Report: Lax Oversight Leaves Charter Schools Vulnerable to Fraud
SF Gate - March 24, 2015, by Jill Tucker - California’s 1,100 charter schools are subject to insufficient financial...
SF Gate - March 24, 2015, by Jill Tucker - California’s 1,100 charter schools are subject to insufficient financial oversight, lax practices that leave the door wide open to fraud, mismanagement and abuse, according to a report released Tuesday by a trio of education policy groups.
Since the first charter school opened in 1992, state or local officials have uncovered more than $81 million in fraud or mismanagement. But that’s probably the tip of a very big iceberg, according to the report released by Public Advocates, Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment and the Center for Popular Democracy.
The report’s authors estimate that charter school fraud could be closer to $100 million in 2015 alone, based on methodology cited the Association for Certified Fraud Examiners 2014 Report to Nations on Occupational Fraud and Abuse.
“Charter schools promised to innovate and show best practices for schools — but is this how they are living up to that promise? This is not an example of how schools should work – this is an example of what not to do,” said Martha Sanchez, a parent and community leader with the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment.
The California Charter School Association, however, criticized the report for “making estimates based on global assumptions calls into the question the credibility of the report and the organizations that published it.”
“While we don’t presume to understand the motives behind this report we do know that California is a state where the charter school sector, authorizers and legislators have come together to put into place real solutions,” according to the charter organization, in a statement. “It is unfortunate that we continue to have similar distractions for a sector that the report itself suggests is demonstrating to be responsible users of precious public funds in addition to serving a half a million public school students well.”
The report cites several instances of uncovered fraud, including $2.7 million for excessive amounts of school supplies at Los Angeles’ Wisdom Academy of Young Scientists Charter Schools, provided by vendors who were family members or close acquaintances of the former executive director and who charged exorbitant prices.
The report also cited Oakland’s American Indian charter schools, where the former director reportedly diverted more than $3 million to his own businesses via rent and other expenditures.
The agency that authorized the charter school — typically the local school district or county office of education — is responsible for oversight, but they don’t always have enough staff to perform fraud risk assessments, the report said.
The report recommended that charter school audits include an assessment by someone certified in financial forensics and that school board or county boards of education should require charter schools to ensure fraud controls are in place before granting a charter or renewing one.
“California already spends too little on public education, so it’s critical to ensure that this money actually goes where it’s intended — to serve kids,” said Hilary Hammell, an attorney at Public Advocates. “When charter school operators misappropriate public education money, our state’s most vulnerable families suffer.”
Source
Retail workers celebrate scheduling law. Requirements will bring change to national chains.
Retail workers celebrate scheduling law. Requirements will bring change to national chains.
Lisa Morrison loves her job in the floral department at Safeway on U.S. Highway 20 in Bend, but she said the company’s...
Lisa Morrison loves her job in the floral department at Safeway on U.S. Highway 20 in Bend, but she said the company’s practice of giving three days’ notice of work schedules has created a lot of stress in her life.
So, she made two trips to Salem this year with representatives of United Food and Commercial Workers Local 555 to lobby legislators on the workplace scheduling bill that passed June 29 with bipartisan support.
Read the full article here.
Coalition Plans to Press Senate Candidates to Back Minimum Wage Rise
Coalition Plans to Press Senate Candidates to Back Minimum Wage Rise
The minimum wage has already been an issue on the presidential campaign trail. Now, three national progressive groups...
The minimum wage has already been an issue on the presidential campaign trail. Now, three national progressive groups plan to use it to pressure Senators in tight races to back higher wages or face a backlash on election day.
The Working Families Organization, the National Employment Law Project Action Fund, and the Center for Popular Democracy Action Fund are teaming up with grassroots organizations in seven battleground states to educate voters about where lawmakers stand on a policy they say can help low-wage workers and the economy.
They also plan to pressure candidates who have opposed higher minimum wages or who haven’t picked a side. In the coming weeks, they are planning a series of actions they hope will influence swing voters, drive voters to the polls, and shame lawmakers into advocating for higher pay floors.
“There’s unprecedented momentum this year for raising the minimum wage. Voters are hungry for leaders who’ll take a strong stand in raising wages and frustrated with their Republican majorities in Congress,” said Paul Sonn, a spokesperson for the National Employment Law Project Action Fund.
