Tag Archives: private

The Feds Just Handed the Private Prison Industry a Big Score

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Three months after the Department of Justice announced that it would phase out its use of private prisons, the Department of Homeland Security has gone in the opposite direction. In a report finalized on Thursday, a subcommittee of the DHS’s advisory council recommended that Immigration and Customs Enforcement continue to use facilities run by private prison companies to detain undocumented immigrants.

The council, which was tasked with reviewing ICE’s use of for-profit facilities, noted concerns about the agency’s ability to oversee private detention centers as well as reports of substandard medical care in some private facilities. But it concluded that the already widespread use of privately run detention centers, combined with their lower cost made it unrealistic to seriously consider eliminating their use. ICE reports that it costs $144 per day to keep a detainee in a private detention center while it costs $184 per detainee per day in ICE facilities.

“Much could be said for a fully government-owned and government-operated detention model, if one were starting a new detention system from scratch,” the committee wrote. “But of course we are not starting anew.” ICE will review the report and implement any appropriate changes, according to a department spokeswoman.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson ordered the advisory council to undertake the two-month review in August, after the Justice Department declared that it would reduce or end its contracts with private prison companies. The DOJ announcement came on the heels of a Mother Jones investigation into a troubled Louisiana prison operated by the Corrections Corporation of America, the major private prison company that recently rebranded as CoreCivic. Private-prison stocks plunged following the announcement.

But the for-profit prison industry’s slump now appears temporary. The election of Donald Trump caused private prison stocks to soar, and CoreCivic has continued to sign lucrative contracts with both ICE and the Department of Justice. If Trump follows through on his promise to deport millions of undocumented immigrants, it would require ICE to significantly expand its detention capacity, likely by turning to private prison companies.

According to the DHS committee’s new report, for-profit detention allows ICE to “respond to surges in migration flows” by expanding its detention capacity. “Capacity to handle such surges, when policymakers determine that detention will be part of the response, cannot reasonably be maintained solely through the use of facilities staffed and operated by federal officers,” the report stated. Last month, Johnson announced he had authorized ICE to acquire new detention space following a roughly 25 percent increase in undocumented immigrant arrests between August and October.

But the deals this fall were moving so quickly that some ICE officials worried there would be no time to ensure that the new detention spaces conformed to certain quality requirements or regulations adopted as a result of the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003, the Wall Street Journal reported. ICE is now pursuing a deal with CoreCivic to reopen the company’s 1,129-bed Cibola County Correctional Center in New Mexico as an immigration detention center, even though the Bureau of Prisons shut down the prison this year following a series of inmate deaths and repeated citations for deficient medical care.

The DHS committee’s report comes less than week after the death of a 36-year-old Guatemalan woman at the Eloy Detention Center, a CoreCivic immigrant detention facility in Arizona. Raquel Calderon de Hildago was arrested near Tucson by Border Patrol officers the day before Thanksgiving. She died on Sunday after having a series of seizures. Calderon was third person to die in ICE custody in the last two months and the 15th person since 2003 to die after being held at Eloy.

Marshall Fitz, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and member of the DHS advisory council, disputed the council’s main conclusion that ICE’s continued use of private prison is inevitable. “The review undertaken by the subcommittee points directly toward the inferiority of the private prison model from the perspective of governance and conditions,” he wrote in a footnote in the report. “Any shift away from such reliance would take years, carry significant costs, and require congressional partnership…but I disagree that these obstacles require our deference to the status quo.”

Read original article – 

The Feds Just Handed the Private Prison Industry a Big Score

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Feds Just Handed the Private Prison Industry a Big Score

Oklahomans are suing frackers over earthquakes.

Residents of Pawnee, Oklahoma, have filed a class-action lawsuit against 27 oil and natural gas companies, alleging that they are responsible for damage caused by earthquakes linked to fracking.

Before the state’s recent fracking boom, earthquakes in the region were relatively rare, but in recent years, Oklahoma has seen thousands of quakes. Many scientists believe the temblors are caused by frackers injecting their chemical-tainted wastewater deep underground.

Pawnee has seen nearly 800 earthquakes in the past year, including a magnitude 5.8 in September, the largest on record in the state. That quake resulted in 289 insurance claims, reports the Tulsa World, but nearly four in five claims made in the area since 2010 have been denied because most homeowners insurance doesn’t cover earthquakes.

