October 23, 2008
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Major U.S. cities including New York, Washington, Atlanta and New Orleans have levels of economic inequality that rival cities in Africa, according to a U.N. report published on Thursday.
The most balanced city in the world is Beijing, with the most egalitarian cities on average to be found in western Europe, the report said.
"The authors (of the study) find that though the cities in the United States of America have relatively lower levels of poverty than many other cities in the developed world, their levels of income inequality are quite high," the report said.
In the United States and Canada one of the key factors in determining levels of economic inequality is race, the report said.
"The life expectancy of African Americans in the United States is about the same as that of people living in China and some states of India, despite the fact that the United States is far richer than the other two countries," it said.
The report said European countries including Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and Slovenia were among those with the lowest levels of inequality.
While Beijing is economically the most egalitarian city in the world, China's special administrative region of Hong Kong, a former British colony, has the highest level of inequality of all cities in Asia, it said.
In Latin America, Brazilian cities "have the greatest disparities in income distribution in the world," the report said, partly because of Brazil's rising unemployment and declining wages.
The U.N. report said that cities in sub-Saharan Africa have the world's highest levels of urban poverty, with more than half of city dwellers living below the poverty line.
The report also said cities in South Africa and Namibia continue to have extremely high levels of income inequality, despite the dismantling of apartheid in the early 1990s.
Source Reuters (Reporting by Louis Charbonneau; Editing by Vicki Allen)
Friday, October 24, 2008
ICOPE on UDHR
The UDHR declares that the aim of education shall be “the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.” (Article 26.2) Education is not placed at the service of the state or of economic powers. Instead, education serves individual human beings whose fullest development occurs in community with others. (Article 29.1) Sixty years ago, in the aftermath of the Third Reich, this perspective was a radical reaffirmation of human dignity and purpose.
“The full development of the human personality” implies a broad curriculum in schools, a mission to educate “the whole child” so that children can become their own best selves. In this view education is not just academics but all knowledge that develops us. The UDHR recognizes that education molds our very dispositions, making “respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms” part of its purpose.
In New York City achieving these human rights standards of education has become increasingly remote. The 2002 federal No Child Left Behind law financially penalizes schools for not achieving targets in “educational improvement”. New York State chose to use standardized tests to implement the law, thereby pressuring a “teach to the test” mentality in the classroom. Also in 2002 the Albany legislature gave control of the quasi-independent Board of Education to its billionaire mayor, Michael Bloomberg as part of a deal to pave the way politically for increased state funding to the city’s schools. The mayor in turn staked his political reputation on raising test scores, instituting a corporate-style regime with rewards and punishments for school principals based on test scores. As the tests in question are narrowly focused on particular mathematical skills and reading comprehension, much of what constitutes State standards in other subjects fell by the wayside. The State, for its part, has been complicitous in the lowering of testing standards as it faces judicial and political pressure for funding equity judgment based in part on NYC’s lower test scores relative to the rest of the state. Neither No Child Left Behind nor mayoral control of the schools has worked to improve education in the city’s school. The children are being fed the educational equivalent of empty calories.
Nor are they being treated very well as human beings. A report by The American Civil Liberties Union, Criminalizing the Classroom, documents the excessive use of police procedures in the public schools and how it works to feed the school to prison pipeline. A report by the National Economic and Social Rights Initiative, Deprived of Dignity: Degrading Treatment and Abusive Discipline in New York City and Los Angeles Public Schools, documents how the learning environment is eroded by chronic overcrowding, zero tolerance discipline policies, lack of support for teachers, and everyday racism. Clearly, “strengthening respect for human rights and fundamental liberties” is not a priority of the NYC school system.
It all falls apart by high school. The four year graduation rate for those making it to 9th grade hovers at 50%. Prospects for these children are bleak: a lifetime of poorly paid jobs, the increased possibilities of prison, ill health, and other misfortunes without the solace or empowerment offered by adequate education.
The failure of the New York public school system is part of the larger cycle of poverty at work in the city. It is not just that children from low income and poor households are less well prepared when they enter kindergarten but that their families and communities lack the power to compel the government to work well at all. Part of this is the economic struggle most public school families are facing every day: 77.7% of public school children meet the federal standards for free lunch or reduced lunch. For a family of four this means an annual income of under $38,220, with $27,600 marking the distinction between poverty and low-income. Federal poverty standards do not take into account local variations in living costs like housing, an enormous expense in NYC where 28% of families spend 50% or more of their income on housing alone. The struggle for the basic necessities runs up against racial discrimination, the dislocations of immigration, housing insecurity, lack of affordable medical care, not to mention the depression and anxiety of trying to cope with it all. A report by the Human Rights Project of the Urban Justice Center Race Realities in New York City documents the racism at work in these conditions.
