2020 Democrats Band Together To Call For Puerto Rico Debt Cancellation
2020 Democrats Band Together To Call For Puerto Rico Debt Cancellation
Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy, welcomed the legislation. “The vast...
Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy, welcomed the legislation. “The vast majority of Puerto Rican debt is owned by actors who invested knowing full well that Puerto Rico could not pay,” she said. “There’s no way for Puerto Rico to recover if it has to use public money to pay hedge funds.”
Read the full article here.
New York's vote to curb stop-and-frisk is another win for civil rights
The Guardian - June 27, 2013, by Brittny Saunders - New York City Council passed two bills designed to guarantee safety...
The Guardian - June 27, 2013, by Brittny Saunders - New York City Council passed two bills designed to guarantee safety and respect for all New Yorkers. The measures were championed by Communities United for Police Reform, a broad coalition of city groups, and will strengthen the existing ban on police profiling and establish independent oversight of the city's police department.
Today is a new day for New York City. The move reflects a growing alarm over NYPD policies and practices that violate the rights of thousands of New Yorkers and undermine police-community relationships – practices such as the discriminatory use of stop-and-frisk that waste valuable public dollars, while producing no measurable impact on public safety.
Criticism is mounting, not only in the council, but also in federal court, where the legality of these practices is being questioned. Those same questions are echoed in the homes of regular New Yorkers – a majority of whom disapprove of stop-and-frisk and two-thirds of whom support independent oversight of the department. The message is clear: it's time for New York City to turn away from an approach to policing that results in countless rights violations each year, while doing little to reduce crime, according to an analysis by the Center for Constitutional Rights.
The bills passed by city council respond to increasing evidence that in too many cases the department has substituted stereotyping for real police work. A study by the New York Civil Liberties Union found that in 2011, for example, 41.6% of all New Yorkers stopped by the NYPD were black and Latino men between the ages of 14 and 24 years old, despite the fact that that these groups make up a mere 4.7% of the city's population. The department has continued to defend these discriminatory tactics, despite evidence that they do not even succeed on their own terms, failing to take guns off the street or to significantly reduce crime. In more than 99% of all 2011 stops, for example, no gun was retrieved. And in the first three months of 2013, crime dropped, even as stops also tapered, undermining the department's claim that stop-and-frisk is responsible for the city's lowered crime rate.
All of this suggests that the department's continued reliance on discriminatory tactics is not about what it takes to actually keep all New Yorkers (and those visiting the city) safe. Instead, it is about what it takes to convince some in New York City's whiter, wealthier communities that the administration and the department are serious about public safety.
For too long, too many city leaders have accepted discriminatory policing tactics on the assumption that the costs borne by the New Yorkers who are targeted are outweighed by the benefits enjoyed by communities that are not singled out for unlawful and abusive treatment. But the truth is the NYPD's discriminatory policies and practices have indirect negative impacts on all who live in the city, including its white residents. They allow the NYPD to substitute crude and ineffective strategies – like stopping New Yorkers on the basis of their race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or gender expression – for the sophisticated police work one might expect from the nation's largest local law enforcement agency. In the process, they position NYPD officers as adversaries instead of allies of many of the communities they are charged with protecting, reducing willingness to report crime and making all New Yorkers less safe.
It is becoming increasingly apparent, then, that the costs of massive spending on ineffective policing strategies extend beyond those borne by the individuals who are unlawfully targeted in the streets each day. But the most powerful argument for increased NYPD accountability has nothing to do with financial costs and benefits and everything to do with what we, as New Yorkers, allow to be done in our names. And it is about staying true to the city's own legacy of innovation and the conviction that here – if nowhere else – we can find a way to keep everyone safe without sacrificing anyone's rights.
City Council made an important choice today. They stopped endorsing a set of NYPD policies and practices that are discriminatory, ineffective and wasteful. They chose instead to guarantee safety and respect across the boroughs. The choices that they and other city leaders will make in the coming weeks, months and years as these bills are enacted and implemented will have a lasting impact on New York City and hopefully set a better example for cities across the country.
