Why Diversity Matters at the Federal Reserve
There’s no question that race and gender matter in determining people’s economic fortunes. African Americans’ unemployment rate is typically twice as high as that of whites. The racial wealth gap...
There’s no question that race and gender matter in determining people’s economic fortunes. African Americans’ unemployment rate is typically twice as high as that of whites. The racial wealth gap has widened since the financial crisis, when African Americans and Hispanics—who had a disproportionate share of their wealth tied up in their homes—disproportionately suffered from subprime loans and foreclosures. The Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finances finds that the median wealth of a white family in 2013, the last year studied, was $134,008. For Hispanics, it was just $13,900. For African-Americans, $11,184. And as everyone knows, or should, women still make 79 cents for every dollar men make.
These deficiencies are more likely to be ignored when our most important economic policymakers don’t reflect the faces of all Americans. Yesterday, 127 Democratic members of Congress wrote to Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen about the lack of diversity at the central bank. “The leadership across the Federal Reserve System remains overwhelmingly and disproportionately white and male,” the letter notes. Led by Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, this high-level challenge also castigates the Fed for being dominated by former and current executives of financial institutions and large corporations, rather than people with backgrounds in academia, labor, or consumer organizations.
The voices of those left behind most egregiously in the economic recovery are simply not present in Fed deliberations.
Momentum to fix the Fed’s diversity problem grew on Thursday when Hillary Clinton endorsed the viewpoints expressed in the letter. Her spokesperson Jesse Ferguson told The Washington Post, “Secretary Clinton believes that the Fed needs to be more representative of America as a whole and that commonsense reforms—like getting bankers off the boards of regional Federal Reserve banks—are long overdue.”
The Fed’s lack of diversity might actually violate the law. Under the Federal Reserve Reform Act of 1977, regional Federal Reserve bank directors are required to “represent the public, without discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, or national origin, and with due but not exclusive consideration to the interests of agriculture, commerce, industry, services, labor, and consumers.” The original Federal Reserve Act only mandated representation from agriculture, commerce, and industry.
It’s unclear what enforcement of that 1977 requirement would look like. But clearly the Fed isn’t living up to it. The members of Congress rely on a February report from the Center for Popular Democracy, organizers of the “Fed Up” coalition, which has pressured the central bank to adopt pro-worker policies. According to their figures, 83 percent of Federal Reserve board members are white, and 72 percent are male. Among the twelve regional Fed bank presidents, only Neel Kashkari of the Minneapolis Fed is non-white, and only Esther George (Kansas City) and Loretta Mester (Cleveland) are female. And among voting members of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), which makes monetary policy decisions, it’s even worse: All ten currently serving members are white.
The lack of occupational diversity is also pretty stark. The Center for Popular Democracy studied the regional feds’ boards of directors, finding that 39 percent represent financial institutions. The Fed’s role as a key supervisor of major banks makes this highly suspect—especially considering there is no mandate for financial interests to be represented on the Fed board.
Another 29 percent of the Fed regional directors represent commerce and industry. Only 11 percent come from community, labor, consumer, or academic organizations. Even representation from the service sector, which has an overly non-white workforce and has expanded in recent years, has shrunk as a percentage of Fed bank-board members relative to 2010, the last time the boards’ makeup was studied.
It’s unusual for members of Congress to take such a public stand on the Federal Reserve, given their mindfulness of central bank independence. But they are recognizing that the lack of diversity has an important effect on economic policy. A more diverse Fed might pay more attention to how far communities of color are from full employment when deciding whether or not to raise interest rates, which they are now deliberating. A more diverse Fed might not be as consumed with the concerns of finance and industry, and their desire to keep inflation and wages low. It might consider how banks have traditionally preyed on communities of color, and target its supervision activities to reflect that.
The voices of those left behind most egregiously in the recovery are simply not present in Fed deliberations. The members of Congress cited a recent blog post by former Minneapolis Fed president Narayana Kocherlakota, who said that “there is one key source of economic difference in American life that is likely underemphasized in FOMC deliberations: race.” Kocherlakota searched transcripts of FOMC meetings from 2010 (the most recent ones released). That entire year, African American unemployment stood at 15.5 percent or above. But, writes Kocherlakota, “Based on that search, my conclusion is that there was no reference in the meetings to labor market conditions among African Americans.”
