A report issued by the White House and the Education Department on Monday showed that the federal economic stimulus package (the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) has so far created or saved 250,000 education jobs. The report is the first hard evidence of the Recovery Act’s contribution to the nation’s economic health, and previews more extensive data that will be released October 30.
The report is good news for at least two reasons. First, it documents how public investment is helping to pull the nation back from the brink of a devastating economic depression. And, second, it includes crucial information that should inform the ongoing investment of stimulus funds to achieve a full recovery—especially when it comes to job creation. In analyzing the full October data, however, it is important to ask not only how many jobs were created and what infrastructure was built, but also whether we are investing in a lasting economic recovery that will include our entire nation.
Because stimulus funds are flowing largely through traditional state and local channels, particular attention is needed to ensure that they reach the communities and populations that need them most, that distribution is fair and transparent, and that progress is measured in terms of greater and more equal opportunity for all Americans.
The U.S. economy is lurching towards recovery. We continue to see nearly as many disheartening indicators as we do reasons to be optimistic, but it does appear that the worst is behind us. Even if the freefall is over, though, the question of whether or not we will return to pre-crisis levels of inequality, or emerge as a nation with a robust economy that is able to create economic security and mobility for all, has yet to be answered. That question will be answered, in large part, by how recovery efforts are structured and the degree to which resources expended on recovery reach the communities that need them most. If we are truly committed to ensuring a fair and equitable recovery, and to building a foundation for future prosperity, we will make investments in education a key component of our recovery strategies.
The reasons for enhanced investment in education are myriad—economic development, global competitiveness, ending the school to prison pipeline—but, ultimately, it’s simply a matter of our responsibility to our children. There is nothing more basically human than a desire to create a life that is more secure and more fulfilling for the next generation, but we are failing. Our children are not learning the skills they need to provide for themselves, nor are they developing the tools of cultural appreciation that will make their lives rich and meaningful. If we are the first generation in U.S. history to leave our children worse off than ourselves, we will never forgive ourselves.
Today is blog Action Day. In the organizers' own words:
Blog Action Day is an annual event that unites the world's bloggers in posting about the same issue on the same day on their own blogs with the aim of sparking discussion around an issue of global importance. Blog Action Day 2009 will be the largest-ever social change event on the web. One day. One issue. Thousands of voices.
Although The Opportunity Agenda does not directly work on climate change, the problem is so pervasive that it impacts the issues we do work on. Climate change is not an abstract phenomenon when it comes the lives of everyday people in America. There is mounting evidence that greenhouse gases are increasing the potency of hurricanes, whose impact disproportionately affects those most vulnerable in our society. And as the climate does change, it will be the poorest among us that suffer in increased fuel costs. Finally, the polluting elements that cause climate change are also most common in low-income communities of color. As a result, the health of residents in these areas is worse than those in more affluent neighborhoods.
For these reasons, climate change isn't an issue simply to be addressed by environmental groups. Social activists, too, must see the connections and address this universal concern—a step in realizing the promise of opportunity for all.
Interesting news out of Britain, as the BBC Trust issues new guidelines banning editorial content that defames human dignity. Although the move seems to confront the American ideal for freedom of speech, their efforts demonstrate the role that media leaders have in shaping public perception. If successful, advocates for human rights could leverage similar action in the U.S., in hopes to help frame positive values based messaging over American airwaves. It might seam dreamlike, but Hollywood is where dreams breathe life.
An expatriated journalist—vetted during the 1990s, when the craft of communicating embarked on its greatest transition since the invention of the printing press—I consider myself a strong advocate for the freedom of information. what I do promote, however, is a restructuring of how American broadcast media operates, a medium of mass communication that has always been seen as public property and, therefore, subject to editorial guidelines. Yet, in the spirit of selling the airwaves to the highest bidders, the public's best interest has been compromised by advertising revenues.
