American Forum Op-Ed

WASHINGTON FORUM
By Nina Auerbach and Anthony Berkley

We need to do more to give children the best start possible. Young children learn more and do better in school and, ultimately, in the workplace when they move seamlessly from home to other early learning settings and to the early grades. Unfortunately, far too few children experience such seamlessness, thanks to a disconnected and deficient educational system that moves them from one place and grade to the next with no sense of continuity. These trends are changing though.

The federal government is promoting meaningful education reform and putting up meaningful money to help pay for it.

President Obama is asking states and communities with innovative ideas to help reshape American education. To propel this innovation, two new federal funds will provide a total of $5 billion to do nothing less than inspire communities to shake up the education landscape.

We’ve long known the best ideas for education bubble up from the community level. Now the stars seem aligned to give this type of bottom-up innovation serious consideration.

Communities large and small – urban and rural – are hard at work. Promising early learning initiatives through a W.K. Kellogg Foundation-sponsored project called Supporting Partnerships to Assure Ready Kids (SPARK), are working with schools, families and community partners to smooth crucial transitions from home, child care and preschool to elementary school. The goal is to ensure children are ready for school and schools are ready for them.

In Washington, a partnership between the State Department of Early Learning, the nonprofit public-private partnership Thrive by Five Washington and the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction is working to make a difference. The three organizations have joined forces to lead the creation of a statewide 10-year Early Learning Plan that will help make sure children are ready to start school.

More than 1,000 Washington residents helped shape the draft plan that is expected to be finalized early this summer. It calls for a coordinated approach to delivering optional early learning opportunities for children and families, based on what they need to enter school ready to succeed. This means expanding access to high-quality child care and preschool programs, to physical and mental health care, home-visiting programs, parenting support and information, and to training and education opportunities for early care and education professionals.

When finished, the plan will bring under one umbrella key efforts to maximize learning from birth through grade three.

In the meantime, efforts are already under way throughout the state to improve early learning. We are developing the state’s voluntary quality rating and improvement system designed to boost the quality of licensed child care and provide families with more information when they’re choosing child care. Local early learning coalitions throughout the state are helping their communities rally around children and families with programs and outreach. A growing statewide public awareness campaign helps convey the importance of early learning and what parents can do to help their children. Additionally, two Thrive by Five Washington Demonstration Communities—in White Center and East Yakima communities – have spent the past few years working in new and different ways to share information, leverage resources, and connect systems and supports, so that families can do the best job possible to get their children ready for school – and so that we can all benefit from what they’re learning.

Sharing lessons from these experiences in here in Washington and from other initiatives such as SPARK is critical. Public awareness campaigns, community and governors’ forums, and targeted efforts such as the W.K. Kellogg Foundation Partnership with IDEO, a renowned design and innovation firm that helps communities improve their learning systems, play an important role in expanding success.

Communities, school districts, and policymakers are creating new ways to teach and nurture children from birth through the third grade.

Now we have the chance to revolutionize learning and set our children on a path to long-term success. Such groundbreaking strategies can help shape federal and state policies. In turn, federal and state governments must allow communities the flexibility to implement policies that help their children learn best.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Auerbach is president and CEO of Thrive by Five Washington, the state’s nonprofit public-private partnership for early learning. Berkley is the deputy director for education and learning at the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Washington Forum. 2/10

By Sarah Wilhelm

While Roe v Wade ensures that abortion is legal in every state, the reality of abortion access today is increasingly dependent upon a woman’s socioeconomic status and geographic location. The average cost of an abortion for a woman up to 12 weeks pregnant is $450 to $600 in the Northwest region, and costs increase markedly after 12 weeks.

The Hyde Amendment, passed in 1976, ended the use of federal Medicaid funding for abortion, except when the woman’s life would be endangered by a full-term pregnancy, or in cases of rape or incest. As the debate about the direction of health care reform takes off, the Obama administration should recognize the critical importance of repealing this fundamental barrier to women’s access to comprehensive health care.

Fortunately, Washington uses its own funds to cover the cost of abortion procedures for women who qualify for Medicaid. However, women living in neighboring states of Idaho and Oregon have limited government assistance for the cost of their procedures.