Traditionally, public pressure on the central bank has come from the right, from the likes of Ron Paul’s “End the Fed” movement. Progressives were largely absent from the conversation, despite the Fed’s central economic role. No more: Thursday’s letter to Yellen is the biggest success yet for the Fed Up campaign, launched two years ago to amplify the voices of communities that didn’t benefit from the recovery. The campaign has brought together labor and community groups to demand that the Fed take its mandate to maximize employment seriously—taking into account all communities, not just affluent ones. And now Fed Up’s views have become dominant in the Democratic Party.
In addition to the hefty names of Sanders and Warren, co-signers include 116 House Democrats, more than half of the caucus, as well as the ranking members of the Financial Services Committee (Maxine Waters) and the Monetary Policy Subcommittee (Gwen Moore), the committees with oversight of the Fed. And Clinton’s endorsement of Fed Up’s sentiment puts most of the ideological spectrum of the party on the side of reform.
But what does reform look like? The Center for Popular Democracy’s February report recommends that each regional board contain at least one member from a labor group, a community organization, academia, and a community bank or credit union. A separate reform proposal from former Yellen advisor Andrew Levin includes a number of ideas, including banning anyone affiliated with a financial institution from serving as a Fed director.
These ideas can be congressionally mandated. That will take time, of course, but the movement has begun to get Democrats off the sidelines to pressure the Fed. When Yellen testified before the House and Senate in February, giving her semi-annual Monetary Policy Report, she received questions about the lack of diversity from 15 different members of Congress. Yellen expressed concern that, among other things, no African American has ever led a regional Federal Reserve bank in U.S. history.
The fact that political pressure can make a difference was again signified by the quick response of a Fed spokesman to Thursday’s letter. The Fed statement said the central bank has “focused considerable attention in recent years on recruiting directors with diverse backgrounds and experience.” Those aspirations have not yet translated into results, however, even after the Fed established an internal diversity office in 2011.
It’s hard for the traditionally cloistered Fed to ignore concerns when they come from high-level Democrats. And just having ordinary workers in the public debate already diversifies the Fed, in a sense. No longer can they simply be responsive to Wall Street without further discussion.
BY DAVID DAYEN
Source
Groups Across NYC Hold a Protest against Amazon’s HQ2
Other participants include: Make the Road New York, New York Communities for Change, The Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU), UFCW, Laundry, Distribution and Food Service Joint...
Other participants include: Make the Road New York, New York Communities for Change, The Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU), UFCW, Laundry, Distribution and Food Service Joint Board of Workers United, SEIU, VOCAL New York, The People for Bernie Sanders, Warehouse Workers Stand Up, Color of Change, Citizen Action NYC, Center for Popular Democracy, Jews for Racial and Economic Justice, The Graduate Center PSC, MPower, Progressive HackNight, Caaav, Drum, Hand in Hand, NYC-Democratic Socialist of America, Tech Action, Human-scale NYC, PrimedOutNYC.
Read the full article here.
Richmond Fed President Jeffrey Lacker to Retire in October
Richmond Fed President Jeffrey Lacker to Retire in October
Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond President Jeffrey Lacker, one of the Fed system’s most outspoken advocates for higher short-term interest rates in recent years, will retire Oct. 1 after 28 years...
Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond President Jeffrey Lacker, one of the Fed system’s most outspoken advocates for higher short-term interest rates in recent years, will retire Oct. 1 after 28 years at the bank, the regional Fed bank said Tuesday.
The Richmond Fed’s board of directors has formed a search committee led by Chairwoman Margaret Lewis to find a new president, and has hired the firm of Heidrick & Struggles to assist in the search, the bank said. The bank intends to conduct “a nationwide search to identify a broad, diverse and highly qualified candidate pool for this leadership role,” it said.
Mr. Lacker became the second Fed official to announce his plans to retire in 2017. Atlanta Fed President Dennis Lockhart will step down at the end of February.
“Jeff has been an outstanding leader for the Richmond Fed and has made many contributions to the Federal Reserve System,” Ms. Lewis said in a statement announcing his departure.
