Some Question City’s Decision to Keep IDNYC Documents
Advocates who opposed a policy of keeping documents submitted by IDNYC applicants believe the doubts they raised in...
Advocates who opposed a policy of keeping documents submitted by IDNYC applicants believe the doubts they raised in 2014 have been validated by the legal fight over destroying those papers before Donald Trump becomes president.
“Now they’re saying, ‘If they come for the data, we’re going to burn it,'” says Abraham Paulos, executive director of Families for Freedom. “Well, then why did you keep in in the first place?”
The policy of keeping documents was not part of the original version of the IDNYC law but was added during intense negotiations involving City Hall, the NYPD and advocacy groups.
Some of those advocacy groups—like Families for Freedom and the New York Civil Liberties Union—ended their support for the IDNYC program over the retention policies because they feared the information could be used by federal authorities hunting for undocumented immigrants. Other organizations expressed concerns but continue to support the bill and promoted the ID program.
The fears about the documents have grown more widespread since Trump, who has pledged to deport millions of people, won election. A lawsuit by two Staten Island lawmakers has at least temporarily halted the city from a planned purge of the documents in its possession.
Mayor de Blasio recently said that IDNYC, one of his signature achievements, would no longer retain copies of passports, utility bills and other documents submitted by people applying for the card, which is held by more than 860,000 New Yorkers.
For advocates, that move—while welcome—casts a harsh light on the decision to collect the documents in the first place. Still, many immigration advocates think the ID was a positive step.
Obstacles to an idea
New Haven, Conn., was the first city to issue a municipal ID in 2007, and some local advocates had been pushing for New York City to follow suit in order to give a widely usable ID card to the undocumented as well as others who lacked official identification. De Blasio embraced the ID as a candidate and called for it in his first State of the City speech.
From the outset, the idea faced an obstacle: How do you create a tool that will be especially useful for undocumented people without making it a scarlet letter? Attaching museum discounts and other benefits to the card aimed to broaden its appeal so that even citizens would obtain it.
But while that broader usage meant the card itself didn’t necessarily indicate a holder’s immigration status, the documents associated with each application still could. To obtain an IDNYC, a person has to present documents that establish identity and residency. Among the accepted proofs of identity are foreign passports, consular ID, foreign military identification—all of which could indicate a lack of legal presence in the U.S.
The question that triggered tension during the negotiations over IDNYC was whether that material needed to be saved once IDNYC staff reviewed the documents and approved the card.
The first version of the City Council measure that created the program included the language, “The city shall not retain originals or copies of records provided by an applicant to prove identity or residency for a New York City identity card.”
But the language that became law described a very different approach. It permitted the city to, once a quarter, destroying any application documents that had been held for two years. It also created an opportunity to destroy all the documents in the program’s possession “on or before December 31, 2016” and end document retention then—an effort to ensure that the papers could be shredded before an anti-immigrant president took office.
The lawsuit by Assemblymembers Ron Castorina and Nicole Malliotakis, both Staten Island Republicans, argues the state’s freedom of information laws should prevent that destruction of documents. Malliotakis made her opposition to the destruction clause known as early as February 2015.
Behind-the-scenes debate
When IDNYC was being shaped in 2014, “retention to us was something that we absolutely did not want,” Betsy Plum, director of special projects at the New York Immigration Coalition, recalls.
However, “It was critical that the NYPD accept the ID,” she says, because one goal for the ID was for it to be a resource when someone is stopped by police. “For us and the community we work with the NYPD was a really critical partner for us to keep at the table for the ultimate success of IDNYC.”
And the NYPD said it needed the documents to investigate fraud, she says. Plum describes a back and forth between advocates and City Hall over the retention issue. “They came back saying to us: ‘This is the only way it’s going to happen.'”
A mayoral spokesperson says the retention clause was inserted “after consideration from many stakeholders, including NYPD.” In addition to the language permitting destruction after two years or at the end of 2016, the final bill did require a court order or warrant for the documents to be handed over to any third party.
Some advocates believed those safeguards were enough to justify going ahead with the ID. “Once we were able to see a clear path for the data to be protected, we saw the benefits far outweigh the risks,” Plum says.
Another advocate involved in the discussions recalls that the coalition of advocacy groups involved in the negotiations took a vote on whether to maintain or drop support for the measure; a clear majority favored pressing ahead with the ID.
