The charter school movement needs greater accountability
A recent study published by the Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools and the Center for Popular Democracy, entitled “...
A recent study published by the Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools and the Center for Popular Democracy, entitled “The Tip of the Iceberg,” found $203 million lost to fraud, corruption and mismanagement in charter schools, with a projected $1.4 billion in losses in 2015 alone. The Federal Bureau of Investigation is concerned as well: It has investigated schools in Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Connecticut, Arizona, Ohio, Massachusetts, Indiana and Illinois.
Brown University’s Annenberg Institute for School Reform released a report detailing the standards that should be required to raise the charter sector to the level of equity and transparency that public schools must meet. Such reforms are popular: A 2015 poll showed that 89 percent of respondents favored making charter board meetings publicly accessible, 88 percent supported routine audits of their finances and 86 percent desired transparent budgets.
Whether or not one thinks that charter schools are a good thing, we should be able to agree that greater accountability strengthens our school system. However, many charter advocates have stood in the way of reform.
In California, four long-overdue bills that would bring a higher level of accountability to the state’s 1,100 charter schools were introduced last March. A 2015 report from the Center for Popular Democracy documented how charter schools in California have lost $81 million in public funds to fraud and abuse. Over the last 10 years California’s Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team revealed multi-million dollar scams in Los Angeles, Oakland and Santa Ana, to name a few cities, as well as rampant abuse in what was the state’s largest charter operator.
Instead of supporting common-sense reform, the state’s charter industry, represented by the California Charter School Association, has fiercely opposed the bills. “We believe current laws address these concerns and these proposals are unnecessary,” the lobbying group wrote in a press release.
California, the state with the largest number of charter schools, should lead the way for reform. But progress is slow going: There is little indication that any of the bills will make progress in Sacramento this year.
In Connecticut, it took a scandal to spur this kind of reform. A 2014 study from the National Association of Charter School Authorizers ranked Connecticut as the seventh-lowest state with regard to charter accountability. In response, the state passed a law in July that makes all charter school records a matter of public record subject to the Freedom of Information Act. It also requires charter schools to have anti-nepotism and conflict of interest policies, and it empowers the state’s Department of Education to post each school’s certified audit statement on its website.
The reform was spurred by a massive scandal around a prominent charter school figure named Michael Sharpe. For years Sharpe led a chain of schools called the Jumoke Academy and advocated for unfettered charter expansion. Yet, in early 2015, in the midst of an FBI investigation and after more than six months of relentless investigative reporting by the Hartford Courant, Connecticut’s Department of Education found Sharpe’s network riddled with “rampant nepotism.” Its report also revealed that Sharpe had ordered “expensive and ornate modifications” to an apartment owned by his company, which he then rented for his own use.
In the aftermath of these revelations, Connecticut’s reform law was approved in May by a 35 to 1 vote in the state Senate and 142 to 3 in the state Assembly. While this is a positive development, other states should not have to wait for a scandal of this magnitude before demanding greater accountability.
Charter reform can be a bipartisan cause. In Ohio, Republican State Senator Peggy Lehner began pushing for laws to require greater disclosure of how public funds are spent after, she says, seeing “story after story” about charter school scandals. A recent investigation by the Akron Beacon Journal found that of the 300 charter schools reporters contacted, only a fourth provided basic information like board members’ names. Meanwhile, 87 percent of charters got Ds or Fs on the most recent state report cards.
Major charter advocates spoke to the need for reform. “Charter schools are public schools, and there should not be a veil of secrecy,” said Chad Aldis, vice president for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, which sponsors 11 charter schools in the state. “We need to have transparency.”
In June, a bill that passed the state Senate that would require Ohio to annually audit all charter school operators to monitor the use of public funds. Charter schools would also have to obey open records laws and other transparency standards that are already the norm in public schools.
Such changes should be no-brainers. And yet the bill has stalled in the General Assembly. With much of the debate going on behind closed doors, the public has thus far not been able to get a clear sense for the cause of the delay.
Sunshine advocates fear that the inaction of the Ohio House bodes ill for the bill’s future. “It appears that the poor-performing charter school sector has again won the day,” argues Stephen Dyer, former legislator and Education Policy Fellow at the progressive think tank Innovation Ohio.