The lawsuit alleges that the energy companies have displayed “reckless disregard for public or private safety,” and seeks an unspecified amount for both property damage and emotional distress.

“We have clients who don’t allow their children to go upstairs because they’re afraid the roof will fall in on them,” Curt Marshall, an attorney for the Pawnee residents, told the Associated Press. “There’s a lot of fear; when is the next big one?”

Original source:

Oklahomans are suing frackers over earthquakes.

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, Jason, LAI, LG, ONA, Oster, Ringer, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Oklahomans are suing frackers over earthquakes.

With or without the U.S., the world’s going to move forward on climate change

The last time Marrakech, Morocco, hosted an international climate conference in 2001, negotiators were coming together to discuss how to carry out a climate change treaty, the U.S. had a Republican president, and the new administration had “no interest” in implementing a deal that had been signed by a Democrat.

Sound familiar?

Negotiators, back in Marrakech for COP22, faced a similar crisis the last two weeks: They began work on the eve of the U.S. election to discuss implementing the climate change agreement reached last year in Paris. Then the election results came in and sent shock waves through the proceedings, as Donald Trump has vowed to yank the United States from the agreement.

But the Marrakech conference’s outcome serves as a reminder that the world isn’t exactly where it was 15 years ago. Working early into the morning Saturday, international delegates aimed to send an unambiguous signal with the final text: countries will push forward.

“Country after country here in Marrakech made it crystal clear over the last week,” said Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “They intend to implement and strengthen the Paris Agreement.”

Negotiators agreed on a time frame to map out a rulebook that moves forward on Paris. There were more pledges to remain committed to climate action — the usual fanfare — and some signs that countries, cities, and private companies will stay the course on climate action.

Still, negotiators pushed off essential decisions on finance and transparency until their 2018 meeting in Poland, when Trump administration officials may or may not be there to derail talks.

For the time being, global progress on climate change seems like it’s best measured by diplomats’ plans to make plans.

Reaffirming Paris

The conference in Morocco technically included the first Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement, because the agreement entered into force in early November, years earlier than expected. For climate negotiators that was reason enough to celebrate in Marrakech.

“This COP is first and foremost about a celebration of the entry into force and convening of the first meeting of the parties,” said Elina Bardram, head of the European Union delegation. That excitement yielded the Marrakech Proclamation, a document that basically says countries will follow through on promises, and the Marrakech Partnership for Global Climate Action, an alliance of private and public parties to drive action in the years leading up to 2020. Both passionately reiterate the global commitment to the Paris Agreement.

After delegates quit popping champagne and quaking over the U.S. election, they agreed on a few preliminary commitments to work on for the next two years.

New leaders

If the U.S. quits the Paris climate deal, or even the United Nations climate change body at large, it will leave a leadership vacuum. At COP22, there were already signs other countries are prepared to fill the void. Notably, China has stepped forward. Last week a Chinese foreign minister in Marrakech rebuked Trump’s claim that China invented the climate change hoax, pointing to leadership from Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush on international climate talks before China was even involved. The head of the E.U. delegation also said at the conference that European nations would rise to the occasion, as they did when the U.S. dropped out of the Kyoto Protocol.

Cities and and the private sector will also continue to play a major role in global climate efforts. In the last days of the conference, 365 companies promised climate action even if the U.S bows out. Separately, more than 100 companies met at COP22 to discuss steps like making low-carbon investments and reducing emissions from manufacturing to market. The number of businesses making commitments has more than doubled since Paris last year. More than 7,000 mayors — governing over 8 percent of the world population — also announced efforts to drastically cut emissions.

“[We’ve] had a set of truly impressive activities taking place in and around the COP to mobilize business, the finance sector, subnational governments, and other climate leaders,” said U.S. climate envoy Jonathan Pershing in Marrakech. “This COP is about much more than negotiations; it’s an important signpost on the pathway to a low-emission, climate-resilient economy, and the world is accelerating on that pathway.”

Money

Countries agreed to consider transferring a pot of money meant for small projects that’s tied to the Kyoto Protocol to help implement the Paris Agreement. Over the past two weeks, four countries promised to fill the fund’s coffers with $81 million. A fund that helps poorer countries access climate technologies brought in another $23 million. According to Joe Thwaites of the World Resources Institute, that “sends a really strong signal” about the future of climate finance.

