#loan distribution program

[slyandthefamilybook]

since we now know that all those "my blog is safe for Jewish people" posts are bullshit, here are some Jewish organizations you can donate to if you actually want to prove you support Jews. put up or shut up

FIGHTING HUNGER

Masbia - Kosher soup kitchens in New York

MAZON - Practices and promotes a multifaceted approach to hunger relief, recognizing the importance of responding to hungry peoples' immediate need for nutrition and sustenance while also working to advance long-term solutions

Tomchei Shabbos - Provides food and other supplies so that poor Jews can celebrate the Sabbath and the Jewish holidays

FINANCIAL AID

Ahavas Yisrael - Providing aid for low-income Jews in Baltimore

Hebrew Free Loan Society - Provides interest-free loans to low-income Jews in New York and more

GLOBAL AID

American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee - Offers aid to Jewish populations in Central and Eastern Europe as well as in the Middle East through a network of social and community assistance programs. In addition, the JDC contributes millions of dollars in disaster relief and development assistance to non-Jewish communities

American Jewish World Service - Fighting poverty and advancing human rights around the world

Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society - Providing aid to immigrants and refugees around the world

Jewish World Watch - Dedicated to fighting genocides around the world

MEDICAL AID

Sharsheret - Support for cancer patients, especially breast cancer

SOCIAL SERVICES

The Aleph Institute - Provides support and supplies for Jews in prison and their families, and helps Jewish convicts reintegrate into society

Bet Tzedek - Free legal services in LA

Bikur Cholim - Providing support including kosher food for Jews who have been hospitalized in the US, Australia, Canada, Brazil, and Israel

Blue Card Fund - Critical aid for holocaust survivors

Chai Lifeline - An org that's very close to my heart. They help families with members with disabilities in Baltimore

Chana - Support network for Jews in Baltimore facing domestic violence, sexual abuse, and elder abuse

Community Alliance for Jewish-Affiliated Cemetaries - Care of abandoned and at-risk Jewish cemetaries

Crown Heights Central Jewish Community Council - Provides services to community residents including assistance to the elderly, housing, employment and job training, youth services, and a food bank

Hands On Tzedakah - Supports essential safety-net programs addressing hunger, poverty, health care and disaster relief, as well as scholarship support to students in need

Hebrew Free Burial Association

Jewish Board of Family and Children's Services - Programs include early childhood and learning, children and adolescent services, mental health outpatient clinics for teenagers, people living with developmental disabilities, adults living with mental illness, domestic violence and preventive services, housing, Jewish community services, counseling, volunteering, and professional and leadership development

Jewish Caring Network - Providing aid for families facing serious illnesses

Jewish Family Service - Food security, housing stability, mental health counseling, aging care, employment support, refugee resettlement, chaplaincy, and disability services

Jewish Relief Agency - Serving low-income families in Philadelphia

Jewish Social Services Agency - Supporting people’s mental health, helping people with disabilities find meaningful jobs, caring for older adults so they can safely age at home, and offering dignity and comfort to hospice patients

Jewish Women's Foundation Metropolitan Chicago - Aiding Jewish women in Chicago

Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty - Crisis intervention and family violence services, housing development funds, food programs, career services, and home services

Misaskim - Jewish death and burial services

Our Place - Mentoring troubled Jewish adolescents and to bring awareness of substance abuse to teens and children

Tiferes Golda - Special education for Jewish girls in Baltimore

Yachad - Support for Jews with disabilities

[batboyblog]

Things Biden and the Democrats did, this week #14

April 12-19 2024

The Department of Commerce announced a deal with Samsung to help bring advanced semiconductor manufacturing and research and development to Texas. The deal will bring 45 billion dollars of investment to Texas to help build a research center in Taylor Texas and expand Samsung's Austin, Texas, semiconductor facility. The Biden Administration estimates this will create 21,000 new jobs. Since 1990 America has fallen from making nearly 40% of the world's semiconductor to just over 10% in 2020.

The Department of Energy announced it granted New York State $158 million to help support people making their homes more energy efficient. This is the first payment out of a $8.8 billion dollar program with 11 other states having already applied. The program will rebate Americans for improvements on their homes to lower energy usage. Americans could get as much as $8,000 off for installing a heat pump, as well as for improvements in insulation, wiring, and electrical panel. The program is expected to help save Americans $1 billion in electoral costs, and help create 50,000 new jobs.

The Department of Education began the formal process to make President Biden's new Student Loan Debt relief plan a reality. The Department published the first set of draft rules for the program. The rules will face 30 days of public comment before a second draft can be released. The Administration hopes the process can be finished by the Fall to bring debt relief to 30 million Americans, and totally eliminate the debt of 4 million former students. The Administration has already wiped out the debt of 4.3 million borrowers so far.

The Department of Agriculture announced a $1 billion dollar collaboration with USAID to buy American grown foods combat global hunger. Most of the money will go to traditional shelf stable goods distributed by USAID, like wheat, rice, sorghum, lentils, chickpeas, dry peas, vegetable oil, cornmeal, navy beans, pinto beans and kidney beans, while $50 million will go to a pilot program to see if USAID can expand what it normally gives to new products. The food aid will help feed people in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Haiti, Kenya, Madagascar, Mali, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, and Yemen.

The Department of the Interior announced it's expanding four national wildlife refuges to protect 1.13 million wildlife habitat. The refuges are in New Mexico, North Carolina, and two in Texas. The Department also signed an order protecting parts of the Placitas area. The land is considered sacred by the Pueblos peoples of the area who have long lobbied for his protection. Security Deb Haaland the first Native American to serve as Interior Secretary and a Pueblo herself signed the order in her native New Mexico.

The Department of Labor announced new work place safety regulations about the safe amount of silica dust mine workers can be exposed to. The dust is known to cause scaring in the lungs often called black lung. It's estimated that the new regulations will save over 1,000 lives a year. The United Mine Workers have long fought for these changes and applauded the Biden Administration's actions.

The Biden Administration announced its progress in closing the racial wealth gap in America. Under President Biden the level of Black Unemployment is the lowest its ever been since it started being tracked in the 1970s, and the gap between white and black unemployment is the smallest its ever been as well. Black wealth is up 60% over where it was in 2019. The share of black owned businesses doubled between 2019 and 2022. New black businesses are being created at the fastest rate in 30 years. The Administration in 2021 Interagency Task Force to combat unfair house appraisals. Black homeowners regularly have their homes undervalued compared to whites who own comparable property. Since the Taskforce started the likelihood of such a gap has dropped by 40% and even disappeared in some states. 2023 represented a record breaking $76.2 billion in federal contracts going to small business owned by members of minority communities. This was 12% of federal contracts and the President aims to make it 15% for 2025.

The EPA announced (just now as I write this) that it plans to add PFAS, known as forever chemicals, to the Superfund law. This would require manufacturers to pay to clean up two PFAS, perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid. This move to force manufacturers to cover the costs of PFAS clean up comes after last week's new rule on drinking water which will remove PFAS from the nation's drinking water.

Bonus:

President Biden met a Senior named Bob in Pennsylvania who is personally benefiting from The President's capping the price of insulin for Seniors at $35, and Biden let Bob know about a cap on prosecution drug payments for seniors that will cut Bob's drug bills by more than half.