Organizing for change in the public schools has become more difficult than ever. The governance changes of 2002 permitted the mayor to replace publicly elected community school boards with parent panels selected by parent association leaders, resulting in a massive voter disenfranchisement. The parent panels enjoy no popular mandate. Like the community school boards before them, the parent panels are the supervised by the Board of Education. District superintendents and principals are no longer answerable to their communities but to the mayor. There is no one at the community level who is empowered to make a decision or who can be held to account, itself a violation of state education law. Community based organizations which in earlier times might have organized their communities have been enticed by the contracts to the Board of Education and to the city, not to mention the private philanthropies of the mayor and his financial cohort. Probably in Harlem is the issue of divided community loyalties no more evident where the rampant gentrification might have at least brought into the public schools a critical mass of families with the social capital to demand change. Now these families are siphoned off to charter schools which compete with existing public schools for space, resources, and attention from public officials. The corporate model of education has reduced public school families to mere consumers. The public has been taken out of public education altogether.
The values of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights challenge us to act. Human dignity permits no compromise on any front. By fulfilling our duty to our community we more fully develop our own individual selves.
Cecilia Blewer (ICOPE)
Independent Commission on Public Education of NYC (ICOPE) is a member of the New York City Initiative (NYCHRI)
“The full development of the human personality” implies a broad curriculum in schools, a mission to educate “the whole child” so that children can become their own best selves. In this view education is not just academics but all knowledge that develops us. The UDHR recognizes that education molds our very dispositions, making “respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms” part of its purpose.
In New York City achieving these human rights standards of education has become increasingly remote. The 2002 federal No Child Left Behind law financially penalizes schools for not achieving targets in “educational improvement”. New York State chose to use standardized tests to implement the law, thereby pressuring a “teach to the test” mentality in the classroom. Also in 2002 the Albany legislature gave control of the quasi-independent Board of Education to its billionaire mayor, Michael Bloomberg as part of a deal to pave the way politically for increased state funding to the city’s schools. The mayor in turn staked his political reputation on raising test scores, instituting a corporate-style regime with rewards and punishments for school principals based on test scores. As the tests in question are narrowly focused on particular mathematical skills and reading comprehension, much of what constitutes State standards in other subjects fell by the wayside. The State, for its part, has been complicitous in the lowering of testing standards as it faces judicial and political pressure for funding equity judgment based in part on NYC’s lower test scores relative to the rest of the state. Neither No Child Left Behind nor mayoral control of the schools has worked to improve education in the city’s school. The children are being fed the educational equivalent of empty calories.
Nor are they being treated very well as human beings. A report by The American Civil Liberties Union, Criminalizing the Classroom, documents the excessive use of police procedures in the public schools and how it works to feed the school to prison pipeline. A report by the National Economic and Social Rights Initiative, Deprived of Dignity: Degrading Treatment and Abusive Discipline in New York City and Los Angeles Public Schools, documents how the learning environment is eroded by chronic overcrowding, zero tolerance discipline policies, lack of support for teachers, and everyday racism. Clearly, “strengthening respect for human rights and fundamental liberties” is not a priority of the NYC school system.
It all falls apart by high school. The four year graduation rate for those making it to 9th grade hovers at 50%. Prospects for these children are bleak: a lifetime of poorly paid jobs, the increased possibilities of prison, ill health, and other misfortunes without the solace or empowerment offered by adequate education.
The failure of the New York public school system is part of the larger cycle of poverty at work in the city. It is not just that children from low income and poor households are less well prepared when they enter kindergarten but that their families and communities lack the power to compel the government to work well at all. Part of this is the economic struggle most public school families are facing every day: 77.7% of public school children meet the federal standards for free lunch or reduced lunch. For a family of four this means an annual income of under $38,220, with $27,600 marking the distinction between poverty and low-income. Federal poverty standards do not take into account local variations in living costs like housing, an enormous expense in NYC where 28% of families spend 50% or more of their income on housing alone. The struggle for the basic necessities runs up against racial discrimination, the dislocations of immigration, housing insecurity, lack of affordable medical care, not to mention the depression and anxiety of trying to cope with it all. A report by the Human Rights Project of the Urban Justice Center Race Realities in New York City documents the racism at work in these conditions.