A Richmond Fed spokesman said Mr. Lacker wants to return to teaching, writing and academic research, though he had no details on where Mr. Lacker may go after he leaves the bank later this year.
Mr. Lacker joined the Richmond Fed in 1989 and served in various leadership positions before becoming president in August 2004. For the past decade he has anchored the Fed’s hawkish wing, warning of the risks of rising inflation and dissenting often in favor of a higher benchmark federal-funds rate, which officials held near zero for six years following the financial crisis.
He was a voting member of the Fed’s policy committee in 2006, 2009, 2012 and 2015, and dissented a total of 15 times out of 32 meetings.
Mr. Lacker also argued against the Fed’s interventions in financial markets throughout the financial crisis, and has said financial instability was worsened by expectations that the Fed would always provide a backstop for financial firms in trouble.
Over the past year, he has also argued against efforts to overhaul the Fed system, including measures that would subject the Fed’s interest-rate decisions to greater congressional scrutiny or tie its policy to a mathematical formula.
“I’m hoping that our leaders in Congress and the administration understand that our independence is of value and is important to the credibility of the country’s commitment to price stability and I hope they’re willing to proceed accordingly,” he said after the November presidential election.
Mr. Lacker said in a statement Tuesday he felt fortunate “to have participated in some of the most extraordinary policy deliberations in our nation’s history. It’s been my deepest privilege to lead the Richmond Fed and the dedicated people who work here.”
The search to replace Mr. Lacker is likely to face scrutiny from activists and congressional Democrats who have called for more diversity among the Fed’s upper ranks, as well as more openness about how it selects its regional bank leaders.
Following Mr. Lockhart’s announcement last year, the left-leaning Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign said it hoped the next Atlanta Fed president would be black or Hispanic, which would be a first for a regional Fed bank.
In an unusual move, a group of African-American House members wrote to Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen and the chairman of the Atlanta Fed’s board urging them to consider candidates of diverse racial, ethnic, gender and professional backgrounds. The lawmakers also noted that most of the presidents worked at major financial firms before their appointments.
“We hope that candidates from distinctive sectors like academia, labor, and nonprofit organizations are given due consideration,” they wrote.
Before joining the Richmond Fed, Mr. Lacker was an assistant professor of economics at the Krannert School of Management at Purdue University and previously worked at Wharton Econometrics in Philadelphia, the bank said.
The bank posted information about its search process on its website Tuesday.
By Kate Davidson
Source
Schumer retira oferta sobre muro fronterizo de negociaciones sobre “DACA”
Schumer retira oferta sobre muro fronterizo de negociaciones sobre “DACA”
“Se sienten muy traicionados porque los demócratas habían hecho una promesa muy específica… no hay ninguna garantía, y sabemos que la estrategia de votar por el Dream Act como una ley separada ha...
“Se sienten muy traicionados porque los demócratas habían hecho una promesa muy específica… no hay ninguna garantía, y sabemos que la estrategia de votar por el Dream Act como una ley separada ha fracasado año tras año, no es una promesa que se traduce a un alivio para los Soñadores”, explicó Ana María Archila, del grupo Centro para una Democracia Popular.
Lea el artículo completo aquí.
New Pilot Program Gives Immigrant Detainees Public Defenders
NPR - November 29, 2013, by Hansi Lo Wang - In the American criminal justice system, you have the right to an attorney. And if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.
...
NPR - November 29, 2013, by Hansi Lo Wang - In the American criminal justice system, you have the right to an attorney. And if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.
That's not the case if you're a defendant in U.S. immigration court. Immigration proceedings are civil matters, and the Constitution does not extend the right to court-appointed attorneys to immigrant detainees.
But a new pilot program in New York City is trying to change that with the nation's first government-funded public defender service for immigrants facing deportation. Launched earlier this month, the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project provides poor immigrant detainees with court-appointed attorneys from the Bronx Defenders and Brooklyn Defender Services.
About 44 percent of detainees entered immigration court hearings last year without a lawyer. Organizers say public defenders could not only help some immigrants avoid unnecessary deportations, but also speed up immigration proceedings and cut down on detention time.
