Donald Trump isn't crazy to attack the Fed
Donald Trump isn't crazy to attack the Fed
Today, as the Federal Reserve meets to set monetary policy, it will also be bracing for another round of attacks from Donald Trump. In one of the many twists of this strange election season, Trump...
Today, as the Federal Reserve meets to set monetary policy, it will also be bracing for another round of attacks from Donald Trump. In one of the many twists of this strange election season, Trump has gone straight after Fed chairwoman Janet Yellen, saying she should be “ashamed” of keeping interest rates low, and accusing the Fed of creating a “false economy” and doing “political things.” If the Fed declines to raise rates today, as is expected, he will likely attack the central bank yet again.
The implication of Trump’s attacks is that the Fed is just another institution rigged against Trump: that Yellen is keeping rates artificially low to help the economy, which helps the Democrats look better and thus helps his opponent, Hillary Clinton.
Economists, and a lot of political observers, have been horrified by Trump’s direct attacks: What seems normal for the pugnacious outsider candidate is a major violation of American political norms. Politicians aren’t supposed to push the Fed one way or the other; it's a point of pride for the Fed, and for the nation overall, that the central bank sets policy independent of political pressure. Economists credit central bank independence as one of the great economic success stories of the 20th century, paving the way for lower inflation and stronger growth.
But how far off is he, really? It's true that the Republican nominee is violating tradition: critiquing individual policy decisions shows that he doesn't respect the line between politics and monetary policy. And there’s an implicit threat that could genuinely damage the Fed’s autonomy: He’s signaling that Fed leaders would be on notice in a Trump administration, and could pay a price for making decisions he didn't like.
But the line between politics and the Fed is far blurrier than the conventional wisdom would have it—and politicians before Trump have crossed it in much more serious ways. Moreover, buried within Trump’s comments is a kernel of truth: The Federal Reserve is, by definition, not independent. Unlike the Supreme Court, the central bank is a creation of Congress and is accountable to lawmakers on Capitol Hill. It can be changed—or abolished—by Congress as well. And to pretend it's not—to treat the Fed as an entity totally removed from American politics—also leaves us powerless to talk about the ways it might be improved.
It's important to point out that Trump's immediate accusations are almost certainly wrong: Economists across the political spectrum reject Trump’s claims that Yellen is declining to raise interest rates to improve Clinton’s election odds. Yellen, who has also firmly rejected Trump’s claims, does not set monetary policy alone; it’s set by the 12 members of the Federal Open Markets Committee. (Currently, it has just ten members.) That means no individual member, or even small group of members, can tip the scales to benefit a certain candidate. And any collusion would also be difficult to hide: Transcripts of FOMC meetings are released publicly (though on a five-year delay), and Yellen testifies before Congress four times a year.
“The fact that I don’t happen to agree with the conduct of policy doesn’t mean that they are being political,” said Glenn Hubbard, the dean of Columbia Business School and former top economist to President George W. Bush, who believes rates should rise faster. “I think that’s very unfortunate.”
A real example of political interference with monetary policy occurred in the early 1970s. Taped recordings of Richard Nixon provide clear evidence that Nixon pressured then-Fed Chair Arthur Burns to adopt expansionary monetary policies to improve his reelection chances. For instance, before Burns was confirmed by Congress, Nixon told him: “I know there’s the myth of the autonomous Fed ... and when you go up for confirmation some senator may ask you about your friendship with the president. Appearances are going to be important, so you can call [Nixon economic advisor John] Ehrlichman to get messages to me, and he’ll call you.” Nixon met with Burns frequently and tacitly pressured the chairman to keep policy loose. The FOMC transcripts indicate that many Fed members had doubts about the policy decisions but voted for them anyways.
Trump’s criticism of the Fed on the campaign trail doesn’t approach Nixon’s actual interference in monetary policy from the White house. But it does raise the broader question of what constitutes "political interference" in the Fed, and what constitutes legitimate criticism. One key distinction: Nixon used his presidential powers to influence Burns, while Trump currently has no such power over Yellen. But Trump, if elected, will also nominate the next Fed chair. That inherently means his criticisms of the central bank veer closer to political interference than critiques from academics like Hubbard.
