De Blasio Administration Rejects Two Council Voter Registration Bills
Gotham Gazette - October 23, 2014, by Kristen Meriwether -In 2000 the City Council passed Local Law 29 which aimed to...
Gotham Gazette - October 23, 2014, by Kristen Meriwether -In 2000 the City Council passed Local Law 29 which aimed to increase voter registration by requiring 19 city agencies to offer voter registration forms to its customers. It's fourteen years after the law's passage and compliance has been abysmal.
A report compiled by Center for Popular Democracy released this week shows during their walk-ins to 14 of those city agencies, 95 percent of people were never asked if they wanted to register to vote. Of those who self-identified as citizens, the report indicated 84 percent were not given a voter registration form.
On Thursday the City Council held an oversight hearing to discuss the poor compliance and introduce two bills aimed to increase voter registration at the city agency level. Intro 493, sponsored by Committee on Government Operations chair Ben Kallos, would require 15 additional agencies to be covered under the agency-based voter registration law. Intro 356, sponsored by Council Member Jumaane Williams, would assign a code to each agency that would be printed on the voter registration forms and allow the City to track how many forms are being utilized from each agency.
Both bills are being rejected by the de Blasio administration.
"We are committed to getting agency-based voter registration right," Mindy Tarlow, director of the Mayor's Office of Operations, said during her testimony. "But to get it done, we are going to need time and space to manage the agencies and correct long-standing behavior."
Tarlow pointed to Directive 1, issued by Mayor Bill de Blasio on July 11, 2014. In the directive—his first as mayor—he ordered each agency covered under Local Law 29 to prepare a plan showing how they would implement the requirements of the Charter and submit it within 60 days.
The directive also requires each agency submit a semi-annual report on how the plan is being implemented which will include the number of voter registration forms distributed, the number of registration forms completed, and the number of forms transmitted to the Board of Elections.
Tarlow said she agrees with the assessment that there is a problem, but she argued that with the administration already addressing the problem, it was too early for further legislation.
"It is hard. We are trying to bring a number of agencies along," Tarlow said, adding that before moving on new legislation, "we want a chance to feel like we have made some inroads."
Tarlow did not provide an exact timeline as to when the Council would see the results from Directive 1, but did promise to share preliminary reports with the Council some time at the end of November. Kallos jokingly said he looked forward to to reading it in between bites of his Thanksgiving dinner.
"We need the flexibility to watch this over time," Henry Berger, special counsel to the mayor, said during the hearing.
Intro 356The administration's rejection of the second bill, Intro 356, is based less on Directive 1 and more on privacy concerns. Tarlow argued that by putting a code which would identify what agency a voter was getting services from may deter voters from registering at agencies.
"This is to protect the privacy of the individuals who receive services from government that they don't wish to be disclosed," Tarlow said in her testimony.
The council members now face the prospect of attempting to negotiate the bills with the administration.
On Thursday, Council Member Williams went through a lengthy back-and-forth with members of the administration as well as representatives of the Board of Elections (who testified in a later panel) to dispute objections. Williams argued there was already a code (the number 9) on all voter registration forms coming from City agencies and a separate code for those coming from CUNY.
Both Williams and Kallos asked if it was a matter of that information being released to the public or simply being documented. Tarlow said it wasn't a matter of determining who the person was, but what services they were seeking or receiving. She said the administration believes the fear of that information getting out would deter people from signing up to register to vote.
Williams pointed out information such as social security numbers, fax numbers, and driver's license numbers are all exempt from public reporting, but records are still kept. He argued this code could be exempt as well.
Michael Ryan, executive director of the New York City Board of Elections (BOE), said during his testimony the BOE did not believe this code could be exempt based on current law, but he admitted they did not have a chance to dive in deeply on the issue because they were preparing for the upcoming election.
"I don't know that I have been persuaded," Williams said.
Source
Climate Jobs for All: A Key Building Block for the Green New Deal
Climate Jobs for All: A Key Building Block for the Green New Deal
Sunrise Movement is a youth climate organization that aims to “stop climate change and create millions of good jobs in...