While the focus is on Senate races, “partners in this effort are educating voters on where candidates for office from president down to city councilperson stand on raising wages,” said Mr. Sonn, who added that Hillary Clinton is a strong supporter of raising the federal minimum wage while Donald Trump “has been all over the map.”
With control of the Senate hanging in the balance after Republicans won the majority in 2014, the groups are betting minimum wage could be a pivotal issue in key races in Pennsylvania, Missouri, Wisconsin, Ohio, Arizona, New Hampshire, and North Carolina. They are in the process of scheduling protests outside of Senate debates, arranging door-to-door canvassing, organizing candidate forums and town halls and doing polling on the issue. Another tactic they plan: inviting candidates to spend a day shadowing a low-wage worker on the job, and possibly exposing those who won’t do it.
Republicans are defending 24 Senate seats this November, while Democrats are defending 10. Democrats need to win at least five net seats to gain back control from Republicans, or four if Hillary Clinton wins the White House and Tim Kaine is elected vice president and can break tied Senate votes.
Some of the lawmakers the groups plan to target because of the lack of support they’ve shown for higher minimum wages are Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, who is in a contest against Democratic Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, and Missouri Republican Sen. Roy Blunt, challenged by Democrat Jason Kander.
In Pennsylvania, GOP Sen. Pat Toomey could feel some heat from the groups in his race against Democrat Katie McGinty, who has repeatedly called for raising the federal minimum wage. And in Wisconsin, they will target Republican Sen. Ron Johnson in his contest with Democrat Russ Feingold, who has made raising the minimum wage a pivotal part of his campaign.
Marina Dimitrijevic, the state director of the Wisconsin Working Families Party, one of the grassroots groups involved, said the organization plans to bring a crowd to a mid-October debate between Sen. Johnson and Mr. Feingold. It will also invite Mr. Johnson to a roundtable discussion about raising minimum wages.
“I hope he comes and listens,” she said.
The federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, and leading Democrats in Congress have gained no traction on bills to increase it. Pay floors have been rising in cities and states instead to as high as $15 an hour.
Hillary Clinton has said she supports a $12 federal minimum wage but thinks states or cities should be allowed to set higher rates if they have local support. She has stopped short of backing the $15 federal minimum many unions and other left-leaning groups are calling for, but she has won many of their endorsements nonetheless.
Donald Trump has wavered on the issue, saying last year that wages were “too high,” then saying this year that he would like to see an increase in the minimum wage. He recently called for a $10 federal minimum, though he said the states should really call the shots.
By MELANIE TROTTMAN
Source
Toys ‘R’ Us Promotes Nostalgic Selfies While Employee Unrest Boils
Toys ‘R’ Us Promotes Nostalgic Selfies While Employee Unrest Boils
“There are thousands and thousands of retail employees now working at companies owned by Wall Street and private equity...
“There are thousands and thousands of retail employees now working at companies owned by Wall Street and private equity firms, and this kind of financial instability in the sector makes it hard for workers to have sustainable careers,’’ said Carrie Gleason, a director at the Center for Popular Democracy, which is working on the campaign along with Organization United for Respect. “We’re organizing to ensure there’s some accountability for owners who aren’t necessarily running the businesses in good faith."
Read the full article here.
Dozen protesters arrested in Manhattan during May Day rallies
Dozen protesters arrested in Manhattan during May Day rallies
Exuberant rallies, inspirational speeches and more than two dozen arrests for the cause of immigrant workers marked May...
Exuberant rallies, inspirational speeches and more than two dozen arrests for the cause of immigrant workers marked May Day celebrations around the city on Monday.
A dozen protesters were arrested outside JPMorgan Chase’s Park Ave. headquarters, and demonstrators also gathered in front of a Wells Fargo bank nearby, highlighting the two institutions’ financing of private Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facilities.
Read full article here.
As Attacks on Unions Continue, Bringing Back the Strike May Be Our Only Hope
On December 14, Chicago Teachers Union Vice President Jesse Sharkey announced the results of the union’s strike...
On December 14, Chicago Teachers Union Vice President Jesse Sharkey announced the results of the union’s strike authorization vote. For the second time in three years, the union’s membership voted overwhelmingly to strike if necessary. "Our ability to withhold our labor is our power," declared CTU President Karen Lewis on the eve of voting.
