Daily Digest - July 23: It's Been a Good Year for Financial Reform

Jul 23, 2014Rachel Goldfarb

Click here to subscribe to Roosevelt First, our weekday morning email featuring the Daily Digest.

Ignore the Naysayers: Dodd-Frank Reforms Are Finally Paying Off (TNR)

Click here to subscribe to Roosevelt First, our weekday morning email featuring the Daily Digest.

Ignore the Naysayers: Dodd-Frank Reforms Are Finally Paying Off (TNR)

The past year has seen important successes, like higher capital requirements, writes Roosevelt Institute Fellow Mike Konczal, and the next steps for financial reform are getting clearer.

We’re Arresting Poor Mothers for Our Own Failures (The Nation)

Bryce Covert points to the policy failures of welfare reform, which requires parents to work or look for work to receive benefits but hasn't provided for child care, leading to recent high-profile arrests.

Obama to Sign Bill Improving Worker Training (Time)

In the first significant legislative reform to job training in a decade, Maya Rhodan says the Obama administration and Congress put training programs on a more forward-looking path.

SEC Is Set to Approve Money-Fund Rules (WSJ)

The new rules target institutional investors over individuals, says Andrew Ackerman, aiming to train investors to accept fluctuations and prevent panicked mass sell-offs.

TaskRabbit Redux (New Yorker)

Adrienne Raphel writes that TaskRabbit's recent relaunch makes it more clear that for all their marketing, online tools for hiring labor or transportation are about commerce, not community.

New on Next New Deal

Dr. Strangelove and the Halbig Decision

Roosevelt Institute Fellow Mike Konczal points out the fallacy in right-wing claims that there is a "doomsday machine" in the Affordable Care Act: doomsday machines only work if you tell people about them.

Full-Time Employment May Give Way to a Free Agent Economy

In his speculation on the future for the Next American Economy project, Carl Camden, CEO of Kelly Services, suggests that temporary employment firms like his will become the purveyors of social services.

Share This

Fighting Bad Science in the Senate

Jul 17, 2014Andrea Flynn

The Senate hearing for the Women's Health Protection Act shows just how important it is for women's health advocates to push for the facts.

The Senate hearing for the Women's Health Protection Act shows just how important it is for women's health advocates to push for the facts.

The propensity of anti-choice advocates to eulogize false science was on full display on Tuesday’s Senate hearing on the Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). That bill is a bold measure that would counter the relentless barrage of anti-choice legislation that has made abortion – a constitutionally protected medical procedure – all together inaccessible for many U.S. women.

The bill was introduced last year by Senators Richard Blumenthal and Tammy Baldwin and Representatives Judy Chu, Lois Frankel and Marcia Fudge. It prohibits states from applying regulations to reproductive health care centers and providers that do not also apply to other low-risk medical procedures. It would, essentially, remove politicians from decisions that – for every other medical issue – remain between individuals and their providers.

The WHPA is long overdue. For the past three years, conservative lawmakers have used the guise of protecting women’s health to pass more than 200 state laws that have closed clinics, eliminated abortion services, and left women across the country without access to critical reproductive health care. The WHPA would reverse many of those policies and prevent others from being passed.

Tuesday's hearing was representative of the broader debate over abortion rights. Those in favor of the bill argued that securing guaranteeing unfettered access to reproductive health care, including abortion, is critical to the health and lives of U.S. women and their families.

Those in opposition used familiar canards about abortion to argue the law would be calamitous for U.S. women. Representative Diane Black of Tennessee had the gall to make the abortion-leads-to-breast cancer claim, one that has been disproven many times over. Others repeatedly cited the horrific cases of Kermit Gosnell, insinuating that all abortion providers (abortionists, in their lingo) are predatory and that late term abortions are a common occurrence. In fact, if women had access to safe, comprehensive and intimidation-free care, Kermit Gosnell would have never been in business. Given the opposition’s testimony, you’d never know that late term abortion is actually a rarity. According to the Centers for Disease Control, more than 90 percent of all abortions occur before 13 weeks gestation, with just over 1 percent taking place past 21 weeks.

At one point Representative Black argued that abortion is actually not health care. The one in three U.S. women who have undergone the procedure would surely argue otherwise.

