WASHINGTON, - Parents should talk to their kids about issues surrounding the President's speech to the nation's school children Tuesday, such as the role of the federal government in education, the state of our nation's education crisis, and how they can elect officials who will make critical changes, according to Making Sense of President Obama's School Speech: 10 Things Parents Should Share with their Kids, released today by the Center for Education Reform.
"Parents are not only the first line of defense when it comes to their family's education, they should be the first line of offense as well," says Jeanne Allen, president of the Canter for Education Reform. "Parents can be assertive and effective change agents in improving schools and using this occasion to help their young understand how to right education's wrongs is a big first step to reforming our schools."
The Center for Education Reform has for 16 years helped parents become better advocates for their children, and given policymakers the tools they need to succeed. Thus CER brings its broad and unique expertise to the controversial discussions surrounding the president's speech by offering parents a variety of topics to cover to help educate their children about why President Obama is speaking to them, what his role is, and what other issues this nation faces in bringing excellence to all schools.
"Above all parents should remind their children something that schools often neglect -- that they live in the land of opportunity, the best nation on earth, and that along with making sure they receive a great education, they must always seek to learn from history and to advance the principles upon which this country was founded," added Allen.
10 Points of Concern
1) What was the purpose of President Obama's speech?
President Obama, like all presidents who care about the progress of the US, is concerned that the quality of our schools today is just not good enough. In some places, it's very bad, and even in our community (if you live where there are generally good schools) there are students who have needs that are not being met. A president should reinforce how important education is.
2) What does the president have to do with our schools?
Presidents should care about education, but it's the state's responsibility, not the federal government's, to create and manage school policies that help us succeed. Our governor, our state legislators and school boards are elected to do the job we want them to do. So, we must make sure we elect people at the state level who know how to make difficult decisions about programs that work, which to fund and which to remove.
3) So the federal government doesn't have much to do with school policy?
Actually, today the federal government does have more control than it used to over what and how schools operate, and that's because states like ours for a while allowed too many bad schools to remain open. Our nation's Founding Fathers intended for education to be a state issue, and the Constitution makes states responsible for all things not otherwise specified in the Constitution (Article 10). We have to make sure our state officials do the right thing so that the federal government doesn't need to get involved in our local affairs again.
4) How are schools doing in America?
Just like the economy is in need of reform, so are our schools. While our school may or may not be the best in our community, more than half of all students nationwide are not reading or doing math at grade level. Millions of students are in schools the government considers failing, and US schools rank 21st out of 29 industrialized nations internationally.
5) Is there something the president wants us to do?
Well, his administration has supported the idea of having more charter schools: public schools that are like our public schools used to be, with teachers, principals and parents in control, and accountable for results. They are also open by choice, so parents can choose a different school for their children than the one assigned by the district.
Some are also very glad that the president talks about performance-based pay for teachers, though it will take tough changes in law at the state and district level to get rid of union contracts that pay all teachers the same regardless of how well they do.
The president does not support more comprehensive school choices, like programs in DC, Florida and Pennsylvania, for example, that allow scholarships for kids, particularly poor children, to choose private schools.
6) Why are some people so mad about his giving the speech?
Some people think this is another attempt by the president to take over an issue that's historically been a local one. Clear authority for school improvement needs to be made at the state level. The federal government can provide support or incentives, but we'd prefer that decisions about how we operate schools and what kinds of reforms we adopt be made closest to where we live--by state legislators that we elect from our communities. Local decisions are not always the best, but we can monitor them more easily and they reflect the unique differences of each state. As long as we all recognize that, no one should be threatened by the president's speech.
7) What's being done to fix bad schools, and to help children most in need?
Some states and communities are moving to close failing schools. Giving parents options to "buy" their way out of failing schools (through vouchers, scholarships, charter schools) is also a strategy that most Americans think would be the quickest and most quality approach to getting all kids the education they deserve.
8) What are some other things we can do to help the schools, the teachers, etc?
