The Criminalized Majority
The Criminalized Majority
“Everyone should go to jail, say, once every ten years,” opined novelist and poet Jesse Ball in a recent LA Times...
“Everyone should go to jail, say, once every ten years,” opined novelist and poet Jesse Ball in a recent LA Times article. It may seem like Swiftian satire, but Ball’s proposal is earnest. Addressed “to a nation of jailers,” he argues that a brief but regular stint in jail would serve as the necessary correction to make such institutions more livable–and perhaps less common. “Just think,” he writes, “if everyone in the United States were to become, within a 10-year period, familiar with what it is like to be incarcerated, is there any question that the quality of our prisons would improve?”
Read the full article here.
Protesters Stage 'Die-In' At Harvard Museum To Criticize Namesake's Link To Opioid Crisis
Protesters Stage 'Die-In' At Harvard Museum To Criticize Namesake's Link To Opioid Crisis
Several organizations, including the Center for Popular Democracy, SIFMA NOW, ACT UP Boston, participated in the...
Several organizations, including the Center for Popular Democracy, SIFMA NOW, ACT UP Boston, participated in the protest.
Read the full article here.
No, 2016 Won't Be the Year of the $20 Minimum Wage
Bloomberg Businessweek - November 13, 2014, by Josh Eidelson - In the midterm elections, four red states—Alaska,...
Bloomberg Businessweek - November 13, 2014, by Josh Eidelson - In the midterm elections, four red states—Alaska, Arkansas, Nebraska, and South Dakota—passed minimum wage increases. Those votes mean that, starting next year, a majority of states will have minimum wages higher than the federal rate. The last time that happened, in 2007, Democrats newly in control of Congress used their power to pass the first national increase in a decade, from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour. It’s extremely unlikely the Republicans who took back the Senate in the midterm elections will do the same. “Waiting for Congress to act is frustrating and, at this point, pointless,” says Ed Flanagan, a former Alaska labor commissioner who spent a year campaigning for his state’s new increase, from $7.75 to $9.75.
Already, labor organizers in Oregon are considering a ballot initiative for 2016 that would raise the state minimum to $15 an hour, matching the leap taken this year by Seattle and San Francisco. In Los Angeles, where Mayor Eric Garcetti signed an ordinance mandating a $15.37 wage floor for some hotel workers in October, 6 of the 15 members of the city council have asked for a vote in early 2015 on a proposal to increase the city’s rate to $15.25 across the board by 2019.
Voters in most states shouldn’t expect to see pushes for higher rates than that anytime soon. Labor activists say they want to end the exclusion of tipped workers such as restaurant wait staff from minimum wage laws and add worker protections, like requiring employers to give workers advance notice of schedule changes or offer paid sick days. That approach worked this year in Oakland, where voters approved a referendum on Nov. 4 that lifts wages only to $12.25 but requires employers to offer paid leave above what the state requires. “When you combine them together, it’s actually more popular,” says Brian Kettenring, co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy, a union-backed community organizing group. “People appreciate that you are trying to actually solve the problem.”
Not all the coming fights will be put directly to voters. In California, Democratic Governor Jerry Brown signed a compromise bill last year increasing the statewide minimum from $8 to $10 by 2016. Some Democratic state lawmakers say that’s not enough to help workers make ends meet. “It will still allow the legal payment of a poverty wage,” says Mark Leno, the state senator who sponsored a bill that would have increased minimum pay to $13 by 2017 and then indexed future wage levels to inflation. That passed the state senate in May but failed by a single vote in an assembly committee. Leno plans to revive the issue in the next legislative session.
In some cities, Democrats are pitting themselves against the Republicans who control their state governments. Louisville has held hearings about raising wages to $10.10 after a statewide increase died in the Republican-controlled state senate. City officials in other states are hamstrung by laws prohibiting municipal governments from raising minimum wages above state levels. In June, business-friendly Democrats in Rhode Island’s statehouse killed efforts by the Providence city council to raise hotel pay to $15 an hour with a budget rider barring cities from setting their own minimum wages. In New York, where state law denies cities authority over pay rates, Governor Andrew Cuomo agreed to support changing that statute, along with a statewide increase to $10.10, to win the endorsement of the progressive Working Families Party in the November gubernatorial election. “He made a promise on this,” says Bill Lipton, the party’s New York director. “We expect him to fulfill it.”
