Survey of New Yorkers Show Strong Backing for Paid Family Leave, Stringer and Several Politicos Say
New Yorkers need policies that would help them balance work and family responsibilities, according to a report released...
New Yorkers need policies that would help them balance work and family responsibilities, according to a report released today by New York City Comptroller Scott M. Stringer, in partnership with A Better Balance.
The report, “Families and Flexibility: Building the 21st Century Workplace,” is based on a survey of more than 1,100 New Yorkers working in a broad range of industries and provides a follow up to Comptroller Stringer’s report, “Families and Flexibility,” from June 2014. The online survey, while not scientific, asked workers in all five boroughs about: · The availability of flexible work arrangements; · How comfortable they are requesting flexible schedules; · The need for paid family leave; and · For “shift workers,” the predictability of their work schedules. “No New Yorker should ever have to choose between keeping their job and caring for their family,” said Comptroller Stringer. “With policies like FlexTime, paid family leave, and advanced notification of schedules, we can give workers the tools they need to address their personal and professional responsibilities.” Flexible work arrangements, which allow employees to work outside the traditional 9-to-5 schedule and from locations other than their offices, are one of the most effective ways to help individuals establish a work-life balance. Flexible work arrangements also help businesses boost their bottom line by improving morale and minimizing turnover. But, nearly half of workers surveyed do not have access to flexible work arrangements. Just as troubling, respondents who had requested flexible work arrangements in the past reported that they had experienced missed promotions, negative reviews, and belittling comments. Among respondents without office-wide policies on flexible scheduling: 59% were “uncomfortable” or “very uncomfortable” asking for FlexTime; and 71% said they would be more likely to ask for flexibility if everyone in their workplace had the right to request it. People who did have flexible work arrangements reported that it allowed them to better manage their lives. For example, one respondent was able to complete a Master’s program thanks to FlexTime, while another was able to care for her father during the last six weeks of his life without worrying about losing her job. Comptroller Stringer calls on Congress to pass the Flexibility for Working Families Act and on Albany and City Hall to enact local “right-to-request” laws These laws – which are sponsored by Representative Carolyn Maloney in Congress and Assemblywoman Nily Rozic and State Senator Daniel Squadron in Albany – would create a framework for employees to discuss FlexTime with their bosses without fear of retaliation. “New Yorkers shouldn’t be intimidated or fearful when asking for flexibility in their schedules,” Comptroller Stringer said. “That’s why it is critical that we pass right-to-request legislation which would enable employees to discuss FlexTime without fear of retaliation. New Yorkers should be able to take their son to the doctor, pick their daughter up from school, or care for their elderly parents without having to worry about their jobs.” The Comptroller’s survey also found strong support for paid family leave, which allows new parents to bond with their children and provides support for individuals caring for sick family members: 80% of respondents support a paid family leave system funded by a small employee payroll deduction, as state legislation in Albany has proposed; and 86% support equal amounts of paid family leave for both mothers and fathers. A 2011 study of California’s program by the Center for Economic and Policy Research shows that paid family leave helps employees care for their loved ones, and is also good for business. Over 89% of employers reported it had a “positive effect” or “no noticeable effect” on productivity, profitability, turnover, and employee morale. This legislation, sponsored by Assemblywoman Catherine Nolan and State Senator Joseph Addabbo, Jr., would create a state-wide paid family leave insurance system, which would be funded by a small employee payroll deduction. “Two countries in the world don’t have paid family leave: New Guinea and the United States,” the Comptroller said, referring to a study by the International Labor Organization. “That needs to change. Mothers and fathers should have the opportunity to bond with their newborns, and all workers should be able to care for sick family members without fear of losing their job. While this issue should be addressed at the federal level, we can and must take steps now in Albany to support paid family leave for all New Yorkers.” The survey found that among “shift workers,” whose schedules often change week-to-week, 18% receive their schedule only a day in advance, with some respondents reporting that they often don’t know their schedule until the day of—or even during their shift. This uncertainty prevents workers from scheduling day care for their kids, providing elder care for their loved ones, and furthering their own education. Among these workers: Nearly one-fifth receive their schedules