American Forum Op-Ed

MISSOURI FORUM

By State Reps. Walt Bivins and Jill Schupp

Missouri is well behind the curve in adopting smoke-free standards for public places. In locales throughout the state, we are subjecting real people – customers, workers, children and people with breathing diseases to the harmful effects of secondhand smoke.

People have the right to breathe clean indoor air. They should be able to eat at restaurants and go into public buildings without being exposed to the serious health dangers of secondhand smoke.

A typical “non-smoker” who works in a smoky restaurant inhales almost an entire pack of cigarettes during just one eight-hour shift. Secondhand smoke contains over 4,000 chemicals and is estimated to cause over 30,000 deaths every year. Missourians alone spend $119 million on health care costs associated with secondhand smoke.

According to a 2004 U.S. Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) report: “…people at risk for heart disease should avoid all indoor places that allow smoking because short-term exposure to secondhand smoke creates an increased risk of heart attacks.”

Elimination of secondhand smoke exposure in public places is a matter of common sense and necessary to protect public health. The 2006 Surgeon General’s Report on Involuntary Smoking stated that there is no “risk-free” level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Furthermore, we learn that air cleaning and ventilation systems cannot eliminate all of the chemical exposure risks caused by secondhand smoke. The only way to stop exposure to deadly secondhand smoke is to end smoking in public places.

Missouri has begun to consider a smoke-free in public areas proposal. As word of this proposal has been gaining attention, employees are reaching out to tell their stories. One single mother, a casino employee, is imploring us to follow up and keep fighting to make her workplace smoke-free:

“Thank you for fighting for us. I'm a casino dealer. I'm also a single mom. I feel like I have to sacrifice my later years of life with my child and those joys, so that I can support him now. As a dealer we cannot wave the smoke from our face, ask the smoker to hold the cigarette back, or even move our heads to find air because it may offend the smoker.

My casino allows cigars, I've been made sick by them several times…We don't get an occasional cigarette in the face, we get it most of our day. More than one at a time, and several are chain smokers.

I'm not saying people don't have the right to smoke, I just think that I should have the right to perform my job and breathe at the same time. Please keep fighting and thank you!”

Missouri’s smoke-free proposal is designed to keep one person’s decision to smoke from interfering with other people’s health.

A comprehensive smoke-free public proposal is a public health issue. Just as food handling, plumbing, and traffic regulations are in place to support the public good, regulations for smoke-free public areas are a public service.

Over a decade ago when California became the first state to require bars and restaurants to go smoke-free, it was considered a novelty. Today, about half of the states have enacted such restrictions. Missouri’s most populous cities: Kansas City, Springfield, Columbia, St. Louis, and St. Louis County all have ordinances in place. Most Missourians already live in areas where smoking isn’t allowed in public places. Undoubtedly, we are ready for smoke-free public places. With the public health risks of secondhand smoke, nothing will be gained by further delaying the inevitable.

For the health and well-being of the people of Missouri, the time has come for a single statewide smoke-free law to protect our citizens from the serious health hazards of secondhand smoke.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bivins is a state representative (R-District 97). Schupp is a state representative (D-District 82).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Missouri Forum. 3/10

FLORIDA FORUM

By Arthur J. Rosenberg

Florida has a tremendous opportunity to boost its economy and help thousands of unemployed workers stay afloat as they look for their next job.

More than 1 million of our residents are now unemployed. Our neighbors, our friends, and their families are struggling everyday to cover necessities like housing, health care, and food. Unemployment compensation (UC) is a necessary tool to help them and our state get back on its feet.

As a result of the Federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), Florida could receive $444 million in federal funding to pay for unemployment benefits. For Florida to get this sorely needed money, the legislature needs to modernize our UC system and mend holes in our UC safety net.

Last session, our elected state officials had an historic opportunity to do what is right for the families hardest hit by unemployment by helping to boost local economies and reforming our unemployment system to meet the challenges of the 21st Century. Yet, they rejected this much needed stimulus money as well as the opportunity to update our system to help deserving workers when they lose their jobs.

Florida now faces an unemployment rate of close to 12 percent, one of the highest in the nation. It is Florida’s highest rate in decades. Our UC trust fund has been depleted by the huge rise in claims, and we are borrowing $250 million each month from the federal government to pay benefits. Now, more than ever, the infusion of significant federal funding could go a long way to help address the system's funding woes and at the same time provide UC benefits to over 60,000 unemployed Floridians.

But our UC system needs more than a simple infusion of cash: It needs serious reform. At present, only a fraction of Florida’s unemployed are eligible to collect benefits. In prior recessions, workers who lost their jobs knew they could at least count on unemployment benefits to help them get by for a time. Now only 31 percent of our state’s jobless are able to access unemployment benefits, 48th lowest in the nation.

Many of the remaining workers fall through the cracks of the unemployment system because of outdated eligibility rules that fail to count their most recent work. This historical anachronism, left over from a time when it took months to add up and transmit a worker’s wages from handwritten records to a distant state agency, today subsists in an era of instantaneous computer calculation and electronic transmissions. The result often prevents low-wage workers and those in high-turnover fields from getting UC while they look for another job. As a result, hard working families are far too often found ineligible for unemployment benefits. Thirty-five states have adopted laws over the past year to modernize their system and in doing so will be able to receive their share of federal funds. More states are poised to do so in their upcoming legislative sessions.

Florida is again considering proposals that could modernize our UC system and mend holes in the unemployment safety net – which was designed for the workforce of the 1930’s. Rather than excluding thousands of unemployed workers from receiving benefits, these proposals would provide a lifeline for low wage earners, victims of domestic violence, and workers who have to leave their jobs to care for a sick family member, or who have to follow a spouse who has relocated. If approved, Florida would receive an infusion of $444 million, and thousands of deserving unemployed Floridians would become eligible for benefits that would keep them out of poverty during these hard economic times. These federal funds would cover the cost of their benefits for at least four years.

Unemployment benefits put money into local economies as recipients spend their funds on basic needs like food, housing, transportation and consumer goods. Once spent, this money re-circulates in the market, contributing $1.64 in economic growth for every $1 of UC awarded, allowing the $444 million to generate $728 million in our communities.

Our state leaders now have a tremendous opportunity to get relief to thousands of unemployed workers presently slipping through the safety net, to boost our economy, and thereby get thousands of residents back to work. Adopting these unemployment reforms will help Florida out of the recession and put our state on track to building a first-class unemployment program to serve the future needs of all working Floridians and the businesses that employ them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rosenberg is an attorney with Florida Legal Services.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Florida Forum. 3/10

AMERICAN FORUM

By Margot Dorfman

The reckless and deceptive practices of our financial industry have devastated businesses, families and our economy. It is time for Congressional leaders to stop listening to financial industry lobbyists and start protecting the future of our nation. The U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce believes the establishment of a strong Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) is a crucial step in reforming financial rules and restoring the trust we need to rebuild a thriving American economy.