Sunrise Movement is a youth climate organization that aims to “stop climate change and create millions of good jobs in the process.” It has been taking the lead on efforts to combine climate protection with a federal jobs guarantee. Other groups like the Sierra Club, Demos, 350.org, the Center for Popular Democracy, the Labor Network for Sustainability, and the US Climate Action Network have also been discussing the climate jobs guarantee (CJG).
Read the full article here.
Kenny Leon on directing the Avengers-studded Our Town reading
Kenny Leon on directing the Avengers-studded Our Town reading
The one-night-only reading, which will benefit hurricane relief in Puerto Rico, takes place Monday night at the Fox...
The one-night-only reading, which will benefit hurricane relief in Puerto Rico, takes place Monday night at the Fox Theatre.
Read the full article here.
Fed's Bostic to Hear Case for Excluding Housing From Inflation
Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta President Raphael Bostic will hear the case for excluding housing from measures of...
Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta President Raphael Bostic will hear the case for excluding housing from measures of consumer prices that the U.S. central bank targets when he meets this week with Fed Up, an advocacy group focused on monetary policy.
Read the full article here.
Why Black Lives Matter wants Hillary Clinton to reinstate Glass-Steagall
Why Black Lives Matter wants Hillary Clinton to reinstate Glass-Steagall
Hillary Clinton's support from financial institutions has always been her Achilles heel but running counter to this...
Hillary Clinton's support from financial institutions has always been her Achilles heel but running counter to this criticism is her pledge to end systemic racism. The two are actually closely related and if she is to make good on her promises on racial justice, she will have to test those close connections to Wall Street by directly pushing for a reinstatement of Glass-Steagall and closing the carried interest tax loophole.
The Movement for Black Lives' policy platform calls for a reinstatement of Glass-Steagall, the 1933 law that separated commercial and investment banking. The law has lately become a core focus of economic progressives.
Groups involved with the Movement for Black Lives see it as a key way to advance economic racial justice. Hillary Clinton has hesitated to publicly talk about the policy – in no small part because Bill Clinton was the one who repealed the law under his administration. The absence of an impermeable boundary between commercial and investing functions both instigated and then accelerated the 2008 financial crisis, forcing millions to lose their homes and jobs.
Communities of color were hit hard and recovered more slowly. Mortgage lenders like Wells Fargo systemically targeted black and brown borrowers for subprime loans, putting many at risk of foreclosure. In the years after the recession, many of these lenders settled multi-billion-dollar discrimination lawsuits years after the damage had been done.
Also, a 2015 American Civil Liberties Union study showed that black families continued to lose wealth years after the recession – even as white families began to climb out. The average black household lost 40 percent of its non-home equity wealth.
"Hillary Clinton has hesitated to publicly talk about Glass Steagall – in no small part because Bill Clinton was the one who repealed the law under his administration."
Home ownership is one of the most stable and reliable ways to acquire wealth in America, and the massive loss of homes among black and brown communities during the 2008 crisis will take decades to recover from. A new Glass-Steagall would help prevent banks from getting bigger and riskier, stopping them from coming back to black and brown neighborhoods and destroying even more wealth.
The carried interest tax loophole is another example. Eliminating this loophole, which lets private equity firms and hedge funds avoid taxes on part of their income, could raise $180 billion. It might sound like a drop in the bucket in the context of a national budget, but when you look closer, it is money that could make a huge difference.
It is also money that could have drastic implications for cities and states around the country that claim they don't have enough funding. The City of Chicago is facing a massive school funding crisis of more than a billion dollars. The hedge fund-cozy Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Governor Bruce Rauner routinely go to the school district for more concessions to make up the gap.
In the meantime, billionaire hedge-funders use the carried interest loophole to get out of paying taxes that translates into much needed revenue. The details of closing the loophole should be worked out by economists, but one thing is clear: if we keep a loophole that costs us billions of dollars while closing schools in black and brown neighborhoods, we are making a strong statement about the level of racial injustice we are willing to accept.