“The line is blurry,” said Joseph Gagnon, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics who has worked at the Fed intermittently for the past 30 years.
On substance, what constitutes a "political" attack versus a policy criticism isn't immediately clear: Trump’s comments on the Fed often are substantive, such as when he said the Fed’s policy has created “a big, fat, ugly bubble.” But given his penchant for changing positions on the institution—he first said he’d retain Yellen before saying he’d replace her, for instance—many economists have concluded that Trump’s motives are concerned more with his own advantage than any serious policy beliefs.
To some experts, the threat posed by "political" attacks on the Fed has always been overblown. “I don’t get as worked up as some people to do about what politicians say,” Gagnon said. “They are allowed to have their opinions. If they think the Fed should do something differently, they can say it.”
The long tradition of deference to the Fed’s policy independence can even pose a risk: It creates an environment in which any critique of the Fed is seen as out of line, including the idea of reforming how it works. "The Federal Reserve is a crucial public agency, so there are lots of important questions—including the selection of its leaders, the determination of their priorities, and the specific strategy that they're following—that should all be open to public discourse," said Andrew Levin, an economist at Dartmouth who spent two decades working at the Fed, including as a top advisor to Yellen and her predecessor, Ben Bernanke.
Levin has been part of a movement that has put a few cracks in the protective shield around the Fed this year. Earlier this year, he published a set of recommendations for reforming the Fed in conjunction with the Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign; the goal is to make the Fed's board members—currently 83 percent white, nearly three-quarters male and nearly 40 percent from financial institutions —more representative of the American public. Although it hasn’t received as much attention as Trump’s attacks on the Fed, Hillary Clinton also quietly criticized the central bank when her campaign said she supported such reforms.
To Ady Barkan, the head of the Fed Up campaign, these efforts do not constitute an unacceptable interference with the Fed’s independence, and neither do Trump’s comments. The Fed’s independence, he said, comes from its structure; its leaders are appointed, not elected, for long terms, which inherently insulates the central bank from political pressure. The Fed must still be accountable to the public though, and one way policymakers fulfill that responsibility is through public comments. For that reason, Barkan added, monetary policy decisions “are appropriate topics for political debate.”
“The main thing about Trump’s comments is that they show real ignorance about how the Fed works,” he said. “I don’t object to the idea that Trump or Hillary would object to what the Fed is doing.”
By Danny Vinik
Source
Jessica Biel Throws Shade, Meryl Streep, Mila Kunis & More
Jessica Biel Throws Shade, Meryl Streep, Mila Kunis & More
Alyssa Milano and Ady Barkan attend the Los Angeles Supports a Dream Act Now! protest on Wednesday.
...
Alyssa Milano and Ady Barkan attend the Los Angeles Supports a Dream Act Now! protest on Wednesday.
See the picture here.
Coalition Calls for Fed Focus on Full Employment, Higher Wages
The Dallas Morning News - March 4, 2015, by Sheryl Jean - A coalition of community and labor groups in Texas is calling for the Federal Reserve to focus on full employment and higher wages for...
The Dallas Morning News - March 4, 2015, by Sheryl Jean - A coalition of community and labor groups in Texas is calling for the Federal Reserve to focus on full employment and higher wages for blacks and others in poor neighborhoods who have been left behind in the economic recovery.
The group also wants the board of the Fed’s regional bank in Dallas to keep that in mind as it searches for a replacement for Dallas Fed president Richard Fisher, who will retire March 19.
Liberal activists across the country on Thursday plan to protest outside seven Fed regional banks, including New York, Philadelphia and St. Louis, to highlight high unemployment among minority groups and to urge officials not to raise interest rates yet and instead focus on full employment and higher wages. A demonstration also was planned at the Dallas Fed’s office on the edge of downtown, but was canceled due to a forecast for bad weather.
Still, activists in Dallas plan to call attention to a new report showing that the nation’s economic recovery hasn’t reached many minority communities. Falling jobless rates maskhigh black and long-term unemployment and racial inequality in wages in Texas and across the country.
The 84-page report by the Center for Popular Democracy and the Economic Policy Institute shows that Texas’ average jobless rate was 5 percent in 2014, but it was 9.5 percent for blacks. In the Dallas metro area, the average rate was 5.1 percent last year, but it was 9.6 percent for blacks. Nationally, the black jobless rate was 10.3 percent, compared with a national average of 6.2 percent.
