Congress must fill the leadership void

President Trump is promising a swift and seamless economic recovery if only the states will hurry up and lift their stay-at-home orders. “Those jobs will be back and they’ll be back very soon,” he said, reacting to last month’s horrendous spike in unemployment.

This is fantasy. Besides ignoring the health hazards of prematurely reopening the economy, Trump is raising false hopes among millions of U.S. workers whose jobs have vanished in the COVID-19 crisis.

In fact, getting everyone back to work once the pandemic is contained will be a huge challenge. It will happen in stages, not all at once, and it will require a well-focused national push to help less-educated and low-wage workers find new jobs, skills and careers.

Unfortunately, the Trump administration seems as woefully unprepared to grapple with this urgent task as it was to check the pandemic’s spread. That means Congress will have to deliver what we need: A full-scale, full-employment initiative in which the federal, state and local governments work in tandem with the private sector to upskill displaced workers, match them to openings in fast-growing sectors and lower obstacles to starting a business.

Read the full piece here.

With Latinx Students Near 30 Percent of all Public School Students, Latinx Leaders Demand a Seat at the School Board Table

It is time for Latinx communities to build the political power necessary to demand education reforms that benefit their children, several Latinx leaders argue. Within 16 months, 30 percent of all public school students will be Latinx, they pointed out during a recent Progressive Policy Institute webinar. But school boards often have no idea what these students need.

“A lot of the problem I see is that the people in power don’t even take the first step to understand who they’re dealing with,” said Ricardo Miguel Martinez, who founded and leads Latin American Parents for Public Schools (LAPPS), in Georgia.

“These systems were designed” generations ago by white people, added Cinto Ramos, president of the school board in Ft. Worth and the Mexican-American School Board Association in Texas. “Our whole system was designed in whiteness.” Latinx parents are rarely at the table when decisions are made, so “we district leaders have got to get ready to listen like we’ve never listened before.”

Particularly now, the needs are acute. Many communities have suffered during the Covid-19 pandemic, but Latinx and black communities have suffered the most. They have lost jobs faster than white or Asians, and their death rates are higher.

“Most Latino families are low-income, and what we’re seeing is that low-income families are much more susceptible to health problems,” says Alma Marquez, who leads a public affairs firm called the Del SOL Group and founded La Comadre, a network of Latina women in California fighting to improve education for their children. “Only 15 percent of Latino parents can work from home, so most of them have to work outside the home, and that exposes them to this virus.”

“We have people in our community that are already selling their cars and their possessions to pay for groceries and rent and keep the lights on,” Martinez added.

Martinez’s LAPPS organization has helped create a COVID Relief Fund, to provide money to Latinx and black families in crisis, and Ramos’s district has worked to get laptops and WiFi hotspots to Latinx students so they can continue learning from home. But all agreed that deeper reforms are necessary.

The first step, several argued, is to give Latinx parents real information about the quality of their children’s schools. LAPPS prepared an “Equity Report,” which showed the disturbing reality that in Atlanta Public Schools, only 16 percent of black students and 20 percent of Latinx students read proficiently. “We show people the graphs and charts about how we’re doing, and the first thing we see is the jaws drop,” Martinez said.

“If you do not have an Equity Report for your district, you need one.”

The next step is to get parents to attend school board meetings and speak up. In Atlanta, LAPPS worked with the school board to pass the first language access policy in the state of Georgia. Other districts have begun to follow suit.

Parents should demand that the districts actively recruit quality Latinx teachers, the participants agreed. Districts should also create more options that fit the needs of Latinx students, such as specialized schools for recent immigrants, dual-language immersion schools, and career-tech high schools. In California, La Comadre is pushing the governor to mandate that districts create individualized learning plans for each English language learner, based on the success of a program in Modesto that has done that.

Rather than assign students to such schools based on where they live, districts should allow families to choose the school that best fits their needs, some participants added. “For Latino families, I think choice is something that could be of life or death importance,” Marquez said. “School choices really do dictate so much of family outcomes, socioeconomic outcomes, and as we’re seeing with this COVID crisis, health outcomes.”

