The Week Ahead in New York Politics, May 1
What to watch for this week in New York politics:
President Donald Trump is due back in New York City for the first time since taking office this week -- see below for details and expect...
What to watch for this week in New York politics:
President Donald Trump is due back in New York City for the first time since taking office this week -- see below for details and expect protests, traffic gridlock, and political statements from all corners.
Read full article here.
Toys `R' Us Workers Go to Congress to Seek Curbs on Buyout Firms
Toys `R' Us Workers Go to Congress to Seek Curbs on Buyout Firms
“We need to fight for all workers who are being treated like the Toys ‘R’ Us employees, who are bearing the personal economic costs of corporate greed run amok,” Senator Gillibrand said on Tuesday...
“We need to fight for all workers who are being treated like the Toys ‘R’ Us employees, who are bearing the personal economic costs of corporate greed run amok,” Senator Gillibrand said on Tuesday in a meeting organized by Rise Up Retail and the Center for Popular Democracy, which represent retail workers. “I will keep doing everything I can in the Senate to make that happen.”
Read the full article here.
Former Fed Staffer, Activists Detail Plan to Overhaul Central Bank
Former Fed Staffer, Activists Detail Plan to Overhaul Central Bank
A former top Federal Reserve staffer joined with activists on Monday to lay out the mechanics of a plan to overhaul the structure of the U.S. central bank.
Dartmouth College’s Andrew Levin...
A former top Federal Reserve staffer joined with activists on Monday to lay out the mechanics of a plan to overhaul the structure of the U.S. central bank.
Dartmouth College’s Andrew Levin, who was a top adviser to former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, Jordan Haedtler of the left-leaning Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign and the Economic Policy Institute’s Valerie Wilson say in a paper that their proposals amount to an important modernization of the Fed.
“The Fed’s structure is simply outdated, and that makes it harder for its decisions to serve the public,” Ms. Wilson said in a press call. “We are well aware we can’t create a dramatic shake-up” of the Fed, she said, explaining what she and her colleagues are calling for is “pragmatic and nonpartisan.”
The linchpin of the overhaul is bringing the 12 quasi-private regional Fed banks fully into government. The paper’s authors also repeated calls for bankers to be removed from regional Fed bank boards of directors, while proposing nonrenewable terms for top central bank officials and greater government oversight over Fed actions.
The paper Monday fleshed out the specifics of how the overhaul would happen, building on ideas first made public in April. “We had a ‘why,’ and now we have a ‘how,’” Mr. Levin told reporters.
Mr. Levin and Fed Up have seen successes in their campaign to overhaul the central bank. Earlier this year, congressional Democrats and the campaign of Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton endorsed their push to remove bankers from the boards overseeing the 12 regional Fed banks. Fed Up’s effort to promote diversity in a central bank that is still dominated largely by white males, not withstanding the current leadership of Chairwoman Janet Yellen, also has gained traction among Democrats.
The regional Fed banks are unique among major central banks for being owned by local banks. Some fear this structure gives financial institutions undue sway over policy decisions. Fed bank presidents have countered this isn’t the case.
Regional Fed officials have acknowledged that more diversity within the central bank system would be welcome, but they have been reluctant to tinker with the current structure. The paper also proposes auditing the Fed’s monetary-policy-making functions, and that has been something officials have fought hard against, believing it will lead to bad economic outcomes.
The authors say regional Fed banks can easily be made public by canceling the shares of the member banks and refunding the capital these banks were required to keep with the Fed.
The money to do this can be created by the Fed, and the paper says the fact that the central bank no longer would have to pay dividends to the banks would help it return more of its profit to the government. Over the next decade, that could mean the Fed might return as much as $3 billion more in excess profit, helping reducing the government’s budget deficit.
A number of regional Fed bank leaders have pushed back at being made fully public. In May, New York Fed President William Dudley said “the current arrangements are actually working quite well, both in terms of preserving the Federal Reserve’s independence with respect to the conduct of monetary policy and actually leading to pretty, you know, successful outcomes.”