But the biggest monetary decisions have been punted until 2018. The United Nations has promised to mobilize climate adaptation funds to the tune of $100 billion a year beginning in 2020, and they’re still a long ways from that goal.

A plan spearheaded by Australia and the U.K., released ahead of the COP, details how rich countries could raise the $100 billion a year. But analysis from organizations like WRI and Oxfam suggest that even if countries meet those pledges, they’ll still need to be scaled up in the future.

“Developed countries are resisting any decision which really compels them to step up,” says Tracy Carty, Oxfam’s COP22 climate policy lead. “This needed to be the COP that turned a corner, but instead it looks like the issue is going to be kicked along the road to the next COP.”

Trust and transparency

Firm details on transparency, like how countries will monitor and report their progress on climate goals, may also have to wait for 2018. While countries such as Germany and Canada pledged $50 million to a transparency initiative to help countries report progress, the parties are still working on a program for sharing information.

As the Paris rulebook comes together, countries have vowed that transparency will be baked into measuring, reporting, climate finance, and technology development.

Ambition

Countries agreed to hash out a system before 2018 to increase emissions cuts in future years. The United States, Germany, Mexico, and Canada released mid-century decarbonization strategies — a goal set in the Paris Agreement.

On the last day of the COP, a group of nearly 50 of the world’s most vulnerable countries also announced plans to convert to 100 percent renewable energy as soon as possible.

What’s next?

More incremental progress is expected at COP23 in Fiji next year, but 2018 will be the “year to watch for,” said WRI’s Yamide Dagnet. The meeting in Poland could be as significant as last year’s in Paris. It’s the deadline for parties to set all the implementation strategies for making good on their Paris promises. It’s also the year when countries will reevaluate their commitments and hopefully increase their ambition.

But the swift entry into force of the Paris Agreement has diplomats negotiating a slippery balance. “They want to make sure they don’t rush decisions,” said Thwaites, “that they allow as many countries as possible to join the agreement and be part of that decision-making process.” At the same time, many of the most vulnerable nations want to see action as soon as possible, with no backsliding.

In the end, parties seemed satisfied with the Marrakech negotiations. “COP22 has been what it needed to be,” said U.N. climate chief Patricia Espinosa, “a COP of action that has accelerated progress under the Paris Agreement across finance, new initiatives, ambition, and solidarity.”

Though U.N. officials may be encouraged by their progress, they’ve got a lot more hard work to come if there’s to be any chance of limiting warming to 2 degrees C — let alone 1.5 degrees — above pre-industrial levels. Neither the Paris nor Marrakech negotiations get us remotely close to that goal, so now the focus turns to the the 2018 conference. Over the next two years, it will become clearer whether the 2016 Marrakech meeting was the point at which climate action swelled to meet and exceed the ambition of Paris — or another year in which U.S. politics stalled progress, again.

Read this article:

With or without the U.S., the world’s going to move forward on climate change

Posted in alo, Anchor, Casio, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Ringer, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on With or without the U.S., the world’s going to move forward on climate change

Donald Trump thinks climate change is a Chinese hoax. China begs to differ.

And it’s just in the nick of time, since President-elect Trump has promised to repeal all of President Obama’s climate regulations.

This rule, which will be gradually phased in, requires drilling operators to halve the natural gas that is flared off from new and existing wells, limit venting from storage tanks, inspect for leaks, and so on. DOI projects that the rule should cut methane emissions up to 35 percent.

Methane is an extremely powerful heat-trapping gas. With the the increase in natural gas and oil drilling that is the fracking boom, methane leakage from wells and pipelines has also skyrocketed. A crackdown on these leaks was part of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan.

The new rule doesn’t govern private land, where most drilling takes place. The Environmental Protection Agency developed rules limiting methane leakage from new wells on private land. Hillary Clinton proposed to follow up on that with a rule for existing wells on private land.

Trump will not do that. But, now that the public lands rule is finalized, undoing it would require a new rule-making process, subject to legal challenge.

See original article: 

Donald Trump thinks climate change is a Chinese hoax. China begs to differ.

Posted in alo, Anchor, eco-friendly, FF, GE, global climate change, LAI, ONA, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump thinks climate change is a Chinese hoax. China begs to differ.