Source
Falciani celebra que siete directivos del Santander declaren en la Audiencia Nacional por blanqueo
Falciani celebra que siete directivos del Santander declaren en la Audiencia Nacional por blanqueo
El ex informático del banco suizo HSBC, Hervé Falciani, que destapó los nombres de presuntos evasores fiscales en...
El ex informático del banco suizo HSBC, Hervé Falciani, que destapó los nombres de presuntos evasores fiscales en bancos helvéticos, ha celebrado que siete directivos del Banco Santander estén citados a declarar en la Audiencia Nacional por un delito de blanqueo de capitales, ya que, según ha dicho, "cada día hay ejemplos similares en otros países".
Lea el artículo completo aquí.
Progressive Group Sues Fed, Seeking Information on Presidential Selection
Progressive Group Sues Fed, Seeking Information on Presidential Selection
The left-leaning Center for Popular Democracy on Wednesday filed a lawsuit in federal court against the Federal Reserve...
The left-leaning Center for Popular Democracy on Wednesday filed a lawsuit in federal court against the Federal Reserve, seeking to shine light on the central bank’s president selection process.
The lawsuit, filed under the Freedom of Information Act, is a product of the “Fed Up” campaign to strip private bankers’ influence from the Fed’s top rungs and increase transparency in its leadership selection. The suit was filed after the Fed ignored a FOIA request filed in August seeking information on president selections in 2015 and 2016, the group said.
“The leaders of the twelve Reserve Banks are among the most powerful and influential actors in shaping the nation’s monetary policies, yet the process by which they are chosen is completely non-transparent,” the group wrote in the complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
The lawsuit comes as Dennis Lockhart, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, prepares to leave the bank in February.
“The public has a right to obtain records about how the Federal Reserve’s leaders are selected, and there is no justification for the Fed’s withholding of basic information about its governance,” said Connie Chan, an attorney representing Fed Up, in a statement. “The fact that Fed Up has to bring this FOIA lawsuit is itself further evidence of the Fed’s lack of transparency.”
By Tara Jeffries
Source
Who’s running our schools anyway?
After reading about Gov. Walker’s plan to close some Green Bay public schools and replace them with charters, I’m...
After reading about Gov. Walker’s plan to close some Green Bay public schools and replace them with charters, I’m beginning to believe the takeover of our public schools by big business and legislators like Walker is proceeding very well.
They say our public schools are failing. That’s not fully true. Some are, but it’s because of poverty. We don’t fund them adequately to overcome student poverty-related problems.
No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, and Common Core were composed and implemented by Bill Gates and other member of the 1 percent without input from parents, teachers of early childhood students and early education experts.
The educational expectations, of especially very young children, are causing children great stress, enough to make them throw up, cry and get sick. The standardized testing by Pearson (a British multinational corporation) is a hoax. It has no background in education or teaching children. Its record of mistakes in the test questions, correcting tests, and delivering them on time is dismal.
I remember in the ’70s standardized testing was dropped all over the country because the tests were considered an inaccurate method of measuring the whole learning process. They basically measure memorization. Now they’re back and they’re quick, inaccurate and expensive.
The complaint of parents, teachers, children and administrators are growing louder because of excessive homework. Health care professionals are saying the stress of overburdening students causing sleeping problems is unhealthy. The curriculum being used now relies on demand-and-push as a method of teaching. I call it abusive because that method doesn’t respect the personhood of the student who becomes a yes person, not a creator.
In my teaching experience, I found children love to learn if they are presented with material they are mentally, physically and developmentally ready for.
We had a school in De Pere called the Wisconsin International School. It left with very little notice to parents and children. Teachers were out paychecks. A friend lost nearly $1,000 she paid as a retainer fee for the next year. They are suing but to little avail.
A year ago, the Center for Popular Democracy issued a report demonstrating “charter schools in 15 states ... had experienced over $100 million in reported fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement. Now there are millions of new alleged and confirmed cases of financial waste, fraud, and mismanagement reported.”
