Categories
Health

As Government Shutdown Continues, Domestic Violence Shelters Struggle to Survive


Estes Valley Crisis Advocates hasn’t taken a direct hit from the government shutdown—yet. But it’s just a matter of time.

“We’re very aware of where we’re at and when that’ll run out,” says Diana David Brown. Brown is the executive director at the domestic violence shelter, which also provides emergency response services in Estes Park, Colorado. “There is a point where we would have to start looking at cutbacks in hours and layoffs. That’s probably the end of this month.”

The organization is the only crisis domestic violence shelter in the area, run by four full-time employees, two part-time employees, and volunteers. “It’s full all the time,” Brown says. Estes Park is a tourist town, at the base of Rocky Mountain National Park, so the center comes to the aid of the thousands of visitors who flock to the area every year, for everything from responding to tourist fights that involve domestic violence to counseling services for unexpected deaths. But its budget relies heavily on federal grants; just a small share of its funding comes from private donations, given the small year-round community in which it exists.

The shelter is already feeling some effects of the shutdown. It recently got approval to use grant money to get new equipment to Skype with legal experts in the closest cities (which are about 40 miles away). And its heating system is outdated and old, at risk of breaking down and forcing the organization to relocate shelter residents to hotels, but the application it put in for grant money to update it is from a fund that’s frozen while the government remains shuttered. They’ve put all these plans on hold until the shutdown comes to an end.

“I just don’t know how long programs can hold on at this point.”

Nationwide, programs like the ones that Estes Valley Crisis Advocates operates are desperately waiting for reimbursements to come through—money that was set aside for them last year but hasn’t arrived yet, explains Cindy Southworth, executive vice president of the National Network to End Domestic Violence. “This is money that shouldn’t be locked up,” she says. But because the employees who work at the Department of Justice who release the funds were furloughed, the checks couldn’t go out. The DOJ was able to bring some employees back to work to process the payments on January 7, but that is a bandaid at best. The department has told providers that it only has enough money carried over from prior years to flow funds through January 17. It’s also not clear whether enough DOJ employees are back on the job to process all of the frantic requests for reimbursements.

“We’re literally days away from them running out of federal funds,” Southworth says. Unlike federal employees who can be made to work without pay if they’re deemed to be essential, many states have laws that won’t allow shelter staff to work or even volunteer their services without pay. “It may mean shelters closing down, hotlines going dark,” she says. “Local organizations are terrified. They’re crunching the numbers, they’re watching. They’re seeing exactly how long can we hang in there and at what point do we have to start shutting down.”

Such an outcome is almost sure to have devastating consequences. When Southworth was new in her career and staffing a hotline, she picked up a call one day from a little boy whose mother had sent him to a neighbor’s house to supposedly get some flowers. He told Southworth that his stepfather was holding his mother hostage and had said that if police showed up at the house, “He’ll kill the police and kill himself and the whole family,” she recalls. Southworth was able to contact the mother and come up with a plan: because the mother had a medical condition, she was able to convince her partner to take her to the hospital. Southworth reached out to the police, who went to the hospital disguised as doctors. They were able to get her and her children away from the abuser, and that evening they booked the family into their shelter.

“It was an incredible, incredible day,” she says. But it was only possible because the organization was fully staffed with paid employees, all of whom pitched in to help get the family to safety. “There’s no way that could have been done with a volunteer on the hotline,” she notes. “Volunteers are fantastic, but they have to be backed up by paid staff…who know the ins and outs, know the legal system.”

Once programs can’t cover their expenses, victims will start to feel the effects immediately, sources say. “I just don’t know how long programs can hold on at this point with all of their staff,” says Joyce Grover, executive director of the Kansas Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence. “There may be a reduction in staffing for outreach offices, people may have to get an appointment in order to see someone.” Victims may face delays in assistance for getting protection orders, talking to law enforcement, getting examined at a hospital, or even going into shelter. “Somebody who needs help with a protection order will either have to wait by the phone or be delayed in getting one,” she says, “and we know that’s just not safe.”

Without the staff available to pull such heroics off, “lives are on the line,” Southworth says. “If the life-saving domestic violence frontline advocates are laid off and our hotlines go dark, lives are on the line.”