Wages also lagged. Texas’ median wage grew 3.9 percent from 2000 to 2014, but it rose 8 percent for whites and declined 0.8 percent for blacks, according to the report. Nationally, wages have been stagnant for most workers since 2000.
“If the Fed raises [interest] rates to banks, then our rates go up, but wages aren’t going up,” said Danny Cendejas, senior organizer in Dallas for the Texas Organizing Project, one of the groups in the coalition. “It’s something that is very concerning for most of our community. In the black and brown communities, where we know the unemployment rates are higher, how do we expect those people to pay their loans back?”
The Fed has kept interest rates near zero since 2008 to help spur business lending to create jobs and boost the economy.
Coalition members in Texas want a more open search process for Fisher’s replacement with more involvement by the community. Fisher, who was in El Paso on Wednesday, has been one of the most vocal advocates of raising interest rates sooner than later.
“Look around at all the construction cranes in Dallas,” said Becky Moeller, president of the Texas AFL-CIO. “I think the lower interest rates are spurring businesses to do work and then they’re hiring people. We just don’t want an interest rate policy that isn’t good for workers in the state.”
Moeller was among a group of 10 community leaders who met with three Fed representatives — general counsel John Buchanan; Alfreda Norman, head of community development and public affairs; and spokesman James Hoard — for about 90 minutes in January to discuss the search process for a new president, the timeline and the qualifications sought.
“We had a good conversation and thought we answered their questions,” Hoard said. The Dallas Fed put the name of the search firm and its email address on its website for anyone interested in nominating a candidate, he added.
Moeller has a different view of the meeting.
“We don’t have a candidate, but we felt like we had some input we wanted to share,” she said. “We don’t want it to be someone who wouldn’t be good for jobs in the future. We wanted to make sure they were looking at the economic factors that relate to real people in Texas, Louisiana and New Mexico. We have low-wage workers who can’t get their head above water. We have folks who are long-term unemployed.”
In addition to the Texas AFL-CIO, the groups that met with the Dallas Fed were the American Federation of Teachers, Communication Workers of America, Dallas Central Labor Council, Fort Worth Building Trades and Ironworkers, Harris County Central Labor Council, Jobs With Justice, Texas Organizing Project and Workers Defense Project.
Coalition members last summer protested the Kansas City Fed’s annual Jackson Hole, Wyo., forum and met with Fed chairwoman Janet Yellen in November.
Yellen and three other Fed officials met with about 30 workers and activists, including some from Texas, for an hour to hear their plights of being long-term unemployed and struggling to make a living. As a result, the Fed created the Community Advisory Council in January to provide different perspectives on the economy, especially the needs of low- to moderate-income families.
“She listened very carefully and was very engaged and was grateful to us for requesting the meeting,” said Ady Barkan, staff lawyer for the Center for Popular Democracy, who was at the meeting. “It’s the kind of response we would like to see from others.”
Source
A First for Jackson Hole — Protesters Are Here, and They Don’t Want Rate Hikes
MarketWatch - August 21, 2014, by Greg Robb - Protesters, worried that the central bank is about to put its foot on the brakes, have come to the Federal Reserve’s Jackson Hole retreat this year to...
MarketWatch - August 21, 2014, by Greg Robb - Protesters, worried that the central bank is about to put its foot on the brakes, have come to the Federal Reserve’s Jackson Hole retreat this year to urge the central bank to hold off and give the economy more time to heal. This is believed to be the first time there ever has been protesters at the event.
“We strongly urge the Federal Reserve to reject the calls to raise interest rates and slow the economy down,” said The Center for Popular Democracy, a coalition of 70 organizations, in a letter to Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen and her colleagues.
“Although the stock market has roared back to life, and the wealthiest Americans are richer than ever before, too many of us struggle to secure even basic levels of dignity,” the letter said.
Becky Dernbach, 28, an organizer with Neighborhoods Organizing for Change — an advocacy group for low-income residents in Minneapolis — said she came to Jackson Hole to make sure that the voices of average workers were being heard by the Fed.