That axiom, that strikes are where unions derive their power, is pretty out of favor these days. A wave of disastrous strikes and lockouts beginning in the Reagan era that helped deunionize much of American industry has left the surviving labor movement skittish about the prospect of full-scale walk-outs. But bright spots like Fight for 15, Bargaining for the Common Good and the Chicago teachers strike have shown that workers can win strikes (if one defines victory as workers walking away from the ordeal feeling more powerful). Labor activists and leaders, particularly as they anticipate a viciously anti-union Supreme Court decision in Friedrichs v. CTA, have to figure out more strategies to revive the strike weapon in our current era.
How strikes became a “bad idea”
Ironically, the seeds of labor’s 1980s defeats were planted during its best seasons for growth in the 1930s. During the wave of sit-down strikes that grew union membership by leaps and bounds, Congress passed the National Labor Relations Act in 1935. The purpose of the act was to establish an orderly process for certifying unions and compelling employers to bargain in good faith with them. The plain language of the law also made it illegal to fire an employee for union activity.
But in two of the early Supreme Court cases that established the constitutionality of this law, the court casually cut into workers’ rights to their jobs.
In a 1939 case called NLRB vs. Fansteel Metallurgical, the court ruled that the NLRB cannot compel the reinstatement of a fired worker who broke the law, even if his illegal activity was part of an otherwise protected union activity like striking. Sit-down strikes, the physical occupation of someone else’s property to prevent their business from operating without you, was simply not going to be a protected activity under this new labor law regime.
In an earlier case, 1938’s NLRB v. Mackay Radio, the Supreme Court stripped workers of their unalloyed right to return to their jobs after a strike. The Court held that not only was an employer allowed to replace striking workers to keep a business going during a strike, but that they could keep the scabs on the job after the strike was over. The strikers would not be fired, per se, as an employer would have to make provision to recall former strikers as vacancies occur.
The McKay germ lay dormant for over 40 years. There were thousands of strikes in the United States all the way through the 1970s. And while plenty of bosses hired plenty of scabs, those scabs were almost always let go after a strike. To take a worker’s job away for standing with her union was viewed as almost un-American.
Or at least it was, until no less of an American than the sitting President, Ronald Regan, fired the striking air traffic controllers in 1981, sending a strong signal to industry: have at it..
McKay was weaponized by the Phelps-Dodge Corporation in 1983. The copper mining company bargained its Steelworkers local to impasse over drastic cuts in pay, benefits and working conditions—essentially daring the union to strike. Exploiting the bad economic times, the company had no problem importing a permanent replacement workforce, for whom even the reduced pay was far better than most jobs available. After 12 very ugly months, the scabs voted to legally decertify the union.
This Phelps-Dodge blueprint is how much of the deunionization of American industry occurred in the Reagan-Bush (and Clinton) era. Unions that survived frequently did so by capitulating to management’s giveback demands.
Tellingly, the AFL-CIO’s 1990s version of labor law reform was not for organizing rights, like card check, but a bill to undo the McKay doctrine and ban the permanent replacement of strikers. In 1994, the year that the Workplace Fairness Act effectively died, there were 14 major strikes involving over 108,000 workers. By 2012, there were only four, and they involved less than 15,000 workers.
And perhaps most telling of all: Unions’ most recent attempt at labor law reform, the Employee Free Choice Act, did not include any provision on strikes. We have abandoned the strike weapon.
Well-planned strikes serve as inspiration
Not every union has abandoned strikes. The last Chicago teacher strike served as the strongest example in years for everyday workers of the power of a well-planned work stoppage.
On paper, it made no sense that a teachers union could wage a successful strike in 2012. Teachers unions had suffered from years of well-funded political attacks that cast them in the media as villains who prioritize “adults’ interests” over “students’.” The city’s power brokers, Mayor Rahm Emanuel in particular, were crying broke and exploiting civil rights rhetoric in their give-back demands. And there were thousands of teachers in charter schools and unemployed and recently retired teachers in the Chicago area who could have been recruited as replacements if they viewed the Chicago Teachers Union as striking against the public interest.
