Category Archives: Intentional Communities

BLOOMINGTON, Ind. Fourteen Indiana student athletes including Trayce Jackson-Davis and Race Thompson have signed with Hoosiers For Good, a new program launched in March partnering Hoosier athletes with charitable organizations that can benefit from their name, image and likeness.

Each of the 14 athletes are paired with a local charity to help raise awareness through the athlete's social media and in-person appearances through autograph sessions, speaking engagements, etc.

Their NIL deal with Hoosiers For Good is for the duration of the spring. Hoosiers For Good will sign a new class of student athletes in the fall.

We are proud to announce this substantial and unique support for these Indiana charities and the people and communities they serve, said Hoosiers For Good Legal Counsel Fred Glass.

It is worth expressly noting that we are not announcing, and cannot announce, that any or all of these students are definitely staying at IU for their next season of eligibility. The agreements we announce today do not, and cannot, include any requirement that they be enrolled at IU in order to provide these NIL services.

Below is a list of the 14 athletes and their respective charities signed with Hoosiers For Good:

Scroll to Continue

We are excited to announce our first class of Hoosiers For Good student athletes, said Hoosiers For Good executive director Tyler Harris. From the outset, we have been intentional in identifying student athletes who have a platform and the ambition to positively impact communities in Indiana through charitable participation.

"We believe this first class of Hoosiers For Good student athletes, and all subsequent classes will drive real value for our charitable partners.

The total NIL compensation for the student athletes is at $470,000 made possible by donors. Agreements are not seen as one size fits all but instead reflects the reach and impact each student athlete uses to promote and impact their assigned charity.

As a student athlete I am always looking for ways to impact my community, and I'm so excited to be a part of the work that Indiana Wish is doing to grant wishes for kids," said Indiana women's basketball forward Mackenzie Holmes.

"Supporting Indiana Wish and these kids and families gives me the opportunity to be a part of something thats much bigger than myself."

Hoosiers For Good uses an Incubator Program to encourage any student athlete interested in helping their community and using their voice for good to submit a proposal for funding.

From there, the organization's mission is to support local charity work while influencing the next generation of community leaders in the form of student athletes.

I'm excited to partner with Stop the Violence Indianapolis and Turnstone as a Hoosiers For Good athlete, said Indiana mens basketball forward Trayce Jackson-Davis. I am truly blessed to raise awareness for these causes that empower people throughout Indiana.

Indiana's Mackenzie Holmes (54) shoots in front of Princeton's Abby Meyers (1) during the second half of the Indiana versus Princeton women's NCAA second round game at Simon Skjodt Assembly Hall on Monday, March 21, 2022.

Iowa Hawkeyes guard Tomi Taiwo (1) tries to stop a shot by Indiana Hoosiers guard Grace Berger (34) during the second quarter of the BIG Ten women's championship game Sunday, March 6, 2022, at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in Indianapolis.Jenna Watson/IndyStar / USA TODAY NETWORK

Oct 31, 2020; Piscataway, New Jersey, USA; Indiana Hoosiers quarterback Michael Penix Jr. (9) throws the ball as Indiana Hoosiers offensive lineman Matthew Bedford (76) blocks against the Rutgers Scarlet Knights during the second half at SHI Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Vincent Carchietta-USA TODAY Sports

USA Today

Nov 13, 2021; Bloomington, Indiana, USA; Indiana Hoosiers quarterback Jack Tuttle (14) before the game against the Rutgers Scarlet Knights at Memorial Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Marc Lebryk-USA TODAY Sports

Indiana forward Jordyn Levy (9) holds back Purdue defender Skylurr Patrick (31) during the second half of an NCAA women's soccer match, Sunday, Oct. 24, 2021 at Folk Field in West Lafayette.Nikos Frazier / Journal & Courier / USA TODAY NETWORK

Mar 17, 2022; Portland, OR, USA; Indiana Hoosiers forward Trayce Jackson-Davis (23) dunks the basketball against the Saint Mary's Gaels during the second half during the first round of the 2022 NCAA Tournament at Moda Center. Mandatory Credit: Soobum Im-USA TODAY Sports

Mar 17, 2022; Portland, OR, USA; Indiana Hoosiers forward Race Thompson (25) is defended by Saint Mary's Gaels forward Kyle Bowen (14) and forward Matthias Tass (11) during the first half during the first round of the 2022 NCAA Tournament at Moda Center. Mandatory Credit: Troy Wayrynen-USA TODAY Sports

Oct 30, 2021; College Park, Maryland, USA; Indiana Hoosiers defensive back Tiawan Mullen (3) before the game against the Maryland Terrapins at Capital One Field at Maryland Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Tommy Gilligan-USA TODAY Sports

Purdue safety Sanoussi Kane (21) breaks up a pass intended for Indiana tight end AJ Barner (88) during the third quarter of an NCAA college football game, Saturday, Nov. 27, 2021 at Ross-Ade Stadium in West Lafayette.Nikos Frazier / Journal & Courier / USA TODAY NETWORK

Go here to see the original:

14 Indiana Student Athletes Sign With Hoosiers For Good to Make Difference in Their Communities - Sports Illustrated

FAYETTEVILLE -- Nancy Gallardo met some of her neighbors Wednesday, and her house isn't even built yet.

Gallardo, along with her two sons, Gabriel, 12, and Mateo, 7, and her 2-year-old daughter, Sofia, will live in a house built through their own sweat equity with Habitat for Humanity. The home will be part of the Willow Bend neighborhood under construction east of South College Avenue between 9th and 11th streets.

Gallardo's home will be one of three Habitat for Humanity will help build in the 81-home, mixed-income neighborhood. Habitat uses a model that involves prospective homeowners putting in more than 300 hours of work, known as sweat equity. The homeowner buys the home with a zero-interest loan under an affordable mortgage.

Willow Bend also has its own method of getting families into homes. The neighborhood, developed by nonprofit Partners for Better Housing, uses a shared equity program to make a third of the homes affordable to lower-income families. The homes are sold at market rate. However, the Pay It Forward shared equity program enables lower-income families to receive down-payment assistance that functions as an interest-free loan and lowers monthly payments.

The two organizations have a shared goal to make home ownership possible for a diversity of incomes. A meeting of the minds came about because Habitat had families and Willow Bend had land, said Brandon Swoboda, executive director of Habitat for Humanity of Washington County.

"They wanted to create a mixed-income community; we had the families for them to be able to help them to do that, and they had the affordable land for us," he said. "It was a great marriage."