One of the shining moments in Obama's campaign from 2008 was the "Yes We Can" mantra that rang out across America. It was a powerful reminder of the founding principles rooted in our democracy, the idea that we live as "We The People." I think this is an important icon to meditate on after hearing news that President Obama is awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
The United States lost a great deal of respect by the world community during the eight years leading up to Obama's victory. This is, I believe, due to the rampant cowboy behavior we wore on our sleeve when stepping out into the world. For eight years, the values of the old frontier—boot straps, Bibles and bourbon—were thrown down on the table; bootstraps because we lived by a "We don't need anyone to help us" mentality, Bibles because we saw the world with certitude as if we were gods, and bourbon because we drank ourself blind with greed and profit.
With the Autumnal Equinox recently behind us, the leaves are starting to fall and the days are finally cooling. It would seem public opinion on certain hot issues has also started to cool, for better or for worse. Below are findings from recent studies that show a decline in support for legal abortions although still a majority of Americans oppose increasing barriers to abortion access, and a relatively nonchalant attitude toward racial conflict. On the flip side, support for making abortions illegal has gained in popularity, and public opinion is heated around perceived conflict between immigrants and the native-born.
This week's immigration blog roundup will cover some state news, a short video on immigrants' experiences with the U.S. immigration system, and more.
Immigration officials are considering further increases in citizenship application fees. The fee is currently over $675, which is a 69% increase. The hike has led to a drop in applications from 254,000 to 58,000 last year.
Faith-based groups across the country are organizing to push for comprehensive immigration reform. These groups have called to end the separation of families, visited with their Congress officials, and worked in countless ways to help welcome the stranger—as they were once strangers in a strange land -
The ancient scriptures describe the stories of immigrants—people cast out of their native land who wander in the world’s wilderness and seek refuge in foreign places. It’s an epic saga, filled with struggle and conflict, despair and deliverance. Little wonder that present-day people of faith find parallels in the lives of immigrants in this country.
It's easy for us to lose our focus. Just look at the ruckus unleashed this past August at town hall meetings across our country. And, as we move closer toward comprehensive immigration reform on the Hill, progressives need to enter into the conversation with their eyes fully fixed on the end goal, reform that fixes our broken immigration system and moves us all forward together as one nation.
Breakthrough's latest video, Restore Fairness, does an excellent job of reopening our eyes to what is really on the table if we don't find real solutions to our immigration crisis. The video, which focuses on the need to reform detention and detainment of immigrants, is a stark reminder on how a broken immigration system is more than just a gad fly that aggravates the workings of a government; the trials of migration existing as long as humans divided themselves into groups. On the contrary, when the fundamental values rooted in our history—values like fairness, dignity and equality—are ignored, lives are put on the line, and some are even lost.
Restore Fairness helps frame the need for restoring those values that are fundamental for any country born out of the rights owed to every human.
Already, the video has gained much support and created quite a buzz on the web. It helps open our eyes to the reality that exists when a system needs fixing. Check it out and spread the word, to help us all open our eyes as we begin to move toward another hot and contentious debate.
We are already well into September, the President is back in the White House, and Congress is in session. As we are re-engaging in the heated public discourse, it's important to know where public opinion stands today, and how it's shifted, if at all, in the past few months. Below is a rundown of important findings on health care reform and from a pioneering survey of immigrants in the US, which were released during the summer. The focus is primarily on data, which can inform advocates' communications, and strategy.
Overwhelming support for covering all children: new survey by Lake Research Partners for First Focus
Vast majority of Americans support ensuring that all children are covered as part of health care reform, even if it increases their taxes. By a margin of 87%-11%, nearly 8-to-1, Americans favor ensuring all children have health care coverage, including by a 68%-28% margin even if it increases their taxes. By more than a 3-to-1 ratio (78%-21%), voters believe that it is extremely/very important that “all children in America are provided health care coverage as part of health reform.”
A 3-to-1 majority (62%-21%) of Americans would oppose the elimination of CHIP if they learned that the Health Insurance Exchange “may be more costly for families and provide fewer benefits for children.” By a 54-14% margin or almost 4-to-1, Americans would be less likely to vote for a candidate who supported a health care reform plan that reduced the level of health care coverage for children in such a manner.
