Seattle Officials Repeal Tax That Upset Amazon
“From coast to coast, people lose their homes and get displaced from their communities even as the biggest corporations...
“From coast to coast, people lose their homes and get displaced from their communities even as the biggest corporations earn record profits and development booms,” said Sarah Johnson, director of Local Progress, a national association of progressive elected municipal officials. “Elected officials across the country are paying close attention to how Amazon and other corporations have responded to Seattle’s efforts to confront their affordable housing and homelessness crisis.”
House Republicans face voters in home districts angry over health care bill
House Republicans face voters in home districts angry over health care bill
Rep. Tom Reed of New York, who was among the Republican members of Congress to vote for a bill to repeal and replace...
Rep. Tom Reed of New York, who was among the Republican members of Congress to vote for a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare, held a string of hometown forums on Saturday where he was lambasted by crowds of angry voters and signs that read, "GOP Disaster" and "Why do you want to kill my daughter?"
Reed, whose district in upstate New York includes the cities of Ithaca and Corning, held three town hall meetings where the overwhelming majority of attendees had questions about health care. The congressman was met with boos and jeers throughout the forums, with people repeatedly chanting "Shame!" and "Vote him out!"
Get the full story here.
How Cities’ Funding Woes Are Driving Racial and Economic Injustice—And What We Can Do About It
The Nation - April 28, 2015, by Brad Lander & Karl Kumodzi - In August 2014, the municipality of Ferguson, Missouri...
The Nation - April 28, 2015, by Brad Lander & Karl Kumodzi - In August 2014, the municipality of Ferguson, Missouri erupted onto the national scene. In the wake of the killing of Michael Brown, we learned much about economic and political life in Ferguson and greater St. Louis County.
To many, it was no surprise to learn that, for years, African-American residents of municipalities throughout St. Louis County have been disproportionately and illegally stopped for minor offenses. Blacks are far more likely to be stopped, searched, ticketed, fined, and arrested. Many wind up jailed, leading to a cycle of lost jobs, drivers’ licenses, homes, or child custody. Some are beaten, terrorized, or—like Michael Brown—even killed.
It was more surprising to learn that in Ferguson, “Driving While Black” isn’t only about racial profiling: it’s also about municipal revenue. Fines and court fees have become the city’s second largest revenue source, and the over-criminalization of Black people has become a strategy for collecting taxes.
It is important to understand and address the revenue crisis facing U.S. municipalities. As cities have become unable to pay their bills, they often turn to regressive strategies that disproportionately harm people of color and low-income residents.
Ithaca, NY is like Ferguson. Up until January 2014, residents had to pay for installations and repairs of public sidewalks adjoining their properties—with one notable case in which 28 homeowners were forced to pay a combined $100,000 out of their personal pockets to the city for repairs. Detroit, MI is like Ferguson. After the city filed the largest municipal bankruptcy in US history, the city’s water department responded to pressures to lower their $90 million portion of the overall $20 billion debt by shutting off crucial water services to mostly Black low-income residents who owed over a mere $150 on their water bills. This April, Baltimore followed Detroit’s lead.
These cities are like Ferguson because of a common underlying problem: All across America, cities and towns are struggling to maintain enough revenue to provide crucial services to residents. The collateral damage of this revenue crisis—over-criminalization, utility shut-offs, the withdrawal of public services, and slashed budgets for schools—is dire.
Local Progress, a national network of progressive municipal elected officials, is working to address inequality from an often overlooked source: municipal budgets. In our new report, Progressive Policies for Raising Municipal Revenue, Local Progress lays out forward-thinking strategies and policy options that cities can pursue to restructure their revenue streams in a way that doesn’t fall disproportionately on the backs of their most vulnerable residents.
The roots of the municipal revenue crisis were decades in the making. Following the post-war desegregation of housing and education, and other civil rights victories of the 50’s and 60’s, racial animosity and the conservative backlash against taxation—referred to by historians as the tax revolt—helped to fuel the exodus of higher-income families from urban centers to suburban enclaves.
This “white flight” dramatically eroded the tax base of urban centers like Detroit, Cleveland, and St. Louis—and later of first-ring suburban municipalities like Ferguson.
The tax revolt also led directly to policies that dramatically reduced the ability of cities to collect enough revenue through property and other taxes. Most dramatic was the 1976 passage of Prop 13 in California, which contributed heavily to the erosion of California’s public education system and other public services.