The CFPA will benefit business, especially small businesses, which create most of the nation’s new jobs. It’s too often forgotten in the debate over the CFPA that small-business owners frequently rely on personal credit -- such as personal credit cards and home equity loans -- to start, run and expand their business.

Small-business owners have been hit hard by the continuing crisis in business and consumer lending. They have been rocked by waves of credit contraction, foreclosures and business closures -- affecting them, their customers, suppliers, the communities they do business in and their families.

Banks that profited from predatory lending now are choking businesses by cutting lines of credit or pulling them entirely.

Some of our members have been forced out of business. Others are struggling to keep doors open. Many of our members can't expand their businesses even though they have viable business opportunities because they cannot access the credit needed to capitalize on their opportunities. Even with orders and contracts in hand, they can't get credit needed to hire new workers, buy new equipment and add necessary business infrastructures.

The unscrupulous practices of the credit-card industry have delivered another hard blow, as unwarranted credit rate escalation, increased fees, and decreased credit availability have left many firms unable to manage day-to-day purchases.

Lenders offering sound mortgages and other credit were undercut by those pushing misleading products with hidden risks. Women were 32 percent more likely to have received subprime mortgages of all types than men, regardless of income. Women also are 41 percent more likely than men to have received higher-cost subprime loans, regardless of income.

Women business owners and consumers have been hurt especially hard by predatory lending. Millions of women business owners, who used their home equity to secure small-business loans, are at risk of losing both their homes and businesses.


Elizabeth Warren, chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel charged with reviewing the state of the financial markets and regulatory systems, provided this snapshot of economic devastation in a December article: "One in five Americans is unemployed, underemployed or just plain out of work. One in nine families can't make the minimum payment on their credit cards. One in eight mortgages is in default or foreclosure. One in eight Americans is on food stamps. More than 120,000 families are filing for bankruptcy every month. The economic crisis has wiped more than $5 trillion from pensions and savings, has left family balance sheets upside down, and threatens to put 10 million homeowners out on the street."

A disproportionate number of those suffering are women. Women, who were already at a higher risk for retirement insecurity, are now terrified about what the future will hold.

We cannot let the financial practices that drove us to this disaster continue. If we do, there will be no real recovery for business and for women generally. The next crisis, when it comes, will be even worse.

Business owners and consumers need the security of knowing that the costs and risks of financial products, services and lending are fully and fairly disclosed. We need a strong federal agency to promote financial product safety and accountability. We need a CFPA with independent rule-making authority and enforcement powers.

We cannot let financial industry lobbyists succeed in killing the CFPA or winning a pale substitute that would not actually be able to protect consumers and small-business owners. We cannot accept a CFPA subject to interference by bank regulators who have failed us time and time again.

We cannot let those whose risky, deceptive practices destroyed so many jobs and businesses kill the reforms designed to prevent the next calamity. It is time for our Congressional leaders to act to support the financial protection and well-being of all Americans.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dorfman is CEO of The U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce (TM), the leading advocate for women on economic and leadership issues and vice president of the National Association of Small Business Contractors.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright (C) 2010 by the American Forum. 3/10

MISSISSIPPI FORUM

By Warren Yoder

Just when we need it the most, thousands of Mississippi workers are being denied unemployment benefits because of a broken, outdated system. When the national unemployment system was created in 1935, the work force was made up predominately of full-time, male workers. Today, that work force includes more part-time and female workers. Although America’s economy has changed, our state unemployment insurance system has not. This spring, fewer than 4 of 10 Mississippi workers qualified for unemployment benefits.

Because of the base period the state uses to consider eligibility, workers can have up to six months of their most recent earnings excluded when determining eligibility for unemployment benefits. This rule disproportionately hurts low-wage workers, because monetary qualification is based on earnings during the base period. A Mississippian can work more than other employees, yet not receive unemployment benefits simply because they are paid less. This is one of the reasons low-wage workers are half as likely as higher wage workers to receive unemployment benefits.

Recognizing the need for reform, Congress provided funds through the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for states to modernize their unemployment insurance system. Mississippi is eligible for nearly $60 million of this incentive funding. Should the state adjust its base period, as mentioned above, and consider workers’ most recent earnings, Mississippi can receive as much as $21.7 million. It can receive another $37.4 million by making two of the following four changes:

• Allow unemployment compensation for certain people seeking only part-time work (More than 40% of women heading families with children work part-time).

• Allow unemployment compensation for persons leaving work for compelling family reasons, such as domestic violence, illness or disability of an immediate family member, or the need to accompany a spouse whose employment is beyond commuting distance;

• Allow unemployment compensation for permanently laid-off workers who need extra unemployment benefits to continue participation in training authorized under the Workforce Investment Act;

• Allow a dependent allowance of at least $15 per dependent for workers who qualify for state benefits.

The Mississippi Department of Employment Security has adopted some reforms in recent years, including allowing victims of domestic abuse and workers forced to relocate because of military service of a spouse to remain eligible for unemployment benefits.

Opponents of reform claim the changes will increase employer taxes and threaten solvency of the state trust fund. But the National Employment Law Project estimates the federal dollars would cover the additional benefit costs for up to 4.5 years, after which Mississippi can determine whether to eliminate or scale back the reforms to ensure system solvency without raising Mississippi business taxes. Even should the state choose to keep the reforms after federal dollars are gone, concerns about cost are exaggerated. Many newly covered workers will be low-wage workers who receive 25 percent to 40 percent smaller benefit checks. The National Employment Law Project estimates that the average payout from the state unemployment trust fund will increase by only 4 percent to 6 percent in a typical year -- certainly no threat to solvency.

In truth, additional unemployment benefits could provide a boost to the state economy when it's most needed. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, every $1 paid in jobless benefits causes the economy to grow by more than $1, because these benefits are spent immediately and have multiplier effects. Thus, $56.1 million in stimulus funds for unemployment benefits could generate almost $100 million in economic activity for Mississippi.

More important than the potential boost in economic activity are needs of struggling families. Almost 40,000 Mississippi workers could benefit from this money. These families are suffering from the greatest recession since the Great Depression. They did not get fired because of misconduct, and they did not stop looking for work. They are not strangers; they are sisters and brothers, neighbors and friends, fellow church members, and fellow Mississippians.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yoder is executive director of the Public Policy Center of Mississippi.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Mississippi Forum. 3/10

TEXAS LONE STAR FORUM

Karen Hadden

Heavily subsidized by taxpayers and rate-payers, nuclear power is susceptible to delay, cost overruns and significant environmental risks. Investing billions into more nuclear power threatens to derail funding that would be better spent on energy efficiency and safer, cleaner renewable energy.