In the event that the shutdown continues past the end of the month and federal money dries up, Brown and her program director Cato Kraft at Estes Valley Crisis Advocates have discussed deferring their own pay and cutting other people’s hours, knowing full well what the ramifications could be. “We just can’t have people work and not get paid,” Brown says. “Nobody’s in this work for the money, but they have to have the money to do this work.” Having fewer staff on hand couldn’t come at a worse time. As the shutdown creates stress in people’s lives, particularly for the federal employees who work for Rocky Mountain National Park and low-income residents who rely on government services, the need for help will rise.

“We’re all hoping that this freeze doesn’t last,” Brown says. “Everyday we’re hoping that something’s going to change. But it’s all a little scary.”

Larger, urban and suburban providers and shelters may be able to weather the lack of federal money longer since they are more likely to have a base of donors and local funding in their budgets that they can fall back on. But smaller, rural programs are less likely to have that kind of unrestricted money to plug the holes. “Programs that are already operating on a shoestring budget with a federal grant or a couple of federal grants—those programs are most at risk,” Southworth says. The same is likely true for more specific programs such as tribal ones that serve Native Americans or those that serve the elderly.

All providers that Glamour spoke to stress they will do whatever they can to keep their core services running. But options may be limited. Providers may choose not to pay rent or other utilities to at least make sure their staff gets paid. But there’s no doubt, as Southworth points out, that “the biggest part of their budget is payroll.” Even if an organization forgoes other bills, it won’t be long before it can’t issue paychecks.

“We’re getting people calling and saying, ‘How much longer are you going to be open?’ People think they’re not going to get services.”

The uncertainty and confusion has almost certainly trickled down to those who are dealing with and trying to escape violence. Many may see the news of the shutdown and assume that providers and shelters have had to close, even though none have taken that step.

“We’re getting people calling and saying, ‘How much longer are you going to be open?’” says Beth Hassett, executive director of WEAVE, a services provider for domestic violence and sexual assault in Sacramento, California. “People think they’re not going to get services.” The confusion may make people who are considering leaving an abusive relationship or getting counseling hesitate. “It certainly has a chilling effect on people who are debating what their future holds,” Hassett says. If the government is shutting down, she adds, people may wonder if services will be there to help them move forward. That could mean some stay in dangerous situations because they assume there will be no one to help them if they reach out.

Staff feel the impact, too. It’s already a difficult job. Employees are underpaid, overworked, Southworth says: “We know that the toll this work takes on these heroic advocates is challenging.” Now they are also grappling with not knowing if they’re going to get a paycheck to cover their rent and bills, or whether they will soon have no job at all. If people get furloughed or let go, once the government reopens, Grover says, you have to convince staff to come back. “If this talk of uncertainty continues on federally and you’ve been able to find another position, you’re probably not going to want to come back.”

The irony, of course, is that Trump has repeatedly stressed that he has to keep the government shutdown to extract funding for his border wall in the name of safety and security. But the shutdown, if it continues, will threaten women’s safety and security as services and shelters go dark.

“About 1,300 to 1,500 women are killed every single year by their intimate partner,” Southworth says. “That is domestic terrorism. If we have the audacity to shut down those life saving services in the alleged name of security and safety, that’s appalling. It’s unconscionable.”


Bryce Covert is an independent journalist writing about the economy. She is a contributing op-ed writer at the New York Times and a contributing writer at The Nation.



Source link

Categories
Health

These Women Are Still Waiting for Their Paycheck Because of the Government Shutdown


Americans know when the federal government shutdown began: December 22, 2018. What we don’t know as President Donald Trump and Congress remain at odds is when it will end. For many women in public service who are on furlough and now looking at not getting that vital paycheck, the uncertainty can be agonizing. Here are some of the stories furloughed women told Glamour about living, waiting, and trying to get by. They spoke on their own behalf, not for the federal government; some requested partial anonymity out of concern for their jobs.


“We have to be there to pick each other up when systems fail us.”

—Alicia Crain, 38, diversity/equal employment opportunity worker, Washington, D.C.