The paper’s authors said making the Fed fully public also would allow it to remove bankers and other financial-sector members from the boards that oversee each regional Fed bank. The authors said directors should be nominated by either a member of Congress or a state governor, subject to approval by the Fed boards.
None of these directors should be from the financial sector, to prevent the conflict of interest created by a member of a regulated financial institution overseeing the operations of their own regulator.
This, too, has drawn pushback from some on the Fed. Philadelphia Fed leader Patrick Harker said in July that “the banker from a small town in Pennsylvania provides incredibly important insight,” and he wants people like that on his board.
New bank leaders should be selected by an open process in which candidates are named publicly, with a formal mechanism for public input. All Fed officials also should serve single staggered seven-year terms, which the paper says would help insulate central bankers from political interference. The selection process of regional Fed bank leaders has long been a secretive affair. Meanwhile, the leaders of the Dallas, Minneapolis and Philadelphia Fed banks, who all took their posts since 2015, have had connections to Goldman Sachs, which has drawn criticism from the Fed Up campaign. Mr. Dudley at the New York Fed was once that firm’s chief economist.
The authors also would like to subject Fed monetary policy decisions to Government Accountability Office audits. To ensure this oversight doesn’t interfere with Fed decision-making, the paper calls for the audits to be done annually and not at the request of a member of Congress, and the GAO shouldn’t be able to comment on any given interest-rate decision.
The paper calls for the Fed to release a quarterly monetary policy report that describes officials’ views on policy, the economy’s performance relative to the Fed’s official price and job mandates, forecasts and a description of risks, and a description of any models driving policy-making.
Any changes to the Fed are ultimately up to elected officials. In February, Ms. Yellen told legislators “the structure could be something different and it’s up to Congress to decide that—I certainly respect that.”
By Michael S. Derby
Source
California Eminent Domain Isn't Government Run Amok
To judge from the disparaging reaction to its plan to use eminent domain to cope with underwater homes, you'd think the city leaders of Richmond, California, had proposed an outrageous and...
To judge from the disparaging reaction to its plan to use eminent domain to cope with underwater homes, you'd think the city leaders of Richmond, California, had proposed an outrageous and unprecedented distortion of state power.
Filing suit against Richmond, BlackRock Inc., Pacific Investment Management Co. and other plaintiffs alleged that the city's proposal amounts to an “unconstitutional application of eminent domain” and a “brazen scheme.” The Federal Housing Finance Agency announced that it was considering ceasingto do business in municipalities that pursue this course. Media coverage generally echoed the plaintiffs’ take. USA Today’s headline summed up the conventional wisdom, declaring that Richmond “runs amok with eminent domain.”
In fact, the city's plan relies not on a novel use of eminent domain but on one endorsed by the conservative Supreme Court of 1935. And although there is a long history of excessive use of eminent domain, Richmond's plan has no place in it. Richmond's plan is to seize 624 mortgages valued at more than the homes for which they were written. Relying on a private intermediary, the city would compensate the investor holding a mortgage at a price reflecting the home's current value rather than an inflated bubble value. The city would then sell a more modest loan to the homeowner. Richmond hopes this will induce residents to remain in their homes and pay their mortgages and property taxes. Proponents of the plan also point out that this probably will lower the risk of default, protecting investors holding the mortgages.
Nonetheless, the big players in the bond markets are angry that they’re being forced to accede to the demands of a small city in California. Before they fight city hall, the plaintiffs should appreciate that use of eminent domain to seize intangible assets like mortgages has a solid history. Federal courts have long sanctioned the taking of everything from shares of stock to contract rights, insurance policies and even hunting rights.
But mortgages? Yes. Consider a famous Supreme Court case from the Great Depression. During that crisis, banks foreclosed on farmers who fell behind on their mortgage payments. In response, Congress passed the Farm Bankruptcy Act granting farmers five years to negotiate a reduction in the principal of their loans. Farmers were entitled to buy the property at the current appraised value, even if it fell short of the value attached to the original mortgage.
