Bad deals with Wall Street are costing the city as much as $1 billion a year
NY Daily News - December 2, 2013, by Phyllis Furman - Coalition urges city to change its relationship with banks as a way to address income inequality.
...NY Daily News - December 2, 2013, by Phyllis Furman - Coalition urges city to change its relationship with banks as a way to address income inequality.
Wall Street has put the squeeze on the city to the tune of $1 billion, a report due out Tuesday claims.
As much as $723 million worth of unnecessary fees and bad deals, coupled with $300 million in bank subsidies should be rejiggered, says a study from a new left-leaning coalition called New Day, New York Coalition.
"New York City could be saving $1 billion annually just by changing the way it does business with Wall Street," one of the report's authors, Connie Razza, director of strategic research initiatives at the Center for Popular Democracy, told the Daily News.
The study, dubbed "Leveraging New York's Financial Power to Combat Inequality," kicks off a week of events organized by the group, culminating in a rally set for Thursday at Foley Square.
The coalition, whose members include veterans of Occupy Wall Street, labor unions such as 1199SEIU, and faith organizations, says its goal is to "draw attention to the ways Wall Street and big corporations continue to siphon resources away from average New Yorkers and point toward solutions that would help reduce inequality and build economic fairness."
Mirroring a key campaign theme of Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio, the report notes the huge disparity between the city's haves and have-nots, with the 1% controlling a whopping 40% of the city's income.
The city and its pension funds have tremendous leverage that can be used to bridge the gap, the study says: $350 billion that travels through the financial system.
"We should be using that leverage to demand a different relationship" with Wall Street, Razza said.
Among the key findings: the city, its pension funds and the MTA pay $563 million in Wall Street fees each year.
Rather than pay out megabucks to Wall Street big shots, the city should set up an in-house group to manage its pension assets and bond offerings, the report recommends.
That suggestion comes on the heels of a recent city report that showed fees paid by New York City pension funds surged by 28% to $472.5 million in the year ended June 30.
The idea of bringing the management of the city's money in-house isn't new.
New York's former chief investment officer, Larry Schloss, recommended just that before he recently stepped down. A number of public pension funds in Canada, including Ontario's $126 billion teachers' pension fund, have already moved in that direction.
But achieving that goal here is a long shot, said Leo Kolivakis, publisher of Pension Pulse Blog.
"Attracting and retaining qualified managers to manage money in-house is a huge challenge," Kolivakis told the News.
Patrick Muncie, a spokesman for Mayor Bloomberg, noted the financial services industry's crucial contributions to the local economy.
"The financial services sector is a critical driver of New York City's economy, providing more than 400,000 jobs and generating $3 billion in tax revenue last year alone," he said.
A spokesman for outgoing New York City Comptroller John Liu said the report encapsulates many of the comptroller's efforts, including "better and more cost-effective in-house management of pension assets."
The report "effectively and succinctly aggregates the real underlying issues of deepening inequality," Liu said in a statement.
Reps for de Blasio and incoming New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer, declined to comment.
Other recommendations of the report include holding banks to firm commitments to improve the community in exchange for the $300 million a year they receive in subsidies.
pfurman@nydailynews.com
What they want:
*Renegotiate financial deals to save up to $725 million each year
*Hold banks to commitments in exchange for $300 million in subsidies
*Banks should write down underwater mortgages to keep 86,000 families in their homes
SourceAs debate heats up over interest rates, progressive movement mobilizes behind a pro-wages, racial equity agenda
Following the call, participants released the following statements:
Dawn O’Neal, teaching assistant and member of Rise Up Georgia:
Atlanta, Ga.
"When...
Following the call, participants released the following statements:
Dawn O’Neal, teaching assistant and member of Rise Up Georgia: Atlanta, Ga.
"When the Fed meets in Jackson Hole to discuss inflation, they will be almost 2,000 miles away from South DeKalb County. Here, the lines of people desperate for even a temporary job at the local work pool stretches around the block – those people include my husband. Together, despite our hard work and best efforts, we still struggle at the end of the month with health and household bills. That’s not just our story, but that of our neighbors and our community. For members of the Fed looking to slow down the economy, I’d invite them to come here to East Atlanta. It’s not easy to live here; for some people the economy means our very survival.”
Keesha Moore, intern, job seeker, and member of Action United: Philadelphia, Penn.