Making sure every teacher that we have is evaluated fairly and rewarded for good performance is important. Making sure schoolbooks and programs reflect the best of the currently available research on how kids learn, and promoting approaches that work. Making sure there are options within as well as outside district schools. Making sure money flows to schools, not to districts, to spend money wisely. Having high standards and tests that help assess your performance day to day... these are all important to do - simultaneously.
9) What do we support?
(This is an opportunity to talk about some of these proposals, to learn more and to find out if any are going on in your community, city or state).
10) How can we help improve education?
Working hard is important, but to make that hard work meaningful, students need access to schools with great books, great teachers, high standards and strong programs that instill a strong sense of learning among all kids. Learning a lot comes from more than just working hard - it requires us to have such schools around us. That means that we probably need to change at least one thing - if not more - about the way our whole school system operates. We may have to change the way contracts with teachers or principals are written, how we decide our curriculum, what options we provide to parents, whether we have uniforms or not, how we spend money. In other words, it takes a lot more than going to a PTA meeting. It takes learning about education reform, educating our friends and family about it, and electing people in our states who are willing to pass such reforms into law and give us the power to reform on our own, too. Like by starting charter schools, getting scholarships for our kids to go to other schools when the ones available to us don't work, and more.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Monday, September 7, 2009
Usefull Information:New Powerful Recruitment Solution for Oil & Gas Industry
ABERDEEN, Scotland, - A new recruitment site designed specifically for the oil and gas industries is set to revolutionise traditional employment resources and searching. Aberdeenshire-based business http://www.oilandgaspeople.com aims to fundamentally change the oil and gas recruitment process by providing an accurate snap-shot of current vacancies, the workforce and its availability.
Oilandgaspeople.com provides a central point where recruiters can advertise the latest job vacancies and candidates upload their CVs. The site, which goes live on 7th September 2009, will fast-track and facilitate the process of matching the right person to the right job benefiting the recruiter, the candidate, and the employer.
Having worked in the industry for over six years, oilandgaspeople.com developer, Kevin Forbes, used his experience of the sector and his frustrations with existing recruitment methods to devise and deliver a new alternative that aims to save time and money and increase candidate matching success.
He says: "I found the system of using numerous job sites to search for vacancies fragmented and frustrating. I would regularly spend hours at a time searching for positions which became even more difficult when I was working offshore or abroad with limited internet access.
"I decided to take the issue into my own hands with a website to present my CV and background to potential employers and agencies directly. As I saw immediate impact I expanded on the idea and http://www.oilandgaspeople.com is the end result.
"The launch of http://www.oilandgaspeople.com is good news for the industry during the economic downturn - it is a cost-effective solution for recruiters at a time when reducing costs is of the utmost importance and it will also help those looking for work as they benefit from an efficient, free recruitment service."
Contact -
Kevin Forbes: Email: info@oilandgaspeople.com, Mobile: +44(0)7590984538
Oilandgaspeople.com provides a central point where recruiters can advertise the latest job vacancies and candidates upload their CVs. The site, which goes live on 7th September 2009, will fast-track and facilitate the process of matching the right person to the right job benefiting the recruiter, the candidate, and the employer.
Having worked in the industry for over six years, oilandgaspeople.com developer, Kevin Forbes, used his experience of the sector and his frustrations with existing recruitment methods to devise and deliver a new alternative that aims to save time and money and increase candidate matching success.
He says: "I found the system of using numerous job sites to search for vacancies fragmented and frustrating. I would regularly spend hours at a time searching for positions which became even more difficult when I was working offshore or abroad with limited internet access.
"I decided to take the issue into my own hands with a website to present my CV and background to potential employers and agencies directly. As I saw immediate impact I expanded on the idea and http://www.oilandgaspeople.com is the end result.
"The launch of http://www.oilandgaspeople.com is good news for the industry during the economic downturn - it is a cost-effective solution for recruiters at a time when reducing costs is of the utmost importance and it will also help those looking for work as they benefit from an efficient, free recruitment service."