[olowan-waphiya]

About the Campaign

The Aim:

We are seeking 30 acres of land with healthy soil, ideally with a previous history of agricultural use. The land should be within 20 miles of Denver, CO and grant us both water and mineral rights. The land should be valued equally to all members of the ecosystem that occupy it. We intend to use this land to grow food for our communities throughout Denver and as a place of education and healing. The land would be owned by the organization, FrontLine Farming, but would also be open to collective use in our BIPOC community.

Now is the Time:

Black, Brown and Indigenous Farmers across the United States have been systemically excluded from access to land whether through outright intimidation and theft, loan discrimination or laws such as Heirs Property Rights. Land in the United States was stolen from Indigenous Communities and while BIPOC communities represent a quarter of the US population, they own less than 5% of farmland and cultivate on less than 1% of the land. Yet those who have historically cultivated the land and comprise the over 2.4 million farmworkers in the United States are people of color from diverse communities and foodways. They are descendants of Africans brought here, immigrants, refugees and people who have continuously brought their agricultural knowledge and skills to feed nations.

We have used our radical imaginations for our vision of coming back to the land and are ready to bring this vision to life. To acquire our own soil and land will fortify our efforts to honor our ancestors, to educate our community, to generate independent economic systems, to manifest equitable policies and systems change, to lead by example, to understand history and to create our future. It is a way to co-create generational wealth for our communities, and more importantly, shared power.

Acquiring the land that we envision requires moving money and resources. We are seeking support from philanthropy, local and national networks, and donors. The funds raised from this project will aid our vision and goal.

Frontline Farming

We are a BIPOC-led farmer advocacy and food justice organization that strives to create greater equity across our food system on the Front Range of Colorado. We support and create greater leadership and access for Black, Indigenous, People of Color and Womxn in our food systems. We achieve these goals through growing food, listening, educating, honoring land and ancestors, generating policy initiatives and engaging in direct action.

In 2021, we distributed 26,000 lbs of farmed produce through various programs such as our CSA, Healing Foods and SNAP/WIC recipients. We also advocate for farmers and farm workers alike to ensure that the people who grow our country’s food have access to basic rights and protections that are already afforded to other workers in the state.

[videogamesincolor]

"In a swift decision, a three-judge panel of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has unanimously affirmed a March 2023 lower court decision finding the Internet Archive's program to scan and lend print library books is copyright infringement. In an emphatic 64-page decision, released on September 4, the court rejected the Internet Archive’s fair use defense, as well as the novel protocol known as “controlled digital lending” on which the Archive’s scanning and lending is based. “This appeal presents the following question: Is it ‘fair use’ for a nonprofit organization to scan copyright-protected print books in their entirety, and distribute those digital copies online, in full, for free, subject to a one-to-one owned-to-loaned ratio between its print copies and the digital copies it makes available at any given time, all without authorization from the copyright-holding publishers or authors? Applying the relevant provisions of the Copyright Act as well as binding Supreme Court and Second Circuit precedent, we conclude the answer is no,” the decision states."

[mariacallous]

The imposition of the largest sanctions program since the Second World War in response to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine remains a key tool for limiting the Kremlin’s war machine. But it has inadvertently also had substantial secondary and tertiary effects, from the rewiring of European energy networks to myriad lawsuits over what insurers should have to pay for the Kremlin’s seizure of over 400 Western aircraft.

These unintended consequences have garnered far less attention than the intended ones, but the former are still multiplying and there are tens of billions of dollars already at stake in them. While sanctions rightfully continue to be tweaked to maximize their impact, policymakers have not paid due attention to the legal spats and sanctions challenges that have already arisen in their wake. Their outcome will greatly determine the effectiveness of the sanctions and the extent to which the Kremlin or the West will bear their cost.

This is not the first time the West has had to deal with such issues. At the outbreak of the war with Japan in 1941, the U.S. seized assets and businesses owned by Japanese nationals on its soil, acting under the Trading with the Enemy Act. These actions, while directed primarily at the war-time adversary, inevitably wrought a lot of collateral damage, as investors in Japanese enterprises, their creditors, or depositors in Japanese-owned banks, were often the American public.

It took years to untangle the resulting mess. And yet, when all was said and done, the U.S. Supreme Court and Congress acted to protect the interests of these investors, and ensure both the orderly liquidation and the equitable distribution of proceeds to those affected. Thus, the depositors of Yokohama Specie Bank, had their claims on the “yen certificates” preserved in a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1967, allowing the certificate holders to recover at least some economic value from proceeds of the bank’s liquidation.

In short, there is a blueprint for handling the legal spats that result from waging economic war. That blueprint, in broad terms, is to act forcefully against the economic interests of the enemy, yet make full use of the institutions of law and justice for the interests of affected parties at home.

Today, as Russia and the West remain engaged in a full-scale economic war, this blueprint seems largely ignored. What we see instead, is perhaps the opposite: The adversary ruthlessly subverting the toolkit of the “rules-based international order” for its benefit with lawsuits that seem to lead Western institutions down the path of treading softly where Russian interests are concerned, while Western investors and, of course, Ukraine take the brunt of the costs and receive little or no protection.

Consider the June G-7 summit, where member states united on a plan for using the returns earned by Russia’s $300 billion in frozen sovereign assets to aid Ukraine, of which $200 billion are held as cash and securities at the Belgian financial company Euroclear. Leaders of the G7 have agreed to effectively monetize the future income flow on the frozen assets, and turn it into an immediate $50 billion in loans to Ukraine. This is as stark an acknowledgement as possible that Russia’s assets will not be returned to it any time soon, even if outright seizure is off the table for now following a chorus of complaints that doing so would not be compatible with international law.

Nevertheless, Brussels has insisted Kyiv will not receive any of the five billion euros that the frozen assets have generated thus far and continues to tread softly against Russia and its proxies. The reason: Euroclear itself is worried about lawsuits brought by Russia over this action and its freezing of other securities affected by the Western sanctions regime.

According to Euroclear, it is facing “a significant number of legal proceedings…almost exclusively in Russian courts,” where “the probability of unfavourable rulings is high since Russia does not recognize the international sanctions.”

This reveals a fundamental flaw in the arguments made by proponents of the so-called “rules-based international order.” Russia can appeal to its structures too—and, slowly but surely, make sanctions even less effective than they already are. Meanwhile in the West, the powers that be continue to dither, and ignore the blueprints for economic confrontation from the past.

Russia’s efforts here are already advancing: thus the suits against Euroclear, and the efforts of Mikhail Fridman—the sanctioned Russian oligarch—to return the nearly $16 billion of his former assets through an arbitration claim under the Soviet-Belgium-Luxembourg Bilateral Investment Treaty. As its name gives away, the pact actually even predates Russia’s establishment as an independent state and was inherited from the Soviet Union. It has not been updated since, but cannot be so easily unwound—its final clause notes that it applies to investments made before its hypothetical abrogation for 15 years thereafter.