If Hillary Clinton wins the election, she will enter office at one of the most racially charged moments in American history. It is also a moment of some of the greatest income inequality in history – a reality even starker for black and brown communities. If we truly want to achieve racial justice, we should look at policies that prevent a repeat of the 2008 crisis. Closing the carried interest loophole and reinstating a modern Glass-Steagall are the tip of the iceberg. It is up to us to push Clinton for more.
Commentary by Maurice Weeks, who leads the housing & Wall Street accountability campaign at Center for Popular Democracy. Follow him on Twitter @mo87mo87.
By Maurice Weeks
Source
OPPOSING A MINIMUM WAGE HIKE COULD COST THE GOP THE SENATE
Labor Day has started the sprint to the November election. And with more than 40 percent of U.S. workers struggling on...
Labor Day has started the sprint to the November election. And with more than 40 percent of U.S. workers struggling on less than $15 an hour, our economy’s tilt toward low-paying jobs has become a top economic issue this year.
Now, as GOP leaders fret that Donald Trump may drag down Republican incumbents, turning more U.S. Senate races into toss-ups, the Republican majority’s stonewalling of any action to raise the federal minimum wage could cost the party control of Congress.
New polling shows that close to 70 percent of voters in key swing states want an increase in the federal minimum wage—and that 60 percent or more support a $15 minimum wage in six of the seven states polled.
Try Newsweek for only $1.25 per week
Even more, the polling shows that candidates’ positions on raising pay could play a pivotal role in this year’s electoral battles for control of the U.S. Senate. The results show that the incumbent Republican U.S. senators locked in close races could lose critical support—and even their seats—over opposition to raising wages for working people.
In Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and New Hampshire, Democratic challengers Katie McGinty, Russ Feingold and Governor Maggie Hassan strengthened their leads over incumbent Republican Senators Pat Toomey, Ron Johnson and Kelly Ayotte when voters were made aware of the senators’ opposition to raising the minimum wage.
And in Arizona, Missouri and North Carolina, Democratic challengers Representative Ann Kirkpatrick, Jason Kander and Deborah Ross pulled ahead of Senators John McCain, Roy Blunt and Richard Burr, flipping those contests on their heads, when voters learned of the senators’ track records opposing raises.
For example, in Arizona—where John McCain has just emerged from his toughest re-election primary ever—a 43-43 tie turns into a 44-38 lead for Kirkpatrick once voters hear about McCain’s opposition to raising pay.
The polling comes as the National Employment Law Project Action Fund, the Center for Popular Democracy Action, the Working Families Organization and other grassroots groups in seven states begin to mobilize voters.
The coalition plans to engage in canvassing, hold candidate forums and wage debate protests, among other actions, to educate and energize voters around candidates’ positions on the raising the minimum wage.
While Donald Trump, who has been all over the map on the minimum wage, has announced he now supports an increase to $10, most Republicans in Congress remain opposed.
Leading Republican pollster Frank Luntz’s firm LuntzGlobal has warned minimum wage opponents, “If you’re fighting against the minimum wage increase, you’re fighting an uphill battle, because most Americans, even most Republicans, are OK with raising the minimum wage.”
Farm workers pick vegetables on a farm in Rancho Santa Fe, California, on August 31. Paul Sonn writes that Republican U.S. senators locked in close races could lose their seats over opposition to raising wages.
While Congress has refused to act, over the past three and a half years, more than 50 states, cities and counties, as well as individual companies, have stepped forward to approve minimum wage increases, delivering raises to 17 million workers.
And 10 million of those workers are in states or cities that have approved phased-in $15 minimum wages, raising pay for more than one in three workers in California and New York and beginning to reverse decades of growing pay inequality.
Historically, raising the minimum wage enjoyed the same bipartisan backing in Congress that it does with voters. But over the past 20 years, increasing polarization in Washington and the growing role of money in politics have led many Republicans to abandon their support.
As a result, the federal minimum wage today remains frozen at just $7.25 an hour. And taxpayers are being forced to pick up the tab, as low-wage workers in the seven states just polled must rely on $150 billion per year in public assistance to make up for their inadequate paychecks.