Quick Matches
Attorneys at the Bronx Defenders leave nothing to chance as they prepare for immigration court. After double-checking files and running through courtroom scenarios, there's still one thing attorney Conor Gleason won't know for sure until just hours before he's in front of a judge: the person he'll have to represent next as a public defender in immigration court.
"We are used to meeting our clients long before our first hearing before a judge and having contact with their families and knowing a little bit about their life," Gleason explains. "And now we're requesting people to trust us within five seconds of meeting us."
These quick matches happen about once or twice a week, when there's a new group of unrepresented detainees scheduled for their first hearings before a judge at New York's Varick Street Immigration Court. Detainees must have household incomes at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level to receive free legal services.
Gleason says having a public defender can have huge implications on the fate of immigrant detainees who cannot afford a private attorney or secure pro bono legal defense.
"Someone's rights are involved in this scenario," he says. "The individuals are in orange jumpsuits. They have the name of the facility on the back of their jumpsuits. Their hands are chained to their waist, and [only one hand is unchained], their writing hand, if they need to sign something."
'A Sea Change'
Funded mainly by the New York City Council and a contribution by Yeshiva University's Cardozo School of Law, the pilot program costs $550,000 and will serve 190 detainees until at least late February. Organizers say they hope this test run will ultimately lead to a model program for other parts of the country.
"What we're seeing right now is a sea change in the quality of justice afforded to immigrants in America," says Peter Markowitz, a law professor at Cardozo and one of the program's key organizers.
But the project raises questions about immigrant detainees having access to government-funded representation, says Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors tougher immigration enforcement. While there are a few exceptions under federal law, such as juveniles in delinquency proceedings, for the most part, Vaughan says, "American citizens are not entitled to this kind of taxpayer-funded representation when they're in civil courts."
“What we're seeing right now is a sea change in the quality of justice afforded to immigrants in America.
- Cardozo law professor Peter Markowitz
Still, the launch of the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project comes months after the Obama administration introduced a new policy in April that provides "qualified representatives to detainees who are deemed mentally incompetent to represent themselves in immigration proceedings."
A Ripple Effect
Dana Leigh Marks, president of the National Association of Immigration Judges, says the pilot program in New York is "long overdue." After serving on the San Francisco Immigration Court for more than two decades, she says the more lawyers, the better.
"It's helpful to have lawyers involved in the process because this is such a complicated area of the law. It's just that simple," Marks says.
The federal court system is currently overburdened with a large backlog of immigration cases. Part of the reason, she says, is a ripple effect of unrepresented or misguided appeals.
"We are not where the case ends. People then can appeal it to the Board of Immigration Appeals, to the Circuit Court of Appeals, and even ultimately sometimes go to the U.S. Supreme Court," she says.
Organizers of the pilot program argue in a recent report that public defenders can save time and money for both detainees and taxpayers by ensuring proceedings move along efficiently and shortening detentions.
A Lawyer And 'An Angel'
Jose Antonio Rico is one of its first test cases taken on by the public defender program. Rico's mother, Brunilda Fontanillas, says she and her son couldn't afford a private attorney after he was detained in October following an earlier landlord-tenant dispute that escalated into an arrest.
"The court helped find my son not only a lawyer but an angel," Fontanillas says in Spanish.
As a lawful permanent resident who has lived in the U.S. for decades, Rico may be eligible to avoid deportation back to the Dominican Republic, according to Rico's attorney Ruben Loyo of Brooklyn Defender Services.
Of the 41 detainees represented by public defenders in the pilot program's first month, 17 so far have accepted orders for deportation.
Jennifer Friedman, who manages the immigration attorneys at the Bronx Defenders, says the public defenders have encountered more clients anxious to accept removal orders than they expected.
While it "doesn't feel good" to represent clients accepting deportation, Friedman says she and her team take comfort in helping detainees make "empowered" decisions.
"Each one of those people who took a removal order sat down and had a lengthy conversation with an attorney before they made that decision," she says.
Source
Calls Renewed for Charter School Regulations
The Philadelphia Tribune - December 12, 2014, by Wilford Shamlin -A new report calls for tighter regulations of Philadelphia charter schools, concluding wasteful spending at the privately managed...