It is also this treaty that Russia would ultimately use to try and have its domestic court rulings against Euroclear and other Western institutions enforced. We can be sure that there is more to come: Russia has already promised “endless legal challenges” if its assets or the income on these assets are seized. One of the largest such clashes is likely imminent, and will require politicians decide how to proceed. On 7 June the Permanent Court of Arbitration awarded Uniper, which was taken over after being bailed out by the German state, €13 billion in damages from Gazprom over Putin’s decision to toggle Europe’s gas taps in 2022, which forced Germany to bail out Uniper. A Russian arbitration court, on the other hand, has awarded Gazprom €14 billion from Uniper in the dispute. Berlin aims to re-IPO Uniper but will hardly be able to do so with such an albatross hanging above it.

It is therefore all the more remarkable that Western policymakers have not yet addressed how they intend to overcome such risks, nor why Russia remains permitted to take advantage of Western legal system under circumstances of a full-scale economic warfare.

Potential vulnerability to legal action by Russia and its proxies, and a lack of credible or coherent response by the West appears to have led Euroclear to take a number of actions that are clearly not in the Western interest and are often inconsistent with its past practices.

The clearing house has, for example, refused to label a number of securities as being in default in cases where the underlying entity has chosen to default rather than being forced to into default by sanctions. This has not just affected Russian corporate borrowers but even the debts of the government of neighboring Belarus. Belarus’ sovereign Eurobonds that were due to be repaid in early 2023 and are still unpaid, and thus in “default”; but Euroclear has instead designated these as “matured”. This semantic choice has significant implications, blocking the clearing and settlement of these bonds and thus impacting Western creditors – while Belarus, a key ally to Russia in its war, remains (intentionally or not) shielded from the full consequences of its default.

Good explanations for these actions are lacking, but it does appear that Euroclear has, in effect, accepted Belarus’ purported excuse: that sanctions prevent it from paying. But not all sanctions are a barrier to payment—certainly not those that have been imposed on Belarus. Notably, the Development Bank of Belarus, which faces a similar sanctions regime as the sovereign government, successfully made its coupon payment in November 2022, which was, albeit with delay, passed on to the bondholders by Euroclear. Suspension of payments, then, is simply a policy choice, and indeed, the Development Bank ultimately followed the sovereign and suspended payments as well, and this year failed to repay its Eurobonds at maturity. Euroclear took the same action with respect to the Development Bank’s bonds: they are marked as “matured” instead of “in default”.

This sort of leniency, and, seemingly, a fear of calling a “default” on a Russian ally, is without precedent, and completely at odds with the approaches by rating agencies, investors, the World Bank, the ISDA Determinations Committee (as it relates to Russia) and Euroclear’s own actions as to other sovereigns. In the recent past, the defaulted bonds of Sri Lanka, Lebanon, Zambia are all correctly marked by Euroclear as “in default” and continue to settle.

For Western creditors of Belarus, its Development Bank and the similarly placed Russian corporate borrowers, the block on trading and settlement by Euroclear is clearly harmful. For Russia and its ally, the lack of a “default” label by a key player in the Western financial infrastructure looks oddly protective. It also makes a mockery of the fact that sanctions are meant to constrain the inflow of funds to Russia and its allies instead of limiting their outflow and reducing the resources available to Russia and its allies to pursue an unjust war.

How should Western policymakers respond to these challenges? Firstly, by looking at the existing playbook for economic war, and treating as many claims as standard defaults and bankruptcies as possible. Secondly, by recognizing that the “international rules-based order” is in fact largely a set of established norms, particularly when it comes to creditor disputes, and that Russia has spent at least the last decade seeking to undermine these—beginning with its attempt to muck up Ukraine’s restructuring in 2014, something that continues to wind its way through the English courts.

That is the least that can be done to protect Western interests, free up more funds for Ukraine, and defang the Kremlin’s attempts to weaponize international law and institutions.

[baroque-hashem]

Full article text so no paywall:

By Isaac Arnsdorf

and

Josh Dawsey

July 30, 2024 at 3:06 p.m. EDT

The right-wing policy operation that became a rallying cry for Democrats and a nuisance for Republican nominee Donald Trump is trying to escape the public spotlight and repair relations with Trump’s campaign.

Project 2025, a collaboration led by the Heritage Foundation among more than 110 conservative groups to develop a movement consensus blueprint for the next Republican administration, is winding down its policy operations, and its director, former Trump administration personnel official Paul Dans, is departing. The Heritage Foundation also recently distributed new talking points encouraging participants to emphasize that the project does not speak for Trump.

The former president has repeatedly distanced himself from Project 2025 after relentless attacks from Democrats using some of the 900-page playbook’s more aggressive proposals to impute Trump’s agenda since many of the proposals were written by alumni of Trump’s White House. While some participants in the project started avoiding interviews and public appearances, Trump advisers grew furious that Heritage leaders continued promoting the project and feeding critical news coverage.

Trump senior adviser Susie Wiles repeatedly called Heritage leaders instructing them to stop promoting Project 2025. She and Trump strategist Chris LaCivita repeatedly authored public statements disavowing the project, and then Trump started saying so in his own social media posts. More recently, LaCivita has started saying that people involved in the project would be barred from a second Trump administration.

“President Trump’s campaign has been very clear for over a year that Project 2025 had nothing to do with the campaign, did not speak for the campaign, and should not be associated with the campaign or the President in any way,” Wiles and LaCivita said in a joint statement Tuesday. “Reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed and should serve as notice to anyone or any group trying to misrepresent their influence with President Trump and his campaign — it will not end well for you.”

Some Project 2025 participants have responded by doubting a ban could be enforced when contributors include close Trump advisers such as former White House speechwriter Stephen Miller, former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Tom Homan, and former White House economic adviser Peter Navarro. Miller has denied his involvement in Project 2025, but his America First Legal group is a participating organization and his deputy, Gene Hamilton, wrote the playbook’s chapter on the Department of Justice.

Many of the plan’s proposals overlap with official pronouncements from Trump’s campaign.

Both Trump and Project 2025 have proposed eliminating the Department of Education and reversing President Biden’s student loan relief program. Both have said they want to reintroduce a policy change to weaken tenure protections for career civil servants and tighten White House supervision of the Department of Justice and other agencies. Both have proposed large-scale immigration raids and repealing temporary protections for migrants from unsafe countries. Both proposed ending affirmative action and rolling back Biden administration environmental regulations.

At least some Heritage employees are considering leaving the organization because they do not want to alienate a future Trump administration and hurt their future job prospects, according to a current employee, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to detail internal dynamics. While Heritage President Kevin Roberts has told people privately that the storm will blow over, employees have texted and messaged one another with dismay about the Trump campaign’s continued attacks on the organization.

“We are extremely grateful for [Dans’]and everyone’s work on Project 2025 and dedication to saving America," Roberts said in a statement. "Our collective efforts to build a personnel apparatus for policymakers of all levels — federal, state, and local — will continue.”

Roberts will take over direct supervision of the project. Earlier in the presidential primary, Roberts was perceived as closer to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. His relationship with Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) fueled new attempts by Democrats to tie Trump to the project since he chose Vance as his running mate.

Some donors have also expressed concerns about how angry the campaign seems about the project, the current employee said. Others agree that the controversy will pass.

Harris campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said Democrats will not stop talking about Project 2025.