National telephone survey (n=1000) conducted by Lake Research Partners for First Focus; Released on 8.13.09
This week's immigration blog roundup will cover health care reform and more.
About a quarter of American tech companies are founded by immigrants. Immigrant entrepreneurs who have contributed to the tech industry include Intel's former CEO, Yahoo's co-founder, and Google's co-founder. Immigrant-founded firms produced over $50 billion in sales and employ nearly half a million people in 2005.
In more fallout from Rep. Wilson's outburst during President Obama's health care speech, President Obama is proposing to bar undocumented immigrants from accessing his proposed health insurance market, even if they pay with their own funds. It is unclear how barring immigrants from accessing health care reflects the "fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country," as the President stated in his speech to Congress last Wednesday. Frank Sharry of America's Voice argues that this move by President Obama "rewards bullying in a way that begets more bullying." Rep. Gutierrez adds, "You cannot say you want to bring people out of the shadows and then deny them non government access to health care that they can use their own dollars to purchase.”
Andrew Romano argues that "from a purely economic standpoint, insuring illegal immigrants makes a lot of sense" as immigrants tend to be younger and healthier, which results in a 55 percent lower cost of health care for them than for a native born American.
This week's immigration blog roundup covers some new studies on migration and more.
Several new studies have found that immigrants are choosing to remain in their adopted countries rather than return to their countries of birth. Despite the economic downturn, immigrants still see the United States as a land of opportunity and are content with their decision to move here.
President Obama is expected to address the Congressional Hispanic Caucus next week on immigration reform. Representative Gutierrez and Senator Menendez are also expected to address the Caucus.
Last Saturday in Sacramento, hundreds marched to urge President Obama to pass comprehensive immigration reform.
Outgoing Senator Mel Martinez of Florida ended his tenure by stressing the need for immigration reform. During his time as Senator, he worked with Senators McCain and Kennedy on immigration reform.
On December 6-8, the National Immigration Law Center will be holding its 7th National Low-Income Immigrant Rights Conference in Arlington, Virginia. Attendees will share information and experiences and develop strategies around some of the core issues affecting low-income immigrants.
Lastly, ImmigrationProf Blog has a list of web resources for labor and immigration law for anyone considering hiring non-U.S. citizens.
As mounting evidence shows, the practice of busting myths - lining up facts to disprove an opponent's false assertions - just doesn't work. Most recently, Sharon Begley takes on the practice in Newsweek, exploring why people believe nutty stories about health care reform or supposed controversies about the president's birth certificate. She reports that, basically, people want to believe what they want to believe and they predisposed to ignoring any facts that clash with those beliefs. In fact, she finds that we actually go out of our way to find facts that bolster our beliefs. And most people are not too picky about the source of those facts, which makes the internet an ideal tool for them.
However, it's true that the audiences we want to reach are not usually completely opposed to our arguments and comitted to disagreeing with us regardless of the facts. Usually, we need to sway the middle, the people who haven't necessarily made up their minds. Why not line up statistics showing how wrong opposing arguments are for them? There are a few reasons. First, even with these groups, facts are not going to be the swaying element of your argument. If they are leaning toward believing that immigration is generally bad for the country, numbers showing how much immigrants contribute to the economy are not going sway them alone. It's important, instead, to frame arguments with the basic values that we know our audiences share. In the case of immigration, fairness is important. Numbers can then support how, because immigrants pay into a health care system, for instance, it's only fair that they receive the benefits from it.
But with these middle audiences, there is another danger in relying on myth busting, and that's repeating your opponent's argument. If a series of myth busts say "immigrants do NOT commit more crimes than citizens" or "health care reform does NOT want to kill your grandmother", you have put those arguments back into print once again, with only a measely "not" separating them from your opponents. Worse, some myth busting sheets repeat the arguments word for word and the refute them. Research shows that this mainly leaves the bad argument lingering in people's minds, not the counter. As Shankar Vedantam reports in the Washington Post:
I speak to you tonight at a crucial moment in our nation’s history. When you elected me president almost one year ago, you voted in favor of hope, and in favor of change. You voted for the idea that we are all in it together, and that we share responsibility to uphold the public good. You rejected the old politics of special interests, of legislative gridlock, and the failed notion that you’re better off on your own than as part of one indivisible nation.
