Experts Urge Fed To Pursue 'Genuine Full Employment' Before Rate Hike
The Federal Reserve should pursue "genuine full employment" with "robust wage growth" before raising interest rates, ...
The Federal Reserve should pursue "genuine full employment" with "robust wage growth" before raising interest rates, experts from the Center for Popular Democracy and the Economic Policy Institute argue in anew report.
The report authors say the Fed, the central bank of the United States, can help reverse wage stagnation and narrow gender and racial wage gaps through its monetary policy.
Most Americans have faced wage stagnation over the last 35 years, despite there being a 64.9 percent growth in productivity during this time, according to the report. Wage growth also remained sluggish last month, with average hourly earnings increasing only 2 percent in June from one year ago.
A move by the Fed to slow the economy with an interest rate hike before "genuine full employment" is achieved will "hamper the ability of workers' wages to rise," the authors wrote.
"Because the vast majority of American workers have seen near-stagnant wages even as economy-wide productivity growth has constantly risen, there's ample space for wage gaps to close without anyone losing wages," said report co-author Josh Bivens, EPI's research and policy director. "The Fed has a powerful role in shaping labor market trends and raising wages. By pursuing full employment, it could help to close these wage gaps among workers."
In the report, the experts highlighted wage trends over recent decades among men and women as well as racial groups. Over the past 35 years, racial wage gaps between whites and Latinos or blacks have widened, the report says. During the same time period, disparities in median earnings between men and women did narrow by about 30 percent, but over a quarter of that progress was due to a decline of men's wages, according to the report.
For its part, the Fed has a "dual mandate" to keep prices stable and maximize employment. The Fed's current inflation target is 2 percent, and full employment is defined by the financial institution as a jobless rate between 5.0 percent to 5.2 percent. The nation's unemployment rate in June was 5.3 percent.
At some point this year, the Fed could begin to raise short-term interest rates, which were cut to near zero percent during the Great Recession to support the economy.
The report authors argue that the Fed's full employment estimate is "too meek," adding that the financial institution "should experiment aggressively with letting the unemployment rate fall as low as possible before raising interest rates."
"[T]he Fed should allow much lower unemployment levels, so long as no accelerating inflation results," the report adds. "Substantial evidence supports pursuing this more tolerant approach to falling unemployment. The late 1990s saw much lower rates (4.0 percent for two full years in 1999 and 2000) without sparking accelerating price inflation."
According to the experts, annual wage growth should also be in the 3.5 percent to 4.5 percent range before the Fed considers an interest rate hike.
Here are the three key recommendations listed in the report:
The Federal Reserve should set a clear and ambitious target for wage growth, which will provide an important and straightforward guidepost on the path to maximum employment. Wage targeting can be fairly easily tailored to the Fed's price-inflation target and pegged to increases in productivity.
The Fed should maintain a patient, but watchful posture. The history of the past 35 years shows a generally steady downward trend in price inflation and that prematurely slowing the economy results in higher than desirable unemployment.
The Federal Reserve should not consider an interest-rate hike until indicators of full employment--particularly wage growth--have strengthened.
"Failure to aggressively target and achieve genuine full employment by keeping interest rates low and setting a clear and ambitious target for wage growth explains a large part of why wages continue to stagnate," said report co-author Connie Razza, CPD's director of strategic research. "There is increasing talk about raising interest rates, but it would be a terrible mistake for the Fed to do so. Raising interest rates too soon will slow an already sluggish economy and will disproportionately harm women and people of color."
Source: Progress Illinois
‘If Texas votes how it looks, we win’: The grassroots effort behind Texas’ progressive movement
‘If Texas votes how it looks, we win’: The grassroots effort behind Texas’ progressive movement
“What’s happening in Texas is arguably a phenomenon unique to the state, but it also has national implications. The...
“What’s happening in Texas is arguably a phenomenon unique to the state, but it also has national implications. The kind of work Brown’s organization does for local communities can be replicated elsewhere, argued Asya Pikovsky, who works with the Center for Popular Democracy Action. “Groups like [TOP] are demonstrating how to win power in red and purple states: focus on city elections, lean into progressive principles, and mobilize voters who have long been marginalized by fielding candidates who can effect real change,” Pikovsky told ThinkProgress. “We should expect to see the same dynamic repeated over and over again this year as organizers find new ways to leverage local elections to win far-reaching national change.”