Perhaps the most ironic testimony against the WHPA – and in favor of abortion restrictions – came from Senator Ted Cruz, who hails from Texas, a state with so many abortion restrictions that women are now risking their health and lives by self-inducing abortions or crossing the border to get care in Mexico. Senator Cruz attempted to validate U.S. abortion restrictions by referencing a handful of European countries with gestational restrictions on abortions. This was a popular argument during the hearing for Texas’ HB2 – the bill responsible for shuttering the majority of clinics in that state.

Cruz wins the prize for cherry picking facts to best support his argument. When citing our European counterparts, he conveniently ignored that such abortion restrictions are entrenched in progressive public health systems that enable all individuals to access quality, affordable (often free) health care, including comprehensive reproductive healthcare. Senator Cruz and his colleagues have adamantly opposed similar policies in the U.S., particularly the Affordable Care Act’s provisions for contraceptive coverage and Medicaid expansion. On the one hand conservatives lean on European policies to argue for stricter abortion restrictions at home, and on the other they claim those policies are antithetical to the moral fabric of the United States.

Would Cruz support France’s policies that enable women to be fully reimbursed for the cost of their abortion and that guarantees girls ages 15 to 18 free birth control? Or Belgium’s policy that enables young people to be reimbursed for the cost of emergency contraception? Or the broad exceptions both countries make for cases of rape, incest, and fetal impairment, to preserve woman’s physical or mental health, and for social or economic reasons? He absolutely would not.

Given the House of Representatives seems to be more motivated by suing the President than by voting on – let alone passing – laws that will actually improve the health and lives of their constituents, it’s highly unlikely the WHPA will become law. But Tuesday's debate – and the bill itself – is significant and shows a willingness among pro-choice advocates to go on the offense after too many years of playing defense.

Bills such as the WHPA – even if they face a slim chance of being passed by a gridlocked Congress – provide an opportunity to call out conservatives' use of bad science in their attempts to convince women that lawmakers know best when it comes to their personal medical decisions. And they allow us to remind lawmakers and citizens that despite all of the rhetoric to the contrary, abortion is a common, safe and constitutionally protected medical procedure, and that regulating it into extinction will only force women into back-alley practices like those run by Gosnell, costing them their health and their lives.

Those in support of the WHPA showed anti-choice lawmakers that the days of make a sport of trampling women’s health and rights are numbered.

Andrea Flynn is a Fellow at the Roosevelt Institute. Follow her on Twitter @dreaflynn.

Share This

Daily Digest - July 14: Local Actions Hold the Line for Labor

Jul 14, 2014Rachel Goldfarb

Click here to subscribe to Roosevelt First, our weekday morning email featuring the Daily Digest.

Why Volkswagen Agreed to UAW Local at Its U.S. Plant (USA Today)

G. Chambers Williams III explains the decision to create a local union at the Chattanooga VW plant despite the United Auto Workers' narrow loss in a February worker vote.

Click here to subscribe to Roosevelt First, our weekday morning email featuring the Daily Digest.

Why Volkswagen Agreed to UAW Local at Its U.S. Plant (USA Today)

G. Chambers Williams III explains the decision to create a local union at the Chattanooga VW plant despite the United Auto Workers' narrow loss in a February worker vote.

U.S. Deficit Continues to Shrink (MSNBC)

The budget deficit has reached its lowest point since 2008, reports Suzy Khimm, thanks to a recovery that has increased tax revenues and reduced demand on safety net programs.

Tracy Morgan Sues Walmart Over Deadly Crash in New Jersey (NYT)

Emma G. Fitzsimmons reports that Morgan and others injured in an accident involving an overtired Walmart truck driver are blaming the accident on the company's poor labor practices.

Here's Definitive Proof That Republicans Don't Care About the Long-Term Unemployed (TNR)

Danny Vinik asks why budget gimmicks were unacceptable for funding the Senate Democrats' extension of unemployment insurance but are fine when the House GOP uses them.

New Study: Lobbying Doesn't Help Company Profits—But It's Great For Executive Pay (MoJo)

Corporate lobbying expenditures, which measure in billions of dollars, do far more to enhance a CEO's earnings than to benefit companies as a whole, reports Alex Park.