Rather than standing in the way of greater accountability, lawmakers should view the current bill as a first step. Not only should the measures be passed, they should be strengthened. Communications and overhead costs would not have to be disclosed under the state Senate’s bill, casualties of the charter industry’s lobbying.
Moreover, Ohio’s bizarre system of charter approval would remain largely unchanged under the bill. Instead of having a few authorizing agencies to approve charter schools, Ohio allows dozens of groups, including non-profits, to sponsor and approve charter schools. These authorizers receive payments from the schools and rarely close them as a result.
The public deserves better — in Ohio and beyond. If charter schools are to become a permanent and respected part of public education in America, their champions will need to clean up their sector and let the sunshine in.
Source: Al Jazeera America
The Fed’s Big Mistake: Rate Hikes Hurt US Workers
Protesters rallied in Washington, New York City and Philadelphia yesterday against an imminent government action that...
Protesters rallied in Washington, New York City and Philadelphia yesterday against an imminent government action that would damage the financial prospects of ordinary workers. And no, it had nothing to do with Donald Trump.
The Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign wants the Federal Reserve to break with expectations and hold interest rates steady rather than hiking them this week. They believe minority communities have yet to recover from the ravages of the financial crisis, and are still experiencing high unemployment and stagnant wages.
Read the full article here.
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
Why the People’s Climate March matters to people of color like me
Ever since taking power, the Trump administration has made clear it intends to wage war on the environment. It’s given...
Ever since taking power, the Trump administration has made clear it intends to wage war on the environment. It’s given the green light to both the Dakota Access and Keystone pipelines and geared up to wipe away long-standing protections that keep our air and water safe. Its mission is clear: Eliminate any obstacle that stands in the way of fossil fuel companies.
Yet I refuse to see this moment as a crisis. I see it as an opportunity to bring together people from different backgrounds and different areas of the country to start building a truly national movement to defend our environment. And the People’s Climate March, happening on April 29 in Washington, D.C., is where it will take off.
This movement will be led by those most affected by climate change and pollution: communities of color and working-class families. These are the communities that have always been hardest hit by under-regulated oil pipelines running through their towns. The ones closest to coal train routes, whose residents suffer from lung cancer at alarming rates. The ones whose children bear the most exposure to lead. Many working-class Trump voters, in fact, may come to regret their votes when environmental problems worsen in their backyards.
That is why I believe caring for the environment is not a Democratic or Republican issue. I think it’s an issue all voters can and will come to rally around in coming years as Trump’s policies hit home.
The good news is that the climate movement is in a better place to take on this challenge than it’s ever been. And it is getting stronger every day, fueled by young people and people of color who are growing increasingly empowered to speak up for the safety and health of their communities.
The opposition to the Keystone Pipeline helped galvanize this movement into action. For years, pipelines had been approved around the country with only a passing glance at their effect on the local community, local wildlife, and local history. Keystone marked a turning point, showing that a unified, broad opposition could stymie plans for a pipeline.
Keystone planted the seeds, but Standing Rock is when the movement truly bloomed, bringing together thousands of people from every corner of the country to block a pipeline that threatens ancient water sources and blatantly disregards treaties with sovereign First Nations. By making a powerful argument that wove together environmental, racial, and economic justice, water protectors were able to attract both die-hard climate activists and allies brand-new to the cause.
This intersectionality will be the hallmark of the movement in coming years, and it will be our strength. That is why the People’s Climate March is so important. It’s not just about sending a message to Washington that we won’t stand for their agenda. It’s about sending a message of unity that crosses color lines and income scales. It’s about demonstrating the diversity of the climate movement, the diversity that gives us our strength.
But the work can’t and won’t end with a march. Already, community groups in states and cities across the country are banding together to fight the worst damage expected from the Trump administration. In Florida, Missouri, New York, and Virginia, they are looking for ways to elevate fights over local pipelines into the national debate. In cities like Seattle and New York, they are pushing their elected leaders toward divestment from the funders of the Dakota Access Pipeline. And nationally, they are mobilizing to prevent giveaways to oil, gas, and coal companies in any national infrastructure package.
Climate can no longer be a fringe issue. It must be an essential part of any resistance that fights racism and economic inequality, because the environment we live in affects those issues intimately. Air filled with smog raises the risk of lung disease, cutting life expectancy. Water filled with lead forces our children to grow up with learning defects that limit their ultimate earning potential. And workplaces filled with safety hazards make it more likely that workers — not employers — bear the cost of any accidents.