Source
The very vocal protesters who took on the Fed are now fighting to protect it
The very vocal protesters who took on the Fed are now fighting to protect it
Liberal advocacy group Fed Up launched a campaign nearly three years ago in hopes of persuading the nation's central...
Liberal advocacy group Fed Up launched a campaign nearly three years ago in hopes of persuading the nation's central bank to hold off raising its benchmark interest rate.
The group organized protests at the Fed's annual retreat in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. It demonstrated outside the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. And it recruited prestigious economists and former top central bank officials to the cause.
But now, Fed Up has a new target: Republicans who want to curtail the central bank's power.
House Financial Services Chairman Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, is expected to introduce legislation soon that would require the Fed to set rules for conducting monetary policy and explain any deviation from those rules. The Fed has bristled at the proposal, arguing that the proposal limits its power to revive the economy in moments of crisis.
Fed Up agrees, finding common ground between itself and the central bank it was created to criticize. The group mobilized its members at Fed Chair Janet Yellen's appearance Tuesday before the Senate Banking Committee. The group held protests ahead of her semi-annual testimony and intends to pack the hearing room with members wearing bright green shirts bearing slogans such as, "Whose Recovery?" Executive Director Shawn Sebastian said Fed Up met with several senators before the hearing to voice its concerns.
"We see the [bill] as speeding us toward another financial crash and preventing the Fed's ability to respond to another financial crash," Sebastian said.
The so-called Financial Choice Act would also roll back some of the regulatory authority handed to the Fed following the 2008 financial crisis. Sebastian said his group would be closely watching President Donald Trump's nominees to fill the three vacant seats at the central bank's board of governors in Washington. Fed Up has pushed for greater diversity among Fed appointees, both on the board and among the 12 regional central bank presidents.
The alliance could provide the Fed with its own grassroots support as it attempts to steer clear of the populist anger against economic elites that helped propel Trump into the White House. The president has promised to "do a number" on the post-financial crisis reforms known as the Dodd-Frank Act that were designed to, among other things, curtail risky behavior among banks and protect consumers from unscrupulous practices by lenders.
A draft version of Hensarling's bill includes shifting the Fed's annual bank stress tests into two-year cycles and changing the way banks calculate risk, among other things, according to a memo obtained by CNBC.
"Donald Trump and [Treasury Secretary] Steven Mnuchin, the foreclosure king, don't care about stories like mine. They only care about their billionaire friends," Philadelphia resident Tyrone Ferguson said in a prepared speech. "Now Trump and his billionaire friends want to take over the Fed, too."
Fed Up has proven adept at navigating the often esoteric world of central banking. The group has met with Yellen and Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer. It also raised pointed questions about racial diversity and ties to Wall Street during a discussion with top central bank officials at the Jackson Hole conference last year.
Sebastian compared the Fed's 14-year appointments to those of the Supreme Court. He said he will continue to press the central bank on those issues — as well as the lawmakers responsible for confirming the Fed's new governors.
"The entire world has shifted around us," Sebastian said. "But our principles have remained the same on this."
By Ylan Mui
Source
Arizona’s special election could send an important message for the midterms — even if the GOP wins
Arizona’s special election could send an important message for the midterms — even if the GOP wins
Ady Barkan, the man with ALS who became nationally famous for confronting Sen. Jeff Flake over his support for the...
Ady Barkan, the man with ALS who became nationally famous for confronting Sen. Jeff Flake over his support for the Republican tax bill has thrown his support behind Tipirneni, creating a viral web ad for her campaign.
Read the full article here.
A Job Guarantee and the Federal Reserve Board
A Job Guarantee and the Federal Reserve Board
The idea that the government would commit itself to act as an employer of last resort and guarantee a job to everyone...
The idea that the government would commit itself to act as an employer of last resort and guarantee a job to everyone has been getting more attention in recent months. While many on the left have long pushed this position, the Clinton-linked Center for American Progress (CAP) recently embraced the idea in a conference last week. It is good to see ideas outside of the mainstream getting attention, but there are a couple of issues worth keeping in mind to ensure that the effort does not end up being counterproductive.