State and Local Pensions: A Progress Report (Market Watch)

Alicia H. Munnell looks at recent shifts in local and state pensions, including both the good (increased contributions) and the worrisome (plans still hold too much of their portfolios in equities).

New on Next New Deal

Port Drivers Take on Low Wages in an Industry Built on a Lie

All Americans should support the Los Angeles port truck drivers' strike, writes Roosevelt Institute Senior Fellow Richard Kirsch, because all consumers depend on their hard work.

Share This

The Supreme Court's One-Two Punch Against Women's Health: McCullen and Hobby Lobby

Jul 2, 2014Andrea Flynn

The Court's rulings place more barriers, both physical and financial, between U.S. women and basic health care.

The Court's rulings place more barriers, both physical and financial, between U.S. women and basic health care.

In the last week the Supreme Court announced two decisions that could dramatically change the landscape of women’s health access in the United States. It will be some time before we know the full impact of McCullen v. Coakley and Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, but in the short term two things are for sure. The decisions will make it more difficult and less safe for many women to get the care they need, and they will undoubtedly embolden a conservative movement that hardly needs fortification.

The last three years brought record setbacks to women’s health and rights. More abortion restrictions were enacted between 2011-2013 (205) than in the entire previous decade (189). Today nearly 90 percent of U.S. counties do not have an abortion provider and more than 56 percent of U.S. women live in a state hostile to abortion. In many states the procedure has essentially been regulated out of existence. But it’s not just abortion rights that are under attack. The days of conservatives being “anti-abortion” but pro-family planning are long behind us. Today’s conservatives view birth control as the gateway drug to abortion, and regulate it with the same zeal they once saved for abortion.

Restrictions to Title X funding are closing publicly funded clinics around the country. Those clinics serve to provide reproductive health services to low-income and young women, and the majority do not even provide abortions. There is reason to fear that other conservative states are following the lead of Texas, where thousands of women are dealing with the consequences of a complete lack of access to basic health care thanks to lawmakers who have closed a record number of clinics. 

Making matters worse, today 24 states are not participating in the Medicaid expansion originally mandated by the Affordable Care Act (ACA), leaving two-thirds of poor blacks and single mothers and more than half of low-wage workers uninsured.

It’s against this backdrop that we have McCullen and Hobby Lobby, two decisions that are effectively a one-two punch to U.S. women. They allow employers to erect financial barriers to contraceptive choice and embolden protesters to serve as physical and emotional barriers to women’s basic health care. 

In McCullen, the Court struck down as a violation of free speech a Massachusetts law that provided a 35-foot “buffer zone” around clinics that provide abortion. The law was created to protect patients entering clinics, and many states have similar regulations in place. It’s unclear what will happen to those other buffer zones. It’s also more than slightly ironic that the Supreme Court, the very body responsible for upholding freedom of speech, has a 100-foot buffer zone that is still intact.

Protesters will feel vindicated in their attempt to persuade, intimidate, threaten, and terrorize women from accessing care to which they are constitutionally guaranteed. Last weekend the Boston clinic at the heart of the McCullen case saw a threefold increase in protesters. That’s just in Massachusetts. Clinics in more conservative states regularly see hundreds of protesters on a given day.

Hobby Lobby was just one of more than 50 companies (supported by organizations like the Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty) that took issue with the ACA’s “contraceptive mandate,” the requirement that all employer-based health plans fully cover, without cost sharing, all FDA-approved methods of contraception. These companies filed claims against the mandate, arguing that intra-uterine devices (IUDs) and emergency contraception (EC) constitute abortion and therefore being required to provide coverage for those methods was a violation of their religious liberty. Never mind that by all accepted medical standards those methods prevent, not terminate, pregnancy. The Court ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby, allowing “closely held” companies – generally understood to be those having more than 50 percent of the value of their stock owned by five or fewer individuals – to refuse coverage of certain contraceptive methods.

So, what happens now? Well, most women who work for Hobby Lobby and other such companies will no longer have access to the contraceptive method of their choice. They will have to decide if they want to pay for those methods out of pocket or go to a clinic where they can receive subsidized care, if they are lucky enough to have access to one. This will place additional and unnecessary pressure on an already embattled public health infrastructure.