But Families for Freedom did not. Paulos (who was a City Limits intern eight years ago) already harbored concerns about whether the cards themselves could be used to identify undocumented people. “The retention and the data was the deal breaker,” he recalls. “Once we heard that the NYPD was also in the discussion, we pulled out.”
The New York Civil Liberties Union also parted ways with other advocates. “In this bill, the city has not done enough to protect those documents from being used by law enforcement,” NYCLU advocacy director Johanna Miller testified as the bill was about to be signed in July 2014. “While the NYC ID will bring benefits to many people, we are disappointed that the city is inviting New Yorkers to gamble with the stakes as high as prosecution or even deportation.”
A July 2015 report by the Center for Popular Democracy (which supported the New York law) noted that “the vast majority of municipal ID card programs around the country have prohibited the copying or retention of documents presented to prove identity or residency. In New Haven, San Francisco, and Mercer County, NJ, municipal ID card programs have run smoothly for years without copying or retaining personal documents of applicants.”
“The only city-run municipal ID card program that stores applicants’ personal documents is IDNYC,” the report continued.”
No regrets from supporters
In the months after the law’s passage but before it took effect, the commissioner of the city’s Human Resources Administration—which oversees the ID program—issued executive orders clarifying the protections for IDNYC data and the handling of requests for program information by law enforcement.
But concerns persisted. When the first oversight hearing about the law was held in mid-2015, The Fortune Society testified that it was concerned that, despite the safeguards in the bill, “federal, state and local law-enforcement agencies may not have to meet a probable cause standard to obtain documents.”
Fortune Society director JoAnne Page now tells City Limits: “The more vulnerable people are, the most risk that damage will be done,” if personal information falls into the wrong hands. “I don’t think there is a more vulnerable group than undocumented immigrants who have criminal records.”
Plum says despite the Trump election and the lawsuit, NYIC has no regrets about its decision to support the bill despite the retention policy. “If we were all to live in a reality where we only acted as it if the worst possible things could happen and we allows ourselves to educate and serve communities from a lens of total paranoia, I think we’d have a far worse outcome for the communities we serve and protect,” she says. “I think still with the ID the benefits have and still do outweigh the risks. The alternative here would be to have had no IDNYC – to have parent who can’t get into their kids schools, to have families unable to open bank accounts, to have survivors of domestic violence afraid to call the police because they have no way to identify themselves. I don’t think anyone would want to sacrifice any of those benefits.”
The Castorina-Malliotakis lawsuit is next in court on January 18. NYCLU staff attorney Jordan Wells says he believes the city will ultimately be able to follow through on their plans to destroy the documents. “The lawsuit pending in Staten Island is without merit,” he says. “Eventually the city will be able to follow the procedure.”
But Paulos believes damage has already been done. The fact that the city will now destroy the documents, and will no longer keep those generated for new applications, makes it hard to credit the assertions that keeping that paperwork was necessary in the first place. “There’s a lot of mistrust.”
By Jarrett Murphy
Source
Minority Groups Rally Outside Fed Against Interest Rate Hike
Observer - March 5, 2015, by Will Bredderman - Minority activist organizations demonstrated in the snow outside the...
Observer - March 5, 2015, by Will Bredderman - Minority activist organizations demonstrated in the snow outside the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, insisting that the institution keep interest rates low until stubbornly high unemployment rates in nonwhite communities drop further.
Immigrant advocacy group Make the Road NY and neighborhood organizers New York Communities for Change joined other left-leaning groups outside the lower Manhattan headquarters of the New York Fed, a branch of the national system that controls the interest rates at which lending institutions may borrow money from the United States government. The Fed has left the rates near zero since the financial crisis of 2008 in order to encourage investment, but it has indicated it might raise them this summer amid an improving economy.
The protesters, however, argued that black and Hispanic communities in New York City are still languishing in an economic doldrums, with jobless rates sitting at 11.2 percent and 5.7 percent respectively.
“These unemployment rates are not going to be better by this summer. We’re not a couple months away from a recovery,” said Shawn Sebastian from the Center for Popular Democracy, arguing that the Fed is looking only at a general joblessness picture that averages in the relatively low unemployment rates among whites. “They’re trying to look at the aggregate levels of unemployment and ignore how it’s disproportionately affecting minority communities to push this narrative about a recovery that we’re not experiencing.”
Chanting “don’t raise the rate,” the demonstrators insisted that New York Fed President William Dudley meet with their organizations to discuss the special needs of minorities.
