Today we CAN do something to honor Heather Heyer. We can stand up against the hate that killed her.
Today we CAN do something to honor Heather Heyer. We can stand up against the hate that killed her.
We can honor Heather in the same way she stood up for justice and equality. We can rise up against the hate that took...
We can honor Heather in the same way she stood up for justice and equality. We can rise up against the hate that took her life and that targets even more of our fellow Americans. There are events taking place all across the country today against the hate and violence on display in Charlottesville this weekend. Find one and be there. If you can’t, please help spread the word so others may do so.
Read the full article here.
Which States Could Adopt Automatic Voter Registration Next?
If Americans needed any further proof that voting itself has become a partisan battleground, look no further than...
If Americans needed any further proof that voting itself has become a partisan battleground, look no further than proposals calling for automatic voter registration.
California this month enacted a law that will automatically register people to vote when they get or renew a driver's license or state identification card from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), following the example set by Oregon several months ago. Over time, this could bring most of the 6.6 million Californians who are eligible but not yet registered onto the voting rolls. Alex Padilla, California's secretary of state and sponsor of the measure, calls it potentially the largest voter registration drive in U.S. history.
Other states could soon follow.
Legislators have introduced automatic voter registration bills in 16 additional states, including Hawaii, Illinois and Vermont, as well as the District of Columbia. New Jersey lawmakers approved a package that includes automatic voter registration in June. Republican Gov. Chris Christie hasn't acted on it, but he's made his opposition clear.
"The current process creates an unnecessary barrier for citizens to exercise their fundamental right to vote," said state Sen. Andy Manar, a sponsor of the Illinois measure. "And it's an inefficient use of taxpayer dollars."
The states where bills have seen real movement, however, are all blue states. In states where Republicans control the legislature -- including Georgia, South Carolina and Texas -- measures have mostly languished in committee.
Supporters argue that the real reason for Republican opposition is the party's worry that automatic registration would boost the number of poor and young voters -- groups that favor Democrats. But Republicans complain that automatically registering people to vote based on their DMV status will result in more fraud because, for example, teens still too young to vote and undocumented immigrants get driver's licenses.
In New Jersey, more than 85 percent of eligible citizens are already registered to vote. During a radio appearance in June, Gov. Christie said that, "there's no question in my mind that there are some advocates of this who are looking to increase the opportunities for voter fraud. That's not democracy either."
Studies have shown, however, that voter fraud seldom happens. Proponents of automatic voter registration say that governments have a responsibility to ensure eligible citizens have the opportunity to exercise the franchise, without unnecessary hurdles.
Supporters of the idea are currently collecting signatures in Alaska to put it on the ballot next year. If Christie ultimately vetoes the New Jersey package, a ballot measure may be likely there as well.
"It's not just an election modernization reform, it's a shifting of responsibilty for who populates the rolls," said Katrina Gamble, director of civic engagement and politics at the Center for Popular Democracy. "Even before Oregon, people saw automatic voter registration as the most tranformative reform that we can move that would bring a huge number of people onto the rolls."
Huge numbers of eligible citizens aren't registered to vote. In addition to the nearly 7 million Californians, there are 2.3 million such people in Illinois and there were 300,000 in Oregon.
"If you look across the country, there are at least 50 million people who are eligible but not registered to vote," said Jonathan Brater, counsel for the democracy program at NYU's Brennan Center for Justice. "We see year after year that registration is one of the biggest obstacles to participation."
Other states might explore other models, like using agencies other than the DMV to find potential voters. If the Alaska initiative passes next year, the state will find potential voters through its Permanent Fund, which pays dividends to residents based on oil revenues.
Regardless of the database that's used, automatic registration has the potential to be more accurate than the current approach, which in many places still means relying on paper forms. It should also save money. When Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, only Arizona and Washington offered online registration. Earlier this month, Vermont became the 26th state to allow voters to register online. Going paper-free saves states at least 50 cents on every registration.
It's in part for that reason that Republican legislators in states including Florida, Georgia and Oklahoma have supported online registration. Supporters of automatic voter registration hope that promises of savings might bring GOP lawmakers around to supporting things like registration through the DMV, too.
So far, that's not happening.