“Hiding the 920-page blueprint from the American people doesn’t make it less real – in fact, it should make voters more concerned about what else Trump and his allies are hiding," she said in a statement. “Project 2025 is on the ballot because Donald Trump is on the ballot. This is his agenda, written by his allies, for Donald Trump to inflict on our country."

Project 2025 published its playbook in 2023, and it always planned to wind down the policy program and hand off recommendations to the official presidential transition when it starts this summer. Another arm of the project, a personnel database of more than 20,000 applicants for potential political appointments should Trump be reelected, will remain in operation, people familiar with the matter said.

In a departing message to staff on Monday, Dans lamented attacks on the project’s work as a “disinformation campaign" that aims to “falsely associate Former President Trump with the Project.” Dans ended by quoting Trump’s words after he survived an assassination attempt on July 13, which quickly became a MAGA movement mantra: “Fight! Fight! Fight!”

Dans did not respond to requests for comment.

Democrats routinely use Project 2025 and Trump’s plans for a second term interchangeably. Left-wing discussion of the project surged in June as the Biden campaign and surrogates started focusing on proposals in Project 2025 to portray Trump as extreme. While some project contributors took pride in being vilified by Democrats and in news coverage, they grew concerned when they started feeling the pressure coming from Trump.

Other areas of divergence have caused headaches for the Trump campaign. In particular, Project 2025 proposes restricting access to abortion medication and blocking shipments through the mail. Trump has said he opposes a federal abortion ban.

In another recent message to participants, communications adviser Mary Vought advised them to respond to questions about the project saying it is not partisan and not affiliated with any candidate. “If asked during a media interview, you can use these points to pivot,” she wrote.

The talking points included: “While President Trump and Project 2025 see eye to eye on many issues, President Trump alone sets his agenda. Project 2025 does not speak for President Trump or his campaign in any capacity.”

End article text.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: publishing their manifesto was the worst mistake the MAGAts could have made. Now we know exactly what bullshit they wanna pull off. And their plans are falling apart. I continue to be filled with hope for November. Get out and vote, people. Democracy can live another day, if we all participate in it.

[thatswhatsushesaid]

personal/professional anecdote related to my last reblog:

I remember when I was first starting out in my masters program back in 2014 and approached my advisor with my thoughts about how to affordably approach digital preservation of records, I received the most skeptical and condescending of responses, and it took the wind right out of my sails for the next two years.

my advisor: how interesting, can you demonstrate how this would work

me: well, no, but I can show you the website of a distributed digital preservation network in my home state that spreads the costs of maintaining the network across all participating member institutions, which lowers the barriers of access to small community archives and libraries

him: cool, can you bring up the website now?

me, getting out a pen and a notepad: no, I don't have a laptop, but I can write down the URL for you--

him, cutting me off: you don't have a laptop? you've enroled in a masters program here at [prestigious canadian university] and you don't have a laptop? you are going to struggle in my courses. you'll struggle in the whole program.

me, totally thrown off-balance and humiliated but trying not to show it: um, I have a desktop computer at my apartment. the graduate studies office said we could rent laptops from the faculty for completing coursework, and I've always taken my notes by hand--

him: if you are serious about this field, you really need to get a laptop.

me, wondering what any of this has to do with my ideas: I can't afford a laptop.

him, smiling and shrugging his shoulders: (:

it really bears mentioning that this guy's background and CV were why I applied to this program, put myself nearly $70K into student loan debt, and moved myself literally a cross a continent in the first place. (don't fret about the money; I have nearly paid it all off by now, but the me of 2014 certainly had no way of knowing that was going to happen.)

I just remember sitting across from this titan in the field while he smiled at me with this expression of pleasant condescension on his face, and I remember trying desperately to understand why my inability to be able to afford a laptop as new immigrant graduate student with barely enough money in the bank to buy groceries or cat food or make that month's rent had any bearing on the value of my ideas. (ideas which were, you'll note, about how to make digital preservation work when you don't have any fucking money.) what I can't remember is how I ended the conversation; I just know that I went home and shamefully begged my dad for help buying a laptop that neither of us could really afford to spend money on at the time.

it's been nearly ten years since I had that conversation with my advisor, and I am now what just about anyone would consider 'professionally successful' in my field, but that field is not digital preservation. because I was so shamed by this conversation, and I so completely internalized my advisor's attitude that my inability to afford this one piece of technology meant I was not 'serious' about the field. which is stupid, and I have the experience and self-confidence and success to my name now to know just how stupid that is.

anyway if I bump into him at an alumni reunion sometime, I think I'll tell him exactly how much his words undermined my self-confidence and changed my professional trajectory, and politely ask him to never say that to another poor, first year graduate student ever again.

[reasoningdaily]

The Navajo Nation has received a $55 million grant to help Navajo homeowners with mortgage payments and home repairs.

Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren said as many as 901 homeowners should qualify for the funds.

The money comes from the American Rescue Plan Act, which provides nearly $10 billion to support homeowners throughout the country who face financial hardships due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The program is open to Navajo homeowners of all income levels within the Four Corner states who live on both tribal lands and in urban areas.

The funds must be used within three years.

PHOENIX — Urban Navajos who own homes off the Navajo Nation will soon receive some unexpected help they’ll want but didn’t need to ask for.

On Sept. 11, Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren told 250 Phoenix metro area Navajo homeowners that the Nation received a $55 million federal grant to provide financial assistance to Navajo homeowners under various Homeowner Assistance Fund programs.

This includes mortgage payments and home repair assistance.

As many as 901 Navajo homeowners should qualify for the money for their homes, he said.

“Make sure we tell everybody,” Nygren told an overflow crowd in the shade outside the historic Phoenix Indian School Visitor Center, one of the remaining buildings from the 100-year-old Indian boarding school.

They were outside because a capacity crowd was already indoors awaiting the same announcement, and Nygren wanted to address those in the 105-degree F heat first.

The Homeowner Assistance Fund was authorized through the American Rescue Plan Act to provide $9.9 billion nationwide to support homeowners who face financial hardships associated with COVID-19, the Nygren said yesterday.

The funds were distributed to states, U.S. territories, and tribes. The Navajo Nation was awarded $55,420,097.

Most federally funded programs are restricted to low- and very-low-income households.

This program allows higher-income Navajo homeowners to receive financial relief from the economic effects of COVID-19, as well.

“Tell your relatives,” Nygren said. “Say the $55 million that came from our government was specifically for Navajo people who are homeowners.”

To launch the process, Nygren signed an agreement with Native Community Capital. The group is a Native-led and operated non-profit corporation that was selected as the sub-recipient to administer the Homeowner Assistance Fund Project activities on behalf of the Navajo Nation.

Native Community Capital is certified by the U.S. Department of the Treasury as a Native Community Development Financial Institution and is a licensed mortgage lender in Arizona and New Mexico.

The program is designed for both higher-income and medium-income homeowners, Native Community Capital CFO Todd Francis said.

As an example, a family of four in Maricopa County in Arizona earning as much as $132,450 a year may be eligible for the tax-free, non-repayable funds to pay their mortgage or repair their homes, he said.

The program will benefit Navajo relatives and their families who reside in both rural remote locations and those in the urban areas of Phoenix, Albuquerque, Denver, Salt Lake City, surrounding smaller cities and towns, and wherever Navajo homeowners live off-reservation, said NCC CEO Dave Castillo.

