Liberals turn to Fed in populist push
Left-leaning groups and lawmakers are taking their populist economic fight to the Federal Reserve, as they seek to...
Left-leaning groups and lawmakers are taking their populist economic fight to the Federal Reserve, as they seek to exert new influence over key monetary decisions and a pair of vacancies at the central bank.
The Fed has faced heavy criticism from the right for years, but the other side of the aisle is now beginning to publicly push the institution for preferred policies. With Congress and the White House seemingly set to butt heads for the next two years, left-leaning community and labor groups are turning to the Fed in an attempt to get an economic policy boost for middle- and working-class Americans.
“In the face of the fiscal side not being really a realistic option to promote an economic recovery, the most important economic policymaker in the United States is the Federal Reserve,” said Shawn Sebastian, policy advocate for the Center for Popular Democracy.
And after successfully driving President Obama to nominate Janet Yellen to lead the Fed, some Senate Democrats are again pressing the administration about openings at the central bank. Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) are vocally calling on Obama to nominate tough-nosed Wall Street watchdogs to fill out two board spots that often are filled by academics or economists.
The resurgence of left-leaning interest in the Fed’s operations further complicates the bank’s efforts to remain above the political fray. The Fed has weathered years of criticism from the right, which argues its unprecedented foray into monetary stimulus after the recession was a recipe for disaster.But now, with the Fed preparing to finally dial back years’ worth of quantitative easing, it’s the other side that is airing concerns. This time, the worry is that the Fed could tighten policy too quickly, even as millions of Americans still are looking for work or grappling with stagnant paychecks.
“I have been concerned for some time that when the Federal Reserve began to tighten policy that they would be subject to considerable pressure from people who don’t want them to do that,” said Donald Kohn, a former Fed vice chairman now with the Brookings Institution.
A host of left-leaning groups, including the AFL-CIO and the Economic Policy Institute, have joined forces to take a populist message directly to the Fed. The groups have protested a central bank powwow in Jackson Hole, Wyo., and have held public protests outside the institution’s headquarters in Washington.
The leftward push on the Fed follows those groups notching a major victory at the central bank in 2013. With Obama reportedly favoring economic adviser Lawrence Summers to replace the outgoing Ben Bernanke as head of the Fed, Democrats on and off Capitol Hill embarked on a concerted campaign to get Yellen nominated for the top job instead.
Democratic lawmakers took the rare step of publicly advocating for Yellen, then the Fed’s vice chairwoman, before a nomination was made, effectively announcing opposition to Summers in the process. Though Obama defended Summers in public, he ultimately deferred to that pressure and nominated Yellen for the job.
Now, Warren and Manchin are hoping to exert more influence, calling on Obama to fill two openings at the seven-member board with tough supervisors who “have a demonstrated commitment to not backing down when they find problems.”
Fed governors are given a 14-year term, so if those two find success on that front, the end result could be a considerable shift in how the central bank operates as a financial regulator. And any new voices would likely receive an open hearing from Yellen, whose background is as an economist, not a regulator.
“My impression is that Chair Yellen is running the system by consensus in a considerable way, she consults widely,” said Kohn.
Since taking the job, Yellen has made a concerted effort to place the Fed’s deliberations within the context of the working class. One of her first acts as the Fed’s new leader was to address at a Chicago event how the central bank hoped to boost jobs, and she has agreed to meet with left-leaning protestors to hear their concerns.
But Yellen’s openness to those new voices is leaving some unsettled.
“There’s a trend here that’s pretty clear and pretty concerning,” said Steven Lonegan, director of monetary policy at American Principles in Action, which advocates for tighter Fed policy, including a return to the gold standard.
“You can’t start manipulating the value of our money because you have a specific political agenda,” he added.
But these new advocates argue the Fed has always been subject to politics. Sebastian argued that Fed officials and those that track Fed policy skew heavily from corporate and banking interests, leaving a “Main Street” voice out of the picture.
“Every person carries political baggage,” he said. “All we’re trying to do is have that conversation reflect reality.”
But even the people behind the new leftward push on the Fed acknowledge advocacy of the publicly mysterious institution is somewhat novel. Conservative criticism of the Fed has been around for years, first helmed by former Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), but a more liberal effort for influence has not been seen in decades.
“This is a new space for us,” said Sebastian. “We don’t know what the effect of this type of engagement will be.”
Source: The Hill
The Fed's lack of diversity is hurting its judgment
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen found herself in the hot seat at the recent bi-annual Humphrey Hawkins testimony as...