But we don’t yet have the necessary law to protect us from dishonesty in charter schools. How come?
Sen. Dave Hansen said, “Wisconsin taxpayers cannot afford to pay for two systems, much less a system of private schools that are not held accountable for providing their students quality education.”
We need our public schools to care for all our students. Finland, a world leader in education, manages it with great success.
Peggy Burns of Green Bay has a bachelor’s degree in kindergarten-primary education, a master’s degree in elementary eduction and 24 graduate credits in early childhood/educational exceptional needs.
Source: Green Bay Press Gazette
Nancy Pelosi, N.Y. pols rip GOP tax plan at Queens teach-in
"When we look at this bill, it’s really a thinly veiled $1.5 trillion attempt to take away people’s health care, to...
"When we look at this bill, it’s really a thinly veiled $1.5 trillion attempt to take away people’s health care, to stop funding schools, to sell off our nation’s infrastructure. That’s really what’s happening,” Charles Khan, with the Community and Labor Coalition and the Center for Popular Democracy, told the crowd at the All Saints Episcopal Church.
Read the full article here.
After the Las Vegas Shooting, Taking on Myths About Gun Control
After the Las Vegas Shooting, Taking on Myths About Gun Control
Nearly 60 people were killed and more than 500 injured in the worst mass shooting in modern US history on Sunday night...
Nearly 60 people were killed and more than 500 injured in the worst mass shooting in modern US history on Sunday night, early Monday morning in Las Vegas at a concert. As details are still emerging about the suspected shooter, we’ll take on the issue of gun control and the myths of the gun industry with Dennis Henigan. Then, we’ll turn to the situation in Puerto Rico. Samy Olivares of the Center for Popular Democracy will give us a report on the on-going slow-motion disaster unfolding in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria and how mainland Americans can help. Finally, author George Monbiot joins us from London to discuss his new book Out of the Wreckage: A New Politics for an Age of Crisis. Hosted by Sonali Kolhatkar.
Listen to the story here.
Letter: Gorsuch wrong for Supreme Court
As a faith leader deeply involved in the lives of working people, I understand the impact that the nation’s highest...
As a faith leader deeply involved in the lives of working people, I understand the impact that the nation’s highest court can have on our daily lives. We need a Supreme Court Justice committed to protecting the rights of all people. The more I learn about Neil Gorsuch, confirmed by the Senate on Friday, the more convinced I am that he is not that justice...
Read full article here.
Fed officials tell activists rate hikes won't derail economy
An unusually large group of Federal Reserve policymakers appeared before activists on Thursday and defended their plans...
An unusually large group of Federal Reserve policymakers appeared before activists on Thursday and defended their plans to raise interest rates to keep the U.S. economy from eventually overheating.
Several policymakers said raising interest rates gradually would allow them to stimulate the economy for longer, but that an overheating economy could end in a recession.
"It's not about trying to stop the economy from growing," San Francisco Fed President John Williams told about 100 labor activists from the Fed Up coalition who pressed policymakers not to raise interest rates. "We're going to keep this economy growing, we are going to run it hot."
"My objective is not to slow down the economy," said Kansas City Fed President Esther George, who organized the meeting ahead of the annual central banking conference in Jackson Hole, Wyoming.
Fed policymakers have yet to decide when to raise rates again after lifting them in December for the first time in nearly a decade. Policymakers are divided whether to hike soon or take a more cautious approach.
A core group of Fed policymakers, the Board governors, are currently debating what is going on in the U.S. economy and how to set policy, Fed Vice Chair Stanley Fischer told the meeting.
"Everything that's being argued here is being argued in the board as well," Fischer said.
Much of the public commentary of Fed officials in recent weeks suggests the central bank is moving closer to a hike.
But the activists, who met with 11 Fed policymakers, used catcalls and applause to signal they were not buying it.
Years of lackluster wage gains and underemployment have left many Americans feeling left out of the country's economic recovery despite a 4.9 percent jobless rate.