Habitat for Humanity bought the land where Gallardo will build her home in February for $210,000, according to Washington County property records. Gallardo will take ownership once the house is built.

So far, 10 homes are finished at Willow Bend. The goal is to build 27 homes per year until the neighborhood is complete.

The shared goal between the two organizations is made all the more important considering the housing crunch the region is facing, said Monique Pierre, chief executive officer of Partners for Better Housing.

Benton and Washington counties saw record numbers of homes sold during the second half of last year and at the highest average prices ever, according to the most recent Skyline Report. Over the past five years, the average price of a home sold in Benton County went up nearly 56% and increased 54% in Washington County.

Front porches, not garages, line the streets at Willow Bend. The project is trying to set a standard in the region to create better communities, Pierre said.

"We're doing that by being realistic about what's on the horizon, and being intentional about how we create sustainable communities," she said.

As Gallardo stood outside mingling, Michal Richter and Carlos Mendez walked up from two houses down to say hello. They exchanged phone numbers, and the pair invited Gallardo into the neighborhood's Slack channel, a group messaging app.

Gallardo said life isn't easy, especially as a single mother. She was glad to know she'll be bringing her children into a neighborhood with a strong sense of community.

Gallardo applied with Habitat for Humanity in the fall. At the time, she and her children were sharing a single bedroom at Gallardo's mother's house. The family has since moved into a two-bedroom apartment, but Gallardo said she was eager to experience the stability home ownership will bring to her and her children.

Gallardo said she plans to go to school to study health care administration. She works at the business office at Highlands Oncology.

"This has just opened up more doors for more possibilities," Gallardo said. "Now, I won't have to worry so much about expensive rent rates or expensive mortgage rates."

On the web

For more information about Habitat for Humanity, go to:

Home

For more information about Partners for Better Housing and Willow Bend, go to:

https://www.partnersforbetterhousing.org/

Home

Continued here:

Organizations team up to help build home for family at Willow Bend in Fayetteville - Arkansas Online

Welcome back to our Workplace newsletter. Today: how one company tackles technical training in a hybrid workplace, the NLRBs response to Amazon, and why Google is pouring $100 million into upskilling.

Michelle Ma, reporter (email | twitter)

As execs continue to discover the elusive secret to making hybrid work work, training employees looks vastly different from the days when we regularly crowded around a conference table for a programming lunch-and-learn or an interactive manager training.

Some companies have moved toward painfully tedious hours-long Zoom training or asynchronous video tutorials, while other leaders with the L&D budget have resorted to simply offering all their employees subscriptions and stipends to go learn on their own. Envoy, a company focused on creating a more efficient way to manage our new world of work, chose a hybrid route for distributing training to employees. Its also pivoted its manager training to focus more on how to work with hybrid teams.

Envoys Chief People Officer Annette Reavis gave Protocol a peek under the hood at its learning and development strategy, and shared how its thinking about technical training in the hybrid workplace.

Responses have been edited for clarity and brevity.

Lets start by getting a baseline for what kind of training programs Envoy has in place. How are you currently thinking about training and skilling to engage employees?

We have different training programs and we think about them more around learning [and] continuing to expand people's learning There's official training and then there's on-the-job training, so making sure you have what you need from your colleagues and the necessary skills.

We also do a fair bit around leadership, too. We have an internal program called Envoy Lead that takes our top talent, and we put them through a series of learning. Part of it is around learning strategy skills and how to read financials, up to how do you lead a team through change. And then we also do manager training. So we've got those new managers, people that want to come in and either learn how to manage, or they've managed somewhere before, but they need to learn it the Envoy way.

How have you tackled manager training as people learn how to work in a flexible environment? Have you tailored training for managers specifically around managing a remote or hybrid team?

We ask the talent that joins our company to come in two to three days a week. So managers know that they've got focused time, and then they'll be able to [come] in with their team. One thing we talk about in that manager training is having a team day and being focused around what you do for that day, and really separating what you can do together from what you can do when your talent is remote.

And so trying to train folks on, OK, you've got a team day everyone's here. That's when you do your team meetings. That's when you do your one-on-ones, that's when you have lunch together. That's one piece. And then when they're remote, you're really more focused on execution. I think it's a little harder if you never had any time together, but we're lucky in that we have people that have some time together and then time to work remotely.

So the job training that's needed in order to do a job, is that better done in the office when people are together, or on people's own time, when they're remote?

It's generally done better together. It's hard to have unstructured problem solving when you're not together because a lot of times if you think about when you schedule your remote meetings, you're very focused, you know what you're going to do, you know you've got 25 minutes and hopefully five of those [are] spent getting to know each other in the meeting. But when you're together, you have that unstructured problem-solving, and that is where a lot of the learning happens. Again, not 100%, because I'm not saying you don't learn when you're remote. But if we think about how it's really set up best, it's when you're together that a lot of that happens.

How dependent is Envoy on outside courses and learning and development service subscriptions?

We really do less of that because we are so fortunate to work with some of the smartest people in the world. Envoy has such top talent here that we actually can learn from each other. Not saying some of those courses arent great, but sometimes they just move too slow, if you think about a course, even over a week, and what you can learn in a few hours if you're actually sitting across from someone. And so, again, with the pace and the way everything's moving, we're really focused on: How can we learn from each other?

Now, the other thing we do have though is we offer everyone an L&D credit. They can spend $1,000 on outside learning. And again, we do that so people can be really focused on learning stuff specific for their job.

Your career in tech has spanned HP, Meta and now Envoy. Tech changes so quickly and people in highly skilled roles often have to upskill and learn as they go. From your perspective, how has the training a decade ago changed from what training is offered now?

It's more intentional. I think what stayed the same is that on-the-job training. Its just different in the sense that what you needed to learn 10 years ago is different from what you'll need to learn now. Even from a coding perspective, or from a project manager perspective, it's different. The pace is much faster than it was 10 years ago. And we thought it was really fast then. But I think on-the-job training has become even more important because so much of what we learned in school is baseline, but as you said, technology is changing all the time. Schools cant even keep up with it.

So how are we making sure that people have the opportunity to learn in-house? For example, at Facebook, we did a lot of technical training where the engineers would come together and problem-solve again, take that unstructured problem-solving A lot of that was on the job, real-time learning. I see that a lot more now than 10 years ago. It was almost [always], Go take this class or do that class, whereas now it's really much more on-the-job learning as you're coding or working with people.