There is no plan B when it comes to our planet. It is a precious resource and it cannot be taken for granted. We must fight for it, today and for the years to come. The People’s Climate March is just one small step on this path.
By Aura Vasquez
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
National advocacy groups are backing the sick-leave effort in Texas
National advocacy groups are backing the sick-leave effort in Texas
National advocacy groups based mostly in Washington, D.C., and Brooklyn, N.Y., were responsible for $1.8 million of the...
National advocacy groups based mostly in Washington, D.C., and Brooklyn, N.Y., were responsible for $1.8 million of the $2.5 million contributed and loaned to the political action committee leading the effort to mandate paid sick leave for workers in Texas...The other major outside donors include...$95,000, Center for Popular Democracy, Brooklyn, N.Y.
Read the full article here.
Fed Chairwoman: African-Americans Have Not Recovered from Economic Downturn
Fed Chairwoman: African-Americans Have Not Recovered from Economic Downturn
Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen delivered her semiannual testimony on the U.S. economy and monetary policy to...
Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen delivered her semiannual testimony on the U.S. economy and monetary policy to the Senate Banking Committee Tuesday. In her prepared remarks, Yellen acknowledged that the country’s economic recovery has not fully extended to the African-American population.
“Jobless rates have declined for all major demographic groups, including for African-Americans and Hispanics,” Yellen said. “Despite these declines, however, it is troubling that unemployment rates for these minority groups remain higher than for the nation overall, and that the annual income of the median African-American household is still well below the median income of other U.S. households.”
An accompanying report revealed that the median Black household income in 2014 was $40,000, which means African-American households are earning just 88 percent of their pre-recession incomes.
The 2014 median white household income was $67,000. According to the report, white, Asian and Hispanic households have regained 94 percent of their pre-recession earnings.
Furthermore, unemployment rates for African-Americans continue to be lower than they were prior to the recession, compared to white unemployment rates, which have nearly returned to original levels.
The Fed has faced growing criticism from activists and lawmakers who accuse the banking system of ignoring the economic disparity faced by minorities in the U.S. Supporters say Fed-controlled interest rates have a direct impact on the economic success of Black Americans.
Tuesday’s comments were a stark contrast to the position taken by Yellen last July, when she argued there was nothing the Reserve could do “about any particular group.”
The statements fired up Connie Razza, director of strategic research at the Center for Popular Democracy, who issued a statement in response.
“With African-Americans still mired in our own Great Recession, we should be hearing a positive vision from the Fed on how to foster full employment,” Razza said on behalf of the Fed Up Coalition. “While the economy is complex and the Federal Reserve’s tools are limited, there is plenty the Fed can do to improve the labor market for Black workers and to reduce racial inequality in the job market.”
The Fed Up Coalition is a consortium of labor unions, community-based organizations and policy think tanks fronted by the Center for Popular Democracy and Action for the Common Good. The group maintains that the economic upswing is a myth for most demographics and stresses that keeping interest rates low will give the economy a chance to truly recover for everyone. Modest rates will raise wages, bringing the country closer to full employment and eliminating the need for discriminatory hiring practices, according to the campaign.
During Yellen’s February address to the House Financial Services Committee, several Democrats pressed the issue of Black unemployment rates.
“Nobody is suffering from unemployment like the African-American community,” Georgia Rep. David Scott said at the hearing, per CNN. “We have got to get the Fed to get off the dime and put the issue of African-American unemployment on the front burner. That is the core of all of the domestic issues that we’re facing.”
The unemployment rate for African-Americans in May was 8.2 percent, which was double the rate of whites at 4.1, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
By Shaundra Selvaggi
Source
Expandiendo el Electorado en Nueva York
El Diario - December 14, 2014, by Steve Carbo - Aunque las oportunidades para avanzar reformas progresistas se han...
El Diario - December 14, 2014, by Steve Carbo - Aunque las oportunidades para avanzar reformas progresistas se han disminuido en Washington y en muchos estados después de las elecciones de noviembre, existe aún terreno fértil en las ciudades, lugares que reciben menos atención de los medios pero son cada vez más reconocidas como importantes "laboratorios de la democracia".