Federal Bureau of Prisons Renews Contract With the Company Formerly Known as CCA

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The private prison company formerly known as the Corrections Corporation of America—recently rebranded CoreCivic—announced Tuesday that the Federal Bureau of Prisons will extend its two-year contract with the company, despite recent findings of inadequate supervision and gaps in oversight of private prisons.

In August, the Department of Justice announced that it would phase out its use of private prisons. The announcement came on the heels of a blockbuster Mother Jones investigation of a Louisiana CCA prison by reporter Shane Bauer, and just one week after the DOJ’s inspector general released a report that found shortcomings in safety, security, and oversight at private prisons used by the government. The Bureau of Prisons is a subsidiary of the DOJ.

The Bureau of Prisons’ 1,633-bed contract extension for the McRae Correctional Facility in Georgia goes against the recommendation of Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, who in an August memo explained the DOJ decision to end its partnerships with private prisons. “As each private prison contract reaches the end of its term, the bureau should either decline to renew that contract or substantially reduce its scope in a manner consistent with law and the overall decline of the bureau’s inmate population,” Yates wrote. “This is the first step in the process of reducing, and ultimately ending, our use of privately operated prisons.”

The renewed contract covers 8 percent fewer beds than the former.

Continued – 

Federal Bureau of Prisons Renews Contract With the Company Formerly Known as CCA

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Federal Bureau of Prisons Renews Contract With the Company Formerly Known as CCA

Countries announced a new global partnership to deliver on their Paris Agreement goals.

If you’ve ever followed a climate conference — no? just me? — you know that they involve a lot of different coalitions coming together to push climate action. But the partnership announced Tuesday at COP22 is an especially notable example.

The partnership, named for the Nationally Determined Contributions that countries have pledged to meet Paris Agreement goals, features 23 countries — including Morocco, the U.K., and the Marshall Islands — and four international institutions.

The plan involves a three-pronged approach: creating and sharing tools and technology, providing policy and technical expertise, and working on raising money for implementation of country programs. Basically, it’s a central collaboration space for private investors, technical experts, international institutions, and countries. Anyone is welcome to join.

The launch of the partnership coincides with the release of an essential tool that allows countries to search for funds available to implement the individual country plans that form the backbone of the Paris Agreement.

“The intention behind the NDC Partnership is that we can best tackle climate change and support climate adaptation by pooling our strengths and our knowledge,” says Dr. Gerd Müller, German Federal Minister for Economic Cooperation and Development. “If we try to go it alone in limiting global warming, we will fail.”

Taken from:

Countries announced a new global partnership to deliver on their Paris Agreement goals.

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, Everyone, FF, GE, Green Light, LAI, ONA, Ringer, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Countries announced a new global partnership to deliver on their Paris Agreement goals.

The Daily Trump Shitshow Is About to Begin

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In the near term, the Donald Trump shitshow is going to unfold on a daily basis as we learn who will be running things in the new administration. The bad news starts at the top: Mike Pence is replacing Chris Christie as head of Trump’s transition team. Christie may be an intolerable prick, but he’s not a conservative ideologue and might have played a slightly calming role. Pence is nothing of the sort. He’s a stone right winger who will be perfectly happy to put the Heritage Foundation in control of the country.

As for the lower-level folks, it turns out that Trump doesn’t hate lobbyists all that much after all. That whole “Drain the Swamp” thing was just red meat for the rubes. The Associated Press reports that far from hating lobbyists, Trump absolutely adores them. Here’s the Trump transition team:

The behind-the-scenes transition operation is being run by Ron Nichol, a senior partner at The Boston Group, a management consulting firm where 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney launched his business career.

Ken Blackwell…senior fellow at the Family Research Council…Veteran agribusiness lobbyist Michael Torrey…Energy industry lobbyist Mike McKennaDavid Bernhardt…represents mining companies seeking to use resources on federal lands…Lobbyist Steven Hart, who focuses on tax and employee benefits, is leading the transition team for the Labor Department.

Cindy Hayden…top lobbyist for Altria, the parent company of cigarette-maker Philip Morris…Homeland Security Department. Jeff Eisenach, a consultant and former lobbyist…Federal Communications Commission….Michael Korbey…former lobbyist who led President George W. Bush’s effort to privatize America’s retirement system….Shirley Ybarra…champion of “public-private partnerships” to build toll roads and bridges….Myron Ebell…man-made global warming is a hoax…David Malpass…Bear Stearns’ chief economist…Dan DiMicco…former chief executive of steel company NUCOR and a board member at Duke Energy…Former Rep. Mike Rogers…serves on boards for consulting firms IronNet Cybersecurity and Next Century Corp.