In fact, the way that high-profile Democrats running for president have embraced the idea seems to be driving Republicans away. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont introduced an automatic voter registration bill in Congress, and Hillary Clinton supported the idea during a speech earlier this year in which she castigated the GOP for trying to "disempower and disenfranchise young people, poor people, people with disabilities and people of color," through voter ID requirements and attacks on early voting.
Clinton's speech, according to polling, cost automatic voter registration support among Republican voters. A majority of Republicans (53 percent) supported the idea when Oregon passed its law in March, but after Clinton gave her speech in June, GOP support dropped to 38 percent. When survey respondents were told Clinton backed the idea, their support plummeted further, to 28 percent.
Source: Governing
Restaurant group preps for fight against Ariz. minimum wage boost
Restaurant group preps for fight against Ariz. minimum wage boost
PHOENIX -- The head of the state's restaurant industry is gearing up to convince voters to quash an initiative that...
PHOENIX -- The head of the state's restaurant industry is gearing up to convince voters to quash an initiative that would boost the state's minimum wage to $12 an hour by 2020.
Steve Chucri, president of the Arizona Restaurant and Hospitality Association, said Wednesday the campaign against the measure will be based on showing them how much wages in Arizona have gone up since voters enacted the first minimum wage law in 2006.
Prior to that, Arizona employers had to pay only what was mandated in federal law, which was $5.15 an hour. The ballot measure pushed that to $6.75, with a requirement for annual adjustments based on inflation.
That has pushed the current state minimum to $8.05.
"The public will say, 'Enough's enough,'" Chucri said. And he said polls done for the industry in the spring show people believe that $12 is "too much."
The comments come as Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families is planning to submit its petitions for the $12 wage plus required paid leave today to the secretary of state's office.
Spokeswoman Suzanne Wilson said organizers have collected more than 250,000 signatures. That is 100,000 more than are needed to qualify for the ballot.
But Chucri said he's not convinced his organization will even have to fight the battle in November. He questioned whether petition circulators, both volunteer and paid, were careful to ensure that those who signed are qualified to vote in the state.
Arizona has become the latest battleground over what can be considered a living wage.
Several states have enacted their own laws, often through legislation. Most recently, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a measure that will take that state's minimum, now $10 an hour, up to $15 by 2022 for large employers; small companies will get another year to comply.
Chucri said part of the campaign against the ballot measure will be to remind voters here that Arizona already has a minimum wage that's higher than what federal law requires.
And that same law requires annual revision. Chucri pointed out that has meant a boost every year except for two when the rate of inflation was too small for even a nickel more, the bare minimum adjustment.
The difference, though, is not great: That $8.05 an hour is just 80 cents more than the federal minimum.
What Chucri also faces is that $8.05, assuming it's a family's sole source of income, translates out to $16,744 a year.
For a single person, the federal government considers anything below $11,880 a year to be living in poverty. That figure is $16,020 for a family of two and $20,160 for a family of three.
That's part of what has driven similar living wage efforts elsewhere in the country. But Chucri said the idea of a $12 minimum won't sell here.
"That is too high of a wage for a place like Arizona,'' he said.
Chucri said part of the campaign against the ballot measure will be the argument that higher wages mean fewer jobs.
"Restaurateurs are going to survive,'' he said. But what they will do, Chucri said, is simply hire fewer people.
He pointed out the push toward automation already is underway.
At Panera Bread, customers place their orders through computer screens and then can pick up what they want. And even at more traditional sit-down place like Applebee's, orders can be placed through tablets at each table.
Chucri conceded, though, that is happening even in places where the minimum wage is not going up. What approval of this measure would do, he said, is hasten the day.
"I don't think it's a matter of 'if,' '' Chucri said. "It's a matter of 'when.' ''
He would not say how much his group and other business organizations intend to spend to kill the measure.
The most recent campaign finance reports show campaign organizers have raised more than $342,000. Virtually all of that comes from Living United for Change in Arizona. But Tomas Robles, former executive director of LUCHA, said much of that is from a grant to the organization from The Center for Popular Democracy, an organization involved in efforts to establish a $15 minimum wage nationally.
Another $25,000 came from The Fairness Project which has its own efforts to push higher minimum wages on a state-by-state basis.
By Howard Fischer
Source
Low-paid Workers to Protest April 15
St. Louis Post-Dispatch - March 31, 2015, by Jim Gallagher -Fast-food labor organizers in St. Louis are calling for a...
