Tag Archives: Cory Booker

by - 0 comments

More Merkley drama: the Stop Cruelty to Migrant Children Act

razzledazzle

Not one to miss a chance to put himself in the spotlight, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) grandly announced on July 11 that he led a group of 40 senators in introducing the Stop Cruelty to Migrant Children Act.

Merkley was in so much of a hurry to claim leadership on the bill that he has issued a press release, a section-by-section breakdown of the bill (S. 2113) and a one-pagesummary, but the bill hadn’t even been written.  According to Congress.gov, text had still not been received for S.2113 as of July 16, 2019.

Nevertheless, the bill has been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary Committee. Suffice it to say, however, the bill isn’t going anywhere.

One reason – not a single Republican has signed on as a cosponsor. In this, Merkley is continuing to earn his reputation as one of the Senate’s most partisan Members.

The Bipartisan Index measures the frequency with which a Member co-sponsors a bill introduced by the opposite party and the frequency with which a Member’s own bills attract co-sponsors from the opposite party. The Index reflects how well members of opposite parties and ideologies work together.

According to the Bipartisan Index of senators released by The Lugar Center and Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy, Merkley had the third most partisan track record in the entire Senate in the most recent analysis covering the 115th Congress (2017-2018)

That was even worse than Merkley did in the 113th Congress, when he was ranked the 7th most partisan senator.

Another reason Merkley’s migrants bill is already dead in the water — – how many Republicans does Merkley seriously think are going to support a bill demanding that the Administration “Stop Cruelty to Migrant Children”?

Then there’s the expansive scope of the bill.

The bill would create “non-negotiable standards” for the treatment of migrant children, including:

  • Ending family separations except when authorized by a state court or child welfare agency, or when Customs and Border Protection and an independent child welfare specialist agree that a child is a trafficking victim, is not the child of an accompanying adult, or is in danger of abuse or neglect;
  • Setting minimum health and safety standards for children and families in Border Patrol Stations.
    • Requiring access to hygiene products including toothbrushes, diapers, soap and showers, regular nutritious meals, and a prompt medical assessment by trained medical providers.
    • Requiring children receive three meals a day that meet USDA nutrition standards.
    • Ending for-profit contractors from operating new Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) standard shelters or influx facilities.
      • Ensuring that temporary influx facilities are state-licensed, meet Flores standards, and are not used to house children indefinitely.
      • Expanding alternatives to detention and the successful Family Case Management Program.
      • Lowering case manager caseloads, mandating lower staffing ratios, and ending the information sharing agreement between ORR and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
      • Ensuring unaccompanied children have access to legal counsel and continue to be placed in a non-adversarial setting for their initial asylum case review.

Additionally, the legislation would provide resources to non-profit centers that are helping to provide humanitarian assistance.

It all sounds all very high-minded, but it would be onerous. For example, at a time when shelter facilities are bursting at the seams, ending for-profit contractors from operating new Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) standard shelters or influx facilities would mean rapidly securing replacements.

Then there’s the bill’s cost. But you won’t find that in the hastily issued press release, the section-by section breakdown of the bill, the one-page summary or in a text of the bill itself. That’s because as of July 16, 2019, a Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate for the measure has not been received.

But Merkley and the 39 senators signing on as co-sponsors don’t really care. They know the bill is nothing more than an exercise in stage management, part of legislative theater.

As they sang in Chicago:

Razzle dazzle ’em
Give ’em a show that’s so splendiferous

Row after row will grow vociferous

Give ’em the old flim flam flummox
Fool and fracture ’em

How can they hear the truth above the roar?
_________________

S.2113 is sponsored by Sen. Merkley and co-sponsored by Senators Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Patty Murray (D-WA), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Bob Menendez (D-NJ),Chris Coons (D-DE), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Mark Warner (D-VA), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Kamala D. Harris (D-CA), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Tina Smith (D-MN), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Bob Casey (D-PA), Angus King (I-ME), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), and Sherrod Brown (D-OH).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

by - 0 comments

Politicians are laundering Harvey Weinstein’s filthy lucre

Disingenuous – “Not candid or sincere; giving a false appearance of simple frankness”

moneylaundering

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Democrat of New York, is shocked, shocked to find that Harvey Weinstein is a serial sexual harasser of women (And even more egregious, the New Yorker reported today that three women had told a writer there that Weinstein raped them). So shocked is Schumer that he’s going to show his purity by getting rid of the money Weinstein has given to him over the years.

“Sen. Schumer is donating all of the contributions to several charities supporting women,” Matt House, a spokesman for the Democratic leader told the Washington Post.

Other Democrats have gotten religion, too. Lawmakers who have said they will be donating Weinstein’s contributions include: Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J.

No word yet from dozen of other Democrats who have gleefully taken Harvey Weinstein’s money over the years. The Center for Responsive Politics, a non-profit, nonpartisan research group that tracks the effects of money and lobbying on elections and public policy, has a record of those donations.

According to the Center, recipients of Weinstein’s money include the Democratic Party of Oregon, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and such Democratic luminaries as Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), and even, in an odd twist, the Midwest Values PAC. Weinstein has also made donations to the Clinton Foundation. The Foundation’s website  says Weinstein gave $100,001 to $250,000 through June 2017.

Weinstein has also served as a bundler, collecting contributions from other wealthy donors. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, he was a bundler for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, raising millions for both.