“We need to sit down with him and have an honest conversation about why he needs to keep interest rates low in order to fight for our communities of color, so that we can make sure we are supplying jobs to all,” said Victoria Ruiz of Make the Road.
The protesters also lashed out at the Fed, which has the additional duty of regulating large banks, for failing to prevent lenders from issuing, packaging and selling dubious mortgage loans—which disproportionately went to black and Hispanic homeowners, with areas like Southeast Queens now leading the country in foreclosures.
“The banks, while the Fed was not watching what they were doing, was not doing its job supervising them, they went around snapping up subprime lenders and fueling all of that toxic subprime lending that happened,” said Alexis Iwanisziw of the New Economy Project, noting many major financiers have since paid out massive settlements to the Department of Justice for their activities.
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York referred the Observer to chairwoman Janet Yellen’s remarks after the Fed’s meeting last December, when she said “it can be patient in beginning to normalize the stance of monetary policy.”
Source
Richmond Fed Names McKinsey's Thomas Barkin as Its President
Directors at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond confirmed Monday they had chosen Thomas Barkin, a senior executive at...
Directors at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond confirmed Monday they had chosen Thomas Barkin, a senior executive at global consulting firm McKinsey & Co., as the institution’s next president.
“We are fortunate to have found an extremely well-qualified individual to serve the Federal Reserve’s Fifth District and the American people,” Margaret Lewis, chair of the Richmond board of directors, said in a statement.
Read the full article here.
A Victory for Smarter, More Effective Policing
Huffington Post – September 9, 2013, by Brittny Saunders - On August 22, the New York City Council took the final step...
Huffington Post – September 9, 2013, by Brittny Saunders -
On August 22, the New York City Council took the final step toward enacting the Community Safety Act (CSA), overriding Mayor Bloomberg’s recent veto and striking a blow against stop-and-frisk and other discriminatory NYPD tactics. This is more than a win for those who have fought hardest for the CSA. It’s a victory for everyone who wants smarter and more effective policing — in NYC and beyond.
In June, the Council approved two CSA measures: the “End NYPD Discriminatory Profiling Bill,” which will expand and strengthen the ban on bias-based policing and the “NYPD Oversight Act,” which will create a new Inspector General to provide independent oversight of the Department. Despite the Mayor’s rejection of the bills and weeks of aggressive advocacy by the administration and its surrogates, the Council re-affirmed its decision recently.
The hard-won victory is due to the tireless efforts of Communities United for Police Reform — a coalition of base-building, legal and policy groups in the City — their allies in the Council and the countless New Yorkers who raised their voices in opposition to discriminatory policing. It also amounts to a repudiation of a set of policies and practices that the Bloomberg administration has vehemently defended, even in the face of statistical evidence undermining their claims and growing concern among members of the public.
The basic facts are undisputed. Under Mayor Bloomberg, NYPD officers have made over 4 million stops on the streets of the city. Over 80 percent of those stops have targeted black or Latino New Yorkers. And in nearly 9 out of 10 cases, there has been no accusation of wrong-doing — no arrest was made and no citation was issued. Where the Mayor and Commissioner Kelly have set themselves against the opinion of growing numbers of New Yorkers is on the legality of these stops. Both Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Kelly have maintained that the city’s use of stop-and-frisk is consistent with what the law requires and that these stops are an essential means of keeping the city safe. Advocates, meanwhile, have challenged both the constitutionality and the effectiveness of these stops, arguing that they are neither responsible for the decline in the city’s crime rates nor particularly effective at removing weapons from the city’s streets. Just over a week ago, federal judge, Shira A. Scheindlin, agreed, declaring the NYPD’s racially discriminatory stop-and-frisk practices unconstitutional in her decision in Floyd v. City of NY.
The sheer volume of stops conducted, the magnitude of the city’s investment in these tactics and the intensity of Mayor Bloomberg’s commitment to them have, unfortunately, established New York City as a poster child for discriminatory policing. And to some degree, the persistence of such discriminatory tactics in New York — long an innovator in public policy — has legitimized these approaches. The administration’s failure to evolve in this respect has reinforced the message that both Bloomberg and Kelly have made fairly explicit: that it is impossible to preserve public safety while also respecting the rights of all residents. For over a decade, they have asserted through words and actions that even the most sophisticated police force in the nation is incapable of doing things differently. Even with billions in funding and what are purported to be the greatest public safety minds in the nation at its disposal, the Department has been unable to break with a shameful history of subjecting people of color and other historically marginalized groups to invidious forms of social control.