After serving for years as a development worker in Mexico, Crain relocated to D.C. from Portland in 2016 to take a federal government job as a diversity specialist—a move that ate into her savings. Her take-home pay is about $3,000 a month. She is single and lives by herself. Her rent is $1,225. She spends about $80 for her phone and $50 a month for internet, but doesn’t own a car. Past experiences have taught her about the art of living frugally. Those lessons are getting put to the test during the shutdown.

At first the shutdown was more like vacation. For the first week, week and a half, and it was just fine to literally get up, sit on the couch, watch Netflix. I have a really cute little apartment with nice windows, so I have a good place to hang out, which I know isn’t true for lower-level federal employees who are already working [multiple] jobs to make ends meet.

But now it’s been 19 days of just waiting and seeing if I can do my job. I’ll be missing a paycheck, and there seems to be no end in sight. I am in not-great financial circumstances. … If I pay my rent on February 1 [without another paycheck], I’ll almost empty my account; I’d have maybe $200 left. So I’ve signed up as a dog walker on a couple apps to provide a little cash.

[The shutdown] is just sort of maddening and confusing. This is just getting out of hand… The president is like a two-year-old throwing a temper tantrum: ‘I will do whatever I want, and I don’t care who I have to hurt to get what I want.’ That just hit home for how self-centered and narcissistic he is… If there was any sort of empathy, the shutdown would have ended a long time ago.

Alicia Crain has been keeping track of her projects during the furlough. She shared this screenshot of her list.

It’s demoralizing sitting around waiting to be able do my job that I’m good at, that I love, but I am not willing to give in to a narcissistic fascist. Fortunately, my credit union sent a message about all kind of ways to help—paycheck replacement loans, late-fee waivers, a variety of things which I haven’t looked into yet. And my family offered to help when and if I need.

I’ve been getting up without an alarm. I make coffee, make breakfast… I’ve been organizing, weeding through things, cleaning. I clean a lot. I took all my Christmas decorations down. I washed all of my work clothes and ironed them. Today, I decided to make a calendar out of paper bags. I saw [one] somewhere over the weekend and I looked it up, but it was $25.

Yesterday, American University had “Classes Without Quizzes,” a whole day of workshops for furloughed feds, and I ran into a bunch of colleagues there. The great thing about being furloughed in D.C. is many businesses are offering free classes, free food, discounts.

A friend of mine was going out for kind of a nice dinner for Christmas Eve. I did not do that, to save money. I haven’t been eating out. I’ve been saying no to events, even if they don’t cost a lot, like $15—that stuff adds up. I took a bunch of things back to Ikea [for a refund of] $150… I have definitely made fewer trips to the grocery store. I’m trying to eat what I have. I would prefer not to have to borrow money that I’ll have to pay back, but I guess if it comes to that, I will.

The calendar Crain made out of recycled paper bags.

I’m reading A Book of Joy by the Dalai Lama and Desmond Tutu. One of the first things that they talk about is that both have experienced a lot of suffering in their lives. How do you be compassionate while suffering? They both said they remember that they’re not alone in their suffering. There are 450,000 of us [federal employees] affected, and we’re all together. If folks need help, reach out. It’s not easy, but relationships are super important… We have to be there to pick each other up when systems fail us.


“We’re scared and nervous about what the future holds.”

—C., 37, Maryland, international development worker

A few days ago, C., her fiance, and their son had just moved into a new home in a Washington suburb, with plans to rent out their old one-bedroom condo in D.C. Now, she’s without a paycheck, and her partner’s salary won’t stretch far enough to cover both mortgages. When she first heard about the shutdown, the fear set in. Now she’s concerned she may not be able to keep the apartment.

I was shocked… The next week, we were closing on a house, so financially, I was panicking. I was sitting up all night watching the news, waiting to see if it was going to happen. My fiance was like, “Just go to bed. What can you do?” [and] I was like, “We can’t! We have to plan! What are we going to do if it happens?”

My partner works for a private employer, thank goodness. We do have that to fall back on. And this has given me time to really be with my son, which is a positive thing… [But] just thinking about the workload that I’m going encounter if [the government] does open up—I work on things that have very strict deadlines and certain numbers have to be met, and so with this happening, my amount of time to do my work is going to be significantly less.