“I have been searching for employment for 7 months now. I am 36 years old and I have a family to provide for and a house to maintain. I know I’m not alone when saying that the way the economy is today my household needs dual income in order to maintain and stay afloat. In Philadelphia, mine is a story all too common: We need more jobs available and fair wages. I don’t think that people who do not live here or pay taxes here should be able to take our jobs away from us with the stroke of a pen. At Jackson Hole, we will remind them that our communities also deserve a say in this debate.”
Josh Bivens, Economic Policy Institute
“The recovery will never reach workers’ wages if the Federal Reserve prematurely slows the recovery. The Fed should at least keep short term rates low until we reach a genuine full recovery from the Great Recession. At a minimum, this means waiting until wage growth is consistent with the Fed’s overall inflation targets and the labor market is back to pre–Great Recession health. And since the pre-Great Recession labor market was likely not at genuine full-employment, we can probably be even more aggressive in that in letting unemployment decline.”
Ady Barkan, campaign director for the Fed Up at the Center for Popular Democracy
“Members of the Fed Up coalition across the country have rallied for a more inclusive Federal Reserve that prioritizes wages and promotes a recovery in all of our communities. Our members have shared their stories with regional Fed Presidents and informed them why raising the rates prematurely would be disastrous in our communities, where many are still mired in a Great Recession. In Jackson Hole, we will put a faces and stories within reach of the Federal Reserve. Before they can have a real discussion of raising interest rates and slowing the economy, they should understand first-hand who it would affect.”
The Fed Up campaign, anchored at the Center for Popular Democracy, will hold a number of teach-ins in Jackson Hole, Wyo. during the Federal Reserve’s symposium from August 27 to 29 to convey why it does not make sense to stop the recovery for America’s families. The teach-ins will be led by workers, economists, and Fed Up allies and will cover an array of topics like the Fed’s role in full employment, the intersection of Black Lives Matter and the Fed, the selection process for regional bank presidents, a historical look at inflation, and more.
###
The Center for Popular Democracy promotes equity, opportunity, and a dynamic democracy in partnership with innovative base-building organizations, organizing networks and alliances, and progressive unions across the country. CPD builds the strength and capacity of democratic organizations to envision and advance a pro-worker, pro-immigrant, racial justice agenda.
Dimon Says He'll Look Into Concerns About Private Prison Financing
Dimon Says He'll Look Into Concerns About Private Prison Financing
Jamie Dimon said JPMorgan Chase & Co. will look into investors’ concerns about whether the bank should continue to help finance private prisons.
The chief executive officer came under...
Jamie Dimon said JPMorgan Chase & Co. will look into investors’ concerns about whether the bank should continue to help finance private prisons.
The chief executive officer came under fire Tuesday at the company’s annual meeting for the bank’s role in financing debt for companies including the Geo Group Inc. and CoreCivic Inc., which operate privately-owned prisons and immigrant detention centers. Some investors and protesters urged JPMorgan to end its relationship with such firms, arguing that they make money off human suffering and violate immigrants’ rights.
Read the full article here.
Charter Schools are Cheating Your Kids: New Report Reveals Massive Fraud, Mismanagement, Abuse
Salon - May 7, 2014, by Paul Rosenberg - Just in time for National Charter School Week, there’s a new report highlighting the predictable perils of...
Salon - May 7, 2014, by Paul Rosenberg - Just in time for National Charter School Week, there’s a new report highlighting the predictable perils of turning education into a poorly regulated business. Titled “Charter School Vulnerabilities to Waste, Fraud and Abuse,” the report focused on 15 states representing large charter markets, out of the 42 states that have charter schools. Drawing on news reports, criminal complaints, regulatory findings, audits and other sources, it “found fraud, waste and abuse cases totaling over $100 million in losses to taxpayers,” but warned that due to inadequate oversight, “the fraud and mismanagement that has been uncovered thus far might be just the tip of the iceberg.”
While there are plenty of other troubling issues surrounding charter schools — from high rates of racial segregation, to their lackluster overall performance records, to questionable admission and expulsion practices — this report sets all those admittedly important issues aside to focus squarely on activity that appears it could be criminal, and arguably totally out of control. It does not even mention questions raised by sky-high salaries paid to some charter CEOs, such as 16 New York City charter school CEOs who earned more than the head of the city’s public school system in 2011-12. Crime, not greed, is the focus here.