Oregon does cover abortion procedures through its Oregon Health Plan (OHP) program; however, the program has seen significant budget cuts over the past year making it difficult for women to receive OHP funding for abortion in a timely manner.

Idaho does not use state funds to cover abortion, except in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest. Idaho even bans private insurance from covering abortion (except in cases of life endangerment) without payment of an additional premium.

Women in rural Washington, Oregon, and much of Idaho also experience limited access to abortion providers. In fact, it is not possible to get an abortion past 14 weeks in the state of Idaho. These women are faced with the added time and expense of travel to get an abortion.

And this was before the economic crisis hit.

With rising unemployment and cuts in social services added to the already challenging landscape of abortion access in the Pacific Northwest, increasing numbers of women experiencing an unintended pregnancy are finding themselves in an economic crisis of their own.

Between 1994 and 2001, the rate of unintended pregnancy increased by 29 percent among U.S. women whose income was below the poverty line, while it decreased 20 percent among women with incomes at least twice the federal poverty level.

During this time, state level restrictions to abortion access, from dwindling numbers of abortion providers particularly in rural areas, to state budget shortfalls leading to cuts in Medicaid funding (as in the case of Oregon), have left many poor women with few options when faced with an unintended pregnancy.

Private abortion funds seek to fill some of the gaps left by inadequate state laws and funding by providing women with some or all of the funds needed to obtain an abortion.

The Community Abortion Information and Resource (CAIR) Project is an all-volunteer regional organization that provides abortion funding and hotline support to women in Washington, Alaska, Idaho and Oregon. The fund empowers women in need to be able to afford abortions and other associated costs, such as travel and childcare. In 2007, the CAIR Project gave $25,700 to women in need -- leveraging the $171,500 the women were able to contribute to the cost of their procedures themselves.

Since 1999, the CAIR Project has worked tirelessly to break down financial barriers to abortion and improve reproductive health care access for all women. As the gap between rich and poor in our country continues to widen, each year we find that the number of women who require our services increases.

Much of this increased need is a result of a dramatic rise in the number of women calling us from Oregon. In 2005, only 27 percent of our clients were from Oregon; but in 2007, Oregon women made up 48 percent of the women we serve. The drastic cuts to Oregon’s Medicaid funding have led to virtually no new Medicaid enrollments and indefinite processing times for applications. As these women wait, the cost of their abortion and their financial stress rise. Compounding the financial difficulty facing Oregon’s women, the state’s unemployment rate soared above the national average to 12 percent in April 2009.

As unemployment continues to rise while social services are being slashed in our region, we expect the need for our services will continue to increase. While it is critical that we continue to engage in legal and political advocacy to improve state and national policies around abortion and reproductive health, we must also offer support to those who are in need of help now and can’t wait.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wilhelm is a board member of Community Abortion Information and Resource (CAIR) Project. The CAIR Project seeks to help meet the needs of these women while also drawing attention to the policies and systems that have left them unable to afford the choice that Roe v Wade assures them.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2009 by the Washington Forum. 6/09

By Jesse Hagopian

No one ever said teaching middle school would be easy.

Last week, however, truly tried my patience. You’d think, by this time in the school year, they’d know not to fabricate elaborate excuses for incomplete work.

No, I am not ranting about unruly students in my third period.

I’m referring to delinquent state lawmakers who approved a two-year operating budget in this past legislative session that fails students and teachers by cutting a staggering $800 million from a school system that already ranks 45th in the nation in per-pupil spending. The bulk of the cuts come from voiding I-728, the voter approved class-size-reduction initiative designed to address our class-size ranking of 46th in the nation.

Astoundingly, these representatives maintain they are champions for public education because of their much-touted bill that promised to redefine basic education to include tools educators need to prepare kids for college.

But even my student who attempted to excuse himself from an incomplete assignment by explaining to me that temporary amnesia is a clinical condition -- not to be confused with merely forgetting -- would blush at the litany of half-truths and pretexts in the past legislative session.