Candidates’ positions on the minimum wage have made a difference in close U.S. senate races before. Ten years ago, in Missouri and Montana, Democrats Claire McCaskill and Jon Tester successfully used their support for a higher minimum wage to highlight the difference between them and their opponents, Republican Senators Jim Talent and Conrad Burns, who both opposed raising the wage.
McCaskill and Tester rode the issue to an Election Day victory, helping to break a logjam in Congress and delivering the first federal minimum wage increase in 10 years in 2007.
With the public demanding action to boost pay, the Republican majority and individual candidates this fall face a clear choice: stop standing in the way of a long overdue federal minimum wage increase—or risk their political future.
By Paul K. Sonn
Source
Newark schools should offer more social services, advocates say
NJ.com - 05-06-2015 - Newark's schools should add more social services and community programming to tackle issues of...
NJ.com - 05-06-2015 - Newark's schools should add more social services and community programming to tackle issues of poverty afflicting local neighborhoods, a group of education advocates said Tuesday.
Dubbed the "community school" model, schools should strive to address needy students' health and emotional needs, teach content beyond what is included in standardized tests and include parental input in the decision making.
NJ Communities United organizer Roberto Cabanas told a packed audience in Kings Family Restaurant & Catering, that the district could work local nonprofit organizations to support a wider range of student needs.
"We need to bring the village inside of the school," he said.
Cabanas was one of four panelists at an education forum organized by activists and the city, including Newark chief education officer Lauren Wells, Evie Frankl of the Center for Popular Democracy and Mary Bennett of the Alliance for Newark Public Schools.
Wells said Newark Public Schools once adopted this approach about five years ago through the Global Village Zone, when the district attempted to turn around seven schools in the city's Central Ward.
At the time, the district announced that the program would implement longer days and provide more professional development and pay for teachers. Under the model, schools were set to turn schools into a place where students would be taught but also be able to go to health clinics.
"A community school is a place, a physical place, but it's also a practice," Wells said. "It is a way about going about doing things."
The program also sought input from teachers and parents when it designed it, Wells said.
"Teachers, specifically, at 18th Avenue School worked with the principal to design what (an) extended day would look like in their school," she said.
Bennett said when she was a principal in the district she tried to better serve students on probation by working with the county probation department to have one probation officer assigned to all the students in her school.
Under the community schools model, the district could streamline cooperation between government and universities, Bennett argued.
"You shouldn't have to spend a year to try and unify the services to support students," she said.
Frankl said districts around the country including in Baltimore, New York City and Lancaster, Pennsylvania are adopting this approach.
"Community schools can happen," she said. "There is no reason why a community school should not be the definition of a public school in the United States of America."
Source: NJ.com
Five things to watch for as the Federal Reserve makes its rate hike decision
The typical Federal Reserve monetary policy announcement has all the drama of a traffic signal. Officials provide...
The typical Federal Reserve monetary policy announcement has all the drama of a traffic signal.
Officials provide enough hints beforehand that there's little surprise when the news comes about whether they have given the green light to an interest rate change.
That's not the case Thursday.
Nearly a decade after the last increase in the benchmark federal funds rate — and after almost seven years of keeping it at the unprecedented level of near-zero — central bank policymakers will announce if the time has come for an increase.
Analysts said the potential for a rate hike is too close to call as the Federal Open Market Committee on Thursday wraps up its most eagerly awaited meeting in years.
There have been fewer than normal signals from Fed policymakers, including an unusual two months of public silence from Chairwoman Janet L. Yellen.
And the turmoil in financial markets that began in late August has dampened expectations that the Fed would raise the target level for the rate by 0.25 percentage point this month.
Here are five things to watch for when the Fed makes its announcement at 11 a.m. Pacific time, followed 30 minutes later by a news conference with Yellen.
One and done
In June and July, Yellen said she expected a rate hike this year, and most analysts put their money on September.
But that was before China devalued its currency late last month. The move, a signal that the Chinese economy was slowing, roiled financial markets. Many fear a Fed rate hike could add to the volatility.
The 0.25 percentage point increase in itself is minor.
"If the Fed moves the rates a quarter of a point, it probably isn’t going to have a significant impact in how CEOs invest and hire over the next 12 months," AT&T Inc. Chief Executive Randall Stephenson said this week.
