Campaign News

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.

Gawker - December 2, 2013, by Hamilton Nolan - Last week, voters in SeaTac, Washington voted to raise the minimum wage for airport workers to $15 an hour. California recently approved a statewide minimum wage of $10. As low wage workers increasingly voice their frustration with their shitty lot in life, it's time to raise the minimum wage— everywhere.

The federal minimum wage is $7.25. If one were to work full time for 50 weeks a year at that wage, one would make $14,500, which is below the poverty line for a household of two. Add to that the fact that most minimum wage workers cannot get full time hours, and the fact that many of them are supporting families (only 12% of workers earning under $10 an hour are teenagers, contrary to popular stereotypes), and the self-evidently ludicrous nature of our national standard becomes clear.

The common argument against raising the minimum wage is that it would cause employers to cut back on hiring. Not so. The economist Arindrajit Dube wrote this weekend about the latest research into this topic, which finds that fears of job loss have been greatly overstated:

In my work with T. William Lester and Michael Reich, we use nearly two decades' worth of data and compare all bordering areas in the United States to show that while higher minimum wages raise earnings of low-wage workers, they do not have a detectable impact on employment. Our estimates — published in 2010 in the Review of Economics and Statistics — suggest that a hypothetical 10 percent increase in the minimum wage affects employment in the restaurant or retail industries, by much less than 1 percent; the change is in fact statistically indistinguishable from zero.

Dube estimates that a 10% rise in the minimum wage would reduce overall poverty by 2%. That's nice. It's also evidence that we need the minimum wage to rise by much more than 10% (which would only bring it up to about $8 an hour). A $10 minimum wage would offer a full time worker a salary of $20,000 a year—a shitty salary, but enough to raise a household of three over the official poverty line, at least. A $15 minimum wage would mean a $30,000 annual salary. Of course, the vagaries of hourly work and ever-shifting schedules would mean that annual take-home pay would probably fall well under those figures.

Later this week, fast food workers across the nation will stage a one day walkout as part of their ongoing quest to shame employers into raising their wages. Shame will not work, except as a tool for motivating political will. If low wage workers in dead end jobs are ever to gain some small measure of economic security, their wages will have to be raised by law. Ten dollars an hour is a good starting point. But that should be seen as a stopgap humanitarian measure meant to be temporary, until support can be gathered for another raise, or at least for a law indexing minimum wage to inflation.

Minimum wage earners are sometimes dismissed as people too lazy to find a better job. But a land of opportunity in which there is a higher-paying job available for everyone who works hard is a childish fantasy. With a different shuffle of the deck of fate, any one of us could be earning minimum wage. The question is not "How much do those people deserve?" The question is: How much would you accept to do that job?

Source

Weekly Press - December 17, 2014, by Nicole Contosta - Charter Schools have become a divisive issue in Philadelphia. Supporters swear to their effectiveness. Critics argue that they lack accountability.

Both sides of the charter school debate were heard last Tuesday, December 9th. That’s when the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), hosted the Philly Charter School Forum: Who’s Minding the Store?

Panelists included Feather Houstoun from the Philadelphia School Reform Commission (SRC); Jurate Krokys, founding principal of the Independence Charter School, Kyle Serette of the Center for Popular Democracy and author of Fraud and Financial Mismanagement in PA’s Charter Schools; and Barbara Dowdall, retired public school teacher and former ADA board member.

Solomon Leach, Philadelphia Daily News Education Reporter, moderated. Leach began the evening’s discourse by asking Houstoun to comment on the evolution of charter schools in Philadelphia.

Houstoun, who spent most of her career in managing care, transit and welfare problems, cited her experience with "good oversight." But when Houstoun joined the SRC three and half years ago, "I was really surprised […] about the incredibly precarious situation the school district was in. Now," Houstoun continued, "we’re living within our means, but we’re horrifically under-resourced."

And with regard to charter schools, Houstoun said, "I was really dumbfounded by how badly over the course of time the [Philadelphia School] District had organized itself to assure that we were getting good value for children in charter schools."

To Houstoun, getting good value for the city’s children proves relevant given the fact that "40 percent of our children are being educated at charter schools that are separate from the district apparatus."

But, Houstoun continued, "We must accept responsibility for these things." And in Houstoun’s opinion, part of the problem resulted from the fact that "the District did not set up standards for academic performances. There were no systematic annual check-ups about what they were doing in terms of finance, corporate or academic measures."

Houstoun cited the fact that the SRC only renews charter schools on a five-year basis as contributing to the lack of oversight. However, at the same time, Houstoun expressed optimism when it comes to moving forward with the city’s charter schools. Over the past year, the SRC performed an overhaul of the charter school office, placing Julian Thompson at the helm. "We’re operating within charter school law that gives us the obligation to monitor and review charter schools," Houstoun emphasized.

From the charter school perspective, Krokys said that she hasn’t always had the best experience working with the SRC.

"I’ve been in the charter world for about 14 years," Krokys said, "In the past and sometimes the not so recent past—what it was—the relationship and the process of authorization and renewal were secret, haphazard, and hostile. And I’m not exaggerating. It was always up for grabs."