La ciudad de Nueva York es notable por su liderazgo. Después de tomar las riendas en enero, el Alcalde Bill de Blasio, la Presidenta del Concejo Melissa Mark-Viverito, junto con concejales progresistas, han expandido las leyes de días de enfermedad pagados, han implementado políticas policiales más justas, y han puesto fin a las detenciones injustas de inmigrantes. Y esta semana, el alcalde Bill de Blasio firmó una nueva legislación que que marca el comienzo de una gran expansión del electorado a través de la revitalización de la ley Pro-Voter (Pro-Votante) . Este es un modelo que otras ciudades deberían seguir.
La ley Pro-Votante, que fue inicialmente firmada en el año 2000, prometía expandir las oportunidades para el registro de votantes en la ciudad. La ley exigía que diecinueve agencias municipales, cada una de las cincuenta y nueve juntas comunitarias, y muchas agencias que reciben contratos del gobierno municipal, debían ofrecer formularios de inscripción de votantes, y asistencia completando los formularios, para residentes de la ciudad que estuvieran aplicando para recibir servicios de las agencias, re- certificando su exigibilidad, o reportando un cambio de dirección. Estos programas de registro de votantes en agencias públicas están basados en la Ley Nacional de Registro de Votantes, la cual requiere en parte que las agencias estatales de asistencia pública ofrezcan formularios de registro electoral a sus clientes.
Al ser administrados bien, estos programas tienen la capacidad de registrar del 15 al 20 por ciento de los clientes de la agencia. Un programa local similar en la ciudad de Nueva York podría ayudar a cientos de miles a qué se registren para votar.
Lamentablemente, las cosas aún no se han dado así. En octubre, el Centro para la Democracia Popular, y sus aliados en la coalición Pro-Votante, reportaron en un estudio que las agencias municipales de la ciudad de Nueva York estaban ignorando la ley. El ochenta y cuatro por ciento de los clientes entrevistados para el estudio eran elegibles pero nunca recibieron formularios de registro electoral.
Pero las elecciones son importantes y el cambio está en camino. En su primera Directiva Ejecutiva el verano pasado, el Alcalde De Blasio ordenó a cada una de las agencias contempladas en la ley Pro-Votante que desarrollarán planes para conformarse a la ley, y que reportaran su desempeño en la implementación de estos planes cada seis meses. Nuestra coalición fue invitada a ayudar a desarrollar modelos de planes para las agencias. Inmediatamente el Concejo de la Ciudad tuvo su primera audiencia pública acerca del tema, y el 25 de noviembre aprobó una nueva legislación presentada por los concejales Ben Kallos y Jumanee Williams, la cual fortalece las provisiones de la ley Pro-Votante. Con estas nuevas mejoras y algunos cambios adicionales, como la inclusión de agencias con un alto número de clientes como la agencia de viviendas públicas (NYCHA) y el departamento de educación, y el reemplazo de formulario de papel con formularios electrónicos, la ley Pro-Votante de la cuidad de Nueva York representa un gran modelo nacional que otras ciudades pueden replicar. El gobierno puede y deber jugar un papel líder en asegurarse que cada individuo que es elegible para votar sea agregado a las listas de votantes.
Pero las ciudades no deben para ahí. Con suficiente autoridad y autonomía, las ciudades pueden expandir la democracia permitiendo medidas como el registro de votantes el mismo día de la elecciones, el voto temprano, y la extensión del derecho al voto a los no-ciudadanos y personas que han pasado por el sistema judicial, el registro de estudiantes de secundario, y el pre-registro de jóvenes de 16 y 17 años de edad. Estas son algunas de las medidas promulgadas por la coalición de oficiales electos progresistas, Local Progress, que se han unido por su compromiso a avanzar una economía justa, igualdad para todos, ciudades habitables y gobiernos efectivos.
Los años que vienen van a ser difíciles para las personas que luchan por la justicia social. Pero aún mientras luchamos en contra de la agenda de la agenda regresiva de la derecha, los progresistas debemos buscar oportunidades para avanzar políticas públicas. Y como lao demuestra la nueva ley Pro-Votante, las ciudades representan un gran espacio de oportunidad.