New York’s recent move to reject discriminatory policing, however, contains a lesson for elected leaders everywhere. Put simply, in the 21st century, outdated notions of government accountability must expand. The Bloomberg administration’s efforts to defend the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk practices are, perhaps, most instructive when understood as a failure to deal with this fact. Local leaders must, of course, safeguard the rights and attend to the needs of all constituents, regardless of their numbers. But in a city with large numbers of black, brown, immigrant, homeless and LGBTQ residents, the unsustainable nature of policies that subject members of these and other groups to regular surveillance, harassment and civil rights violations should have been exceedingly clear. Still, over the last ten years, the administration has missed countless opportunities to shift course because it has ignored a sizeable chunk of its constituents. It has overlooked, for example, how unjustified street stops undermine trust between the police force and the next generation of New Yorkers, a puzzling choice for an administration that claims to be interested in keeping the city safe over the long term.
With the Council’s most recent vote and implementation of the CSA imminent, the city is poised to set precedent for how large urban centers can both enforce the law and respect the constitutional rights of all residents. And the prospect of a new local executive makes this a particularly hopeful moment. If the upcoming election brings with it a mayor who aims to be a leader for all New Yorkers, the city may at long last step into the leadership role it should always have occupied, demonstrating what local government can produce when it holds itself accountable to all constituents.
Source
Trump Picks Monetary Expert for No. 2 Job at Federal Reserve
Trump Picks Monetary Expert for No. 2 Job at Federal Reserve
President Trump continued a sweeping remake of the Federal Reserve’s leadership on Monday by nominating Richard...
President Trump continued a sweeping remake of the Federal Reserve’s leadership on Monday by nominating Richard Clarida, a Treasury official in the administration of President George W. Bush, for the Fed’s second-ranking job.
Read the full article here.
Los trabajadores latinos quieren que la Fed les oiga
Lo cierto es que pese a la mejora económica la tasa de desempleo de latinos (6.8%) y negros (9.1%) es más elevada que...
Lo cierto es que pese a la mejora económica la tasa de desempleo de latinos (6.8%) y negros (9.1%) es más elevada que la de los blancos (4.6%) y asiáticos (4%) y muchos de ellos trabajan por sueldos muy bajos. Muchos de ellos, como Rubio no sienten la recuperación. “Yo paso por los bares y los veo llenos incluso los lunes pero no todos podemos hacer eso, yo no”, explica.
Su inquietud por los más desfavorecidos le ha llevado a integrarse en la asociación comunitaria Make the Road para ayudar a los trabajadores, muchos de ellos latinos, de forma diferente a como lo hacía en su país. Desde hoy está en Jackson Hole, Wyoming, donde se reunen economistas de todo el mundo y representantes de bancos centrales para hablar de política monetaria. Rubio forma parte de un grupo de trabajadores y asociaciones de base de todo el país, en las que hay representación latina, que quieren convencer a la Reserva Federal de que no suba las tasas de interés. Su argumento es que si se quedan bajas como ahora “ayudarán a mejorar las condiciones laborales y crear más empleo”.
Rubio dice que la recuperación no ha llegado a los trabajadores como ella y que por eso no es momento de empezar a subir unas tasas que reconoce que están históricamente bajas(0%-0.25% desde diciembre de 2008) para estimular el crecimiento durante la reciente Gran Recesión.
“Lo que decide la Fed nos atañe a todos”, explica con convicción Rubio antes de hablar de la fuerte desigualdad laboral que hay y el hecho de que apenas hay inflación, motivo por el que no debería haber prisa por subir tasas o como dicen los economistas, normalizarlas. El programa de Jackson Hole y la lista de asistentes se hace público por el organizador de este encuentro anual, la Reserva Federal de Kansas City, hoy mismo pero ya se sabe que la presidenta de la Fed, Janet Yellen, no va a asistir. Rubio espera estar en algunas reuniones con parte de los asistentes.
“Uno piensa que no les van a ver pero ha veces que hay que pedir y abrir un caminito”, dice.
De hecho, Rubio, junto con otros trabajadores y activistas, ya se reunió este mismo mes con el presidente de la Reserva Federal de Nueva York, William Dudley. Según esta hondureña les dio la razón cuando se planteó la existencia de una desigualdad laboral y que no hay empleo para todos. Dudley dijo que dada la situación económica fuera de las fronteras la necesidad de subir las tasas es ahora “menos imperiosa”.