The Philadelphia Tribune - December 12, 2014, by Wilford Shamlin -A new report calls for tighter regulations of Philadelphia charter schools, concluding wasteful spending at the privately managed schools costs a yearly average of more than $1.5 million of taxpayers’ money, and more than $30 million since 1997.
“Pennsylvania lawmakers have not given oversight bodies the tools they need to detect that fraud and stop it early,” according to a report prepared by three nonprofit agencies, ACTION United, The Center For Popular Democracy, and Integrity In Education.
The three groups are part of the umbrella group, Philly Coalition Advocating for Public Schools (PCAPS), which continued to seek greater oversight of privately managed charter schools that are publicly funded like their district-run counterparts. The group’s members delivered copies of its findings and recommendations this week to the state Attorney General’s Office and the Philadelphia School Reform Commission (SRC), which oversees the city’s public school system.
ACTION United, which has criticized the school district for policies and practices it deems unfair, reported no significant action on the 20-page report released in September. The renewed push for increased regulations on charter schools comes as the state-controlled commission ended its seven-year ban on considering new charter school applications in an effort to control operating costs.
The Philadelphia Federation of Teachers union wants the moratorium reinstated until measures are taken to increase charter school regulation and improve transparency. The state Legislature required the school district to start considering new charter school applications as a condition to receive a sales tax on cigarette packs sold in Philadelphia.
Local activists and educators called for the state Attorney General’s Office to investigate whether all charter schools have appropriate levels of internal controls and policies to prevent fraud. Oversight agencies have inadequate resources to maintain staff needed to assess fraud and conduct targeted audits.
The nonprofit organization asked 62 charter schools to provide details about fraud prevention practices, but about half of the respondents replied and only four school districts had adequate fraud prevention practices on the books.
Earlier this week, the group called for providing additional funding to the SRC for improving oversight of fraud risk management practices in all publicly funded schools. They made calls for more leadership from the governor’s office, and for granting authority to city or county controllers to assess fraud risk and conduct audits of school district’s finances.
There are only two auditors for the school district, with more than 200 public schools. And implementation of charter school fraud risk management programs has been lacking in publicly funded schools and fraudulent activities aren’t typically exposed by the type of audits that are conducted, according to PCAPS.
“General auditing techniques alone don’t uncover fraud,” according to the report.
Source
National Poll Shows Overwhelming Support for Reigning in Charter Schools
02.29.2016
Washington, D.C.—As the number of charter schools continues to rise, few states are paying adequate attention to how to hold these schools accountable to...
02.29.2016
Washington, D.C.—As the number of charter schools continues to rise, few states are paying adequate attention to how to hold these schools accountable to parents, communities, and taxpayers. Now, new poll results released today by In the Public Interest and the Center for Popular Democracy (CPD) show that Americans embrace proposals to reform the way charter schools are authorized and managed.
The poll shows overwhelming national support for initiatives to strengthen charter school accountability and transparency, improve teacher training and qualifications, prevent fraud, serve high-need students, and ensure that neighborhood public schools are not adversely affected.
“A severe lack of public oversight and real accountability has created what are essentially two separate school districts in many places, each competing for students and funding,” said Donald Cohen, Executive Director of In the Public Interest. “This is increasing inequality in public education, and these results confirm that parents and communities want to fix that.”
The poll’s key findings include:
Overwhelming majorities, as high as 92%, back proposals to strengthen transparency and accountability, improve teacher training and qualifications, implement anti-fraud measures, ensure high-need students are served, and make sure neighborhood public schools are not adversely affected.
92% of voters support requiring companies and organizations that manage charter schools to open board meetings to parents and the public.
90% of voters support requiring companies and organizations that manage charter schools to release to parents and the public how they spend taxpayer money.
“School choice” ranks last in a list of the biggest concerns voters have for K-12 education, with only 8% listing it as a concern.
Far more popular than “school choice” or unaccountable charter schools is the concept of community schools, which serve as community hubs, ensuring that every student and their family gets the opportunity to succeed no matter what zip code they live in.
A statewide poll of Colorado voters showed that 69% rate the quality of education at public schools in their neighborhood excellent or good—an even higher percentage than those that feel that way nationally. Colorado voters also overwhelmingly support proposals to reform the way charter schools are authorized and managed.