A significant lack of investment in tribal communities compared to non-Indian communities has resulted in a critical absence of homeownership on tribal lands, particularly for higher-income Native households, he said.

As a result, Navajos with higher incomes tend to purchase or build homes off the Navajo Nation where they can qualify for loans and mortgages to build equity and wealth.

The Center for Indian Country Development reports that 78% of Native people live outside of tribal trust land in counties surrounding their homelands. It is these families the HAF Project will seek to support, Castillo said.

Nygren said the Navajo HAF Project will provide financial assistance to 901 eligible Navajo homeowners to use for qualified expenses in five activities for the next 36 months.

The program will provide financial assistance to eligible Navajo homeowners in the four-state region of Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Colorado.

Each eligible applicant could receive a maximum amount of $125,000 of combined assistance under various programs.

These include:

Monthly mortgage payment assistance to a maximum assistance level of $72,000 per participant. This is for Navajo homeowners who are delinquent in mortgage payments or at risk of foreclosure due to a loss of household income.

Mortgage reinstatement assistance would give a maximum assistance of $50,000 per participant to those who are in active forbearance, delinquency default status, or are at risk of losing a home.

Mortgage principal reduction assistance that would assist up to $100,000 for those who find the fair market value of their home is now less than the price they paid for it and now may result in a loss when it is sold.

Home repair assistance that would give $100,000 to those who need significant home repairs.

Clear title assistance of up to $30,000 for grant assistance to receive a clear title of their primary residence.

In his 2022 presidential campaign, Nygren committed to helping urban Navajos who have said for years that they felt underserved by the tribal government. He said this grant addresses that.

He said one of his administration’s next goals is to buy or construct a building owned by the Navajo Nation in the metro area to serve urban Navajo Phoenicians.

“Wouldn’t it be nice if we used the entire $55 million this year?” Nygren asked. “I know you committed to live here and to take care of your family. I see a lot of familiar faces and I understand this is where your jobs are. We want you to have access to resources.”

Castillo urged applicants to be sure their applications were complete and submitted early.

“One thing we want to emphasize is to be ready when the information is being requested on the checklist,” he said. “Make sure you have your documents prepared and you get it to our licensed professionals that will be working with you. If you do not, the application will expire in 30 days.”

He said the program has just three years to deploy the $55 million.

“It seems like we could do that quickly but we can only do it quickly if you help us, if you’re ready, and if you submit the information that’s necessary.”

Debbie Nez-Manuel, executive director of the Navajo Nation Division of Human Resources, said visits to other urban areas will be planned, scheduled, and announced by Native Community Capital.

The funds must be used within three years.

So does any of this money go to the Black Indians Tribes? @militantinremission

maybe y'all should start asking for your cut right now cause they got it

[firjii]

Just had someone talk down to me about my "misusing" USPS Priority packing materials.

Karen you're retired on Medicare and Social Security and take several age-related tax breaks and/or investment shelter perks. You're also married and file joint taxes, and because you had kids, you probably took some form of child credit or dependent deduction at least once. Those are all legal things (taking Medicare is, in fact, required by law after a certain age) that I don't begrudge people.

But Karen I pay out my fucking nose for private insurance that does things Medicaid won't. I have never been on government assistance programs. I didn't get a student loan. I pay taxes on what laughably little I earn and only barely get a refund for my trouble (literally somehow owed back taxes once, the fucking leeches).

Karen I won't destabilize an entire government by getting a little creative with some mail packing materials now and then. I promise you're screwing the government out of far more money than I am.

Karen I am not individually the reason why USPS is chronically in several BILLION dollars of operations budget debt. Maybe consider instead directing your outrage at bloated military contracts, tax shelters for established millionaire Senators that treat lawmaking as an intellectual side hustle game, misappropriated road maintenance funds, the (not always very) covert bankrolling of foreign wars, a flawed school district funding distribution system and profoundly skewed implementation of special education programs for decades, or literally any other finance issue that's worth legitimate outrage.

[qqueenofhades]

May not by your wheelhouse, but regarding ever-increasing college tuition, where does the money go? Why is college so much more expensive than it was a few decades ago?

I have indeed written several posts about the college affordability crisis, which are probably to be found in my "ronald reagan burn in hell" tag. This is because, as with most of the batfuckery of the American economy since the 1980s, it is indeed Ronald Reagan's fault. The overall causes of college skyrocketing in cost include, but are not limited to:

1) Huge tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, gutting the funding that public education systems/public universities previously received from the government;

2) This in turn increased the costs at private universities, which had always been more expensive than public universities anyway, and besides, they were now free to put up their prices as far as they wanted;

3) The "unregulated free market trickle-down capitalism for everyone!!" Reagan-era mentality led to the explosion of costs in healthcare, housing, education, etc etc., and drastically widened the level of income inequality between rich and poor;

4) The replacement of grants (which you don't have to pay back) with loans (which you do), which incentivized unscrupulous loan companies to increase the burden of debt on students and for colleges to charge more and more tuition in the form of loans;

5) A bachelor's degree was once supposed to guarantee you a job, and now does nothing of the sort, and because the market has become so crowded and oversaturated with generally unsatisfactory and unstable job options, you are expected to pay for multiple degrees and go even DEEPER into debt;

6) Obviously, because of this total rejiggering of the economic landscape, everything costs a fuckton more than it used to 40 years ago, so colleges can't return to their 1970s-era fee structure;

7) As an academic, I can promise you that very little of this money is actually going to faculty salaries or the development/sustainment of new programs. Yes, obviously it costs money to run a quality educational institution, and I also obviously want all universities to be funded properly and for academics to be paid what they deserve. But the actual distribution of this money is... less clear.

8) Schools with giant well-known Division I sports programs tend to get all or most of the money that comes into their institutions, leaving relatively little for academic or faculty development;

9) For example: I work at a large, fairly prestigious, private university with very high research activity/classification, and we don’t even have a football team sucking up the money. But still, every single quarter, my department has to go through the budget with a magnifying glass, cut low-enrolled courses, argue constantly with the dean about which courses we do get to teach, etc. Our adjuncts also get paid literal peanuts for taking on a lot of work, and because we're so low on core faculty and just had to cancel another faculty search because of budget reasons, probably 50% of our schedule in the upcoming quarter is being taught by adjuncts. This is... not ideal.

10) Student debt is now such a lucrative part of the American commodities market, is so embedded in the financial system, and constitutes (at last glance) up to $1.8 trillion of outstanding debt, that when Biden tried to cancel even some of it, the Republicans immediately lost their minds and sued him to stop it. As of now, that case is still pending before SCOTUS, and because they're the literal worst, nobody hold your breath for a good outcome.

In short: college is one of the areas that has suffered the most from unregulated Reagonomics over the last 40 years, has been repeatedly incentivized to become and to stay extremely expensive and to represent a long-term burden of debt, and while you would hope that the money was being responsibly reinvested into actual faculty hiring/retention/academic program development etc, that is... not usually the case. The big Division I universities that serve as farm team training programs for the NFL, with a little academics on the side, also tend to have tons of investment in sports and not nearly as much in the classroom. But I'm sure this is fine!