I wake up every day at 3:30 in the morning and have numbers and stress and everything going through my head until 5:30 or 6….

Hearing the stories about the people who have this as their sole income—I can’t imagine the stress that they’re going through. Really, had we just been in our same situation of not buying this new house last week, I would have been completely fine.

But now that we’re in this possible predicament of two mortgages, one paycheck—his paycheck will not pay for two mortgages… I have been every day trying to figure out what we can do to make sure our money is kind of spread out. I make about $80,000 a year [and it’s] about $5000 a month for two mortgages. He makes about the same as me, $80,000. We definitely rely on both of our checks every single month to make sure we pay for everything.

I wake up every day at 3:30 in the morning and have numbers and stress and everything going through my head until 5:30 or 6, and then somehow it shuts up for a moment, and then it’s time to be with my kiddo… I definitely have become much more aware of the amount that I’m spending.

The idea of having to sell the condo is pretty upsetting. It’s literally the last resort. There’s nothing that really calms the mind when it comes to this. I have no idea what we’ll do. We don’t have family members who are going to be able to help us pay for things…

I’ve never owned anything before that [condo]. I’ve never even owned a car. It was the only thing I’ve ever owned. So of course there’s that emotional part towards keeping it, but I have to use my practical side of my brain to make the smart decision, obviously. But it will be hard. It’ll be sad to know that I was pushed into that corner to have to put it on the market at this point in time.

The president has no idea what any of us on furlough feel or think or know or agree with or disagree with. He has to talk to us.

We have shelter and we are not going to lose our homes, we hope, but if this continues—we will be forced into doing things we are not prepared to do, like putting our homes on the market and using our credit cards to buy our groceries. We’re scared. We’re nervous about what the future holds for us, and we need to find the calm within the storm. We need to feel supported by our leadership—and I don’t feel that.


“Insecurity about your job takes an emotional toll.”

—Lilibeth Mata, 27, Houston, Texas, NASA analyst

Mata has lived through a shutdown before, but this is one of the longer ones she’s seen. She’s looking for side hustles to keep at least some cash coming in as she waits for a resolution. And she has empathy for fellow federal workers who may have it worse.

In September of 2013, literally the week that I got hired, I had my first furlough, so I’ve had this experience before. The very first one was about two weeks long, so that’s something that I was okay with and was kind of prepared for.

Now we’re going into something way longer than I’ve ever had to deal with, and of course it gets you kind of scared and anxious about when you’re going to go back to work and when you’re going to receive your paycheck again. It’s scary how often it’s happening. You think as a civil servant you have really great job security, but in reality, they can shut down the government whenever they want. More than anything, it’s sort of the emotional toll of the insecurity in your job.

Coming right after the holidays, the timing of this shutdown is extra harsh.

Finance-wise, you’re digging into those savings, and especially right now, at the beginning of the year. For me, my six-month car insurance payment hits in January, the homeowner’s bill for the entire year. I also help my parents out, because they’re both retired and just kind of depend on their Social Security. And coming right after the holidays, the timing of this shutdown is extra harsh.

Lilibeth Mata of NASA has lived through shutdowns before, but not furloughs this long.

I think I’ll be ok, but I have to prioritize certain things to make that happen. And I also have been trying to look for little jobs—just kind of odds and ends to make a little bit of extra cash. I have a friend who’s an event coordinator, so I have helped her with two events throughout these few weeks, a wedding and a New Year’s party. I set up the decorations, I ushered people around and I catered to the bride, groom, and family. And I’m trying to see if any friends need math tutors or anything.

I’m aware that shutdowns happen. It’s starting to get to the point of it that the length of it is getting scary. Everything that I hear in the news doesn’t sound like we’re coming any closer to a resolution. In the past we’ve gotten back pay, but it’s never a guarantee.

Besides worrying myself, I worry about my friends—both husband and wife are NASA employees and they have a child. I know there’s people who are even worse off than me because they have an entire family and their whole entire income comes from the federal government. As bad as I have it, I know there are people who have it worse.


“My son’s like, ‘I love Furlough Mommy!”