Instead, the Chicago public overwhelmingly viewed the CTU as striking for the common good. Partly, this was thanks to two years of deep and meaningful community organizing and partnerships that the union diligently pursued knowing there would likely be a strike. And partly, this was thanks to the union bargaining for school resources demands that resonated beyond just their membership.
For the last really big strike that got even non-union workers thinking about their power, you have to go all the way back to 1997. The Teamsters—who, like the CTU at the local level, had elected progressive reformers to their national leadership—also spent years preparing for a planned strike against UPS. These sort of well-planned strikes are crucial for getting workers, those in unions and those without, to think about power and the exercise of it.
In his book Only One Thing Can Save Us, labor lawyer Thomas Geoghegan expresses a preference for one-day strikes, which he has seen used effectively by the hotel employees union. In such a strike, a union signals its intent to return to work after 24 hours, allowing strikers to impact the employer’s business but protecting them from permanent replacement.
Joe Burns, also a labor lawyer, has written extensively on labor’s need to bring back the strike weapon. In his Reviving the Strike, he scorns one-day “publicity strikes” as no substitute for “an effective traditional strike,” which he defines as one that aims to halt production.
Burns’ contribution gets us thinking not just about the need to get more strikes going in this country, but to really think through how to define a “successful” strike. But his mantra-like focus on “halting production” is strangely limiting. As a result of union busting and globalization in manufacturing, most of the new organizing and strategic contract campaign action is in healthcare, education and the service industry. A Chicago teacher would likely rankle at the thought of their strike “halting production.” (What, after all, does their employer aim to produce? One hopes it is citizens and scholars, but fears it is docile workers and future prisoners.)
My own union work so far has been in hotels, home healthcare and education. I have worked on only a small number of work stoppages, most of a limited duration. In my experience, employers are working from such an ossified playbook that unions can get a lot of mileage out doing the last thing that the boss and his lawyers expect.
For example, hotel employees can cost the company more money by not striking on the day the company expects, thus costing them the expense of paying and lodging scabs as well as the continued payroll costs of the union members who stayed on the job an extra day.
I don’t prescribe a perfect form of strike. American workers will not learn to strike again from articles like this or books like Burns’ and Geoghegan’s, which are really more for labor nerds and bookish organizers—they will only learn to strike by watching contemporary examples of workers striking. Since it’s hard to raise chickens without eggs, even one-day “publicity strikes” have an educational value.
But many thousands times more working people will be educated by the next Chicago Teachers strike. The teachers will halt production, but, perversely, that will save their employer money. Chicago will continue to collect taxes and be freed of the burden of compensating its teachers for a few weeks. (In fairness, Joe Burns expounds upon this unique aspect of public sector strikes in his follow-up book, Strike Back.)
To be effective, the CTU must take the students and parents who will be disrupted and bring that disruption to the doorsteps of Rahm Emanuel, Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner and Chicago’s unelected school board. To win for the working class, they must continue to loudly proclaim, as CTU President Karen Lewis did, “Your power is your ability to withhold your labor.”
Possible paths forward
Our challenge is to inspire even non-union workers to think about their power and how to exercise it using the tools we have on hand: a union movement with miniscule density in only a handful of service and public sector industries largely led by staff who have precious little personal experience with leading job actions. We should be clear about how deep this deficit is.
One of the most promising labor projects of the moment is Bargaining for the Common Good. This is an effort by public sector unions in Washington, Oregon, California, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois and Ohio to align their bargaining demands with each other and with community demands around progressive taxation, affordable housing, youth incarceration and government transparency.
These community demands fall well outside a union’s scope of bargaining and are therefore technically illegal. But as long as the unions also have demands that are within their legal scope (not hard to do when employers refuse to pay people what they deserve), then the unions can press the community’s case. This is a brilliant way of getting community to see unions’ fights as their own and of building worker and community power—and the next Chicago teachers strike will likely be the highest profile test of the theory this side of the Mississppi.
What follows could be bigger. A number of public and private sector unions in Minnesota have contract expirations in 2016. Their bargaining demands for the common good are focused not just on their individual employers but also on the largest employers in the state: Target and Wells Fargo. This is the potential for the closest thing we’ve seen in a while to a general strike (something Minnesota has a history of doing).