Read the full article here.
Support Asylum Seekers From the Migrant Caravan Vilified by Trump
Support Asylum Seekers From the Migrant Caravan Vilified by Trump
With 71 percent of people detained by ICE held in privately-operated facilities, the private prison industry is one of...
With 71 percent of people detained by ICE held in privately-operated facilities, the private prison industry is one of the largest beneficiaries of anti-immigrant policies. The Center for Popular Democracy, Make the Road New York, Enlace International, New York Communities for Change, and the Strong Economy for All Coalition recently released a report that found that Wall Street companies such as JP Morgan and Wells Fargo not only profit from the industry: they massively increased their investments after Donald Trump was elected president. Check out the report here, then write a letter to one of the companies and share some of the report’s most potent facts on social media using the hashtag #BackersofHate.
Read the full article here.
City Bar Statement Praising New York City Council’s Efforts to Fund Immigration Public Defender System, and Urging Nationwide Action
New York City Bar - July 19, 2013 - The New York City Bar Association applauds the New York City Council for allocating...
New York City Bar - July 19, 2013 - The New York City Bar Association applauds the New York City Council for allocating $500,000 for the “nation’s first public defender system for immigrants facing deportation,” as the New York Times described it. The Council’s effort is a model for what Congress should enact nationwide, to support justice, economic fairness and efficient administration of the courts.
The City Bar salutes the City Council’s commitment to fund lawyers for New York’s low-income immigrants through the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project. Research by a study group convened by Second Circuit Judge Robert Katzmann has demonstrated the inability of immigrant detainees to represent themselves, with only three percent of them achieving success in their cases without counsel. Lenni Benson, the chair of the City Bar’s Immigration and Nationality Committee, and Lynn Kelly, the Executive Director of the City Bar Justice Center, are participants in Judge Katzmann’s efforts.
Congress should build upon New York’s model and provide appointed counsel to indigent non-citizens in immigration proceedings nationwide. In its position letter and in continued meetings with Congressional members and staff, the City Bar, through its Immigration & Nationality Committee, has emphasized that a right to counsel advances fundamental American values of fairness and due process. As the letter stated, “There is no citizenship test for counsel in America.” The familiar words “You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you” do not include “only if you are a citizen.”
City Bar President Carey R. Dunne said, “When you consider that Congress, with bipartisan support, has granted a right to counsel to sex offenders and Al Qaeda suspects in detention hearings, and that 76 percent of Americans support a right to counsel for immigrants facing deportation, it’s hard to see why appointed counsel is still denied to non-citizen residents facing detention and deportation.”
Counsel also provides economic and social benefits that outweigh its costs. Appointing counsel in these cases pays for itself by reducing costly detention, increasing court efficiency, and reducing societal costs due to the splitting up of families and the resulting abandonment of children. “Increasing access to justice by funding legal services for the City’s poorest residents actually benefits the entire City’s economy,” said Dunne. The City Bar’s 2013 Policy Recommendations for New York City’s Next Mayor sets out these benefits in more detail, and the City Bar’s Immigration & Nationality Law Committee is currently preparing a report to more specifically articulate these benefits in the immigration context.
The City Bar’s efforts to expand the right to counsel in immigration proceedings follows its decades of advocacy to provide lawyers to those unable to adequately represent themselves when liberty and basic needs are at stake. In 1959, the City Bar’s groundbreaking report Equal Justice for the Accused advocated appointed counsel for criminal defendants as reflecting society’s interest in “fundamental human rights,” and provided support for the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1963’s Gideon v. Wainwright decision. In 2006, the City Bar co-sponsored the American Bar Association’s resolution supporting a right to appointed counsel in civil proceedings. In 2009, the City Bar’s Immigration & Nationality Committee released a report arguing for a right to appointed counsel for detainees in immigration removal proceedings.