Raising rates at this point in the recovery, said Rod Adams of Minneapolis, means "You'll be leaving us behind, pulling up the ladder right after you've climbed it."
The meeting, billed by organizers as a polite "listening session" for exchanging ideas, turned out to be a tough grilling for the Fed policymakers, who rarely appear in public in such numbers.
Fed officials worry that leaving rates too low for too long could stoke inflation, forcing the Fed to raise rates aggressively.
"One of the key goals should be that we don't have another recession," said Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren.
(Reporting by Ann Saphir and Jason Lange; Editing by Toni Reinhold and Andrew Hay)
By Ann Saphir and Jason Lange
Source
Supreme Court deadlocks on immigration case
Karla Cano faces uncertainty. She had expected to qualify for deferred action under the Obama administration’s...
Karla Cano faces uncertainty. She had expected to qualify for deferred action under the Obama administration’s executive orders on immigration. But a tied decision by the U.S. Supreme Court creates uncertainty for Cano and her family.
“All that is unjust about my situation will continue,” said Cano, 21, a senior at Mount Mary University and the mother of a 2-year-old son.
“I am in college so I can have a career helping others, but I cannot start a career like that without work authorization,” she said. “We just want to help this country and support our families like anyone else.”
The court on June 23 deadlocked on President Barack Obama’s executive actions taken to shield millions living in the United States from deportation.
The 4–4 tie means the next president and a new Congress will determine any change in U.S. immigration policy. The president said the court’s deadlock “takes us further from the country we aspire to be.”
Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee for president, called the court ruling unacceptable and pledged to “do everything possible under the law to go further to protect families.”
The dispute before the eight justices — the case was heard in April, after the death of Antonin Scalia — was over the legality of the administration’s orders creating “deferred action for parents of Americans and lawful permanent residents” or DAPA and expanding “deferred action for childhood arrivals” or DACA.
Basically the actions would have provided protection from deportation and three-year work permits to about 5 million undocumented parents of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, as well as undocumented people who came to the United States before the age of 16.
The president announced the orders in 2014 and, soon after, they were challenged by 26 states led by Republican governors, including Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker.
Federal district and appeals courts sided with the states and said the executive office lacked the authority to issue orders shielding immigrants from deportation.
The high court tie means the appeals court ruling stands. But the ruling in United States v. Texas did not set any landmark standards in the dispute over immigration.
The U.S. Justice Department brought the case to the Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the appeals court decision.
The American Civil Liberties Union was among the many groups to file a friend-of-the-court brief in the case.
Cecillia Wang, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said, the “4–4 tie has a profound impact on millions of American families whose lives will remain in limbo and who will now continue the fight. In setting the DAPA guidelines, President Obama exercised the same prosecutorial discretion his predecessors have wielded without controversy and ultimately the courts should hold that the action was lawful.”
Reaction from the U.S. progressive community was swift and compassionate.
“This split decision deals a severe blow to millions of immigrant families who have already been waiting more than 18 months for the DAPA and DACA programs to be implemented,” said Alianza Americas’ executive director Oscar Chacón. “The cold fact is that millions of parents and children will go to bed tonight knowing once again that their families could be torn apart at any moment.”
At the Center for Popular Democracy, co-executive director Ana Maria Archila said, “If the highest court in the land cannot find a majority for justice and compassion, there is something truly broken in our system of laws, checks and balances.”
In Wisconsin, Voces de la Frontera held news conferences in Green Bay, Madison and in Milwaukee. LULAC, Centro Hispano and the Southside Organizing Committee also were involved.
“This is very sad for me,” said Jose Flores, a factory worker, father of four and also the president of Voces de la Frontera. “I have been waiting and fighting for reform like DAPA for years. But we are not giving up. I refuse ... to shrink back into the shadows.”
Cano, a member of Voces de la Frontera, said, “I am not giving up on the struggle. We need more people to get involved in the upcoming elections, because this decision shows the importance of both the presidential and U.S. congressional elections and whom the next president will nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
BY LISA NEFF
Source
2 months ago
2 months ago