causality is problematic,” Mathis notes. “Portfolios mean different things in different places.”
"If you don't change what happens in the classroom, you don't really change anything," Mathis contends. And he finds little evidence a portfolio approach will necessarily result in improvements in curriculum and instruction.
Former school board member Jeannie Kaplan also questions the success of such reforms. In an op-ed published last year in the Denver Post, Kaplan spotlighted numerous negative outcomes after many years of portfolio-based reform, including growing achievement gaps between white and non-white students, a school system stubbornly segregated along racial lines, and high staff turnover rates in schools.
Her op-ed pointed to a 2015 analysis from the University of Washington’s Center on Reinventing Public Education (an organization that advocates the portfolio approach), which looked at the 50 largest urban school districts in the country that have been actively engaged in education reform. Kaplan noted that, "Of them, Denver Public Schools was dead last in both reading and math, with gaps of 38 percent and 30 percent respectively. The average for the other districts was around 14 percent for each subject.
“As for graduation rates, Denver ranked 45th out of the 50 districts."
Whose Choice?
So far, less than 27 percent of families have opted to participate in Denver’s choice program, according to a Chalkbeat analysis. The remaining 73 percent have chosen to remain in their current local schools.*
That same analysis attributes the low participation rate to the extremely small percentage of parents who opt to "choice out of" their current school when their children are not in a "transition year" – for instance, moving from an elementary school into a middle school. An older article in the Denver Post reported numerous parents feeling "stressed out" over the choice process.
That said, some parents do find there are advantages to the choice system. For instance, when Scott Gilpin looked to enroll one of their daughters in a school, they used the enrollment process to "choice into" an innovation school that offered a dual language program. Similarly, when Emily Sirota looked for a school for her oldest daughter, she found an innovation school that had an expeditionary approach more to her liking.
But there's also evidence Denver's system of choice leads to a lot of outcomes that look more like forced choice. For instance, Gilpin notes that the enrollment zones set up to encourage choice often result in students being placed in charters whether their families indicated that as their top choice or not.
When Sirota visited the neighborhood school her family was zoned for, she noticed extremely large class sizes and the lack of adequate facility space for the students. Upper grades in the elementary school were housed in portable buildings. No doubt, such conditions dis-incentivize parents from choosing that school.
"Choice sounds good," says Earleen Brown, but "there aren't five high performing schools in our area to choose from," she says. Although there are some "blue schools" in Brown's Northeast neighborhood, she argues their high ranking is often mostly due to Denver's methodology that rewards schools for recent growth in test scores, even when the percent of students who are on grade level in the school is still quite low.
Also, many of the traditional public schools in Brown's community have been closed or had charter schools "co-located" in them (an arrangement where a charter takes over a portion of a public school's facility). So for some families in Northeast Denver "being able to enroll in a nearby traditional public school is a choice you don't get," she notes. Certainly, for parents who wanted Montbello High School to serve as a traditional, comprehensive high school, that choice was simply overruled by the district.
"We really have no choice in our community," Brown maintains.
What Parents Want
Given all of the obvious flaws and questionable results attached to Denver’s current reform model, one can’t help but wonder why is this approach is being lifted up as a "model of excellence" to be replicated across the nation.
Of course, we've seen this type of bluster in support of charter schools and education reform before. For years, the New Orleans school system was held up as a reform model for other urban communities to emulate.
NOLA schools, essentially wiped out by Hurricane Katrina, provided reformers with "a clean slate" to remake an urban public school system based on their own ideas alone, which consisted primarily of converting the district into a nearly all charter school entity and turning school enrollment into a choice process.
Former Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal claimed NOLA-style reform had laid down a path for schools everywhere else to follow. David Osborne, in another of his laudatory commentaries about education reform, wrote in 2015, "New Orleans made charter schools work." Politico reported, “Mayors and governors from Nevada to Tennessee" were in full throttle campaigns to "replicate the New Orleans model.”
Except that, for a host of reasons, the New Orleans model turned out to be impossible to replicate. In fact, in Denver today there’s little discussion of education reform being patterned after New Orleans. In Osborne's promotion of the Denver model, in fact, he contrasts the Denver approach with New Orleans’, and lauds it for being an approach to education reform that hasn't required state intervention or other forms of "insulation from local electoral politics."
But it's not clear that the form of electoral politics practiced in Denver has yet given parents what they want as much as it has delivered outcomes desired by an elite few.
In Earleen Brown's case, what she wants is pretty specific: She'd like to see the district act on her community's desire to have a comprehensive, public high school.
Jeannie Kaplan advocates the adoption of models she has seen work in the past that provided schools resources to stay open longer hours and provide a fuller range of services including tutoring, health care, and extra-curricular activities. "Now we call these 'community schools,'" she explains. What Denver needs most, she believes "is the money [to fund] this."
"We need more focus on the schools in our neighborhoods, rather than popping up new charter schools here and there," Emily Sirota maintains. And she'd like to see smaller class sizes, guaranteed recess for kids, and a more equitable system that ensures a high level of quality curriculum and instruction in all schools, not just the ones the better-off children attend.
As for Scott Gilpin, he wants to see spending on education in Denver going more toward the classroom instead of to administration, consultants, and school board elections. He thinks less emphasis on testing would not only free up more time for instruction; it would make teachers' jobs more rewarding — which would, in turn, lower teacher attrition rates.
What Denver parents seem to want most from education policy in their community is for leaders to find a different way to talk about these issues, and to solicit, and honor, parent input before decisions are made.
Whether they will ever get what they want in this regard remains an unsettlingly open question.
* Though officials from Denver Public Schools argue that in the transition grades (kindergarten and grades 6 and 9) participation levels are now at 84%, overall participation rates across all grades remain at just 26.5%.
Jeff Bryant is director of the Education Opportunity Network, a partnership effort of the Institute for America's Future and the Opportunity to Learn Campaign. He has written extensively about public education policy.
By Jeff Bryant
Source
1 day ago
1 day ago