banner2e top

CBC Fights Education Cuts as Consumer Coalition Attacks Regulatory Reversals By Charlene Crowell

March 26, 2017

CBC Fights Education Cuts as Consumer Coalition Attacks Regulatory Reversals
By Charlene Crowell

charlene-crowell

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - In releasing his first-ever federal budget blueprint, President Donald J. Trump stated that his intent was to “Make the Government lean and accountable to the people.”  A review of its proposals, however, might be better characterized as mean.

Proposed cuts of $54 billion annually will demand a series of sacrifices from those who have the least to give: low and moderate income families. From disadvantaged youth served by Job Corps centers across the country, to senior citizens trying to cope with financial constraints in what should be their golden years, the Trump budget proposal harms far more Americans than it helps.

Over the next few weeks, this column will explore many of the proposed funding cuts identified in the March 16th document.

For example, education has historically been the bridge to a better quality of life. Yet the FY18 budget proposal would widen economic divides for some and deepen societal divisions for others. Overall, the proposed funding reduction represents approximately 13 percent of the department’s current budget.

In response, both the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) and a diverse coalition of national and state organizations are standing up and speaking out. Education is proposed to lose $9 billion that includes $3.9 million from Pell Grants revenues that otherwise would have been carried over into FY18. Additionally, the popular Federal Work-Study program would remain but only as a shadow of its former capacity – also due to more severe budget cuts.

On March 22, the 49-member Congressional Black Caucus met with President Trump at the White House. In comments to the Associated Press before the meeting, Rep. Cedric Richmond of Louisiana, the CBC’s Chair said, “His budget is contrary to African-American interests in a number of ways, and it’s our role as policymakers to call him out on it.”

The CBC also prepared for the meeting a 128-page document entitled “We Have a Lot to Lose: Solutions to Advance Black Families in the 21st Century”. In its executive summary, the CBC wrote, “If President Trump is sincere in his interest in advancing the Black community, this document should be the guiding post of his administration.”

Addressing recommendations affecting many departments and agencies, the CBC report terms proposed FY18 funding levels for HBCUs as “an inadequate commitment.”

It was only a few weeks ago that presidents of the nation’s Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) also had a high-profile White House meeting. It was touted as a new beginning to strengthen federal support for institutions that serve high percentages of minority students. Instead, the FY18 proposal would only continue – not raise -- the current funding of $492 million.

The CBC report called for increased funding for HBCUs, Pell Grants and Title II that provide grants supporting local efforts to recruit and retain quality educators.

On the same day, more than 50 organizations including Black and Latino civil rights groups along with consumer advocates, educators, labor, legal and veterans’ organizations united in a letter to Congress that called for better stewardship from the Education Department.

“We believe protections for students and taxpayers should be strengthened, not scaled back”, wrote the diverse coalition. “Veterans, low-income students and students of color have been disproportionately harmed by predatory colleges.”

The Education Department’s budget blueprint would earmark $1.4 billion for ‘school choice’:

§  A $1 billion increase for Title I funding that is hoped to encourage school districts to adopt a system of student-based budgeting and open enrollment that pays financial support for students to attend the public school of his or her choice;

§  $250 million for a new private school choice program; and

§  $168 million more for charter school funding.

These budget-shifting priorities become financially possible with severe cuts to eliminate:

§  $2.4 billion for the Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants program;

§  $1.2 billion for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program that supports before and after-school programs as well as summer programs; and

§  $732 million for the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant program.

Beyond the proposed Education Department budget, private, for-profit career colleges have gained a regulatory reprieve, a reversal of a key rule promulgated by the Obama administration.

Secretary DeVos announced an extension for comments to be filed by career colleges on the gainful employment rule. Readers may recall that this rule requires career colleges to provide skills and knowledge that enable students to repay their student loans. Education and consumer advocates pushed for a rule that would end the years of using taxpayer dollars to fund career education studies that did not deliver what was promised while enriching private firms with taxpayer dollars.