Then, as now, banks didn’t like the policy and went to court, arguing that it violated their property rights, as guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment. In May 1935, the Supreme Court overturned the law in a unanimous decision, the first of several such rulings that made the court into a conservative counterweight to the New Deal. Nevertheless, in the final paragraph of its decision, the court laid out an alternative course for just the kind of remedy the Farm Bankruptcy Act had sought.
Justice Louis Brandeis observed, "If the public interest requires, and permits, the taking of property of individual mortgagees in order to relieve the necessities of individual mortgagors, resort must be had to proceedings by eminent domain.”
In effect, the court stated that if the government wished to modify loans, it could only do so via an eminent domain proceeding of precisely the sort now being contemplated in Richmond. Brandeis didn’t think this a particularly controversial point; he made no effort to defend it or explain his reasoning because it was an established doctrine.
And so it remains today: Intangible assets have again and again been deemed fair game for eminent domain proceedings, so long as “just compensation” is given. In California, the state Supreme Court has taken a similar stance: A decision in 2008, for example, affirmed longstanding precedent that the state’s eminent domain law “authorizes the taking of intangible property.”
None of this is to suggest that eminent domain hasn’t been abused. In the postwar era, however, its victims have not been investors but poor, black, inner city residents.
The case that opened the door to mass evictions and confiscations was Berman v. Parker, decided by the Supreme Court in 1954. In it, a black department store owner in the District of Columbia sued to stop an eminent domain proceeding against his profitable business, which had the misfortune of being situated in an area designated as blighted.
The court rejected Berman’s protest, defining eminent domain in remarkably broad terms. If the public interest demanded that his property be torn down with less desirable properties to rescue an entire neighborhood from blight, it ruled, there was nothing Berman could do. His store was soon reduced to rubble. While many urban planners celebrated the decision, Harvard Law School Professor Charles Haar was more prescient, noting that the ruling “may cause a lot of trouble some day.”
This was an understatement: in the ensuing years, municipalities across the country used and abused their powers to confiscate the property of poor, often black residents, rarely giving “just compensation.” Entire, thriving neighborhoods vanished before the wrecking ball, destroying communities and leaving behind gaping holes in the urban fabric that remain eyesores in many cities today.
This didn’t end with the 1960s. In 2005, the Supreme Court handed down its controversial decision in Kelo v. City of New London. The case grew out of efforts by New London, Connecticut, to use eminent domain to evict working-class residents from a neighborhood in the hopes of handing the land to a private developer who promised to attract more affluent residents with a mixed-use project. The court ruled in favor of the city, vastly expanding the powers of eminent domain. The project foundered during the financial crisis and today remains a series of vacant lots, monuments to an extreme vision of eminent domain.
These are examples of eminent domain “run amok.” Yet to listen to the hysterical denunciations of the Richmond plan, a proposal to bring 624 mortgages in line with market prices is the epitome of eminent domain abuse. History suggests otherwise.
Source:
As the Stock Market Swings
Yet it’s hard to escape a vague sense of unease. The swoon that began a week before last was quickly attributed, at least in part, to China’s economic problems. Just as quickly, many investors and...
Yet it’s hard to escape a vague sense of unease. The swoon that began a week before last was quickly attributed, at least in part, to China’s economic problems. Just as quickly, many investors and policy makers concluded that China’s leaders would manage those problems in ways that would allow the global economy to chug along. But what if they don’t? A prolonged slowdown is more likely to provoke social unrest in China than in other developed economies, because stability there has been based on high growth rather than political and other institutional arrangements. The prospect of social unrest, in turn, raises economic and national-security concerns not raised by economic crises elsewhere.