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen found herself in the hot seat at the recent bi-annual Humphrey Hawkins testimony as members of Congress challenged her over the lack of diversity among the Fed's ranks.
Asked by Senator Elizabeth Warren whether she was concerned that 10 of the 12 Fed's regional presidents are men, Yellen answered that she did believe it was "important to have a diverse group of policymakers who can bring different perspectives to bear."
The nation's central bank has recently come under intense scrutiny for appointing predominantly white men from the banking and corporate sectors to leadership positions. Last month, 127 members of Congress sent a widely publicized letter to Yellen calling for her to commit to leadership that better reflects the diversity of the United States.
For the last two years, the Fed Up coalition – comprised of community organizations and labor groups in each of the 12 Federal Reserve districts – has sat down with Yellen and other Fed policymakers to ask that more diverse candidates are considered for directorships at the Federal Reserve Banks, and that the process for selecting Federal Reserve Bank presidents be opened up to greater transparency and public input.
The call for a Fed membership that reflects America's diversity was enshrined in a law passed by Congress 40 years ago, an important thing to keep in mind when considering the modest recent progress touted by Yellen. The law requires the Federal Reserve to "represent the public, without discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, or national origin, and with due but not exclusive consideration to the interests of agriculture, commerce, industry, services, labor and consumers."
While we are encouraged that Yellen became the first woman ever to hold the position of Fed Chair in 2014, the reality of the Federal Reserve is far from representative of the public. Currently, 11 of the 12 regional Reserve Bank presidents are white and 10 of the 12 are men. Not a single Reserve Bank president is Black or Latino, which means there is no representation from the communities hardest hit by the 2008 financial crisis. In fact, there has never been an African American president of a Reserve Bank in the history of the Federal Reserve System.
Moreover, all voting members of the Fed's powerful interest rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) are white.
This is a problem. The power for ensuring the country reaches full employment rests solely with people who do not share the lived experiences of those most affected by their policies. The voices of women, African-Americans, Latinos, and representatives of consumers and labor are being shut out of key discussions over our economic future.
The impact of the economic crisis was not experienced uniformly across different communities, with the vaunted recovery never reaching some segments. The unemployment rate for African-Americans currently stands at 9 percent, more than double the unemployment rate for white Americans of 4.3 percent. The Latino unemployment rate of 5.6 percent is also worse than what it is for white Americans.
In a marked shift from her stance a year ago, Yellen noted racial disparities in economic outcomes in her opening remarks to Congress and stressed the importance of monitoring "different groups in the labor market to see if what we perceived as broad-based labor market improvement is being widely shared."
"Elizabeth Warren told Janet Yellen that the current process for appointing regional bank presidents 'is broken.'"
Compare this with her testimony last year, when Yellen dismissed the impact full employment can have on reducing racial disparities in unemployment and wages, claiming the Fed's tools were limited.
Yellen separately acknowledged racial disparities and the need for greater diversity among Fed leadership, but stopped short of linking the two. We believe the two are inextricably linked – a Fed filled with white male bankers will never be able to fully relate to impoverished communities of color.
That is why we have offered Yellen a slate of 39 candidates from which she can appoint directors to sit on the boards of the regional Banks. Drawn from all 12 Fed regions, the candidates are racially diverse, gender balanced and come from a range of backgrounds in labor, academia, and community-based organizations.
Elizabeth Warren told Janet Yellen that the current process for appointing regional Bank presidents "is broken." Yellen can demonstrate her commitment to diversity by appointing any of these 39 candidates to open board director positions.
Warren and other members of Congress in both houses are standing with low-wage workers to shine a light on our nation's opaque but vitally important economic policymaking institution. It's time for the Fed to heed the call on behalf of the millions of Americans around the country who are still suffering from the devastating impact of the 2008 crisis. It's time for the Fed to truly represent the public.
By Dushaw Hockett
Source
Should state be allowed to take over chronically failing schools?
Should state be allowed to take over chronically failing schools?
Georgia voters are being asked to approve a new and controversial way to improve public education. The proposal would...
Georgia voters are being asked to approve a new and controversial way to improve public education. The proposal would empower the state to take over chronically failing schools or convert them to charters or even close them.
It’s called Amendment 1 on the Nov. 8 ballot, and it’s called the Opportunity School District in the legislation that authorized it. The Georgia General Assembly passed Senate Bill 133 during this year’s session with the required two-thirds majority in both chambers. The referendum now needs a simple majority from voters to become law.