a mere 24-hours before their shift begins; and Almost one-third reported retaliation after requesting schedule changes. “Advance notification of schedules isn’t a perk – it’s a basic necessity for millions of Americans who deserve to know when they need to clock in so that they can plan their lives accordingly,” Stringer said. “Enacting this as standard workplace policy is long overdue." “Now more than ever, so many workers are struggling to juggle the responsibilities of their jobs with the demanding tasks that come with having a family. In a city as high-paced as New York, that battle is only intensified, and no one should be forced to have to ultimately choose between their job and their family. I commend Comptroller Stringer for not only providing us with hard evidence that proves flexible work arrangements really are needed in our city, but for putting forth recommendations that can help us one day make that a reality,” said Senator Addabbo, Jr. “Everyone has the right to strike a balance between work and their personal lives, so they can plan to take care of important issues, including healthcare, education and childcare matters,” added Senator Jose Peralta. “Flexible scheduling creates a win-win scenario for both employers and workers. Employees perform at their best when they are free from the worry of finding time to manage all aspects of their personal and professional lives. I want to thank the City Comptroller Scott Stringer for taking an important step towards facilitating the balance between one’s work schedule and one’s private life.” “With flexible work hours, individuals will no longer have to choose between work and their family,” State Senator Toby Stavisky said. “The Comptroller’s findings show how truly beneficial flexible work arrangements can be, not only for the employee, but employers as well. I applaud Comptroller Stringer for advocating for a better work-life balance for city workers.” "Flexible work schedules are important to allowing parents and families the ability to coordinate and plan," said State Senator Daniel Squadron. "I'm proud to carry legislation giving workers the right to request flexible work schedules, as well as better understand the feasibility of broader implementation, along with Assemblymember Rozic. I thank City Comptroller Stringer and colleagues for continued focus on this issue for families." “Right to Request legislation helps hardworking New Yorkers to negotiate non-traditional hours with their employers in order to accommodate their personal needs and ultimately work more effectively and efficiently. Flexible Work Arrangements benefit employees, businesses, and New York City as a whole, and I am proud to support this legislation,” said Assemblyman Michael DenDekker. “New York is moving towards the economy of the future, but in many ways, we’re still operating under the rules of the workplace of the past,” said Assemblyman Francisco Moya, Chair of the Subcommittee on Workplace Safety. “Flexible work arrangements give workers, especially single working parents and those who care for elderly relatives, the flexibility they need to prioritize both work and family. New York must create an environment that is as hospitable to working families as possible. I commend Comptroller Scott Stringer for boldly championing the important, but oft-overlooked issue of work-life balance.” “When a significant portion of the workforce is made up of working parents, caregivers, and students who find themselves unable to achieve work-life balance, we must consider implementing flextime policies that reflect changing workforce dynamics. As the sponsor of 'Right to Request' legislation, I am proud to see us moving in a direction that recognizes the benefits of flexible working arrangements. I thank Comptroller Stringer for his leadership on this issue, and I call on my fellow State Legislators to pass this bill come January,” said Assemblywoman Nily Rozic. "Flex Time presents a great opportunity for the employers and workers of New York City. Not only would flexible work hours allow for employees to meet their obligations outside of the workplace, but giving them the opportunity to work outside of normal 9 to 5 business hours could greatly reduce traffic congestion during the rush hour commute. Giving working New Yorkers the time to take care of aging relatives as well as their children allows them to meet their own needs and also provides new means to foster greater productivity," said Assemblyman David Weprin. "Hardworking New Yorkers should be given the opportunity of Paid Family Leave. Employees perform their best when they know their employer is on their side and that they and their families are cared for. I thank Comptroller Scott Stringer for conducting this survey and his commitment to creating a fair workplace environment for every working individual,” said City Council Member Elizabeth Crowley. "A one-size-fits-all approach to the work day is outmoded and unfair to hardworking New Yorkers who serve as caretakers for elderly, disabled and young family members," said City Council Member Daniel Dromm. "I applaud Comptroller Stringer's efforts to revise and reform this outdated model and look forward to working with him to implement his progressive vision for New York City families." "Comptroller Stringer's