Another promising project is the Fight for 15. Some have dismissed the series of rolling one-day strikes for increases in the minimum wage and organizing rights as mere P.R. stunts. But there is something deeply radical and significant at play here. Workers who don’t even technically have a union are proving their value—and their power—to their bosses by withholding their labor. And the response from the general public is, at worst, a sort of patronizing “Well, good for them” but more often something a bit closer to “Go get ‘em!”
Just two short years ago, it would have been inconceivable to most union strategists that the lowest paid and most vulnerable workers would be willing to risk it all as these fast food workers have done. But, then, one is reminded of the old Dylan lyric: “When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose.”
The great potential of Fight for 15 is that unorganized workers see reflections of themselves in the strikers and begin to fantasize about what a job action could look like at their workplace. This is the perfect complement to well-planned and executed strikes by established labor unions.
The labor wars of the 1980s and 1990s were won by bosses who caught their unions by surprise. The unions that are still here are survivors who have an obligation, both to their continued survival and to the hope of inspiring a greater wave of organizing, to meaningfully plan for job actions that can win in every round of bargaining.
Those who toil in alternative forms of worker representation—the workers centers, advocacy groups and non-majority unions—should strategize and experiment in job actions that help their members and anyone watching and drawing inspiration feel a sense of their own power and agency.
And the rest of labor, starting with the AFL-CIO, should send a strong signal that strike plans are back by incorporating a ban on permanent replacements in the successor to the Employee Free Choice Act and as part of a broader “right to your job” movement. For those public sector unions who are most threatened by the pending Friedrichs decision, a wave of “free speech” strikes to both celebrate and protest the dubious new rights that the Supreme Court threatens to give them.
Source: In These Times
Rivera and Camara Push 'Ambitious' Bill for Noncitizen Voting
Capital NY - June 16, 2014, By Nidhi Prakash - With just four remaining days in the state legislative session, sponsors...
Capital NY - June 16, 2014, By Nidhi Prakash - With just four remaining days in the state legislative session, sponsors of a new bill to grant citizenship rights to undocumented immigrants said they hope to begin building momentum for next session.
“First of all, this is obviously not something that is going to pass by the end of this week," said State Senator Gustavo Rivera, at a press conference in Battery Park City. "This was never about this particular legislative session. We’ve been working on it for almost two years, it’s a bold idea and we wanted to make sure it was thought out."
The bill, titled the New York is Home Act, would make it legal for undocumented immigrants in New York State to vote in local and state elections, get professional and drivers' licenses, and make them eligible for state-funded Medicaid and financial aid for higher education.
“What we’re doing today is we’re starting a conversation not only in New York, but hopefully across the country,” said Rivera, who was joined at the press conference by representatives from the Center for Popular Democracy and Make the Road New York.
Senator Rivera said he was choosing this moment to introduce the bill, despite nearing the end of the legislative session, partly because of a lack of movement in Washington on immigration reform. He pointed to the defeat last week of Republican House majority leader Eric Cantor by a Tea Party candidate who criticized Cantor's support for limited immigration reform.
But some progressives have also balked at provisions in the proposed bill. Mayor Bill de Blasio has called for municipal ID cards for undocumented immigrants, but said last year he's "not comfortable" with the idea of noncitizen voting.
“We are certainly asking for everyone in the Senate and the Assembly as well as in other sectors—the mayor and the governor—to support it, and we will have conversations with them going forward," Rivera said. "We are just starting the conversation."
Assembly Member Karim Camara, the bill’s sponsor in the Assembly, said the broad scope of the bill could help other stalled measures, like the Dream Act and a bill to allow undocumented immigrants access to drivers' licenses.
“We’re hoping that by looking at this big picture, and this is probably one of the most ambitious efforts over at least the last decade or two, maybe those smaller pieces now seem like they’re not that big of a deal,” said Camara.
Camara said he hoped the bill would create momentum for other immigration reform initiatives by the start of the next legislative session.
“We didn’t break it into priorities in this bill, but we’re hoping that by looking at this overarching bill it’ll perhaps make those other smaller bills easier—drivers' license, Dream Act, et cetera,” he said.
Camara blamed the balance of power in the Senate for those bills being unsuccessful in the past, and said if that was to change there may be more hope for immigration reform on a state level.