In 2008, the Great Recession caused the municipal revenue crisis that had been brewing for decades to explode, spurring significant and rapid declines in general fund revenues for municipalities. In order to deal with the impacts of this dramatic shortfall, cities were forced to cut personnel, cancel capital projects (and their much-needed jobs), and slash funding for education, parks, libraries, sanitation, and more. These cuts hit low-income families the hardest. And they are especially harmful to Black families because African-Americans are 30 percent more likely to be employed by the public sector than other workers.
The strategies that many municipalities adopted to address the crisis hit low-income people of color the hardest. When property tax revenue declined in St. Louis County, fines-and-fees revenue increased in order to maintain revenue. Tickets are issued for everything from failure to cut one’s lawn to sleeping over at someone’s house without being on the occupancy certificate. In nearby Edmundson, the city averages $600 per person per year in court fines, and forecasts increasing revenue from these fines in their future budget proposals – essentially creating a hidden tax on the most vulnerable residents. Black residents throughout the region report feeling “as if their governments see them as little more than sources of revenue.”
Many towns have resorted to privatizing formerly public responsibilities such as trash collection, sewage, roads, parks, and introducing new fees to force residents to foot the bill directly. These fees and taxes are often extremely regressive, because as everyone is forced to pay a flat rate, poor people end up paying a higher percentage of their income. A recent study conducted by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy found that the nationwide average effective state and local tax rates are 10.9% for the poorest fifth of taxpayers and 5.4% for the wealthiest 1 percent. In fact, in the ten states with the most regressive tax structures, the poorest fifth pay as much as seven times the percentage of their income in taxes and fees as the wealthiest residents do.
ADVERTISEMENT
Addressing the municipal revenue crisis is, therefore, a central barrier to achieving racial and economic justice in our urban centers, and to rebuilding a more democratic, just, and livable America with genuinely shared prosperity.
Luckily, there are creative and progressive strategies that municipalities can adopt to generate more revenue in a progressive way, such as:
● Expanding the progressivity of existing local income taxes by creating more tax brackets with greater differences between brackets, and doing the same for property taxes in order to generate more revenue from commercial and high-end development.
● Eliminating corporate tax breaks at the city level, particularly Tax Increment Financing and business improvement districts that come with tax breaks
● Restructuring fines so that residents pay different rates based on income. A $200 traffic ticket has no deterrent effect for a millionaire, but can be devastating for a low wage worker; a more rational fine system, like the one adopted in Finland, would be more fair and generate more revenue.
● Mandating that major tax-exempt institutions like hospitals and universities make genuine and fair payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs) to help cover the costs of crucial city services that they use.
● Converting city services into municipality-owned utilities when possible, charging utility fees to all users, and applying conservation pricing so lower-income households pay a lower rate while bulk users—such as commercial and industry—pay higher rates
● Forming statewide coalitions of municipal elected officials, grassroots organizations, school boards, and other affected parties to change preemption and revenue policies at the state level.
These policy innovations and many more are detailed in our report.
Cities are America’s bedrock and its future: both for our country and for the progressive movement. Cities are home to 67% of the population, account for 75% of our GDP, and house our best public institutions and infrastructure.
The policy recommendations laid out by Local Progress in our new report can help municipalities develop progressive revenue solutions—so they can pay for public education, health, and housing programs that help families thrive, invest in the infrastructure of public transportation, climate resilience, parks that sustainable cities need, and stimulate inclusive economic growth that creates good jobs.
Through progressive revenue strategies, cities can turn the Ferguson-like cycle of disinvestment and inequality into a cycle of reinvestment and opportunity—and help make sure that our cities can become the models for our vision of a more progressive and prosperous America.
Source
Six retailers agree to end on-call scheduling: AG Schneiderman
Six retailers agree to end on-call scheduling: AG Schneiderman
Six national retailers will cease to use on-call scheduling methods for employees nationwide following a multistate...
Six national retailers will cease to use on-call scheduling methods for employees nationwide following a multistate investigation, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced in a press release Tuesday.
Aeropostale, Carter’s, David’s Tea, Disney, PacSun, and Zumiez were approached by attorney generals in eight states and the District of Columbia regarding the scheduling practice, which requires employees to contact the employer to know if they are to work a scheduled shift. Companies using this scheduling method often ask employees to call only one to two hours before a shift would begin, creating an unpredictable work schedule, according to a written statement from Schneiderman’s office.