In short, the report is about as apolitical as can be imagined: It is narrowly focused on a white-collar crime wave of staggering proportions, and what can be done about it within the existing framework of widespread charter schools.
The report, co-authored by the Center for Popular Democracy and Integrity in Education, makes the point that the problem of charter school waste, fraud and abuse, which it focuses on, is just one symptom of the underlying problem: inadequate regulation of charter schools. But it’s a massive symptom, which has so far received only fragmentary coverage.The report takes its title from a section of a report to Congress by the Department of Education’s Office of the Inspector General, a report that took note of “a steady increase in the number of charter school complaints” and warned that state level agencies were failing “to provide adequate oversight needed to ensure that Federal funds [were] properly used and accounted for.”
But, the report noted, it’s not just the federal government that should be concerned. Reform efforts are underway in several states; Hawaii even repealed its existing charter school law in 2013, and put strict new oversight measures in place, and “Even the Walton Family Foundation, an avid charter advocate, launched a $5 million campaign in 2012 to make oversight of charters schools more stringent.”
“We expected to find a fair amount of fraud when we began this project, but we did not expect to find over $100 million in taxpayer dollars lost,” said Kyle Serrette, the director of education justice at the Center for Popular Democracy. “That’s just in 15 states. And that figure fails to capture the real harm to children. Clearly, we should hit the pause button on charter expansion until there is a better oversight system in place to protect our children and our communities.”
The report explained that the problem has its roots in a historical disconnect between the original intentions that launched the charter school movement and the commercial forces that have overtaken it since. At first, the report noted:
Lawmakers created charter schools to allow educators to explore new methods and models of teaching. To allow this to happen, they exempted the schools from the vast majority of regulations governing the traditional public school system. The goal was to incubate innovations that could then be used to improve public schools. i The ability to take calculated risks with small populations of willing teachers, parents, and students was the original design. With so few people and schools involved, the risk to participants and the public was relatively low.
But the character of the movement has changed dramatically since then. As charter school growth has skyrocketed (doubling three times since 2000), “the risks are high and growing, while the benefits are less clear,” the report continued, adding:
This is not an uncommon occurrence in our nation’s history. In the past—in some cases, our very recent past—industries such as banking and lending have outgrown their respective regulatory safety nets. Without sufficient regulations to ensure true public accountability, incompetent and/or unethical individuals and firms can (and have) inflict great harm on communities.
The report found that “charter operator fraud and mismanagement is endemic to the vast majority of states that have passed a charter school law.” It organized the abuse into six basic categories, each of which is treated in its own section:
• Charter operators using public funds illegally for personal gain; • School revenue used to illegally support other charter operator businesses; • Mismanagement that puts children in actual or potential danger; • Charters illegally requesting public dollars for services not provided; • Charter operators illegally inflating enrollment to boost revenues; and, • Charter operators mismanaging public funds and schools.
Perhaps most disturbingly, under the first category, crooked charter school officials displayed a wide range of lavish, compulsive or tawdry tastes. Examples include:
• Joel Pourier, former CEO of Oh Day Aki Heart Charter School in Minnesota, who embezzled $1.38 million from 2003 to 2008. He used the money on houses, cars, and trips to strip clubs. Meanwhile, according to an article in the Star Tribune, the school “lacked funds for field trips, supplies, computers and textbooks.”
• Nicholas Trombetta, founder of the Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School is accused of diverting funds from it for his private purchases. He allegedly bought houses, a Florida Condominium and a $300,000 plane, hid income from the IRS, formed businesses that billed even though they had done no work, and took $550,000 in kickbacks for a laptop computer contract.
• A regular financial audit in 2009 of the Langston Hughes Academy in New Orleans uncovered theft of $660,000 by Kelly Thompson, the school’s business manager. Thompson admitted that from shortly after she assumed the position until she was fired 15 months later, she diverted funds to herself in order to support her gambling in local casinos.
Others spent their stolen money on everything from a pair of jet skis for $18,000 to combined receipts of $228 for cigarettes and beer, to over $30,000 on personal items from Lord & Taylor, Saks Fifth Avenue, Louis Vuitton, Coach and Tommy Hilfiger. But the real damage came from the theft of resources for children’s future.