“The Republican-led Senate has been a main challenge," he said. "We would have passed it this year if it was not for that. So of course there is that elephant in the room, that political dynamic that we can’t avoid, and if that’s not the case then we’ll appeal to individuals’ reason."
Source
Ciudades no sólo benefician a los inmigrantes con el ID municipal
Ciudades no sólo benefician a los inmigrantes con el ID municipal
Ocho años atrás, a raíz de ataques contra la comunidad local de inmigrantes y el fracaso de la legislatura estatal en...
Ocho años atrás, a raíz de ataques contra la comunidad local de inmigrantes y el fracaso de la legislatura estatal en expandir el acceso a licencias de conducir, la ciudad de New Haven creó el primer programa municipal del país que otorga un documento de identificación.
Poco a poco, otras ciudades siguieron el ejemplo de New Haven y reconocieron los grandes beneficios que otorga una identificación municipal, no solo para los residentes que no pueden obtener acceso a otros tipos de identificación emitida por el gobierno, sino por el bien de la vida política y económica en general.
Al principio, la adopción de programas de identificación municipal fue un proceso lento, pero se ha acelerado significativamente en el año 2015, impulsada en gran parte por el lanzamiento de la identificación municipal de la ciudad de Nueva York. El IDNYC , aprobado por el Concejo Municipal el año pasado y estrenado a inicios de este año por el alcalde Bill de Blasio, es ahora el más extenso programa de identificación municipal en el país, con más de 350,000 inscritos.
Sin la correcta identificación, una persona tal vez no pueda abrir una cuenta bancaria o cobrar un cheque, recibir atención médica en un hospital, inscribir a su hijo en la escuela, solicitar beneficios públicos, presentar una queja ante el departamento de policía, sacar libros de la biblioteca, votar en las elecciones o siquiera recoger un paquete de la oficina de correos. Con una simple medida, la identificación municipal elimina todas esas barreras.
Si bien las comunidades inmigrantes han sido una fuerza influyente al solicitar que las ciudades adopten programas de identificación municipal, los beneficiarios no se limitarán a las comunidades de inmigrantes.
La identificación municipal es una medida política de gran impacto, precisamente por su potencial de adaptarse a un amplio espectro de situaciones de la vida real. Una docena de ciudades tienen programas nuevos, y hay campañas a su favor en otras tantas. Estos programas tienen el propósito de reducir la falta de acceso a servicios municipales para jóvenes, personas sin hogar, ancianos, ex convictos y personas trasgénero.
Las ciudades también se están dando cuenta de que, para que sus programas de identificación local tengan éxito, deben ser atractivos para todos, incluso residentes que ya tienen otras formas de identificación. El uso de estos documentos de identificación otorga beneficios en negocios e instituciones culturales locales. De esta manera, las ciudades atraen una amplia gama de participantes, lo que le da mayor legitimidad a dicho documento en la comunidad.
Mientras continúe la lucha por la reforma a nivel federal, la identificación municipal es algo que los gobiernos locales pueden hacer para incluir y empoderar a los inmigrantes en su comunidad.
Programas como estos envían un mensaje de inclusión y bienvenida no solo dentro de los linderos de la ciudad donde existen, sino también externamente, hacia el resto del país y Washington DC, donde millones de vidas están en la cuerda floja, pendientes de un debate paralizado.
Source: El Diario
Joining Forces to Win
The Huffington Post - November 21, 2013, by Ana María Archila - As progressives, we need to dramatically increase our...
The Huffington Post - November 21, 2013, by Ana María Archila - As progressives, we need to dramatically increase our scale and reach to win. With the merger of the Center for Popular Democracy (CPD) and the Leadership Center for the Common Good (LCCG) in January 2014, we are poised to do just that. The stakes are high. The crisis in American society is severe: Inequality is now at the highest level ever recorded. In 2012, the top 1 percent of U.S. households received 19.3 percent of all household income.
The income gap between white and non-white America is growing even faster. Between 2005 and 2009, median white wealth declined by 16 percent, while median black wealth dropped by 53 percent and Latino wealth declined by 66 percent. Increasing economic inequality is being matched by increasing political inequality. Our democracy and the political participation of people of color, young people and the elderly are being eroded by state legislatures, with the tacit support of the Supreme Court.