report shows the urgent need for action to make sure working New Yorkers have schedules that work for their lives and their families. I was especially struck by the retail worker who said 'There are no words to describe the frustration and anxiety that comes from not knowing my schedule for the next week and the inability to plan my life and finances.' I look forward to supporting legislation that gives hard-working New Yorkers schedules that work," said City Councilmember Brad Lander. “Flexible work arrangements benefit both employers and employees. They allow employers to maximize the productivity of work hours while providing workers with a reasonable work and home life balance. A 21st Century workplace needs this flexibility so company policies can be made to fit the unique circumstances of individual workers and employer settings,” said City Council Member Mark Levine. “I believe that we have all at one time or another experienced the unexpected and, as a result, we do whatever is necessary to deal with the situation. Providing New Yorkers with flexibility in their jobs and/or prospect of flexibility would be of great support. Comptroller Stringer is raising awareness around an issue that everyone – employee and employer can relate to.” – City Councilwoman Rosie Mendez. “In today’s world, many people do not have the same 9-to-5 availability that was common for so long,” said City Council Member Donovan Richards. “With the amount of college students who must work through school, single mothers and parents who must both work to survive in this city, we need to accommodate a variety of different schedules for our residents. Too many New Yorkers are being burdened by school loans and day care fees to not come together to account for the vastly changing dynamic in homes today.” “New Yorkers across all professions are negatively impacted by inflexible work schedules that make juggling careers and families increasingly difficult. I applaud Comptroller Stringer for advocating flexible work arrangements that allow employees to work outside the confines of the traditional 9-to-5, and for advancing forward-thinking policy recommendations to improve work-life balance,” said City Councilman Ritchie Torres. "This groundbreaking report sheds light on the urgent need for predictable and flexible work schedules and paid family leave to help New York parents and caregivers stay attached to the workforce,” said Dina Bakst and Sherry Leiwant, co-presidents of A Better Balance. “Policymakers should heed the call from working families and enact legislation to establish a floor so all workers, not just a select few, can better meet the conflicting demands of work and family and have the opportunity to succeed." “This study shows how important it is for working New Yorkers and their families to have access to paid family leave and the right to request flexible schedules when they need them,” said 32BJ President Hector Figueroa. “Fast-food and other low-wage workers find it nearly impossible to arrange for childcare, attend classes or work another job due to the practice of on-call scheduling that requires them to be constantly at the disposal of their employers. As we continue to fight for access to $15 an hour and a union for all workers, we need to promote policies that ensure hard-working people can take care of their families instead of allowing employers to maximize their profits at workers’ expense.” “As more and more New York City residents find themselves in the role of family caregiver, it is no surprise to AARP that concepts like paid family leave, flexible scheduling and predictive scheduling are so popular,” said Christopher Widelo, associate state director of AARP New York. “We hope all policymakers at both the city and state level join City Comptroller Stringer in appreciating the benefits of these forward-looking policies not only for New York’s families but for business and taxpayers in terms of increased productivity on the job and the ability to provide cost-effective care for our aging loved ones at home. Already under a great deal of stress, family caregivers need support, and these policies would provide them the peace of mind of knowing they can care for their loved one without paying an unreasonable price.” “We applaud the New York City Comptroller’s attention to these critical issues facing New York City’s workers. The survey results make clear that action is needed to make working schedules match the needs of our families. We look forward to working with the Comptroller and the City Council to take action on the issue of scheduling in New York City,” said Andrew Friedman, Co-Executive Director, Center for Popular Democracy. "This powerful new report from Comptroller Scott Stringer underlines the urgency for enactment of public policies like paid family leave and advance notice of work schedules that will make it possible for New Yorkers to support their families without neglecting them," said Nancy Rankin, Vice President for Policy Research and Advocacy at Community Service Society. "We found widespread support for such laws in our annual Unheard Third survey." “For 45 years, Legal Momentum has fought to make the workplace more family-friendly and welcoming to women, including pregnant women and working mothers,” said Penny M. Venetis, Executive