Kevin O’Connor…partner at the law firm of close Trump adviser Rudy Giuliani…Jim Carafano…Heritage Foundation’s vice president for Foreign and Defense Policy Studies…retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg…chief operating officer for Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq…Mira Ricardel…vice president of business development for Boeing Strategic Missile & Defense Systems.

Buckle up. This is going to be a rough ride.

Original source – 

The Daily Trump Shitshow Is About to Begin

Posted in Cyber, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Daily Trump Shitshow Is About to Begin

Gun Control Advocates Have Something to Smile About Today

Mother Jones

Even as the National Rifle Association celebrates Donald Trump’s victory, gun control advocates have something to smile about today. Of the four gun-related measures on state ballots this year, three passed.

Maine’s Question 3

The only gun-related ballot measure not to win, Question 3 asked voters whether background checks should be required for private gun sales. If neither the buyer nor the seller is a licensed gun dealer, they’d have to go to a licensed dealer who would run a background check. The measure would have also required a background check for loaning guns, with exceptions for gun transfers between family members, emergency self-defense, and temporary transfers for hunting and sport shooting. Supporters, including Maine Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense Fund and Mainers for Responsible Gun Ownership Fund, have spent $5.2 million to get the measure passed. Approximately $1 million was spent against it, the vast majority by the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action.

California’s Proposition 63

Prop 63 passed easily, garnering 63 percent of the vote. It will ban certain types of semi-automatic assault rifles, require background checks for ammunition sales, outlaw magazines that carry more than 10 bullets, create a system for confiscating guns from felons, and require gun owners to report lost or stolen firearms. Major components of the initiative already became law earlier this year, and gun rights groups say they will challenge the overlapping laws in court. Opponents spent nearly $1 million against the measure to the nearly $4.5 million spent by supporters.

Nevada’s Question 1

Similar to Maine’s ballot initiative, Question 1 will require most gun sales, including private sales, to be subject to a background check. However, it narrowly passed by less than 10,000 votes. The same exemptions that Maine allows also apply here. Supporters spent more than $18 million and received significant financial backing from Everytown For Gun Safety. The NRA Nevadans for Gun Freedom and Nevadans for State Gun Rights spent nearly $6.5 million to sink the initiative. The NRA stuck to its usual script in opposing the measure, writing, “Question 1 does nothing to prevent criminals from obtaining firearms.”

Washington’s Initiative 1491

Initiative 1491 allows family, household members, and police to petition a judge to temporarily prohibit a person’s access to guns if that person is found to be a risk to himself or others. Petitions for an “extreme risk protection order” will last one year. Those under order can request a hearing to argue against the order. The NRA opposed the measure, saying that “if a person is truly dangerous, existing law already provides a variety of mechanisms to deal with the individual.” Nonetheless, it passed with 71 percent of the vote.

View the original here: 

Gun Control Advocates Have Something to Smile About Today

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Gun Control Advocates Have Something to Smile About Today

One Bold Way to Blow Up the College Debt Nightmare

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In 2008, sociologist Sara Goldrick-Rab began studying a group of 3,000 students as they entered public universities in Wisconsin. For six years, she tracked how financial aid affected their college experiences and whether it would help them graduate. The results were stunning: Even with aid, half the students dropped out of school, often because they couldn’t afford to keep studying. Less than 1 in 5 earned a degree in four years.

A four-year college degree is one of the most important predictors of economic success: Americans who have one earn an average of 98 percent more per hour than those who don’t. But how much should students pay for this piece of paper? In her new book, Paying the Price: College Costs, Financial Aid, and the Betrayal of the American Dream, Goldrick-Rab argues that for most families, it’s become financially unmanageable to send a kid to college. Poorer families are hit the hardest: the poorest quarter of households can spend up to 84 percent of annual income on college bills, with little guarantee of return.