Then it asks voters this question:
“Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended to allow the state to intervene in chronically failing public schools in order to improve student performance?”
Gov. Nathan Deal’s OSD proposal, based on similar initiatives in Louisiana and Tennessee, would allow Georgia’s governor to appoint an OSD superintendent, separate from the Georgia Department of Education superintendent, who is elected by voters. The OSD superintendent could take over as many as 20 eligible schools each year and control no more than 100 such schools at any time. The OSD superintendent could waive Georgia Board of Education rules, reorganize or fire staff and change school budgets and curriculum. The state also could convert OSD schools to nonprofit or for-profit charter schools or close them if they don’t have full enrollment.
The state would use the College and Career Ready Performance Index to determine which schools are eligible for takeover. Schools that score below 60 on the 100-point CCRPI for three straight years could be included in the OSD. Those schools would stay in the OSD for no less than five years (or, if they are an OSD charter school, for the length of the initial charter’s term) and no more than 10 years before returning to local control. Opportunity Schools could be removed from the OSD whenever they are graded above an F in the state’s accountability system for three straight years.
Muscogee County had 10 of the 141 schools on the state’s original list of chronically failing schools released last year. Georgetown and Rigdon Road elementary schools, however, improved enough with other schools in the state on the 2015 CCRPI to move off the list. That leaves 127 schools in Georgia and these eight in Muscogee on the current list: Baker Middle School and Davis, Dawson, Forrest Road, Fox, Lonnie Jackson, Martin Luther King Jr. and South Columbus elementary schools.
The case for Yes
OSD proponents cite the number of chronically failing schools as the most obvious reason to try something drastically new. They also note the reduction in the number of chronically failing schools since the threat of state takeover became possible after Senate Bill 133 passed.
Deal says on his proposal’s website, “While Georgia boasts many schools that achieve academic excellence every year, we still have too many schools where students have little hope of attaining the skills they need to succeed in the workforce or in higher education. We have a moral duty to do everything we can to help these children. Failing schools keep the cycle of poverty spinning from one generation to the next. Education provides the only chance for breaking that cycle. When we talk about helping failing schools, we’re talking about rescuing children. I stand firm on the principle that every child can learn, and I stand equally firm in the belief that the status quo isn’t working.”
Alyssa Botts, spokewoman for the pro-Amendment 1 campaign committee Opportunity for All Georgia Students noted, “The graduation rate for students attending failing schools is an abysmal 55.7 percent,” compared to the most recent statewide figure of 78.8 percent in the class of 2015.
“A school that fails to properly educate its students perpetuates cycles of poverty and increases the likelihood of incarceration,” Botts said in an email to the Ledger-Enquirer. “For many students, educational opportunities provide the best chance to break out of these cycles. … Voting ‘yes’ for the Opportunity School District amendment is a vote to ensure that future generations of Georgians will have the best opportunities available. No child in Georgia should be forced by law to attend a failing school.”
The governor-appointed Georgia Board of Education and the Georgia Chamber of Commerce have endorsed the OSD referendum.
Michael O’Sullivan, executive director of the Georgia Campaign for Achievement Now, part of the 50-state CAN nonprofit organization advocating “a high-quality education for all kids, regardless of their address,” has successfully fought a similar political battle, helping to convince voters to approve the 2012 Georgia charter school amendment. And the OSD is the next logical step, he figures.
“What this has done is create a sense of urgency for districts to act,” O’Sullivan said in an interview with the Ledger-Enquirer. “Voters should be asking what’s being done now? What plans are in place to improve our schools? That’s the ultimate goal. How can we ensure that every student in the state has access to quality education? Right now, 68,000 students attend a school that has failed at least three years or more.”
The opposition is based on being “afraid of loss of control,” O’Sullivan said. “… It’s my hope that opponents would be putting as much effort into fixing their schools so they aren’t eligible for the OSD. I can tell you which option will be best for schools.”
O’Sullivan emphasized that state takeover is only one option for intervention in the OSD.
“There is the ability for the state to assist schools that are failing for one year or two years, and then, after three years, there is a multiple intervention model,” he said. “One is a joint governance structure, with the OSD and the local school district working together to turn around the school.”
Addressing concerns that OSD schools would receive less funding, O’Sullivan said, “Whatever amount that would have been dedicated to that school remains in that school.”