Source
150 Restaurants Are Donating Proceeds to Puerto Rico for World Central Kitchen’s 'World Food Day'
150 Restaurants Are Donating Proceeds to Puerto Rico for World Central Kitchen’s 'World Food Day'
World Central Kitchen will host its fourth annual World Food Day on October 13, and so far 150 restaurants nationwide...
World Central Kitchen will host its fourth annual World Food Day on October 13, and so far 150 restaurants nationwide have agreed to donate 10 percent of their proceeds to WCK’s Puerto Rico aid and to a new culinary school in Haiti.
Read the full article here.
Small Business Hiring is Swinging Higher
CBS News - March 3, 2015, by Jonathan Berr - Want another sign of the economic rebound? Small-business hiring is on the...
CBS News - March 3, 2015, by Jonathan Berr - Want another sign of the economic rebound? Small-business hiring is on the rise.
The Paychex/IHS Small Business Job Index posted a 0.19 percent monthly increase in February, rising to 100.84. That follows January's 0.09 percent gain and marks the second straight month of advances. On a year-over-year basis, the index, which measures hiring at businesses with 50 or fewer workers, slipped 0.31 percent.
"Small businesses are off to a solid start in 2015 when it comes to job growth," said Martin Mucci, president and CEO of Paychex, in a press release. "While it's still early in the year, the first two months have seen consistent positive improvement."
Nationally, signs of increased small-business hiring abound. Only two regions that were measured in February showed a decline, and 13 of the 20 states analyzed have index levels topping 101. The Pacific Region had the best performance in February, while New England, which has gotten pounded this winter with record-setting snowfall, showed the worst one-month performance.
Indiana edged out Texas and Florida to become the leading state for small-business hiring, and Dallas led all metropolitan areas.
The index is calculated using aggregated small-business payroll data on 350,000 small businesses and with a base year of 2004 because it was a period of expansion before the start of the economic downturn. Although politicians often refer to small businesses as an engine of economic growth, economists have disputed this notion in recent years.
Nonetheless, the report does underscore positive job market trends. During 2014, 37 states and the District of Columbia showed statistically significant improvements in employment. Texas had the largest gains (457,900), followed by California (320,300) and Florida (230,600). The biggest job losses were in Minnesota (5,200), Idaho (1,700) and New Mexico (1,600). The strengthening continued in January, when the nation's overall unemployment rate slipped to 5.7 percent.
According to the Federal Reserve, economists believe the "long-run normal" unemployment rate would be between 5 percent and 6 percent over the next five to six years in the absence of "shocks."
Jobless rates for certain categories of workers, though, remain stubbornly high. Unemployment for Millennials, for instance, was 14 percent as of January. According to Fivethirtyeight.com, this generation is poorer than people their age were in 1989 because so many are deeply indebted with student loans and are less likely to own a house.
The national jobless rate for African-Americans was 10.3 percent in January. In the two-thirds of states for which data are available, the median real wages of African-Americans fell between 2000 and 2014, while pay for whites rose 2.5 percent during the same period. Two liberal think tanks, the Center for Popular Democracy and the Economic Policy Research Institute, argued in a report released today that these job-market disparities indicate the Federal Reserve should resist pressure to raise interest rates.
"America needs the Federal Reserve to concentrate on labor market stability and ensure that wages are rising with productivity, so that workers reap the benefits from their efficiencies and hard work; that means prioritizing a wage growth target, rather than inflation," the report said. "A Federal Reserve dominated by banks and major corporations will produce an economy that works for them, at the risk of leaving tens of millions of working families -- particularly Black working families -- with little hope of a better life."
Source
As Attacks on Unions Continue, Bringing Back the Strike May Be Our Only Hope
On December 14, Chicago Teachers Union Vice President Jesse Sharkey announced the results of the union’s strike...
On December 14, Chicago Teachers Union Vice President Jesse Sharkey announced the results of the union’s strike authorization vote. For the second time in three years, the union’s membership voted overwhelmingly to strike if necessary. "Our ability to withhold our labor is our power," declared CTU President Karen Lewis on the eve of voting.