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from the New York Times:

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has a line about the state of small-scale agriculture in America these days.

It’s drawn from the National Agricultural Statistics Service, which shows that as the average size of farms has risen, the nation had lost 544,000 of them since 1981.

“That’s every farm today that exists in North Dakota and South Dakota, added to those in Wisconsin and Minnesota, added to those in Nebraska and Colorado, added to those in Oklahoma and Missouri,” Mr. Vilsack told a conference in Washington this spring. “Are we as a country OK with it?”

Even though the United States continues to produce more food on fewer acres, Mr. Vilsack worries that the loss of small farmers has weakened rural economies, and he wants to stop the bleeding. Unlike his last turn in the same job, under former President Barack Obama, this time his department is able to spend billions of dollars in subsidies and incentives passed under three major laws since 2021 — including the biggest investment in conservation programs in U.S. history.

The plan in a nutshell: Multiply and improve revenue streams to bolster farm balance sheets. Rather than just selling crops and livestock, farms of the future could also sell carbon credits, waste products and renewable energy.

“Instead of the farm getting one check, they potentially could get four checks,” Mr. Vilsack said in an interview. He is also helping schools, hospitals and other institutions to buy food grown locally, and investors to build meatpacking plants and other processing facilities to free farmers from powerful middlemen.

But it’s far from clear whether new policies and a cash infusion will be enough to counteract the forces that have pushed farmers off the land for decades — especially since much of the money is aimed at reducing carbon emissions, and so will also go toward large farming operations because they are the biggest polluters.

The number of farms has been declining since the 1930s, in large part because of migration from rural areas to cities and greater mechanization of agriculture, which allowed operators to cultivate larger tracts with fewer people. Over time, the federal government abandoned a policy of managing production to support prices, prompting growers to become more export-oriented while local distribution networks atrophied.

The last half-decade has been more disruptive than most. First came a trade war against China under former President Donald J. Trump, which drew retaliatory tariffs that cut into U.S. exports of farm products like soybeans and pork. Then came the pandemic, which scrambled supply chains and sapped farm labor, leaving crops to rot in the fields.

After Congress cushioned the blow with relief for farmers hurt by pandemic disruptions, things started to turn around. Even as the cost of supplies like fertilizer and seed rose, so did food prices, and farm incomes increased. In 2023, default rates on farm loans neared record lows.

“Farm balance sheets are the healthiest they’ve ever been in the aggregate,” said Brad Nordholm, the chief executive of Farmer Mac, a large secondary market for agricultural credit. “The tools available to American farmers to have a more predictable return, even when commodity prices change and input prices change, is greater than it’s ever been before.”

But wholesale crop prices are expected to decline over the coming year. Rising interest rates have made it more difficult to finance planting and harvesting, borrow for an expansion or just get into agriculture — especially since land values jumped 29 percent from 2020 to 2023.

That’s especially true for the smallest farmers, who are far less likely to be tapped into Department of Agriculture assistance programs and are more vulnerable to adverse weather, labor shortages and consumer whims.

“I think in some ways they’re in a worse position than before the pandemic,” said Benneth Phelps, executive director of the nonprofit Carrot Project, which advises small farmers in New England. “We see a lot of farmers making hard decisions right now about whether to stay in or get out, because they’ve run out of steam.”

That’s where the American Rescue Plan, the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law come in.

The laws have collectively provided about $60 billion to the Agriculture Department, which has parceled it out across a variety of priorities, from relieving farmers’ debt to paying them to reduce their carbon emissions.

The biggest chunk — about $19.5 billion — has breathed new life into subsidies to encourage conservation practices that improve the land, like cutting back on plowing and planting cover crops to sequester carbon in the soil. Some of the programs had shrunk in successive Farm Bills, which are five-year legislative packages that covers most agricultural subsidies, and about two-thirds of farmers who applied each year got nothing.

The new funding has added 16,000 recipients over the past two years. Preliminary data shows the expansion is allowing smaller farms to take part.

[plethoraworldatlas]

The Green Bank for Rural America has won a $500 million federal award to advance clean energy technology projects in the 13-state Appalachian region and in “energy communities” with a connection to the coal industry.

The green bank expects to leverage private capital to finance $2.25 billion in 2,750 clean energy projects, including distributed solar and storage projects. Other eligible project types under the federal award program are new or renovated buildings with low carbon emissions, and projects supporting zero-emission transportation.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) made a total of $6 billion in awards to five green banks through the Clean Communities Investment Accelerator, all of which “will flow to low-income and disadvantaged communities,” said a White House press release.

Each of the five green banks receiving the awards will allocate the funds to community lenders, primarily to make loans to projects. A small portion of funds will be used to provide technical assistance to those lenders. The Green Bank for Rural America will provide technical assistance on topics including structuring contracts with local utilities for the sale of solar or wind power.

The Green Bank for Rural America expects to provide capitalization funding to about 100 participating community lenders and investors serving rural areas, with most funding provided in commitments of $10 million or less, and a few commitments ranging up to $50 million. The bank, established by Appalachian Community Capital, will be structured to be a self-sustaining entity.

The support to community lenders will not only finance near-term deployment of climate and clean energy projects, the White House said, but also build the lenders’ capacity to “finance projects at scale for years to come.”

The green bank expects to leverage private capital to finance $2.25 billion in 2,750 clean energy projects, including distributed solar and storage projects. Other eligible project types under the federal award program are new or renovated buildings with low carbon emissions, and projects supporting zero-emission transportation.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) made a total of $6 billion in awards to five green banks through the Clean Communities Investment Accelerator, all of which “will flow to low-income and disadvantaged communities,” said a White House press release.

Each of the five green banks receiving the awards will allocate the funds to community lenders, primarily to make loans to projects. A small portion of funds will be used to provide technical assistance to those lenders. The Green Bank for Rural America will provide technical assistance on topics including structuring contracts with local utilities for the sale of solar or wind power.

[sabakos]

🔥 something about the University/college system

People get all upset about the SAT and college graduation rates correlating with income level and other markers of wealth that have high racial disparity, but this isn't really a problem for colleges to solve or even concern themselves with, and the attempts that have been made at doing so are doomed to failure.

I don't believe that much if any amount of so-called "intelligence" is innate, any genetic factors are minor at best compared to the impact of environmental factors. The Flynn effect is, in my view, almost entirely due to a massive improvement in the physical and mental well-being of children and teenagers in the past century. And this has not been evenly distributed, kids from wealthier backgrounds do have an enormous advantage in their ability to succeed at university over their age-group peers, they truly are more "intelligent" by any reasonable metric due to their upbringing, which means they have far more potential to get something useful out of a college education, and it's wrong to accept people to your institution for any reason that is unrelated to their ability to succeed.

Accepting kids from poorer backgrounds whose test scores and grade point averages are worse than their more privileged classmates, under the belief that their ability to overcome adversity makes up for their lack of education, is setting them up for failure, and I believe the statistics on graduation rates and income level of these students post-graduation largely bear this out. Colleges know all this, but still love affirmative action and financial aid programs because they know can get grants and scholarship money for these students, and it doesn't matter if the students' academic ability is subpar because the college is not planning on many of them graduating. Two years worth of easy scholarship and loan money and no degree is a very good deal for these institutions and a very bad deal for their victims, and someone ought to go to prison for it.