—L., 39, Virginia, budget manager

A mother of two who describes herself as always having been very career-oriented, L. has been in federal service long enough to have seen shutdowns before. Her husband’s salary keeps the family out of financial peril—so she admits time away from the job has actually made her less stressed, not more.

My husband can cover our mortgage, our basics. Ironically, the day before the shutdown, he got an offer for a government position, but he didn’t hear the phone. He wanted that job for a long time, but it actually worked out that he hadn’t gone there earlier, because then he would have been furloughed too. If this went on for months and months and months, yeah, it would be bad. But another week or two, even the end of the month, is not earth-shattering. The main thing coming out of my checking account is my student loans I pay every month, and student loans you can pretty easily freeze, so that’s what I did.

Normally, I’m out of the house by the time my kids even wake up. I have a four-year-old in daycare and an 11-year-old who goes to school. Now, I can get up with them, help them start their day, get them off onto the bus. I decided I’m going to hit the gym every day I’m furloughed. I’ve personally been trying really hard to be productive. I’ve done a lot of painting in my house. Me and some of my friends, we hold ourselves accountable for getting up and doing things. If you lounge around, you can become depressed because you feel like you’re not contributing, you’re not being productive in society. So I’ve just been go, go, go. Go to the gym. Tidy up my house. It makes the day go fast.

If you lounge around, you can become depressed because you feel like you’re not contributing…so I’ve just been go, go, go.

This is really cheesy, but I feel like I’ve kind of had some time to be a better mom. Because usually, I’m so harried and stressed, and they’re like, “I need this, I need this.” When you get home from work, you’re like, “When am I going to do all these things?” Well, you know what? My son needed something and I leisurely went to Target today and got it for him. I’m going to be here when he gets home. I’ve always been like a career person. I’m not usually very touchy-feely. So I have to say this is honestly the most connected I’ve ever felt with my kids. My son’s like, “I love Furlough Mommy!”

When I go back to my job, what I hope to take with me is realizing that when I bring home stress from work, that it impacts everybody, and realizing how, because I’m really calm right now, that improves the mood of the whole family. I’m going to try really hard to take that as a lesson learned: when I come home from work, just let it go.


“This was a dream job. But the furlough has made me question that.”

—Bonnie Nesbitt, 36, New York, underwriter, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

It’s the feeling of being in professional and financial limbo that’s frustrating for Nesbitt, a new HUD employee who is among the federal workers who, amid the uncertainty, has decided to take the step of seeking unemployment benefits to prevent her from draining away money she’s saved toward other life goals, including buying a home.

I started this job just two months ago, October 29th, 2018. The whole situation is frustrating and unnerving since there’s no gauge to sense when we could be back to work. This feeling of being in limbo, everything’s been put on hold with no foreseeable end in sight; it’s something I’ve never experienced before.

My whole professional career has been in the affordable housing industry, so when I landed this federal gig, it was a dream job. As far as public-sector work goes, federal positions are kind of the gold standard, in my opinion. This was a career-changing move that I was, and still am, very excited about. But to leave a job to take the next step in my career, only to fall into a trap of no employment and no pay for an undetermined amount of time, has honestly made me question my move.

Bonnie Nesbitt got her dream job at HUD, but now she’s furloughed along with hundreds of thousands of federal workers.

Financially, I am among the privileged where I do have savings I could re-allocate to cover my expenses (rent, high student loan payment, some credit cards, along with basic items like food, etc.)—but not for months on end.

Additionally, my partner Will and I were in the process of applying to buy into a co-op apartment in Queens before the shutdown went into effect. The money we have saved has been designated to cover our down payment and closing costs. I transferred roughly $2,000 of that designated money to my checking account yesterday to cover bills for the next couple weeks. I can’t keep that up for weeks or months on end.

[Losing the co-op is] definitely a concern. Co-op boards look for purchasers to have a certain amount of post-closing liquidity, and if I keep having to tap into savings to make ends meet, it could potentially put our transaction in jeopardy. We’re too far along into the process to back out now though, so I have to keep extraneous spending to a minimum and stay optimistic we’ll be back to work sooner than later.

I decided today to file for unemployment benefits to help cover some bills. It will help—that’s why we pay into these social safety nets so they’re there when we do need them—but after taxes, it won’t be close to matching my regular take-home pay.