Kendra Brooks, 42, a resident of Philadelphia who has an MBA but still found herself out of work even after her unemployment benefits ended, said the American dream has “fizzled” in this economy.
“We are not their [the Fed's] primary concern. They are more focused on the top end of the [income] scale,” she said.
The activists said the Jackson Hole protest was the start of a new effort to get officials to understand the economy is broken.
The group held a two-hour meeting with Kansas City Fed President Esther George, who has been one of several regional bank presidents advocating for a rate hike sooner rather than later.
Ady Barkan, a staff attorney with the Center for Popular Democracy, said that the group appreciated the meeting but that the two sides had talked past each other.
George told the group that higher rates might not come soon, but said are coming and will balance the economy, he said.
“That is completely wrong,” Barkan said. The way to combat imbalance in the economy is through strong regulation “not throwing people out of work,” he said.
Source
Report: Starbucks falls short on vow to make workers' schedules more fair
Despite a public pledge last year to ease scheduling burdens for its baristas, Starbucks has fallen short of its commitment on a number of fronts, according to a new report released Wednesday...
Despite a public pledge last year to ease scheduling burdens for its baristas, Starbucks has fallen short of its commitment on a number of fronts, according to a new report released Wednesday based on interviews with the coffee chain’s workers across the country.
The report, titled “The Grind: Striving for Scheduling Fairness at Starbucks” (PDF), said Starbucks baristas across the country were still complaining that they often don’t receive their work schedules soon enough before shifts and that they are under pressure to avoid taking sick days.
The New York-based advocacy group Center for Popular Democracy produced the report, which cited survey data collected from more than 200 Starbucks baristas in 37 states and compiled by Coworker.org, an online platform that supports workplace rights.
“More than six months after Starbucks publicly recommitted to scheduling policies and mandated ten days’ notice, the scheduling issues they sought to address still persist in their frontline stores,” the report said.
After a New York Times investigation in August 2014 highlighted the scheduling travails of a Starbucks worker and single mother named Janette Navarro, the company announced that it would strive to improve work schedules for its employees, whom the company calls “partners.” The workers’ survey cited in Wednesday’s report was conducted in March this year.
“Taking care of our partners is a responsibility I take very personally,” Cliff Burrows, a high-level Starbucks executive, said in an internal company email at the time, according to the New York Times and other news outlets. Burrows was quoted as saying the company would work to aid “stability and consistency” in the schedules of its more than 130,000 baristas.
Burrows pledged then that the company would improve its scheduling software to make it easier on employees to plan their lives.
But the directive has only partially trickled down to the company's more than 12,000 U.S. locations, Wednesday's report says.
“They’ve made some improvements, but they’ve been minor,” said Carrie Gleason, co-author of the report. “A fair workweek at Starbucks exists in some stores,” she said, but “the issue is inconsistency.”
Starbucks did not respond to a request for comment on the report's findings before the time of publication.
The report said many baristas noted a high incidence of so-called “clopening” shifts, in which a person closes and opens in consecutive shifts, often leaving a span of only a few hours in which to return home before working again.
Last year Starbucks' Burrows pledged an end to the dreaded clopening shifts, saying “district managers must help store managers problem-solve issues specific to individual stores to make this happen.”
But the report indicated that such shifts were still widespread, with nearly a quarter of workers regularly getting them.
“I feel that baristas should have a minimum of 10 hours in between shifts. Everyone should have a fair chance to get home, settled, and be able to sleep for eight hours before having to get up for another shift," the survey report quoted an Illinois Starbucks worker as saying.
But the majority of workers who do clopening shifts are able to get fewer than seven hours of sleep, the report said.
“Because I was frequently scheduled for clopening shifts, I got just four or five hours of sleep a night. I was doing all I could to get ahead, but Starbucks’ scheduling practices made me question whether that was possible,” said Ciara Moran, a former Starbucks barista wrote in a petition she launched with Coworker.org, asking for further scheduling reforms.
The report released Wednesday said that 48 percent of surveyed Starbucks workers said they received their work schedules a week or less in advance, and that 40 percent reported they had experienced pressure to avoid taking sick days.
"Employees say that it can be extremely difficult to take sick days because they face pressure to work while sick, fear negative consequences or are forced to find their own replacement," the report said.