“Our school system exists to serve students and enrich communities,” said Sabrina Stevens, executive director of Integrity in Education. “School funding is too scarce as it is; we can hardly afford to waste the resources we do have on people who would prioritize exotic vacations over school supplies or food for children. We also can’t continue to rely on the media or isolated whistle-blowers to identify these problems. We need to have rules in place that can systematically weed out incompetent or unscrupulous charter operators before they pose a risk to students and taxpayers.”
Stevens was not just expressing a nebulous hope. The report also offered a set of proposals on how to go about reining in the abuses. Initial suggestions on how to respond to each kind of abuse are presented in each of the six areas mentioned above, but there is also a comprehensive framework integrating them into a coherent whole.
The report’s first proposal is that all states should establish an oversight “Office of Charter Schools.” It “should have the statutory responsibility, authority, and resources to investigate fraud, waste, mismanagement and misconduct,” including the authority to refer findings for prosecution. It should have “an appropriate level of staffing” so that “The ratio of charter schools to full-time investigators employed by the Office should not exceed ten to one.” It should have the power to place distribution of charter school funds on hold. And it should have the authority to intervene in funding or other decisions made by charter authorizing entities if they are violating state or federal law.
A second proposal is that states amend their charter laws to “explicitly declare that charter schools are public schools, and are subject to the same non-discrimination and transparency requirements as are other publicly funded schools.”
A third proposal is to require public online availability of each charter school’s original application and charter agreement.
Not surprisingly, a number of proposals target those running charter schools. Specifically, regarding charter school governing board members, the report proposes: 1) Require them to live in close proximity to the school/s physical location. 2) Require boards to be elected “with representation of parents (elected by parents), teachers (elected by teachers) and in the case of high schools, students (elected by students).” Other board members should be “residents of the school district in which the school/s operate.” 3) Require board members to file full financial disclosure and conflict-of-interest reports, similar to those required of traditional school district board members — and post them online on the school’s website. 4) Hold board members legally liable for fraud or malfeasance occurring at the school or schools that they oversee.
More broadly, charter schools — and the oversight entities that authorize them — should be publicly transparent in the following ways: 1) A full list of each charter school’s governing board members, officers and administrators with affiliation and contact information should be available on the school’s website. 2) Minutes from governing board meetings, the school’s policies, and information about staff should be available on the school’s website. 3) Charter schools should be fully compliant with state open meetings/open records laws. 4) Charter school financial documents should be publicly disclosed annually, on the authorizer’s website, including detailed information about the use of both public and private funds by the school and its management entities. 5) Charter schools should be independently audited annually, with audits published on the school’s websites. 6) All vendor or service contracts over $25,000 should be fully disclosed. No such contracts should be allowed with any entity in which the school operator, or any board member, has any personal interest.
If most of these sound like simple common sense, that’s pretty much just the point. There are plenty of issues around education that are controversial. Protecting ourselves, our children and their future against a massive white-collar crime wave should not be one of them.
Source
At the RNC, Don’t Just Watch Trump. Watch Who Follows Him.
At the RNC, Don’t Just Watch Trump. Watch Who Follows Him.
In the coming days, our nation’s media will focus enormous attention on the formal anointment of Donald Trump as the GOP’s candidate for president at the Republican National Convention. Endless...
In the coming days, our nation’s media will focus enormous attention on the formal anointment of Donald Trump as the GOP’s candidate for president at the Republican National Convention. Endless ink will be spilled on Mr. Trump’s entrance, his appearances, and his words. But, as the Republican Party prepares itself to nominate the most anti-immigrant and racist presidential candidate in at least a generation, Americans should not just be watching Mr. Trump—we must pay attention to those who follow him.
It’s no secret that Mr. Trump has defined himself politically, from the very launch of his campaign, by scapegoating immigrants as “criminals” and “rapists,” and doubling down on his bigotry with proposals to, among other things, deport eleven million undocumented immigrants and ban all Muslim immigrants. Mr. Trump’s dominant strategy has been to animate the nativist portion of the Republican primary electorate—a strategy that proved quite successful in the primaries, and that Mr. Trump will continue (albeit in modified fashion) in the general election.
None of this is new. And Republicans will likely lose the White House because Trump has so alienated Latinos, communities of color, and other groups, including women.
But as Latinos and immigrants, we can’t just watch Trump. Our fight is not just about defeating Trump: it’s also about defeating “Trumpism,” the anti-immigrant and hateful policies and rhetoric he embraces.