All this would be much worse of course, if not for the work of the progressive organizations and movements that have fought inequality and racism for decades.
We can, and must, go farther and faster to fight inequality, the erosion of democracy and racial injustice. There is a growing opportunity to challenge the status quo and to build a society characterized by opportunity, equality and inclusion. Increasingly strong and assertive community organizations across the country are stepping up to demand better. Immigrant organizations, worker centers, progressive unions, elected officials and people of faith are envisioning and creating more inclusive and equitable cities and states, even in spite of our failed national politics.
The most successful community campaigns present a new vision for change, a creativity and fearlessness to promote policies many have thought unachievable, as well as a canny understanding of how to navigate local political forces.
My organization, the Center for Popular Democracy, works at the center of this emerging new politics, working to build the capacity and resilience of rooted, democratic, community-organizing institutions. We feel the urgency to grow our movement, to build new strength, to share organizing models and strategies more broadly, and to replicate campaigns and tactics that work to confront racial and economic inequality.
Just as our movement needs more power and reach, so do we. That's why we are merging with the Leadership Center for the Common Good to create a newly powerful Center for Popular Democracy on January 1, 2014. Our organizations' sister c4 organizations, Action for the Common Good and Center for Popular Democracy Action Fund will also merge to create a newly powerful Action for the Common Good. Part campaign center, part capacity builder, part policy shop, our merged and expanded organizations will work together to more effectively build the strength and capacity of democratic organizations to envision and advance a pro-worker, pro-immigrant, racial and economic justice agenda. From recent successes, we have a sense of what is possible when working communities are well organized, resourced and equipped to demand change. In New York, coalitions of community groups, progressive unions, and faith networks came together this year to secure a raft of impressive victories, from a raise in the state's minimum wage, to the adoption of paid sick days' legislation in New York City to the passage of pro-immigrant language access initiatives in both Nassau and Suffolk Counties on Long Island. And, in the face of fierce opposition from outgoing Mayor Bloomberg, CPD and our allies secured passage of new laws to stop the discriminatory policing tactics of the NYPD -- Stop and Frisk. CPD brought our policy expertise, strategy insights, and coalition coordination experience to these fights -- helping drive them to victory.
The New York victories mirror the work we are engaged in across the country -- in 27 states with more than 90 partners nationally. Through strategic and sustained local and state victories, driven by strong community and labor partners, and supported in important ways by CPD, we can secure tangible improvements in working people's lives and generate the upward pressure and momentum necessary to refocus national policy on furthering values of equity, opportunity and democracy for all.
Strong local organizations with a clear vision and an appetite for bold action are well able to scale up to win national victories when strategic opportunities present themselves. Last May, for example, the Home Defenders League, a project of LCCG and many close allies, staged a dramatic week of action which included civil disobedience by foreclosed homeowners at the Department of Justice as well as at other sites. Their actions tied together the simmering public outrage over the lack of prosecutions of Wall Street banks with a need to find relief for the hard hit families and communities. Five months later, reports of a pending $13 billion federal settlement with JPMorgan Chase suggest the long fight may be about to yield results.
The launch of the merged and expanded Center for Popular Democracy and Action for the Common Good is our ambitious move to help increase the strength, scale and reach of community organizing. Together, we are stronger. Together, we can build the power we need to win.
Source
Pittsburgh police tightening security for march after Dallas
Pittsburgh police tightening security for march after Dallas
PITTSBURGH (AP) - Pittsburgh police say they're using uniformed and plainclothes officers and "extreme caution" to...
PITTSBURGH (AP) - Pittsburgh police say they're using uniformed and plainclothes officers and "extreme caution" to safeguard police and the public at an activists march on Friday.
The march opening the People's Convention at the city's convention center is billed as protesting "growing inequality and a toxic atmosphere of hate." Organizers expect 1,500 activists to march through downtown protesting what they believe are various social ills.
Pittsburgh's Public Safety Department is working with the FBI and other law enforcement in the wake of sniper shootings that killed five police officers and wounded seven others at a protest march in Dallas on Thursday.
Pittsburgh Bishop David Zubik also planned a noon Mass to pray for "peace and reconciliation."
And Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput (SHAP'-yoo) says the Dallas murders "only discredit" such protesters' "legitimate anger."
Source
2 hours ago
2 hours ago