"The Department of Education’s decision to extend deadlines under this rule sends a signal to schools with poor performing programs that they may not be held accountable after all,” noted Robin Howarth, a senior researcher with the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL) who specializes in student lending.  “Any weakening or reversal of the gainful employment rule puts students’ financial well-being at risk and reverses the progress that has been made in safeguarding taxpayer dollars from funding programs that fail students repeatedly."

In its letter to Congress, the education coalition also spoke to the importance of the gainful employment rule. “Delaying, weakening, or repealing the gainful employment rule would lead to a new race to the bottom as unscrupulous schools compete to enroll as many students as possible without regard to the quality of training, the student’s preparation, or the job prospects,” wrote the coalition.

Also during the Obama Administration, departmental guidance ended fee collections from defaulted student loan borrowers. In recent days, Secretary DeVos took steps to begin fee collection again that can total up to 16 percent of a borrower’s loans can be added – even if borrowers could fully repay their loans within 60 days.

"The student loan program exists to help students pay for their educations, not to trap them in debt,” said Whitney Barkley, a CRL policy counsel also specializing in student lending.

“Struggling student loan borrowers who enter a rehabilitation program within 60 days of default should be given the chance to make good on their payments, not hit with excessive fees, “Barkley added. “By allowing these fees to be collected, the Department has created a perverse incentive for student loan collectors, making borrowers in default more valuable than borrowers who are repaying their loans."

For all of these reasons and more, I believe the American taxpayer deserves better from its federal government. Quality education is essential to our nation’s future.

The real bottom line:  Every federal budget should help – not hurt – Americans.

Charlene Crowell is the communications deputy director with the Center for Responsible Lending. She can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Supreme Court Nominee Gorsuch Has Not Met The Civil Rights Standard To Earn Our Support By Marc H. Morial

March 26, 2017

Supreme Court Nominee Gorsuch Has Not Met The Civil Rights Standard To Earn Our Support
By Marc H. Morial

marcmorial

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - "Overall, we conclude that there is an inadequate record to determine if Judge Gorsuch has a commitment to protecting and safeguarding civil rights and, therefore, we do not believe he satisfies the second prong of our requirement for endorsement. Based upon our review of Judge Gorsuch's record, we have concerns that he has a narrow view of rights that are protected by the Constitution, as well as a skeptical view about the importance of protecting those rights in the courtroom. In short, Judge Gorsuch's record does not allow us to support his nomination for the Supreme Court at this time." - Lawyer's Committee on Civil Rights, Report on the Nomination of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court

The importance of a Supreme Court Justice's commitment to protecting civil rights cannot be overstated. Much of the progress this nation has made on issues of equal opportunity are due to Supreme Court rulings such as Brown v. Board of Education, Loving v. Virginia, Obergefell v. Hodges and Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc.

The Supreme Court has also regressed on civil rights, as with Shelby County v. Holder, which struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act and led to a proliferation of racially-motivated voter suppression laws throughout the nation.

More than most other communities, the future of African Americans' rights and opportunities hang on the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice. That's why the National Urban League cannot support the nomination of Judge Neill Gorsuch.

Beyond the level of scholarship and judicial experience required of a Justice, which Judge Gorsuch does appear to meet, a Supreme Court Justice must have demonstrated what the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights called "a profound respect for the importance of protecting the civil rights afforded by the Constitution and the nation's civil rights laws based on a large body of civil rights opinions or comparable information from statements and activities other than service on the bench."

We see no such respect demonstrated by Judge Gorsuch.

As I have maintained since the announcement of his nomination, what I find most troubling in the record of Judge Gorsuch is his apparent criticism of those who have sought advancement of individual rights through the courts.

He consistently has ruled against the rights of workers and consumers who were harmed by employers and corporations, and against disabled students pursuing their right to a meaningful education.

In fact, even as he sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week, the Supreme Court overwhelmingly rejected his opinion that a school district complies with the law so long as they provide educational benefits that "must merely be 'more than de minimis.'" In other words, according to Judge Gorsuch, a school district can meet its obligation to disabled students with little more than nothing.