The majority claimed the Hobby Lobby ruling was narrow and would not have the sweeping consequences suggested in Justice Ginsburg’s scathing and on-point dissent. I’m not convinced. According to Harvard Business Review, 90 percent of U.S. companies are considered closely held, and those companies employ more than 51 percent of U.S. workers. There are already at least 80 other cases waiting to follow in Hobby Lobby’s footsteps. Given conservatives’ strategic organizing and employers’ willingness to carry the anti-reproductive rights, anti-Obama, anti-ACA banner, others will surely join the cause.

For the time being, the ACA – and the mandate – remain intact, even if somewhat fractured. We should continue to fight for the full implementation of the ACA, a historic – and by all measures successful – piece of legislation that is advancing the vision FDR articulated more than 70 years ago when he called for a Second Bill of Rights. That vision included medical care to allow all Americans to achieve and enjoy good health.

In falsely pitting freedom of speech and religion against women’s rights – as if women don’t also have rights to those same freedoms – the Supreme Court has given momentum to an already fast-moving train. Conservatives will only have more resolve to continue tearing down the building blocks of women’s health and rights. It’s going to take a lot to stop them. A lot of outrage, a lot of action, and a lot of engaged voters committed to standing up for women’s rights. Here’s hoping we can make that happen.

Andrea Flynn is a Fellow at the Roosevelt Institute. Follow her on Twitter @dreaflynn.

Image via Thinkstock

Share This

Summer Vacation is Feeding the Achievement Gap

Jun 27, 2014Sarah Pfeifer VandekerckhoveCandace Richardson

Learning loss during summer vacation is far worse for students of lower socioeconomic status, making low-cost and free educational summer programming essential.

Learning loss during summer vacation is far worse for students of lower socioeconomic status, making low-cost and free educational summer programming essential.

New York City public schools begin summer break today. For many students, summer is a time to rest, travel and play, and a recent study even demonstrates the critical role of play in a student’s future academic and financial success. But extensive research shows that these few months away from the structured activities of school are particularly detrimental to the academic achievement of students of low SES (socioeconomic status) families. Without access and exposure to educational enrichment opportunities during the summer months, these students face substantial setbacks in their academic development.

Of course, all students experience some learning loss during the summer months. Research on the “summer slide” phenomenon shows that nearly all students perform worse on standardized tests taken at the end of summer vacation than the same test taken at the end of the previous school year and lose two months of math skills over the summer months.

For low SES students, however, summer slide does even greater damage to their academic achievement year over year, increasing the achievement gap as well as the likelihood that such students will drop out of high school or not attend college. Summer slide occurring during elementary school alone contributes to at least half of the SES achievement gap by the time students reach 9th grade.  In fact, low SES high school students are eight times less likely to attend a four-year college, compared with their high SES peers.

While only about 20% of students from low-income families participate in summer learning programs, high-income families can afford to expose their children to a variety of enrichment activities, including summer camp. In February, TimeOut published a list of upcoming academic summer camps in New York City that offer exciting sessions on robots, chemistry, reading, and math along with many educational field trips to museums and zoos, with the average cost of these camps totaling $2,176 per month.  For the seventy-eight percent of New York City’s 1.1 million students who qualify for free or reduced-price lunch ($43,568 annually for a family of four) that’s nearly 60 percent of their family’s monthly income, meaning these academic summer camps are out of the question for the families whose kids need them the most.

Cost is only one of many barriers to summer program participation for low SES families. Accessibility plays a big role. For instance, the New York City Department of Education’s Summer Quest, a free, five-week enrichment program to combat summer slide, is only available at 22 of the city’s 1700 public schools. And while NYC Mayor Bill De Blasio and NYC Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña have strongly encouraged participation in summer enrichment programs, only about 55,000 low SES students will receive free programming this summer.

Despite the efforts to engage students in summer enrichment programs, New York City still has a long way to go.

About one-third of the achievement gap can be attributed to a child’s SES before they even enter kindergarten. Combatting the 31.4% child poverty rate in New York City through expansion of Home Visiting programs can go along way in getting students off on the right foot. This is just one of many policy solutions that arose at the Roosevelt Institute’s recent conference, Inequality Begins at Birth.