The first is to recognize that a job guarantee is a huge lift, not only politically but in its implementation. In effect the guarantee is not only going to be providing jobs to workers who do not currently have one, but it will also end up offering a potentially more attractive alternative to millions of people now in low-wage jobs. How attractive the alternative is will of course depend on the wage offered in the government supported jobs.
Read the full article here.
100 groups call for Climate Investment Funds to sunset
100 groups call for Climate Investment Funds to sunset
Ahead of this week's meeting of the trust funds of the World Bank’s Climate Investment Funds, 100 groups have called...
Ahead of this week's meeting of the trust funds of the World Bank’s Climate Investment Funds, 100 groups have called for the CIFs to finally sunset, now that the Green Climate Fund is clearly operational. Two-thirds of the groups are from developing countries.
Here's the letter.
June 14, 2016
Dear Trust Fund Committee Members of the Strategic Climate Fund and Clean Technology Fund:
Now that it has approved projects and is beginning to disburse money, the Green Climate Fund is clearly operational. It is thus also unambiguously clear that it is time for the World Bank’s Climate Investment Funds to sunset.
Since their inception, the CIFs were meant to be interim funds. In 2008, the sunset clauses of the Strategic Climate Fund and the Clean Technology Fund said, “…the SCF will take necessary steps to conclude its operations once a new [UNFCCC] financial architecture is effective…” and “the CTF will take necessary steps to conclude its operations once a new [UNFCCC] financial architecture is effective.”[1] That new financial architecture – the Green Climate Fund – is now indisputably effective. The CIFs’ raison d'etre has expired; attempts to reinterpret the obvious must cease.
Unlike the multilateral development bank-driven CIFs, the GCF was set up according to the principles of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. With a governance structure evenly split between developed and developing countries, the GCF is founded on a “country-driven approach” accountable to the institutions and people in developing countries, and has placed a premium on direct access to funds by developing country entities. The GCF promotes a gender-sensitive approach to its funding – the first climate fund to do so from the outset of its activities.
While lessons learned from the CIFs should be applied to the GCF, efforts to spin the CIFs as complementary to the GCF are disingenuous. Resources directed toward the CIFs are resources that should instead be directed to the GCF. Any effort to raise new sources of finance for the CIFs should cease immediately, and there should be no new investments.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
11.11.11-Coalition of the Flemish North-South Movement, Belgium
ActionAid International
Aksi for Gender, Social and Ecological Justice, Indonesia
All Nepal Peasants Federation, Nepal
All Nepal Women’s Association, Nepal
Alliance Sud, Switzerland
Alyansa Tigil Mina (Alliance Against Mining), Philippines
Aniban ng Manggagawa sa Agrikultura, Philippines
Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development, Thailand
Asian Peoples Movement on Debt and Development, Regional
ATTAC Japan
BankTrack, Netherlands
Beyond Beijing Committee, Nepal
Both ENDS, Netherlands
Bretton Woods Project, United Kingdom
Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino, Philippines
Campaign for Climate Justice, Nepal
Carbon Market Watch, Belgium
Center for Biological Diversity, United States
Center for Environment, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Center for Popular Democracy, United States
Center for Socio-Economic Research and Development, Nepal
Centre for 21st century Issues (C21st), Nigeria
Centre for Social Impact Studies, Ghana
Centre pour l'Environnement et le Développement, Cameroon
Centro Humboldt, Nicaragua
Centro Salvadoreño de Tecnologia Apropiada/Friends of the Earth El Salvador
Christian Aid, United Kingdom
Civic Concern Nepal
Climate Action Network Europe, Regional
Climate Change & Development NGO Alliance, Azerbaijan
Climate Finance Group for Latin America and the Caribbean (GFLAC), Mexico
CNCD-11.11.11, Belgium
Consumers Protection Association, Lesotho
Digo Bikas Institute, Nepal
Ecological Christian Organisation, Uganda
Ecological Society of the Philippines
Environics Trust, India
Farmers Forum South Asia, Regional
Finance & Trade Watch, Austria
Food & Water Watch, United States
Foundation HELP, Tanzania
Freedom from Debt Coalition, Philippines