The report suggested that the experiences of individual workers varied considerably, depending on store locations and personnel.
“Many of us have different experiences at Starbucks, depending on our manager,” Moran said, asking others to support the cause “for consistent protections across the company, starting with healthy schedules across the board.”
“On a corporate level there isn’t that level of accountability. They’re not looking whether their polices are going far enough,” Gleason said. “For Starbucks, it can be a model for the industry for how to deliver a sustainable workweek.”
“I think they need to engage their workforce in a different way,” she said.
Source: Al Jazeera America
Why Community Schools Are The Key To Our Future
by Kyle Serrette, Director of Education Justice Campaigns, Center for Popular Democracy
John H. Reagan High School is located in northeast Austin. In the late 1990s...
by Kyle Serrette, Director of Education Justice Campaigns, Center for Popular Democracy
John H. Reagan High School is located in northeast Austin. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Reagan’s student body became increasingly poor as middle-class families left the area. In 2003, a student was stabbed to death by her former boyfriend in a school hallway. The incident made headlines and scared away neighborhood families. Students left Reagan in droves. Enrollment dropped from more than 2,000 students to a new low of 600, and the graduation rate hovered just below 50 percent. In 2008, the district threatened to close Reagan. In reaction, a committee of parents, teachers, and students, brought together by Austin Voices for Education and Youth, formulated a plan to turn Reagan into a community school. The district accepted their plan.
Today, five years after adopting the community school strategy, Reagan is graduating 85 percent of its students, enrollment has more than doubled, and a new early college program has made it possible for Reagan’s students to earn two years of college credits from a nearby community college while still attending high school.
Reagan High School, or any community school for that matter, doesn’t immediately look different than any other school — that is, until you spend some time there.
At 3.8 million square miles, the United States is a big place, with almost 50 million primary and secondary students attending more than 98,000 public schools in 14,000 school districts.
Many things unite our vastly different 50 states, but our approach to education is not one of them.
It is fair to say that the United States does not have one approach to education. Rather, it has thousands of pedagogical approaches that fit into roughly the same structure (elementary, middle, high school).
If the universe of poorly funded public schools in the United States were the night sky on a clear night, you would find some really bright stars and a lot of jarring empty space. The problem with a scattershot approach to education in such a vast country is that there’s no effective way to share successful practices.
Thousands of schools in poor neighborhoods fail generation after generation, while other schools with the same demographics and challenges have found ways to succeed and break the cycle of failure. Today, if you are a business, nonprofit, or any type of entity, it is quite hard to figure out if a school wants help or what kind of help it needs. Most schools lack a clear analysis of what they need to help improve outcomes, and if they do have a clear understanding of needs, most lack a point person to manage partnerships.
Unfortunately, there is also no sound system for sharing successful strategies from schools that are getting it right. This is analogous to a heart surgeon developing a revolutionary life-saving approach and only telling people she bumped into about it. Yet that’s basically how our education system works in the United States.
While poor schools have taken many paths to transform themselves into successful schools, one particular path has worked again and again. There are 5.1 million children enrolled in approximately 5,000 community schools in the United States, and those numbers are growing quickly. In New York, mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio promised to create 100 community schools. As mayor, he has fulfilled that campaign promise and recently announced a plan to grow that number to 200 by 2017.
Philadelphia mayoral candidate Jim Kenney announced a plan to open 25 new community schools during his first term. This past December, Ras Baraka, mayor of Newark, announced a plan to scale up community schools with a tentative commitment of $12.5 million from the Foundation for Newark’s Future, the organization created to manage the $100 million that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg donated to the city in 2010 to reform the city’s floundering school system.
Community schools are not a new concept. John Rogers, community schools historian at UCLA, tells us they have existed at least since the turn of the 20th century in many forms, but always with the same objective of addressing inequities at both the school and community levels. Jane Addams’s Hull House in the 1890s is an early example: “There were kindergarten classes in the morning, club meetings for older children in the afternoon, and for adults in the evening more clubs or courses in what became virtually a night school. The first facility added to Hull House was an art gallery, the second a public kitchen; then came a coffee house, a gymnasium, a swimming pool, a cooperative boarding club for girls, a book bindery, an art studio, a music school, a drama group, a circulating library, an employment bureau, and a labor museum.”