Of the 55,000 New York City students receiving free summer programming, De Blasio anticipates that 34,000 of those will be middle-schoolers. Increasing the engagement of elementary school children will mitigate substantial growth in the achievement gap, as early academic setbacks compound over time. The DOE can start by expanding NYC Summer Quest and other programs to target younger students, and over time the focus should be on engaging even more of the 850,000+ low SES students in New York City public schools.

Sarah Pfeifer Vandekerckhove is the Roosevelt Institute's Director of Operations.

Candace Richardson is a Policy Intern for the Four Freedoms Center.

Chart from the Campaign for Grade-Level Reading.

Share This

Daily Digest - June 24: What We Talk About When We Talk About Poverty

Jun 24, 2014Rachel Goldfarb

Click here to subscribe to Roosevelt First, our weekday morning email featuring the Daily Digest.

21st Century Democrats: Konczal on GOP Misunderstanding Charity (America's Democrats.org)

Click here to subscribe to Roosevelt First, our weekday morning email featuring the Daily Digest.

21st Century Democrats: Konczal on GOP Misunderstanding Charity (America's Democrats.org)

Roosevelt Institute Fellow Mike Konczal discusses his article on "The Voluntarism Fantasy," the false idea that private charity could provide for the needs of the poorest Americans.

Get Sick, Get Fired: America's Low-Wage Workers Push Back (TAP)

Sharon Lerner says the fight over paid sick leave is characteristic of larger fights over the nature of democracy, and whether the desires of the common people are being accounted for.

Washington is Making Inequality Worse (MSNBC)

A new study suggests that growing political polarization and rising income inequality are linked. Timothy Noah emphasizes that polarization stems from the GOP moving to the right.

Massachusetts Nannies and Housekeepers Now Protected From Long Days, Abuse, Sexual Harassment (The Nation)

Michelle Chen speaks to some of the workers who will benefit from Massachusetts's new Domestic Workers Bill of Rights, which awaits the governor's signature.

Corporate Close-Up: Should CEO Compensation Determine Corporate Income Tax Rates? (Bloomberg BNA)

Melissa Fernley reports on a new model for corporate income taxes being considered in California, which would scale tax rates based on CEO-to-median worker compensation ratios.

States Undo Food Stamp Felon Bans (HuffPo)

California and Missouri are giving more ex-offenders access to food stamps, reports Arthur Delaney. He says this is an opportunity to reduce recidivism by helping people feed their families.

Mankiw, Piketty, and Wealth Taxes (On The Economy)

Jared Bernstein argues that economist Greg Mankiw fails to prove that allowing the wealthy to keep more of their wealth will be better for everyone else.

Share This

Teachers and Tutors Can't Fix All of Low-Income Students' Problems

Jun 13, 2014Casey McQuillan

Targeted public policy could help with many of the problems students face that their teachers can't solve alone.

My parents, both teachers, often blurred the line between being parents and being educators. Luckily, I found academics to be second nature. As a result, my teachers in the local public school system served as valuable role models and fostered my personal growth not just as a student, but as a whole person. I always felt supported by my community and equipped with the necessary tools for my success.

Targeted public policy could help with many of the problems students face that their teachers can't solve alone.

My parents, both teachers, often blurred the line between being parents and being educators. Luckily, I found academics to be second nature. As a result, my teachers in the local public school system served as valuable role models and fostered my personal growth not just as a student, but as a whole person. I always felt supported by my community and equipped with the necessary tools for my success.

I faced a stark contrast to my own experience when I worked with Achieve, a program that offers tuition-free educational enrichment to impoverished students in Boston. I taught critical math skills and literacy comprehension for eight weeks during the summer, and volunteered on Saturdays during the school year. Over the three years I spent with Achieve, I developed intimate and meaningful relationships with my students; but I felt that my impact, even the impact of the entire program, was severely limited.

These students did not have the same tools I did to succeed in the classroom. As a teacher, it was excruciatingly painful to hear a student who is already falling behind explain he could not do his homework because his mom could not pay the bills and the electric company shut off the power. It kills me to tell a student to take notes in class only to find out later that her parents can't afford the prescription glasses she needs to see the board and take those notes. I was expecting these kids to read when some of them could not even see.