Closer to home, market volatility has significantly reduced the odds that the Federal Reserve will begin to raise interest rates at its next meeting in mid-September. A delay is nothing to lament, because the still significant slack in the labor market would make an increase this year premature. The Fed has generally played down the potential impact of China and other international headwinds, while asserting that the negative effects of low oil prices and a strong dollar were likely to be temporary. But these forces are proving potent and long lasting — further reason to give the Fed pause.
Renewed stock market downdrafts could disrupt the economy, and the Fed’s plans, in other ways. The recovery in housing is an important gauge of economic health. But this year, the big increases in sales and prices have come at the high end of the market, where investment wealth is assumed to be more of a factor in the decision to buy than wages and salary. The very real possibility is that if the stock market falters again, so too will the housing market.
Economic fundamentals today are no different than they were before the market took a walk on the wild side. Inflation is well below the Fed’s target of 2 percent. Unemployment is still higher than it was before the last recession and wages have shown no signs of rising. The economy is being propelled forward by consumers and other advantages, and being held back by insufficient government spending and other disadvantages.
It all works out to an economy growing at 2.5 percent. At that modest pace, the United States cannot be of much help if other economies falter. But it can rebound from a market swoon, at least for now.
Source: New York Times
Newark schools should offer more social services, advocates say
NJ.com - 05-06-2015 - Newark's schools should add more social services and community programming to tackle issues of poverty afflicting local neighborhoods, a group of education advocates said...
NJ.com - 05-06-2015 - Newark's schools should add more social services and community programming to tackle issues of poverty afflicting local neighborhoods, a group of education advocates said Tuesday.
Dubbed the "community school" model, schools should strive to address needy students' health and emotional needs, teach content beyond what is included in standardized tests and include parental input in the decision making.
NJ Communities United organizer Roberto Cabanas told a packed audience in Kings Family Restaurant & Catering, that the district could work local nonprofit organizations to support a wider range of student needs.
"We need to bring the village inside of the school," he said.
Cabanas was one of four panelists at an education forum organized by activists and the city, including Newark chief education officer Lauren Wells, Evie Frankl of the Center for Popular Democracy and Mary Bennett of the Alliance for Newark Public Schools.
Wells said Newark Public Schools once adopted this approach about five years ago through the Global Village Zone, when the district attempted to turn around seven schools in the city's Central Ward.
At the time, the district announced that the program would implement longer days and provide more professional development and pay for teachers. Under the model, schools were set to turn schools into a place where students would be taught but also be able to go to health clinics.
"A community school is a place, a physical place, but it's also a practice," Wells said. "It is a way about going about doing things."
The program also sought input from teachers and parents when it designed it, Wells said.
"Teachers, specifically, at 18th Avenue School worked with the principal to design what (an) extended day would look like in their school," she said.
Bennett said when she was a principal in the district she tried to better serve students on probation by working with the county probation department to have one probation officer assigned to all the students in her school.
Under the community schools model, the district could streamline cooperation between government and universities, Bennett argued.
"You shouldn't have to spend a year to try and unify the services to support students," she said.
Frankl said districts around the country including in Baltimore, New York City and Lancaster, Pennsylvania are adopting this approach.
"Community schools can happen," she said. "There is no reason why a community school should not be the definition of a public school in the United States of America."
Source: NJ.com
American Legislative Exchange Council lobbyist being exposed
American Legislative Exchange Council lobbyist being exposed
Niccolo Machiavelli would have been proud of the folks who support the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). At the end of September the U.S. Department of Education approved another $245...
Niccolo Machiavelli would have been proud of the folks who support the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). At the end of September the U.S. Department of Education approved another $245 million in grants to eight states under the federal Charter School Program. That brings to nearly $4 billion in charters in the last two and a half decades.
The Center for Popular Democracy spelled out in its report “Charter School Black Hole” how tax dollars have gone to “ghost schools,” charters that never opened. In the case of schools that did open only to fail, there was no accounting for money spent or assets purchased.
There was no accountability to the school children affected by charter fraud, waste, and incompetence. Virtual charters like the K12 operation performed markedly worse. They are similar to fantasy football games — those that are bet on but are never physically played.