In answering Leach’s question about what she’s learned from really effective charter schools, Krokys said, "Community partners and stakeholders are one of the things that can be done with all schools—but it’s especially important for charter schools. Site admission selection for parents and staff—there’s nothing like feeling that you have chosen something and were not defaulted to it," Krokys stressed. "That makes a big difference in partnership.

The same thing," Krokys continued, "goes for staff. The staff is not assigned; they’re not grazing until they get their retirement. Staff is selected to work in a specific school."

Serette discussed the history and evolution of charter schools. That began on March 31, 1988. "That’s when our chamber got in front of the press club in DC and announced a new type of school, something that would help figure out the most complicated problems in our education system. And it was the charter school."

As Serette explained it, the charter school concept was designed as a "calculated risk to figure out if we could figure out something that could then be exported into the public system. And," Serette continued, "This makes sense because you don’t want to take a calculated risk and export it into the whole system. I think we forgot that lesson as we were expanding throughout the nation.

We have a situation where we have the largest charter school system in the country-K12 Inc.," Serette continued, "It’s fully funded by public dollars but it’s traded on the stock exchange. The goal of being on the exchange is to make money. So we have slightly diverged from the original mission of charters."

With regard to the effectiveness of charter schools, "they have had a meaningful impact," Serette said, adding, "They have taught us some really smart things to figure out and export to our system. The first charter school started in 1992. And now we have 43 states with charter school laws."

But, Serette noted, citing an investigation of 15 states, his office found, "about 136 million in charter school funding that was abused, that was used for fraud. To us, that was an alarming number."

In PA, Serette explained that he didn’t think the state government "did a great job of regulating the system. So we have here, two auditors looking after a system that has revenue of 700 million, auditing 86 charter schools.

Dowdall, in answering Leach’s question about academic accountability for charter schools said, "Rather than start with the charter school in the quest of academic accountability, we might journey back to the government entities that established, regulates and monitors them namely the PA State Legislature the Governor of PA, the State Department of Education and the SRC.

While the public schools whose assumed inadequacies sparked the takeover," Dowdall continued, "they were more or less placed in a giant petri dish; we more or less organized a dizzying away of name changes, administrative changes, etc. Test prep came to rule and push out libraries, librarians, music, art and other extra curricular activities. Funding cuts led to the disappearance of nurses, counselors, teaching assistants, custodial help and the financial oversight provided by operations personnel.

Twenty three neighborhood schools," Dowdall continued, "were shuttered. And 40 new charters are supposed to open. Since the SRC has the authority to approve schools," Dowdall said, "maybe they should do so based on the actual needs of the district rather than the whims and desires in some highly funded charters."

As the discussion continued, Leach asked Houstoun "how has the introduction [of reversing] no-charter re-imbursement in PA influence the SRC assessment when it comes to renewing charters?"

Leach’s question references the fact that Government Corbett eliminated the $100 million for charter school re-imbursement to the Philadelphia School District in 2011.

Houston cited the cancellation of the re-imbursement as painful. "For every child that’s added to charter school system, we can’t take off $10,000 for expenses. If," Houstoun explained, "we can restore the charter re-imbursement that was in place, it would alleviate the first level of pain that we’re suffering in the district right now."

Leach asked Krokys to comment on how to rectify the public perception of charter schools when taking into account those that are underperforming or fraudulent.

Krokys began her answering by stressing, "There are thousands and thousands of children who would not have had one chance in their neighborhood school. And a lot of them came through my doors and are now graduating from college."

When it comes to addressing inadequacies in Philadelphia charter schools, Krokys said, "It took a while for the charter school community to finally say, ‘yes. There are some charters that need be closed.’ Yes," Krokys said, "we are weary of the few bad apples because that’s what ends up in the papers. And that’s what ends up tainting everything else."

With regard to K12 Inc., "Who the hell gave permission for a for-profit to run a charter school?" Krokys asked. "Whose fault was that?"

To Serette, Leach asked, "One of the original aims of charter schools was to be a model for public schools. But that got lost in the shuffle over time. How do you think we can go back so that public schools can benefit from the successful roles of charters?"

According to Serette, "The narrative in the US is that the public school system is broken, right? And you can’t just get a good education so you have to be saved by a lot of other systems. But the truth is," Serette continued. "We have a good public school system in upper class and upper middle class neighborhoods. Those tend to be wonderful. And then you have the struggling sectors where people can’t make ends meet and we’re trying to figure that out."

Leach then asked Dowdall how charter and public schools could reach a middle ground.

To Dowdall, "It’s about equity. It’s about resources. Whether it’s traditional or charter, it can be defined. It’s about small classes with libraries where the students can be guided."

And in Dowdall’s opinion, "There needs to be an agreement between those on the board that authorization renewal for charter schools should be set at three years as opposed to five."

For more information on the ADA, visit Youth http://www.phillyada.org.

Source

Congress could revise the Federal Reserve’s mandate to emphasize running the economy at full employment with rising wages and moderate inflation. Progressives should follow the lead of Fed Up, the project of the Center for Popular Democracy, and challenge appointments to Federal Reserve and its member banks, demanding greater representation of workers, consumers and poverty advocates.

Read the full article here.