Both Marquez and Ramos noted that they had benefited from the opportunity, as Ramos put it, “to attend a better school than some of my neighbors were able to, than some of my siblings were able to.”

They also stressed that schools need significant autonomy, so their leaders can hire more effective teachers and use their resources in more effective ways.

As an illustration, Beacon Network Schools Executive Principal Alex Magaña talked about the opportunity he had in Denver to transform a struggling district school — where 80 percent of the students were Hispanic and 96 percent qualified for subsidized meals — into an “innovation school,” with waivers from much of the bureaucracy’s red tape.

He and his teachers — all district employees — “redesigned the school to do something different for the population we were serving. We offer a unique program of enrichment activities [particularly through an extended day], personalized learning and blended learning [in which every student has a computer], and character development, or social-emotional learning.”

Because innovation school status gave them the flexibility they needed to do all of this, Magaña and his staff succeeded. A few years later the district offered them a chance to take over another failing school, which they also turned around. Now they are an “innovation zone,” with its own board, which advocates for the school, defends its autonomy, and raises money to fund its many enrichment activities.

With their autonomy, the schools were able to pivot to remote learning almost immediately when the district closed down. “The students were not shocked,” Magaña said. “They knew where to go on their computers for their assignments. We can quickly make adjustments and changes to serve the needs of our kids; we don’t need to wait.”

Marquez expanded on this theme in a subsequent interview: “We’ve got to trust educators at the local level, and too often, because of these big bureaucracies, and because people who work in them are disconnected from the daily realities that students and their families face, they just don’t have the connections to the students. We’ve got to trust that educators can make those decisions, and at the same time, we have to hold them accountable.

“We need to trust principals to hire their team. We need to trust that principals can be instructional leaders, who should have the autonomy to help others move out if they are not meeting the goals and vision of the school. In addition to hiring and firing their staff, we need to make sure principals are able to determine what resources are used where, with a very clear delineation that the kids who most need those resources get those resources. So we need to make sure that the money is being budgeted with an equity lens, that more of the money is going to kids who are furthest from opportunity. And we need to make sure that there is transparency and accountability about that money.”

Martinez emphasized that schools should be made accountable to parents. “We‘re big on accountability,” Martinez explained, also in a follow-up interview. “Accountability means that the customers and the customer service are based on facts and decisions are based on facts and figures. The customers are the kids and their parents, and the customer service is the teachers and principals. The customer service in so many of these schools is horrible; parents are treated like dirt.”

Marquez noted that accountability to parents can be made real by giving them the right to move their children to a better public school if they are not satisfied. “They deserve the same opportunity to choose a school for their children that upper income people have,” she said.

She added that parents should have the option of choosing public charter schools if they prefer them. “Latino families like the autonomy” charters have, she noted. “Latino families like the respect they get as customers” who can choose what’s best for their children.

But none of this will simply be given to Latinx families, Marquez and the others noted. Cinto Ramos, who described himself as “that pissed off parent who ran for the school board,” said Latinx leaders have not yet figured out how to mobilize their community to embrace its power. He quoted Martin Luther King: “You must have power with love. Power without love is reckless and abusive. And love without power is sentimental and anemic.”

“We must lift our people into positions of power to fight for our children,” Marquez added. “Often those in power don’t want to hear from black and brown moms — and surely don’t want to give them any power. So we are raising our voices to them. We’re going to continue to push you, to embarrass you, to love on you, whatever it takes to make sure our kids get what they need. Because our kids only have one chance. They don’t get a do-over in 10 years.”

Read the full piece here.

WEBINAR: How Telehealth Can Improve Access to and Implementation of Mental Health Services

Fears about the novel coronavirus, the economy, and prolonged self-isolation are taking a toll on Americans and is making us sick. Calls to the federal mental health crisis hotline have increased 900 percent compared this time last year. Telehealth provides an opportunity for Americans to access mental health and essential primary care providers from their homes.