Organizing for change in the public schools has become more difficult than ever. The governance changes of 2002 permitted the mayor to replace publicly elected community school boards with parent panels selected by parent association leaders, resulting in a massive voter disenfranchisement. The parent panels enjoy no popular mandate. Like the community school boards before them, the parent panels are the supervised by the Board of Education. District superintendents and principals are no longer answerable to their communities but to the mayor. There is no one at the community level who is empowered to make a decision or who can be held to account, itself a violation of state education law. Community based organizations which in earlier times might have organized their communities have been enticed by the contracts to the Board of Education and to the city, not to mention the private philanthropies of the mayor and his financial cohort. Probably in Harlem is the issue of divided community loyalties no more evident where the rampant gentrification might have at least brought into the public schools a critical mass of families with the social capital to demand change. Now these families are siphoned off to charter schools which compete with existing public schools for space, resources, and attention from public officials. The corporate model of education has reduced public school families to mere consumers. The public has been taken out of public education altogether.
The values of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights challenge us to act. Human dignity permits no compromise on any front. By fulfilling our duty to our community we more fully develop our own individual selves.
Cecilia Blewer (ICOPE)
Independent Commission on Public Education of NYC (ICOPE) is a member of the New York City Initiative (NYCHRI)
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Cidadao Global commemorates 60th Anniversary of the UDHR
In Celebration of the 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Cidadao Global and Capoeira Brasil recognize Article 22 & 27 of the UDHR. Capoeira is a Afro-Brasilian cultural legacy and art form that represents the self-determination of the enslaved African people of Brasil. For 1892 to 1937, Capoeira was outlawed and associated with criminal behavior. Since then Capoeira has begun to take its rightful place within society and is recognized globally as a cultural form of resistance.
Article 22
Everyone has the right to social security and to the realization of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for dignity.
Article 27
Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(Please click in the picture to see details)
Monday, October 20, 2008
Common Cause/NY--Memo in Opposition to Intro 845
Anti-Discrimination Policy & Action Center - Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund - Citizens Union - Concerned Citizens of Greenwood Heights - Common Cause/NY - Democracy for NYC – Human Rights Project, Urban Justice Center - Jews for Racial and Economic Justice - NYCAACFSU - New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc. - Professional Staff Congress - Queens Civic Congress - South Brooklyn Coalition for Democracy – Street Vendor Project, Urban Justice Center
MEMO IN OPPOSITION TO INTRO 845
Our groups oppose legislation that would overturn two public referenda on term limits.
New Yorkers twice voted for the current term limits law, in 1993 and again in 1996. A legislative repeal would send a terrible message to New Yorkers that their votes don't count. The end doesn't justify the means -– the end of revising term limits doesn't justify politicians overruling the will of voters.
Both Mayor Michael Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn have been clear in the past in opposing changing term limits by legislation.
Mayor Bloomberg told the Daily News in 2002: "I would oppose any change in the law that a legislative body tries to make. I do think after you’ve asked the public to express their views twice, you don’t try to circumvent the will of the people." And in 2008 you renewed this view, saying: "The public has voted for it twice."
A statement issued by Speaker Quinn on December 3, 2007 said: "After careful consideration and discussions with my colleagues in the Council, I have decided not to pursue a change in New York City's term limit law… I believe that over-ruling the will of New Yorkers - who have voted twice in favor of term limits - would be anti-democratic and anti-reform."
As you know, the City Council considered repealing the term limits law in 2001 by legislation. The bill lost by a vote of five to four in the Governmental Operations Committee.
Now is a highly appropriate time to recall the words of Council Member Stephen Fiala, who was the deciding vote against repeal. On March 15, 2001, on the floor of the City Council, Fiala said:
"As much as I disagree with the outcome of both referenda elections, I nonetheless recognize the importance of respecting the integrity of the electoral process. For if the integrity of the process is questioned then that slow extinction caused by apathy, indifference and undernourishment will only be accelerated. "
For those who are skeptical of term limits, there is a better way to go: a charter commission review and public discussion of issues that includes a broad look at term limits and their impact on city government that could result in presenting a referendum on the issue in 2009.
Please contact ckeeley@commoncause.org for further information or to sign on (deadline by tomorrow Tuesday, Oct. 21, 11:00am).
