Campaign News

World Journal - November 8, 2013, by Luohui Qi - New York City this summer from the city council was set aside $ 500,000 to establish the nation's first publicly-provided legal assistance to undocumented immigrants pilot program, called "Project New York immigrant family reunification" (New York Immigrant Family Unity Project), the project officially launched this week. Multiple agencies involved in advocacy on the 7th released the latest report noted that such projects be extended to the whole of New York, an annual savings of up to 5.9 million yuan for the government's detention and deportation of undocumented immigrants hidden costs.

Non-profit agencies involved in advocating for one year, "the New York immigrant family reunification program" includes mass democracy Center (Center for Popular Democracy), the North Manhattan Immigrant Rights Coalition (Northern Manhatttan Coalition forImmigration Rights), make New York the road, "Make the Road New York "and the Cardozo School of Law (Cardozo School of Law) Greenberg Immigration Justice Research Institute (Kathryn O. Greenberg Immigration Justice Clinic). They published the 7th "New York immigrant family reunion project: suitable for families, suitable employer for all New Yorkers." (The New York Immigrant Family Unity Project: Good for Families, Good for Employers, and Good for All New Yorkers) reports.

The report notes that the project is indeed a legal advisory network, funding of $ 500,000 per year is expected to be about 1,800 low-income, detained and facing deportation of undocumented immigration services to provide basic legal assistance to them, such as translation, social workers and investigation. Record lawyers seeking assistance from immigration court objects, such as the case during the trial, the defendant meets the conditions and requirements of the project, these people will get the initiative to contact a lawyer.

The report also pointed out that due to the state capital every year detention and deportation of undocumented immigrants spend 13.4 million yuan, such as the annual 7.4 million yuan invested in the project - the state's taxpayers liable only 0.78 yuan per share, will be able to save 5.9 million spending. These agencies believe that now that the project has commenced, with the report was published, the project will increase the likelihood of expansion. These institutions will share the report with state officials and other analysis to allow more undocumented immigrants and their families can get equal treatment before the law.

Salon - May 7, 2014, by Paul Rosenberg - Just in time for National Charter School Week, there’s a new report highlighting the predictable perils of turning education into a poorly regulated business. Titled “Charter School Vulnerabilities to Waste, Fraud and Abuse,” the report focused on 15 states representing large charter markets, out of the 42 states that have charter schools. Drawing on news reports, criminal complaints, regulatory findings, audits and other sources, it “found fraud, waste and abuse cases totaling over $100 million in losses to taxpayers,” but warned that due to inadequate oversight, “the fraud and mismanagement that has been uncovered thus far might be just the tip of the iceberg.”

While there are plenty of other troubling issues surrounding charter schools — from high rates of racial segregation, to their lackluster overall performance records, to questionable admission and expulsion practices — this report sets all those admittedly important issues aside to focus squarely on activity that appears it could be criminal, and arguably totally out of control. It does not even mention questions raised by sky-high salaries paid to some charter CEOs, such as 16 New York City charter school CEOs who earned more than the head of the city’s public school system in 2011-12. Crime, not greed, is the focus here.

In short, the report is about as apolitical as can be imagined: It is narrowly focused on a white-collar crime wave of staggering proportions, and what can be done about it within the existing framework of widespread charter schools.

The report, co-authored by the Center for Popular Democracy and Integrity in Education, makes the point that the problem of charter school waste, fraud and abuse, which it focuses on, is just one symptom of the underlying problem: inadequate regulation of charter schools. But it’s a massive symptom, which has so far received only fragmentary coverage.The report takes its title from a section of a report to Congress by the Department of Education’s Office of the Inspector General, a report that took note of “a steady increase in the number of charter school complaints” and warned that state level agencies were failing “to provide adequate oversight needed to ensure that Federal funds [were] properly used and accounted for.”

But, the report noted, it’s not just the federal government that should be concerned. Reform efforts are underway in several states; Hawaii even repealed its existing charter school law in 2013, and put strict new oversight measures in place, and “Even the Walton Family Foundation, an avid charter advocate, launched a $5 million campaign in 2012 to make oversight of charters schools more stringent.”