Vice President and Legal Director of Legal Momentum. “Legal Momentum supports any legislation that would allow women and men to reach their full potential as workers, without abandoning their responsibilities to their families. Today’s technology permits all workers to have more flexible work hours so that they don’t have to choose between their work and their families.” Deborah Axt, Co-Executive Director of Make the Road New York, said: "We applaud the Comptroller for being one of the earliest and best champions on the critically important issue of workplace scheduling. All too many immigrant and low wage workers know the reality that this report documents: being called into work with little notice, having hours that fluctuate significantly from week to week, and reporting to work only to be sent home without pay. These scheduling practices create economic instability and make it incredibly difficult for people to plan their lives--to arrange for day care, go to the doctor, and fulfill their obligations as parents and family members.” “A woman’s ability to exercise her full reproductive rights, including determining when and whether to have children, is often dependent on the degree of flexibility provided by her employer,” said Andrea Miller, president of NARAL Pro-Choice New York. “NARAL Pro-Choice New York looks forward to working with Comptroller Stringer and other elected officials to pursue flexible workplace policies that improve women’s lives and enable their financial stability.” “The Comptroller’s survey confirms how critically important paid family leave is to both New York women and men,” said Donna Lieberman, Executive Director of the New York Civil Liberties Union. “The state legislature has no reason to delay passing a paid family leave program – it’s good for business, it costs the state nothing, and it will finally ensure New Yorkers can take the time they need to care for their families without facing debt or bankruptcy.” “Comptroller Stringer asked and New Yorkers resoundingly answered: The public wants and needs stronger family-friendly policies and protections to create work-life balance and economic security. New laws ensuring paid family leave, flex-time, and advanced notice of schedules will provide workers with the necessary tools to manage the demands of the 21st Century workforce,” said Beverly Neufeld, President of PowHer New York. “Due to on-call scheduling, many retail workers not only live paycheck to paycheck, but now hour to hour. Our union has long been fighting the unfair practice of erratic scheduling and the hourly injustice of on-call shifts in retail jobs. When low-wage workers face changing schedules week to week and even within hours of a shift can be told not to come in, it puts a major strain on their lives. This leads to family and financial stress, not knowing when one will work or how much they will make week to week. I would like to thank Comptroller Scott Stringer for this report that will now provide city policymakers with necessary details of how 'flexible' work schedules harm workers at the low end of wage scale,” said Stuart Appelbaum, President RWDSU Rachel Laforest, Director of the Retail Action Project (RWDSU), says: "In retail, and across the service sector, workers face increasingly erratic hours due to employers’ efforts to match labor costs to consumer demand. These scheduling practices are not sustainable: families don’t know if they can meet weekly expenses, caregivers can’t predict when they will have to arrange for care for children or relatives, and students don’t know if they will be able to attend classes. It’s time to call for worker-driven flexibility where employees’ scheduling needs are respected. The Retail Action Project applauds Comptroller Stringer for bringing work-life balance to the forefront and calling for the right to request a flexible schedule." Source: Black Star NewsTurning Wisconsin schools into police states won't help kids learn
Turning Wisconsin schools into police states won't help kids learn
According to a new report put together by LIT and the Center for Popular Democracy, “Despite white students’...
According to a new report put together by LIT and the Center for Popular Democracy, “Despite white students’ overwhelmingly similar behavior patterns, and despite black students accounting for only 55% of the student population in Milwaukee in the 2013–2014 school year, data shows that black students accounted for 84.6% of the referrals to law enforcement.
Read the full article here.
Outside Clout in Final Report?
Times Union - August 10, 2014, by Casey Seiler - Between its draft and final versions, a report by...
Times Union - August 10, 2014, by Casey Seiler - Between its draft and final versions, a report by SUNY's Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government on New York's controversial Scaffold Law incorporated changes that tended to increase its estimates of the law's cost and impact.
Some of the changes echoed suggestions made to researchers by the leader of an anti-Scaffold Law organization that paid $82,000 to fund the report — sponsorship that has led critics to attack the study as advocacy in the guise of research. Its authors, however, insist the changes reflect nothing more than their own good-faith efforts to clarify the analysis.