Our government claims each citizen maintains the right to an education, but fails to substantiate this right with everything needed for an education. The social safety net did not subsidize electricity for low-income families, and Medicaid doesn't cover prescription eyewear. How could these students possibly reach their full potential under such circumstances? I could see the changes needed to better these students’ lives, but I could not enact them. Our political system remains apathetic or even complicit to the systemic inequality I faced everyday in the classroom. I cared about these students and their success, and it deeply disturbed me to see them seemingly destined for failure because of conditions out of their control.

I only grew more frustrated when I continued to encounter these obstacles with my students. I tried to provide these students with an education that would empower them to be agents of change in their community; instead, when I faced these situations, I felt more helpless than helpful. My students looked to me for help, but I was utterly powerless. I came to the conclusion that to affect positive change would require more than volunteering with these students. Children in these situations needed more from me than an education. Instead of growing more frustrated within the system as I continued to confront these impediments to my students’ success, I decided the entire system needed change. That brought me to the Roosevelt Institute | Campus Network, and to the Summer Academy Fellowship.

This summer, I will be researching and writing a policy proposal regarding economic equality and equitable development in New York City. I am also working with Operation Hope to provide financial guidance and education to low-income communities. My students remain my driving motivation: I hope this work improves their lives, and the lives of other students in similar situations. To meet their needs and help them achieve their best, our system needs to change.

Casey McQuillan, one of four Andrew Goodman Foundation Fellows in the 2014 NYC Summer Academy, is a rising sophomore and active Roosevelt Institute | Campus Network member at Amherst College studying Math, Economics, and Law.

Share This

Daily Digest - June 9: The Middle Class Needs a Better Tax Code

Jun 8, 2014Rachel Goldfarb

Click here to subscribe to Roosevelt First, our Monday through Friday morning email featuring the Daily Digest.

How Tax Reform Can Save the Middle Class (Moyers & Company)

Click here to subscribe to Roosevelt First, our Monday through Friday morning email featuring the Daily Digest.

How Tax Reform Can Save the Middle Class (Moyers & Company)

Roosevelt Institute Chief Economist Joseph Stiglitz and Bill Moyers continue their discussion of Stiglitz's new white paper on how tax reform can reduce inequality and promote prosperity.

For Poverty Solutions, Looking Beyond Congress (The Hill)

As Rep. Paul Ryan prepares for another hearing on the War on Poverty, Roosevelt Institute Fellow Andrea Flynn and Nell Abernathy look at ways to strengthen the safety net to fight child poverty.

Lawsuit Claims Thin Red Line in Discriminatory Lending Practices (MSNBC)

Roosevelt Institute Fellow Dorian Warren speaks to the mayor of Providence, RI, who says that Satander Bank is discriminating against people of color seeking mortgages in his city.

Everything You Need to Know About Walmart, in Nine Charts (Vox)

Danielle Kurtzleben references William Lazonick's Roosevelt Institute white paper on CEO pay to explain how Walmart could give its workers raises without cutting into profits.

Taxi Driver Solidarity (NYT)

Taxi drivers across the country are seeking to form a national union, reports Steven Greenhouse. Beyond shared grievances about pay and costs, many are concerned about ride-share apps.

The Fault in our Starry-Eyed 'Recovery': 2014 Looks Like We're Going Bust Again (The Guardian)

Heidi Moore says the recovery of the last five years was only for corporations and Wall Street, and hasn't helped average Americans, who still face rising costs and high unemployment.

Wall Street Fights for Our Right to Pay 5% Fund Fees (Bloomberg News)

Wall Street is pushing back against a strong fiduciary rule that would require financial advisors to put clients' interests first, writes Ben Steverman, because it would cut into profits.

Share This

Daily Digest - May 28: Progressive Taxation: Another Capital Idea

May 28, 2014Rachel Goldfarb

Click here to receive the Daily Digest via email.

The Stiglitz Code: How Taxing Capital Can Counter Inequality (Next New Deal)

In a major white paper published today, Roosevelt Institute Chief Economist Joseph Stiglitz connects tax reform to the fight against income inequality. President and CEO Felicia Wong comments.