Scores of major companies have abandoned ALEC after protests from their stockholders and clients. Recently the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees wrote to the CEO of AARP urging that group to get out of the lobbying group. They asked that the senior citizens group stop “endorsing an organization that brings corporate lobbyists and elected officials from around the country together to write anti-senior, anti-family legislation in a process that locks out the public and subverts our democratic process.” Among other things ALEC has pushed for is repeal of the Affordable Care Act.
Enterprise, the largest car rental company in the world, owns Enterprise Rent-A-Car, National and Alamo, has moved away from the lobbying juggernaut. Part of the push to accomplish that divorce came from a petition by a petition with 89,000 signatures.
The company’s membership in ALEC, which has poured considerable resources into denying and minimizing scientific efforts to quantify climate change, was brought to the Guardian’s attention by the watchdog group the Center for Media and Democracy.
Growing concern about climate change has led many high-tech companies such as eBay, Expedia, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo to abandon the ALEC ship. In 2015, environmental concerns pushed energy-industry giants, Royal Dutch Shell and BP, as well as the American Electric Power and the Canadian National Railway to quit.
A laundry list of model bills proposed in many state legislatures is very long — and very threatening.
For a listing of bills sponsored by ALEC, go to the website for the Center for Media and Democracy: www.alecexposed.org. Download the zip files of ALEC model bills for agriculture, energy, and the environment. Consider one such bill aimed at land use controls.
One bill would repeal all land use planning and zoning in rural counties by both county and state governments. Under the bill property could be put to any use, without regard for single-family, agricultural, or industrial zoning, or environmental land use restrictions. Under that restraint, no one could prevent a nude bar or body shop next to a school. Nor could local government prevent polluting industries from building in their jurisdiction.
If you want more information about the machinations of this cabal, simply contact Senator Josh Harkins and Representative Jim Beckett, who are chairmen of the Mississippi chapter.
In closing, consider these words from the ALEC website: “When states resort to tax carve-outs in a misguided attempt to grow their economies, they are ignoring the bigger problem — an uncompetitive tax climate. More fundamentally, government should budget for outcomes. This means identifying the core functions of state government and measuring results.”
Reviewing their handling of budgets and tax give aways in the past year, one can only wish they had taken their own advice.
TJ Ray is a retired professor of English at Ole Miss.
By Oxford Eagle Contributors
Source
Can Community Organizers Build Progressive Power?
Last Tuesday, Alton Sterling was shot and killed while pinned on the ground by Baton Rouge police. The next day, Philando Castile was shot and killed by a cop in Falcon Heights, Minnesota, as he...
Last Tuesday, Alton Sterling was shot and killed while pinned on the ground by Baton Rouge police. The next day, Philando Castile was shot and killed by a cop in Falcon Heights, Minnesota, as he reached for his ID. On Thursday, protests swept across the country calling for an end to police killings of black and brown men. At one of those peaceful protests, in Dallas, a sniper opened fire from a vantage point above the march, trying to kill white police officers. Five officers died.
It was against this backdrop of deep social turmoil that dozens of community organizing groups from across the country came together in Pittsburgh for the People’s Convention.
Over the weekend, more than 1,500 community organizers and leaders—many of them Black and Latino—convened to discuss ways to create a more cohesive, powerful progressive grassroots network. It was the first step by the Center for Popular Democracy, a progressive organization that is trying to fill the vacuum left in the wake of ACORN’s demise in 2010.
On top of the recent events in Louisiana, Minnesota, and Texas, the convention also came at a critical political moment—on the Republican side, Donald Trump’s campaign is increasingly stoking racial animosity; on the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders has worked to push his party’s platform leftward.
“We wanted to make it both a statement in the electoral moment and really a statement that transcends the electoral moment,” Brian Kettenring, co-director of the Center for Popular Democracy, told the Prospect at the convention. “We’re trying to stand in this particular moment but also not be captive to the narrow partisan politics of our country.”