St. Louis Post-Dispatch - March 31, 2015, by Jim Gallagher -Fast-food labor organizers in St. Louis are calling for a tax day strike by low-paid workers on April 15, part of a national day of protest.
Organizers say they'll have rallies in Forest Park in St. Louis and in Ferguson. They are demanding minimum pay of $15 per hour.
In St. Louis and nationally, organizers say they are expanding their demands for higher wages to include home health care workers and adjunct faculty members, including those at Washington University who voted in January to join a union.
Kendall Fells, organizing director for Fight for $15, said Tuesday the April 15 protests will include actions on about 170 college campuses, as well as cities around the country and abroad.
At an event announcing the actions in front of a McDonald's in New York City's Times Square, organizers said home health care aides, airport workers, adjunct professors, child care workers and Wal-Mart workers will be among those turning out in April.
Terrence Wise, a Burger King worker from Kansas City, Missouri, and a national leader for the Fight for $15 push, said more than 2,000 groups including Jobs With Justice and the Center for Popular Democracy will show their support as well.
"This will be the biggest mobilization America has seen in decades," Wise said at the rally as pedestrians walked past on the busy street.
In St. Louis, and around the country, fast food workers have been calling one-day walkouts and mass protests for the past two years to demand higher wages.
Source
What the Overworked and Underemployed Have in Common
Huffington Post - October 7, 2014, by Robin Hardman - One morning last week I joined a small gathering in a conference...
Huffington Post - October 7, 2014, by Robin Hardman - One morning last week I joined a small gathering in a conference room at New York City's Baruch College to listen to a line-up of speakers and panelists talk on the subject of "Families and Flexibility." The event was sponsored by Scott Stringer, our NYC Comptroller, who has been promoting city-wide "right to request" legislation. In case you've missed them, right to request laws, currently on the books in many countries around the world and very slowly gaining traction here in the U.S., provide employees with the simple right to request a flexible schedule. Details--including who can ask and for what reasons, and how much leeway employers have in responding-- vary, but laws are already in place in San Francisco and Vermont, and legislation is pending in many other places--including the U.S. Congress.
Hence this event, which gave Comptroller Stringer an opportunity to strut his stuff; featured a closing keynote by Anne-Marie Slaughter, President and CEO of the New America Foundation; and allowed a number of smart policy-makers, advocates, researchers, corporate work-life champions and workers to weigh in with their stories and data. But perhaps the most noticeable aspect of the morning was what I'll call the Great Divide between the two panels that made up the bulk of the agenda.
The first panel featured political scientist Janet Gornick; A Better Balance co-president Dina Bakst; Families and Work Institute's Kelly Sakai-O'Neill, and work-life/flex champions from two accounting firms: Marcee Harris Schwartz of BDO and Barbara Wankoff of KPMG. Moderated by New York Times reporter Rachel Swarns, the panelists conducted an interesting, data-driven discussion about why flexibility matters and the very real problems many professional men and women face achieving any kind of work-life "balance." The ideas and concerns they raised were the important stuff that is often stressed in our national work-life conversation: The business benefits of a more flexible workplace. The negative impact of overwork on both families and society at large. The dark-ages state of parental leave laws in this country, especially in comparison with pretty much every other country in the developed world.
We listened to and discussed these topics for a full hour, grabbed some more coffee, and moved on to the second panel. I wished I'd worn my sneakers: it was a dizzying leap across a conceptual chasm.
The second panel featured A Better Balance's other co-president, Sheery Leiwant, as well as sociologist Ruth Milkman and Carrie Gleason, Director of the Center for Popular Democracy's Fair Workweek Initiative. It also featured a woman named Deena Adams, a single parent who, shortly after receiving a service award for loyalty, lost her job because she couldn't find child care to accommodate a sudden requirement that she start taking on overnight shifts. (A fifth panelist, Carrie Nathan, is a union activist and hourly employee at Macy's, which apparently has an exceptionally supportive system for shift scheduling.)
At this panel, moderated by Times labor reporter, Steven Greenhouse, we heard about the other end of the spectrum. We heard about things not usually talked about in the context of work-life and not talked about enough in any context. In contrast to the (very real) problems of professional workers--so many of whom feel overworked and short on time--we now focused on the growing legions of workers who aspire, most of all, to have a full-time job. The exploitation of the underemployed has become something of a science in recent years, as technology provides elaborate algorithms that can tell employers on a day-to-day--sometimes hour-to-hour--basis exactly how many employees they need on site and how many they can just tell to stay home. Many employers use this hyper-efficiency to move workers about like pieces on a chessboard, expecting them to be on call for the next move, whenever it may come.