Amber Burton, reporter (email | twitter)

If you havent been following the Amazon union battles over the last two weeks, heres a quick update to get you up to speed. In Staten Island, a group of workers called the Amazon Labor Union won a surprising and sweeping victory against Amazon on April 1. Then, on Thursday, Amazon filed paperwork that shows it is planning to challenge the results and accuse the union of coercing voters. Meanwhile, the NLRB needs to review 400-plus contested ballots to determine a winner in a Bessemer, Alabama, Amazon facility. And at the end of this month, a second union election will start in another facility in Staten Island.

There are big implications for all employers here. Amid the election drama, NLRB general counsel Jennifer Abruzzo released a memo this week calling to make captive-audience meetings illegal. Employers typically use these small meetings to try to deter people from voting for a union (Amazon used them in both Staten Island and Bessemer), and now Abruzzo wants to end the practice. Past labor precedent has allowed employers to hold these meetings while making it very difficult for unions to do the same, even though technically employers are not legally allowed to interfere with union organizing.

I believe that the NLRB case precedent, which has tolerated such meetings, is at odds with fundamental labor-law principles, our statutory language, and our Congressional mandate. Because of this, I plan to urge the Board to reconsider such precedent and find mandatory meetings of this sort unlawful, Abruzzo wrote.

Todays labor market is tighter than ever. Heres how 10,000+ companies have changed the way they recruit for tech roles. We're sharing the latest trends in job requirements, job titles, applicant gender and more. How do you stack up?

Learn more

Google launched a $100 million career certificates fund. Digital bootcamp Springboard is committing $10 million in scholarships to underrepresented students. And theres a reason theyre doing that, according to new reporting from my colleague Amber Burton. The tech talent gap is real, and companies are realizing that one way to narrow it is by helping underserved communities. Win-win.

Read the full story.

Its hard out there for tech companies with open roles. Weve known that for a while, but tech services company Commit interviewed 200 senior tech leaders of U.S. startups and found:

Our research shows that tech job openings have grown 81% over the past two years, while the median applicant pool has shrunk by 39%. With the tech hiring market tighter than ever, recruiting strategies that worked just a few years ago aren't cutting it in 2022.

Learn more

Thoughts, questions, tips? Send them to workplace@protocol.com. Have a great day, see you Tuesday.

View post:

'It's more intentional.' How to train employees who might live a half a world away. - Protocol

If you ever want a straight answer, just ask a veteran.

When the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs announced last month its recommendation to close the VA medical center in Leeds, citing the age of its buildings and a projected decline in the number of veterans in our region, local veterans reacted with both disgust and disbelief.

I immediately went into panic mode, said Christine Hatfield, a Navy and Air Force veteran who is one of them, describing the moment when she heard the news about Leeds. This will be absolutely devastating.

Many veterans like Hatfield would be homeless if it were not for a widely renowned homelessness prevention program started years ago by the Soldier On organization through a VA partnership at Leeds where veterans can live next to and have access to VA care and services.

Closing Leeds will also mean closing a regional hub for veterans requiring care and would come at a time when the largest group of veterans today are Vietnam veterans in their 70s or older. As these veterans age they will require significantly more care and more resources. In addition to the many veterans residing in Soldier On facilities, veterans from surrounding Hilltowns and from throughout rural western Massachusetts have come to rely heavily on Leeds.

Over the years, Ive met countless veterans, many from the Vietnam era, who would tell me the VA in Leeds literally saved their life. Now they tell me they cant imagine starting all over again with new providers in the community who very likely wont understand their time in service.

What is even more inexplicable, given the irony of the VAs recommendation, is the amount of taxpayer money spent more than $50 million and counting in the last decade to modernize and upgrade buildings on the Leeds campus.

On a recent and bone chilling March morning, while veterans were talking about the news that Leeds was on a VA closure list, workers were adjusting and configuring even more scaffolding on buildings. With new parking lots being built into the hill and ongoing and multi-faceted renovations and modifications taking place throughout the sprawling 105-acre campus, few local veterans anticipated the ball being dropped on their facility.

For the residents in Soldier On, the ethereal combination of housing, health care, behavioral health and peer support on the Leeds campus cant be moved or shifted easily or certainly more efficiently elsewhere. Whats in Leeds, they say, is centrally, safely, and securely located within walking or electric wheelchair distance.

Thats important for veterans like Robert Benoit and James Oliver who have both physical and mental health disabilities that require them to get regular care and support from VA programs on a near daily basis. They have lived on the Leeds campus in Soldier On for more than a decade and say whats been built over the years at Leeds works because everything is in familial proximity. So, why they ask, should anyone bust up what works?

Its a small town up here, said Benoit. Were a family really a community of veterans who care about one another. Whether its intentional or not, closing Leeds would be making life a whole lot worse for many, many veterans.

Oliver agrees. Who knows where and what wed be doing if it were not for this place, he said. Probably living on the street or in someones basement.

Now they rely on hope and promises from area elected officials that veterans at Leeds wont be abandoned. The process to close any federal facility is lengthy, takes many steps, and will include public hearings. Elected officials say it will be years for all of this to play out, and nothing is yet final.

But they will be battling a lobbying effort started some time ago by political forces to privatize VA, to reward select people and companies with profit, and to shutter facilities just like Leeds. Its been an incremental, insidious, and underhanded movement, which culminated in congressional legislation in 2018 that mandated the infrastructure review and one that the Biden administration cant stop.

People who truly understand VA health care know that dismantling such a highly integrated system and outsourcing treatment is a terrible idea.

The private sector, already struggling to provide adequate access to care in many communities, is ill-prepared to handle the number and complexity of patients that would come from closing or downsizing VA hospitals and clinics, particularly when it involves the mental health needs of people scarred by the horrors of war, wrote Dr. David Shulkin in the New York Times after he was fired from his post as Secretary of Veterans Affairs by a tweet from President Trump.

The truth is that Leeds was built in the 1920s to provide neuropsychiatric care for veterans returning from the trenches of a world war started in Europe. It has served our region well and proudly for nearly 100 years. And veterans know better than anyone that only the dead have seen the end of war. What will the next 100 years bring us?

I am getting so sick and tired of people talking about the declining veteran population, said state Sen. John Velis at a wind-swept rally hosted last month by the Massachusetts Nurses Association to protest the Leeds announcement.

Velis, a major in the Army Reserve, a veteran of Afghanistan, and a straight shooter, was incredulous. Is anybody watching the news lately by any chance? We live in a very, very dangerous world.

John Paradis, a retired U.S. Air Force lieutenant colonel, lives in Florence.

More:

My Turn: The devastating effect of dropping a wrecking ball on the VA in Leeds - The Recorder

I always wanted for my family what I observe in so many other Jewish families: that feeling of deep connection that comes from being part of a Jewish community.