Celeste Katz is senior politics reporter for Glamour. Send tips and questions to Celeste_Katz@condenast.com.

Lead photo: Getty Images





Source link

Categories
Health

Women in Congress Have Never Hit What Researchers Call "The Tipping Point." How Would Government Change If They Did?


The end of 2013 government shutdown started with pizza, wine, and 20-ish frustrated female senators. It was Aaron Sorkin–esque, except zero men were present.

By the first week of October, the partisan battle had dragged Washington to a halt. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D–N.H.) invited the women to her office to discuss a plan to reopen the government that Senator Susan Collins (R–Maine) had put forth. “There were a lot of people—ahem, men—who would have liked to be the bullies on the playground and just cross their arms and see who had to back down first,” Senator Patty Murray (D–Wash.) recalls. “We didn’t want to wait to see who backed down.” She’s heard that women politicians are more polite and more patient than men, but that wasn’t their motivation: “What we were was impatient.” To finish it. To get back to business.

When the shutdown ended at last, the late Senator John McCain (R–Ariz.) tipped his hat to his female colleagues: “Leadership, I must fully admit, was provided primarily from women in the Senate.”

The Senate comprises 100 members. At the time of the 2013 fracas, its female faction was made up of 16 Democrats and four Republicans. Today the Senate boasts 23 women (only 52 have ever served). It’s a paltry improvement, but leaps and bounds better than the fraction of women in power in other strata of influence: Just six governors are women. Only 24 Fortune 500 companies are women-led—that’s less than 5 percent.

Sen. Shaheen wants to see the Senate look like America, with an equal gender split. (Hers is a moderate stance; when asked at what point there will be enough women on the Supreme Court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pronounced, “When there are nine.”) But even a modest increase in women could make a difference in how the legislative branch operates and votes and affects all our lives.

The midterm elections will see more women than ever on the ballot. What we don’t know is how many of those candidates will win. If current female incumbents hold their seats, a woman-versus-woman race in Arizona will inch the number of women in the Senate up to 24. Some pollsters think it’s possible that Democratic Representative Jacky Rosen could win in Nevada or Republican Representative Marsha Blackburn could come out ahead in Tennessee, which would push the number to 25 or 26 and create a coalition with far more influence than women have had so far.

With a result like that, we’d be closer than ever to getting the answer to a question that has tantalized and divided political scientists for decades: What would happen to our gridlocked, super-partisan politics if women surpassed the tipping point?

The idea of the tipping point dates back to 1977, when Rosabeth Moss Kanter, then a professor at Yale University and Harvard Law School, theorized the idea of critical mass as it applies to women in positions of power. Kanter observed that women had to make up at least 30 percent of a team to contribute at their full potential. Under that threshold, women were often dismissed as token representatives of their gender—not equal participants, let alone persuasive decision makers. Ever since then, experts have debated the ideal proportion: Is it 35 percent? Would 25 be sufficient? Whatever the number, women in federal government haven’t reached it. “The point is to be included—not seen as an outsider,” says Kanter, now chair and director of Harvard University’s Advanced Leadership Initiative.

Make no mistake, it does help to have one woman, or a handful, in “the room where it happens.” That was visible in April, when Senator Tammy Duckworth (D–Ill.) gave birth to her daughter, Maile. Less than two weeks later she was back in the Senate, Maile in tow, for a vote. But Maile’s presence there—let alone her warm welcome— would have once been inconceivable. Babies have been banned from the floor as far back as all the people who serve in the Senate can remember. When Sen. Duckworth learned she was pregnant, she asked Senator Amy Klobuchar (D–Minn.) to lead a bipartisan effort to strike down the rule. For months Sen. Klobuchar met with colleagues to convince them to support a reversal. Some on the Hill were worried about whether—the horror!—Sen. Duckworth would have to breastfeed. But Sen. Klobuchar made her case, and the rule was overturned with unanimous consent. “I think it would do us good…to see a pacifier next to the antique inkwells on our desks,” said Senator Dick Durbin (D–Ill.) at the time.