The inquiry, which was sent to 15 retailers in April 2016, said the nature of on-call scheduling negatively impacts workers. Employees at these retailers may have difficulty making arrangements for childcare and elder-care and pursuing higher education, according to the letter. The letter also states employees subjected to on-call scheduling “in general experience higher incidences of adverse health effects, overall stress, and strain on family life” than workers who know their schedule in advance.
“People should not have to keep the day open, arrange for child care, and give up other opportunities without being compensated for their time,” Schneiderman said in a written statement.
Nearly 50,000 employees of the six retailers nationwide will be affected by the agreement.
“We are especially glad that employers like Disney and Carter’s, whose brands promote putting families first, will stop using on-call shifts that are notorious for wreaking havoc on families’ balance and puts undue stress on children,” Carrie Gleason, director of the Fair Workweek Initiative at the Center for Popular Democracy, said in a written statement.
Of the 15 retailers that received the inquiry letter regarding on-call shift scheduling, nine said they did not use on-call scheduling or had recently ceased doing so.
Employers in New York State are required to pay any employee who is either called into work or requests to work same-day to be scheduled “for at least four hours, or the amount of hours in a regularly scheduled shift, whichever is less, at the basic minimum hourly wage.”
Schneiderman sent a similar letter of inquiry in 2015 requesting retailers to end on-call scheduling. Of those, Abercrombie & Fitch, Gap, J. Crew, Urban Outfitters, Pier 1 Imports, and L Brands – the parent company of Bath & Body Works and Victoria’s Secret – were among the companies who agreed to end on-call scheduling.
By Jenna Macri
Source
The CEO of Starbucks won’t keep promises to his workers, but wants an end to “cynicism”
The CEO of Starbucks won’t keep promises to his workers, but wants an end to “cynicism”
Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, who has somehow convinced himselfthere is public desire for him to be president, took a...
Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, who has somehow convinced himselfthere is public desire for him to be president, took a moment at yesterday’s board meeting to deliver some pious criticism of America’s unusually rancorous political season.
“Dysfunction and polarization have worsened,” the coffee entrepreneur said. Deep in a bout of Bloombergitis, Schultz warned of the failure of the American dream: “Sadly, our reservoir is running dry, depleted by cynicism, despair, division, exclusion, fear and indifference.”
“What is the role and responsibility of all of us, as citizens?” Schultz asked.
His employees have one answer: They want him to keep Starbucks’ promise to set their schedules at least 10 days in advance, and stop making them work consecutive shifts closing a location and then returning to open it early the next morning. So-called “clopening” shifts can entail working until 11pm and then starting again at 4am.
The scheduling problems have been an issue since at least 2014, when a New York Times investigation exposed how scheduling practices can be as problematic for workers as low pay or abusive treatment. The problem is especially difficult for parents, who must find a way to care for their children without knowing their work responsibilities more than a few days in advance.
The problem seems especially galling because the company uses scheduling software to match employee availability with the predicted demand. Experts suggest that this software could be used to provide more predictability for workers. Starbucks has repeatedly said it will remedy these issues, but interviews with employees suggest they remain. The Center for Popular Democracy, a union-backed organization that runs advocacy campaigns for workers rights, published a survey of 200 workers (pdf) in September 2015 that found half received their schedules less than a week in advance and one in four worked the “clopening” shift.
Grant Medsker, who worked at a Starbucks in Seattle for about a year before quitting in January, told Quartz that managers often don’t follow dictates from headquarters. “Everyone runs their ship their own way, regardless of company policies,” he said.
Some franchise managers attribute the lack of follow-through on the company’s promise on schedules to pressure from higher-ups to keep labor costs down, which leads to chronic understaffing. Meanwhile, Starbucks earnings per share more than doubled between 2011 and 2015; in fiscal 2015 it had an operating income of $3.6 billion. Quartz reached out to Starbucks but has not received a response. In the past, the company has noted that many of its employees see a flexible schedule as a perk, rather than a hindrance. The company also provides its part-time employees with access to health insurance and educational benefits that it says are more generous than comparable companies. But given the company’s history of dubious social responsibility campaigns, it’s hard to see this failure to implement corporate policy as an accident. This is, after all, the executive who announced a personal boycott of political spending even as his company spent millions on lobbying.