To build bonds, I said yes when asked to teach a Yom Kippur study session at a local synagogue. I said yes when asked to provide feedback to rabbis on diversity initiatives. I said yes to a shuls search committee and to the invitation to plot and plan how to transform into a multiracial, anti-racist congregation.

Ten years later after all the diversity committees, reviewing of draft congregant surveys and sermons, I look out at my community and there is little, dare I say nothing, to show for these efforts.

The same affluent, cisgender, white men chant from the bimah. There are no former campers of color working at the shuls summer camps. There are no Black, Asian or Latino Jewish teenagers behind the desk to welcome folks to the front office. And its not just the synagogues Ive interacted with there is essentially no racial diversity in leadership anywhere in our progressive shuls in our progressive towns in our progressive states.

And I dont see it changing any time soon, since rabbinical hiring processes tend to prioritize the rarefied, traditional training that few clergy of color have, to date, fully acquired.

I recently had a very difficult conversation with a senior congregational rabbi Ive worked with for years. Beyond her good intentions, we talked about their failure to implement any tools or strategies that institutionalize efforts toward ensuring a multiracial, anti-racist synagogue community. I told them that goodwill and intentions are not strategies.

I pointed to the absence of institutional policies and how their absence thwarted their stated objectives of ever having the shul and its leadership reflect the racial diversity of the Jewish community. I explained that the lack of progress literally none that could be measured was in fact regressive and harmful to the community.

Lack of policies and practices to ensure a multiracial, anti-racist community, and failure to create and support pathways to diverse role models and diverse leadership reinforces a false narrative of who is a Jew and a Jewish leader in the United States, harming and arresting the development of us all.

My experience isnt unique. I know there are hundreds if not thousands of Jews of color working with passion and fever to transform their communities into ones that embody anti-racist values and reflect the racial diversity of the American Jewish community.

I am so grateful to them. I also share their frustration. We must work through congregational and organizational leaders to activate and eventually institutionalize durable multiracial, anti-racist change. Yet it is our leaders who inadequately respond to racism and white supremacy in the Jewish community.

When youre Black, queer or female or all three every moment of institutional power attainment comes with a parallel consciousness about the significance of responsibilities that come with that power. With the opportunity and authority to deal in power also comes a sense of yirah, Hebrew for awe or fear. It is an extraordinary and sometimes heavy responsibility to hold power power that can both help and harm.

Many of our white leaders come from predominantly white communities. They are products of those environments. They are often born into power pathways designed to serve them, pathways indelibly informed by policies and practices related to race, gender, affluence and Jewish communal history.

And when one is of an environment, it can be hard to see the self from outside of that environment. Until we, collectively, are able to responsibly own and hold power, it will be difficult to be in an honest and intimate relationship with our power.

Last year, Beyond the Count a study commissioned by the group I lead, the Jews of Color Initiative found that 80% of Jews of color have experienced discrimination in the U.S. Jewish community. Of the more than 1,000 Jews of color surveyed, just 13% said Jewish leaders are doing an adequate job responding to racism in our communal organizations.

Decades and decades of quiet reinforcement of racism, a paucity of communal leaders of color, and a lack of bold, catalyzing public commitments has created communal hardship that our leaders can and must remedy and repair.

We must begin by planting our feet firmly on the side of courageous and righteous justice. Among other things, this means we own our communal influence, take risks, and speak truth to power. Leveraging the learnings about the impact of racism and white supremacy on Jews of color, we as leaders have the opportunity and responsibility to commit publicly to halting the legacy of racism and white supremacy in our organizations.

This must be done even when we dont yet know how to halt this legacy, and it must be done publicly to build accountability. It is powerful to own and name harm and to walk away from parts of our past that dont serve us as the Jewish people.

But I want to ask more of leaders, and more of myself.

First, those of us with institutional authority must employ bring to all we do a view of leadership informed by racial equity and justice. Leading a diverse population requires intentional training and skill. And that training must include works, voices, pedagogy and conceptual frameworks from people of color. This training is vital; it imbues us with the capacity to stand in front of our communities and explain with integrity, clarity and care the value-proposition for the Jewish community to see and understand itself as multiracial.

Second, sitting leaders must construct their succession plans for the next three, five, seven and 10 years with racial diversity as a clear goal. Chief executive officers, presidents, executive directors and board members should not only be thinking about how to attract the best visionaries and organizational developers, but those who also reflect the perspectives and experiences of the Jewish community theyll be working with now and well into the future.

I dont have a strategic plan for how we, as the current collective of national Jewish leaders, will make transformative communal change. Instead, I have an invitation.

Leaders: look at the data. Look at our communities, and commit right now to do everything in your power to reduce the percentage of Jews of color telling us they experience racism and discrimination in the organizations we run.

Lets increase that paltry 13% statistic that reflects the number of Jews of color who believe we as leaders are doing an adequate job responding to racism in our communities.

Lets feel the feelings alarm, sadness, disappointment, even a sense of failure.

And then lets keep it moving. Ten more years is too long for any Jew of color to further endure racism in our organizations, to not receive adequate and appropriate care from leaders, and to not see a reflection of ourselves on the bimah or in the C-Suite.

To contact the author, email editorial@forward.com.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Forward.

See the original post:

Despite 10 years of promises, Jewish leaders have failed to make space for Jews of color - Forward

Rep. Ritchie Torres (photo: Jeff Reed/City Council)

As congressional representatives seek re-election this year, there is one member of Congress who doesnt need to worry about having an opponent: Rep. Ritchie Torres. At the time of this writing, there is no word of a candidate circulating petitions to challenge Torres in this Junes Democratic primary. As political insiders well know, it is rare for an incumbent in New York not to have a challenge.

Many may have taken notice of Torress popularity in his congressional district, as is evident in this Data for Progress poll. According to the poll, Torres enjoys a 73% favorability rate in the 15th Congressional District.

The rise of Ritchie Torres is one that I foresaw in these pages some years ago. I believe the rest of the country will continue to share our New York experience of Torres as a thoughtful legislator who has an uncanny ability to dig through complex policy issues and who articulates his positions clearly and concisely.

Equally fascinating to me has been Torres political philosophy since 2013, a posture of pragmatic progressivism. The pragmatic part of this posture has earned Torres the scorn of some other progressives.

Contemporary political progressivism in the United States. has several variants. The current trajectory of progressive politics can perhaps be distinguished between those on the socialist left and those on the liberal left, who consider themselves more pragmatic.