Louisiana enacted the Recovery School District in 2003. The RSD comprises 62 autonomous charter schools in Orleans, East Baton Rouge and Caddo parishes with a total enrollment of more than 32,000 students, according to the RSD’s 2015 annual report. The percentage of RSD schools considered to be failing has been reduced from 44 percent in 2011 to 19 percent in 2015, the report says.
According to the RSD’s 2014 annual report, the percentage of students performing at the basic level or above increased 29 percentage points from 2008 to 2014, while the state average increased 9 percentage points.
In New Orleans, 63 percent of the public school students are in the RSD. According to a June 2015 study by Patrick Sims and Vincent Rossmeier of the Cowen Institute for Public Education Initiatives at Tulane University, “the percentage of (New Orleans) students at the basic level or above has increased 15 percentage points over the past six years. That growth has largely come from the RSD, which has improved by 20 percentage points.”
In Tennessee, as of the 2015-16 school, there were 29 schools in the Achievement School District, enacted in 2010 with the goal of moving the state’s bottom 5 percent of school into the top 25 percent of student achievement. The ASD has made progress, according to its July 2015 report.
“Over a three-year period, ASD students have earned double-digit gains in math and science proficiency and have grown faster than their state peers,” the report says.
The ASD reading scores, however, declined along with the state average.
“We know from national research and our own experience that reading growth tends to lag behind other subjects in a school turnaround setting,” Malika Anderson, then the ASD deputy superintendent and now its superintendent, says in the report.
The case for No
Georgia Federation of Teachers president Verdaillia Turner, a retired Atlanta educator, has seen the statistics that indicate state takeovers improved student achievement, but her organization touts evidence that argues otherwise.
The federation says in its campaign literature that the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a lawsuit against the state-created school district in New Orleans on behalf of 4,500 students for denying appropriate services. A July 2015 SPLC fact sheet notes that, while an average of 19.4 percent of students with disabilities graduated high school in Louisiana, only 6.8 percent of them graduated in the Recovery School District.
A February 2016 report titled “State Takeovers of Low-Performing Schools: A Record of Academic Failure, Financial Mismanagement and Student Harm” from the Center for Popular Democracy, a liberal-leaning nonprofit advocacy group, found that state takeovers of schools in Louisiana, Michigan and Tennessee produced:
▪ “Negligible improvement — or even dramatic setbacks — in their educational performance.”
▪ “A breeding ground for fraud and mismanagement at the public’s expense.”
▪ “High turnover and instability” among staff, “creating a disrupted learning environment for children.”
▪ “Harsh disciplinary measures and discriminatory practices” for students of color and those with special needs.
Turner fears too much of the motivation for the OSD proposal is about creating profit opportunities in public schools for private charter school companies.
“The bottom line here is that this is a new business at the public’s expense,” Turner said in an interview with the Ledger-Enquirer. “The only thing public about these schools is our tax dollars.”
The federation notes the OSD may retain 3 percent of state funds for administrative operations, reducing the amount of money available for instruction.
“I love my state, and I respect the office of the governor and all of government,” Turner said. “However, this is still a democracy, and we believe that educators and the public need not be misled by what’s about to happen.”
That includes the OSD superintendent’s authority to “get rid of people at will” at any OSD school, Turner said. “The law says, the last line in Senate Bill 133 says, all laws in conflict with this act are repealed.”
Turner noted the state’s standardized testing system has changed the past five consecutive years. “Therefore, we know it’s not reliable,” she said.
In many chronically failing schools, Turner said, “children end up going to jail. But in many of these same schools, children go to Yale. So we need to have a real conversation about what makes schools work.”
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has reported that a political group called the Committee to Keep Georgia Schools Local has a TV ad campaign opposing the OSD referendum. The group includes the Georgia Association of Educators, Georgia AFL-CIO, the Professional Association of Georgia Educators, Georgia Stand-Up, the Coalition for the People’s Agenda, Public Education Matters, Southern Education Foundation, Working America, Pro Georgia, Better Georgia, Georgia Federation of Teachers and Concerned Black Clergy of Metro Atlanta, according to the AJC.
The Georgia School Boards Association’s board of directors voted to oppose the amendment. School boards representing the counties of Bibb, Chatham, Cherokee, Clayton, Fayette, Henry, Richmond and Troup have expressed opposition.
The Muscogee County School Board was scheduled to join them last month, but the proposed resolution was deleted from the agenda between the Sept. 12 work session and the Sept. 20 meeting. Neither superintendent David Lewis nor board chairman Rob Varner has responded to the Ledger-Enquirer’s requests for an explanation.
