Society's Social Needs Let's Fix Them

Populist Jim Hightower was quoted sometime ago in The Sun magazine as saying "Conservatives have historically seen people falling through the cracks in society and said, That's the way things work, survival of the fittest. Liberals see people falling through the cracks and say, We've got to do something about those people falling through the cracks, so we need a strong government that can provide programs and assist those people. Populists say there shouldn't be any cracks; let's fix them."

Whether the issue is education, employment, affordable housing, veteran care, or health (including mental health) care, we have to push our elected leaders to stop with the band-aid approaches and to set policy that allows every American to have good education, a decent place to live, work that supports their family's basic needs, and access to affordable health care. If we can do these things as communities, much of governmental spending for stop-gap domestic policies will decline in the long-run.

To do this though, we need to stop finger pointing and start planning. How a person ends up in desperate straits is irrelevant. The thing that matters is how we find a way to move forward.

There are some initiatives that we need government to ride herd on. If you read my post about energy policy, it is my belief that government does need step in and establish a course to address the serious affects that global climate change poses. However, with these domestic issues, it is probably good that states and localities develop solutions that work. As I note the pulling together of concerned citizens to address the aftermath of the flooding here in Iowa, I realize that this is also a way to address these day to day ongoing problems that are never addressed to the level they deserve.

So, Gov. Culver, once you get your blue ribbon panel's report about how to address the flood aftermath, challenge localities to address the social needs I've outlined. I'd be glad to volunteer.

Frank Cordaro Speaks

On October 5, 2007, peacemaker Frank Cordaro was sentenced to 30 days in jail for the criminal trespass charge that came from his participation in an occupation of Senator Charles Grassley's office on September 21. He joined an effort led by Iowa high school students who are members of the group, Students beyond War.

After being taken into custody, Cordaro was transferred to the Bridewell Detention Center in Bethany, Missouri, where he is serving his sentence. This is his first report from there.

First Report from Bridewell

By Frank Cordaro

October 14, 2007

It's All About the $.

"I want you to know it was a great privilege to act with those young people stand against the unjust, immoral, and illegal war. Any time I serve in jail will only add to that honor and privilege."

I addressed Judge Moisan with these words just before she sentenced me to thirty days in jail for my criminal trespass charge from the September 21 high school occupation of Senator Grassley's Des Moines offices.

Though they are noble words, and I stand by them and the truth they state about the U.S. war in Iraq and the courage of the young people with whom I was arrested. These young people had nothing to do with the severity of the sentence I was given. Sending me to jail was all about the money I owe Polk County.

Since the year 2000, when I was protesting the Iowa National Guard's and the F-16's participation in the U.S.-enforced "No-Fly Zones" over Iraq, to the beginning of the Iraq invasion in March of 2003, to today; I've been convicted eight times for criminal trespass in Polk County. For most of these convictions, I have refused to pay any of the fines and court costs that resulted from these convictions. Added to these fees are additional fees assessed for time spend in jail at the rate of $48/day for an incarceration in December, 2004. If I add to these my per diem fees for my current incareration, I estimate that I will owe Polk County between $4,000 to $5,000 by the time I am released on November 3^rd.

It used to be—when I first began getting arrested—that we could tell the judge up-front that we refused to pay any fines, and the judge would send us to jail in lieu of the fines and court costs. You did your time, and that was the end of it.

Today, if you are found guilty, the judge must assess a mandatory minimum fine, court costs, arrest fees and/or any number of potential surcharges in addition to imposing incarceration time. Now however, a criminal trespass conviction carries a minimum $65 fine, court costs, arrest fees, and surcharges that bring the total minimum bill for the crime to $300. There are fees for every institutional contact in the process, even including fees for time spent in community service.

Obviously these "pay as you go" policies are an egregiously unfair burden on the poor. Nowhere is this unjust tax more clearly demonstrated than the $48-a-day fee for being an inmate in the Polk County Jail system. The outrageously potential outcome is that a poor person could be held in jail indefinitely from the inability to pay these accumulating costs.

My biggest concern is that my sentence will serve as a deterrent to others considering joining us in the Iowa Occupation Project. So far those arrested in IOP actions have only received fines and the added charges for their convictions. Whether or not, some judges will begin to impose jail time is unlikely.

However, the impact of good citizens putting their personal liberty on the line has clearly swayed public opinion toward a desire to end the war, and we know that these efforts, as expensive as they may become, are ultimately saving lives. How much is a human life worth?

Since the financial liability is not affordable for many of those willing to risk arrest, saving those lives requires more help from those with the resources to do so. Now, more than ever, the larger peace community needs to step up and support those willing and able to take this risk.

I don't know what I am going to do about my own growing debt. I plan to continue refusing to pay it as a principled position of solidarity with the poor who are disproportionately burdened with these unfair and unjust taxes of the criminal system and by the war itself. Should the day come that paying the debt becomes more prudent than not paying it, I trust that God's providence will supply me with what I need.