The Scaffold Law, which places "absolute liability" on employers for gravity-related workplace injuries, is supported by labor unions but opposed by business groups that claim it needlessly drives up construction costs. Opponents would like to see New York follow other states by adopting a "comparative negligence" standard that would make workers proportionately responsible when their actions contribute to an accident.
The Rockefeller Institute report was funded by the Lawsuit Reform Alliance, a leading opponent of the law, through its research arm, the New York Civil Justice Institute. The study, made public in February, drew initial controversy for a statistical analysis that concluded construction injuries in Illinois dropped after the state repealed its version of the Scaffold Law in 1995. That finding was highlighted by the law's opponents, and harshly criticized by labor groups such as the Center for Popular Democracy.
The director of the Albany-based Rockefeller Institute, Thomas Gais, subsequently backed away from that chapter, citing what he described as flaws in the Illinois analysis — conducted by a Cornell University researcher — and the fact that the report was released to its funders before a final round of vetting had taken place.
After that dispute came to light in April, advocates on both sides filed Freedom of Information Law requests to find out if pressure had been placed on the institute, either during its research or after the report's release.
Documents produced by the Rockefeller Institute in response to the Center for Popular Democracy's FOIL included email correspondence between researchers and Tom Stebbins, the leader of the Lawsuit Reform Alliance. The exchanges, described last month by the Times Union, included a July 2013 email containing two pages of Stebbins' suggested edits offered in response to a draft version of the report. While many of his suggested changes were merely typographical, others went to the substance of the report.
The institute initially refused to release the draft report, but produced it last week on the advice of SUNY's FOIL officer. Side-by-side comparisons of the two reports show that in several instances changes were made that addressed issues raised by Stebbins.
The contract between the institute and the LRA required the researchers to communicate regularly with their funders as the report progressed. In an interview last week, Stebbins said his suggestions were nothing more than an effort "to get the complete picture" of the costs of Scaffold Law.
The second section of the report, prepared by lead researcher Michael Hattery, attempted to assess the public sector costs and impacts imposed by Scaffold Law, including the annual average price of Scaffold Law-related injury awards for public projects. In the draft, researchers found that sum by taking total spending on state and local capital projects (not including public authorities) and applying the average percentage that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority reported spending for labor law injury award costs. (Because the MTA uses what's essentially an in-house insurance entity, it offered the researchers rich data on insurance costs, claim awards and construction value.)
In the draft version of the report, the formula estimates the cost of gravity-related claims costs by using half of the MTA's fraction (0.3 percent of total construction value) to estimate awards in urban areas and a quarter of the MTA average (0.15 percent) for non-urban awards. Using those multipliers, the average cost added up to $28.3 million for 2007-2011.
"Why do you use half of the MTA average .3%," Stebbins asked the researchers in his notes on the draft. He added that it seemed "very inconsistent" with the industry's estimate that Scaffold Law adds at least 4 percent to the cost of any public construction project.
"How can we reconcile?" he wrote.
Stebbins also pointed the authors to data available from the New York City School Construction Authority, which has in recent years buckled under escalating insurance costs for its projects.
The $28.3 million figure, he wrote, "does not include additional insurance costs, which is likely the driver of the 4% estimate. Any thoughts on getting to that number? ... Perhaps we could have an MTA estimate for payouts and an SCA estimate for insurance. That may help reconcile the two figures."
The final report uses calculations that doubled the potential claims costs.
A corrected version of the draft's calculation ($30.2 million) is offered as a "lower bound" for average annual injury awards, but the report provides a new "upper bound" of $60.5 million obtained by employing the full MTA average (0.6 percent) for urban projects and half of that fraction (0.3 percent) for non-urban work.
In a response to the Times Union's emailed questions last week, Hattery said that the injury award cost figure was always intended as "a very rough estimate" due to a lack of specific data.
"After reflection — after the first draft — we chose to use a range rather than a single point estimate," he said. "This is often done so that users and readers of the report do not overvalue the 'precision' of a single number when it is based on a significant set of assumptions."