Many health care providers including therapists and psychiatrists have adapted, moving their appointments from their office and meeting virtually with patients online. And there is evidence that telehealth provides benefits to patients with anxiety and depression. Virtual care can help people feel less isolated, learn coping tools, develop goals and routines, and provide emotional support for people struggling during this difficult time. And in bolstering mental health, telehealth offers a new highway for improving patients’ overall health.

Lucy McBride, MD, Neil Leibowitz, MD, JD, of Talkspace, and PPI’s Arielle Kane discuss how telehealth can improve access to mental health services and how policy can improve access and encourage better integration of mental health across the care continuum.

Watch the full webinar here.

To Succeed in the Post-COVID Era, Our Schools Need to Stop Batch-Processing Kids

As school winds down for this year, discussion in education circles has turned to next year. After a spring of uneven distance learning and a long summer, should classes pick up where they were last March—or where they would normally start? Should they ask those who did not participate in distance learning to repeat a year?

But these questions miss the point. All students arrive, every year, at different stages in their academic growth. Some are multiple years behind grade level; some are near grade level but have gaps in their learning, topics they have never mastered. And some are at or above grade level.

Schools full of low-income children have struggled with this reality for years, because many of their students are years behind grade level. Many charter schools were founded to serve such students, and they have led the search for answers.

Read the full piece here

WEBINAR: Former Governors, Experts Join PPI for Important Health Care Conversation

The coronavirus pandemic has had profound social and economic consequences but it also has moved the national health care debate beyond the narrow focus on universal coverage, to a larger question of how to address the disparities which underlie disease. We’ve seen the disproportionate impact the pandemic has had on underserved populations. Former Governors John Kitzhaber, MD and Jack Markell, as well as special guest Gerard Anderson, Ph.D., discuss how to reform health care delivery and payment to improve outcomes.

House HEROES Act Gets The Trade-Offs Wrong

The U.S. House of Representatives is moving ahead with plans to vote today on the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act: the fifth – and potentially final – a piece of major legislation addressing the coronavirus pandemic and its economic effects. The 1800-page bill is estimated to cost roughly $3 trillion and contains a mix of both good policies and bad but is perhaps most notable for what it leaves out: automatic stabilizers.

The biggest flaw with previous relief bills was that aid was limited by the availability of funds appropriated by Congress or arbitrary calendar dates it chose instead of being based on the real needs of our economy. As a result, measures like the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) were exhausted within three weeks and many eligible businesses couldn’t get needed financial relief until Congress took additional action. The best way to prevent this problem in the future is by adopting “automatic stabilizers” — policies that cause spending to rise or taxes to fall automatically as predetermined economic or public-health benchmarks are met. For example, a proposal by Congressman Don Beyer and Senators Jack Reed and Michael Bennet would change the expansion of unemployment benefits included in the CARES Act to gradually phase out as the economy recovers instead of expiring arbitrarily on July 31st. The centrist New Democrat Coalition has also been vocal in calling on leadership to adopt automatic stabilizers in future relief bills.

Unfortunately, the HEROES Act doesn’t include any new automatic stabilizers – reportedly because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is concerned about the bill’s $3 trillion price tag. On the one hand, Speaker Pelosi is right to be concerned about wasting taxpayer money on unnecessary expenses given our nation’s serious long-term fiscal challenges. But the unfortunate reality is that supporting our economy during the worst public health crisis of our lifetimes is a large and necessary expense. It is no less fiscally responsible to pass one $3 trillion bill than three $1 trillion bills if the money is efficiently targeted to support our economy throughout this pandemic. Moreover, there are a number of costly provisions included in the HEROES Act that are a poor trade-off for sacrificing automatic stabilizers.

Read the full piece on Forbes.