Moody’s advises investors that nuclear projects frequently lead to financial crunch and credit rating drops. The two South Texas Project reactors proposed for the existing Bay City site were supposed to lead the so-called “nuclear renaissance,” but there has been strong citizen and legal opposition and the cost has already skyrocketed. Estimates now exceed $18 billion, three times original projections. No shovel has yet been turned and no license granted.

Maybe you remember the massive boondoggle when the South Texas nuclear reactors ran six times over budget; were eight years late coming online; and plagued with mismanagement, construction problems and lawsuits. Think déjà vu.

South Texas Project partners NRG and San Antonio municipal utility CPS Energy have not seen eye to eye. For more than a year a buyer was sought for a portion of the increasingly expensive reactor project, but none surfaced.

When CPS hid a $4 billion cost increase from the public for half a year, the backlash led them to court to clarify terms for pulling out of the project. A settlement agreement now halts further CPS nuclear investment and shrinks their original 50-50 reactor share by 85 percent. The lesson: Nuclear reactors are simply too risky and too costly.

The good news is that effective and affordable energy solutions are already in place, growing and improving. Wind is a huge success story for Texas. We now lead the nation in wind power. Last October, a record was hit when wind accounted for 25 percent of the state's electric generation.

Texas is perfectly positioned to demonstrate similar leadership on the solar front. Solar technology is advancing and costs are plummeting. Stimulus funding will help. We have a huge opportunity to develop new clean energy industries and create local jobs -- if we do things right.

For example, West Texas wind that comes in at night can be perfectly paired with solar energy generated during the day. Natural gas and energy storage can bridge the gaps between them. Pre-approved transmission is helping new wind and solar projects move forward. Geothermal power systems can help heat and cool homes. And "smart grid" technology will lessen the need for clunky baseload plants -- the outdated cement trucks of the energy world. It’s time for zippy and flexible energy vehicles that can ramp up or down quickly to meet changing demand.

Energy efficiency is reducing electric demand. New homes and businesses are being built to use less energy and save on electric bills. New legislation has allowed for better financing of energy upgrades. Those who wisely make improvements will be free of ongoing debt should they decide to sell their home.

In the end, who will want expensive nuclear power when more affordable options are available? Industrial customers want short-term, flexible energy contracts, not long-term burdens.

Texas ratepayers are at huge financial risk if NRG continues down the nuclear path. Luminant also seeks to build two more reactors. Their reactor design for Comanche Peak, has never been built anywhere in the world. It’s time to drop expensive and risky nuclear power. We should pursue affordable energy efficiency first and then tap the free power of Texas’ sun and wind.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Karen Hadden is the executive director of the Texas based Sustainable Energy & Economic Development (SEED) Coalition.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Texas Lone Star Forum. 2/10

ALABAMA FORUM

By Pat Byington

It was one of those see-it-to-believe-it moments. While visiting my sister-in-law on a typically gray day in Seattle, I noticed she had just replaced her roof, and on top of the house were several solar panels.

Solar panels in cloudy and rainy Seattle?

With a grin on her face, she took me down to her basement and showed me her electrical meter. And there it was...running backward.

She then explained, "At this moment, Seattle City Light, the local power company, is paying me. And, in fact, they want this." She then pulled out her monthly Seattle City Light newsletter. It had a story encouraging its customers to help them "build a power plant" by using less energy and turning to alternative sources so it would not have to build a new coal-powered plant.

When I got back into my car, turning on my wiper blades to sweep away the Seattle mist, I could only think: If solar power can work in this climate, it can work anywhere.

Search the state of Alabama's government website for the words "solar power" or "solar energy," and you will find just a couple of press releases over the past seven years mentioning a small solar power grant or two. As an economic development priority, it is rarely, if ever, discussed in this state.

Visit Tennessee's government website and you will find numerous news items and almost monthly gubernatorial press releases detailing how, in just a few years, the state has emerged as a premier location for the global solar power industry. In Tennessee, they have become true believers in solar power, capturing billions of new manufacturing development dollars and creating, even in this tough economy, thousands of new jobs.

For example, in 2009, the Volunteer State attracted:

• Hemlock Semiconductor, a joint venture between Dow Corning and two Japanese companies that will be locating a solar manufacturing operation in Clarksville, investing between $1.2 billion and $2.5 billion.

• Wacker Chemie, a German company that will be building in Bradley County a $1 billion polycrystalline silicon manufacturing operation -- the root material for solar panels.

• Missouri-based Confluence Solar, who will be investing $200 million to build a plant in Clinton. Bottom line: Another 200 to 400 jobs will be created.

Together, these three plants will generate conservatively more than 2,000 new manufacturing jobs. To put it into perspective for Alabamians, these economic development investments are like attracting two new auto-assembly plants in one year.

Alabama may have won the national championship in football this year; however, Tennessee topped the nation in new solar power manufacturing and jobs.

Now, this did not just magically happen in Tennessee. Through Gov. Phil Bredesen's leadership and recently secured federal stimulus funds, the state has created a comprehensive solar energy and economic development program to create jobs, improve education, and promote research and renewable-power production. This includes establishing the Volunteer Solar Institute at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville and the West Tennessee Solar Farm, a five-megawatt, 20-acre power generation facility next to a proposed industrial site.

And the jobs will keep coming once the state completes the "Tennessee solar supply chain," which will include not only multinational manufacturers, but also local jobs for distributors, sales, system design, installation and maintenance of this new source of energy. These will be permanent, home-grown jobs.

What made the emerging solar power industry in Tennessee possible was commitment from the top: the governor. Is solar power on Gov. Bob Riley's radar? Is it on the radar of any of the candidates for governor?

I guess when you see electrical meters running backward and solar panels popping up and working economically in "gray and rainy" places like Seattle, solar power is here to stay. It is obvious Tennessee has jumped on the solar power economic development bandwagon. Will Alabama follow?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byington is senior associate with The Wilderness Society and publisher of Bama Environmental News.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Alabama Forum. 3/10

FLORIDA FORUM

By Yvonne Scruggs-Leftwich

Judging from current media coverage, one might think that women who repeatedly get falling-down drunk or pass out in public places from taking illegal substances are merely observing a rite of passage from stressful childhood to irresponsible-but-fun adult life.

Countless celebrities fill tabloid and mainstream news slots with their substance-abuse antics, and in doing so become poster girls for the fast life.

The "cure?" An escape into a hospital or upscale rehabilitation retreat, which is quickly portrayed by media spin artists as an experience of reflection, remorse and religious epiphany that allows the penitent to emerge reborn…only to do it all over again.

And why not? Money and privilege cushion the "bottom" hit by media glamour girls -- consequently, the depth of their actual addiction is trivialized. But their public and overdramatized lives are a world apart from the thousands of everyday women who struggle daily to recover from drug and alcohol abuse.