The same chapter of the draft includes a two-page case study on the construction of the Lake Champlain Bridge, in which those interviewed — including the chief engineers on the New York and Vermont sides of the project, Vermont's attorney general, and the contractor's project engineer and risk control manager — said Scaffold Law had only marginal impact on the structure's price tag.
In his edits, Stebbins recommended scrapping the case study: "As discussed, suggest we remove this section unless we can get someone to talk."
"I felt that no one they interviewed knew what Scaffold Law was and how it affected the cost of construction," Stebbins said last week. " ... We were not able to get people who understood what the costs were."
The final report jettisoned the Champlain Bridge analysis.
Hattery said the case study was dropped because it failed to provide a contrast between insurance costs in the two states. Because New York was the principle partner in the bridge project, he said, "there was no contrast to compare in the execution of the project ... nor were there any fall-from-height claims to review and describe, to our knowledge."
In its place, a new case study was added that examined Scaffold Law's impacts on the School Construction Authority, and described the $1.1 million settlement of an accident claim that ended up costing half of the construction value of the project where the injury occurred.
Hattery said the SCA analysis was included because of the researchers' desire to offer "at least one specific Scaffold case in a higher-density urban environment. ... The case was completed later, in part, because it required a longer time frame for access to personnel, data, etc."
Stebbins said it would have been irresponsible for researchers to not have addressed the SCA in the analysis.
The final report was the centerpiece of February's annual Scaffold Law reform lobby day at the Capitol. The Lawsuit Reform Alliance touted its release with a news statement: "With the study in hand," it concluded, "Scaffold Law reform advocates look for positive traction in the legislature this year."
Instead, the session ended with no action taken on Scaffold Law.
Josie Duffy of the Center for Popular Democracy called on the Rockefeller Institute to release all the drafts of the disputed report.
"The public deserves a full accounting of SUNY's role in helping business groups attack worker safety laws," she said.
Source.
Gap Inc. to end on-call scheduling after inquiry by New York attorney general
A spokeswoman for the San Francisco-based retailer said Thursday the decision also applies to Gap's other brands,...
A spokeswoman for the San Francisco-based retailer said Thursday the decision also applies to Gap's other brands, including Banana Republic, Old Navy and Athleta and was part of an effort to "improve scheduling stability and flexibility" for workers.
Spokeswoman Laura Wilkinson said the change will apply "across our global organization" and will be fully implemented by the end of this month. Wilkinson said the company is working to establish scheduling systems giving store employees at least 10 to 14 days' notice.
Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's office sent letters to Gap and 12 other retailers earlier this year questioning them about on-call scheduling, which required hourly workers to stay on-call for shifts set the night before or the same day, giving them little time to arrange for child care or work other jobs.
"Workers deserve stable and reliable work schedules, and I commend Gap for taking an important step to make their employees' schedules fairer and more predictable," said Schneiderman, a Democrat.
Abercrombie & Fitch also ended the practice this month.
Carrie Gleason, director of the Fair Workweek Initiative at the Center for Popular Democracy, said in a statement that Gap's decision reflects not only Schneiderman's concerns but also a new ordinance in San Francisco requiring chain retailers to set schedules in advance. Similar proposals are pending before other city governments.
"Working people in hourly jobs are starting to speak out about the impact that employers' scheduling practices has on their lives," Gleason said in a statement.
Source: US News & World Report
Health Care Activists Protest at Senator's Offices in the Capitol - Photo
Health Care Activists Protest at Senator's Offices in the Capitol - Photo
Activists protest against the Republican health care repeal-and-replace legislation at U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz's office in...
Activists protest against the Republican health care repeal-and-replace legislation at U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz's office in the Russell Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill July 19, 2017 in Washington, DC. Organized by the Center for Popular Democracy, Housing Works, National Nurses United and other organizations, dozens of people were arrested for protesting against the GOP attempts to end Obamacare.
See the photo here.
Nina Tassler, Denise Di Novi Launch Independent Studio for the Time's Up Era
Nina Tassler, Denise Di Novi Launch Independent Studio for the Time's Up Era
PatMa has already forged strategic partnerships with several organizations with shared common values, including the...