Please understand what this means: employees must be ready, sometimes forty hours a week, sometimes 24/7, to drop everything and show up for their minimum wage job. They have to have child care available; they can make no permanent social or vacation plans; they cannot take a class. Generally, all this readiness leads to far less than full-time work and yet by definition also makes it impossible to take a second job. One man quoted in an article by Greenhouse talked about being told in a job interview that he'd have to be on call full-time but would be able to work no more than 29 hours/week. When he objected, the interview was over. Another described asking his employer to schedule his "wildly fluctuating" 25 hours/week at the same time each day so could find a second job--and promptly had his weekly hours cut to 12. A woman commuted an hour to her scheduled shift only to be told to go home (with no pay)--she wasn't needed today.
The overworked, the underworked. The Great Divide. It's odd to wrap the phrase "work-life" around the situations of these two groups of people, yet it does apply to both. Each ultimately comes down to a lack of control over one's own time. Each apparently stems from employers' mistaken belief that providing a modicum of flexibility and predictability is bad for business (as if stressed-out employees and high turnover were good for the bottom line). Each affects more than just the people involved--it affects our families, our friends and our communities.
The good news is that some of the "right to request" existing and pending legislation around the country focuses not just on flexibility but also on predictability. The tools are at hand to make changes that affect men and women on both sides of the chasm. Did I mention that it's National Work and Family Month? Come on, people, let's get going.
Robin Hardman is a writer and work-life expert who works with companies to put together the best possible "great place to work" competition entries and creates compelling, easy-to-read benefits, HR, diversity and general-topic employee communications. Find her and follow her blog at www.robinhardman.com.
Source
Más alta la factura de luz y otras implicaciones de los acuerdos de la junta
Más alta la factura de luz y otras implicaciones de los acuerdos de la junta
Encubrimiento de violaciones de ley, conflicto de intereses, ganancias desmedidas de especuladores financieros y...
Encubrimiento de violaciones de ley, conflicto de intereses, ganancias desmedidas de especuladores financieros y mayores cargas económicas para el pueblo son algunas de las implicaciones de los acuerdos que la Junta de Supervisión Fiscal está negociando con los acreedores del gobierno, según el Frente Ciudadano por la Auditoría de la Deuda.
Read the full article here.
Conyers presses Federal Reserve for more diversity
Washington — Rep. John Conyers, the longest serving member of Congress, is leading a group of 127 lawmakers who are...
Washington — Rep. John Conyers, the longest serving member of Congress, is leading a group of 127 lawmakers who are urging the Federal Reserve System to add more diversity to its leadership ranks and become more attuned to economic problems in minority communities.
The lawmakers complained that all but one of the 12 Federal Reserve Bank presidents across the nation are white and 10 of them are men. In addition, they said none of the current Federal Reserve presidents are African-American or Latino, and the system has never had a regional president who is black.
“Far too often, the voices of minorities are silenced because they aren’t sitting at the table,” Conyers, the longtime Democrat and African-American Detroiter, said in a statement. “The Federal Reserve needs leadership that models the diversity that exists in this Nation.”
The Federal Reserve has banks in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Richmond, Atlanta, Chicago, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Dallas and San Francisco. Detroit is part of the Chicago bank.
Conyers said the diversity of the bank’s regional presidents is important to Detroit and other urban cities, however.
“Detroit and cities across the country with high minority populations have the highest unemployment rates and will be harmed if the Federal Reserve does not consider our needs when they make key policy decisions,” he said. “Increasing diversity at the Federal Reserve will help ensure that the needs of people of color, women, labor, and consumers are part of the crucial conversation in our nation’s central bank.”
A spokesman for the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors said the system has been committed to bolstering diversity and continues to aim for increasing ethnic and gender diversity.
“Minority representation on Reserve Bank and Branch boards has increased from 16 percent in 2010 to 24 percent in 2016,” spokesman Dave Skidmore said in a Thursday statement. “The proportion of women directors has risen from 23 percent to 30 percent over the same period. Currently, 46 percent of all directors are diverse in terms of race and/or gender (with a director who is both female and a minority counted only one time).
“We are striving to continue that progress.”