This I know. What I lack in money is more than compensated in my richness in friends and family. My most valued asset is my membership in the Des Moines Catholic Worker community. I am abundantly blessed to part of a community of people committed to lives of material poverty and dedicated to their service to the poor. It is a community that values the peace-making and affords me the luxury of being in jail while they continue our work of hospitality and the other works of mercy for which Catholic Workers are so widely known.

I am reminded of something M. Gandhi once said, "It takes a lot of rich people to keep me in poverty."

This is certainly true for those of us who live and work in the Des Moines Catholic Worker community, and for this we remain constantly grateful.

In my next reflection, I intend to share more about life here in the Bridewell Detention Facility in Bethany, Missouri. Please know that I am doing well and stay busy with the challenges placed before me each day in this confined space.

———-

You can donate to a fund for fees for those arrested through the Iowa Peace Network at the link below:

www.iowapeacenetwork.org

Or you can make donations to the Des Moines Catholic Worker at:

www.desmoinescatholicworker.org

Updates on the Iowa Occupation Project can be found on the web page:

www.schoolformoralcourage.com/iowaoccupationproject.html

Information about SODaPOP:

www.desmoinescatholicworker.org/sodapop.html

The Little Rock 9 and the Cedar Rapids 19: Parallels in Justice

At a gala on Monday evening, Former President Bill Clinton said Americans needed to continue to improve race relations.

"It is easy to celebrate the courage of others for what they did 50 years ago. It is another thing altogether to build the world our children would like to live in 50 years from now."

Without lessening the impact of the Little Rock 9, it occurs to me that a similarity can be drawn between justice seekers of any generation. The people right here in Iowa who sat-in at Senator Grassley's office to ask him to help end the war in Iraq, the mayor of San Diego who voted his conscience to challenge the ban on same-sex marriage in California, the UAW strikers all are helping to build the world our children will live in.

If there is a reason to value the Constitution of the United States, it is this, the ability of free people to speak their minds and take action against tyranny. While it is nowhere near "a more perfect union," the Constitution allows us the possibility.

Stop the Repo Madness

What benefit is it to the average US taxpayer if housing is repossessed? Business decisions like these end up being paid for by all of us. If lenders make risky loans, it makes sense that they figure out a way to help the people they put into these homes to keep them.

From the BBC

The slowing housing market is a problem for lenders

A coalition of civil rights groups in the US has called on sub-prime lenders to stop repossessing borrowers' homes.

They want a six-month moratorium on foreclosures and say the industry should move borrowers onto loans with more favourable terms.

Sub-prime lenders provide loans such as mortgages to people with poor credit records, but they tend to charge higher rates of interest.

US sub-prime lender New Century filed for bankruptcy protection on Monday.

'Reckless and unaffordable'

The civil rights groups say that a predicted wave of foreclosures stems from "reckless and unaffordable loans", for which the lenders must bear some responsibility.

Without intervention, sub-prime foreclosures will impose the greatest drain on African-American and Latino wealth ever experienced in this country Hilary Shelton, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

The National Council of La Raza, which campaigns on behalf of Hispanic Americans, says the problem is that most sub-prime loans start with favourable fixed interest rates that later change into adjustable-rate mortgages.

The group says that higher risk borrowers should be moved into sustainable 30-year fixed rates.

Adjustable rates have caused particular problems following two years of interest rate rises from the Federal Reserve between 2004 and 2006.

Twenty Lousy Cents

Last night I was at the grocery store and accidentally wrote a check that was over the amount the cashier told me by twenty cents. Perhaps because I was world weary, or perhaps because I was in a cynical mood I said flippantly, "Well, I don't think that extra twenty cents will change the world--don't worry about it."

The bagger, who was a young woman, looked up from my groceries and said, "wouldn't it be something if twenty cents did change the world?"

I jokingly responded, "Well, if it would change the world-- I'll give it right back."

As I walked home, I thought about it. When I woke up this morning, I thought about it some more. I'm still thinking about it as I write this.

Iowa has 2.9 million people in it. If every person in Iowa ponied up twenty cents, that would be $580,000. Would the world change on account of that kind of money being available?

The United States has , according to the census bureau Population Clocks, 301,473,951 people. If everyone chipped in twenty cents, that's $60,294,790.20. that is slightly more than the entire city budget of Iowa City. Imagine what changes could happen with that kind of money?

The World population is estimated to be 6,584,998,266 (at 21:52 GMT (EST+5) Mar 27, 2007). Of course now you have to factor in currency conversion and the idea that twenty cents here is worth more or less than other places in terms of goods and services, but in US dollars, we are now talking about $1,316,999,653.20. How much world change could come from this?

Imagine $1.316 billion dollars to help feed, shelter, immunize/heal, provide clean water and sanitation, create jobs with.

Twenty lousy cents it turns out may make a world of difference.

Skinny on the Mini(mum Wage)

6 States during the mid-term elections passed minimum wage laws. As expected, conservatives have painted increasing the minimum wage as "bad for business." But is it? Here are some facts:

A minimum wage increase would raise the wages of millions of workers.
An estimated 14.9 million workers (11% of the workforce) would receive an increase in their hourly wage rate if the minimum wage were raised from $5.15 to $7.25 by 2008. Of these workers, 6.6 million workers (5% of the workforce) currently earn less than $7.25 and would be directly affected by an increase. The additional 8.3 million workers (6% of the workforce) earning slightly above the minimum would also be likely to benefit from an increase due to “spillover effects”.