The convention started off Friday with a march of more than 1,000 activists through the streets of downtown Pittsburgh, including stops outside the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center to demand fair wages for workers; the Pittsburgh Federal Reserve to call for equitable economic policies for working families; and Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey’s office to protest his anti-immigration stances. Some onlookers joined the chanting—“What do we want? Justice. If we don’t get it? Shut it down,”—and raised their fists in solidarity. Others were visibly angry at the marchers’ message of justice for undocumented immigrants and victims of police brutality.
The following day, activists heard speeches from heavyweights of the progressive movement like Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison and the Reverend William Barber III, leader of North Carolina’s Moral Mondays movement, who both spoke powerfully about the recent killings and the need for a unified response.
“The country needs healing, but you can’t heal a dirty wound,” Ellison pronounced. “A dirty wound needs disinfectant.”
He pointed to the “amazingly poised” Diamond Reynolds, the fiancée of Philando Castile, who streamed the immediate aftermath of his shooting on Facebook, as a model for the movement. “We need to push back with the same presence of mind of Diamond Reynolds,” he said.
With the killings of Sterling and Castile fresh on everyone’s mind, the specter of police violence loomed large at the convention. But the People’s Convention also wove together the threads of today’s social justice movements—not just Black Lives Matter, but also those campaigning for immigration reform, the Fight for $15, LGBTQ rights, and environmental justice, in a way that made clear the intersectionality of modern progressive organizing.
“We’re all dealing with the various layers of oppression,” said Jose Lopez, organizing director for Make the Road New York. “Whether it’s workplace inequality, housing inequality, or the recent decision from the Supreme Court, which to a degree sent a message to our families that we’re going to create opportunity for a limited number of children but we’re going to throw away the key to the gate to this country when we begin to talk about their parents.”
“[This convention] created the space and now we have to make sure we continue to stay in contact—using CPD as the vehicle—so that we can build out a network of power that can transform everything from immigration reform to worker rights to housing rights to the attack of black and brown people in this country by police,” Lopez said.
Groups attending the convention included New York Communities for Change, which helped launch the Fight for $15 back in 2012 and is now turning its focus toward addressing affordable housing needs in the city; Minnesota Neighborhoods Organizing for Change, which, in response to the police killing of Jamar Clark helped organize a protest occupation outside a North Minneapolis police precinct that lasted 16 days; the Texas Workers Defense Project, a worker advocacy group that has improved labor standards in the Texas construction industry; and Make the Road state chapters that have led local fights against deportations. Some of these groups have collaborated before, while others have been somewhat isolated from other community organizing groups.
Community organizations lost much of their national clout in the wake of ACORN’s demise, which was brought about in 2009 by a conservative smear campaign. CPD’s goal now—and that of the organizations represented at the conference—is to rebuild such groups’ institutional power and make it a critical part of the broader progressive movement.
In recent years, that movement has had some signal successes, which conference workshops showcased: how SEIU successfully organized for a $15 minimum wage in Seattle; how black community groups in St. Louis helped create lasting momentum for policing reform in the wake of Ferguson; how the New York Working Families Party established a powerful electoral presence; how organizers in Florida worked for climate justice in communities vulnerable to climate change.
“We are beginning to launch a real national organizing framework—that’s something that really hadn’t been seen since ACORN went under,” said Jonathan Westin, executive director of New York Communities for Change. “I think this is the beginning of an intentional path forward to try to create real structural power for community institutions and neighborhoods that already exists in places like the labor movement.”
Creating such structural power, organizers admit, will be challenging. There’s a shortage of funding for community organizations, which has kept them closely tethered to more well-funded labor unions and foundations—and, in many ways, also tethered to their funders’ agendas. The central challenge is how to establish a sustainable and independent source of funding, as unions have done with member dues, in order for community power to become a singular force on its own.
Beyond that, a critical question for community organizers is how to capitalize on both the current social and political moment.