The letter, which is signed by 116 House members and 11 Senate members, is being spearheaded by Conyers and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts.
Other Michigan representatives who signed the letter were Brenda Lawerence, D-Southfield; Sander Levin, D-Royal Oak; Dan Kildee, D-Flint Township; and Debbie Dingell, D-Dearborn. Democratic presidential candidate and U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont was also a signatory.
By Keith Laing
Source
Immigrants in US illegally see this election as crucial - See more at: http://www.timescolonist.com/immigrants-in-us-illegally-see-this-election-as-crucial-1.2472426#sthash.BroJZxQz.dpuf
Immigrants in US illegally see this election as crucial - See more at: http://www.timescolonist.com/immigrants-in-us-illegally-see-this-election-as-crucial-1.2472426#sthash.BroJZxQz.dpuf
NEW YORK, N.Y. - There was never any doubt Juana Alvarez's 18- and 20-year-old American-born daughters would be taking...
NEW YORK, N.Y. - There was never any doubt Juana Alvarez's 18- and 20-year-old American-born daughters would be taking part in the election this year. Alvarez did her best to see to that.
"I had two people I wanted to get registered and I registered them," Alvarez, a 39-year-old housekeeper in Brooklyn who came to the U.S. from Mexico as a teenager, said through a translator.
For Alvarez and the estimated 11 million other immigrants living illegally in the U.S., this is a potentially crucial election, with Republican Donald Trump talking about mass deportations and a border wall and Democrat Hillary Clinton pledging to support immigration reform and protect President Barack Obama's executive actions on behalf of immigrants.
Come Election Day, these immigrants will be watching from the sidelines, their future in the hands of others. Under the U.S. Constitution, only full citizens can vote; legal immigrants who are green card holders also are not allowed to cast a ballot.
Trump has spoken of fears of election fraud or that immigrants living illegally in the country might vote. More broadly, he has said all immigrants should play by the legal rules.
Alvarez and others like her say although they can't vote, they have been taking part in get-out-the-vote efforts among citizens.
In places like New York, California, Arizona and Virginia, they have been knocking on doors and making telephone calls, registering people, urging them to go to the polls, and telling their stories in hopes of persuading voters to keep the interests of immigrants in mind when they go into the booth.
"For me, it's important that those who can vote come out of the shadows and make their voices heard," Alvarez said.
Isabel Medina, a 43-year-old from Los Angeles who has been in the country illegally for 20 years and has three sons, two born in the U.S., has worked phone banks and taken part in voter registration drives for U.S. citizens, making sure that "even though they're frustrated, they are disappointed, they still realize it is really important, that they know the power that they have in their hands."
She says she emphasized the need to vote for all the races, not just the presidency, and the importance of taking part in referendums and propositions.
Even though these immigrants can't vote, their pre-Election Day efforts make a difference, said Karina Ruiz, 32, of Phoenix, who came to the U.S. illegally from Mexico when she was 15 and is acting executive director of the Arizona Dream Act Coalition, an immigrant-advocacy group that has been doing get-out-the-vote work.
"It is making an impact because those people who wouldn't vote otherwise, when they listen to my story and hear their vote does count and make a difference, they're encouraged to participate and be my voice," said Ruiz, who has a work permit and an exemption from deportation under Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy. That policy was created by executive order, one that could be undone by any president in the future.
"I think to myself: I could just vote once, if I had the power to," she said. But "if I can influence 50 to 60 people to go ahead and vote, that's my voice multiplied by a whole lot."
As for what will happen after Election Day, "the uncertainty, it is there, I don't know what's going to happen," said Medina, who avoids talking about the election with her U.S.-born sons because she doesn't want them to get scared that their parents might be deported. "I am worried, yes."
By Deepti Hajela
Source
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."
Amazon Not Happy with Seattle’s New Compromise Head Tax
An open letter May 14 to the city of Seattle from about 55 elected leaders—some from cities on Amazon’s short list for...
An open letter May 14 to the city of Seattle from about 55 elected leaders—some from cities on Amazon’s short list for HQ2—rebuked Amazon for its tactics and its opposition to the tax proposal. “We urge you to remain steadfast in your commitment to this effort to reduce homelessness and the persistent inequities faced by all of our cities,” the leaders wrote to their Seattle colleagues.
Read the full article here.
3 days ago
3 days ago