PHOTO: CHIP SOMODEVILLA/GETTY IMAGES

Senator Tammy Duckworth, back at work with her newborn.

It’s a nice sentiment, but it overlooks the fact that the United States remains the lone industrialized nation in the world that doesn’t guarantee paid parental leave. Kanter believes that more elected women would lead to changes in policies like paid leave or access to health care. But Georgetown University professor Michele Swers, Ph.D., is more skeptical. While she acknowledges that women have unique experiences to draw on that can make men view certain political issues with a fresh perspective, she cautions that women are not immune to the extreme partisanship that has infected Washington, despite the notion that women are reputed to be better at collaboration and risk assessment than men. “At the national level, there’s just less room for collaboration than there used to be,” Swers says.

Even so, women in the Senate have tried to make the most of their low numbers. It was former Senator Barbara Mikulski (D–Md.) who set out to boost women’s collective power with routine bipartisan dinners. Credit where credit is due, notes Sen. Murray: “Because we took the time separate from legislative action to know where people come from…then when those impasses are reached, it’s much more likely that someone will reach out and ask, ‘How can we solve this?’ ”

There’s evidence, too, that women in office use their voice to different effect than men. In a 2010 University of Minnesota study, researchers found that women in the House of Representatives give more floor speeches. (How else to be heard in public?) And female politicians tend to emphasize issues that matter more to women and families (never mind that most families include men too): A deep dive into 2018 congressional transcripts found that female representatives spent more than twice as much time on health care in their speeches as male legislators did. Those efforts could have a greater impact, in part, because of the “Jill Robinson effect.” Two political scientists coined the term in 2011, positing that because bias makes it harder for women to get elected, those who do persevere are more adept lawmakers. (The phenomenon is named after baseball icon Jackie Robinson, the first African American to play Major League Baseball.) To wit: The research found that congresswomen claim up to 9 percent more in flexible dollars for their districts than congressmen do. Want to better fund education or health care in your area? Elect women.

While business doesn’t do much better than government when it comes to female representation— women make up just 21 percent of corporate board seats in the S&P 1500—active steps have been taken to boost their ranks. California recently passed bills that would require publicly traded companies in that state to have at least one woman on their board by 2020, and more women, depending on a company’s size, by 2022. Europe has had such requirements for a decade. In 2006, for example, Norway established a quota for women on boards. France now has one too; the aim for female representation is 40 percent. The laws were passed in the name of fairness, but they’re also good for business. A 2016 report from global nonprofit Catalyst found that companies with three or more women on their board of directors, no matter the size, outperformed the competition across three crucial metrics: return on equity, return on sales, and return on invested capital. In other words, money, money, money. And research from Miriam Schwartz-Ziv, Ph.D., assistant professor at Michigan State University, has found that members of gender-balanced boards are twice as active (meaning, likely to take initiative) as non-gender- balanced boards.

That math underscores principles that William P. Lauder, executive chairman of the Estée Lauder Companies, says have been baked into the DNA of his family’s business since its inception. In April the company added two more women, Jennifer Hyman, cofounder and CEO of Rent the Runway, and Jennifer Tejada, CEO of PagerDuty, to the board, which means eight of its 17 directors are now women. (For perspective, just three Fortune 500 companies have an equal number of male and female board members.) Lauder chafes at the excuse that there are too few qualified women candidates in the pipeline. Lauder, a member of the 30 Percent Coalition, an initiative to create more diverse corporate boards, maintains women are a “value add” for companies’ boards. Before beginning this latest search, he remembers he was explicit with his current board members: “I said, ‘Here’s what we need—we need expertise in cyber and we need expertise in social and digital.’ On top of that, I said, ‘We need more women directors.’ Those were the criteria: female, with these qualifications.”

Hyman notes that women are responsible for 85 percent of purchases in the U.S., so it just makes sense to empower them in business—who better to know the consumer? She joined Estée Lauder because she trusted her opinion would be valued. “It wasn’t that they hit a number,” she says. “It was that they embraced the diversity of the people who were there across every metric. They say it out loud.”