University of Chicago Press

The sociologist from Temple University thinks it’s time to overhaul how we handle financial aid. “The system is broken in so many ways that we need to stop trying to save it,” she tells me. She advocates a “first-degree free” approach, where all students—regardless of their family’s income—can earn at least an associate’s degree without paying a cent of tuition; in her model, financial aid, no longer earmarked for tuition costs, could help students from low-income families cover the additional costs of living while they finish their degree. I caught up with Goldrick-Rab to hear about the biggest surprises of her research, her advice for college students, and her thoughts on Donald Trump’s education plan.

Mother Jones: You followed these students for six years. What stood out to you?

Sara Goldrick-Rab: A lot of people talk about student loans with regard to how things are after you finish college, such as the challenges of repaying debt. But they don’t talk about the fact that people are so worried about debt even while they’re still in college. Watching people go without enough food to eat because they’re afraid to take out a loan, or decide to not go abroad or not hang out with friends because they’re so worried about what will happen—that to me says that we’ve changed what college is.

MJ: How so?

SGR: Well, it’s always been the case that you go to college and you get a fair bit of choice in deciding where you’re going to go, what you’re going to study and how you want to set that up. And the thing that distinguishes one choice from another is your ability—how intelligent you are and how hard you want to work. Increasingly, that’s not true. What distinguishes you and your choices is your income.

MJ: You say in the book that it’s sort of a failure of the American dream.

SGR: Well, it’s a betrayal. We tell people that the way to get ahead in life is through education, but then we only give them educational options that are unaffordable and end up shoving them backward. Imagine going to college and ending up with debt and no degree. That’s a betrayal.

MJ: Half the students in the study dropped out. Was that a surprise?

SGR: It’s aligned with national figures, so on the one hand, it’s not that surprising. But numbers like that still surprise you when you see that students were doing most things right—they were trying to go to class, they were interested in school, they were working and taking on debt and doing all the things that we tell them to do. And they still didn’t get a degree.

MJ: Do you know what happened after they dropped out?

SGR: We stopped collecting data for the most part in 2014. We have enough information to recontact them, but contacting people in a study like this is very expensive. They’re probably around 25 or 26 years old now. What I really want to know is how they view their own education now—whether they think it was worth it, and whether they plan to send their own kids to college.

MJ: They might have so much debt that they won’t.

SGR: Exactly. Or such a bad taste in their mouths.

MJ: So why is college financial aid so broken?

SGR: The first reason is that it tries so hard to figure out who needs what and who doesn’t deserve money. Think about the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). It introduces all kinds of bureaucracies that alienate people. It also leaves out the constituency that’s needed to make it politically viable: the middle class. It makes it a program for poor people—and programs for poor people are poor programs. It doesn’t have a broad base support, which means it’s perpetually underfunded. The other thing is that, in the FAFSA’s effort to decide who gets what, it uses a bunch of fake numbers that don’t mean much. It produces the “expected family contribution,” a number that doesn’t even consider the family’s debt. The FAFSA also relies on prices for tuition and living costs that are set up by colleges with no assessment of whether they’re accurate. So if a college says it costs $10,000 a year to attend, well, that’s all you can get. If a college says it costs $30,000, you might be encouraged to take loans up to an amount that would be ridiculous to repay. So they overstate and understate the actual cost of college.

MJ: You point out that there’s no federal authority that requires states to make colleges affordable, and since the 1980s states have slowly decreased their funding for public schools, leaving families to take on more costs. College is much more expensive than before, but, as you note, the proportion of state budgets going to higher education is about the same today as it was in 1966.

SGR: Right. The whole federal system is based on the assumption that states would also help out, but they didn’t do anything to encourage states to do that. I don’t know what the federal government was thinking when they put trust in states in the beginning.

Sara Goldrick-Rab Chris Kendig

MJ: So what’s the way out of all this?

SGR: The way out is to build a different type of system. We can do some small things, such as expanding the federal work-study program so students can have more jobs on campus, or making sure that when students file for financial aid, they can get information about other benefits available to them. But we better be working on a system that more effectively lowers the price of college for a lot more people. Doing that requires focusing on the public sector. We need to have a conversation about whether we’re going to continue funding private colleges and universities when we’re underfunding public ones. I wish more people realized every time they see a commercial on TV for the University of Phoenix that they are funding those universities. I don’t think most Americans have a clue how much they’re spending on private education.

MJ: What do you think of Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s education plans?