Contact -
Kevin Forbes: Email: info@oilandgaspeople.com, Mobile: +44(0)7590984538
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Betsy McCaughey Addresses New York Times: Charges of Falsehoods But No Evidence
NEW YORK - Reporter Jim Rutenberg of the New York Times published a profile of me. (September 5, 2009) Mr. Rutenberg accused me of making false statements, but gave no evidence. Below you will see the evidence proving my statements are true. Mr. Rutenberg is the one writing falsehoods. When Mr. Rutenberg requested a personal interview, I declined because personality profiles are not what's needed. The focus should be on the health bills, not on personalities.
After a careful reading of H.R. 3200 and the Kennedy bill, I have explained the dangers of these bills in numerous articles. For the most part, these substantive issues are not discussed in Mr. Rutenberg's profile. He did make two claims that need to be addressed: He claimed, without providing evidence, that I "incorrectly" depicted the end of life consultation program in H.R. 3200 and he claimed that I falsely described Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel's views in a 1996 Hastings Center publication. Because these claims are important to the medical care of the American people and to my own credibility, they must be addressed.
Mr. Rutenberg sent me a list of written questions before writing his profile, and I responded in writing. Here are the e-mailed answers I sent him verbatim. He did not include this evidence in his profile or rebut it.
ON END OF LIFE COUNSELING:
Partisans for the legislation claim it simply provides Medicare coverage for end of life counseling sessions. That would have taken one or two lines in the bill, not six pages.
The bill lists what "shall" must be covered in the consultations, a decision that should be left to the patient and doctor, not prescribed by government. (425-430) The bill's partisans say the consultation sessions are voluntary. But if there is a penalty for noncompliance, then it is not voluntary, regardless of whether the word mandatory used. The penalty is on page 432. Doctors' quality ratings will be determined in part by the percentage of the doctor's patients who create a living will and the percentage who adhere to it. (And quality ratings affect a doctor's Medicare reimbursement)
The "adhere to" part is especially dangerous. Some people say "they'd rather die than be on a ventilator, but when the time comes, they choose to live. Doctors will incur penalties when families do not adhere to end of life written plans. - a horrible conflict of interest. As a patient advocate, I see these difficult situations and know that government should not be involved. Paying for consultations, that's fine. But the bill goes much farther.
ON MY DESCRIPTION OF EMANUEL'S 1996 ARTICLE:
Here is the Emanuel quote verbatim as printed in the Wall Street Journal, August 26, 2009): "Substantively it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity -- those that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations -- are to be socially guaranteed as basic. Covering services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic, and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia."
This quote from Emanuel's article in the Hastings Center Review was not taken out of context. It was quoted at length to ensure fairness and accuracy. Let's make the passage even longer: The sentence immediately before the quoted passage makes his intention clear: "The civic republican or deliberative democratic conception of the good provides both procedural and substantive insights for developing a just allocation of health resources."
Then the "substantive insight" is quoted in my article, (Wall Street Journal, August 26, 2009) along with the "obvious example" of "not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia." And then he reemphasizes the positive contribution "communitarianism" offers: "the overlap between liberalism and communitarianism points to a way of introducing the good back into medical ethics and devising a principled way of distinguishing basic from discretionary health services."
Going beyond this article, Emanuel's subsequent writings are consistent with expecting doctors to compromise the needs of an individual patient in order to advance the common good. His discussion of the Hippocratic Oath, quoted at length in my piece, puts forward the same viewpoint. He advocates retraining physicians to provide "socially sustainable care." My description of his work is accurate, fair, and nuanced. Please check with the people you've quoted in his defense to see if they've read his articles. Have you read them?
You should be aware that Dr. Emanuel is part of a school of thought that imposes on doctors the duty to serve society and advance "population health" rather than focusing on the needs of their own patient. I have long opposed this view, and it would be rash and unfair to ascribe my views to partisanship.
If only more reporting on the health care issues focused on the content of the bills, rather than superficial attacks. I will be addressing both the issues raised here: the dangerous ideas of Dr. Emanuel and the purpose of the end of life program provisions in HR 3200 -- at a rally on the lawn of the U.S. Capitol on September 12th. See you there!!
Betsy McCaughey, Ph.D., is founder and Chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and former Lt. Governor of New York State.