That axiom, that strikes are where unions derive their power, is pretty out of favor these days. A wave of disastrous strikes and lockouts beginning in the Reagan era that helped deunionize much of American industry has left the surviving labor movement skittish about the prospect of full-scale walk-outs. But bright spots like Fight for 15, Bargaining for the Common Good and the Chicago teachers strike have shown that workers can win strikes (if one defines victory as workers walking away from the ordeal feeling more powerful). Labor activists and leaders, particularly as they anticipate a viciously anti-union Supreme Court decision in Friedrichs v. CTA, have to figure out more strategies to revive the strike weapon in our current era.
How strikes became a “bad idea”
Ironically, the seeds of labor’s 1980s defeats were planted during its best seasons for growth in the 1930s. During the wave of sit-down strikes that grew union membership by leaps and bounds, Congress passed the National Labor Relations Act in 1935. The purpose of the act was to establish an orderly process for certifying unions and compelling employers to bargain in good faith with them. The plain language of the law also made it illegal to fire an employee for union activity.
But in two of the early Supreme Court cases that established the constitutionality of this law, the court casually cut into workers’ rights to their jobs.
In a 1939 case called NLRB vs. Fansteel Metallurgical, the court ruled that the NLRB cannot compel the reinstatement of a fired worker who broke the law, even if his illegal activity was part of an otherwise protected union activity like striking. Sit-down strikes, the physical occupation of someone else’s property to prevent their business from operating without you, was simply not going to be a protected activity under this new labor law regime.
In an earlier case, 1938’s NLRB v. Mackay Radio, the Supreme Court stripped workers of their unalloyed right to return to their jobs after a strike. The Court held that not only was an employer allowed to replace striking workers to keep a business going during a strike, but that they could keep the scabs on the job after the strike was over. The strikers would not be fired, per se, as an employer would have to make provision to recall former strikers as vacancies occur.
The McKay germ lay dormant for over 40 years. There were thousands of strikes in the United States all the way through the 1970s. And while plenty of bosses hired plenty of scabs, those scabs were almost always let go after a strike. To take a worker’s job away for standing with her union was viewed as almost un-American.
Or at least it was, until no less of an American than the sitting President, Ronald Regan, fired the striking air traffic controllers in 1981, sending a strong signal to industry: have at it..
McKay was weaponized by the Phelps-Dodge Corporation in 1983. The copper mining company bargained its Steelworkers local to impasse over drastic cuts in pay, benefits and working conditions—essentially daring the union to strike. Exploiting the bad economic times, the company had no problem importing a permanent replacement workforce, for whom even the reduced pay was far better than most jobs available. After 12 very ugly months, the scabs voted to legally decertify the union.
This Phelps-Dodge blueprint is how much of the deunionization of American industry occurred in the Reagan-Bush (and Clinton) era. Unions that survived frequently did so by capitulating to management’s giveback demands.
Tellingly, the AFL-CIO’s 1990s version of labor law reform was not for organizing rights, like card check, but a bill to undo the McKay doctrine and ban the permanent replacement of strikers. In 1994, the year that the Workplace Fairness Act effectively died, there were 14 major strikes involving over 108,000 workers. By 2012, there were only four, and they involved less than 15,000 workers.
And perhaps most telling of all: Unions’ most recent attempt at labor law reform, the Employee Free Choice Act, did not include any provision on strikes. We have abandoned the strike weapon.
Well-planned strikes serve as inspiration
Not every union has abandoned strikes. The last Chicago teacher strike served as the strongest example in years for everyday workers of the power of a well-planned work stoppage.
On paper, it made no sense that a teachers union could wage a successful strike in 2012. Teachers unions had suffered from years of well-funded political attacks that cast them in the media as villains who prioritize “adults’ interests” over “students’.” The city’s power brokers, Mayor Rahm Emanuel in particular, were crying broke and exploiting civil rights rhetoric in their give-back demands. And there were thousands of teachers in charter schools and unemployed and recently retired teachers in the Chicago area who could have been recruited as replacements if they viewed the Chicago Teachers Union as striking against the public interest.
Instead, the Chicago public overwhelmingly viewed the CTU as striking for the common good. Partly, this was thanks to two years of deep and meaningful community organizing and partnerships that the union diligently pursued knowing there would likely be a strike. And partly, this was thanks to the union bargaining for school resources demands that resonated beyond just their membership.