SGR: Donald Trump has talked about taking the federal government out of making student loans, and I think it’s very dangerous.* We actually just started making student loans from the federal government about six years ago. If we stopped doing that and let banks do it instead, taxpayers will end up with a lot more wasted money. Note: Though Trump’s policy director has mentioned this plan, Trump has not mentioned it during campaign speeches, calling instead for increased federal and state funding for students to attend either public or private schools.

Hillary Clinton’s plan is a decent step in the right direction. I would like to see it be a little more focused. Debt is not the problem, it’s a symptom of the problem. All the talk right now is about making college debt-free, but I’d rather see a strong, clear message of making college tuition free and putting support in to cover living expenses for those who need it.

MJ: Wasn’t one of the main criticisms of debt-free college that if we make college tuition free for all families with an income under $125,000, it would actually hurt poor students and help more affluent ones?

SGR: This is driving me crazy. In order to make good policy, we need to stop counting who gets what dollars and think in terms of who gets what benefits. Think of it this way: Right now, there are students who don’t go to college because the current financial aid system is so underfunded, so in the current system, they get nothing. That’s Person 1. Person 2 is going to college, and they’re not getting a full Pell Grant, so the tuition is not covered. They’re probably from a middle-income family. If we make college tuition-free, then two things happen. First, the person who’s already going to college is going to see tuition costs eliminated and we will have given them some money for living expenses. Some people think that we shouldn’t give them that money because they already go to college, but they’re missing that these students are not always finishing college—the small subsidies could go a long way to help. Second, the person who doesn’t currently go to college, if he gets money, he comes into the new system—he gets to come to college.

The idea that tuition-free college is going to only benefit the upper-middle class ignores the huge benefits to the lower-middle class. The other thing is that we can count on the wealthy to go to private schools. Hillary Clinton said when she was debating Bernie Sanders that she didn’t want Donald Trump’s kids to benefit from free college…But we really don’t have to worry about it: Donald Trump is not going to suddenly send his kids to public schools.

MJ: You said you were surprised by the study. Did you have an emotional reaction?

SGR: It’s totally distressing. These are actual people to me. I know some of them still. Some of them I’m in regular touch with.

MJ: What would you tell a student who is facing some of these struggles?

SGR: I would tell them that the struggles they’re facing are happening to lots of people. I know it doesn’t solve anything for them, but knowing you’re not alone matters when you’re really struggling financially. Students also…have to let people know this is happening to them. And even though it might be too late for them and their kids to escape these struggles, students have a responsibility to change the future system. They need to make it a voting issue. This is not a private trouble—it is a public problem, and it needs to be treated like one.

Excerpt from – 

One Bold Way to Blow Up the College Debt Nightmare

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, University Of Chicago Press, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on One Bold Way to Blow Up the College Debt Nightmare

U.N.’s annual climate conference kicks off under shadow of U.S. election

International negotiators are coming together on Monday in Marrakech, Morocco, for the most highly anticipated climate gathering of the year. But they’ll spend the first couple of days doing exactly the same thing as the rest of the world: holding their breath as they nervously watch to see how the U.S. presidential election turns out.

Yes, America’s 2016 electoral dumpster fire will loom large at this year’s U.N. Climate Change Conference, aka COP22. The main goal of the Marrakech meeting is to hash out more specific plans for putting last year’s landmark Paris climate agreement into action. Donald Trump has said he would “cancel” the agreement, so if he’s elected, negotiators are likely to panic. If an antagonistic American president moved to pull the U.S. out of the deal, implementing it around the globe would become a whole lot more difficult.

If, on the other hand, Hillary Clinton is elected, then conferees will feel more confident in getting down to work.

Riding a wave of momentum

U.S. election aside, there’s a lot of positive momentum heading into COP22. The Paris Agreement formally entered into force on Nov. 4, much earlier than anticipated. That’s because leaders of other countries wanted to make sure the deal was done before American voters had a chance to throw it off-course, so they kicked their normally lethargic ratification processes into high gear. That says a lot about the unprecedented level of international commitment to this deal.

The month leading up to Marrakech saw two other notable steps toward climate progress. On Oct. 6, more than 190 nations reached the world’s first agreement to cut emissions from international flights. And on Oct. 15, over 170 countries pledged to rid air conditioners and refrigerators of hydrofluorocarbons — which can have warming potential thousands of times higher than carbon dioxide — in a legally binding accord, potentially cutting warming by 0.5 degrees C.