“We expected to find a fair amount of fraud when we began this project, but we did not expect to find over $100 million in taxpayer dollars lost,” said Kyle Serrette, the director of education justice at the Center for Popular Democracy. “That’s just in 15 states. And that figure fails to capture the real harm to children. Clearly, we should hit the pause button on charter expansion until there is a better oversight system in place to protect our children and our communities.”

The report explained that the problem has its roots in a historical disconnect between the original intentions that launched the charter school movement and the commercial forces that have overtaken it since. At first, the report noted:

Lawmakers created charter schools to allow educators to explore new methods and models of teaching. To allow this to happen, they exempted the schools from the vast majority of regulations governing the traditional public school system. The goal was to incubate innovations that could then be used to improve public schools. i The ability to take calculated risks with small populations of willing teachers, parents, and students was the original design. With so few people and schools involved, the risk to participants and the public was relatively low.

But the character of the movement has changed dramatically since then. As charter school growth has skyrocketed (doubling three times since 2000), “the risks are high and growing, while the benefits are less clear,” the report continued, adding:

This is not an uncommon occurrence in our nation’s history. In the past—in some cases, our very recent past—industries such as banking and lending have outgrown their respective regulatory safety nets. Without sufficient regulations to ensure true public accountability, incompetent and/or unethical individuals and firms can (and have) inflict great harm on communities.

The report found that “charter operator fraud and mismanagement is endemic to the vast majority of states that have passed a charter school law.” It organized the abuse into six basic categories, each of which is treated in its own section:

• Charter operators using public funds illegally for personal gain; • School revenue used to illegally support other charter operator businesses; • Mismanagement that puts children in actual or potential danger; • Charters illegally requesting public dollars for services not provided; • Charter operators illegally inflating enrollment to boost revenues; and, • Charter operators mismanaging public funds and schools.

Perhaps most disturbingly, under the first category, crooked charter school officials displayed a wide range of lavish, compulsive or tawdry tastes. Examples include:

• Joel Pourier, former CEO of Oh Day Aki Heart Charter School in Minnesota, who embezzled $1.38 million from 2003 to 2008. He used the money on houses, cars, and trips to strip clubs. Meanwhile, according to an article in the Star Tribune, the school “lacked funds for field trips, supplies, computers and textbooks.”

• Nicholas Trombetta, founder of the Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School is accused of diverting funds from it for his private purchases. He allegedly bought houses, a Florida Condominium and a $300,000 plane, hid income from the IRS, formed businesses that billed even though they had done no work, and took $550,000 in kickbacks for a laptop computer contract.

• A regular financial audit in 2009 of the Langston Hughes Academy in New Orleans uncovered theft of $660,000 by Kelly Thompson, the school’s business manager. Thompson admitted that from shortly after she assumed the position until she was fired 15 months later, she diverted funds to herself in order to support her gambling in local casinos.

Others spent their stolen money on everything from a pair of jet skis for $18,000 to combined receipts of $228 for cigarettes and beer, to over $30,000 on personal items from Lord & Taylor, Saks Fifth Avenue, Louis Vuitton, Coach and Tommy Hilfiger. But the real damage came from the theft of resources for children’s future.

“Our school system exists to serve students and enrich communities,” said Sabrina Stevens, executive director of Integrity in Education. “School funding is too scarce as it is; we can hardly afford to waste the resources we do have on people who would prioritize exotic vacations over school supplies or food for children. We also can’t continue to rely on the media or isolated whistle-blowers to identify these problems. We need to have rules in place that can systematically weed out incompetent or unscrupulous charter operators before they pose a risk to students and taxpayers.”

Stevens was not just expressing a nebulous hope. The report also offered a set of proposals on how to go about reining in the abuses. Initial suggestions on how to respond to each kind of abuse are presented in each of the six areas mentioned above, but there is also a comprehensive framework integrating them into a coherent whole.

The report’s first proposal is that all states should establish an oversight “Office of Charter Schools.” It “should have the statutory responsibility, authority, and resources to investigate fraud, waste, mismanagement and misconduct,” including the authority to refer findings for prosecution. It should have “an appropriate level of staffing” so that “The ratio of charter schools to full-time investigators employed by the Office should not exceed ten to one.” It should have the power to place distribution of charter school funds on hold. And it should have the authority to intervene in funding or other decisions made by charter authorizing entities if they are violating state or federal law.