That’s why have to, and we will, watch who follows him in contested Congressional races around the country. These “down-ballot” elections will determine the prospects for critical federal legislation in 2017 and beyond on issues including: reforming our out-of-date immigration system and ensuring that millions of immigrant families can remain together, ending police brutality, and raising the federal minimum wage.
What we will if we watch the candidates in these congressional races over the next few days is as simple and scary: the lion’s share of one of America’s two principal parties, including hundreds of sitting Congressional representatives, will embrace Trump’s hateful campaign strategy and applaud him as he formally becomes their standard bearer.
Their embrace will take two forms.
First will be incumbents and candidates who wholeheartedly endorse Trump. Hundreds of Republican elected officials have said openly that they will support him, and they will double down through November. Their ranks will grow during and after the convention. These Trump acolytes are people like Rep. Lee Zeldin of New York, who has endorsed and then repeatedly stumped for Mr. Trump. At the RNC, voters should pay careful attention to figures like Mr. Zeldin. Despite representing a moderate district where people of color represent roughly 20 percent of the voting-age population, Rep. Zeldin has acknowledged the racism in Trump’s words, but refused to withdraw his support.
Second will be legislators who are uncomfortable with the Trump brand, but quietly copy his playbook. Many Republicans are concerned that Trump’s divisive rhetoric may hurt the Republican brand and their poll numbers—so they stop short of full-throated endorsement, and in some cases are skipping the convention—but will mirror his demagoguery. Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania offers a perfect example. Locked in a re-election fight with Democrat Katie McGinty, Toomey has not endorsed Trump for fear of its political downside. Instead, he has echoed Trump’s nativist appeals, leading efforts in the Senate to punish localities that have sought to improve community-police relations and public safety for all residents by distancing local law enforcement from immigration enforcement. To justify this politically-motivated policy fight, Sen. Toomey has suggested that immigrants are criminals and murderers—despite research consistently showing that immigrants commit fewer crimes than native-born residents.
This behavior from legislators like Zeldin and Toomey will not be lost on Latinos, voters of color, and other voters who stand for inclusion and diversity.
Latino and immigrant voters across this country are angry and we are energized. This is why residents protested outside Rep. Zeldin and Sen. Toomey’s offices this past weekend. And it is why, over the coming months, community organizations across the country, working with national groups like the Center for Community Change Action and Center for Popular Democracy Action, will be talking to millions of voters in our communities to make sure that they know the importance of voting all the way down the ballot.
No number of photo ops at local cultural events will erase the damage that legislators like these are doing to themselves, and to the Republican Party writ large, by embracing the politics of Trump.
As the GOP prepares for its convention, let there be no mistake: our communities are watching. And, to those who have embraced the politics of Trump, we say: we see you. And, in November, we will hold you accountable for vilifying us.
By ADANJESUS MARIN AND WALTER BARRIENTOS
Source
Why I Let D.C. Cops Drag My Body out of the Capitol
"Why don't you spend more money on health care instead of ugly, fake Colonial furniture for Senate offices!"
That's just one of the things I remember yelling on Thursday, July 10, as I sat...
"Why don't you spend more money on health care instead of ugly, fake Colonial furniture for Senate offices!"
That's just one of the things I remember yelling on Thursday, July 10, as I sat on the floor outside the office of Lamar Alexander, Republican senator from Tennessee, in the District of Columbia's Dirksen Senate Office Building, waiting for the D.C. Capitol police, about a dozen of whom had assembled, to carry me away.
Read the full article here.
Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Stand to Profit from Trump’s ‘Zero Tolerance’ Policies, Report Says
Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Stand to Profit from Trump’s ‘Zero Tolerance’ Policies, Report Says
A new report released by Make the Road New York and the Center for Popular Democracy confirmed that Trump’s “zero tolerance” immigration policy can mean racking up dollars for financial...
A new report released by Make the Road New York and the Center for Popular Democracy confirmed that Trump’s “zero tolerance” immigration policy can mean racking up dollars for financial beneficiaries.
Read the full article here.
Trabajadores expresan a través del arte sus experiencias como inmigrantes
EFEUSA – September 17, 2013 -
Nueva York, 17 sep (EFEUSA).- Un grupo de trabajadores inauguró hoy una exposición de pinturas, fotografías y vídeos en la que plasmaron sus experiencias...