By pragmatic I am not referring to the philosophical school of thought of pragmatism made popular by the likes of William James and John Dewey in the 20th century. Rather, I refer to pragmatic as an electoral and governing approach to politics that seeks to achieve social ends through the most practical means possible.

These two distinguishing markers of political progressivismthe socialist left and the liberal left are hardly a recent phenomenon. Since the 20th century, progressive politics has been quite diverse. Interestingly enough, the socialist left once had a similar influence in New York and national politics to what it has now, though the impact is perhaps a bit greater now if we consider the number of socialists that are being elected to local office. The recent electoral successes of socialists are due to their intentional efforts to work within the Democratic Party instead of functioning as a third party as they did decades ago.

Perhaps the most prominent and influential socialist figure in 1930s electoral politics was Norman Thomas, a member of the Socialist Party of America. Thomas charm, charisma, and intellect helped to catapult the socialist agenda into the national political discourse.

Yet this socialist influence began to wane with the social progress achieved through FDRs New Deal initiatives. What replaced it for the next few decades was the influence of the liberal left.

What has been deemed liberal left I call pragmatic progressivism. And it is in this wing of progressive politics that Ritchie Torres resides. Pragmatic progressives seek most of the same goals as other progressives: universal healthcare, adequate funding for education and housing, fair wages, among others. The pragmatic element in this type of progressivism acknowledges that to function, politics must maintain a healthy equilibrium between competing interests.

The key difference between the socialist left and pragmatic progressives lies in the paths they take to achieve progressive aims. Pragmatists assert that the attainment of progressive goals may entail negotiating with those competing interests that are at different points along the political spectrum. Therefore, pragmatists make no bones about the fact that they must work within an imperfect and indeed broken system full of people with different opinions and constituencies that make these negotiations necessary. Pragmatists see these negotiations as necessary for the work of progress.

If Norman Thomas was the face of the socialist politics that preceded current socialist movements, like the contemporary Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), then the theologian and ethicist Reinhold Niebuhr, in the same era, represented the pragmatic progressivism exemplified today by Ritchie Torres.

In the 1930s, Niebuhr was part of the Socialists of America party and even ran for office twice on their ballot. The realities of World War II and the social and economic impact of FDRs New Deal changed his politics, leading him eventually to co-found New Yorks Liberal Party and later the Union for Democratic Action, which eventually became the Americans for Democratic Action. Niebuhr understood that the seeking of political perfection was far from realistic; therefore the necessity to seek compromise. He believed that the idealism of the socialist left, as was evident by their propensity to clamor for pacifictic alternatives during World War II, was indeed an attempt to seek the perfect. Yet, Niebuhr would assert that the perfect cant be the enemy of the very good.

Torres reflects in word and deed the type of progressive politics espoused by Niebuhrseeking progressive goals by balancing realities of politics and governance.

When have we seen Rep. Torres inclination toward this kind of pragmatic progressivism? Lets take a look at his stance on the Defund the Police movement prominently espoused by those on the socialist left. Speaking to Jose Diaz-Balart on MSNBC last month, Torres said, ...any elected official whos advocating for the abolition and/or even the defunding of police is out of touch with reality and should not be taken seriously. Torres prefers to speak of a reform the police type of movement, one that acknowledges the necessity of policing for ensuring public safety while acknowledging also that there are structural deficiencies within police departments that need deep and sustained reform. Torres says, What most New Yorkers want is not less policing or more police, but better policing more accountable and transparent policing.

Perhaps this stance of Torress points to his inclination to work within a broken system in order to seek necessary changes from within rather than seeking a total abolition of a system that doesnt work for many, particularly for communities of color. Hence, Torres has developed positions and backed legislation that seek to attack root causes of crime like poverty and housing instability, and pursues policies to address them.

Torres position on the Defund the Police movement and his penchant for reforming systems from within deficient structures could perhaps be seen in a police reform bill fight in 2017, during his tenure in the New York City Council.

The 2017 Right to Know Act, a controversial and much-debated set of police reform bills, sought to deter police abuse and to ensure transparency in any interaction between an officer and an individual.

There were two bills in the Act, one introduced by then-City Council member and now Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso and the other introduced by Torres. After hearings and negotiations, Torres made changes to his bill.

The Reynoso bill was championed by many police reform advocates, earning the praise of Monifa Bandele, a spokesperson for a prominent coalition, since Reynosos bill would bring transparency and accountability regarding searches during non-emergency policing encounters that have no legal basis other than a persons supposed consent."

Of Torres bill, Bandele said: This NYPD bill being advanced by Torres is neither the Right to Know Act nor a compromise, but political backroom dealing and a surrender of legislative independence to the NYPD and the Mayor. Bandeles statement reflected the sentiment of other reform advocates, who felt that the updated version of Torres police reform bill conceded too much to the NYPD.

Torres indeed negotiated particulars of the bill with NYPD representatives and the mayors office. But he insisted that any concessions made to the de Blasio administration would ensure the needed transparency in a number of interactions between police and individuals.

Torres earned the scorn of both police reform advocates and the police unions. History has shown that this type of criticism from both extremes is often the result of political decisions made by pragmatic progressives. Acknowledging the need for negotiations between disparate political interests and views in order to achieve progress on behalf of the citizenry never earns them friends at the extremes and most devoted parties, but does win them broad support among the more pragmatic general population.

Torres has done this again with his position on the status of Puerto Rico, siding for statehood for the Caribbean island, a position favored by conservatives on both the island and the mainland. A little over two weeks after winning his congressional race in a historically majority-Latino (and Puerto Rican) congressional district that was once represented by Herman Badillo, Torres penned an op-ed declaring his support for Puerto Rico statehood. His statehood stance can be succinctly captured by his declaration that As Americans, we must speak out forcefully against the de jure disenfranchisement of our fellow citizens in Puerto Rico, for it represents a deep rot at the very core of American democracy, not to mention a manifestation of the very systemic racism against which millions have stood in protest.

Using the lens of systemic racism to critique the current status of Puerto Rico is in essence utilizing a progressive principle (the fight against systemic racism and the acknowledgement of Puerto Ricos colonial status) in order to stand on the side of statehood, a position long held by mostly conservatives in Puerto Rico.

This position places Torres on the opposite side of the issue from the other two Puerto Rican congressional representatives in New York City, Reps. Nydia Velzquez and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, both of whom have introduced the Puerto Rico Self-Determination Act of 2021. The bill seeks to give Puerto Ricans on the island the opportunity to finally determine their status through an elaborate process that would include publicly-financed elections and a convention with delegates elected by the Puerto Rican people. Torres believes that Puerto Ricans have already determined their will by a recent referendum in which voters selected statehood as their preferred option.