CONTACT: Betsy McCaughey of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths,
+1-917-748-0227
After a careful reading of H.R. 3200 and the Kennedy bill, I have explained the dangers of these bills in numerous articles. For the most part, these substantive issues are not discussed in Mr. Rutenberg's profile. He did make two claims that need to be addressed: He claimed, without providing evidence, that I "incorrectly" depicted the end of life consultation program in H.R. 3200 and he claimed that I falsely described Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel's views in a 1996 Hastings Center publication. Because these claims are important to the medical care of the American people and to my own credibility, they must be addressed.
Mr. Rutenberg sent me a list of written questions before writing his profile, and I responded in writing. Here are the e-mailed answers I sent him verbatim. He did not include this evidence in his profile or rebut it.
ON END OF LIFE COUNSELING:
Partisans for the legislation claim it simply provides Medicare coverage for end of life counseling sessions. That would have taken one or two lines in the bill, not six pages.
The bill lists what "shall" must be covered in the consultations, a decision that should be left to the patient and doctor, not prescribed by government. (425-430) The bill's partisans say the consultation sessions are voluntary. But if there is a penalty for noncompliance, then it is not voluntary, regardless of whether the word mandatory used. The penalty is on page 432. Doctors' quality ratings will be determined in part by the percentage of the doctor's patients who create a living will and the percentage who adhere to it. (And quality ratings affect a doctor's Medicare reimbursement)
The "adhere to" part is especially dangerous. Some people say "they'd rather die than be on a ventilator, but when the time comes, they choose to live. Doctors will incur penalties when families do not adhere to end of life written plans. - a horrible conflict of interest. As a patient advocate, I see these difficult situations and know that government should not be involved. Paying for consultations, that's fine. But the bill goes much farther.
ON MY DESCRIPTION OF EMANUEL'S 1996 ARTICLE:
Here is the Emanuel quote verbatim as printed in the Wall Street Journal, August 26, 2009): "Substantively it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity -- those that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations -- are to be socially guaranteed as basic. Covering services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic, and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia."
This quote from Emanuel's article in the Hastings Center Review was not taken out of context. It was quoted at length to ensure fairness and accuracy. Let's make the passage even longer: The sentence immediately before the quoted passage makes his intention clear: "The civic republican or deliberative democratic conception of the good provides both procedural and substantive insights for developing a just allocation of health resources."
Then the "substantive insight" is quoted in my article, (Wall Street Journal, August 26, 2009) along with the "obvious example" of "not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia." And then he reemphasizes the positive contribution "communitarianism" offers: "the overlap between liberalism and communitarianism points to a way of introducing the good back into medical ethics and devising a principled way of distinguishing basic from discretionary health services."
Going beyond this article, Emanuel's subsequent writings are consistent with expecting doctors to compromise the needs of an individual patient in order to advance the common good. His discussion of the Hippocratic Oath, quoted at length in my piece, puts forward the same viewpoint. He advocates retraining physicians to provide "socially sustainable care." My description of his work is accurate, fair, and nuanced. Please check with the people you've quoted in his defense to see if they've read his articles. Have you read them?
You should be aware that Dr. Emanuel is part of a school of thought that imposes on doctors the duty to serve society and advance "population health" rather than focusing on the needs of their own patient. I have long opposed this view, and it would be rash and unfair to ascribe my views to partisanship.
If only more reporting on the health care issues focused on the content of the bills, rather than superficial attacks. I will be addressing both the issues raised here: the dangerous ideas of Dr. Emanuel and the purpose of the end of life program provisions in HR 3200 -- at a rally on the lawn of the U.S. Capitol on September 12th. See you there!!
Betsy McCaughey, Ph.D., is founder and Chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and former Lt. Governor of New York State.
CONTACT: Betsy McCaughey of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths,
+1-917-748-0227
National Recession Sets Wages Back for Middle-Class Pennsylvanians
Think tank releases State of Working PA 2009 Key findings: federal stimulus efforts working, but structural reforms needed to rebuild middle class
HARRISBURG, Pa.,- Federal policies to stimulate the economy have halted the economic freefall that just six months ago was consuming Pennsylvania and the United States, according to the Keystone Research Center's annual report on the state's economy and working families.