Friday, October 17, 2008
International Day for the Eradication of Poverty, 2008
UNITED NATIONS
Press Release
International Day for the Eradication of Poverty
17 October 2008
Statement by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay
On this International Day for the Eradication of Poverty, I would like to pay tribute to those who strive to defend the rights of some 1.4 billion people still living in abject poverty and exclusion around the world. This year marks not only the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but also the 10th anniversary of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders.
In 1987, a year after the Declaration on the Right to Development was adopted by the General Assembly, more than 100,000 human rights defenders from all over the world gathered on this day to express their solidarity in the fight against extreme poverty and their commitment to ensure that everyone's dignity and freedom are respected.
Those human rights defenders are at the forefront in sounding the alarm and protecting the rights of the poor. Our collective responsibility is to ensure their efforts are matched with concrete action and accountability.
Poverty and inequality often exacerbate abuse, neglect and discrimination, denying millions the enjoyment of their civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights, and ultimately, their right to development. Our efforts to fight poverty and to achieve the Millennium Development Goals must be firmly grounded in the universal values and principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and international human rights instruments.
There have been some significant development gains over the years, but these cannot be sustained, if rights are not anchored in laws and institutions, and if those in power are not aware of their responsibilities to uphold people's rights, and are not held accountable for their failures.
The current financial crisis, and the huge challenges posed by climate change and systemic problems in the global food supply, make it essential for us to act beyond narrow national interests, in the spirit of global cooperation laid down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the numerous other international laws and guidelines that it spawned. Operationalizing the right to development would offer better prospects for reducing poverty and enhancing accountability at both the national and global levels.
Poverty exists everywhere – as do human rights challenges – and they are often inextricably linked. International days such as this often stimulate fine words, but they need to be backed by deeds. The philosophy and structures for combating poverty at the international level exist. But a true commitment to translate that philosophy into effective action, which will improve the actual day-to-day life of almost one quarter of the world's population who live in poverty, is still far from evident.
Reducing poverty is an achievable goal. What we need is to bring the rights and dignity of those who are suffering most to the centre of our efforts.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Monday, October 13, 2008
Common Cause Statement Regarding Self-Interest and Mayor Bloomberg's Term Limit Proposal
10/13/2008 -- There is talk today that Mayor Michael Bloomberg offered political cover and the possibility of long-term job security to Council Speaker Christine Quinn in return for her support of his proposal to allow himself a position on the 2009 ballot.
It is well documented that Speaker Quinn has joined Mayor Bloomberg in reversing her past position on term limit modification.
It is said that the Mayor promised the Speaker a position on his side of City Hall were she to lose her Council seat or her Speaker's gavel. Though the purported arrangement was mentioned in the City's gossip pages, the Mayor's recent policy proposals and decisions for commission appointments leave it nearly impossible to ascertain where the Mayor's closed-door conversations may lead nowadays.
We are saddened to see this degree of naked ambition seeming to play out so brazenly among the City's elected leaders. Decisions on appointments and City policy should be made on the basis of what is best for the public interest, not based on self-interest.
We would hope that our elected officials would be able to rise above self-interest and weigh public policy on the only acceptable basis - what is best for the people. We are disappointed to see that it appears that the proposal to extend term limits only for those currently in office is having exactly the opposite effect. Horse-trading and arm-twisting are a necessary part of politics and policy, undoubtedly, but self-serving policies must never be.
It is well documented that Speaker Quinn has joined Mayor Bloomberg in reversing her past position on term limit modification.
It is said that the Mayor promised the Speaker a position on his side of City Hall were she to lose her Council seat or her Speaker's gavel. Though the purported arrangement was mentioned in the City's gossip pages, the Mayor's recent policy proposals and decisions for commission appointments leave it nearly impossible to ascertain where the Mayor's closed-door conversations may lead nowadays.
We are saddened to see this degree of naked ambition seeming to play out so brazenly among the City's elected leaders. Decisions on appointments and City policy should be made on the basis of what is best for the public interest, not based on self-interest.
We would hope that our elected officials would be able to rise above self-interest and weigh public policy on the only acceptable basis - what is best for the people. We are disappointed to see that it appears that the proposal to extend term limits only for those currently in office is having exactly the opposite effect. Horse-trading and arm-twisting are a necessary part of politics and policy, undoubtedly, but self-serving policies must never be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