Responding on their behalf, MCSD communications director Valerie Fuller also didn’t explain the sudden change in thinking, who proposed the resolution, who rescinded it and why. Here is her statement in an email to the Ledger-Enquirer:
“The Muscogee County School District is a public school system, which is supported by taxpayer money. All of our stakeholders (taxpayers, students, parents, teachers administrators and staff) have different opinions on this proposal. Although we believe, and the results indicate, that we are making progress with our challenged schools, to take a side could anger supporters, who might say the BOE is opposed to helping ‘failing’ schools.
“We don’t think it would be wise for a publicly elected body to pass a resolution in opposition of this amendment that might result in controversy, causing unnecessary distractions from the work being done on behalf of these schools. Because this could result in a change to Georgia’s Constitution, we do believe it is important for voters to read and be fully informed about the amendment and its implications.”
In a letter Tuesday to school district superintendents and Regional Education Service Agency directors, Georgia Department of Education deputy superintendent for external affairs and policy Garry McGiboney reminded public school officials that the Georgia Office of the Attorney General advised the GaDOE in 2012, “Local school boards do not have the legal authority to expend funds or other resources to advocate or oppose the ratification of a constitutional amendment by the voters.”
Regardless of whether the proposed OSD is good for Georgia, the referendum’s wording doesn’t accurately explain it, some folks insist. The Georgia PTA called it “deceptive.”
“If the governor and state legislators believe the best way to fix struggling schools is to put them under state control and either close them or turn them over to charter schools, then let the language on the ballot reflect this initiative,” Georgia PTA president Lisa-Marie Haygood said in a news release. “As it stands, the preamble, and indeed, the entire amendment question, is intentionally misleading and disguises the true intentions of the OSD legislation.”
To that end, a class-action lawsuit was filed Sept. 27 against the governor, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp. The three lead plaintiffs, all from metro Atlanta — parent Kimberly Brooks, First Iconium Baptist Church senior pastor Timothy McDonald III and Coweta County teacher Melissa Ladd — allege in the complaint that the wording is “so misleading and deceptive that it violates the due process and voting rights of all Georgia voters.”
Gerry Weber, an Atlanta lawyer representing the three lead plaintiffs, told the Ledger-Enquirer in an interview the Georgia Supreme Court ruled about 10 years ago that a challenge to the wording of ballot measures must be decided after the vote because the lawsuit would be moot if the proposal fails.
The Ledger-Enquirer asked Deal spokeswoman Jen Talaber Ryan for the governor’s response to the allegation about the referendum’s wording. Ryan replied in an email, “The opposition didn’t attend the publicly announced constitutional amendment meeting where the language was discussed and approved. Why don’t you ask them why? And the preamble and question say exactly what the OSD will do — provide a lifeline for children forced by law to attend a failing school. The only thing misleading here is the fact that national, outside special interest groups are spending money instead of local groups. After all, their go to line is about ‘local control.’ Hypocritical, don’t you think?”
Keep Georgia Schools Local campaign manager Louis Elrod told the Ledger-Enquirer in an email from media relations manager Michelle Davis, “It’s unbelievable that pro-school takeover advocates would make this charge. They are grasping at straws because they’re desperate and losing this fight.
“They know full well that many members of our bipartisan coalition of parents, teachers and public school advocates actively petitioned for changes to both the amendment and the ballot question at multiple hearings. The even more deceptive preamble language was drafted at a separate meeting in Deal’s office. Janet Kishbaugh of Public Education Matters Georgia says she and other opponents called and searched online daily to find an announcement of this meeting. It was later revealed that the preamble was written in Deal’s office in a meeting attended only by the three men who drafted the words.
“The pro-takeover campaign’s political maneuvering just confirms what we know about their intentions — this amendment is designed to silence parents and strip away local control.”
Do your homework and vote
The Georgia Partnership for Excellence in Education has taken a neutral position on the OSD referendum, but the partnership’s president, Steve Dolinger, is advocating this:
“The important thing is Georgia voters do their own homework on this issue and make their decision based on solid research and fact-finding, not emotion,” Dolinger, who was superintendent of Fulton County Schools (1995-2002), said in an email to the Ledger-Enquirer from Bill Maddox, the partnership’s communications director. “Both sides make compelling arguments, but it should always come down to what the voter feels is right for the children of our state.”