Still, the "Great Recession" has wrought damage on the state and national economies, adding to the urgency for policymakers to take decisive action to strengthen the middle class, center economists Stephen Herzenberg, Ph.D., and Mark Price, Ph.D., concluded in The State of Working Pennsylvania 2009.
"Income inequality is at its highest levels since 1917," said Dr. Price. "The reforms of the New Deal established labor market conditions that produced three decades of broadly shared prosperity. Now, we need new structural reforms to reinvigorate middle-class families who have been left behind."
The State of Working Pennsylvania is an annual checkup on the state economy with a focus on working families. The 2009 edition documents how the middle class has been particularly hard hit by the worst recession since the Great Depression. (See Fact Sheet below for detailed findings.
Inflation-adjusted wages for middle-class workers have declined over the past year, the report notes, which comes on the heels of a seven-year stretch of wage stagnation for most Pennsylvania workers. Between 2001-2002 and 2008-2009, all but the top 5% of earners experienced a decline in inflation-adjusted wages.
Meanwhile, the incomes of the wealthiest Pennsylvanians have surged to new highs. Between 2001 and 2006 (the latest year these data are available), the top 1% of earners captured 68% of all growth in personal income.
Federal Policies Avoid Depression, But Pennsylvanians Still Struggling
One piece of good news in the report is the finding that the economic recovery plan and other federal efforts to stabilize the economy are working.
"The federal government's response has not been perfect, but it has pulled the state and nation away from the brink of a second Great Depression," said Dr. Herzenberg, Executive Director of the Keystone Research Center. "Both federal and state governments need to keep their feet on the economic accelerator this year and next because it will take at least that long for private?sector demand to rebound."
Job losses in Pennsylvania have slowed from an average of more than 31,000 per month between February and April 2009 to an average of 9,200 in the last three months. National data show that the relative improvement in the economy is thanks in large part to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed by Congress.
Still, the "Great Recession" has hit Pennsylvania hard, the report notes. Since the recession began in December 2007, the state has lost 192,300 jobs and more than a half million Pennsylvania workers remain unemployed. Additionally, one in seven workers are underemployed.
"While Pennsylvania workers are hurting, we have fared better than the nation as a whole," Dr. Price said. "Still, more work must be done to rebuild the middle class and lay the groundwork for a prosperous future."
Lessons from the New Deal
The report recommends that policymakers charting a course out of the "Great Recession" borrow two principles of the New Deal: continue stimulating the economy and enact structural reforms to rebuild the middle class.
"With unemployment on the rise and wages falling, government must remain the primary source of increasing economic demand," Dr. Herzenberg said. "The federal government should extend unemployment benefits and continue investments in the green economy -- from energy efficiency to renewable energy to more environmentally sustainable manufacturing and agricultural production and transportation systems."
Policymakers in the 1930s also enacted four structural reforms to strengthen the middle class over the long-term: laws to establish unemployment insurance and Social Security, create a minimum wage and give factory workers the right to unionize. So far, structural reforms to rebuild and strengthen the middle class have not been on the policy radar screen in the "Great Recession."
"This should be a high priority for our policymakers," Dr. Herzenberg said. "Without a strong middle class, the risk of a prolonged economic slump remains high."
About Keystone Research Center
The Keystone Research Center is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization that promotes a more prosperous and equitable Pennsylvania economy. More information about the Keystone Research Center is available online: www.keystoneresearch.org. For ongoing analysis of the Pennsylvania economy: www.papolicyblog.com.
State of Working Pennsylvania 2009: Fact Sheet
Government Action Pulled the Economy Back From the Brink
-- Job loss in Pennsylvania averaged 31,067 per month from February 2009
to April 2009, but it has averaged "only" 9,200 per month in the last
three months.
-- Independent analyses show that the relative improvement in job losses
was driven in large part by increased public sector spending due to
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).
-- Gross Domestic Product after falling at an annual rate of 6.4% in the
first quarter of this year declined at an annual rate of 1% in the
second quarter. Goldman Sachs and Mark Zandi of Economy.com suggest
that without ARRA, GDP would have fallen by 3.2% to 4% in the second
quarter.