But the expectation has been that once the Fed started raising the rate, it would continue with 0.25 percentage point increases at just about every meeting for the near future.
That would be part of a long, slow climb back to about the 3% level the rate averaged from 2001 to 2007.
If the Fed goes ahead with a rate hike Thursday, it could try to soften the impact by signaling there won't be another increase for a while.
Some analysts have called that a "one and done" rate hike.
Policymakers could indicate that approach in their policy statement. They also could show that in their estimations in the accompanying quarterly economic projections, which contain each member's evaluation of where the federal funds rate would be at the end of the year.
Or Yellen could simply state it when she addresses reporters after the meeting.
Split the baby
If Fed officials are torn between a 0.25 percentage point rate hike or no rate hike at all, some think they could split the difference with a mini-hike of 0.125 percentage point.
The Fed frequently moved the rate by increments of an eighth of a point in the 1970s and '80s. But it hasn't made such a minor move since 1989.
It's unclear whether a mini-hike would make everyone happy. It could end up upsetting both those wanting a rate hike and those opposed to one.
But don't be shocked if the rate moves up by less than 0.25 percentage point.
All aboard
On a major policy decision like the first rate hike since 2006, Yellen will strive for consensus.
Recent Fed history shows that will be difficult to obtain.
Jeffrey Lacker, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, Va., one of the 10 voting members of the FOMC, could be a dissenter if the committee votes to hold the rate steady.
He said this month that "it's time to align our monetary policy with the significant progress we have made."
On the other side, John Williams, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, warned this month of "pretty significant" headwinds for the U.S. economy that have "grown larger" recently.
And the committee's vice chair, William Dudley, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, said late last month that the case for a September rate hike had become "less compelling" amid concerns about the global economy.
Dudley, a close ally of Yellen's, is unlikely to dissent if the rate is raised. But Williams could.
Yellen probably will try for a unanimous vote to send a clear signal to financial markets about the Fed's view of the economy. Getting such a vote could be a big accomplishment.
Market reaction
The lack of clear signals from the Fed about what it will do Thursday could translate into a wild ride on Wall Street and in financial markets abroad after the news breaks.
By one indicator based on federal funds futures, investors believe there is only about a 30% chance of a rate hike. So if the Fed increases the rate, markets would be expected to nosedive.
Adding more volatility to an already roiled financial marketplace is a reason some analysts believe Fed policymakers will wait to increase the interest rate.
In addition to its dual mandate of maximizing employment and keeping inflation in check, the Fed has had an unwritten third mandate since the Great Recession: financial stability.
"The worry surrounding a rate hike really centers around how it might affect financial markets abroad, especially in emerging market countries such as China," said John Lonski, chief economist at Moody's Capital Markets Research Group.
"They probably don’t want to go ahead and add to financial market volatility at this point in time," he said.
But survey results Wednesday from CNBC showed 49% of the 51 economists, money managers and strategists the business news network polled think the Fed will increase the rate.
About 43% think the hike will come later, with the rest undecided.
That would point to a market decline if the Fed doesn't act.
But some argue removing the questions about when the Fed would raise the rate would do more for financial stability, particularly in the long-term, than holding steady.
"It’s this deep uncertainty surrounding the conduct of monetary policy that is exacerbating swings in financial markets," said Lawrence Goodman, a former Treasury official who is president of the Center for Financial Stability think tank.
Political fallout
The Fed's decision will reverberate around the globe. But some of the biggest reactions could come from within Washington.
Liberals have been calling for Yellen and her colleagues to delay a rate increase, arguing the economy still is too weak.
Fed Up, a coalition of 25 labor, community and liberal activist groups plan a news conference Thursday morning in front of the building where Yellen will meet with reporters. The group plans to make its case that the Fed should wait until there is more improvement in the jobs market.
Liberal activists pushed for Yellen to be made Fed chair over former Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers, and they'll be upset with a rate increase this month.
Summers recently said that a rate increase now would be "a serious mistake." His comments echoed warnings from the World Bank.
But holding the rate steady carries its own political risks.