Minimum wage increases benefit working families.
The earnings of minimum wage workers are crucial to their families' well-being. Evidence from an analysis of the 1996-97 minimum wage increase shows that the average minimum wage worker brings home more than half (54%) of his or her family's weekly earnings.
An estimated 1,395,000 single parents with children under 18 would benefit from a minimum wage increase to $7.25 by 2008. Single parents would benefit disproportionately from an increase — single parents are 9% of workers affected by an increase, but they make up only 7% of the overall workforce. Approximately 3.9 million parents with children under 18 would benefit.

Adults make up the largest share of workers who would benefit from a minimum wage increase: 80% of workers whose wages would be raised by a minimum wage increase to $7.25 by 2008 are adults (age 20 or older).

Over half (54%) of workers who would benefit from a minimum wage increase work full time and another third (30%) work between 20 and 34 hours per week.
Minimum wage increases benefit disadvantaged workers.

Women are the largest group of beneficiaries from a minimum wage increase: 59% of workers who would benefit from an increase to $7.25 by 2008 are women. An estimated 14% of working women would benefit directly from that increase in the minimum wage.

A disproportionate share of minorities would benefit from a minimum wage increase. African Americans represent 11% of the total workforce, but are 16% of workers affected by an increase. Similarly, 14% of the total workforce is Hispanic, but Hispanics are 19% of workers affected by an increase.

The benefits of the increase disproportionately help those working households at the bottom of the income scale. Although households in the bottom 20% received only 5% of national income, 38% of the benefits of a minimum wage increase to $7.25 would go to these workers. The majority of the benefits of an increase would go to families with working adults in the bottom 40% of the income distribution.

Among families with children and a low-wage worker affected by a minimum wage increase to $7.25, the affected worker contributes, on average, over half (59%) of the family's earnings. Forty-six percent of such workers actually contribute 100% of their family's earnings.
Relatively large shares of the workforce (up to 19.1%) in some Southern and Mid-Western states would benefit from an increase to $7.25.

A minimum wage increase would help reverse the trend of declining real wages for low-wage workers.
Since September 1997, the purchasing power of the minimum wage has deteriorated by 20%. After adjusting for inflation, the value of the minimum wage is at its lowest level since 1955.
Wage inequality has been increasing, in part, because of the declining real value of the minimum wage. Today, the minimum wage is 31% of the average hourly wage of American workers, the lowest level since the end of World War II.

A minimum wage increase is part of a broad strategy to end poverty.
As welfare reform forces more poor families to rely on their earnings from low-paying jobs, a minimum wage increase is likely to have a greater impact on reducing poverty.
A recent study of a 1999 state minimum wage increase in Oregon found that as many as one-half of the welfare recipients entering the workforce in 1998 were likely to have received a raise due to the increase. After the increase, the real hourly starting wages for former welfare recipients rose to $7.23.

The federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) combined with the minimum wage helps to reduce poverty, but the EITC is not a replacement for a minimum wage increase. For example, in 1997, a single mother of two children working 40 hours per week year-round at the minimum wage would have earned $9,893 (after Social Security and Medicare taxes) and would have been eligible for the maximum EITC of $3,656, which would have put her family income at $13,549, a mere 5% above the 1997 poverty threshold of $12,931 for a family of three. But because the minimum wage has not kept up with increases in the cost of living since 1997, the same family is now below the poverty line. In 2005, a single mother with two children would have combined earnings and EITC of $14,177, or 11% below the 2005 poverty threshold of $15,735 for a family of three.

The minimum wage raises the wages of low-income workers in general, not just those below the official poverty line. Many families move in and out of poverty, and near-poor families are also beneficiaries of minimum wage increases.

The inflation-adjusted value of the minimum wage is 30% lower in 2006 than it was in 1979.
The effect of the last minimum wage increase in 1996-97 has been completely eroded by inflation.

$5.15 today is the equivalent of only $3.95 in 1995 — lower than the $4.25 minimum wage level before the 1996-97 increase.

There is no evidence of job loss from the last minimum wage increase.
A 1998 EPI study failed to find any systematic, significant job loss associated with the 1996-97 minimum wage increase. In fact, following the most recent increase in the minimum wage in 1996-97, the low-wage labor market performed better than it had in decades (e.g., lower unemployment rates, increased average hourly wages, increased family income, decreased poverty rates).

Studies of the 1990-91 federal minimum wage increase, as well as studies by David Card and Alan Krueger of several state minimum wage increases, also found no measurable negative impact on employment.

New economic models that look specifically at low-wage labor markets help explain why there is little evidence of job loss associated with minimum wage increases. These models recognize that employers may be able to absorb some of the costs of a wage increase through higher productivity, lower recruiting and training costs, decreased absenteeism, and increased worker morale.

A recent Fiscal Policy Institute (FPI) study of state minimum wages found no evidence of negative employment effects on small businesses.