BY MARK RICE
Source
The First Time Maria Gallagher Talked About Her Sexual Assault, It Was to Senator Flake
The First Time Maria Gallagher Talked About Her Sexual Assault, It Was to Senator Flake
The Senate Judiciary Committee has officially voted to move Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination forward. However...
The Senate Judiciary Committee has officially voted to move Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination forward. However, Sen. Jeff Flake has requested an FBI investigation take place before the full Senate votes on Kavanaugh's confirmation, something Republican leaders have now agreed to, per The Hill.
Read the article and watch the video here.
De Blasio and Mayors of Chicago, Los Angeles Launch Initiative to Help Immigrants Become U.S. Citizens
SILive - September 18, 2014, by Anna Sanders - Mayor Bill de Blasio on Wednesday announced the launch of a new...
SILive - September 18, 2014, by Anna Sanders - Mayor Bill de Blasio on Wednesday announced the launch of a new initiative to push for eligible immigrants to become U.S. citizens in the nation's three largest cities.
"Cities for Citizenship" aims to increase naturalization programs and other efforts to help immigrants in New York City, Chicago and Los Angeles.
"This win-win effort will help us create more inclusive cities that lift up everyone," de Blasio said in a statement announcing the initiative. "From increased economic activity to larger voting and tax bases, the advantages of citizenship will not only expand opportunity to our immigrant families, but to all New Yorkers and residents nationwide."
The de Blasio administration said increasing immigrant access to citizenship will help fight poverty and estimated that naturalizing 684,000 legal permanent residents will add up to $4.1 billion to the city's economy over a decade.
In a report released Wednesday, the Center for Popular Democracy estimated that there are about 750,000 legal permanent residents eligible for naturalization.
Citigroup, a corporate partner of the initiative, will contribute $1.15 million for the new initiative.
New York City will use funds for NYCitizenship, a coordinated effort to connect low- and moderate-income New Yorkers to free legal assistance during the naturalization process. NYCitizenship works with city agencies to connect those in the city eligible to become U.S. citizens with assistance, such as legal advice, help on applications and financial counseling.
The NYCitizenship program has already helped more than 1,800 New Yorkers complete naturalization applications since 2012, according to the Center for Popular Democracy report.
In addition to the initiative, the city's Office of Immigrant Affairs will also commission a study on the economic impact of citizenship programs nationwide.
Source
Charter School Oversight Lacking, Report Says
Epoch Times - May 18, 2014, by Petr Svab - Due to poor oversight charter schools lost over $100 million to waste, fraud...
Epoch Times - May 18, 2014, by Petr Svab - Due to poor oversight charter schools lost over $100 million to waste, fraud, and abuse over the past 20 years, according to a report by two anti-charter non-profits.
The $100 million cited by the report is an aggregation of audit and prosecution results on local, state, and federal levels.
The Center for Popular Democracy, and Integrity in Education, are both relatively new organizations, formed in 2012 and 2014 respectively. Both have a track record of opposing charter schools.
Charter schools are publicly funded but privately run. They operate under “charters” issued for five years that require them to measure up to goals the schools set, including academic goals.
The federal Department of Education’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) stated in 2010 that local agencies issuing the charters “often fail to provide adequate oversight needed to ensure that Federal funds are properly used and accounted for.”
There are three such agencies in New York State: State University of New York, Board of Regents, and the New York City Department of Education. None of them responded to an immediate request for comment.
Between January 2005 and September 2013 the OIG opened 62 charter school investigations, resulting in 40 indictments and 26 convictions of charter school officials.
New York did relatively well. The report cites only two cases of fraud or mismanagement. One dealt with the East New York Preparatory Charter School in Brooklyn. It was ordered to close in 2010 after revelations that the school’s founder named herself a superintendent and gave herself a $60,000 raise.
Another school mentioned was the Niagara Charter School in Buffalo, where the State Education Department found “pervasive appearance of financial mismanagement and less-than ethical behavior,” including spending on plane tickets, restaurant meals, and alcohol, and over $100,000 spent on no-bid consulting contracts.
With the charter school sector growing, the report argues that charter-issuing organizations often lack the resources to do proper oversight. Just last year, over 600 charter schools opened across the nation. There are an estimated 6,400 charter schools enrolling over 2.5 million students, according to the report.
Source
BERNANKE’S FORMER ADVISOR: “PEOPLE WOULD BE STUNNED TO KNOW THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE FED IS PRIVATELY OWNED”
BERNANKE’S FORMER ADVISOR: “PEOPLE WOULD BE STUNNED TO KNOW THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE FED IS PRIVATELY OWNED”
With every passing day, the Fed is slowly but surely losing the game. Only it is not just former (and in some cases...