These women don’t appear in tabloids. Instead, they scrape by in those too-few group residences and drug recovery locations. Many more, homeless, wander the streets.

In real life, addiction isn’t pretty, isn’t easy to kick and isn’t a five-week pampered visit to posh rehab clinic.

Meet some addicts (Their names have been changed to protect their identities):

Paramedics scrape Tracey, a 30-year-old black woman, off of the pavement, while pedestrians scurry by. She's been lying there since early morning, having overdosed on methamphetamine. She will be revived in one of the hospital emergency rooms and placed in a locked-down detoxification ward.

Victoria, a 24-year-old Latina, works in a fast-food restaurant trying to maintain a routine that might keep her from relapsing into a crack addiction. She has rent money in her pocket from her paycheck, along with the promised contribution to her grandmother who cares for her 4-year-old son, but habit proves stronger than resolve. The addition kicks in; she takes "just one hit" on the crack pipe. Actually, there is no such thing as "just one” hit. When she surfaces again days later, Victoria has lost her job. Without income, she moves in with a drug-dealing john, predictably re-entering the drug life.

These real women, whose names have been changed to protect their identities, shared their stories with me as residents in Still Standing Recovery Ministry, one of the very few drug recovery programs in South St. Petersburg accepting women.

At any one time, 100 residents – equally men and women, white and non-white - are sheltered and supervised in six residential buildings. They are separated into different houses by gender and required to follow a structured program of 12-step meetings, job and career counseling and faith-based counseling designed to help them stay clean, sober and straight. Two-thirds of the time the plan works, but it works more often for men than for women.

The interviews were conducted because it was clear that life stories of women at Still Standing were not the same as the men's. Observation and recidivism rates suggest that the women are more destitute than the men, and they appear to be more readily drawn back into addictions.

The interviews uncovered destructive patterns of behavior by women that are mostly obscured by the media’s fascination with the glitz, drama and hysteria of celebrities' drug-induced, wild abandons. Unlike the pretty party girls, many of the women I interviewed were impoverished, unemployed and unskilled -- adding to the difficulty of getting and staying clean and sober.

Thirty-one-year-old Simone's [not her real name] candor is instructive:

"Within a year of my first hit, I was strung out. I was 19. I had a son (but) gave him up because he was getting big and demanding and was cutting into my get-high time. Frankly, I wanted him to have a better life than I'd had…I went in and out of local alcohol crisis centers and in and out of detox. I'd do the halfway-house thing and get cleaned up for a little bit…but I was young and there was a lot to come that I had no clue I was headed toward.”

Simone today is serving a long jail term because of her lifestyle and addiction. This is a frequent outcome for female addicts. Tracey fared far worse. About a year after my interview with her, her body was found in a dumpster.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scruggs-Leftwich is Executive.Director-principal investigator for the nonprofit Center for Community and Economic Justice Inc. in St. Petersburg, Fla., which also founded the Still Standing Recovery Ministry.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Florida Forum. 3/10

NEW MEXICO EDITORIAL FORUM

By Sen. Timothy M. Keller

Almost 10 years ago, our country was coping with a series of corporate accountability crises in the wake of Enron, World Com and other breakdowns in organizational governance. Widespread public outcry led to responses through our legal system and in Congress. Hundreds of lawsuits were filed in an effort to retrieve squandered funds and lawmakers responded by passing the Sarbanes Oxley Act. It’s now time for New Mexico to act.

Currently, a similar crisis faces state pension and investment funds across the country and at home in New Mexico. Our State Investment Council (SIC) has been drained by scandal costing over $5 million in legal fees. State funds finished 2009 in the very bottom 1 percent of performance nationwide, down a whopping $2 billion. Like those affected by Enron, our citizens and state should push legal actions to get our money back. We must also address the state investment fund’s inherent structural flaws much like Congress did with Sarbanes Oxley to prevent further deterioration of investor confidence and improve performance.

A central tenet of good governance is to have any board of directors be as diverse in experience as possible. Much attention has been given to ideas directed at diluting the Governor’s influence on our SIC. This idea is warranted, however, it’s only the tip of the iceberg. Our state has numerous structural conflicts of interest built into statute.

In January, an independent review of New Mexico fund governance reported 40 plus recommendations for structural change issued to the Governor and Legislature. The report noted that the State Investment Officer (SIO) has sole control of decision making during the SIC, while the state investment board acts, in reality, as an “advisory” board. Herein lies the root cause of systemic conflicts of interest built into the statutes for our state investment funds.

Right now, all contractor agreements, including financial advisors and legal counsel – which amount to about 85 percent of the $35 million SIC budget -- are at the sole discretion of one person, the SIO. The SIO also has a seat on the SIC so that if they (voluntarily) decide to bring an issue to the SIC, they get to vote on the same issue they are recommending. This structure creates potential for a serious conflict of interest. Considering our state funds manage $30 billion plus dollars, it is crucial that we build into law real accountability and transparency into our state funds.

Further, our investment fund board lacks basic qualification requirements. In Senate hearings we have heard testimony from top state fund officials who declared that their board “recently learned how to read a prospectus,” and “have E*TRADE accounts,” and “used to work at local bank;” as examples of “expertise.” In the professional investment world, these kinds of statements show an embarrassing lack of understanding.

Successful modern investing translates into a keen understanding of “alternative investments.” These are not traditional stocks and bonds; they are private equity, venture capital, derivatives, hedge funds, commercial backed mortgage securities, etc. In the private sector, individuals are not permitted to invest in most of these unless they are a “qualified investor” nor have various certifications, yet we allow or state funds to be invested in them by a board that has almost zero experience in these areas. Faced with the choices of not investing in these types of assets or hiring in house the requisite talent, we rely on almost 40 different advisors to make decisions for us.

Lastly, basic governance concepts such as quorum rules, transparency rules, vice chairman requirements, attendance requirements, designee rules, government conduct act provisions and fiduciary requirements are all virtually non-existent in our state laws.

A proposal, which is now making its way through our state Senate, includes many provisions to specifically address these glaring weaknesses. These changes are imperative in order to ensure best practices in investment bodies. In doing so, this will improve and protect objectivity and independence in investments, foster greater public confidence, establish structural and institutional confidence and promote honest and ethical conduct.

Our state funds, in addition to tax revenue, are the basis for our annual budget and are the $30 billion endowment for our state’s educational services. I hope New Mexico can lead the way in enacting comprehensive investment fund reform.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keller (D-Bernalillo-17) is a state senator who previously worked in private equity, investment banking and corporate governance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the American Forum. 2/10

Tennessee Editorial Forum

By Jaime Gonzalez

My parents are Americans. They are citizens of this great country, which they are proud to call home. They are also immigrants.