Of course, no serious discussion of Judge Gorsuch's confirmation can ignore the fact that his nomination was the result of an egregious dereliction of duty by the Senate, who refused to give President Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, the hearing he was due. The Senate's failure with regard to that nomination does not bode well for its ability to keep partisanship from tainting the process.

Secret Service and the Trumps - Hypocrisy and Hubris By Julianne Malveaux

March 26, 2017

Secret Service and the Trumps - Hypocrisy and Hubris
By Julianne Malveaux

malveaux

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - The “budget lite” that our 45th President submitted is described as a “budget blueprint to make America Great Again”.  Submitted in the third week of March, it trumpets draconian cuts in many federal programs, eliminating some that provide important services, including the African Development Foundation, the Corporation for National and Community Service, the Inter-American Foundation, the US Trade and Development Agency, the Legal Services Corporation, the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and many others.  The cuts are so unfathomable, and so extremely severe, that even some of 45’s allies are biting back.

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, whose daughter Sarah Huckabee Sanders is Deputy White House Press Secretary, has written an op-ed in the Washington Post that argues that the National Endowment for the Arts, which he describes as “just 0.004 percent of the federal budget”, is important.  He says that students who participate in the arts have higher grade point averages and standardized test scores.  He reminds us that NEA grants went to about 16,000 communities, and that some young people only have access to music and the arts because NEA is in their communities.  He also highlights NEA as an “economic driver” because the arts create jobs.  Says Huckabee, “the arts are a $730 billion industry, representing 4.2 percent of our gross domestic product which equals more than transportation, tourism, or agriculture.”  Huckabee, ever the conservative, says he doesn’t want his tax money to fund things that don’t work, but he notes that the $147.9 million allocated to NEA in 2016 is not wasted money.

It seems strange that just 60 days into the game, 45’s head of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), former Congressman Mike Mulvaey (R-SC) has deemed many programs “ineffective”, “inefficient”, or ‘lacking evidence that it is being effectively implemented”.  What evaluation has been done?  Who has made the determination of inefficiency?  Based on these blanket assertions, some Republicans have indicated that the OMB determination is not right.  Former Senator Bob Dole (R-KS), a Republican Party stalwart, says it is short-sighted that 45 would eliminate the McGovern-Dole International Fund for Education program, a program that provides school meals for children in 40 of the world’s most impoverished nations.  Dole told the Washington Post that eliminating the program would “have a disastrous effect on the planet’s most vulnerable children”.  He called the program, which he developed with across the aisle Senator George McGovern (D-SD) as “one of the proudest achievements of his lifetime”.  Our 45th President is so eager to provide $54 billion in extra money for the Department of Defense that he is willing to throw a party stalwart’s legacy under the bus.

Meanwhile, the Secret Service has asked for $60 million more this year to protect 45 and his family.  45 was a frequent critic of President Obama’s golfing, a pastime that he engages in frequently himself.  And he can’t seem to find any golf courses in the DC area so he’s back to Mar-a-Largo, where taxpayers spend $3 million every time the President goes to his private resort.  Mr. Trump is not trying to tighten the belt he wears; he is only trying to tighten the nation’s.

Because Melania Trump likes to keep distance between herself and her husband, taxpayers are paying about $150,000 a day to protect her and their son, Baron, in New York.  The same man who said that the Obamas should consider living in the White House “a privilege” has not convinced his wife of the privilege that has been bestowed upon her.  Instead, we taxpayers will spend $4.5 million a month protecting Melania and Baron in New York.  New Yorkers will spend even more, and they have not been reimbursed for the cost paid when New York police officers are diverted to deal with the Trump family baby-sitting project.

The most egregious part of the scam that allows 45’s family to be protected is the fact that his wildcat sons, traveling the world to generate profit for the Trump brand, are protected by Secret Service with our tax dollars.  When they go to Dubai to celebrate a new Trump golf course, which is a profit generating opportunity for the Trump empire, taxpayers cover the cost of their “protection”.  If the Trump empire gained a profit from that trip, shouldn’t it reimburse United States taxpayers for the expense of protecting these entrepreneurs?