So negotiators are landing in Morocco on a wave of optimism. At the same time, they know there’s a great deal that still needs to be done. Says Yamide Dagnet of the World Resources Institute, “The COP is about celebrating, but it’s not about complacency.”

At last year’s Paris climate conference, 195 countries made a nonbinding agreement to keep warming below 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels, with a stretch goal of limiting it to 1.5 degrees. Each nation made an action pledge to cut or curb its greenhouse gas emissions, and agreed to ratchet up its commitment in the future. The Paris signatories also agreed to raise more funds to help poorer countries adapt to a warming world.

Now, in Marrakech, negotiators will try to figure out how to turn those promises into action. They won’t be able to sort everything out, so some of the work will roll into 2018. But here are the three big issues on the agenda:

1) Money

One of the most contentious topics in Paris was money — big surprise — and you can expect the same in Marrakech.

In 2009, wealthier nations agreed to mobilize $100 billion in climate finance yearly by 2020 to aid poorer nations. In Paris, the rich countries reconfirmed that commitment, and in mid-October, released a plan for how they’d get there.

But many leaders from developing nations and policy advocates say $100 billion falls far short of what’s needed for countries to create programs that stave off climate change and build infrastructure that can withstand it, while working to improve quality of life for their citizens and grow jobs and GDP.

“My organization and many others remain concerned that this is nowhere near enough the amount of money that is needed to help the most vulnerable communities,” says Annaka Peterson, who works on injustice and poverty issues with Oxfam America. “About 20 percent of the $100 billion promised would support adaptation. However, a lot of estimates suggest that by 2030 developing countries could face costs from $140 billion to $300 billion a year.”

And actually, rich countries are not planning to come up with $100 billion a year themselves. They’re counting on sizable contributions from private companies to help meet that goal, which has some negotiators and activists wary about conflicts of interest.

2) Trust and Transparency

If nations are to fully invest in the Paris process, they need to be able to trust that other nations are working toward their goals and accurately reporting their progress. The Paris Agreement asks countries to publish national data on emissions as well as submit their data to a review body.

But how will that work in practice? Will the process be different for rich and poor countries? Negotiators in Marrakech will be working on creating those systems.

“What is the structure of how we look at transparency from now on?” asks Mariana Panuncio-Feldman, senior director of international climate cooperation at World Wildlife Fund. “Will there be flexibility for countries in how they’re reporting?”

Countries also need to start getting specific about how they’ll fulfill their pledges, known as Nationally Determined Contributions, or NDCs. Andrew Steer, president and CEO of the World Resources Institute, says countries should be bringing detailed plans to Marrakech to demonstrate their progress. “What we need to see is NDCs turning from aspirational to roadmap and investment plans,” he says, “the sort of soup to nuts.”

3) Ambition

Perhaps the biggest shortcoming of the Paris Agreement is that it sets the world on a path to 2.7 to 3 degrees of warming above pre-industrial levels — significantly higher than the 1.5–2 degree ceiling called for in the actual text of the agreement, and needed to avert drastic climate change.

But that more aggressive goal will play an important role in Marrakech, where another critical task is setting a plan to ratchet up the ambition of countries’ pledges every few years. The Paris deal calls for countries to assess progress in 2018 and return to the table in 2020 to revisit and ideally toughen their action plans. Diplomats need to create a system that can spur cuts every five years, while increasing the expectation of how drastic those cuts will be.

Based on the agreement’s swift ratification, climate advocates are hoping countries will be able to toughen their plans even earlier than called for, in 2018, as part of a “global fact check,” says Mohamed Adow, co-chair of Climate Action Network International.

“The question is: How fast and how deep is the green transformation going to be? This is why Marrakech is going to be important,” says Dagnet. “Marrakech needs to pave the way for more ambitious action.”

While the Paris conference was a flashy affair fit for celebrities and political wheelers and dealers, Marrakech is one for the wonks to sort out the nitty-gritty. The proceedings won’t be as glamorous, but they’re still critically important.

View this article:

U.N.’s annual climate conference kicks off under shadow of U.S. election

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, Landmark, LG, Naka, ONA, PUR, Ringer, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on U.N.’s annual climate conference kicks off under shadow of U.S. election