Even if the mix of needed change and misguided policy in the proposal was able to help prepare students for college, our representatives didn’t fund it and put higher education out of reach for many by increasing four-year college tuition by 14 percent and two-year college tuition by 7 percent. Furthermore, this new budget denies Washington’s teachers their voter-approved cost-of-living raise, reduces math coaches and curriculum offerings for primary school kids, and will result in thousands of teacher layoffs and more disastrous school closures.

An education reform bill without the funding is like the kid who once told me he really had finished his essay, but I just couldn’t see it because it was written in invisible ink. True story.

Predictably, the Republicans in the state legislature showed why their party is about as popular as the meal-money thieving lunchroom bully, claiming the cuts weren’t deep enough.

However, you can be excused for forgetting which party is in charge in Olympia when the Democrats use their legislative majority to erode education.

“I'm tired of whining and complaining,” said Sen. Budget Chairwoman Margarita Prentice, D-Renton. "I'd like to have a whole lot more money, but you know, we don't.”

But as I tell my students, complaining only becomes whining when you don’t propose a solution.

At the Representative Assembly of the Seattle Education Association on April 20, I submitted a resolution proposing what nearly three-quarters of Americans indicated in a recent CBS/NY Times poll is needed to solve the fiscal crisis: taxing the rich.

This resolution, calling for a progressive income tax that would exempt anyone making less than $250,000 a year, passed with some 90 percent of SEA votes. The Economic Opportunity Institute has shown that with only a 3 percent tax on incomes between $200,000 and $999,999 and a 5 percent tax on incomes over $1 million, the state could immediately raise $2.58 billion -- more than enough to stop the education cuts in addition to cuts to healthcare and the General Assistance-Unemployable program -- a program which helps people with mental and physical health challenges that make it difficult for them to find work. Democrats in the legislature could have helped Washington join the 43 other states with an income tax, but didn’t get the bill out of committee.

Yes, insatiable CEOs trading in asset-backed securities caused a recession, making it hard to raise the money needed to continue basic funding commitments. But teachers, parents, (and yes, even middle school students with temporary amnesia) are tired of lawmakers’ “dog-ate-my-homework” excuses for neglecting schools in one of the wealthiest regions the world has ever known.

Today’s lesson in my third period asks the students to interpret the poem “Cloth” by Phillip Pulfrey:

We weave our excuses around events.
Thin, poor quality cloth of justification Poor substitutes for the heavy tribal blankets Once we wove to wrap our children.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hagopian is a teacher in the Seattle Public Schools and a member of the Seattle Education Association.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright (C) 2009 by the Washington Forum. 5/09

By Pramila Jayapal and Renee Radcliff Sinclair

The early experiences of Amalia Cudeiro, Bellevue School District's new school superintendent, mirror the experiences of many foreign-born residents in Washington and across the United States.

Born in Cuba, Cudeiro came to the United States as a child. Her father was an accountant, but because he didn't speak English, he was only able to find work as a dishwasher. Cudeiro gave back to her father -- she earned a doctorate from Harvard, built a much-lauded career in education, and today is poised to become the first immigrant school superintendent in a city where one in four residents is foreign-born.

Cudeiro's journey and contributions may be viewed as a microcosm of immigrants across Washington state. A recent report released by OneAmerica, a Seattle-based nonprofit dedicated to advancing democracy and justice, clearly lays out the contributions of immigrants to Washington's economy.

The report, "Building Washington's Future: Immigrant Contributions to Our State's Economy," provides the first report specific to our state that looks factually at taxes paid by foreign-born households, consumption patterns of foreign-born families, percentage of immigrants in a variety of industries, and state demographic changes.

Immigrants now make up 14.3 percent of Washington's civilian work force, coming from many regions, spread across the state, and working in a variety of industries. And while immigrants may be perceived as living primarily west of the Cascades, the reality is that Chelan, Douglas, Yakima, Grant, Franklin and Adams counties in Central and Eastern Washington all have percentages of immigrants (compared with the total county population) that are higher than the national average.

The report clearly shows almost every county in Washington needs to start thinking about the tremendous contributions of immigrants to their economy.

Consider these facts:

• The Office of Financial Management estimated that in 2007, Washington households with at least one foreign-born member contributed $1.48 billion in tax revenue, or 13 percent of the state's total tax revenue. Even low-income immigrant households earning less than $20,000 a year contributed a total of $50 million in tax revenue.