“It’s not enough to talk about it, it’s not enough to say, ‘oh that’s really bad, I hope that changes,'” said Medsker, who volunteers with the labor-rights group Working Washington. “We have an obligation to change what is wrong with our society.”
“It’s not about the choice we make every four years,” Schultz said yesterday. “This is about the choices we make every day.”
Source
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
Latinos Have The Highest Mortality Rate In Accidents Of The New York Construction Industry
Latinos Post - February 26, 2014, by Jorge Calvillo - The Hispanic and immigrant population employed in the...
Latinos Post - February 26, 2014, by Jorge Calvillo - The Hispanic and immigrant population employed in the construction industry in the state of New York is the ethnic group most vulnerable to fatal accidents in the workplace, according to a report by the Center for Popular Democracy.
According to El Diario NY, the data collected by the study shows that between 2003 and 2011, within the total amount of deaths by falls and accidents in construction areas registered in New York City, 60 percent of the deceased were Hispanic and/or immigrants.
This is an alarming figure because 75 construction workers die due to accidents per year in the state of New York, revealed journalist Blanca Rosa Vílchez, for news network Univisión.
The source points out that in New York, 41 percent of construction workers are Hispanic. However, the report released on Thursday showed that 74 percent of the deaths by accidents belong to that same ethnic group.
Last September 24, construction workers in Brooklyn protested to demand better safety conditions in their workplaces, after they reported a significant rise in accidents related to the low investment in safety that companies offer, which has caused severe accidents which in many cases have taken the lives of workers, who receive a minimum salary.
Back then, El Diario NY reported that the workers protested at 227 Carlton Avenue in Fort Greene, where a 62-year-old worker lost his life when the roof of one of the buildings he was working on collapsed onto him on September 10.
According to the protestors, contractor companies in New York buy low-quality materials to save some money and don't invest in safety courses for their workers, which leaves construction workers in a perilous situation.
The Latino community working in the construction industry is double vulnerable in this situation, since many of the workers are undocumented immigrants, and if they suffer an accident, they don't report the construction company for fear of being deported or fired.
As if this were not enough, if violations of safety norms are reported, the fines against construction companies are very low, which makes it easy for them to continue ignoring safety norms in construction sites.
Univisión highlights that the fines construction companies face are no higher than $2,000 in case of an accident, and $12,000 if a worker dies, a figure that reflects the dimensions of the risks that construction workers must face every day.
Source
Avoiding 'Regressive Mistake,' Fed Holds Off on Rate Hike — For Now
Update 3 PM EDT: In a decision that aligns with progressive demands, the Federal Reserve ...
Update 3 PM EDT:
In a decision that aligns with progressive demands, the Federal Reserve announced on Thursday that it would keep interest rates near zero in light of "recent global economic and financial developments" and in order to "support continued progress toward maximum employment and price stability."
Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders issued the following statement today after the Federal Reserve announced that it would hold off on raising interest rates:
“It is good news that the Federal Reserve did not raise interest rates today. At a time when real unemployment is over 10 percent, we need to do everything possible to create millions of good-paying jobs and raise the wages of the American people. It is now time for the Fed to act with the same sense of urgency to rebuild the disappearing middle class as it did to bail out Wall Street banks seven years ago.”
The New York Times reports that the Fed’s decision, "widely expected by investors, showed that officials still lacked confidence in the strength of the domestic economy even as the central bank has entered its eighth year of overwhelming efforts to stimulate growth."
Progressives cheered the news, with Josh Bivens of the Economic Policy Institute saying, "Today’s decision by the Federal Reserve to keep short-term rates unchanged is welcome. [...] We hope they continue their pragmatic, data-based approach and allow unemployment to keep moving lower, and only tighten after there is a significant and durable increase in inflation."
He continued: "Tightening before the economy has reached genuine full-employment is not just a mistake, it’s a regressive mistake that would hurt the most vulnerable workers—low-wage earners and workers from communities of color—the most."
However, Reuters reports that "the central bank maintained its bias toward a rate hike sometime this year, while lowering its long-term outlook for the economy."
Which means that pro-worker organizations, which have largely opposed a rate increase that they say would slow the economy and stifle wage growth, will have to keep up the fight.