My father immigrated to this country from Mexico in 1972 when he was 18 years old. At the time he wanted little more than to provide for his growing family. My mother, then pregnant with my oldest brother, had come over a few months earlier. Before crossing the border my dad was told to squeeze into the spare tire compartment of a station wagon as they drove through customs in Tijuana. For over an hour he prayed and thought of his young wife while trying not to inhale too much of the exhaust that was seeping in from the tail pipe.

That night he slept in a country where dreams come true; a country where people from all over the world are literally risking death just to live here.

The next day my father went to work at a plant nursery earning $1.35 an hour. He worked there for five years. In 1977 he started working for General Motors where he drove cars off the assembly line. It was a turning point in his life: my dad didn’t have to hide in the spare tire compartment anymore.

We all seek definition. As a first generation American born to Mexican immigrants I remember reciting the pledge of allegiance everyday before class. It gave me the clarity of something I could depend on. The words came out of me like a song, and its rhythm seemed to synchronize itself with my heartbeat. I was taught to base the rest of the day on the simplicity of the pledge. Often I would focus on the passage “liberty and justice for all.” At the time it just did not occur to me that even though anyone could cry out their allegiance to this country some people would simply never be heard.

Countless communities across the U.S. are filled with people who have no say. In Shelbyville, the community I belong to, we are repeatedly reminded of the plight of immigrant families who have no confidence in a system they feel has little use for them.

We are constantly receiving reports of honor students being told they cannot continue their higher education because they do not have a social security number. Victims of crime have come to me and said they are afraid to file a report after
they have been robbed simply because they fear legal status scrutiny by police. We have spoken to children who say they become worried when their parents are late coming home because they believe their mother or father have been detained by immigration authorities.

This madness must be brought to an end.

In order to bring a logical and rational solution to our immigration crisis the people must first be heard. The need for reform is clear and more urgent than ever before. It makes little sense to teach children “liberty and justice for all” when this sacred passage is treated like a mere platitude.

Both my mother and father pledged their allegiance to this country, and in 2008 they stated their presence by voting in their first presidential election. They earned this right through their loyalty and devotion to the country they call home. My parents were overwhelmed by emotion as they came to understand the noble power of having a voice when so many immigrants live in constant fear. Millions of people now living in this country, no matter how loyal or devoted, are shut out before ever being heard.

In 2010, on the 21st of March, we will rise to speak for those who are still searching for a voice. We will travel from all over this great nation to gather in Washington D.C., and we will march in the pursuit of a stronger nation for us all. More importantly, however, we will stand together in devotion to the dignity of humanity itself. When the leaders of this nation wake up on that Sunday morning and see us there, tens of thousands of Americans, we will remind them that change takes courage. For we are sons, we are daughters, we are brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, we are students, we are teachers, we are engineers, we are builders, we are civilians, we are soldiers, we are dreamers, we are human, we are here; and, we are marching for America.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gonzalez is a community leader from Shelbyville and graduate student at Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Tennessee Editorial Forum. 3/10

Tennessee Editorial Forum

By Rev. Jeremy Tobin

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Article 13 states that, “Everyone has the right to leave any country including his own, and to return to his country.” Article 14 states that, “everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.”

From these and other articles and principles enshrined in the UDHR, came “The International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families,” which was ratified by the United Nations on December 18, 1990.

People of faith believe that human rights are given by the Creator. They come with birth. Good law is to safeguard and protect these rights.

Both Article 13 and the International Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, declare that people have a right to migrate in order to better their living conditions and escape persecution, poverty and destitution. Migration has been going on as long as payment in return for labor was introduced.

The Catholic Bishops of the United States and Mexico have affirmed the long tradition of Catholic social justice in defending the right to migrate.

The international conventions and the bishops stress the right to migrate. So we begin by defending the right for people to migrate in order to seek work, to support their families and escape poverty and destitution.

International trade policies, notably NAFTA, have contributed to the exploitation of foreign economies and the steady flow of desperate people in search of work.

Historically, U.S. immigration policy is geared toward getting the cheapest labor force possible. It is based on discrimination. It ensures the steady flow of the cheapest labor from slavery to sweatshops, to back breaking field labor, to poultry and meat packing plants, and all manner of labor intensive work. The workers are set up to be treated inhumanely and paid well below what is fair and just. Guest worker policies make workers serfs to the companies that sponsor them. We must demand change in trade policies as well as just immigration reform. Both must happen together.

International conventions and statements from the religious community reinforce the principle that morality and justice are on the side of those struggling for fair and just immigration reform.

Looking at the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, article 33 declares, states take appropriate measures to ensure that migrant workers and their families, are informed, upon request, free of charge, in a language they are able to understand, of the rights under this convention and on all matters that will enable them to comply with administrative or other formalities in the state of employment. Migrants are to be informed, even before they leave, of all conditions they must satisfy to gain employment.

Migrants are being abused, on every level as they seek employment in the U.S. Their desperation has created an illegal trafficking industry that robs them of resources and puts them in harms way. Further, they are not being honestly informed, in their own language, of the real conditions of labor on the other side. This must change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Tobin is a member of the Mississippi Immigrant Rights Alliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by American Forum 3/10

Mississippi is a state that has historically faced severe economic challenges, as well as high rates of poverty, dropouts, and illiteracy. Efforts though to bring community partners together have gained traction to create a system of quality education for young children.

Community, state and national leaders saw the need for action to improve the state’s ability to compete economically, to enhance the quality of life for its children and families, and to increase opportunities for all Mississippi children to achieve success. With the support of business, philanthropic, community and education leaders, many child care programs and preschools are receiving help to increase quality early childhood education.

Mississippi has adopted a quality rating system to promote quality improvements and business leaders have backed an early childhood education demonstration model that aims to improve the quality and delivery of services to children in early learning settings. At the same time, coalitions and calls for early education innovation and investments that will benefit young children across the state continue to grow.
Supporting Partnerships to Assure Ready Kids (SPARK) Mississippi has helped to lay a foundation from which an early learning system in Mississippi can evolve. This system includes multiple strategies and service components that ensure children’s health care needs are addressed, parents are supported in their efforts to provide nurturing and stable home environments, and that early care and education settings provide high-quality learning experiences while working with schools to develop effective transition plans.

Starting their work in five locations, mainly in the Mississippi Delta, SPARK staff worked with cohorts of three-year-olds in each community to provide them and their families with the supports and services needed to ensure their seamless transition into school and academic success through the third grade. By providing transition strategies, intense intervention, and scaling the SPARK work, we were able to make a difference in the early childhood education community in our selected sites; Most of which have evolved into model programs that can be replicated statewide using existing governmental resources.

Intervention strategies include: professional development and technical assistance for early learning center staff; resource fairs and cultural awareness activities for children and families; home visitation and the coordination of transition activities between early learning settings and public schools. In a recent evaluation, SPARK children, with all of these interventions, out-performed students in a comparable school district who did not have access to these interventions on a statewide achievement test.