“The genie is out the bottle with progressive politics,” Kettenring said. He believes that a strong force of community organizations can help direct the progressive movement’s current political capital in a way that avoids pitfalls of the past. “One of the historic strategic failures of the progressive movement has been its failure on race. So when you look at this convention and look at how diverse it is and how many of the organizations are rooted communities of color, you see the potentiality of how the community organizing sector can help root a more progressive, but also diverse politics.”
By Justin Miller
Source
Democrats Criticize Fed for Lack of Diversity in Leadership
The U.S. Federal Reserve came under criticism Thursday from some lawmakers over the lack of diversity in the central bank’s leadership.
A majority of Democratic...
The U.S. Federal Reserve came under criticism Thursday from some lawmakers over the lack of diversity in the central bank’s leadership.
A majority of Democratic members of Congress -- 11 from the Senate and 116 from the House of Representatives -- signed a letter addressed to Janet Yellen, calling on the Fed chair to include more African Americans, Latinos and women when it considers candidates for top posts. The letter was written by staff for Representative John Conyers of Michigan, according to Ady Barkan of the Fed Up campaign, an activist group that lobbied members of Congress to add their names. No Republicans signed.
“We remain deeply concerned that the Federal Reserve has not yet fulfilled its statutory and moral obligation to ensure that its leadership reflects the composition of our diverse nation in terms of gender, race and ethnicity, economic background and occupation,” according to the letter, whose signatories included presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren.
The letter said more than 80 percent of directors at the Fed’s 12 regional banks are white and about three-fourths are men. Of 12 regional Fed presidents, who participate in monetary policy meetings, 11 are white and 10 are men, it added.
Improvements Made
Fed spokesman David Skidmore said the central bank and its branches have focused in recent years on increasing ethnic and gender diversity. Minority representation on Reserve Bank and branch boards has risen to 24 percent this year from 16 percent in 2010, he said, and the proportion of female directors has increased to 30 percent from 23 percent over the same period. “We are striving to continue that progress,” Skidmore said.
Fed Up is organized by the Center for Popular Democracy, non-profit groups and unions who are lobbying for the Fed to reject raising interest rates.
Regional Fed presidents are chosen by non-banking members of their respective boards of directors. The appointments are subject to the approval of the Board of Governors in Washington.
Regional boards have nine members, as stipulated in the Federal Reserve Act. Three are chosen by and represent banks in the district; three are chosen by the same banks to represent the public; three are designated by the Board of Governors to represent the public.
Jesse Ferguson, a spokesman for Hillary Clinton, issued a statement on Fed diversity after the letter was released saying the leading Democratic presidential candidate “believes that the Fed needs to be more representative of America.” She also thinks “commonsense reforms” such as removing bankers from regional Fed boards, “are long overdue,” Ferguson said.
Lockhart Retiring
Barring a surprise resignation, the Atlanta Fed presidency will be the next seat on the Federal Open Market Committee to open. Dennis Lockhart, the current president, will be required to step down in March 2017 after serving for 10 years.
“Diversity for the Federal Reserve is critical. This is the very nature of this institution, to broadly represent the communities we serve,” Kansas City Fed President Esther George said in response to a question Thursday after a speech in Albuquerque, New Mexico. “That means industry diversity. It means diversity of thought. And it means racial and gender diversity in the institution.”
There are two governorships already open. President Barack Obama has nominated Allan Landon, the former chief executive officer of Bank of Hawaii Corp., and Kathryn Dominguez, an economics professor at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, to fill the posts. Republican Senator Richard Shelby has refused to hold confirmation hearings for the pair in a dispute with the White House over its failure to fill a separate Fed post.
By Christopher Condon & Steve Matthews
Source
The Fed, Full Employment, African-Americans, and an Event that Brings It All Together
Jared Bernstein Blog - March 3, 2015 - As a tireless (some would say tiresome) advocate for full employment and the benefits it yields for working people, you can imagine how I was thrown by this...