Long before Reagan became a community school, it housed a daycare for the babies of student mothers so they could continue their education. That daycare still exists today with approximately 20 babies enrolled, but there’s more. When school social workers noticed that student moms at Reagan were missing classes to take their babies to doctor appointments, the social workers applied for and won a grant to have a mobile clinic visit the campus once a week. Now student moms can make appointments for their babies to receive checkups without leaving school. Reagan also allows parents to eat lunch with their babies in the daycare and attend parenting classes. Students in Reagan’s Pregnant and Parenting Teen Program now have a remarkable 100 percent graduation rate.
Discipline problems historically have plagued Reagan. Students were frequently suspended, and chronic attendance issues landed students and families in court, which then imposed fines that families could not afford. Dropout rates were high.
Today, a full-time bilingual social worker works to diagnose chronic attendance problems and connects students and their families with supports, with service referrals rather than fines. A student-led youth court has been developed in partnership with the University of Texas–Austin Law School. The youth court and a restorative justice program together have dramatically reduced discipline issues. Today, Reagan is a top Title I high school in Austin.
While there is a fair amount of variability within schools that have implemented this strategy, thousands of schools have gotten it just right. We wanted to understand what distinguished them from the others.
Here’s what we found those schools shared in their strategic plans: 1) culturally relevant and engaging curricula; 2) an emphasis on high-quality teaching, not high-stakes testing; 3) wraparound supports, such as health care and social and emotional services; 4) positive discipline practices, such as restorative justice; 5) parent and community engagement; and 6) inclusive school leadership committed to making the transformational community school strategy integral to the school’s mandate and functioning.
It all seems intuitive. Schools that form strategic partnerships with businesses, nonprofits, local and federal governments, universities, hospitals, and other organizations to meet core unmet needs are usually successful over time. In most strapped schools, a principal doesn’t have time to find the appropriate partners, let alone conduct an analysis of needs. This leaves schools with a random partner strategy, which is no strategy at all. The community school strategy puts one person in charge of determining the school’s ever-evolving needs. The cost incurred to create this position and the work it supports — around $150,000 — pays for itself and then some.
Nine years ago, when Baltimore’s Wolfe Street Academy elementary school became a community school, 90 percent of its students were living in poverty, 60 percent spoke a language other than English at home, and its mobility rate was high at 46.6 (less than half of its students attended for more than three years). Wolfe Street Academy ranked 77th in the district in academic measures, and only half its children reached reading proficiency by fifth grade. It had no library and only sporadic parent or community engagement.
Today, Wolfe Street ranks second in the city academically, its mobility rate has dropped to 8.8 percent, 95 percent of fifth-grade students are reading proficient, and its average daily attendance rate is 95 percent. It has a library, a book club, and volunteer help from a retired librarian. Forty parents attend a morning meeting every day before school while the students eat breakfast. They share school and community news, both good and bad. This transformation at Wolfe Street has taken place even as more students living in poverty have arrived and as the number of students speaking a language other than English in the home has grown.
During one of Wolfe Street’s annual needs assessments, it determined that its curriculum was not dynamic enough to give the school a chance to achieve its academic goals. In response, Wolfe Street formed a partnership with the Baltimore Curriculum Project, which now provides staff with professional development and supports the school with teacher recruitment and retention.
When the assessment revealed that many of its students had never visited a dentist the school partnered with the University of Maryland Dental School to hold free oral health screenings for all the students. A partnership was formed as well with the University of Maryland’s School of Social Work as a way to respond to what the assessment revealed about the daily impact of trauma on their students’ lives. Now licensed social workers and multiple social work interns are available and offer case management and referrals.
We are in the enviable position of knowing what works. And now, with the recent passage of the federal education legislation Every Student Succeeds Act, funds are explicitly available for the essential elements of community schools, such as community school coordinators, needs assessments, and after-school programming.
A United States where every public school is a community school would be a very different place — it would be a school with the community inside it. Your bank, local architect, grocery store, hospital, and other institutions we associate with being part of the broader community outside our schools would be deeply integrated into them. The tax code could be designed to accelerate and incentivize partnerships with schools. The lines between the inside and outside of schools would blur.