Then there is Ivanka Trump, who says she will “voluntarily” comply with ethics rules.  Balderdash!  This woman has a West Wing office and security clearance; she has avoided nepotism laws; she not only has her father’s ear, but she has been allowed to interact with some of the most powerful people in the world.  What will she do with this portfolio when 45’s sun sets, either through impeachment or resignation?  Is she being set up as another Trump profit center?

The Trump family is playing our country as if we are their personal piggy bank.  They get security that they ordinarily wouldn’t get.  They are maximizing profits that they ordinarily wouldn’t receive.  They are playing the capitalist game as it has never been played, merging economics and politics for their benefit.  And too many of us are silently accepting this egregious exploitation.

Julianne Malveaux is an economist, author, and Founder of Economic Education. Her podcast, “It’s Personal with Dr. J” is available on iTunes https://tinyurl.com/withDrJ . Her latest book “Are We Better Off: Race, Obama and public policy is available via amazon.com For more info visit www.juliannemalveaux.com

Trail of Tears By Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq

March 26, 2017

Trail of Tears
By Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq

williams2

(TriceEdneyWire.com) — Although it's no simple task and difficult to do, most who are keenly observant of or listen closely to Donald Trump will recognize that he is a fan of President Andrew Jackson.  If "fan" is over-zealous, it can be said that Jackson is inspirational to his current successor in The Office.  After all, Trump is the first President since Ronald Reagan to honor Jackson with a speech on his (Jackson's 250th) birthday.  Trump also boasts about his portrait of Jackson hung in The Oval Office.

Before someone becomes sentimental about Trump honoring Jackson with his 2017 "birthday" visit to Nashville, Tennessee, we need to refresh our collective memory about Jackson.  Jackson, known as a frontiersman who sprang to prominence from humble beginnings, is arguably a polar opposite from Trump in background and upbringing.  I, and others, would argue that Jackson and Trump are "cut from the same cloth" and are more similar in background and character than commonly acknowledged.

With fame as a soldier, few, except historians, know that Jackson, like Trump, earned much of his wealth from the purchase and sale of property.  In a partnership with two other investors, Jackson acquired lands that had been reserved by treaty from the Cherokee and Chickasaw nations.  Known as the "Jackson Purchase" (1818), a portion of those lands was used by the investors to found the city of Memphis, Tennessee in 1819.

Jackson's ascendency to the Presidency marked the beginning of the "spoils system," a derivation from a quotation attributed to NY Senator William Marcy-- "To the victor belongs the spoils."  Under Jackson, political patronage that rewarded relatives, friends and supporters with government jobs and positions flourished.  Without consideration for merit, these jobs were used as incentives to inspire continued loyalty and support.

Trump's positioning of his family (sons, Donald, Jr. and Eric, daughter, Ivanka and son-in-law, Jared), friends (Carl Icahn and Steve Bannon), financial contributors (Betsy DeVos, Linda McMahon and Steve Mnuchin), and political supporters (Jeff Sessions, Reince Prebus and others) reflect Trump's affinity for Jacksonian politics.  Although reforms against this type of cronyism began in 1883, Trump has used every legal consideration available to deflect the scrutiny from his more questionable appointments.

If one were to accurately characterize Jackson, the label "INHUMANE" is easily applied.  Other than the "It was the nature of the times!" defense, which is no defense at all, there is no excuse for Jackson's ownership of slaves and active participation in slave trade.  In addition, Jackson's most infamous crime against humanity was his orchestration of Indian Removal policies.  Commonly lumped under the title Trail of Tears, Jackson's policies of forcibly relocating native nations from traditional settlements included the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Seminole and Muscogee nations.