Ady Barkan, abogado del Centro de Democracia Popular que está impulsando la campaña “Fed Up” y estas peticiones ante la Reserva, explica que es necesario que las autoridades monetarias “presten atención a los trabajadores”.
“La economía no se ha recuperado, hay mucho desempleo entre negros y latinos, subempleo, baja participación en el mercado laboral y apenas hay subidas de salarios”, resume Barkan. Este abogado cree que la economía necesita tasas bajas para que las empresas sigan invirtiendo de forma barata y que haya préstamos asequibles que reactiven el consumo de todos.
Lo cierto es que las empresas tienen cash y algunos tipos de préstamos como los hipotecarios no han remontado lo esperado. “No obstante, si las tasas suben la situación será peor”, explica Barkan, “porque las empresas tendrán más motivos para quedarse sentadas en sus montañas de cash si tienen rendimiento de ellas y por que para invertir necesitan una inflación que no hay, ni habrá si suben tasas”.
“La economía tiene que calentarse un poco más”, dice. Barkan admite que las tasas bajas no son suficientes y que sería bueno que el Congreso hiciera algo además de subir el salario mínimo.
Representantes de la campaña de Fed Up ya se han reunido con Yellen y presidentes de otras reservas como la de Kansas, San Francisco y Atlanta entre otras, miembros de la Federal.
Dean Baker co director del Center for Economic and Policy Research de Washington publicaba recientemente que la subida “reducirá ingresos y oportunidades para quienes menos tienen”, una posición que también comparte el nobel de economía, Joseph Stiglitz.
¿Cuál es la misión de la Reserva Federal?
La Reserva Federal o Fed es uno de los reguladores de la banca y la autoridad que tiene en sus manos la política monetaria, es decir, regula la cantidad de dinero en circulación. ¿Su misión? Asegurarse de que se creen las condiciones de crédito y monetarias para conseguir el máximo empleo, precios estables (ni inflación ni deflación) y tasas de interés a largo plazo moderadas.
¿Cómo funcionan las tasas?
La Reserva Federal sube las tasas de interés a corto plazo, el dinero que se prestan los bancos entre sí, para retirar dinero del mercado y evitar las subidas de precios o inflación. Cuando las baja es porque los precios están bajos y falla el consumo. Al bajarlas se pone más dinero en circulación lo que, en teoría, animando la economía. Estas tasas a corto terminan reflejándose en las de largo plazo que son las que se usan en hipotecas y otros préstamos que se usan para comprar e invertir. Cuanto más se invierte y más crece la economía más y mejor trabajo se crea.
Source: La Raza
Death Cab for Cutie Kick Off Anti-Trump Campaign ’30 Days, 30 Songs’
Death Cab for Cutie Kick Off Anti-Trump Campaign ’30 Days, 30 Songs’
A group of musicians will be using their music to help convince voters not to support Donald Trump. Titled “30 Days, 30...
A group of musicians will be using their music to help convince voters not to support Donald Trump. Titled “30 Days, 30 Songs,” the project will release one track each day between now and the election in the hopes of creating a “Trump-Free America.”
Related: Roger Waters Trashes Donald Trump at Desert Trip Festival
Death Cab for Cutie begins the project today (Oct 10) with the original track “Million Dollar Loan.”
Ben Gibbard said of the song, “Lyrically, ‘Million Dollar Loan’ deals with a particularly tone deaf moment in Donald Trump’s ascent to the Republican nomination. While campaigning in New Hampshire last year, he attempted to cast himself as a self-made man by claiming he built his fortune with just a ‘small loan of a million dollars’ from his father. Not only has this statement been proven to be wildly untrue, he was so flippant about it. It truly disgusted me. Donald Trump has repeatedly demonstrated that he is unworthy of the honor and responsibility of being President of the United States of America, and in no way, shape or form represents what this country truly stands for. He is beneath us.”
This week, Jim James, Aimee Mann, Thao Nguyen, clipping., and Bhi Bhiman will all share songs, and R.E.M. will premiere a never-before-heard track. New songs will be available every day at 9am PST on Spotify, and will appear 24 hours later on Apple Music.
Fans can also purchase individual songs with proceeds benefitting Center for Popular Democracy (CDP), which aims for Universal Voter Registration.
By Amanda Wicks
Source
Protesters confronted Sen. Flake on his Kavanaugh vote. Hours later, he asked for a delay
Protesters confronted Sen. Flake on his Kavanaugh vote. Hours later, he asked for a delay
Moments after pivotal Sen. Jeff Flake announced his support for Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, the Arizona...