With every passing day, the Fed is slowly but surely losing the game.
Only it is not just former (and in some cases current) Fed presidents admitting central banks are increasingly powerless to boost the global economy, even if they still have sway over capital markets. What is far more insidious to the Fed’s waning credibility is when former economists affiliated with the Fed start repeating mantras that until recently were only a prominent feature in the so-called fringe media.
This is precisely what happened today when former central bank staffer and Dartmouth College economics professor Andrew Levin, special adviser to then Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke between 2010 to 2012, joined with an activist group to argue for overhauls at the central bank that they say would distance it from Wall Street and make its activities more transparent and accountable to the public.
Levin is pressing for the overhaul with Fed Up coalition activists. Many of the proposed changes target the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, which are quasi-private and technically owned by commercial banks in their respective districts.
All of that is not surprising. What he said to justify his new found cause, however, is.
“A lot of people would be stunned to know” the extent to which the Federal Reserve is privately owned, Mr. Levin said. The Fed “should be a fully public institution just like every other central bank” in the developed world, he said in a conference call announcing the plan. He described his proposals as “sensible, pragmatic and nonpartisan.”
Why is that stunning? Because it has long been a bone of contention if only among the fringe media, that at its core the Fed is merely a private institution, beholden only to its de facto owners: not the people of the U.S. but to a small cabal of banks. Worse, the actual org chart of who owns what is not disclosed, even as the vast majority of the U.S. population remains deluded that the Fed is a publicly owned institution.
As the WSJ goes on to note, the former central bank staffer said he sees his ideas as designed to maintain the virtues the central bank already brings to the table. They aren’t targeted at changing how policy is conducted today. “What’s important here is that reform to the Federal Reserve can last for 100 years, not just the near term,” he said.
And this is coming from a former Fed employee and Ben Bernanke’s personal advisor! That in itself is a most striking development, because now that the insiders are finally speaking up, it will be a race among both current and prior Fed workers to reveal as much dirty laundry as possible ahead of what is increasingly being perceived by many as the Fed’s demise.
To be sure, Levin’s personal campaign for Fed transformation will not be easy, and as the WSJ writes, what is being sought by Mr. Levin and the activists is significant and would require congressional action. Ady Barkan, who leads the Fed Up campaign, said the Fed’s current structure “is an embarrassment to America” and Fed leaders haven’t been “willing or able” to make changes.
Specifically, Levin wants the 12 regional Fed banks to be brought fully into the government. He also wants the process of selecting new bank presidents—they are key regulators and contributors in setting interest-rate policy—opened up more fully to public input, as well as term limits for Fed officials.
This would represent a revolution to the internal staffing of the Fed, which will no longer be at the mercy of its now-defunct shareholders, America’s commercial banks; it would also mean that Goldman Sachs would lose all its leverage as the world’s biggest central bank incubator, a revolving door relationship which has allowed the Manhattan firm to dominate the world of finance for the decades.
Levin’s proposal was made in conjunction with the Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up coalition, a group that has been pressuring the central bank for more accountability for some time. The left-leaning group has been critical of the structure of the regional banks, and has been pressing the Fed to hold off on raising rates in a bid to make sure the recovery is enjoyed not just by the wealthy, in their view.
The proposal was revealed on a conference call that also included a representative from Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign, although all campaigns were invited to participate.
The WSJ adds that according to Levin, who knows the Fed’s operating structure intimately, says the members of the regional Fed bank boards of directors, the majority of whom are selected by the private banks with the approval of the Washington-based governors, should be chosen differently. The professor says director slots now reserved for financial professionals regulated by the Fed should be eliminated, and that directors who oversee and advise the regional banks should be selected in a public process involving the Washington governors and local elected officials. These directors also should better represent the diversity of the U.S.
Levin also wants formal public input into the selection of new bank presidents, with candidates’ names known publicly and a process that allows for public comment in a way that doesn’t now exist. The professor also wants all Fed officials to serve for single seven-year terms, which would give them the needed distance from the political process while eliminating situations where some policy makers stay at the bank for decades. Alan Greenspan, for example, was Fed chairman from 1987 to 2006.
As the WSJ conveniently adds, the selection of regional bank presidents has become a hot-button issue. Currently, the leaders of the New York, Philadelphia, Dallas and Minneapolis Fed banks are helmed by men who formerly worked for or had close connections to investment bank Goldman Sachs.