Click here to receive the Daily Digest via email.

The Stiglitz Code: How Taxing Capital Can Counter Inequality (Next New Deal)

In a major white paper published today, Roosevelt Institute Chief Economist Joseph Stiglitz connects tax reform to the fight against income inequality. President and CEO Felicia Wong comments.

  • Roosevelt Take: Read the white paper, "Reforming Taxation to Promote Growth and Equity," here.

Getting Real about Closing the Gender Pay Gap (The Baffler)

Kathleen Geier looks at three policy changes to counter the gender pay gap: make it easier to join a union, pass pay equity laws, and encourage workplace flexibility.

Conservative 'Compassion' for the Underprivileged Blows Another Fuse (LA Times)

Conservative reformers' suggestions for economic reforms show contempt for the underprivileged, writes Michael Hiltzik, and for the public programs that assist them.

Median CEO Pay Tops $10 Million For The First Time (NPR)

The increase in CEO pay was primarily due to performance bonuses and stock options, compensation that allow CEOs to profit from the rising stock market, reports Alan Greenblatt.

  • Roosevelt Take: Roosevelt Institute Fellow and Director of Research Susan Holmberg and Campus Network alumna Lydia Austin call for closing the performance pay loophole.

Chamber Of Commerce Claims Calculating How Much More CEOs Make Than Their Workers Is ‘Egregious’ (ThinkProgress)

Bryce Covert reports on the Chamber's insistence that CEO-to-worker pay ratios won't demonstrate if CEOs are overpaid. Right, they're more likely to show if workers are underpaid.

Verizon Wireless Workers Make History in Brooklyn (In These Times)

Mike Elk says the store workers' vote to join the same union as their Verizon landline co-workers breaks into new ground.

New on Next New Deal

The FT's Piketty Criticism is Nothing Like the Reinhart-Rogoff Affair

Roosevelt Institute Fellow Mike Konczal contrasts Chris Giles' critique of Thomas Piketty's data and the methodology errors in Carmen Reinhart and Ken Rogoff's work.

Share This

Daily Digest - May 21: What Do Consumers Get Out of Cable Mega-Mergers?

May 21, 2014Rachel Goldfarb

Click here to receive the Daily Digest via email.

AT&T and DirecTV Team Up Against Customers (Bloomberg View)

Roosevelt Institute Fellow Susan Crawford says that instead of overseeing mergers that will hurt consumers, regulators should be pushing cable companies to invest in infrastructure.

Click here to receive the Daily Digest via email.

AT&T and DirecTV Team Up Against Customers (Bloomberg View)

Roosevelt Institute Fellow Susan Crawford says that instead of overseeing mergers that will hurt consumers, regulators should be pushing cable companies to invest in infrastructure.

To Lift the Poor, You Can’t Avoid Taxing the Rich (NYT)

The money for programs needed to help low-income Americans has to come from somewhere, writes Jared Bernstein, and simply promoting overall growth isn't a viable alternative.

A Super PAC for the Poor: How to Actually Get Something Done About Economic Suffering (Salon)

Blake Zeff argues that the best way to fight poverty is to take a page from the right's handbook and form a super PAC powerful enough to threaten lawmakers who don't support the cause.

Job Outlook for 2014 College Grads Puzzling (USA Today)

This is the sixth graduating class in a row to enter a profoundly weak labor market, writes Hadley Malcolm, and though unemployment is down, young people are leaving the work force.

No, Taking Away Unemployment Benefits Doesn’t Make People Get Jobs (ThinkProgress)

Bryce Covert reports on new data from Illinois, where two months after Congress allowed extended unemployment to lapse, 82 percent of those who lost benefits were still out of work.

As Court Fees Rise, The Poor Are Paying The Price (NPR)

Joseph Shapiro reveals the impact poverty has on Americans' experiences with the legal system, as fees increase for everything from public defenders to electronic monitoring devices.

Credit Suisse's Plea is Kabuki Theatre. Big US Banks are Still Getting Off Easy (The Guardian)

The Swiss bank's guilty plea won't harm its business, writes Heidi Moore, nor is it a sign that the Justice Department will start pursuing criminal charges against U.S. banks.

Share This

Pages