A second proposal is that states amend their charter laws to “explicitly declare that charter schools are public schools, and are subject to the same non-discrimination and transparency requirements as are other publicly funded schools.”

A third proposal is to require public online availability of each charter school’s original application and charter agreement.

Not surprisingly, a number of proposals target those running charter schools. Specifically, regarding charter school governing board members, the report proposes: 1) Require them to live in close proximity to the school/s physical location. 2) Require boards to be elected “with representation of parents (elected by parents), teachers (elected by teachers) and in the case of high schools, students (elected by students).” Other board members should be “residents of the school district in which the school/s operate.” 3) Require board members to file full financial disclosure and conflict-of-interest reports, similar to those required of traditional school district board members — and post them online on the school’s website. 4) Hold board members legally liable for fraud or malfeasance occurring at the school or schools that they oversee.

More broadly, charter schools — and the oversight entities that authorize them — should be publicly transparent in the following ways: 1) A full list of each charter school’s governing board members, officers and administrators with affiliation and contact information should be available on the school’s website. 2) Minutes from governing board meetings, the school’s policies, and information about staff should be available on the school’s website. 3) Charter schools should be fully compliant with state open meetings/open records laws. 4) Charter school financial documents should be publicly disclosed annually, on the authorizer’s website, including detailed information about the use of both public and private funds by the school and its management entities. 5) Charter schools should be independently audited annually, with audits published on the school’s websites. 6) All vendor or service contracts over $25,000 should be fully disclosed. No such contracts should be allowed with any entity in which the school operator, or any board member, has any personal interest.

If most of these sound like simple common sense, that’s pretty much just the point. There are plenty of issues around education that are controversial. Protecting ourselves, our children and their future against a massive white-collar crime wave should not be one of them.

Source

Wall Street Journal - December 11, 2014, by Pedro Nicolaci da Costa - A group of left-leaning activists is taking aim at the process for selecting the presidents of the Federal Reserve‘s 12 regional banks, saying it lacks sufficient transparency and public input.

Philadelphia Fed President Charles Plosser and Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher have announced they will retire next year and both district banks are conducting searches for successors. The two men have been critics of the central bank’s prolonged low-rates policies, saying they aren’t doing very much to boost employment or growth.

Federal law dictates the process for choosing the regional presidents. They are picked by a subset of the banks’ boards of directors, with approval from the Fed’s Washington-based board of governors. The regional bank boards include bankers, business executives and some community representatives, but directors from banks supervised by the Fed don’t have a vote in hiring the banks’ presidents.

Commercial banks that are members of the Fed system own the stock of their district’s reserve bank and elect most of its directors. Remaining directors are appointed by the Fed board in Washington.

The activist group, led by the Center for Popular Democracy, a national nonprofit organization, said it is in talks with the Dallas Fed about increasing transparency in its selection process and is planning a march in Philadelphia from Constitution Hall to the Philadelphia Fed on Monday. Members of the group plan to hold a press conference outside the regional Fed bank like the one they held in Washington in November, at which community members and leaders will tell some of their stories.

The appointments are “too important to be done behind closed doors, too important to be dominated by financial and corporate interests,” said Ady Barkan, a staff attorney at the center.

“We are concerned there is not going to be enough community and public engagement,” Mr. Barkan said. “Corporate and financial elites already have tremendous influence over monetary policy and interest rates. The Fed should also listen to the tens of millions of working families who are not experiencing a recovery.”

The Fed board, the Dallas Fed and the Philadelphia Fed declined to comment.

In response to the activists’ concerns, voiced during a conversation with Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen in November, the central bank has just published a new list of “frequently asked questions” about the regional president selection process.

Kendra Brooks, a member of Action United in Philadelphia, a community organizing group, said she and others have met with some officials at the Philadelphia Fed, but have yet to be granted a meeting they’ve requested with Mr. Plosser or received an answer to their offer to take top officials around local communities.

“We’re hoping we can push them a little harder about allowing a meeting or taking a tour of their communities,” said Ms. Brooks.