The Great Recession Still Hit Pennsylvania Hard
-- Since the start of this recession in December 2007, the state economy
has lost 192,300 jobs, a decline of 3.3%. In the same period, the U.S.
economy has shed 6.6 million jobs, a decline of 4.8%.
-- As of July 2009, there were more than half a million unemployed people
in the Commonwealth.
-- One out of every seven workers in Pennsylvania is underemployed
(meaning they cannot find the amount of work they want). The U.S.
underemployment rate is 16% -- nearly one out of every six workers.
-- To bring the share of the working-age population who are employed back
to the pre-recession level in Pennsylvania, 230,000 jobs would have to
be added to the state's economy.
Middle Class Wages Decline
-- Between July 2008 and June 2009, inflation-adjusted hourly earnings
for the typical Pennsylvania worker dropped by 2%.
-- During the same period, wages also fell for most Pennsylvania workers
above the median.
-- Pennsylvania workers at the 80th percentile -- earning a little over
$50,000 per year if they work full-time, full-year -- experienced wage
declines of $1.18 per hour, or over $2,000 per year.
-- Lower-wage earners saw slight gains in inflation-adjusted hourly
earnings.
Middle Class Loses Ground, as Wealthiest Pennsylvanians See Their Incomes Surge
-- The top 1% of Pennsylvania earners captured 68% of all growth in
personal income between 2001 and 2006 (the latest year for which the
most detailed Pennsylvania data are available).
-- The average income of the top 1% of taxpayers rose by just over
$300,000 between 2001 and 2006, an increase of 37%. The very
wealthiest -- one out of every 10,000 taxpayers -- saw their income
rise by 50%, from $15 million to $22.4 million.
-- The average income of the bottom 90% of Pennsylvania taxpayers
declined by 4.5% between 2001 and 2006.
-- Income inequality in Pennsylvania and the United States now exceed the
level at any other time for which data exist (data exist from 1986 to
2006 for Pennsylvania, and 1917 to 2007 for the U.S.).
HARRISBURG, Pa.,- Federal policies to stimulate the economy have halted the economic freefall that just six months ago was consuming Pennsylvania and the United States, according to the Keystone Research Center's annual report on the state's economy and working families.
Still, the "Great Recession" has wrought damage on the state and national economies, adding to the urgency for policymakers to take decisive action to strengthen the middle class, center economists Stephen Herzenberg, Ph.D., and Mark Price, Ph.D., concluded in The State of Working Pennsylvania 2009.
"Income inequality is at its highest levels since 1917," said Dr. Price. "The reforms of the New Deal established labor market conditions that produced three decades of broadly shared prosperity. Now, we need new structural reforms to reinvigorate middle-class families who have been left behind."
The State of Working Pennsylvania is an annual checkup on the state economy with a focus on working families. The 2009 edition documents how the middle class has been particularly hard hit by the worst recession since the Great Depression. (See Fact Sheet below for detailed findings.
Inflation-adjusted wages for middle-class workers have declined over the past year, the report notes, which comes on the heels of a seven-year stretch of wage stagnation for most Pennsylvania workers. Between 2001-2002 and 2008-2009, all but the top 5% of earners experienced a decline in inflation-adjusted wages.
Meanwhile, the incomes of the wealthiest Pennsylvanians have surged to new highs. Between 2001 and 2006 (the latest year these data are available), the top 1% of earners captured 68% of all growth in personal income.
Federal Policies Avoid Depression, But Pennsylvanians Still Struggling
One piece of good news in the report is the finding that the economic recovery plan and other federal efforts to stabilize the economy are working.
"The federal government's response has not been perfect, but it has pulled the state and nation away from the brink of a second Great Depression," said Dr. Herzenberg, Executive Director of the Keystone Research Center. "Both federal and state governments need to keep their feet on the economic accelerator this year and next because it will take at least that long for private?sector demand to rebound."
Job losses in Pennsylvania have slowed from an average of more than 31,000 per month between February and April 2009 to an average of 9,200 in the last three months. National data show that the relative improvement in the economy is thanks in large part to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed by Congress.