You called out—in veterans’ halls and in union halls, in congregations and from small businesses, in senior centers and on college campuses—that this is America and, in America, we can fix what’s broken, and we can do it together.
Tonight our nation faces a crucial test of that profoundly American resolve. Will we rise together and ensure the basic security for our people that comes from affordable, quality health insurance? Or will we allow the cynics and the fear mongers, and the entrenched interests to extinguish that hope? Can we transcend the partisan bickering and solve the biggest problems facing our nation? Can we be the country we were meant to be?
Tonight, my fellow Americans, I come to you with a clear answer to that question: Yes We Can.
The words "due process" might not ignite our sense of national pride in the same way as words like "liberty," "justice," or "equality," but they should. And the promise of due process -- that every person, when faced with threats to their life, liberty, or property, will have a chance to have their side meaningfully heard and considered -- has never stood on shakier ground.
In the most recent issue of the New Yorker, investigative reporter David Grann methodically lays out the facts leading up to the 2004 Texas execution of Cameron Todd Willingham -- a man who was convicted of arson murder for a fire that killed his three young children. Later evidence and analysis by a series of national experts showed that the fire had been an accident and, in fact, no crime had occurred.
It's tempting to blame Willingham's wrongful death on an isolated cast of characters.
Willingham's defense attorneys at trial were convinced that he was guilty, which doubtlessly affected, in one way or another, the zealousness of their representation.
The local fire investigators were so cocksure of their scientifically-untested abilities to discern arson from accident that they comfortably stated under oath that Willingham had intentionally set the fire to "kill [his] little girls."
And even though the 15 members of the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles were each provided the report of a nationally-recognized fire and explosives expert, who had reviewed the evidence and concluded that the fire was likely caused by faulty electrical wiring or a space heater, it is not certain that any of them read it. They chose not to call a hearing to consider the new evidence and each of them voted to deny Willingham's petition for clemency.
But these failings of bias, ego, and energy, while shockingly egregious in effect, are unfortunately not exceptional.
This week's immigration blog roundup will cover a number of new studies on immigration issues, some upcoming immigration-related events, and more.
A new survey of low-wage legal immigrant, undocumented immigrant and native-born American workers found that they are consistently paid less than the minimum wage and are not compensated for overtime work. The study was conducted in New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago.
A new report on Suffolk County, New York, where an Ecuadorian immigrant was killed, found that immigrants “are routinely the target of violent attacks, harassment and abuse driven by a virulent anti-immigrant climate that spans a decade.” The survey of over 70 Latino immigrants was conducted by Southern Poverty Law Center.
A Government Office of Accountability report found that the U.S. Border Patrol overstated its checkpoint results over the last two years and that its data is insufficient to determine the agency's efficiency or effectiveness.
Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick announced that state-subsidized health insurance for its 31,000 legal immigrants has been scaled back. The state legislature cut the $130 million immigrant health insurance budget to help close a budget deficit. The program will now cost $40 million. Massachusetts has the lowest percentage of uninsured residents in the country, at 2.6 percent.
(This is very brief, but very good diary for driving home some important messages that are being made on cable, as well as online. - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
Last week, Alan Jenkins, Executive Director of The Opportunity Agenda, co-hosted an episode of MSNBC Live. With the regular host, Carlos Watson, Alan took the opportunity to inject values into the current health care debate.
He told Carlos, "I'm surprised that Obama hasn't been telling the big story rooted in values. He was so good at that during the campaign. Candidate Obama could tie those wonky details, like the public option, to a big values based story that we could all relate to. And he really has failed to do that in this case."
Also on the show, Alan and Carlos spoke with Maya Wiley, Executive Director of the Center for Social Inclusion.