Moments after pivotal Sen. Jeff Flake announced his support for Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, the Arizona Republican was confronted with the consequences.
Read the article and watch the video here.
US Activists Target Fed's Rate-hike Talks
Taipei Times - November 16, 2014 - US labor and community organizers meeting with US Federal Reserve Chair Janet...
Taipei Times - November 16, 2014 - US labor and community organizers meeting with US Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen challenged officials who are ready to raise interest rates to first come visit the poorest neighborhoods with them before saying that the economy has recovered.
Kati Sipp, one of about two dozen activists meeting Yellen, said at a press conference on Friday in front of the central bank in Washington that she would show Philadelphia Fed President Charles Plosser “what life is like in this economy” for his city’s unemployed.
“Clearly Charles Plosser hasn’t been coming out the way that I work,” Pennsylvania Working Families director Sipp said. “I work on 60th Street in West Philadelphia in a storefront office and every single day someone or a couple of people come in to my office because they are looking for work.”
Members of the group met with Yellen and Fed governors Stanley Fischer, Jerome Powell and Lael Brainard. The coalition of 20 community groups, labor unions and religious leaders from around the US wants the Fed to hear the concerns of ordinary US residents as it prepares to raise rates. It is part of wider public pressure, including from legislators of both parties, who want more accountability and transparency from the central bank.
The Fed has been criticized by Democratic and Republican party groups over its rescue of big Wall Street banks in the financial crisis that began in 2008, and over subsequent steps to support the economy through zero interest rates and massive bond purchases.
The group meeting with Yellen and her colleagues on Friday included individuals struggling to find work despite the improving economic picture in the US, Ady Barkan, senior staff attorney at the Brooklyn-based Center for Popular Democracy, one of the organizers of the meeting, said in an interview.
“They all listened very intently and asked questions,” Barkan said of Yellen and the three governors. “They were very interested in hearing about the personal stories of the folks we brought.”
Barkan said Rounds told the Fed officials that “sky-high unemployment” in the St Louis area had contributed to “desperation” in the town.
Another speaker was Shemethia Butler, an unemployed woman from Washington. She recounted for Yellen how she was laid off from a job that offered no paid sick days after becoming ill and missing time at work, Barkan said.
The jobless rate has fallen to 5.8 percent from a 26-year high of 10 percent in October 2009. Interest rates have been held near zero since December 2008 and most Fed officials project that they will raise borrowing costs sometime next year.
Still, millions of US citizens can find only part-time work, while average hourly wages have risen at about a 2 percent pace for the past five years, barely outpacing inflation.
“The economy is not working for the vast majority of people,” Barkan told reporters before the meeting in front of the central bank headquarters facing the National Mall. “It’s too important of an institution to be controlled and dominated by big banks and corporations, rather than the public.”
In addition to low rates to help the unemployed, the groups are pushing for a more open and transparent search process for regional bank presidents that includes more community input. Barkan said the group asked Yellen for support in arranging meetings with each regional Fed president.
While formal changes to the process of selecting regional Fed leaders would require legislation, Barkan said the Fed board of governors held significant informal influence over the process.
“I’m sure they could change the process if they wanted to,” he said.
Plosser and Richard Fisher of Dallas both plan to retire next year and the “Fed Up” coalition wants more public input in naming their successors. Both banks have said they have hired executive search firms to find candidates.
Economist Josh Bivens, research and policy director at the Economic Policy Institute in Washington, said the Fed’s willingness to arrange the meeting was “incredibly encouraging” because the central bank “is one of the most important institutions in the world, but few Americans know it.”
While the unemployment rate has declined to a six-year low, there remains “too large a gap between today and a healthy economy,” he said, adding that stakes are highest for disadvantaged groups, including African-Americans. Their unemployment rate tends to be twice as high as the broader US level both “in good times and in bad,” Bivens said.
Source
Fed's Kashkari Gains Company in Concerns Over Raising Rates
Neel Kashkari labored through much of this year as the most prominent Federal Reserve official opposed to raising short...
Neel Kashkari labored through much of this year as the most prominent Federal Reserve official opposed to raising short-term interest rates. Lately, he's gained more company.
Mr. Kashkari, president of the Minneapolis Fed, has argued the central bank shouldn't be raising borrowing costs when inflation persists below its 2% target. He cast the only votes against the Fed's rate increases in March and June.
Read the full article here.
3 days ago
13 days ago