Still, the "Great Recession" has hit Pennsylvania hard, the report notes. Since the recession began in December 2007, the state has lost 192,300 jobs and more than a half million Pennsylvania workers remain unemployed. Additionally, one in seven workers are underemployed.
"While Pennsylvania workers are hurting, we have fared better than the nation as a whole," Dr. Price said. "Still, more work must be done to rebuild the middle class and lay the groundwork for a prosperous future."
Lessons from the New Deal
The report recommends that policymakers charting a course out of the "Great Recession" borrow two principles of the New Deal: continue stimulating the economy and enact structural reforms to rebuild the middle class.
"With unemployment on the rise and wages falling, government must remain the primary source of increasing economic demand," Dr. Herzenberg said. "The federal government should extend unemployment benefits and continue investments in the green economy -- from energy efficiency to renewable energy to more environmentally sustainable manufacturing and agricultural production and transportation systems."
Policymakers in the 1930s also enacted four structural reforms to strengthen the middle class over the long-term: laws to establish unemployment insurance and Social Security, create a minimum wage and give factory workers the right to unionize. So far, structural reforms to rebuild and strengthen the middle class have not been on the policy radar screen in the "Great Recession."
"This should be a high priority for our policymakers," Dr. Herzenberg said. "Without a strong middle class, the risk of a prolonged economic slump remains high."
About Keystone Research Center
The Keystone Research Center is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization that promotes a more prosperous and equitable Pennsylvania economy. More information about the Keystone Research Center is available online: www.keystoneresearch.org. For ongoing analysis of the Pennsylvania economy: www.papolicyblog.com.
State of Working Pennsylvania 2009: Fact Sheet
Government Action Pulled the Economy Back From the Brink
-- Job loss in Pennsylvania averaged 31,067 per month from February 2009
to April 2009, but it has averaged "only" 9,200 per month in the last
three months.
-- Independent analyses show that the relative improvement in job losses
was driven in large part by increased public sector spending due to
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).
-- Gross Domestic Product after falling at an annual rate of 6.4% in the
first quarter of this year declined at an annual rate of 1% in the
second quarter. Goldman Sachs and Mark Zandi of Economy.com suggest
that without ARRA, GDP would have fallen by 3.2% to 4% in the second
quarter.
The Great Recession Still Hit Pennsylvania Hard
-- Since the start of this recession in December 2007, the state economy
has lost 192,300 jobs, a decline of 3.3%. In the same period, the U.S.
economy has shed 6.6 million jobs, a decline of 4.8%.
-- As of July 2009, there were more than half a million unemployed people
in the Commonwealth.
-- One out of every seven workers in Pennsylvania is underemployed
(meaning they cannot find the amount of work they want). The U.S.
underemployment rate is 16% -- nearly one out of every six workers.
-- To bring the share of the working-age population who are employed back
to the pre-recession level in Pennsylvania, 230,000 jobs would have to
be added to the state's economy.
Middle Class Wages Decline
-- Between July 2008 and June 2009, inflation-adjusted hourly earnings
for the typical Pennsylvania worker dropped by 2%.
-- During the same period, wages also fell for most Pennsylvania workers
above the median.
-- Pennsylvania workers at the 80th percentile -- earning a little over
$50,000 per year if they work full-time, full-year -- experienced wage
declines of $1.18 per hour, or over $2,000 per year.
-- Lower-wage earners saw slight gains in inflation-adjusted hourly
earnings.
Middle Class Loses Ground, as Wealthiest Pennsylvanians See Their Incomes Surge
-- The top 1% of Pennsylvania earners captured 68% of all growth in
personal income between 2001 and 2006 (the latest year for which the
most detailed Pennsylvania data are available).
-- The average income of the top 1% of taxpayers rose by just over
$300,000 between 2001 and 2006, an increase of 37%. The very
wealthiest -- one out of every 10,000 taxpayers -- saw their income
rise by 50%, from $15 million to $22.4 million.
-- The average income of the bottom 90% of Pennsylvania taxpayers
declined by 4.5% between 2001 and 2006.