While the police reform bill and Torres position on the status of Puerto Rico may cause some to question his progressive bona fides, it is also important to remember his championing of a myriad of progressive issues. For instance, Torres has introduced a bill that would require the Federal Home Loan Banks to drastically increase investments in affordable housing, community development, and small business lending. And of course, on the issue of public housing, few elected officials in New York have been as relentless and consistent on the need to revamp our public housing facilities through massive federal investment. More recently, Torres led a push, supported by Ocasio-Cortez, demanding that billions in funding be secured for public housing and rental assistance.

It is difficult to peg Torres solely on one end of even the progressive spectrum. Throughout his career as an elected official, Torres positions have reflected the thinking of a pragmatist who acknowledges the need to balance interests for the greater goal of achieving progressive values.

***Eli Valentin is an adjunct professor at Iona College. He writes regular columns for Gotham Gazette, largely focused on Latino politics in New York City, and is a frequent guest political analyst at Univision NY. On Twitter @EliValentinNY.

***Eli Valentin is a political analyst and author of the forthcoming book, Reinhold Niebuhr: A Political Life. On Twitter@EliValentinNY.

***Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? EmailThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Continued here:

The Pragmatic Progressivism of Ritchie Torres - Gotham Gazette

The California Coastal Commission voted unanimously today to conditionally concur with a federal determination that allowing energy companies and organizations to study a proposed offshore wind farm area on the Humboldt County Coast is consistent with the California Coastal Management Program.

The highly technical and bureaucratic vote clears the way for companies interested in purchasing federal leases to erect large, floating offshore wind turbines to generate renewable electricity off the coast to begin studying and assessing the project site. Known as the Humboldt Wind Energy Area, that site spans 132,000 acres 21 miles off Humboldt Bay, in which the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management plans to sell up to three leases in an auction process slated to begin in the fall.

The commissions vote today does not approve the wind farms or the start of any construction activities all of which would come back before the commission in the future for further review just the potential effects of lease exploration activities, like site characterization and assessment. Those activities will likely include additional boat trips out to the area nearly 500 estimated over a three-year period and the installation of up to three buoys outfitted with scientific sampling equipment.

But commission staff made clear in its report and presentation to the commission that while BOEM believes it is premature to analyze the full scope of environmental impacts of turning a swath of ocean waters off Humboldt Bay into a wind farm, such a transformation is a reasonably foreseeable result of todays vote, so should be considered to the extent possible. Further, commission staff explained this consistency determination was a chance to lay a foundation for the commissions role in the process moving forward as the state and federal governments continue to push for a more sustainable energy grid.

Specifically, the commission approved the following seven conditions:

Condition 1 requires BOEM to work with commission staff to ensure that lessees survey, sampling and analysis plans are coordinated to minimize impacts to coastal resources.

Condition 2 requires lessees to avoid intentional contact with hard substrate, rock outcroppings, seamounts of deep-sea coral/sponge habitats, all of which are critical for the region's biodiversity.

Condition 3 requires vessels conducting site research not exceed a speed of 10 knots to avoid unintentional strikes of sea mammals.

Condition 4 requires BOEM to ensure commercial fishing vessels safe navigation through the lease areas.

Conditions 5 and 6 require engagement with environmental justice communities and Native communities on site assessment and construction and operations plans.

Condition 7 requires lessees to have an independent fisheries liaison to work with the commercial fishing community to make sure site assessment activities dont conflict with local fisheries.

The overwhelming sentiment of the commissioners was that staff had done an excellent job of working with stakeholders and across state and federal agencies to produce a report and recommendations that both properly assessed impacts of the site exploration activities and also set the table for future conversations, all while working under very tight timelines.

California is not only a leader in clean energy in the world, we are a leader in our coastal, wildlife and marine protection, particularly for biodiversity, Commission Chair Donne Brownsey said. I think that this is a good start in show that those two really important goals can be balanced and really work together. I do think thats where were starting and I hope thats where can end.

During her staff report on the subject, Commission Deputy Director of Energy, Ocean resources and Federal Consistency Kate Huckelbridge noted there are a lot of unknowns with deep-water, floating offshore wind farms but made clear there will be environmental impacts.

Theres no free lunch, she said, explaining there will be tradeoffs as the state works to triple its clean energy production in the coming decades to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045.

Moving forward in the process, Huckelbridge said data collection and adaptive management will be crucial components, saying plainly the full-scale impacts of an offshore wind farm on the Pacific Coast wont be clear until projects are in the water and we are able to monitor and measure the effects.

In his comments at the meeting, Humboldt County Fifth District Supervisor and Commissioner Mike Wilson underscored that this project could have profound impacts on Humboldt County.

"We have a community leaning into this we feel a community and a global responsibility to be a part of this effort to address climate change," Wilson said, quickly adding that the community's feet are also "firmly planted" in working to minimize potential negative impacts. "No one is going to roll over us on this. We are taking this really serious."

Check out commission staffs full staff report and supporting documents here and check next weeks Journal for a more thorough report on todays meeting.

Read the rest here:

Coastal Commission Votes to Move Forward with Humboldt Offshore Wind Exploration - North Coast Journal

For several years, there has been a growing expectation that all types of business organizations must pursue sustainability, address environmental risks such as climate change, and commit to diversity, inclusion, and equity. Not just to their employees but as members of local, national, and global communities. And, the time has passed when an organization, large or small, can passively address these concerns.

In response to these considerations has been the rapid maturation of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) strategies as part of an organizations principles and practices. In its most simple form, ESG is a snapshot of an organizations impacts and strategies in these three crucial areas for investors, regulators, potential clients, and upstream and downstream customers. In more complex settings, such as publicly-traded companies, ESG reporting is evolving into a regulatory must that even asks organizations to account for ESG considerations of suppliers and consumers.

This article is designed to provide its own snapshot of the ESG landscape in 2022. Future articles will provide a more in-depth discussion of certain segments within that landscape, including the evolving regulatory and litigation concerns. To start, what is ESG and why should businesses, large and small, care?

What is ESG

ESG criteria are a set of guiding principles for an organizations operations that customers, consumers, and even investors can use to screen an organization and how it fits with their own goals or even reporting requirements. ESG generally includes the following considerations:

With so many factors in play, ESG can mean different things to different organizations, and not all the discreet items will apply or need to be addressed by every organization. Although there is no standard approach to the measuringand reporting of ESG data, there are several reporting frameworks available to companies of all sizes. Knowing the requirements for your organization (are you required to report?) is a first step in determining how your organization may approach its ESG analysis and statements to highlight awareness and action on each of the elements.