Friends of the Earth - England, Wales and Northern Ireland
Friends of the Earth United States
Gender Action, United States
Global Catholic Climate Movement Pilipinas, Philippines
Green Development Advocates, Cameroon
Haburas Foundation/ Friends of the Earth Timor Leste
Heinrich Böll Stiftung North America
Himalaya Niti Abhiyan, India
Human Rights Alliance Nepal
Indian Social Action Forum, India
Indigenous Environmental Network, United States/International
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, United States
Institute for Policy Studies, Climate Policy Program, United States
Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), Regional
International.Lawyers.Org, Switzerland
Jagaran Nepal
Jamaa Resource Initiatives, Kenya
Jeunes Volontaires pour l'Environnement, Niger
Kitanglad Integrated NGOs, Inc., Philippines
Korea Federation for Environmental Movements, South Korea
KRuHA – Peoples Coalition on Water, Indonesia
Labour, Health and Human Rights Development Centre, Nigeria
LDC Watch, International
Leads Nigeria
Les Amis de la Terre France
Migrant Forum in Asia, Regional
National Coastal Women's Movement, India
National Hawkers Federation, India
National Women Peasants Association, Nepal
Nepal Youth Peasants Association, Nepal
Nigerian Conservation Foundation, Nigeria
NOAH Friends of the Earth Denmark
PALAG Mindanao, Philippines
Panay Rural Development Center, Inc., Philippines
Philippine Movement for Climate Justice, Philippines
Philippine Network for Rural Development and Democratization, Philippines
Policy Analysis and Research Institute of Lesotho
Population, Health, Environment Ethiopia Consortium, Ethiopia
Practical Action, United Kingdom
Reacción Climática, Bolivia
River Basin Friends, India
Rural Reconstruction Nepal
Sahabat Alam Malaysia/Friends of the Earth Malaysia
Sanlakas Philippines
Solidaritas Perempuan, Indonesia
South Asia Alliance for Poverty Eradication, Regional
South Asia Food Sovereignty Network, Regional
South Asia Peasants Coalition, Regional
Southern Oregon Climate Action Now, United States
Students for a Just and Stable Future, United States
SustainUS, United States
Third World Network, Malaysia
Trade Union Policy Institute of Nepal
VOICE Bangladesh
WomanHealth Philippines
Women Welfare Society, Nepal
Worldview-The Gambia
By Karen Orenstein
Source
Man with Lou Gehrig’s disease makes emotional plea to Jeff Flake to vote down Trump’s tax plan
Man with Lou Gehrig’s disease makes emotional plea to Jeff Flake to vote down Trump’s tax plan
One of Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ)’s last major votes before retirement could be a death sentence for tens of thousands of...
One of Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ)’s last major votes before retirement could be a death sentence for tens of thousands of Americans. One of them is Ady Barkan, a 33-year-old California father living with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), who, during a Thursday night flight from Washington D.C. to Phoenix, Arizona, asked Flake to cast a vote to save his life.
“I was healthy a year ago. I was running on the beach,” Barkan told Flake on the flight, according to video footage of the exchange. “I’m 33, I have an 18-month-old son, and out of nowhere I was diagnosed with ALS, which has a life expectancy of three to four years, no treatment, no cure.”
Read the full article here.
Second Draft of Scaffold Report Released
Times Union - September 3, 2014, by Casey Seiler - SUNY's Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government has released a...
Times Union - September 3, 2014, by Casey Seiler - SUNY's Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government has released a second draft of its controversial report on New York's Scaffold Law. According to the Institute's Deputy Director for Operations Robert Bullock, it's the only remaining version of the report that was shared with the report's funder, the state Lawsuit Reform Alliance.
The business-backed group, which opposes Scaffold Law, paid $82,800 to fund the report — sponsorship that has led critics to attack the study as advocacy in the guise of research. Its authors, however, insist the research was conducted in good faith.
Scaffold Law, which places "absolute liability" on employers for gravity-related workplace injuries, is supported by labor unions but opposed by business groups that claim it needlessly drives up construction costs — a thesis backed up in part by the report. Opponents would like to see New York follow other states by adopting a "comparative negligence" standard that would make workers proportionately responsible when their actions contribute to an accident.