EFEUSA – September 17, 2013 -
Nueva York, 17 sep (EFEUSA).- Un grupo de trabajadores inauguró hoy una exposición de pinturas, fotografías y vídeos en la que plasmaron sus experiencias personales como inmigrantes y sus reflexiones sobre el valor de la ciudadanía, con motivo del Día de la Ciudadanía.
La exhibición “¿Qué significa para mi la ciudadanía?” realizada en la sede del sindicato Workers United en la ciudad de Newark (Nueva Jersey), es una mezcla ecléctica de dibujos, pinturas y fotografías en blanco y negro y a color, representativo de la diversidad de los propios miembros, que provienen de lugares tan lejanos como Europa del Este, América Latina, América del Sur y Asia.
Entre éstos está la ecuatoriana Naja Quintero, empleada de una guardería, quien participa con dos pinturas, y en una de ellas plasmó lo que sintió cuando llegó a Nueva York por primera vez, hace 14 años.
“Eran las doce del mediodía cuando llegué al aeropuerto John F. Kennedy y crucé Manhattan a pleno sol. Me deslumbró la ciudad. Creo que a todos nos pasa, es la primera impresión, majestuosa y colorida. Me sentí como una estrella”, dijo a Efe Quintero.
La ecuatoriana pintó a un grupo de inmigrantes de diversos países mirando hacia el agua y al otro lado un barco, la Estatua de la Libertad y de fondo, los rascacielos de Nueva York, entre ellos el imponente edificio Chrysler.
“Pinté un bote porque cuando cruzaba Manhattan veía el agua y a gente contemplando la belleza del paisaje”, agregó Quintero, quien llegó a nueva York para reencontrarse con su madre, a quien no vio ni tuvo contacto con ella durante 38 años.
“Tenía tres años cuando ella vino a Nueva York y me dejó con mis abuelos que luego compraron casa en otro lugar y perdimos el contacto con ella”, recordó Quintero, que localizó a su progenitora a través de amistades con los que ésta mantenía contacto en Ecuador.
La emigrante, que era maestra en su país, destacó además que se esforzó por aprender inglés para tomar su examen de ciudadanía.
“Cuando me informaron que había aprobado el examen me dije ‘Naja, esto es como una gran escalera’ donde el siguiente paso fue obtener la ciudadanía”, destacó Quintero, quien expresó en su segunda obra precisamente esa experiencia.
Para ella, la ciudadanía es una planta y su semilla, es el momento en que los emigrantes llegan a Estados Unidos, explicó mientras agregaba que la ciudadanía también significa poder votar e integrarse a una nueva vida.
“A mi me gusta estar integrada en la política, votar, es un deber cívico. Estudié durante un año para ese reto (para el examen de ciudadanía). Yo decía ‘yo puedo, yo puedo’”, dijo emocionada la ecuatoriana, quien preside el comité de arte del sindicato 32BJ, que representa a empleados de mantenimiento, porteros, encargados de edificios privados de vivienda y de guarderías, entre otros, la mayoría latinos.
“Este proyecto de arte pone un rostro a los 11 millones de inmigrantes indocumentados que son una parte indispensable de nuestras comunidades y que necesitan que el Congreso actúe ahora” (por una reforma migratoria), dijo Kevin Brown, director de la 32BJ en Nueva Jersey.
“Los inmigrantes son los estadounidenses. Son nuestras madres y padres, hermanos y hermanas, socios, hijos, abuelos, compañeros de trabajo, vecinos y amigos. Como miembros de la comunidad creativa, tenemos el compromiso de ver y mostrar la humanidad de la historia de la inmigración”, agregó.
Brown destacó que a través de la música, el teatro, la literatura, el cine, la televisión, la danza y otras expresiones de arte, los “inmigrantes y refugiados artistas visuales han definido y redefinido nuestra cultura estadounidense y la historia. Ellos ayudan a renovar nuestra historia nacional”.
Source
New York Families Win $15 Minimum Wage
For Immediate Release
New York Families Win $15 Minimum Wage
Today, the New York Wage Board recommended a $15 minimum wage for fast food workers. In response the...
For Immediate Release
New York Families Win $15 Minimum Wage
Today, the New York Wage Board recommended a $15 minimum wage for fast food workers. In response the Center for Popular Democracy released the following statement:
“Today’s announcement is a testament to the strength of workers and community organizations committed to fight for what’s right,” said Tony Perlstein, co-director of campaigns at the Center for Popular Democracy. “Our communities are tearing down barriers that keep us from sustaining our families, and today we see the fruit of their labor. The fight for $15 is stronger, and workers limited to part-time jobs scored an important victory.”