ESG is an Issue for your Legal Team

The ESG agenda is being driven not only by community consciousness but by the rapid development of laws and regulations at the state and federal levels. Accordingly, organizations legal teams and counsel are taking on critical roles in advancing the implementation of the ESG agenda and strategies. This is in part due to the Securities Exchange Commissions (SEC) growing scrutiny of ESG reporting and the introduction of new proposed rules that will make elements of ESG required reporting. However, more requirements are coming to businesses of all sizes as organizations are asking their supply chain partners for disclosures on sustainability and ESG frameworks to integrate into their own reporting.

Regulatory Considerations

Regulation based on ESG is here and is growing in scope. Consider that in March 2021, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced the creation of a Climate and ESG Task Force division in the Division of Enforcement. Since then, it has become increasingly clear that ESG disclosure regulations for public companies are expected to increase. This is evidenced most recently by the SEC meeting of March 21, 2022, where a proposed rule was issued that would enhance and standardize the climate-related disclosures provided by public companies. The proposed rule would require disclosure about greenhouse gas emissions by the organization reporting, as well as consideration of Scope 3 emissions, which are the indirect upstream and downstream activities in the organizations supply chain and of its consumers. While these regulations are still in the public comment period, heightened scrutiny is coming to public companies and by extension, their suppliers.

Litigation Risks and Greenwashing

As with any developing business practice and regulation, litigation inherently follows, and this is no different in the ESG space. In fact, the litigation arising from ESG considerations even has its own name, Greenwashing.Greenwashing is when a business creates the impression through branding or marketing, or an erroneous or misleading ESG statement, that it and its products are environmentally friendly.Greenwashing may come from an intentional act or simply arise from poor wording or over-stating an organizations capabilities. Suits in this space may come from a variety of sources: consumer groups; consumer class actions; private actions where a company or investor relies on an inaccurate ESG statement of an organization; or even state or federal regulators. A future article will take a deeper dive into the rise in Greenwashing claims and the different actions that an organization may need to be aware of. For now, its worth considering that, just like other areas of business strategy, the best defense often begins with an active review by counsel as ESG strategies are developed and implemented.

What to Take Away

For many organizations, ESG is a strategic move to keep pace as the social consciousness in business organizations continues to evolve. For others, ESG reporting is a move to promote compliance with evolving laws and regulations.Or it could be that your business falls somewhere between the two ends of the spectrum.Wherever your organization falls and whatever the motivations, actively engaging your understanding of ESG has quickly become an essential element of operating in todays environmentally and socially conscious business environment.

View post:

The Evolution of ESG in 2022 | Maron Marvel Bradley Anderson & Tardy LLC - JDSupra - JD Supra

In full transparency, the following is a press release from the Massachusetts Attorney Generals office submitted to SOURCE media. (stock photo)

***

BOSTON In effort to foster diversity, equity, and inclusion in both academic and sports settings, Attorney General Maura Healey today announced she is partnering with state leaders to help prevent and address hate and bias incidents in school athletic programs in Massachusetts.

AG Healey announced the partnership today during avirtual event called Addressing Hate & Bias in School Athletics: A Call to Action,that her office hosted in collaboration with the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents, Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association, and Massachusetts School Administrators Association. The event provided a robust discussion and resources for school administrators, athletic directors, coaches, and referees.

In recent months, a rise in reported hate-based incidents across Massachusetts has presented an acute need and a clear opportunity for school and state leaders to come together and redouble efforts to ensure that schools and athletic programs provide a safe and healthy environment for young people.

As part of the event, AG Healey announced anew collaborative projectto expand programming around preventing and addressing hate and bias incidents in school sports, including an in-person conference planned for the start of the 2022-2023 school year, and regional trainings to be conducted by Northeastern Universitys Center for the Study of Sport in Society.

Sports can be a powerful tool for bringing people together, but in recent months weve seen too many examples where the hate and bias that infects so much of our culture has made its way into our locker rooms and onto our playing fields, saidAG Healey. At the end of the day, there is nothing more important than investing in the health and well-being of our young people. I want to thank our partner organizations and school leaders who are ready to build positive change throughout the state.

School sports are important to students physical and mental health and are a great way to build a sense of community, but only when teams, locker rooms and competitions are safe and welcoming places for everyone, saidElementary and Secondary Education Commissioner Jeffrey C. Riley.This has been a challenging year in many ways, and Im glad to see so many leaders convene around this important issue.

There is no more important responsibility of our schools than providing a safe and supportive environment for our students to grow as responsible citizens, saidTim Piwowar, President of the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents. Hate and bias have no place in our schools and community, and it is our collective responsibility to set appropriate expectations for our students.

The Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association is positioned to play a significant role in growing the courageous leaders of tomorrow, saidRobert Baldwin, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association. Utilizing interscholastic athletics as a platform that proactively promotes behaviors that instill respect for self, team, opponents, officials, rules and the game itself prioritizes our core responsibility particularly educational athletics, which includes sportsmanship and diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Todays event provided attendees with information on current resources available to schools, including the AGs newSchool Sports Guidance. Following todays event, the AGs Office and its partnering organizations will host an in-person conference for school administrators, athletic directors, coaches, and referees, including panel discussions and workshops on best practices around creating a positive school environment and reporting hate and bias incidents. In addition, regional trainings across the state will beconducted by Northeastern Universitys Center for the Study of Sport in Societyto provide more in-depth training and equip school and athletic program leaders with the tools they need to empower and support their students and to prevent and address hate.

We, at the Northeastern Universitys Center for the Study of Sport in Society, applaud Attorney General Maura Healey for her leadership and unwavering commitment to stop the promulgation and proliferation of hate wherever it exists in our Commonwealth and beyond, saidDan Lebowitz, Executive Director of The Center for the Study of Sport in Society at Northeastern University. Sport is an impact engine of inclusion. It has the power to elevate conversation, inspire individual and collective change agency, and create true, sustainable change. AG Healey, her office, and all the committed stakeholders in this initiative, see and embrace sport as a pathway to positive youth engagement, social-emotional development, and the collective community inherent in teamwork. Hate and hurt have no place in sport, and we remain grateful to AG Healey for her responsive proactivity in creating such an intentional program of hope and healing. We are honored to contribute and be part of the team.

For more information on the AGs project on addressing hate and bias in sports and to sign your school up for upcoming programs and trainings,click here.