A key component that has led to the success of SPARK Mississippi is the formation of Local Children’s Partnerships. These partnerships are made up of community members representing early education, local school districts, business leaders, parents, health providers, SPARK staff and other stakeholders who realize that the success of their community and ultimately the state rests upon meaningful investments in its children. These stakeholders work together to act on issues of quality, transition and alignment of the early education community.

The next phase of work plans to take the lessons learned from the first six years of the initiative and expand the model into additional communities throughout the state. We want to ensure that the investments made will continue to build support for early childhood care and education and influence early childhood policy and practice across the state.

To help share the lessons learned through SPARK’s early learning initiatives, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation partnered with IDEO, a renowned design and innovation consulting firm, to help communities improve their learning systems. Instead of relying on outside experts — the usual method for reforming schools — these communities are looking inward, tapping parents, teachers, business and faith leaders, and even students to help generate solutions that work for them.
The best programs, we continue to learn, link parents, teachers, and students and create strong connections between classrooms and communities, building an educational continuum.

Communities, school districts, and policymakers are creating new ways to teach and nurture children from age 3 through third grade. National leaders are taking notice and, more important, taking steps to replicate successful programs across the map. President Obama is asking states and communities with innovative ideas to help reshape American education. To propel these innovative ideas, two new federal funds for innovation will provide a total of $5 billion to inspire communities to shake up the education landscape.

Through the President’s initiative we have the chance to further revolutionize learning and set Mississippi’s children on a path to long-term success despite the current economic crisis.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collins is the executive director of SPARK-MS, an initiative of the Children’s Defense Fund – Southern Regional Office. Taylor is vice president for programs at the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Mississippi Forum 2/10

KENTUCKY FORUM

By Michael Aldridge, Craig Cammack, Chris Hartman, Travis Myles and George W. Stinson

January of 1966, with Gov. Edward T. Breathitt's signing of a law Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., called “the strongest and most comprehensive civil rights bill passed by a southern state,” the Commonwealth of Kentucky became the first state in the south to adopt a Civil Rights Act with enforceable repercussions for acts of discrimination. Two years later, Kentucky was again first in the south, this time in the passage of a statewide fair housing law, which cemented our commonwealth's legacy as the nation's southern civil rights leader.

At its core, the purpose of the Civil Rights Act is to guarantee equality for everyone. It ensures all Kentuckians have the same opportunities to earn a living, be safe in their communities, serve their country, and care for the ones they love. When there has been a history of a particular group's lack of access to these fundamentals of the American dream, the just and appropriate response has been to add that group to existing antidiscrimination laws.

Today our state has the opportunity to once again stand as the pioneer of fairness and equality among its southern peers, and we challenge each and every Kentuckian to add their voice to the call for comprehensive civil rights in the commonwealth.

On Jan. 5, a proposal for a statewide fairness law was introduced to amend our state's Civil Rights Act to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as protected classifications. This would prohibit discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Kentuckians in employment, housing and public accommodations. Even today, any person suspected of being gay or transgender outside Lexington, Louisville or Covington may be legally fired from their job, denied housing, or withheld access to any public accommodation — such as a bus ride or service in a restaurant.

Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia currently enforce such fairness protections, and of the 29 states that do not, more than 70 of their cities and counties extend protections to their gay and transgender citizens. Approximately 25 percent of our state's population resides in the three communities with existing fairness laws, and Census data indicates that large numbers of individuals also commute into these communities during the workweek. Consequently, approximately 30 percent of Kentuckians are protected from this type of discrimination, yet this simple equality proposal has never even come to a committee vote.

This year marks more than a decade since Lexington and Louisville passed their fairness ordinances — the same year a Decision Research Poll documented 73 percent of Kentuckians supported statewide fairness protections. This law is long overdue in our commonwealth, and if we do not act quickly, we will surely lose our place in history as the nation's southern leader of equality.

On June 2, 2008, Gov. Steve Beshear adopted an executive order stating a broad and inclusive policy of nondiscrimination in state government employment. Governor Beshear recognizes the time has come for Kentucky to join the 21 other states that have already enacted laws protecting gay and transgender people, and we must too.

Just as Kentucky led the south in 1966 by becoming the first southern state to pass a civil rights law applicable to employment and places of public accommodation, and led the region in 1968 by becoming the first southern state to pass protections in housing, we must now boldly, resolutely take up the challenge to lead the south into a new era of equality for everyone. We must affirm our commonwealth's legacy by becoming the first southern state to stand united for fairness.

If you cherish Kentucky's rich history as the southern civil rights leader, then look not only to our past, but also to our fair and equal future.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aldridge is executive director of ACLU-KY. Cammack is chairman of Lexington Fairness. Hartman is director of the Fairness Campaign Louisville. Myles is chairperson of the Kentucky Fairness Alliance. Stinson is chairperson of the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights. They are all members of the Kentucky Statewide Fairness Coalition. The Statewide Fairness Day and rally in the Capitol Rotunda is being held in Frankfort on Wednesday, Feb. 24.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Kentucky Forum. 2/10

NEW MEXICO EDITORIAL FORUM

By Jane McGrath, M.D.

You may hear a lot of talk about taxing soft drinks and other sugar-sweetened beverages. A new tax never sounds like a good idea, but this one is well worth considering. The proposal would add an excise tax of 1 cent per fluid ounce on sugar-sweetened beverages. The tax would be levied on the manufacturers and would show up as a small price increase on the drinks on the supermarket shelf.

I don’t think anyone needs reminding that we are in the middle of an obesity epidemic in New Mexico, as well as in much of the rest of the world. Obesity is a complex problem with multiple causes that result in very high medical costs—which is unsurprising given that complications from obesity include diabetes, heart disease, liver failure, sleep apnea and orthopedic problems. In fact, we spend an estimated $147 billion dollars nationally each year on obesity-related medical costs, half of which are paid with taxpayer dollars through Medicaid and Medicare. Strategies such as an excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverages will help decrease obesity rates and save taxpayer money by reducing medical costs.

Fixing the problem of obesity will involve many different kinds of strategies—much as we are doing with smoking. We have anti-smoking public information campaigns; taxes on cigarettes; age restrictions on buying cigarettes; and policies that restrict smoking in many public places, including the workplace. It takes this kind of multi-pronged approach to make an impact. So a targeted tax on sugar-sweetened beverages is part of how we can begin to deal with obesity from a legislative perspective.

Soda/soft drinks are considered “sugar-sweetened beverages,” which are defined by the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University as beverages sweetened with naturally derived caloric sweeteners such as sucrose (table sugar), high fructose corn syrup or fruit juice concentrates. The beverages include soda, sports drinks, sweet teas and coffees, flavored waters, energy drinks and the syrup used to make such drinks in soda dispensing machines.