For the last really big strike that got even non-union workers thinking about their power, you have to go all the way back to 1997. The Teamsters—who, like the CTU at the local level, had elected progressive reformers to their national leadership—also spent years preparing for a planned strike against UPS. These sort of well-planned strikes are crucial for getting workers, those in unions and those without, to think about power and the exercise of it.
In his book Only One Thing Can Save Us, labor lawyer Thomas Geoghegan expresses a preference for one-day strikes, which he has seen used effectively by the hotel employees union. In such a strike, a union signals its intent to return to work after 24 hours, allowing strikers to impact the employer’s business but protecting them from permanent replacement.
Joe Burns, also a labor lawyer, has written extensively on labor’s need to bring back the strike weapon. In his Reviving the Strike, he scorns one-day “publicity strikes” as no substitute for “an effective traditional strike,” which he defines as one that aims to halt production.
Burns’ contribution gets us thinking not just about the need to get more strikes going in this country, but to really think through how to define a “successful” strike. But his mantra-like focus on “halting production” is strangely limiting. As a result of union busting and globalization in manufacturing, most of the new organizing and strategic contract campaign action is in healthcare, education and the service industry. A Chicago teacher would likely rankle at the thought of their strike “halting production.” (What, after all, does their employer aim to produce? One hopes it is citizens and scholars, but fears it is docile workers and future prisoners.)
My own union work so far has been in hotels, home healthcare and education. I have worked on only a small number of work stoppages, most of a limited duration. In my experience, employers are working from such an ossified playbook that unions can get a lot of mileage out doing the last thing that the boss and his lawyers expect.
For example, hotel employees can cost the company more money by not striking on the day the company expects, thus costing them the expense of paying and lodging scabs as well as the continued payroll costs of the union members who stayed on the job an extra day.
I don’t prescribe a perfect form of strike. American workers will not learn to strike again from articles like this or books like Burns’ and Geoghegan’s, which are really more for labor nerds and bookish organizers—they will only learn to strike by watching contemporary examples of workers striking. Since it’s hard to raise chickens without eggs, even one-day “publicity strikes” have an educational value.
But many thousands times more working people will be educated by the next Chicago Teachers strike. The teachers will halt production, but, perversely, that will save their employer money. Chicago will continue to collect taxes and be freed of the burden of compensating its teachers for a few weeks. (In fairness, Joe Burns expounds upon this unique aspect of public sector strikes in his follow-up book, Strike Back.)
To be effective, the CTU must take the students and parents who will be disrupted and bring that disruption to the doorsteps of Rahm Emanuel, Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner and Chicago’s unelected school board. To win for the working class, they must continue to loudly proclaim, as CTU President Karen Lewis did, “Your power is your ability to withhold your labor.”
Possible paths forward
Our challenge is to inspire even non-union workers to think about their power and how to exercise it using the tools we have on hand: a union movement with miniscule density in only a handful of service and public sector industries largely led by staff who have precious little personal experience with leading job actions. We should be clear about how deep this deficit is.
One of the most promising labor projects of the moment is Bargaining for the Common Good. This is an effort by public sector unions in Washington, Oregon, California, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois and Ohio to align their bargaining demands with each other and with community demands around progressive taxation, affordable housing, youth incarceration and government transparency.
These community demands fall well outside a union’s scope of bargaining and are therefore technically illegal. But as long as the unions also have demands that are within their legal scope (not hard to do when employers refuse to pay people what they deserve), then the unions can press the community’s case. This is a brilliant way of getting community to see unions’ fights as their own and of building worker and community power—and the next Chicago teachers strike will likely be the highest profile test of the theory this side of the Mississppi.
What follows could be bigger. A number of public and private sector unions in Minnesota have contract expirations in 2016. Their bargaining demands for the common good are focused not just on their individual employers but also on the largest employers in the state: Target and Wells Fargo. This is the potential for the closest thing we’ve seen in a while to a general strike (something Minnesota has a history of doing).