But here’s the rub.

The contrite Democrats are being more than a little disingenuous.

Many of the Democrats who say they will be re-gifting Weinstein’s contributions plan to give the money to organizations that support Democrats. In other words, the money’s going to be laundered through liberal groups right back to Democrats and their causes.

The Democratic National Committee, for example, has said it will give some of Weinstein’s donations to Emily’s List, Emerge America and Higher Heights. Emily’s List’s entire focus is on electing more pro-choice Democratic women. Emerge America’s focus is on increasing the number of Democratic women leaders in public office. Higher Heights works to elect Black women, a primary constituency of the Democratic Party (94 percent of black women voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016).

Chuck Schumer has said he’ll donate Weinstein’s money to women’s rights groups. You can safely bet that means liberal women’s rights groups that support the Democrats’ agenda, not the National Pro-Life Alliance or The Independent Women’s Forum, a conservative think tank.

Most money laundering is dangerous because it can lead to a criminal investigation. But don’t count on any of the Democrats caught in Harvey Weinstein’s web to face such consequences. They’re politicians. They’re protected.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

by - 0 comments

Get Smart – It’s time to tighten the screws on for-profit schools

Too many for-profit schools have no good reason to exist and lots of reasons not to.

Corinthian Colleges, a for-profit chain of schools with about 72,000 students, took in $1.4 billion in federal student loans and grants last year, almost 90 percent of its total revenue. The money kept afloat the 107 campuses of Corinthian’s schools across the country, operated under the names Heald, Everest and WyoTech.

corinthiancolleges

But now the entire system is collapsing under the weight of lawsuits and government action alleging fraud, excessive student debt, low completion rates, lies about student success in finding employment in their fields, and other malfeasance.

For-profit schools in the United States have become a largely government program, sucking up federal loans and grants, costing taxpayers billions and failing to deliver for students. The government should be coming down hard on a network that delivers so little value for all the federal money pouring into it.

But Congress, particularly heavily lobbied Republicans swamped in campaign contributions from the for-profit colleges industry, refuses to rein in the abuse.

Minnesota Republican Rep. John Klein tops the list of members receiving contributions from the for-profit schools industry, taking in $117,650 in the 2014 cycle. Klein just happens to be Chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Republican Rep. John Klein is a big beneficiary of contributions from the for-profit schools industry

Republican Rep. John Klein is a big beneficiary of contributions from the for-profit schools industry

This isn’t to say the Democrats are all on the side of the angels. Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat, pulled in $11,100 from for-profit schools and Senator Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat, collected $21,70 in the 2014 cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

A typical concern raised by Democrats is that cracking down on the for-profit schools will hurt minorities, a cynical explanation given that minorities tend to be the ones hit the worst by for-profit schools’ abuse.

Prominent companies heavily invested in for-profit colleges include ITT Technical Institute, DeVry, Kaplan, Apollo Group / University of Phoenix, Career Education Corp. (CEC), Education Management Corp. (EDMC), and Globe University.

Just in the first three months of 2014, for-profit education companies spent at least $1.9 million on lobbying expenses, according to an Inside Higher Ed analysis. Apollo Education Group, the Association for Private Sector Colleges and Universities, Bridgepoint Education, Herzing University and Corinthian Colleges (which operates under the school names Everest, Heald, and Wyotech) were among the biggest spenders.

The Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities, the trade group representing for-profit schools, argues on its Higher Education For All website, that “all students should be afforded the opportunity to pursue a postsecondary education regardless of their location, socioeconomic status or career choice… Government should not be in the business of restricting individual’s opportunities…”

Agreed, but that doesn’t mean the government, and taxpayers, should be subsidizing a failing system.

According to the Institute for College Access and Success, more than 600,000 federal student loan borrowers who entered repayment in 2010 defaulted on their loans by 2012. The largest share of these students – 46 percent –attended for-profit colleges, even though they enrolled just 13 percent of students nationally.

Apollo Group says it’s “Playing a vital role in educating the world”, but in 2013, the Washington Post reported that the University of Phoenix had an overall graduation rate — meaning first-time undergraduates who get a degree in six years — of about 16 percent, and the graduation rate for students in online programs was just one-fourth of that.

phoenix-university

Particularly hard hit are veterans. According to the Center for Investigative Reporting, over the past five years, the University of Phoenix campus in San Diego reaped $95 million in post 9/11 GI Bill money, more than the entire University of California system. Meanwhile, the overall graduation rate at the San Diego campus is less than 15 percent and more than 25 percent of students default on their loans within three years of leaving school.

The for-profit college industry has been battling for years to block regulations that could shut off federal dollars flowing to programs that too often leave graduates and drop-outs with excessive debt and no good-paying job.

On Feb. 26, 2014, when Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director, Richard Cordray, filed a lawsuit against for-profit chain ITT Educational Services for misleading students, he cited the failure of for-profit schools to serve their students well.

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, he said, for bachelor’s degree students starting a four-year program in 2004, just 28 percent of students attending for-profit institutions graduated within six years. This was half the rate for students at four-year public institutions.

“This is truly an American tragedy,” said Cordray, in announcing the suit against ITT. “Students may think they are climbing a ladder to success when instead they are getting knocked down, crushed by student debt that does not help them gain a better job or a better life.”

It’s time for Congress to act.