Jumpstarting U.S. Clean Energy Manufacturing in Economic Stimulus and Infrastructure Legislation

AMERICA’S NEW CLEAN ENERGY MANUFACTURING OPPORTUNITY

In his 2016 campaign, candidate Donald Trump famously promised to revitalize American manufacturing and to pass major legislation to rebuild crumbling U.S. infrastructure. So far, in more than three years as President, he has done neither.

But in the face of the unprecedented COVID crisis, economic downturn and the worst unemployment since the Great Depression, many Democrats and some Republicans have begun to urge enactment of ambitious economic stimulus and recovery legislation, including a major infrastructure bill with a job-creating focus.

Properly structured stimulus and infrastructure legislation could help jumpstart U.S. manufacturing, which was already slumping badly under Trump throughout 2019, long before the COVID-crisis. In particular, the U.S. has an opportunity to create high-paying jobs and production in the fast-growing clean energy manufacturing sector, an industry that has been dominated by our global competitors, especially China, for the last decade.

Clean energy manufacturing represents perhaps the biggest single new growth opening for American industry in the coming years, as the transition to zero-carbon global and domestic economies creates unprecedented demand for dozens of clean energy technologies to address climate change. The U.S. is especially well-positioned to capture these markets as our national and corporate laboratories have created far more clean energy innovation breakthroughs than any other nation.

But we have not had a concerted national policy of turning those lab breakthroughs into American-made products to help our manufacturing job growth. Instead, our competitors have used U.S. innovations to bolster their own clean technology manufacturing in areas like solar panels, wind turbines, and electric vehicles.

Remarkably, in the last three years, the Trump Administration has gone out of its way to directly kill the creation of tens of thousands of clean energy manufacturing jobs, seemingly due to President Trump’s own ideological obsession with doing nothing that may have ancillary climate change benefits. Sectors including electric vehicles production and energy efficient refrigeration and air conditioning manufacturing where already tens of thousands of jobs are at stake have suffered from Trump’s animus toward clean manufacturing, while China continues to walk away with contracts, production and jobs.

The current economic crisis provides yet another opportunity to invest in domestic manufacturing in the crucial clean energy sector, creating good jobs in our industrial heartland. Democrats in Congress should include robust clean energy manufacturing incentives as they prepare major stimulus and infrastructure legislation. If Republicans in Congress will not support this agenda, as recent statements by their leader’s suggest, then Democrats, including presidential nominee Joe Biden, will make these issues a centerpiece of the 2020 election debate.

View and download the full report below.

PPI_Clean-Manufacturing-Infrastructure

WEBINAR: How to Address Regulations Suspended During the COVID 19 Crisis

Attempting to mitigate the spread of COVID-19, policymakers at the federal, state, & local levels are suspending or rescinding laws and regulations that hinder timely, sensible responses to the pandemic. The temporary departure from these rules is causing many to question the need to reinstate them post-crisis.

A diverse cross-section of scholars has written on why this is an important time to evaluate whether or not some of these regulations are really beneficial and how policymakers can best make these assessments. This co-sponsored webinar will provide viewers with a grounded, non-partisan approach for doing so.

The Mercatus Center published a policy brief, part of the COVID-19 Response series, that proposes an approach called a Fresh Start Initiative.

The Progressive Policy Institute has consistently proposed an approach to regulations that could foster more growth coming out of the pandemic while still protecting people and the environment.

The Mercatus Center is the world’s premier university source for market-oriented ideas—bridging the gap between academic ideas and real-world problems. As a university-based research center, Mercatus advances knowledge about how markets work to improve people’s lives by training graduate students, conducting research, and applying economics to find solutions for society’s most pressing problems.

The Progressive Policy Institute is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock.

Today, PPI is developing fresh proposals for stimulating U.S. economic innovation and growth; equipping all Americans with the skills and assets that social mobility in the knowledge economy requires; modernizing an overly bureaucratic and centralized public sector; and defending liberal democracy in a dangerous world.

Please contact mercatusoutreach@mercatus.gmu.edu or info@ppionline.org if you would like to speak with the scholars or would like to learn more about the issue.