The only way to fix any of this is to intervene much earlier. Free school lunch programs (and breakfast and dinner) will do more to address racial disparity in education outcomes than any amount of affirmative action ever will, and at a lower expense to the federal government. If possible, free public boarding schools should also be an option for anyone, but especially for those students in more economically depressed and violent areas, whose home life is going to prevent them from succeeding educationally regardless of how well trained and passionate their teachers are. Just to make this spicier these should be made an option for the students starting at age 6 even if their parents don't approve, and any kids who ever run away from home should be automatically enrolled in one.

[rated-a-for-awesome]

The NDN Collective has released an impact report outlining the organization’s expansive work to build financial, social, and political power for Indigenous peoples for the last five years. 

A brief look of the report below.

Centered and made real the work of LANDBACK in all programming.

Distributed $44 million in grants to 745 grantees.

Received funding from over 90,000 individual donors.

Supported 11 development projects centering community wealth building. 

Supported 9 Indigenous-owned businesses through a braided capital model, totaling $6 million in loans and power building resources.

Held 24 creative resistance trainings to ensure Indigenous communities and allies are ready to mobilize in key moments for furthering justice.

Continuously fought to center Indigenous rights in climate policy, including by testifying to Congress and building global power at annual United National Climate Change Conferences.

Produced eight political memos and position papers, providing essential recommendations to the White House and governmental agencies.

[solar-installations-are-the-way]

Solar panel Kent

Solar power for Photovoltaic panels

Photovoltaic panels in London Solar energy begins with the sun. Photovoltaic panel (likewise referred to as "PV panels") are made use of to convert light from the sun, which is composed of particles of energy called "photons", into power that can be made use of to power electric loads. A photovoltaic panel can be made use of for a wide range of applications consisting of remote power systems for cabins, telecom tools, remote sensing, and certainly for the production of power by household and business solar electrical systems. In a healthy grid-connected solar setup setup, a solar array creates power during the day that is then made use of in the residence in the evening. Internet metering programs allow solar generator proprietors to get paid if their system produces more power than what is required in the residence.

Making use of PV panels is a really useful way to produce power for lots of applications. A solar electrical system is potentially more economical by minimizing your power bills and can provide power for upwards of three decades if appropriately preserved. With the arrival of international environment change, it has actually come to be more important that we do whatever we can to lower the stress on our atmosphere from the emission of greenhouse gases by minimizing your carbon footprint. Photovoltaic panel have no relocating components and need little maintenance. They are ruggedly built and last for decades when appropriately preserved. Last, however not least, of the benefits of photovoltaic panels and solar power is that, once a system has actually spent for its first setup prices, the power it produces for the remainder of the system's lifespan, which could be as high as 15-20 years relying on the quality of the system, is cost-free! Prices for photovoltaic panels has actually lowered substantially in the last couple of years. This is great because, incorporated with applicable rewards, NOW is the most effective time ever before to invest in a solar power system. As well as consider this: a solar power system in advance costs about the like a mid-sized car! Obviously, you would certainly require to contrast the expense of a solar setup versus the financial benefits of the decrease in power usage from the power energy grid. A solar company market photovoltaic or PV panels and provide photovoltaic panel setup along with photovoltaic or PV cleaning and repair work services. The solar company will be able to suggest you about solar power, available solar tax credits or solar loans amongst various other things. Space is a key factor to consider. The ordinary roof solar system size is around 3-4kW and this will normally use up around 15-20m2 roof covering location. An unshaded, South facing roof covering is suitable for maximum electric output. East or West facing roof coverings could still be taken into consideration, however North facing roof coverings are not suggested. A system facing East or West will generate around 15-20% much less energy than one facing directly South. Any nearby buildings, trees or chimney stacks could shade your roof covering and have a negative impact on the performance of your roof solar system. Solar PV panels are taken into consideration 'allowed developments' and usually do not need planning consent. If you're preparing to set up a solar PV system in your house, you should register it with your Distribution Network Operator (DNO).

Solar power for Photovoltaic panels

Photovoltaic panels in London Solar energy begins with the sun. Photovoltaic panel (likewise referred to as "PV panels") are made use of to convert light from the sun, which is composed of particles of energy called "photons", into power that can be made use of to power electric loads. A photovoltaic panel can be made use of for a wide range of applications consisting of remote power systems for cabins, telecom tools, remote sensing, and certainly for the production of power by household and business solar electrical systems. In a healthy grid-connected solar setup setup, a solar array creates power during the day that is then made use of in the residence in the evening. Internet metering programs allow solar generator proprietors to get paid if their system produces more power than what is required in the residence.

Making use of PV panels is a really useful way to produce power for lots of applications. A solar electrical system is potentially more economical by minimizing your power bills and can provide power for upwards of three decades if appropriately preserved. With the arrival of international environment change, it has actually come to be more important that we do whatever we can to lower the stress on our atmosphere from the emission of greenhouse gases by minimizing your carbon footprint. Photovoltaic panel have no relocating components and need little maintenance. They are ruggedly built and last for decades when appropriately preserved. Last, however not least, of the benefits of photovoltaic panels and solar power is that, once a system has actually spent for its first setup prices, the power it produces for the remainder of the system's lifespan, which could be as high as 15-20 years relying on the quality of the system, is cost-free! Prices for photovoltaic panels has actually lowered substantially in the last couple of years. This is great because, incorporated with applicable rewards, NOW is the most effective time ever before to invest in a solar power system. As well as consider this: a solar power system in advance costs about the like a mid-sized car! Obviously, you would certainly require to contrast the expense of a solar setup versus the financial benefits of the decrease in power usage from the power energy grid. A solar company market photovoltaic or PV panels and provide photovoltaic panel setup along with photovoltaic or PV cleaning and repair work services. The solar company will be able to suggest you about solar power, available solar tax credits or solar loans amongst various other things. Space is a key factor to consider. The ordinary roof solar system size is around 3-4kW and this will normally use up around 15-20m2 roof covering location. An unshaded, South facing roof covering is suitable for maximum electric output. East or West facing roof coverings could still be taken into consideration, however North facing roof coverings are not suggested. A system facing East or West will generate around 15-20% much less energy than one facing directly South. Any nearby buildings, trees or chimney stacks could shade your roof covering and have a negative impact on the performance of your roof solar system. Solar PV panels are taken into consideration 'allowed developments' and usually do not need planning consent. If you're preparing to set up a solar PV system in your house, you should register it with your Distribution Network Operator (DNO).

solar panels installed solar lights solar panels london solar panel london solar installers near me london solar panels solar panels installation solar london london solar solar panels install solar https://solarpanelinstallerskent.blogspot.com/ https://solarpanelinstallerskent.blogspot.com/2023/01/solar-panel-installers-kent.html https://solarpanelkent.blogspot.com/

[mariacallous]

Over the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath, labor shortages have garnered considerable attention, including among public school teachers. Nationwide, the teacher shortage exceeds 55,000 unfilled positions, with nearly five times as many positions held by underqualified candidates. These gaps have been generated, in part, by increased pandemic-era teacher turnover and a 35% enrollment decline in traditional university teacher preparation programs in the decade preceding the pandemic. Meanwhile, interest, prestige, and satisfaction related to the teaching profession have reached 50-year lows.