Sugar-sweetened beverages have been shown in multiple independent studies to add significantly to the risk of obesity. (Studies funded by the beverage industry have not demonstrated a correlation.) This happens in part because, unlike solid food, liquid calories are not satiating so you don’t adjust your caloric intake at your next meal the way you might if you had, say, a large cookie before dinner instead of a soda.

The benefits of an excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverages are pretty compelling. New Mexicans drink an estimated almost 75 million gallons of sugar-sweetened beverages a year. At that level of consumption, the proposed 1 cent per fluid ounce tax would add $95 million a year to the state’s coffers, reducing our projected state budget deficit by 20 percent.

Increasing the cost of a product on the shelf directly affects consumers and changes their behavior: They buy less. Some people say that such a tax is regressive and disproportionately affects children and the poor—and that is true. But it’s also true that obesity disproportionately affects children and the poor. Changing our behavior so that we drink fewer sugar-sweetened beverages will make us all healthier.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
McGrath is a pediatrician based in Albuquerque.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the New Mexico Editorial Forum. 2/10

AMERICAN FORUM

By Pat Wheatley and Anthony Berkley

Communities, school districts, and policymakers are creating new ways to teach and nurture children from birth through third grade. National and state leaders are taking notice, and more importantly taking steps to replicate successful programs across the map.

The time is right, too. President Obama is asking states and communities with innovative ideas to help reshape American education. To propel these innovative ideas, two new federal funds for innovation will provide a total of $5 billion to inspire communities to shake up the education landscape.

While all levels of education need shaking up, it is important that we start with early learning to get our kids on the right track as soon as possible.

Young children learn more, do better in school and, ultimately, in the world of work when they move seamlessly from home to child care to preschool to the early grades. Unfortunately, far too few children experience such seamlessness, thanks to a poorly implemented educational system that moves them from one place and grade to the next with no sense of continuity.

Communities large and small – urban and rural – are hard at work to change that. Promising early learning initiatives, supported through a W.K. Kellogg Foundation-sponsored project called SPARK, Supporting Partnerships to Assure Ready Kids, are helping communities to smooth those crucial transitions from home, child care, and pre-school to elementary school. SPARK efforts bring together schools, early care and education providers, families and community partners to make sure that children are ready for school and that schools are ready for them.

California communities are embracing these principles and innovative practices to improve student and school readiness to build the foundation for long-term student success. New ideas are the order of the day, especially in California communities already reeling from a state budget crisis that only deepened as the national economy nose-dived. In one community – Santa Barbara – a collaborative that involves First 5 Santa Barbara County, the Carpinteria Unified School District, public and private service providers, philanthropic and community organizations, is working to ensure coordinated services for families and children beginning at the earliest ages. The focus for services is clear: enhancing school readiness and success in the early grades and beyond, improving child and family health, and strengthening the capacity of vulnerable families to thrive.

Efforts are underway to share the lessons learned through SPARK and other early learning initiatives. Governors’ forums help spread good ideas and practices, and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation partnership with IDEO, a renowned design and innovation consulting firm, assists communities in improving their learning systems. Instead of relying on outside experts — the usual method for reforming schools — these communities are looking inward, tapping parents, teachers and even students to help generate solutions that work for them.

The best programs, we continue to learn, link parents, teachers, and students and create strong connections between classrooms and communities, building an educational continuum.

We have the chance, thanks to these dynamics, to revolutionize learning and set our children on a path to long-term success.

Communities like Santa Barbara are already creating new pathways and connections that support early learning and success in school. 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.

Creating and championing innovative programs that communities throughout America can adapt — may well turn this time of economic crisis into one of meaningful and lasting education reform.

The best ideas for education, we’ve long known, bubble up from the community level. Thanks to the President’s $5 billion initiative, the stars seem aligned to give this type of bottom-up innovation serious consideration.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wheatley is executive director of First 5 Santa Barbara County. Berkley is deputy director for education and learning at the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright (C) 2010 by the American Forum. 1/10

American Forum

By Ken Smythe-Leistico and Anthony Berkley

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

The President is asking states and communities with innovative ideas to help reshape American education. To propel these innovative ideas, two new federal funds for innovation will provide a total of $5 billion, enough to launch what Education Secretary Arne Duncan has described as “education reform’s moon shot.” These funds aim to do nothing less than inspire communities to shake up the education landscape.

All levels of education, we believe, need shaking up, but none more than the long-ignored area of early learning.

For years now, school systems have funneled energy and resources to remediation programs in often futile attempts to keep struggling, older children in school. But, they’ve prevented far too few teens from dropping out.

We, of course, must not ignore the serious needs of our older students. But, we still need to do much more to help children kick off their education the right way. We need to start much earlier, the younger the better, to give our younger students an extra boost from so that they never fall behind in the first place.

Young children learn more, do better in school and, ultimately, in the world of work when they move seamlessly from home to child care to preschool to the early grades. Unfortunately, far too few children experience such seamlessness, thanks to a herky-jerky educational system that moves them from one place and grade to the next with no sense of continuity.

Communities large and small are hard at work to change that — in places ranging from Miami and Atlanta to counties across Ohio and Pennsylvania. These communities have launched and expanded promising early learning initiatives through a project called SPARK, Supporting Partnerships to Assure Ready Kids. Sponsored by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, SPARK works to smooth those crucial transitions from home, child care and preschool to elementary school.

The goal: to make sure that children are ready for school and that schools are ready for them. Communities around the country are embracing these principles and innovative practices to improve student and school readiness and the opportunities for long-term student success. The University of Pittsburgh Office of Child Development, for several years has worked with local schools to develop model community teams and implement plans that result in positive school transitions for young children.

They also have helped to establish and sustain good relationships between parents, programs and schools. These kindergarten transition teams reflect and engage the community, including staff from the school, Head Start, child care, literacy programs and social services agencies, parents, clinicians, and clergy.

To help share the lessons learned through SPARK and other early learning initiatives, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation partnered with IDEO, a renowned design and innovation consulting firm, to help communities improve their learning systems. Instead of relying on outside experts — the usual method for reforming schools — these communities are looking inward, tapping parents, teachers, business and faith leaders, and even students to help generate solutions that work for them.

The best programs, we continue to learn, link parents, teachers, and students and create strong connections between classrooms and communities, building an educational continuum.

Communities, school districts, and policymakers are creating new ways to teach and nurture children from age 3 through third grade. National leaders are taking notice and, more important, taking steps to replicate successful programs across the map.

We have the chance, thanks to these dynamics, to revolutionize learning and set our children on a path to long-term success.

Communities are already creating new pathways that support early learning and success in school. 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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smythe-Leistico is director of Pathways to School Success at the University of Pittsburgh Office of Child Development. Berkley is deputy director for education and learning at the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the American Forum. 1/10

AMERICAN FORUM

By Laurie Potts and Anthony Berkley

All levels of education need shaking up, but none more than the long-ignored area of early learning.