She spoke of the continued needs and disparities in New Orleans, particularly in health care, four years after Hurricane Katrina. The situation offers a concrete example of how stimulus dollars are critical for expanding opportunity.
This week's immigration blog roundup will cover immigrant detention, immigration judges, and more.
Immigration activists are mourning the death of Senator Ted Kennedy, citing his work with on behalf of Latinos and communities of color. USA Today reports that Kennedy fashioned our immigration system by working in 1965 to pass a bill that eliminated the quota system. His work continued throughout the decades and has laid the groundwork for comprehensive immigration reform now.
The New York Times reports that the New York Department of Correction has given names of foreign-born inmates (including U.S. citizens) to immigration officials, which has resulted in deportation proceedings for at least 13,000 Rikers Island inmates since 2004. Out of 105,000 inmates annually, about 4,000 are questioned on their immigration status, with about 3,200 being detained (about 3 percent).
The Washington Post reports on the rise in kidnappings of people crossing the border by smuggling cartels. Many undocumented families pay the ransom rather than face U.S. authorities.
A new study by University of California-San Francisco found that immigration judges are being crushed by their workload. There are about 215 immigration judges in the country; they average more than 1,600 cases per year, far more than the 350 cases that federal judges have on their dockets.
Lastly, another Latino has quit the GOP - Sergio Garcia, Political Director of the New Mexico GOP resigned, saying "I have come to the realization that the current environment is no longer conducive for moving forward with any strategic plan of positioning the Party for the future."
This week's immigration roundup will cover comprehensive immigration reform, detentions, and more.
Today there will be a meeting at the White House on immigration reform. You can submit your questions for the Reform Immigration FOR America folks to ask Secretary Janet Napolitano here.
Last Monday, about 150 faith leaders gathered to set an agenda to encourage debate of immigration reform in their congregations and convince Congress to pass it.
Twenty two years ago I received shocking news: I had Hodgkin's disease, a cancer of the lymphatic system that affects primarily young people. At the age of 30 I began a long and to date successful effort to fight the disease and regain my health.
I was lucky: I had good health insurance, access to top doctors, friends and family with the wherewithal to help. I also had a good education that helped me navigate the health and insurance systems and also remain employed.
I also had a home to go to after each round of chemo and, three years later, after hospital treatment for a recurrence.
"Scott" is not so fortunate. Twenty-seven years ago, at the age of 21, he lost his left leg after a car hit him. A month earlier, he had lost his job as a forklift operator, and with that, his health insurance. Unable to afford his own home, he was living with his mother. The money he recovered from the driver of the car that hit him barely covered hospital expenses and the lawyer's fees.
This week's immigration roundup will cover the Obama Administration's decision to get immigration measures passed in 2010 instead of this year.
ImmigrationProf Blog reader Julia Koehler sees the positive in President Obama's putting comprehensive immigration reform on a timeline for 2010. Arguing that the misinformation tactics around health care reform could also be deployed to derail immigration reform, she writes:
It seems more useful to work for piecemeal reforms, in incremental pieces. Starting with a moratorium on raids, ending all 287g programs, and closing down the detention center network. The Obama administration must be questioned about the fact that the President himself is saying, he can't predict whether immigration reform can pass, yet he is stepping up 287g programs. I think stopping the increased unjust "enforcement" that is part of the Obama administration vision has to be the most urgent goal, not "CIR."
The revised timeline comes in light of an increase in arrests and deportations. According to the New York Times, 181,000 illegal immigrants have been arrested and 215,000 immigrants have been deported so far in 2009—double the figures from two years ago. Immigration advocate, Ali Noorani, asks, "How many more millions if not billions of dollars are we going to put into the border without fixing the immigration system?" Although similarly disappointed, Representative Gutierrez also credits Obama for committing to the process.
Advocates are also concerned about the impact of health care reform on immigration reform. Of the 47 million uninsured in the United States, about 7 million are undocumented immigrants. Advocates like Jennifer Ng'andu of the National Council of La Raza's Health Policy Project believe that health care reform cannot pass if it doesn't include undocumented immigrants.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment. blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