Jared Bernstein Blog - March 3, 2015 - As a tireless (some would say tiresome) advocate for full employment and the benefits it yields for working people, you can imagine how I was thrown by this NYT headline over a piece by economics reporter Bin Appelbaum:
Black jobless rates remain high, but Fed can’t do much to help.
“Shots fired!” as the kids say.
I find this hard to believe in the following sense. Black unemployment has averaged almost twice that of overall unemployment since the monthly data begin in 1972 (avg: 1.9, with standard deviation of 0.15, so not a ton of variation around that mean). Crudely, that implies that if overall unemployment fell from 6% to 5%, the black rate might fall more in percentage point terms, from 12% to 10%.
Next, if the Fed can push down the overall unemployment rate, which is certainly within its purview and, at a time like this, its job description, then the headline seems off.
Now, there are important nuances in play here.
First, these relationships are not always so clean. Over the long, strong recovery of the 1990s, black unemployment fell 4.5 points compared to 2.1 points for whites (and 2.5 points overall). Over the 1980s recovery, black unemployment—which was about 20% at the end of the deep early 1980s recession—fell 8.5 points compared to 4.7 for whites.
Those comparatively big declines show the disproportionate benefits that blacks reap from lower unemployment and, conditional on the Fed’s ability to lower unemployment, they belie the NYT headline. I could make similar claims based on wages and incomes, but I’m bound by secrecy for now (more on that in a moment).
However, more recently, that relationship isn’t generating such impressive results. Over this recovery, black and white unemployment have declined by similar amounts (4.5 points for blacks; 3.8 for whites). And, as Appelbaum points out, real median wages have fallen twice as much for blacks as for whites.
But that’s kinda the point: until recently this has been a uniquely weak recovery, and as such, tells us little yet about the extent to which full employment will lift the relative economic fortunes of black workers.
If we get to and stay at full employment, I’m confident it will work as it has in the past, based both on the history briefly cited above and on some truly exciting results from a new paper we’ve commissioned for our full employment project on the benefits of full employment to black workers, written by the economist Valarie Wilson from the Economic Policy Institute.
Valerie will be highlighting the results at an event we’re holding in DC on March 30th so far be it from me to steal her thunder. But she’s got some panel data regressions (which provide lots more observations and variance than the simple time series comparisons noted above) showing the impact of lower unemployment on black compared to white median wages, and man…all’s I can say is I’m employing great restraint not to just print them right here and now!
Here’s another point worth considering. Various economists on team full employment have been trying to get the Fed to hold off on its interest rate liftoff, but Appelbaum writes: “It’s not obvious, however, that holding down borrowing costs for a little longer would be an effective way to address the underlying problem. Indeed, the problem is a good illustration of the limits of monetary policy.”
That may be true in the following sense: if the Fed raises rates a little bit in 2015q4 instead of 2015q3, I doubt it will matter that much to anyone in the real economy (though financial markets would make a huge deal out of it). Similarly, if they hold to a 5.4% full employment rate and a firm 2% inflation ceiling that mustn’t be breached, or if they shift from being data driven to shooting at the phantom menace of inflation that’s allegedly hiding out of sight from the data just around the corner—well then, yeah, they won’t much help those who depend on lasting full employment to catch a break.
He’s also got a point re underlying problems. Even full employment may not be enough to reach the millions of workers with criminal records who face uniquely high barriers to the job market. I’ve written about fair-hiring policies to reach these workers, and so has Appelbaum.
But check this out: I mentioned our March 30 event. Well, another speaker on the panel that morning will be the guy from whom I learned all I know about fair-hiring, Maurice Emsellem from the National Employment Law Project.
I know what you’re thinking: what about macro, what about Fed policy? How can you call yourself a full employment maven and leave that out? Did I forget to mention our keynote speaker? A fella named Bernanke…Ben Bernanke. Here’s the flyer. Be there and be square.
Source
22 hours ago
3 days ago