“While today’s announcement benefits fast food workers, this moment belongs to everyone who mobilized to make this possible: the carwash workers, grocery store workers, retail workers, airport workers, recycling workers and many more. Their message was loud and clear: we are united for $15, part-time doesn’t pay, and we not stop until every worker has access to dignity and opportunity.”
“I am incredibly happy for fast food workers,” said Elva Meneses, a Laundry worker and New York Communities for Change member making $8.33/hr. “Their courage has inspired low-wage workers across New York. We are no longer afraid to stand up and fight for a living wage. The only thing I’m afraid of is to continue to be working full time and living in poverty. We hope that governor Cuomo doesn't forget about the rest of the low-wage workers and that we also win $15 in the near future.”
“Today’s victory happened because workers joined by the thousands to speak up at public hearings and rallies across the state,” said Paola Angel, a member of Make the Road New York. “We all deserve a fair chance to succeed, not a minimum wage that guarantees our continued poverty. Going forward, let there be no doubt: we will continue the Fight for $15 in Albany to ensure that all workers in all industries get a fair wage. This is be a critical step in a larger struggle for all of us.”
###
CPD works to create equity, opportunity and a dynamic democracy in partnership with high-impact base-building organizations, organizing alliances, and progressive unions. CPD strengthens our collective capacity to envision and win an innovative pro-worker, pro-immigrant, racial and economic justice agenda.
Fed Raises Key Interest Rate, Citing Strengthening Economy
WASHINGTON — The Federal Reserve raised its benchmark interest rate Wednesday for just the second time since the financial crisis of 2008, saying the American economy is expanding at a healthy...
WASHINGTON — The Federal Reserve raised its benchmark interest rate Wednesday for just the second time since the financial crisis of 2008, saying the American economy is expanding at a healthy pace and setting itself up as a counterweight to President-elect Donald J. Trump’s push for considerably faster growth.
The Fed cited the steady growth of employment and other economic measures, and signaled that it expects to raise rates more quickly next year to prevent the economy from growing too quickly.
“My colleagues and I are recognizing the considerable progress the economy has made,” Janet L. Yellen, the Fed’s chairwoman, said at a news conference after the announcement. “We expect the economy will continue to perform well.”
The widely expected decision moves the Fed’s benchmark rate to a range of 0.5 percent to 0.75 percent, still very low by historical standards. Low rates support economic growth by encouraging borrowing and risk-taking.
The American economy has expanded by about 2 percent a year over the last six years, and the unemployment rate has fallen to 4.6 percent. The Fed’s assessment that the economy is growing at a healthy pace — not too hot, not too cold — is starkly at odds with Mr. Trump, who has promised 4 percent growth and has described job creation as “terrible” and economic growth as anemic.
Already on Wednesday, one Republican member of the House Financial Services Committee, Representative Roger Williams of Texas, criticized the Fed’s move.
“Today’s decision by the Fed to raise the interest rate is entirely premature and will be burdensome to a nation already struggling to pull itself out of this slow-growth Obama economy,” Mr. Williams said in a statement. “By making rates even higher, the Fed is effectively making our hardships even harder.”
Mr. Williams did not object when the Fed raised rates last December.
In announcing the decision after a two-day meeting of the Fed’s policy-making committee, the central bank gave little indication that Mr. Trump’s election had altered its economic outlook. The Fed said it still expected a slow economic expansion and a steady march toward higher rates. In separate forecasts also published Wednesday, Fed officials predicted three rate increases in 2017.
Rising Rate
The Federal Reserve raised its target rate for only the second time in more than a decade.
Note: Graphic shows the Federal Funds Target Rate previous to the December 2008 rate change; since then it is the upper limit of the Federal Funds Target Range.
By The New York Times | Source: Federal Reserve
For the first time in recent years, however, there is a real possibility of significant changes in fiscal policy. Republicans will control the White House and both chambers of Congress, and Mr. Trump has promised to increase economic growth and job creation through tax cuts and infrastructure spending.
Those measures could spur faster growth after a presidential campaign in which Mr. Trump regularly disparaged the economy’s performance under President Obama. But the Fed reiterated Wednesday that the economy is already expanding at roughly the maximum sustainable pace.