PODCAST: Necessary, but Not Free

On the latest Facing the Future podcast, Concord Coalition Executive Director Bob Bixby, Director of the Progressive Policy Institute’s Center for Funding America’s Future, Ben Ritz, and Fiscal Policy Analyst, Brendan McDermott, joined Concord Coalition’s Chase Hagaman for a discussion of PPI’s recent publication titled “A Roadmap to Recovery” and deficit figures from the CBO’s monthly budget review.

Helping Things Click, Brick-by-Brick: America’s Great Shut-in is a Chance to Engage Students in Deeper Learning

My 10-year-old nephew, like most American kids, is “doing school” at home. An only child, he misses his friends, is not learning as much as he would in the classroom (by his own and his parents’ admission), and is often-times bored.

I ordered him a Lego Star Wars space fighter with a gazillion pieces to occupy him (and to give my sister some peace). He astounded me by putting it together in hours. During our “thank you−you’re welcome” video chat, the conversation drifted to the challenges of his confinement. He imaginatively listed places he plans to visit after the pandemic recedes. Tokyo was at the top, but every other place on his list was a far-flung historical site.

My first thought was, “good luck with that.”

My second thought was a lightbulb moment.

After a quick check−yes, Lego, makes kits for many monuments, buildings and city skylines−we made a deal. I would send him as many sets as he wanted, one at a time, in exchange for a written report on the edifice he’d just built. Reports would include history, architectural significance, milestone events, and so on. I warned him I would critique his English, including spelling and grammar, and would help him correct mistakes.

Read more here.

Donald Trump’s legacy is truth decay

Our country is reeling under the dual onslaught of COVID-19 and runaway unemployment, but there’s one person who’s willing to give President Trump high marks for handling the situation: Donald Trump. “I think in a certain way, maybe our best work has been on what we’ve done with COVID-19,” he mused in an interview this week.

Most Americans disagree with Trump’s generous self-appraisal. “Since March 20, President Donald Trump’s net approval rating (approval minus disapproval) for his coronavirus response has dropped 23 points, settling at a new low of minus 9 this week,” reports Morning Consult, which tracks public opinion on the crisis daily.

“The president’s failure to maintain public confidence in recent weeks stands in contrast with a number of other world leaders, who benefited from significant approval rating improvements in the wake of the pandemic,” Consult adds. Other polls also show that Americans express much more confidence in their governors than in Trump when it comes to combatting COVID-19 and reopening the economy.

The truth is, COVID-19 is fast becoming Trump’s Vietnam War — the defining debacle of his presidency. Even more than impeachment, it poses a mortal threat to Trump’s reelection in the fall. He and his allies know that, which is why the country should brace for a furious propaganda campaign from Trump, GOP SuperPacs, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and the Republicans’ house organ, Fox “News.”

It will be a cynical exercise in instant historical revisionism. Trump and his minions will recast his fumbling response to the virus as decisive leadership that saved “millions of American lives.” It could have been worse, we’ll be told, and that much will be true, because with Trump at the helm it could always be worse.

Read the full piece.

A Wrench in the Works — How Schools Can Keep the Coronavirus Pandemic From Derailing Their Construction Projects

Many state governments have deemed school construction an essential service during the coronavirus crisis. This is a good thing. While New York, the nation’s pandemic epicenter, didn’t give school facilities projects the green light until April 9, states less hard-hit were quicker to make the declaration. That sounds like good news for charter schools expecting to move into new or renovated buildings in time for the fall.

Not necessarily.

Mass public quarantines implemented by China to slow the coronavirus there temporarily shut down factories in the world’s second-largest economy. This will disrupt supply chains globally for months at least, and that includes building supplies.

What does this chaos mean for school leaders, building owners and contractors — not to mention teachers, students and parents — wondering about the fate of charter school construction projects? The Charter School Facility Center turned to three experts in the field for guidance.

Read the full piece here.