Her story is an all-too-familiar one in the Great Recession of 2007-09. Having lost a 15-year job as a program director at Easter Seals, a nonprofit that helps people with disabilities, Ms. Brooks, 42 years old, said it took her a year and a half to find work again—and she now makes just half what she used to. She also lost her home to a foreclosure.

Fed governors are appointed by the U.S. president, subject to Senate confirmation. They all are voting members of the central bank’s powerful policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee.

The New York Fed president is the vice chairman of the FOMC and a permanent voting member. The other 11 presidents vote on a rotating basis. The presidents run the regional Fed banks, which supervise the private banks in their districts. The presidents also move markets and influence Fed policy through their public remarks.

The center organized activists to appear at the Kansas City Fed’s exclusive annual conference in Jackson Hole, Wyo., in August. They argued the Fed should not start raising its benchmark short-term interest rate from near zero until the labor market improves more.

U.S. unemployment has fallen to 5.8%, historically elevated but much lower than postrecession peaks. Some policy makers worry that number masks pockets of weakness including a large number of workers who are only working part-time because they cannot find full time jobs.

Many investors and top Fed officials expect the first rate increase in the middle of next year.

Source

By Greenpeace

In the final day of a record-setting week of civil disobedience at the Capitol, more than 300 people were arrested Monday as they demanded democracy reforms.

Yesterday's arrests came on the third and final day of Democracy Awakening. Combined with arrests made during the recent Democracy Spring, the protests constituted what organizers believe is a record for civil disobedience over democracy issues during this century.

The message: On voting rights, money in politics and the recent vacancy on U.S. Supreme Court, Congress is failing to do its job and ignoring the will of the people. Democracy Awakening isn't the end of something, but the beginning of a new phase in the movement for democracy, organizers said.

Those who planned to risk arrest included NAACP president and CEO Cornell William Brooks; the Rev. William Barber II, pastor and Moral Monday architect; radio commentator Jim Hightower; Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, co-founders of Ben and Jerry's; Greenpeace Executive Director Annie Leonard; and Sierra Club President Aaron Mair.

Here's what they had to say about why they risked arrest at our nation's Capitol:

"I'm willing to risk arrest, arm in arm with partners from the civil rights and the labor movements, in order to help fix our democracy," Leonard said. "We will never get the kind of political progress needed to challenge climate change and systemic racism if corporate cash continues to mean more to politicians than the voices of the people."

"Democracy is supposed to be for all of us, but right now we have an out-of-balance system favoring the interests of big money," Cohen said. "This can't go on. I'm prepared to risk arrest to send a message that democracy should truly be of, by, and for the people."

"At a certain point, you have to say enough is enough," Greenfield said. "I have decided to risk arrest because we can't continue to have a political system where ordinary people are shut out of the process. It's not what our founders envisioned, and it's not what democracy is supposed to be about."

"We cannot sit by and watch obstructionists push an agenda of inequity, injustice and inaction -- and I'm willing to risk being arrested in order to make my voice heard in in the fight to ensure that every voice can be heard in our democracy," Mair said. "All too often, the costs of these assaults on our democracy fall on low-income communities and communities of color that already face disproportionate effects from pollution and the climate crisis. A zip code should never dictate the destiny of any American citizen."

Thousands of activists from around the country streamed into the nation's capital April 16-18 for Democracy Awakening, which featured teach-ins, a rally, a march and lobbying as well as the civil disobedience. The aim: to fight back against business as usual in Washington, DC.

More than 300 organizations endorsed Democracy Awakening. Democracy Awakening is part of a broad movement aimed at advancing democracy reforms. The mobilization began April 2, with Democracy Spring, an event that featured a march from Philadelphia to Washington D.C., followed by six days of sit-ins at the Capitol.

Others who planned to risk arrest included top leaders of the AFL-CIO, All Souls Unitarian Church, the American Federation of Government Employees, the American Postal Workers Union, Campaign for America's Future, Democracy Initiative, Center for Popular Democracy, Communications Workers of America, Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, Every Voice, Food & Water Watch, Franciscan Action Network, Free Speech for People, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Jobs With Justice, the Metropolitan African Methodist Episcopal Church; the NAACP, Oil Change International, Public Citizen, Sierra Club, the United Church of Christ, the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, We Are Casa, the Yes Men and 350.org.

Source