Fed officials also see evidence that the labor market is tightening. Several Fed districts reported labor shortages in the central bank’s most recent compilation of economic reports. In the Philadelphia district, construction workers are hard to find. Atlanta reported a shortage of nurses; Kansas City, truck drivers; Dallas, tech workers.
Faster growth, in the Fed’s judgment, would probably lead to higher inflation. As a result, if Republicans succeed in invigorating growth, the Fed is likely to raise rates more quickly. The greater the stimulus, the faster interest rates are likely to rise.
“Your expectation should depend very little on what you think that the F.O.M.C. is thinking and very much on your view of Trump policies and their macro effects,” said Jon Faust, a professor of economics at Johns Hopkins University and a former adviser to Ms. Yellen, referring to the Federal Open Market Committee. “Don’t focus on the Fed. As James Carville regularly reminded the other Clinton on the campaign trail: It’s the economy, stupid.”
Ms. Yellen emphasized that the Fed was not prejudging the likely course of events. She declined several times to comment on the merits of Mr. Trump’s plans or to predict their consequences for the economy.
“We’re operating under a cloud of uncertainty at the moment,” Ms. Yellen said.
Fed officials predicted that they would raise the Fed’s benchmark rate a little more quickly in the coming years, reaching 2.1 percent by the end of 2018. In September, they had predicted that it would reach 1.9 percent by the end of 2018. The new projections, however, reflect a significantly slower pace of increase than last December, when they expected the rate to reach 3.3 percent by 2018.
The combination of steady growth and faster rate increases indicates that some Fed officials expect the central bank to end up offsetting a modest increase in fiscal stimulus. But Ms. Yellen said most Fed officials were reserving judgment.
“Changes in fiscal policy or other economic policies could affect the economic outlook,” she said. “Of course, it is far too early to know how those changes will unfold.”
What Happens When the Fed Raises Rates, in One Rube Goldberg Machine
Exactly seven years ago, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates to almost zero in order to nurse the ailing economy back to health. Recently it changed direction. This is how it works.
The tensions between monetary and fiscal policy will develop slowly. Legislation takes time to write, and any economic impact would generally be felt in coming years. Political pressures, however, may build more quickly.
Mr. Trump has made clear in the past that he likes low interest rates — and some of his plans, like infrastructure investment, will be much easier to fund if rates remain low.
“The Fed is in a tricky place,” said Michael Feroli, chief United States economist at JPMorgan Chase. “They’re trying not to prejudge how Congress and the administration duke it out, but once they see that, I think they will respond.”
There is also uncertainty about the Fed’s leadership. Ms. Yellen’s term as chairwoman ends in February 2018, and Mr. Trump has said he would prefer a Republican.
Ms. Yellen could remain on the board, a possibility she said Wednesday she had not ruled out. But the Fed, under different leadership, might well choose a different path forward. Some conservative economists, notably John Taylor of Stanford University, argue that the bank should already have raised rates above 1 percent.
The economy, for now, keeps plodding along. Steady job growth has reduced the unemployment rate to a level the Fed considers healthy. A little unemployment is natural as people change jobs and businesses close. Ms. Yellen and other Fed officials have said they see some signs of stronger wage growth. Inflation, too, has picked up a little in recent months, although both wages and inflation continue to rise more slowly than the Fed would like to see.
Ms. Yellen described the rate increase as “a vote of confidence in the economy.”
The decision was made by a unanimous vote of the 10 members of the Federal Open Market Committee, the first time in recent months the Fed has acted by consensus.
Some economists argue that the Fed should wait until inflation strengthens before raising rates, to test whether a stronger economy would persuade some people sidelined during the downturn to start looking for jobs. That would expand the labor force. Unemployment remains particularly high among minorities.
That view, however, has found little support among Fed officials, who worry that interest rates will have to be raised more quickly if they wait too long, increasing the chances of pushing the economy into recession.
“Apparently, Fed officials think the economy is growing too quickly,” said Ady Barkan, the director of Fed Up, a coalition of liberal groups that has pressed the Fed to continue its stimulus campaign. “I doubt you can find many other Americans who share that opinion. And it’s a strange conclusion to draw in the wake of an election that was so heavily impacted by voters’ economic discontent.”
By BINYAMIN APPELBAUM
Source
2 days ago
9 days ago