Medema and Pankovits: A Wrench in the Works — How Schools Can Keep the Coronavirus Pandemic From Derailing Their Construction Projects

Many state governments have deemed school construction an essential service during the coronavirus crisis. This is a good thing. While New York, the nation’s pandemic epicenter, didn’t give school facilities projects the green light until April 9, states less hard-hit were quicker to make the declaration. That sounds like good news for charter schools expecting to move into new or renovated buildings in time for the fall.

Not necessarily.

Mass public quarantines implemented by China to slow the coronavirus there temporarily shut down factories in the world’s second-largest economy. This will disrupt supply chains globally for months at least, and that includes building supplies.

What does this chaos mean for school leaders, building owners and contractors — not to mention teachers, students and parents — wondering about the fate of charter school construction projects? The Charter School Facility Center turned to three experts in the field for guidance.

Read more here.

PPI Signs Letter Regarding New Business Preservation Act

The Progressive Policy Institute has joined a cohort of other organizations in urging the immediate passage of the New Business Preservation Act, which PPI and its co-signers believe is also essential to our nation’s ability to weather and recover from the economic damage inflicted by the coronavirus emergency.

The Act was introduced in the Senate (S. 3515) on March 18th by Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Chris Coons (D-DE), Tim Kaine (D-VA), and Angus King (I-ME), and was introduced in the House (H.R. 6403) on March 26th by Reps. Dean Phillips (D-MN), Terri Sewell (D-AL), Ro Khanna (D-CA), and Tim Ryan (D-OH). The legislation would create a new federal program to incentivize continued venture capital investment in America’s most innovative and promising young companies, or “startups.”

[gview file=”https://www.progressivepolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/New-Business-Preservation-Act-Support-Letter-May-6-2020.pdf” title=”New Business Preservation Act Support Letter May 6, 2020″]

How to Get to Value in Health Care

In pre-coronavirus America, the Democratic primaries were dominated by a contentious debate over how best to achieve universal coverage. The pandemic—with its profound social and economic consequences—has offered us a poignant yet urgent opportunity to move the national debate beyond the narrow focus on universal coverage, to the larger question of how to address the fundamental conditions of injustice which underlie disease by focusing on value and reducing the total cost of care. The urgency of this challenge is reflected in the disproportionate impact the coronavirus is having on low-income Americans, and particularly on communities of color—very little of which has to do with access to the health care system.

Authored by John Kitzhaber, MD, Former Governor of Oregon.

Democrats Shouldn’t Miss This Opening on Immigration. Trump Won’t.

To no one’s surprise, Stephen Miller wants to make President Trump’s temporary suspension of immigration permanent. On April 22nd, in a very belated — and plainly cynical — response to the COVID-19 crisis, the president signed an executive order restricting the issuance of new green cards.

The move was mostly symbolic: the crisis has already halted many forms of immigration. Court proceedings and visa processing are on hold; travel restrictions have been in place for some time. Miller, chief White House nativist, is already saying that the order is a wedge to put in place permanent immigration restrictions, to “turn off the faucet of new immigrant labor.”

Politically, the restrictions are fairly deft and put Democrats in a bind. What is former vice-president Joe Biden, the presumptive nominee, supposed to say? What are any Democratic candidates for Senate supposed to say? They can criticize the restrictions all they want but, so far, Trump’s immigration “pause” appears to have support.

In a new poll from the Washington Post and University of Maryland, two-thirds (65 percent) of respondents said they supported the president’s suspension. Support was predictably split by party affiliation, with 83 percent of Republicans approving of the policy. Yet 67 percent of independents and 49 percent of Democrats also supported the restrictions.

Any calls by Democrats to reopen the borders will be fairly unpopular. They would be met with inflammatory social media activity. That is not a reason to refrain from criticizing the president — but Democrats need to have a smart alternative at hand. This alternative must grapple with the complications of immigration policy while also demonstrating a vision of a functioning immigration system. Moral outrage at the president is warranted, but if it isn’t accompanied by something constructive, Democrats will be left vulnerable to accusations that they simply want to throw open the borders.

Read the full piece here.