Senator Jason Lewis, Senate Chair of the Joint Committee on Education: Every student athlete in the Commonwealth should feel safe and supported on their team and in their school, and there should be zero tolerance for any incidents of hate or bias. I appreciate the leadership of Attorney General Healey, Commissioner Riley, and others who have joined together to help amplify this important message.

Representative Alice H. Peisch, House Chair of the Joint Committee on Education: The Commonwealth and the rest of the nation have seen a noticeable increase of racist, homophobic, and antisemitic incidents in school athletics over the last few years. Recent school-based incidents involving hate and bias, both on and off the field, demonstrate that there is still work to be done in strengthening diversity, equity, and inclusion in our education system. Addressing this issue has been a consistent goal of the Legislature, as evidenced by the recent passage of legislation pertaining to genocide education. I am fully supportive of the efforts being undertaken by school administrators, athletic directors, and coaches from across the state, and I look forward to working closely with my legislative colleagues on continuing to prioritize actions to eliminate hate and bias from our schools.

Tanisha Sullivan, President of NAACP Boston: When the NAACP Boston launched Take the Lead with our professional sports teams in 2017, it was with the belief that athletes and the sports community have an important role to play in stomping out hate and bias and promoting the American values of justice and equality. Following that lead, and to build stronger school communities, it is critically important that we invest in education and supports to ensure that our youth athletes and programs are also serving as champions of anti-hate and bias in our school communities.

Ivn Espinoza-Madrigal, Executive Director of Lawyers for Civil Rights: We are grateful for the Attorney Generals leadership in ensuring equity and fairness in school athletic programs. Hate and bias have no place in sports.

Robert Trestan, Anti-Defamation League New England Regional Director: The need for a statewide call to action to end hate, bias and hazing in youth sports could not be greater. Leadership and education remain the pathway to eliminating hate from the locker rooms, fields, gyms and arenas.

Patience Crozier, GLBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders Senior Staff Attorney: Everyone should have a place in school athletics.Through sports, youth learnessentiallife skills like teamwork and collaboration and, most importantly, they have fun.LGBTQ students experience high rates of bullying in schools, and this bias-based bullyingleads tohigher rates of anxiety and depression.Our school communities coaches, teachers, administrators, adult caregivers, and student-athletes- must work together to foster inclusion and safety in athletics.Too often lately, weve heard disturbing reports of anti-LGBTQand racialbias and bullying in local locker rooms.Were grateful to see this initiative.Together, we can do better, raise awareness, and send a collective message that hate and bias have no place in Massachusetts school sports.

Kimm Topping, The Safe Schools Program for LGBTQ Students Program Manager: We are proud that Massachusetts is a leader in creating safe and supportive school communities for all students, and yetLGBTQ students in our state continue to experience disproportionate risk. We must be intentional in upholding the anti-discriminationpolicies and best practices that our state has created to protect all students, particularly those experiencing marginalization. We hope that todays collaboration will ultimately create new resources that will allow districts to be even more proactive in protecting students through training, technical assistance, and ongoing education.

Anh Vu Sawyer, The Southeast Asian Coalition of Massachusetts Executive Director: Hate and bias against members of our communities too often spills into our schools and even our school sports teams. We are grateful for the work of the Attorney Generals Office to provide resources to schools and athletic programs to address hate incidents and ensure a supportive and inclusive environment for all kids.

View post:

Mass Attorney General Hosts Virtual Call-To-Action To Address Hate & Bias in School Athletics - framinghamsource.com

(As prepared for delivery)

In declaring our nations independence nearly 350 years ago, our founders affirmed the belief that all men are created equal. But as our nation evolved, that founding principle did not result in equal opportunity or equal outcomes for all Americans. When I became Ways and Means Chairman, I made it a priority that our Committee would explore why thats the case and what Congress can do to level the playing field for everyone.

For more than three years now, examining the health and economic inequities engrained in our systems has been central to our work. Our hearings on these issues have looked at a range of topics, from the maternal mortality crisis to the ways the tax code subsidizes hate, to the need for trade policies to include workforce protections.

Our experience with COVID-19, in particular, has heightened the Committees focus on the overlapping issues of health and economic disparities. Early in the pandemic, Ways and Means held the first virtual hearing in the history of the House of Representatives to examine the disparate impact COVID-19 has had on communities of color.

Throughout the pandemic, this Committee has led Congress in crafting policies that promote an equitable recovery, so that all Americans can see their lives improve.

Todays hearing is our next step in this continuing equity work. From health to tax to trade to worker and family support programs, today, we will seek to understand how racial biases have been baked into our policy choices and resulted in stark inequities for communities of color.

In the 20th century, Congress passed several socially transformative pieces of legislation that we all know well. Landmark policy initiatives like the New Deal, the G.I. bill, and the Great Society built out our middle class in unprecedented ways, but they did so unequally. Simply because of skin color, some Americans were left standing on the sidelines without access to the supports that brought the American Dream within reach for many White Americans.

The repercussions of decades-old policy decisions that intentionally excluded communities of color reverberate through our society today. We still see significant gaps in income and wealth accumulation that have compounded over generations.

For example:

There is no denying that the American economy does not work for everyone.

Just as these inequities have stemmed from policy choices made decades ago, we now have the opportunity to make different choices.

Enhancing the EITC and closing the Medicaid coverage gap are examples of policy decisions that can help change our nations trajectory and improve outcomes for everyone.

The zero-sum mindset that the advancement of some people holds others back is false. Fuller participation in our economy means a stronger economy for everyone.

We have an opportunity and a responsibility to address racism to build the inclusive and equitable benefits and shared prosperity that all of us deserve.

This is not an easy conversation, but it is one we need to have. I am reminded of the words of our dear friend, the north star of the Committee, John Lewis. He said:

When you see something that is not right, you must say something. You must do something. Democracy is not a state. It is an act, and each generation must do its part to help build what we called the Beloved Community, a nation and world society at peace with itself.

With an honest dialogue and intentional policies, we can improve our laws and public programs to truly deliver on the promise of the American Dream so that all Americans have the opportunity to experience economic advancement and live healthy lives.

And with that, I would like to yield the balance of my time to the co-chairs of the Committees Racial Equity Initiative. Representatives Terri Sewell, Steven Horsford, and Jimmy Gomez have spent considerable time focusing on these issues and spearheading this important work and I think their brief remarks can help us frame todays discussion.

###

Read more:

Neal Opening Statement at Hearing on Overcoming Racism to Advance Economic Opportunity - Ways and Means Committee