The Center for Popular Democracy, a labor-backed group that supports Scaffold Law, lambasted the report upon its release last winter and requested copies of all communications between the institute and the Lawsuit Reform Alliance. That FOIL request produced a series of emails between researchers and LRA Executive Director Tom Stebbins, including Stebbins' suggested edits to a June 25, 2013, draft copy of the report that was not initially released by the institute.
The center appealed to SUNY, which ultimately released the June 25 draft. A comparison of the draft and the final report suggested that some of Stebbins' suggestions were reflected in the final version. Researchers, however, said any changes were the result of their efforts to sharpen their analysis, and not made due to pressure from the funder.
The newly released draft, dated Aug. 7, 2013, closely resembles the final report.
The center's Josie Duffy claims the six-week gap between the first and second drafts suggests that the institute moved quickly to follow the alliance's edits.
"SUNY says it has now disclosed everything it has, but given that LRANY and the authors held weekly conference calls to discuss the report's progress, we may never know the full extent of their influence over the final version," she said.
In an email, Bullock said the institute "has been open and honest about its contacts with funders and its research has been and will continue to be immune from influence."
"It is unfortunate," he added, "that a research organization known throughout the nation for the quality and character of its work should have to defend itself from accusations leveled by the Center for Popular Democracy, an organization well known for its partisanship."
Source
Albany Must Keep the Charter Cap
Earlier this year, the New York City Council passed my resolution urging the state legislature to keep the cap on...
Earlier this year, the New York City Council passed my resolution urging the state legislature to keep the cap on charter schools. That was nothing new: Council Members have long showed their opposition to raising the cap. But, with recent efforts by powerful special interests, including more than $13 million spent in lobbying and campaign ads, we need to remind New York why raising the cap is not only unnecessary, but also harmful to our public school children.
First, there is the capacity question. Charter schools have 2,500 unfilled seats in New York City. In addition, current charter agreements could allow for more than 27,000 additional authorized seats. In other words, these charter schools already are not handling their assigned share of students, and that burdens crowded public schools, making it more difficult for those schools to provide quality education.
Second, charter schools are not required to serve students who transfer to or join schools mid-year because of disciplinary measures or because of a family's choice. They also do not serve nearly the same amount of students with special needs as public schools. This means that when the school year starts, charters receive funding for a certain number of students yet actually end up teaching fewer than they are budgeted for. They then pocket the remainder and can boast lower class sizes while public schools again shoulder the burden.
Finally, the Center for Popular Democracy reported that New York stood to lose over $54 million to charter school-related fraud in 2014 alone. Audits can help uncover instances of fraud, mishandling of funds, conflicts of interest within governing boards, and a number of other troubling findings, yet charter schools largely oppose efforts to increase transparency. The State Comptroller's attempt to audit charter schools has already been foiled at every turn, meaning New Yorkers are left in the dark about how exactly our public dollars are spent.
Meanwhile, more than $5 billion in state money is owed to our traditional public schools to provide every child access to a "sound basic education" per the Campaign for Fiscal Equity ruling. Forty-four percent of all schools in New York City are overcrowded. The City's Independent Budget Office reports that most schools are at 102 percent capacity or more, and 88 percent of the city's charter schools are co-located within a district school, adding to the space crunch.
Co-located charter schools, by the way, are an exercise in inequality: privately run schools, with access to both private and public funds, that are taking resources from underfunded district schools. What does this mean for the social climate in these schools? Many students feel, and rightfully so, that district schools and their students are not valued the way they should be.
It is sensible to provide the money and attention owed to our public schools to keep them strong. Charter schools already divert resources from the majority of students, who attend public schools. Charter schools do not serve our children, especially the most needy, with enough accountability to justify increasing their share of funding.
All children deserve an education system that celebrates their potential by giving them the space and funding necessary to achieve educational excellence. The raising of the charter cap would be damaging to our public school system in terms of morale, space, funding, and overall quality. Leaders in Albany should finish their legislative session without altering the cap. Instead, it is time to ensure a feasible means of success for public schools by giving them the focus they need and not investing in a private enterprise that has yet to fulfill its promise to New Yorkers.
***Daniel Dromm is the Education Committee Chair of the New York City Council.
Source: Gotham Gazette
4 days ago
4 days ago