PatMa has already forged strategic partnerships with several organizations with shared common values, including the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, Center for Popular Democracy and Planned Parenthood. The studio, whose formation was orchestrated by CAA, Evolution Media and top attorney Cliff Gilbert-Lurie, is designed to create content across platforms, including film and TV, theater, and publishing.
Read the full article here.
Superdelegate system to come under fire at Democratic National Convention
Superdelegate system to come under fire at Democratic National Convention
Top progressive groups — including MoveOn and the Daily Kos — are taking on the Democratic establishment’s “...
Top progressive groups — including MoveOn and the Daily Kos — are taking on the Democratic establishment’s “undemocratic” superdelegate system in a fight that threatens to disrupt the party’s national convention next week in Philadelphia.
A coalition of 14 left-wing organizations announced Thursday that 50 members of the DNC Rules Committee have co-sponsored an amendment filed shortly before midnight Thursday to end the practice of awarding superdelegate status to top officials, lawmakers and other insiders.
The proposal threatens to force the party’s hand on an issue that has dogged Democrats throughout the primary season, driven by supporters of Sen. Bernard Sanders, Hillary Clinton’s chief rival for the presidential nomination.
Leading the fight is Rhode Island state Rep. Aaron Regunberg, a member of the DNC Rules Committee, who said Thursday that the campaign to reform the system is “catching fire.”
“Superdelegates disempower voters, they are less diverse than our overall delegates, and they are wildly unpopular,” Mr. Regunberg said in a statement. “The time has come to end the archaic and undemocratic superdelegate system once and for all — and that starts Saturday in Philadelphia.”
The skirmish has the potential to sully the image of party unity that Democrats hope to convey in contrast to the infighting that has characterized the Republican National Convention, which wrapped up Thursday night.
The Democrats will gather Monday through Thursday at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia.
Mrs. Clinton’s commanding lead with superdelegates was a sore point throughout the primary race with Sanders voters, who accused the Democratic establishment of using superdelegates to tip the scales for the former secretary of state.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, has defended the system, which was instituted in 1982 to serve as a moderating influence on the presidential nominating process after disastrous defeats in 1972 and 1980.
The congresswoman from Florida has argued that the 712 superdelegates, who make up about 15 percent of total delegates, are free to change their minds about candidates and that the setup improves the convention’s racial balance.
The Congressional Black Caucus is staunchly opposed to abolishing the system, arguing in a letter last month to party leaders that the practice allows elected officials to avoid the “burdensome necessity of competing against constituents” for slots.
Even so, critics of superdelegates insist that the preference system benefits white men. A Pew Research Center study released May 5 found that 58 percent of this year’s Democratic superdelegates are men and 62 percent are white, while only 20 percent are black and 11 percent are Hispanic.
“We have always been the party of the hard-working, the voiceless, and the downtrodden; but by upholding the special privileges of superdelegates, we are betraying the people we fight for to service an unjust, archaic, and anti-democratic institution,” Maine state Rep. Diane Russell said in a statement.
Despite their egalitarian image, Democrats have far more superdelegates than do Republicans. The Republican Party’s 168 superdelegates, about 7 percent of the total, are bound to vote in accordance with the majority of delegates in their states.
The Associated Press estimates that 602 superdelegates have thrown their support behind Mrs. Clinton, compared with 48 for Mr. Sanders. Mrs. Clinton also has 2,205 pledged delegates for a total of 2,807, more than the 2,383 needed to secure the presidential nomination.
Organizers said the proposed amendment has won support from backers of both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Sanders. Other leading Democrats who have expressed support for reform include House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts.
One reason: The measure is not retroactive, meaning it will not affect the outcome of this year’s contest.
The 50 members co-sponsoring the amendment represent more than 25 percent of the 187-member committee, a critical threshold under the rules.
If at least 25 percent of those members follow up by voting Saturday in favor of the amendment, the panel will be required to issue a “minority report” and bring the issue to the convention floor, organizers said.
A letter to the Democratic National Committee posted this week on the EndSuperdelegates.com website gathered nearly 125,000 signatures in less than 48 hours in support of reform.
“The superdelegate system is unrepresentative, contradicts the purported values of the party and its members, and reduces the party’s moral authority,” said the letter.