"We applaud Chair Yellen and the Federal Reserve for resisting the pressure being put on them to intentionally slow down the economy," said Ady Barkan, campaign director for the Fed Up coalition, which rallied outside the Federal Reserve on Thursday.
"Weak wage growth proves that the labor market is still very far from full employment," Barkan continued. "And with inflation still below the Fed’s already low target, there is simply no reason to raise interest rates anytime soon. Across America, working families know that the economy still has not recovered. We hope that the Fed continues to look at the data and refrain from any rate hikes until we reach genuine full employment for all, particularly for the Black and Latino communities who are being left behind in this so-called recovery."
Earlier...
Progressives are cautioning the U.S. Federal Reserve against slowing the economy by raising interest rates "prematurely"—a decision the Fed will announce Thursday.
The U.S. central bank will issue its highly anticipated short-term interest rate decision following a two-day policy meeting, with a 2 pm news conference led by Fed Chair Janet Yellen.
As CBS Moneywatch notes, "[t]he decision affects everything from the returns people get on their bank deposits to how much consumers and employers pay for credit cards, mortgages, small business loans, and student debt." That's because a higher rate makes it more expensive for individuals and businesses to borrow, with rising bank lending rates shrinking the nation's money supply and pushing up rates for mortgages, credit cards, and other loans.
Just before the announcement, the advocates, economists, and workers of the Fed Up coalition will be joined by Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) at a rally outside the Fed, calling on the central bank to keep interest rates low to allow for more jobs and higher wages.
"The point of raising rates is to rein in an overheating economy that is threatening to push inflation outside the Fed’s comfort zone," explained Josh Bivens of the Economic Policy Institute in the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday. "But inflation has been running below the Fed’s target for years—and its recent moves have been down, not up."
Furthermore, wrote economist Joseph Stiglitz at the Guardian earlier this month: "If the Fed focuses excessively on inflation, it worsens inequality, which in turn worsens overall economic performance. Wages falter during recessions; if the Fed then raises interest rates every time there is a sign of wage growth, workers’ share will be ratcheted down—never recovering what was lost in the downturn."
Progressive activists opposed to an interest rate hike overwhelmed the Fed's public comment system on Monday in a last-minute effort to sway the central bank. Raising the rate, they said, would be catastrophic for working families, particularly in communities of color that are still struggling. The Fed Up campaign, which includes groups like the Center for Popular Democracy, Economic Policy Institute, and CREDO Action, say the central bank "privileges the voices and needs of corporate elites rather than those of America's working families."
"A higher interest rate means that fewer jobs will be created, and that the wages of workers at the bottom will remain too low to live on," wrote Rod Adams, a member of Neighborhoods Organizing for Change in Minneapolis, in an op-ed published Wednesdayat Common Dreams. "That’s because when the Fed raises rates, they are deliberately trying to slow down the economy. They’re saying that there are too many jobs and wages are too high. They’re saying that the economy is exactly where it should be, that people like me are exactly where we should be."
However, at this point, "many observers believe the Fed will not raise rates this week," analyst Richard Eskow wrote on Wednesday.
"The Fed is really the central bank of the world. If the Fed raise rates a little bit, it will have an impact all over the world, particularly in emerging markets," billionaire private equity professional David Rubenstein told CNBC's "Squawk Box" on Thursday.
"I think the Fed is sensitive to that," Rubenstein said, "and I think therefore the Fed is likely to wait for another month or two to get additional data and probably telegraph a little bit better than it has now that it's about ready to do it at a particular time."
Meanwhile, global markets are fluctuating wildly in anticipation of Yellen's announcement and subsequent news conference.
But as Eskow noted, Thursday's real surprise "is that there’s any question at all what [the Fed] will do. That suggests that our economic debate is not yet grounded in economic reality, at least as most Americans experience it."
While the Guardian is providing live updates on the Fed's decision, others are making comment under hashtags that reflect the unbalanced economic recovery:
Source: CommonDreams
At the RNC, Don’t Just Watch Trump. Watch Who Follows Him.
At the RNC, Don’t Just Watch Trump. Watch Who Follows Him.
In the coming days, our nation’s media will focus enormous attention on the formal anointment of Donald Trump as the...
In the coming days, our nation’s media will focus enormous attention on the formal anointment of Donald Trump as the GOP’s candidate for president at the Republican National Convention. Endless ink will be spilled on Mr. Trump’s entrance, his appearances, and his words. But, as the Republican Party prepares itself to nominate the most anti-immigrant and racist presidential candidate in at least a generation, Americans should not just be watching Mr. Trump—we must pay attention to those who follow him.