Now the stars are aligning to give this type of bottom-up innovation serious consideration.

The President is asking states and communities with innovative ideas to help reshape American education. To propel these innovative ideas, two new federal funds for innovation will provide a total of $5 billion, enough to launch what Education Secretary Arne Duncan has described as “education reform’s moon shot.” These funds aim to do nothing less than inspire communities to shake up the education landscape.

We know that young children learn more, do better in school and, ultimately, in the world of work when they move seamlessly from home to child care to preschool to the early grades. Unfortunately, far too few children experience such seamlessness, thanks to a herky-jerky educational system that moves them from one place and grade to the next with no sense of continuity.

Communities large and small – rural and urban – are hard at work to change that. Promising early learning initiatives through a W.K. Kellogg Foundation-sponsored project called SPARK, Supporting Partnerships to Assure Ready Kids, are working to smooth those crucial transitions from home, child care and preschool to elementary school.

The goal: to make sure that children are ready for school and that schools are ready for them.

Communities around the country are embracing these principles and innovative practices to improve student and school readiness and the opportunities for long-term student success. In Coos County Oregon, Southwestern Oregon Community College and the Commission on Children and Families Early Childhood Committee have for many years built collaboration among programs and services for young children and their families within local communities. The partnership, working with and through the college’s Childhood Education & Family Studies program, community organizations, local schools, and Head Start/Early Head Start programs, serves to strengthen the links and alignment of early childhood programs and services with schools. Successful parenting education programs, a parent-child cooperative preschool, and ongoing teacher and early care provider training have their roots in partnership efforts.

Efforts are underway to share the lessons learned through SPARK and other early learning initiatives, including networking activities, Governor’s fora, and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation partnership with IDEO, a renowned design and innovation consulting firm, to help communities improve their learning systems. Instead of relying on outside experts — the usual method for reforming schools — these communities are looking inward, tapping parents, teachers and even students to help generate solutions that work for them.

The best programs link parents, teachers, and students and create strong connections between classrooms and communities, building an educational continuum.

Communities, school districts, and policymakers are creating new ways to teach and nurture children from age 3 through third grade. National leaders are taking notice and, more important, taking steps to replicate successful programs across the map.

Communities such as Coos Bay are continuously searching for and creating new pathways that support early learning and success in school. Community forums and other strategies identify needs, strengths, and next steps that are then put into action. One undertaking has culminated in the development of a local community school where children participate in enrichment programs, parents can take parenting and early childhood education classes, and social service supports from community partners, are available, right at the school. Such groundbreaking strategies can help shape federal and state policies.

Oregon must work toward tapping into the $5 billion in federal funding to further innovate and expand existing early education programs. We cannot afford to miss out on this tremendous opportunity to better our communities through investing in our children’s futures.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potts is childhood education director at Southwestern Oregon Community College. Berkley is deputy director for education and learning at the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the American Forum. 1/10

AMERICAN FORUM

By Gene Nichol

I am Texan by birth and Southern by acculturation. My family would attest I'm not beyond relating stories that mysteriously expand upon each re-telling. Given my trade, I read much of Madison, Hamilton, Story and Marshall. But, truth told, I prefer Mark Twain, Will Rogers, Woody Guthrie and Huey Long. I do not find hyperbole completely uncongenial.

That conceded, I find no words to convey adequate outrage over Friday's U.S. Supreme Court decision, in the Citizens United case, to radically untether corporate spending in our electoral politics. It is bizarrely anti-democratic. It overtly robs the American people of any conceivable tool to prevent a complete slide into mocking, cynical, purchased, cash-register politics. It marks the court as mere shill for the dominance of economic privilege. Unmolested, it will lead to both democratic and constitutional crises. It is a ruling that will come to reside, deservedly, in infamy.

By a slim majority, the court reached beyond the factual dispute before it to reshape the way elections are conducted. Justice Anthony Kennedy's stunning opinion overruled two recent, major precedents - one from 1990 and one from 2003. Giving the back of the hand to statutes like the Tillman Act that have placed limits on campaign spending by business entities for over a century, the justices determined corporations must be treated like human beings in the political sphere.

Pressing further, Kennedy declared "expenditures ... made by corporations do not give rise to ... the appearance of corruption." That "speakers may have influence over ... elected officials does not mean those officials are corrupt." The "appearance of influence will not cause the electorate to lose faith in this democracy." Say what?

Accordingly, since Friday, corporations have enjoyed an unassailable constitutional right to spend, from their ample treasuries, unlimited amounts of money in elections - federal, state and local - to assist or to defeat particular candidates. If you have worried that institutions of daunting wealth have inadequate influence in the halls of government, be relieved.

A system of government in which those who seek certain policies are allowed to spend unrestrained sums on behalf of those who make the policies can be called many things. "Democratic" and "fair" are not among them.

The Citizens United ruling should put to rest any lingering doubts that Justices Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy are anything other than aggressive, expansive, committed and ideological activists. They cast aside their oft-asserted standards of stare decisis, narrow fact-based decision-making, adherence to tradition, deference to elected branches of government and any conceivable notion of interpretation by original intention. (It's hard not to recall Jefferson's wish "that we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength.")

But it's not the hypocrisy of the decision that crushes. It's the impact. It is one thing to talk about corruption. That trail can lead in an abundance of directions. But, regardless of label, ponder the reality, now constitutionally required.

Months ago, Sen. Kay Hagan was reportedly torn about health care reform. Imagine that then representatives of an insurance company explained, publicly if need be, that if Hagan voted against reform they were prepared to spend $2 million on her behalf in the next election. If she voted for reform, they'd spend $2 million to take her out.

It is impossible to believe that such moves - multiplied across issues and jurisdictions - will not have a corrosive, debilitating and often insurmountable effect on the outcomes of our political process. It cannot be that the Supreme Court majority doesn't know this. The only logical conclusion is the judges embrace it.

And what is good for federal elections applies across the board. If a developer longs to secure a massive project in Chapel Hill, he is free to spend hundreds of thousands to aid a favored council candidate. It may, in fact, constitute a reasonable component of his business plan.
Under such a reality, any system of campaign finance limitation is rendered absurd. We should repeal them all. That may be the actual motivation for the decision.

In the past two years, the Roberts Court has brought us two landmark, unprecedented, inexplicable departures from over a century of settled jurisprudence. One determined that all but a handful of restrictions on the right to possess firearms are unconstitutional. The other, now, gives a free hand to corporations to purchase elections and legislators. It's hard to believe any group could survey American life and determine what we need most are more guns and more corporate influence.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nichol is a professor of law and director of the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity at UNC-Chapel Hill.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the American Forum. 2/10

Mariotte is executive director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS). He lives in Takoma Park.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2009 by the American Forum. 02/10