Washington's Asian and Hispanic buying power accounted for approximately a fifth of the state's consumer market.
• Immigrants constitute significant percentages of the work force in a variety of industries, making up over 62 percent of farming, fishing and forestry workers; 19.5 percent of production, transportation and material moving workers; 19 percent of service workers.

• Immigrant households in Washington use public assistance at rates that are the same or lower than native-born households, with the exception of food stamps.

• Washington ranks eighth in a list of states that would suffer the highest per-capita losses if the undocumented work force — which constitutes about 5 percent of the total work force — were removed. Washington state could lose $14 billion to $46 billion in lost expenditures, and Washingtonians could lose $600 to $1,700 of personal income per capita.

• Washington's immigrant entrepreneurs contributed approximately $1.3 billion or 9.8 percent of total state business income and provided a significant number of jobs. In Washington, Asians and Hispanics own 5.7 percent and 2.2 percent of businesses, respectively.

Considering these economic influences, clearly Washington must invest in strategies that support the two-way integration of immigrants into our communities. Specifically, the report points to strategies that, even in a tough budget year, must stay funded if Washington is to stay strong.

Invest in English language services. English proficiency is related to the economic self-sufficiency of immigrants and their ability to contribute to the economy.

Invest in naturalization assistance. The report presents compelling evidence that citizenship leads to higher earnings and helps immigrants integrate into society. It also points out that Washington has more than 170,000 legal permanent residents eligible for citizenship, but in 2007, only 8.6 percent are naturalizing. Washington New Americans, a partnership between the state of Washington and OneAmerica, is an example of a program that is desperately needed to fill the gap in services.

Finally, our state must boldly push the federal government to enact comprehensive immigration reform. Reform will fuel further economic contributions by immigrants and end a divisive and often polarizing debate that ignores the very real contributions of immigrants every day to our communities and our economy.
As the economic effects of the downturn are felt across the state, it is important for legislators and the public to remember that immigrants stand ready — as they always have — to build Washington's future, bringing creativity, hard work and entrepreneurship to the challenges ahead.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jayapal, is executive director of OneAmerica (formerly Hate Free Zone). Sinclair is executive director of Congressional and Public Affairs for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2009 by the Washington Forum. 4/09

By Alison Mondi

In a time of economic uncertainty, unnerving budget deficits, and ever-worsening employment and revenue figures, it is understandable that the legislators and agency heads charged with setting the state’s budget for the next two years are inclined to reach for the hatchet.

And yes, there are going to have to be cuts, and many of those cuts will have very real repercussions for those most in need. But dwindling state revenues, coupled with more people than ever in need of assistance, demands precise and thoughtful budget trimming.

That is why the state Senate and House budget proposals are so alarming. Among the slew of heartbreaking cuts, the Senate budget calls for a $1 million reduction in state spending on funding for birth control and other family planning services for low-income and at-risk women, which is 10 percent of the total program. The House budget is even worse; it proposes a 10 percent cut for the first year of the two-year budget, and then calls for the complete elimination of family planning funding in the second year. That means ending reproductive health care services for over 20,000 Washington women, and putting up to an additional $19 million in pregnancy care costs on the state’s tab. This drastic cut is a gamble with women’s health – and the state’s bottom line – that we simply cannot afford.

In terms of benefits to recipients, tax payers, and the financial health of the state, few social programs compare to public funding for birth control and other family planning services for low-income women. It’s a rare win-win-win in the realm of public policy and state spending. That is why it is critical that we preserve funding for family planning, even now, during one of the state’s (and nation’s) darker economic hours.

Women themselves benefit from the most immediate “win.” With continued funding, low-income women can access birth control and other health care services, thereby providing them with the ability to plan if and when they get pregnant. When women are in control of their fertility, they are more likely to complete their education, and find and retain employment, making women and their children healthier.