And if you imagine a United States in 2050 where all 98,000 schools have a clear sense of their individual needs and are able to communicate these needs effectively to potential partners, this might be a game changer.
With a new granular understanding of every school’s needs, we could scale partnerships and connect schools with similar needs or pair schools that could benefit from each other’s strengths. We could analyze needs and assess intervention strategies between schools and across districts, cities, states, and the nation.
If you can imagine the world back when it wasn’t connected by the internet and experience again how everything changed when we finally were connected, that is the level shift our schools would experience if every school were a community school. A networked school system would exist, and our atomized system of disparate schools would fade away as a relic of the past.
Source
Activist Group Takes Out TV Ad Calling for Trump to Keep Yellen
The Center for Popular Democracy's Fed Up campaign broadcast a 30-second TV spot urging Mr. Trump to offer Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen a second term. The ad ran during "Fox & Friends," a...
The Center for Popular Democracy's Fed Up campaign broadcast a 30-second TV spot urging Mr. Trump to offer Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen a second term. The ad ran during "Fox & Friends," a morning show the president watches and often reacts to on Twitter.
Read the full article here.
Flake confronted by women on Kavanaugh, then calls for FBI investigation
Flake confronted by women on Kavanaugh, then calls for FBI investigation
Sen. Jeff Flake was confronted by two women on the nature of sexual assault allegations, and Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Then Flake called for an FBI investigation into...
Sen. Jeff Flake was confronted by two women on the nature of sexual assault allegations, and Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Then Flake called for an FBI investigation into Kavanaugh before the vote. Joy Reid is joined by one of those women, Ana Maria Archila.
Read the full article here.
Two weeks before hurricane season, Puerto Rico is not ready, groups warn
Two weeks before hurricane season, Puerto Rico is not ready, groups warn
“One thing is evident at the core of the response,” said Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director at the Center for Popular Democracy and a part of the Power 4 Puerto Rico coalition. “There is a...
“One thing is evident at the core of the response,” said Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director at the Center for Popular Democracy and a part of the Power 4 Puerto Rico coalition. “There is a crisis of democracy. The federal government is acting as if the people of Puerto Rico are not constituents.”
Read the full article here.
Jackson Hole Journal: Rate Rise Friends, Foes Encircle Fed Event
Also getting under way at the lodge is a protest conference organized by the Center for Popular Democracy, a liberal group that has been cajoling the Fed to hold off on raising interest rates....
Also getting under way at the lodge is a protest conference organized by the Center for Popular Democracy, a liberal group that has been cajoling the Fed to hold off on raising interest rates. Their headline speaker will be Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist and once a mentor to Fed Chair Janet Yellen, who is not attending the Fed event.
Policy makers such as Fed Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer won’t be able to avoid seeing their activists, roaming around the lodge in green t-shirts, reading “Whose recovery?” and “Let our wages grow.”
The group, which this year includes representatives from the Black Lives Matter movement, have reserved conference space directly below the room where the Kansas City Fed’s sessions take place.
Left out is the American Principles Project, a conservative organization that has heavily criticized the Fed’s monetary policy as excessively accommodative. They believe interest rates should have been lifted long ago.
The group tried to reserve space at the Jackson Lake Lodge but were refused, according to Steve Lonegan, their director of monetary affairs. So they’ll get their alternative conference started this evening in Teton Village, a more than 30-mile (48-kilometer) drive away. Scheduled speakers include Representative Scott Garrett, a New Jersey Republican who has sponsored legislation to make the Fed more accountable to Congress.
Better Access
Standing at an information table covered with gold-coin chocolates on Wednesday in Jackson Hole Airport, Lonegan complained that his group was refused space at the lodge while the other protesters enjoyed much closer access to the Fed attendees, including the media.
Kansas City Fed Spokesman Bill Medley said the bank had “no say over who else books space here.”
Elizabeth Biebl, a spokeswoman for lodge operator Vail Resorts Hospitality and Real Estate, said in an e-mail there are space limitations and the Center for Popular Democracy was accommodated at the Jackson Lake Lodge because it requested smaller numbers than American Principles Project.
“Groups interested in booking with us are not subject to the approval of other groups who already have bookings,” she wrote.
Source: Bloomberg
3 days ago
3 days ago