-- Income inequality in Pennsylvania and the United States now exceed the
level at any other time for which data exist (data exist from 1986 to
2006 for Pennsylvania, and 1917 to 2007 for the U.S.).
Saturday, September 5, 2009
Commission Protects Financial Aid for More Than 300,000 California Students
Commission Unanimously Approves Alternative $10 Million Budget Cut to EdFund to Save Crucial Cal Grant Services to 'First Generation' and Low-Income Students
SACRAMENTO, Calif.,- Acting to restore the safety net of financial aid to thousands of California students, the California Student Aid Commission (Commission) unanimously voted to reduce the expenses of EdFund, its loan services auxiliary organization. The Commission's prudent action was taken to prevent disruption in the administration of Cal Grants and other financial aid programs to California students.
California's proven mechanism for directing minority and low-income students to college will be dismantled by Governor Schwarzenegger's veto of the Commission Cal Grant delivery system and outreach programs.
"This move will replace the cuts the governor aims to achieve through the budget veto action that would weaken the Cal Grant Program -- the heart and soul of access to college for so many bright young Californians," stated Barry Keene, Chair, California Student Aid Commission. "The effectiveness of Cal Grant services cannot be replaced -- no one else is equipped to devote resources and time exclusively to the singular goal of getting kids to college."
By reducing the EdFund expenses without reducing revenue, consistent with the Governor's direction, the state realizes an annualized savings of $10 million that can be allocated to prevent disruption of services to thousands of California students. With the current economic crisis, the Commission acted to reduce expenses such as incentive compensation and non-critical expenditures in the areas of travel and procurement.
"California's economic recovery depends on a highly trained workforce. Maintaining the opportunity of choice and access for kids who thought higher education was an impossible dream is economically smart," said Lorena Hernandez, Vice Chair, California Student Aid Commission.
The Cal Grant Program -- administered by the Commission -- targets low-income and minority students, providing guidance and one-on-one counseling proven effective in encouraging and directing students -- most from families who believe that college education is unachievable -- to successfully pursue college education.
From 2000 to 2009, the number of new and renewing Cal Grant recipients rose from 179,860 to 301,972, a 68% increase in demand from mostly "first generation" college students.
CONTACT: Louise Shroder, +1-916-464-8237, for California Student Aid
Commission
SACRAMENTO, Calif.,- Acting to restore the safety net of financial aid to thousands of California students, the California Student Aid Commission (Commission) unanimously voted to reduce the expenses of EdFund, its loan services auxiliary organization. The Commission's prudent action was taken to prevent disruption in the administration of Cal Grants and other financial aid programs to California students.
California's proven mechanism for directing minority and low-income students to college will be dismantled by Governor Schwarzenegger's veto of the Commission Cal Grant delivery system and outreach programs.
"This move will replace the cuts the governor aims to achieve through the budget veto action that would weaken the Cal Grant Program -- the heart and soul of access to college for so many bright young Californians," stated Barry Keene, Chair, California Student Aid Commission. "The effectiveness of Cal Grant services cannot be replaced -- no one else is equipped to devote resources and time exclusively to the singular goal of getting kids to college."
By reducing the EdFund expenses without reducing revenue, consistent with the Governor's direction, the state realizes an annualized savings of $10 million that can be allocated to prevent disruption of services to thousands of California students. With the current economic crisis, the Commission acted to reduce expenses such as incentive compensation and non-critical expenditures in the areas of travel and procurement.
"California's economic recovery depends on a highly trained workforce. Maintaining the opportunity of choice and access for kids who thought higher education was an impossible dream is economically smart," said Lorena Hernandez, Vice Chair, California Student Aid Commission.
The Cal Grant Program -- administered by the Commission -- targets low-income and minority students, providing guidance and one-on-one counseling proven effective in encouraging and directing students -- most from families who believe that college education is unachievable -- to successfully pursue college education.
From 2000 to 2009, the number of new and renewing Cal Grant recipients rose from 179,860 to 301,972, a 68% increase in demand from mostly "first generation" college students.
CONTACT: Louise Shroder, +1-916-464-8237, for California Student Aid
Commission
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)