Contrary to the stereotypical "savage" image constructed to explain away and justify the brutal treatment of Native people, the Cherokee and affiliated nations were just as, if not more, civilized as the Anglo-European oppressors.  They had an organized system of government, written language (and a printed newspaper), schools and institutions comparable to their invaders.  In violation of ratified treaties, Andrew Jackson orchestrated the removal and forced march of nations from their lands, some as far east as the Carolinas, to the Oklahoma territory.  Their journey was notably brutal.  They suffered from starvation, exposure and disease. Thousands died.

Although Trump has not yet initiated acts of comparable brutality, his personal anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant and anti-Hispanic xenophobia have infected the national psyche.  Travel bans, TRUMPCARE - the elimination of healthcare for 24 million Americans, subliminal appeals to WE against THEM violence, the normalization of intolerance are all hallmarks of the new America by Trump.

Only through our active resistance can we assure that future generations will not read about a 21st Century Trail of Tears.

(Dr. E. Faye Williams is National President of the National Congress of Black Women, Inc.  202/678-6788.  www.nationalcongressbw.org)

FBI Confirms Trump Lied About Obama ‘Wire Tapping’ Charge by Hazel Trice Edney

March 21, 2017


FBI Confirms Trump Lied About Obama ‘Wire Tapping’ Charge

Republicans Say Trump Should Apologize

By Hazel Trice Edney

presobamaandtrumpinovaloffice-2
Then President Obama meets with President-elect Trump in preparation for transition.
At that time Trump called Obama a "very good man". He now accuses Obama of wiretapping,
an accusation that the FBI and the Justice Department say are not true. PHOTO: The White House

(TriceEdneyWire) - FBI Director James B. Comey has essentially confirmed what Democrats, Republicans and much of the general public already knew. That is that President Donald B. Trump lied on former President Barack Obama when he claimed, in a March 4 tweet, that Obama ordered a wiretap of Trump Tower during Trump’s campaign for the presidency.

"With respect to the president’s tweets, I have no information that supports those tweets…We have looked carefully inside the FBI,” Comey testified during a House Intelligence Committee Monday.

Comey said the U. S. Department of Justice, headed by Trump appointee Attorney General Jeff Sessions, asked him to state that the Justice Department also knows nothing of any such wiretaps.

In four consecutive tweets on March 4, Trump falsely accused former President Obama of the wiretapping:

  • The first tweet at 6:35 am: “Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!”
  • The second tweet at 6:49 am: “Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire tapping" a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!”
  • The third tweet at 6:52 am: “I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!”
  • The third tweet at 7:02 am: “How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”

The false statements are not unusual for Trump – especially when it comes to President Obama. For nearly his entire presidency, Trump falsely claimed he was not born in the U. S. Even after Obama presented his birth certificate proving he was born in Hawaii, Trump still persisted. In other untruths, Trump also claimed to have seen thousands of Muslims celebrating the terrorist attacks on Sept. l1, 2001; and he claimed that millions of people voted illegally in the 2017 presidential election.

But the latest accusation against Obama was particularly egregious because Trump – with no clear reason - falsely accused his predecessor of a high crime. It was also odd given that Obama and Trump appeared to have gotten along so well during the transition period with Trump calling Obama a “very good man”.

Obama immediately responded to the false accusation through a statement from his spokesman Kevin Lewis.

"A cardinal rule of the Obama Administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice," Lewis said in a statement. "As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen…Any suggestion otherwise is simply false."

Civil rights leaders have been oddly silent on the Trump accusation against Obama. It will likely be brought up as members of the Congressional Black Caucus meets with the president March 22. But Republicans, interviewed by CNN leading up to Comey’s statement, said Trump clearly owes Obama an apology.

“I would retract the words if I were in his shoes. I think he should retract those words. To me I would apologize. I think it would be appropriate to do so,” said Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.)

“It never hurts to say you’re sorry. I think that goes for this situation,” says Rep. Bill Hurd (R-Texas).

“Unless you can produce some pretty compelling proof, then I think President Obama is owed an apology in that regard,” said Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.).

But the Obama administration says it will not apologize.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters Monday that the President will not apologize. He said, “This is still ongoing.”

 

 

 

X