It’s no secret that Mr. Trump has defined himself politically, from the very launch of his campaign, by scapegoating immigrants as “criminals” and “rapists,” and doubling down on his bigotry with proposals to, among other things, deport eleven million undocumented immigrants and ban all Muslim immigrants. Mr. Trump’s dominant strategy has been to animate the nativist portion of the Republican primary electorate—a strategy that proved quite successful in the primaries, and that Mr. Trump will continue (albeit in modified fashion) in the general election.
None of this is new. And Republicans will likely lose the White House because Trump has so alienated Latinos, communities of color, and other groups, including women.
But as Latinos and immigrants, we can’t just watch Trump. Our fight is not just about defeating Trump: it’s also about defeating “Trumpism,” the anti-immigrant and hateful policies and rhetoric he embraces.
That’s why have to, and we will, watch who follows him in contested Congressional races around the country. These “down-ballot” elections will determine the prospects for critical federal legislation in 2017 and beyond on issues including: reforming our out-of-date immigration system and ensuring that millions of immigrant families can remain together, ending police brutality, and raising the federal minimum wage.
What we will if we watch the candidates in these congressional races over the next few days is as simple and scary: the lion’s share of one of America’s two principal parties, including hundreds of sitting Congressional representatives, will embrace Trump’s hateful campaign strategy and applaud him as he formally becomes their standard bearer.
Their embrace will take two forms.
First will be incumbents and candidates who wholeheartedly endorse Trump. Hundreds of Republican elected officials have said openly that they will support him, and they will double down through November. Their ranks will grow during and after the convention. These Trump acolytes are people like Rep. Lee Zeldin of New York, who has endorsed and then repeatedly stumped for Mr. Trump. At the RNC, voters should pay careful attention to figures like Mr. Zeldin. Despite representing a moderate district where people of color represent roughly 20 percent of the voting-age population, Rep. Zeldin has acknowledged the racism in Trump’s words, but refused to withdraw his support.
Second will be legislators who are uncomfortable with the Trump brand, but quietly copy his playbook. Many Republicans are concerned that Trump’s divisive rhetoric may hurt the Republican brand and their poll numbers—so they stop short of full-throated endorsement, and in some cases are skipping the convention—but will mirror his demagoguery. Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania offers a perfect example. Locked in a re-election fight with Democrat Katie McGinty, Toomey has not endorsed Trump for fear of its political downside. Instead, he has echoed Trump’s nativist appeals, leading efforts in the Senate to punish localities that have sought to improve community-police relations and public safety for all residents by distancing local law enforcement from immigration enforcement. To justify this politically-motivated policy fight, Sen. Toomey has suggested that immigrants are criminals and murderers—despite research consistently showing that immigrants commit fewer crimes than native-born residents.
This behavior from legislators like Zeldin and Toomey will not be lost on Latinos, voters of color, and other voters who stand for inclusion and diversity.
Latino and immigrant voters across this country are angry and we are energized. This is why residents protested outside Rep. Zeldin and Sen. Toomey’s offices this past weekend. And it is why, over the coming months, community organizations across the country, working with national groups like the Center for Community Change Action and Center for Popular Democracy Action, will be talking to millions of voters in our communities to make sure that they know the importance of voting all the way down the ballot.
No number of photo ops at local cultural events will erase the damage that legislators like these are doing to themselves, and to the Republican Party writ large, by embracing the politics of Trump.
As the GOP prepares for its convention, let there be no mistake: our communities are watching. And, to those who have embraced the politics of Trump, we say: we see you. And, in November, we will hold you accountable for vilifying us.
By ADANJESUS MARIN AND WALTER BARRIENTOS
Source
Turning Wisconsin schools into police states won't help kids learn
Turning Wisconsin schools into police states won't help kids learn
According to a new report put together by LIT and the Center for Popular Democracy, “Despite white students’...
According to a new report put together by LIT and the Center for Popular Democracy, “Despite white students’ overwhelmingly similar behavior patterns, and despite black students accounting for only 55% of the student population in Milwaukee in the 2013–2014 school year, data shows that black students accounted for 84.6% of the referrals to law enforcement.
Read the full article here.
4 days ago
4 days ago