Another promising project is the Fight for 15. Some have dismissed the series of rolling one-day strikes for increases in the minimum wage and organizing rights as mere P.R. stunts. But there is something deeply radical and significant at play here. Workers who don’t even technically have a union are proving their value—and their power—to their bosses by withholding their labor. And the response from the general public is, at worst, a sort of patronizing “Well, good for them” but more often something a bit closer to “Go get ‘em!”
Just two short years ago, it would have been inconceivable to most union strategists that the lowest paid and most vulnerable workers would be willing to risk it all as these fast food workers have done. But, then, one is reminded of the old Dylan lyric: “When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose.”
The great potential of Fight for 15 is that unorganized workers see reflections of themselves in the strikers and begin to fantasize about what a job action could look like at their workplace. This is the perfect complement to well-planned and executed strikes by established labor unions.
The labor wars of the 1980s and 1990s were won by bosses who caught their unions by surprise. The unions that are still here are survivors who have an obligation, both to their continued survival and to the hope of inspiring a greater wave of organizing, to meaningfully plan for job actions that can win in every round of bargaining.
Those who toil in alternative forms of worker representation—the workers centers, advocacy groups and non-majority unions—should strategize and experiment in job actions that help their members and anyone watching and drawing inspiration feel a sense of their own power and agency.
And the rest of labor, starting with the AFL-CIO, should send a strong signal that strike plans are back by incorporating a ban on permanent replacements in the successor to the Employee Free Choice Act and as part of a broader “right to your job” movement. For those public sector unions who are most threatened by the pending Friedrichs decision, a wave of “free speech” strikes to both celebrate and protest the dubious new rights that the Supreme Court threatens to give them.
Source: In These Times
Conservatives May Control State Governments, But Progressives Are Rising
Bill Moyers - March 18, 2015, by George Goehl, Ana María Archila, and Fred Azcarate - In November, conservatives swept...
Bill Moyers - March 18, 2015, by George Goehl, Ana María Archila, and Fred Azcarate - In November, conservatives swept not only Congress, but a majority of statehouses. While gridlock in Washington is frustrating, the rightward lurch of statehouses could be devastating. Reveling in their newfound power, state lawmakers and their corporate allies are writing regressive policies that could hurt families by exacerbating inequality, further curtailing an already weakened democracy, and worsening an environmental crisis of global proportions.
From a law that would censor public university professors in Kansas to a governor who prohibits state officials from using the term “climate change” in Florida, ideologues in state capitols are wasting little time when it comes to enacting an extreme agenda. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Wisconsin officially enacted right to work legislation on Monday, a policy that’s shown to lower wages and benefits by weakening the power of unions. Missouri, New Mexico, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Illinois are all entertaining various versions of the law. In states like New York and Ohio, legislators are considering severe cuts to public education, while vastly expanding charter schools.
Of course, a look at key 2014 ballot initiatives shows voters held progressive values on issues like the minimum wage, paid sick days, and a millionaires tax. And just 36.4 percent of eligible voters cast their ballots in 2014, meaning that there is surely a silent majority sitting on the sidelines.
The path to policies that put families first is not short, but a bold coalition across the country took an aggressive step forward this week.
On March 11th, under the banner “We Rise,” thousands of people joined more than 28 actions in 16 states to awaken that silent majority and call their legislators to account. A joint project of National People’s Action, Center for Popular Democracy, USAction and other allies across the country, the message of the day was simple: our cities and states belong to us, not big corporations and the wealthy. We can work together and push our legislators to enact an agenda that puts people and the planet before profits. And at each local action, leaders unveiled their proposals for what that agenda would look like in their cities and states.
In Minnesota, grassroots leaders are fighting for a proposal to re-enfranchise over 44,000 formerly incarcerated people. In Nevada, our allies are agitating for a $15 minimum wage. In Illinois, we are organizing for closing corporate tax loopholes and a financial transaction tax (a “LaSalle Street tax”) that would help plug the state’s budget hole. With each of these proposals, we are moving from defense to offense and changing the conversation about race, democracy and our economy.
We’ve seen over and over again in American history, change starts close to home – in our towns, cities and states. On March 11th, we saw a fresh reminder of the power of local change. Our families and communities are defining this new front in American public life, and we will continue rising to challenge corporate power and win the policies that put people and planet first - not last.