The 14 groups involved in the campaign are Courage Campaign, Credo, Daily Kos, Demand Progress, Democracy for America, the Center for Popular Democracy, MoveOn, National Nurses United, NDN, The Other 98%, Presente.org, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Progressive Democrats of America, and Social Security Works.
By VALERIE RICHARDSON
Source
Wall Street Stands to Make a Killing From Building Trump's Border Wall: Report
Wall Street Stands to Make a Killing From Building Trump's Border Wall: Report
"It’s always been clear that Trump’s border wall had no real benefit or justification—and now it’s clear that it could...
"It’s always been clear that Trump’s border wall had no real benefit or justification—and now it’s clear that it could serve to further enrich his wealthy friends,” said Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy, in a statement announcing the report.
Read the full article here.
CPD's Josie Duffy Debunks Scaffold Law Myths on Capital Tonight
Capital Tonight's Liz Benjamin interviews Center for Popular Democracy Policy Advocate Josie Duffy on the Scaffold Law...
Capital Tonight's Liz Benjamin interviews Center for Popular Democracy Policy Advocate Josie Duffy on the Scaffold Law. For more information on how the construction industry safety standards elude workers of color, read CPD's report "Fatal Inequality."
Immigration Reform News: Letter to Obama Calls For End of Immigrant, Family Detention
Latin Post 05-12-2015 - A coalition of national organizations, ranging from Latino-based, faith-based and law-based...
"In light of recent developments and ongoing negotiations in litigation on the detention of immigrant families, we, the undersigned 188 immigrants' rights, faith-based, civil rights, human rights, survivors' rights, and criminal justice reform organizations, international educators, and legal service providers, urge your administration to end the practice of family detention," starts the letter, signed by organizations including the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), American Immigration Lawyers Association, Center for Popular Democracy, Detention Watch Network, DREAM Action Coalition, National Council of La Raza and We Belong Together.
The letter acknowledges the family detention centers built in the last year in Berks County, Penn., and Dilley and Karnes counties in Texas. The organizations also recognized that the detained families are largely seeking protection in the U.S., but such centers have had "traumatic impact" on families, notably children. The traumatic impacts may include an individual or families' experience while in Central America.
ADVERTISEMENT"These mental health effects are compounded where families have suffered detention that is prolonged and indefinite in nature," the letter continued. "A growing number of members of Congress have voiced their opposition to the detention of families, and a steady stream of news articles and human rights reports illustrate that families cannot be detained humanely."
The letter reference the lawsuit and human rights reports at the T. Don Hutto Detention Center in Texas, which the U.S. Department of Homeland Security closed in 2009 following inquiries of the facility's procedures. Lawsuits regarding other immigrant detention facilities' policies have also been filed and could result in the centers shutdown.
"DHS has broad authority to release from detention vulnerable populations who do not pose a flight or public safety risk either on recognizance or, where necessary, with additional measures such as alternatives to detention," wrote the 188 organizations. "These should include case management services to ensure that families are informed of their legal rights and obligations and receive appropriate referrals to social and legal services."
The organizations agreed that all immigrant families must receive full due process. The letter to Obama called for all families to have their right to full hearings before an immigration court judge -- as outlined in section 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Calls for an "alternative to detention," or ATD, instead of detention was recommended. The national, state and local organizations in the letter noted families apprehended at the border "generally" have relations or community relations in the U.S. and could be released while awaiting deportation hearings.
"In fact, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) recently issued a Request for Proposals specifically for case management ATD programs appropriate for families. As detailed in your FY 2016 budget request, current ATD programs save taxpayer dollars, costing approximately $5 per day compared to $343 per day for a family detention bed. Current ATDs have high compliance rates, with 99 percent appearance at immigration court hearings and 84 percent compliance with removal orders."
Local-and-state-based organizations signing on the letter include the Central American Resource Center, Coalition of Latino Leaders, Families for Freedom, New York Immigration Coalition and Workers Defense Project.
To read the letter to President Obama and the list of organizations signed, click here
Source: Latin Post
6 hours ago
6 hours ago