When more women, no matter what their income level, have access to birth control, the rate of unintended pregnancies goes down. This leads directly to the next two wins:

Public funding for family planning care is a smart investment. According to a 2008 study by the Guttmacher Institute, for every $1 spent on public funding for reproductive health care, the state saves over $4 in prevented future costs. According to the state’s Department of Health statistics, it costs approximately $550 a year to cover a full range of family planning services for each Washingtonian in need, compared to almost $8,000 in state funds for each Medicaid paid birth. When the state spends a relatively small amount for family planning services, it saves big bucks down the road.

Finally, birth control (i.e. family planning) lifts poor women out of poverty and helps keep women from becoming poor. Not only is this directly beneficial to the women in question, it is also to the benefit of society as whole. A reduction in poverty means less of a strain on public resources and a happier and more productive community. If one of the goals of the budget process is to establish longer-term financial stability for the state – and one would hope that is the case – then it is easy to see that family planning funding should be off the chopping block.

Economic realities mean that many tough decisions await the legislature. To be sure, it is an unenviable task. In the case of funding for birth control and other family planning services for the state’s low-income and marginalized women, the decision is refreshingly easy. For the sake of Washington’s women and for the state’s financial health, the state must allocate full, ongoing funding for reproductive health care.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mondi is the communications director for NARAL Pro-Choice Washington.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2009 by the Washington Forum. 4/09

By Karen Toering

Do we love TV too much? Maybe.

But for nearly all American households, television provides more than mindless entertainment. It's also our most important lifeline for news and information.

According to Nielsen Media Research, 98.6 percent of American households have at least one TV set. And a Project for Excellence in Journalism study shows that more of us get our picture of the world from local TV news than from any other single source.

That is why Congress voted earlier this month to delay the biggest change in over-the-air television in nearly 50 years -- the federally-mandated switch to digital television. Congress pushed back the date from Feb. 17 to June 12 because there are still far too many people who are unprepared for the transition.

Congress left a loophole, however: local broadcasters across the country were given the option to transition earlier. In many large cities, stations have opted to delay their digital shift until June 12, giving viewers another few months to prepare. Stations in rural areas and mid-sized cities have opted to switch on Feb. 17. In Washington State, those cities include Bellingham, Yakima, Spokane and the Tri-Cities.

Whenever stations switch to digital, the effect will be the same: TVs that use set-top or rooftop antennas will no longer work without a new digital converter box (cable and satellite subscribers will not be affected).

Millions of people are aware of the changeover, but just as many are confused by just what the transition means for them. The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights estimates that some 21 million households will automatically be cut off from television, our primary news and information source.

Many of these households are people of color, senior citizens, people with disabilities and those who depend on programs in languages other than English.

Community-based DTV assistance centers set up in various cities have responded to questions from people confused about whether they need to buy a new television (they don’t), or about problems with hooking up the boxes, or with antenna problems.

In these troubled economic times, many TV viewers have been slow to switch because of the perceived expense. Cable companies have been running confusing ads touting their pay-tv service as the simplest way for households to manage the DTV switch.

The most affordable solution is to get a converter box which will allow old TVs to receive the new digital signals. A federal government program is providing two $40 coupons toward the purchase of a converter box to every American household. Those interested in receiving the coupons can apply at dtv2009.gov or by calling 1-888-DTV-2009.

Converter boxes are available online for as low as $40 -- but in Washington state, most retailers are generally charging $60 or more for the boxes.

Adding to the stress for some consumers is the fact that there is now a substantial waiting list for those government coupons -- nearly 26,000 people in Washington state are on that list. But the stimulus package recently passed by Congress included additional funding to get those coupons moving again.

In order to help make this switch go smoothly for everyone, electronics retailers need to provide low-cost boxes; it's also up to the federal government and community partners to work together to provide more thorough education and outreach to keep seniors, people with disabilities and low-income consumers from being left behind.

But it’s not just up to the government. We all have a role to play. The extension will give some of us more time to figure out what we need to do to successfully make the transition. If you haven’t already applied for a coupon -- you should do it. If you have an extra coupon that your family won’t use -- donate it. And if you have a family member or friend who isn’t ready -- help them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Toering is coordinator of the Seattle DTV Assistance Center, a project of Reclaim the Media, at http://www.seattledtv.com/.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2009 by the Washington Forum. 2/09