The national poll of 1,000 registered voters was conducted by GBA Strategies January 5-11, 2016 on behalf of In the Public Interest and CPD. A memo detailing the poll can be found here. The statewide poll of 500 registered voters in Colorado was conducted January 10-13, 2016. A memo detailing the Colorado poll can be found here.
Kyle Serrette, Director of Education at CPD, said, “State lawmakers have created charter laws without meaningful oversight provisions. The result? Over $100 million in taxpayer dollars have been lost to fraud, waste, or mismanagement by charter officials and over 100 thousand children currently attend charter schools that are failing to meet the needs of children. It’s time for lawmakers to add stronger oversight provisions before more money is lost and more children are enrolled in failing charter schools.”
For more information on the poll results, please contact Jeremy Mohler at jmohler@inthepublicinterest.org or 202-429-5091, or Asya Pikovsky at apikovsky@populardemocracy.org or 207-522-2442.
In the Public Interest is a research and policy center committed to promoting the values, vision, and agenda for the common good and democratic control of public goods and services.
The Center for Popular Democracy (CPD) 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
###
Contacts:
Jeremy Mohler, jmohler@inthepublicinterest.org, 202-429-5091
Asya Pikovsky, apikovsky@populardemocracy.org, 207-522-2442
Longtime legal residents aim for citizenship
Somos was one of 14 organizations nationwide to win the nonpartisan grant from Cities for Citizenship, a national initiative aimed at increasing citizenship among eligible U.S. permanent residents...
Somos was one of 14 organizations nationwide to win the nonpartisan grant from Cities for Citizenship, a national initiative aimed at increasing citizenship among eligible U.S. permanent residents and encouraging cities to invest in citizenship programs. The organization site says it is chaired by New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, with support from the Center for Popular Democracy and the National Partnership for New Americans. Citi Community Development is the founding corporate partner.
Read the full article here.
Watch the video for Death Cab For Cutie's new anti-Donald Trump song Read more at http://www.nme.com/news/death-cab-for-cutie/97016#EkDo9zizovyxV1uy.99
Watch the video for Death Cab For Cutie's new anti-Donald Trump song Read more at http://www.nme.com/news/death-cab-for-cutie/97016#EkDo9zizovyxV1uy.99
Death Cab For Cutie have released a new anti-Donald Trump song.
The track, 'Million Dollar Loan', is one of 30 tracks being released over the next 30 days in the...
Death Cab For Cutie have released a new anti-Donald Trump song.
The track, 'Million Dollar Loan', is one of 30 tracks being released over the next 30 days in the final run in to the US Presidential election. Watch the video below.
Other artists who will feature on the anti-Trump '30 Days, 30 Songs' compilation, include My Morning Jacket’s Jim James, Aimee Mann and Thao Nguyen. A previously unreleased live track by R.E.M will also feature.
"Lyrically, 'Million Dollar Loan' deals with a particularly tone deaf moment in Donald Trump's ascent to the Republican nomination,” said Death Cab For Cutie frontman Ben Gibbard. "While campaigning in New Hampshire last year, he attempted to cast himself as a self-made man by claiming he built his fortune with just a 'small loan of a million dollars' from his father. Not only has this statement been proven to be wildly untrue, he was so flippant about it. It truly disgusted me.
“Donald Trump has repeatedly demonstrated that he is unworthy of the honour and responsibility of being President of the United States of America, and in no way, shape or form represents what this country truly stands for. He is beneath us."
You can purchase 'Million Dollar Loan' here. All of 30 Days’ proceeds will go to the Center for Popular Democracy and their efforts toward Universal Voter Registration in America.
Earlier today (October 10), the music world reacted to the second US Presidential town hall debate with Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
By DAMIAN JONES
Source
Scarlett Johansson and Her Fellow Avengers Raise $500,000 for Puerto Rico Relief
Scarlett Johansson and Her Fellow Avengers Raise $500,000 for Puerto Rico Relief
Johansson and the John Gore Organization partnered for a benefit performance of Our Town in Atlanta.
...
Johansson and the John Gore Organization partnered for a benefit performance of Our Town in Atlanta.
Read the full article here.
8 months ago
15 hours ago