Levin called for watchdog agency the Government Accountability Office to annually review and report on Fed operations, including the regional Fed banks. He also wants the regional Fed banks to be covered under the Freedom of Information Act. A regular annual review hopefully would insulate the effort from perceptions of political interference, Mr. Levin said.
* * *
While ending the Fed may still seem like a pipe dream, at least until the market’s next major crash at which point the population may finally turn on the culprit behind America’s serial boom-bust culture, the U.S. central bank, Levin’s proposal would get to the heart of the most insidious conflict of interest in the US: the fact that the Federal Reserve works not for the people of America, but for its owners – the banks.
Which is also why, sadly, this proposal will be dead on arrival, as its passage would represent the biggest loss for Wall Street in the past 103 years, far more significant than anything Dodd-Frank could hope to accomplish.
By Zero Hedge
Source
Fed Up Coalition Complains About Jackson Hole Room Cancellations
Fed Up Coalition Complains About Jackson Hole Room Cancellations
A group of activists planning to attend the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City’s annual economic symposium in Jackson...
A group of activists planning to attend the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City’s annual economic symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyo., has filed a complaint with the National Park Service, the Department of the Interior’s Inspector General’s Office and the Justice Department after the conference hotel canceled the group’s room reservations.
The Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up Coalition said in an Aug. 9 letter that it booked 13 rooms in May at the Jackson Lake Lodge for its members for the nights of Aug. 24, 25 and 26. Last month, the lodge informed the group that their reservations had been canceled because of a “computer glitch,” according to the letter.
But the lodge didn’t cancel the reservations for other guests who booked after Fed Up did, said the letter written by Ady Barkan, campaign director of Fed Up, a left-leaning group that has lobbied for more diversity among Fed officials and more openness about the selection of regional Fed bank presidents.
“It is very hard for me to interpret the Company’s actions as anything other than a specific targeting of the Fed Up coalition,” he wrote in the letter.
Mr. Barkan said the group booked rooms at other hotels farther away from the conference, which will make it difficult for activists to attend events.
The Jackson Hole conference draws central-bank officials and economists from around the world who gather near the Grand Tetons to discuss monetary policy.
Fed Up members have been attending the conference for the past two years to urge Fed officials to hold off on raising interest rates, arguing that higher borrowing costs will slow economic growth and hurt low-income households. The group’s members often hold events and rallies near Fed events, wearing their signature green T-shirts.
A spokesperson for the Jackson Lake Lodge didn’t return a call for comment. Kathy Kupper, a spokeswoman for the National Parks Service said the lodges are run by independent contractors who are responsible for their day-to-day operations.
Mr. Barkan said he was writing the letter “to file a formal complaint regarding improper and potentially illegal behavior,” by the company.
By David Harrison
Source
Nan Goldin and P.A.I.N. Sackler Protest the Opioid Crisis at Harvard’s Sackler Museum
Nan Goldin and P.A.I.N. Sackler Protest the Opioid Crisis at Harvard’s Sackler Museum
The organization hosted over 70 protesters at a die-in demonstration last Friday. The protest operated with support...
The organization hosted over 70 protesters at a die-in demonstration last Friday. The protest operated with support from organizations like VOCAL NY, the Center for Popular Democracy, and the Harm Reduction Coalition. The group marched from Harvard Square to the atrium of the Harvard Art Museums building, which hosts the Fogg Museum, Busch-Reisinger Museum, and Arthur M. Sackler Museum. Participants threw Oxycontin and Narcan (a narcotics overdose prescription medication) containers across the floor of the atrium, chanting protests like “Sacklers lie! People die! Fund harm reduction now!” Hyperallergic reached out to the Harvard Art Museums and a representative of the institution declined to comment.
Read the full article here.
Top economists rip Fed, call for letting inflation run higher than normal
Top economists rip Fed, call for letting inflation run higher than normal
Should Federal Reserve officials meet expectations and raise interest rates next week, they will be doing so over the...
Should Federal Reserve officials meet expectations and raise interest rates next week, they will be doing so over the objections of some high-profile experts, including one who used to work for the central bank.
A coalition of economists released a letter Friday urging the Fed to change the criteria it uses to make decisions. Specifically, the group, called "Fed Up," is advocating for a higher inflation rate target than the current 2 percent level. Among its members is former Minnesota Fed President Narayana Kocherlakota.
Read the full article here.
4 days ago
4 days ago