Many Republicans have been highly critical of the Fed's actions since the Great Recession. They've pushed to change the law to allow for audits of the Fed's monetary policy decisions and require the central bank to set rules for adjusting the federal funds rate.
"Our economy would be healthier if the Federal Reserve were more predictable in its conduct of monetary policy and more transparent about its decision-making," said Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.
Whichever way the Fed goes Thursday, Yellen will face heat for the decision the next time she testifies on Capitol Hill.
Source: Los Angeles Times
Low world inflation dogs central bankers, even as economies grow
Low world inflation dogs central bankers, even as economies grow
Jackson Hole (Wyoming): The world’s top central bankers gather in Jackson Hole, their confidence bolstered by a...
Jackson Hole (Wyoming): The world’s top central bankers gather in Jackson Hole, their confidence bolstered by a sustained return to economic growth that may eventually allow the European Central Bank (ECB) and the Bank of Japan to follow the Federal Reserve in winding down their crisis-era policies.
Yet in one key area, none of the world’s central banks has found the answer. Inflation remains well below their two percent targets, stoking a debate about whether they are missing signals of a less than healthy economy and the need for a slower path of “rate normalisation”, or that they simply don’t understand how inflation works in a globalised world.
Read the full article here.
Adovates for Reading ID cards vow to continue their efforts
Despite collective agreement by city officials, activists say the fight for creating a Reading city ID is nowhere near...
Despite collective agreement by city officials, activists say the fight for creating a Reading city ID is nowhere near over.
Make The Road Pennsylvania, a community action group leading the effort for municipal IDs, filled its Reading headquarters Thursday evening with people resolved to continue pushing for the initiative.
Reading City Council members and Mayor Wally Scott said Monday night that they would not pursue an ordinance setting up a program.
Make The Road submitted a draft ordinance for the creation of a city ID in May.
The IDs would help make everyday life easier for the elderly, undocumented immigrants, some Puerto Ricans and others who face hurdles getting ID, Make The Road says.
City officials cited several concerns about the draft ordinance, including the legality and costs of a program.
Make The Road organizers countered some of those reasons Thursday by naming 13 municipalities around the country that have already approved local IDs.
They also presented their own cost-analysis of the program which, under the group's estimates of an ID with a $30 price tag, would bring in about $130,000 for the city.
Gabriela Raful, president of the Berks County Bar Association Minority Law Committee, and Bernardo Carbajal and Abraham Cepeda, attorneys and Reading School Board members, also spoke with ID supporters.
The local bar association's board of directors endorsed the creation of a city ID Tuesday, but did not specifically endorse Make The Road's draft ordinance.
Though activists are determined, City Council President Jeffrey S. Waltman Sr. said Thursday afternoon that he doesn't think council will revisit the idea anytime soon.
"The bottom line is I don't foresee City Council taking the issue up in the near future," he said. "It deals with federal issues and with our city and our resources, we have to be focused on getting out of Act 47."
Waltman also said the draft ordinance would have to be significantly altered or completely rewritten for council to even remotely consider it.
At the council's meeting Monday, leaders expressed opposition to a stipulation in the ordinance that states the city would not be able to share cardholder information with federal authorities, such as Immigration & Customs Enforcement.
Scott did not return calls requesting comment Thursday, but expressed strong opposition at the council meeting to aspects in the draft ordinance, including the prohibition on information-sharing.
He had also questioned the constitutionality of the draft ordinance, an argument that Make The Road countered Thursday.
The Center For Popular Democracy, a social issues advocacy group based in Washington, helped craft the ordinance.
Emily Tucker, a senior staff attorney specializing in immigration law, said Thursday that in the other cities where similar legislation was introduced and passed, such as New York City and Newark, N.J., there had been no concerns from local officials about limits on information sharing.
Waltman said that the decision to not pursue the IDs is not to slight city residents, but that creating a municipal ID is an effort that the city cannot presently handle or is responsible to undertake.
Cepeda said city officials should not ignore an issue that he feels would be very beneficial to the Latino community.
"It shows that they either have an issue with the people they represent or they are clueless," Cepeda said.
By ANTHONY OROZCO
Source
21 hours ago
4 days ago