If November was a wave election, then this Spring will be a wave of bottom-up people power activism. What starts with defending people and our democracy from an extreme corporate conservative agenda, will pivot to offense as grassroots organizations across the country fight to fundamentally reshape our government and our economy from the bottom up. Expect an unabashedly bold agenda that holds the potential for awakening the progressive majority and ushering in a new era in America, an era where our country works for everyone, not just the wealthy and well connected.
Source
Black leaders in Pittsburgh echo frustration voiced across nation
Black leaders in Pittsburgh echo frustration voiced across nation
Pittsburgh could easily become the next Dallas as frustrations in poor black neighborhoods continue to mount over...
Pittsburgh could easily become the next Dallas as frustrations in poor black neighborhoods continue to mount over perceived economic inequalities and mistreatment by police officers, black community members said Friday.
They condemned the attacks in Dallas that left five officers dead and seven officers and two civilians wounded.
They attributed the shootings to escalating frustration over socio-economic conditions in poor neighborhoods and repeated incidents across the nation in which officers were caught on video using deadly force to subdue minorities.
“These things will fester and grow and grow and grow,” said Connie Parker, president of the Pittsburgh branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. “It's Texas right now, but it can be Pittsburgh next week.”
T. Rashad Byrdsong, president and founder of Community Empowerment Association, a Homewood-based nonprofit, said police officers have become a whipping post for deep-rooted problems beyond their control.
“The real problem is the inability of our public officials to sit down and come up with some comprehensive plan on how to include everybody in this democratic process,” Byrdsong said.
Pittsburgh has had its share of high-profile incidents. The most recent in January — the fatal shooting by Port Authority police of Tyrone Kelly Jr., a 37-year-old homeless man who fatally stabbed a police K-9 dog — drew protests. Police killed Kelly while attempting to arrest him for drinking beer on Port Authority property after he stabbed the dog.
In April 2009, Officers Eric G. Kelly, Stephen J. Mayhle and Paul J. Sciullo II were killed by Richard Poplawski while responding to a 911 call about a domestic disturbance at his Stanton Heights home
Pittsburgh police Chief Cameron McLay was in Washington for a conference when news of the Dallas shootings broke Thursday night. He and his command staff returned to Pittsburgh immediately to begin reaching out to community leaders. He said he was worried about the mood he'd find when he returned to the city Friday morning.
“I expected to find the atmosphere more tense,” he said, adding that city officers remain positive. “I'm really, really proud of them.”
Officers across Allegheny County said that it was impossible not to react emotionally to the massacre in Dallas. A Pittsburgh officer directing traffic Downtown called the mood somber but professional.
Malik Bankston, executive director of the Kingsley Center in Larimer, praised McLay and Mayor Bill Peduto for initiatives to improve relations between police and residents.
“To me, that's sort of the heart of the challenges we have right now, this whole idea of building trust,” Bankston said. “That's very unglamorous, thankless work that's only going to be realized over time, but there has to be a commitment from the highest level.”
Tim Stevens, chairman of the Black Political Empowerment Project in the Hill District, said Dallas is a pivotal moment for the nation to begin bridging a racial divide.
He said the majority of black people are horrified by violence directed toward police, but they also feel the justice system is weighted against them. He called on political and community leaders and residents to unite in an effort to find solutions.
“We have a lot of work to do,” he said.
Greensburg police on its Facebook page said that “no police officer wakes up in the morning wandering who they can shoot today. Realize that none of us are perfect, but we certainly strive to be the best that we can.”
By Bob Bauder & Megan Guza
Source
Divided Democrats face liberal backlash on immigration
Divided Democrats face liberal backlash on immigration
Opponents of demonstrators urging the Democratic Party to protect the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Act (DACA...
Opponents of demonstrators urging the Democratic Party to protect the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Act (DACA) stand outside the office of California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein in Los Angeles Wednesday, Jan. 3, 2018. California has the largest number of people who are affected by the law, also known as the Dream Act.
Read the full article here.
6 days ago
6 days ago