In response, individual states and the federal government have proposed and enacted various policies to strengthen the teacher workforce. These policies vary widely in scope, encompassing both financial interventions (e.g., teacher pay, loan forgiveness) and non-pecuniary policies around teacher working conditions. While debate over the depths and distribution of the teacher shortage continues, public opinion of enacted and mooted policy approaches varies widely. In this context, improved understanding of public support may inform voter-conscious policymaking, especially in contexts where the effects of policies intended to attract teachers may extend beyond school walls and in instances where policy enactment requires direct voter approval.

To explore public sentiment concerning several teacher recruitment and retention policies, we fielded four questions on the fall 2022 Cooperative Election Study (CES) surveys, which were administered to a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults. While many respondents support the proposed strategies, including teacher bonuses, grants, loan forgiveness, and shortened school weeks, significant partisan differences remain evident.

Public opinion in a partisan era

Policies to improve teacher recruitment and retention vary in scope; some specifically target teachers while others focus on broader economic incentives. We posed four survey questions capturing support for the following policies: 1) Expanding the federal Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant from $4,000 to $8,000; 2) Accelerating federal loan forgiveness programs (e.g., the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, the Teacher Loan Forgiveness Program, Perkins Loan Cancellation); 3) Enacting permanent four-day school weeks (4DSWs); 4) Distributing one-time teacher bonuses between $1,000 and $5,000.

The first two proposals focus on potential federal policies to recruit and retain teachers (and broader loan relief objectives) while the latter two proposals focus on state and district approaches to teacher labor markets, primarily addressing teacher retention.

Though the two federal policies may not be predicated directly on their public support, both have garnered significant national debate; the doubling of the TEACH grant stalled through President Biden’s American Families Plan proposal while loan forgiveness remains mired in long-term legal proceedings. Conversely, state and local policies often require direct voter support, either through local school board elections or referenda. Four-day school week policies have grown rapidly, primarily in rural locales, though recent evidence indicates largely negative impacts on student academic outcomes, while questions about their effects on parents, families, and communities remain. Teacher grants and bonuses have proliferated through COVID-19 federal relief funds, a revenue source soon due to expire.

While the efficacy of these policies to stabilize teacher labor markets may vary, our focus lies not in assessing their effectiveness but rather in documenting their public support to inform the feasibility of their enactment and sustainability through public buy-in. The pertinent portions of the CES surveys—which we partnered with YouGov to administer to a national stratified sample of approximately 1,000 adults—queried respondents on their support and opposition to these policies, also collecting their demographic characteristics (e.g., race, income, employment status), and political ideology, factors previously linked to policy support. Each question was contextualized for respondents as a potential tool to improve teacher recruitment and retention.

Polarization and partisanship frequently predict policy preferences, eclipsing demographic factors like age, race, and ethnicity, and even material self-interest. Combined with rhetoric from political leaders, partisanship can lead voters to oppose policies from which they stand to benefit. In our increasingly polarized political environment, Americans often view members of the other political party with distrust, which can lead voters to oppose policies based on political endorsements and to impede goals of the other political party. Thus, we expect partisanship to influence respondents’ preferences regarding education policy, particularly on politicized issues.

Contemporary public opinion on teacher shortage policies

On the one hand, each policy proposal garnered at least a plurality of public support. One-time bonuses (63.6%) and grants to teach in high-need schools (59.4%) were most popular; expanded loan forgiveness (47.3%) and permanent 4DSWs (40.7%) received more limited support (see Figure 1). In addition, support for each policy outstripped opposition by between 10 (4DSWs) to as many as 50 percentage points (one-time bonuses); between two and three in 10 respondents remained unsure of their support for each policy.

On the other hand, significant partisan variation underlies this support. Whereas most liberals support enacting each tactic (between 59.1% and 87.6%), only a plurality of conservatives supported one-time bonuses and a majority disapproved of the remaining strategies (see Figure 2). In fact, only slightly more than one in four conservatives indicated support for expanded loan forgiveness (26.0%) and 4DSWs (27.4%).

Only a few additional characteristics beyond partisanship predicted respondent preferences. Racial minority respondents and those holding a bachelor’s degree each indicated greater support for grants to teach in high-need schools. Additional characteristics like family income, gender, employment status, urbanicity, and age rarely, if ever, predicted policy preferences.

Situating our findings

Recently, scholars have explored partisan sorting in education, showing increasing polarization in education-focused topics, including in familiar debates concerning Common Core State Standards, public school quality, and education spending. Our findings showing partisan differences in support for these policy ideas are not entirely surprising, as some topics in education policy have become well-publicized, polarizing hot-button issues (e.g., ESAs, COVID-19 protection measures, book content, instruction discussing sex, gender orientation, and race and ethnicity).

Republican trust in institutions has been declining for several years. A summer 2023 Gallup poll shows a 34-point partisan gap in confidence in public schools, second only to the gap in confidence in the presidency. Affective partisanship and rhetoric from Republican elites also seems to have impacted Republican views of higher education. For example, a Pew Research Center survey illustrates a rapid decline in the number of Republicans who believe higher education has a positive effect “on the way things are going in the country,” declining from more than half in 2015 to only one in three in 2019. We find that these polarized views impact support for policy issues in education that have yet to feature in the so-called culture wars.

Teacher salaries: The annual Education Next Survey explores many hot-button education-focused topics ranging from perceptions of school quality to preferences for the enactment of new policies and practices. In 2022, responses to queries regarding the trajectory of teacher salaries varied widely by partisan ideology, with 70% of Democrats versus 46% of Republicans generally supporting salary increases.

The cost of education: Loan forgiveness and free two- and four-year college: Consistent with our findings, other survey results regarding loan relief showed a significant partisan divide. While 47% of Americans support some federal loan forgiveness, results from the Quinnipiac University Poll indicate a large partisan divide, with 88% of Democrats indicating approval and 81% of Republicans signaling disapproval. Similar partisan differences emerged in EdNext’s questions regarding free two- and four-year higher education, with Democrats indicating much stronger support (84% and 80%) than Republicans (44% and 36%).

Four-day school weeks: Though we found the least support for 4DSW policies (40.7%), the PDK International Poll recently indicated 53% support 4DSWs, up from 25% two decades ago. The PDK poll motivated 4DSWs with district cost savings whereas our question prioritized teacher recruitment and retention, which district leaders now typically cite as a primary objective of the policy and teachers value as a job perk.

The 2023-24 school year and beyond

As students begin the 2023-24 school year, many will return to schools either under-staffed or staffed, in part, by underqualified teachers, making post-pandemic academic recovery more challenging. Though we find a plurality of adults support a range of teacher recruitment and retention policies, even seemingly politically neutral strategies to address teacher shortages may now court a partisan divide similar to other issues in contemporary education policy, one which may feature prominently in upcoming elections. As a result, the feasibility of implementing local policies like 4DSWs and one-time teacher bonuses may hinge on the direction of local partisanship, while federal policies like loan relief may continue to languish with single-party support.