Source
Fed more upbeat on economy, unclear on timing of rate hike
The Federal Reserve offered a slightly more upbeat assessment of the economy but provided little insight into when it...
The Federal Reserve offered a slightly more upbeat assessment of the economy but provided little insight into when it will raise its benchmark interest rate for the first time in nearly a decade.
Fed officials voted unanimously to keep the target rate at zero for now, after wrapping up their regular two-day policy-setting meeting in Washington on Wednesday afternoon. In a carefully worded statement, the central bank noted that the economy has expanded “moderately.” It pointed to solid job gains and lower unemployment as signs that the labor market has improved, adding that underemployment has also diminished.
Perhaps most important, the Fed characterized the risks to its outlook for the economy as “nearly balanced” — the same description it used after its previous meeting. Some analysts believe that the Fed will move once the risks are weighted more evenly.
U.S. stock markets spiked after the release of the Fed statement but quickly settled back down. Both the blue-chip Dow Jones Industrial Average and the broader Standard & Poor's 500 average were up about half a percentage point in mid-afternoon trading.
Fed Chair Janet Yellen has said several times that she expects the central bank will raise its benchmark federal funds rate before the end of the year, a move that would herald the end of the central bank’s unconventional — and controversial — efforts to resuscitate the American economy.
Many investors and economists believe the moment will come during the Fed’s meeting in September, which would be followed by a news conference allowing Yellen to explain the central bank’s decision more fully. But a vocal minority think the Fed will wait to move in December, the next meeting with a scheduled news conference. A few economists — including two officials within the central bank — believe the Fed should hold off until 2016 to be sure the recovery is solid.
Fed officials have debated how strong of a signal to send as the moment of liftoff nears. But the central bank has repeatedly emphasized that its decision will depend on the evolution of economic data — and so investors should look to the numbers for the green light for action.
A key figure will be the government’s estimate of second quarter economic growth slated for release Thursday. Falling oil prices, a strong dollar and a sharp slowdown in the growth of consumer spending helped drive an unexpected contraction in the economy over the winter. Fed officials are hoping that second quarter GDP growth will prove the dip was merely temporary.
A stronger reading would also align with the pickup in hiring over the past two months. Unemployment is nearing its lowest sustainable level, making some officials antsy for the Fed to start tapping the brakes on the economy.
But others have argued that exceptionally low inflation means the Fed has plenty of time to act. Price growth remains well below the central bank’s 2 percent target, and officials have said they want to be “reasonably confident” it is moving up before tightening policy. In June, the central bank had stated that energy prices “appear to have stabilized.” But on Wednesday, it cited further declines in energy prices, along with the falling price of imports, as reasons inflation has remained low.
The Fed slashed its target interest rate to zero when the country was in the grips of the financial crisis in 2008, and it has stayed there ever since. In addition, it pumped trillions of dollars into the economy in an effort to lower longer-term rates and spur borrowing among consumers and investment among businesses. Unwinding those policies will likely take years.
Meanwhile, the Fed is facing renewed scrutiny in Congress. The House Financial Services committee on Wednesday passed a bill that would require the central bank to explain when it deviates from certain monetary policy models, disclose more information on salaries and allow for audits of the Fed's decision-making process. Another bill sponsored by Texas Republican Rep. Kevin Brady would create a commission to examine the Fed, which recently celebrated its centennial.
“The Fed is trying to do too much,” Brady said in an interview. “It can be the right tool, but not for everything and everybody.”
The central bank is also facing pressure from the other end of the political spectrum. A coalition of community activists and labor groups is urging the Fed to leave its target rate unchanged amid elevated unemployment rates among minorities.
“Until we reach genuine full employment, there is no reason for the Fed to contemplate putting people out of work and slowing down our economy via interest rate hikes,” the Fed Up campaign said in a statement.
Source: The Washington Post
U.S. Cities Issue IDs to Protect Undocumented Immigrants
To help combat such unintended outcomes, the Center for Popular Democracy has consulted with policymakers and advocates...
To help combat such unintended outcomes, the Center for Popular Democracy has consulted with policymakers and advocates—including those from Poughkeepsie—who seek to start municipal ID programs. In 2015, the organization published a municipal ID toolkit listing a series of best practices for local governments to follow.
Read the full article here.
2 days ago
2 days ago