When Ayanna Pressley became the first black woman ever to serve on the Boston City Council in 2009, she did not feel, from the media and the public at least, the kind of embrace that Hyman describes. What she remembers was the sense that people outside the council believed her success was owed to the idea that voters had wanted to elect a “first.” That narrative, she says, “took away from what I had accomplished.” (After she defeated a 10-term incumbent for the Democratic nomination in September, Pressley is now expected to be elected to Congress in November.) Pressley hoped that chatter would die down in 2013, when Michelle Wu was elected to serve on the council. But both women insist it wasn’t until two more women, Anissa Essaibi George and Andrea Joy Campbell, joined in 2015 (and pushed the 13-person council over the 30 percent mark) that their gender started to matter less.

PHOTO: KEITH BEDFORD/THE BOSTON GLOBE VIA GETTY IMAGES

Ayanna Pressley (second from right), Michelle Wu (second from left), and the women of the Boston City Council.

“There had been a lot of pressure on us to represent this whole spectrum [of womanhood],” Wu says. “Would we line up together? Would we take opposite sides? There was so much examination, solely about our relationship with each other because we are women.” The addition of Essaibi George and Campbell made clear that they serve their own constituencies, not just those who happen to have the same chromosomes. That’s a freedom women in federal government, and Democratic women in particular, lack. When Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D–N.D.) declined to vote for stricter gun restrictions in the wake of the Newtown, Connecticut, shooting, she said in an interview with Time that the backlash from women nationwide surprised her: “A female friend in the Senate said to me, ‘You know, it’s because they feel you represent all women, not just the women of North Dakota.’ ”

Earlier in 2018, as yet another government shutdown over how and whether to protect the Dreamers loomed, Sen. Collins introduced a compromise bill that would have given the young undocumented immigrants legal status over time and fund border security. Her effort came closer than other prospective fixes, but failed in a 54–45 vote. An overwhelming number of female senators voted for her amendment, 18 in all. (Four opposed, and one wasn’t present.) Sen. Shaheen points out that with six more likeminded women, the bill would have passed. Nine or 10 more, and women would have had a critical mass—and votes to spare.

Perhaps the headline would have read: “Women Save the Dreamers.” But a better result? If people had looked at the numbers and seen that more than 60 senators with different points of view found a path forward. That, explains Ellen Pao, the activist who cofounded the nonprofit Project Include after losing a gender discrimination suit against the venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers in 2015, is the real purpose of a critical mass. The more women in power, the less gender has to be discussed. “People need to focus on full representation for all people,” Pao says. “Not just on gender, but on race, sexual orientation, age, and socioeconomic background. We have to keep that goal in mind and realize that 30 percent is nothing, or at least it’s not enough. A threshold is not a destination.”

Mattie Kahn is a senior editor at Glamour.
Lede photo by OLIVER CONTRERAS-POOL/GETTY IMAGES



Source link

Categories
Health

We've Seen Pictures of Undocumented Boys in Government Facilities. Where Are the Girls?


A two-story house sits on a quiet residential street in San Diego County.

A bottle of light brown nail polish bakes in the sun beside the mailbox, with the words Color Craze printed in a fun, swirly font. Four small cartons of unopened Suncup juices—orange, grape, and apple—also lie in the dirt.

Nine signs alert passersby to stay away with messages like “Warning: Security Cameras In Use” and “No Trespassing.” It’s July 4, just before 4:00 in the afternoon, and two white minivans pull into the driveway and drop off at least six girls, who appear to range in age from 7 to 14, all wearing red shirts. The vans park in front of a side door and the girls quickly stream into the house.

“¡Gracias!” one calls to a chaperone, who declines to comment except to confirm that she had taken the girls on a field trip to celebrate Independence Day. She refers questions to Southwest Key, the same nonprofit that runs the Walmart turned migrant detention facility in Brownsville, Texas, for about 1,500 boys.

I couldn’t help wondering what the girls were told about the holiday, commemorating our country’s adoption of the Declaration of Independence stating that “all men are created equal.” As the Trump administration seeks to deter Central Americans from coming to the U.S. with his immigration crackdown, I’m curious to hear the girls’ thoughts about the holiday and how it felt to celebrate the day with a field trip.

But I can’t ask them any questions.

Inside that two-story house, where the white vans are parked, are the girls—among the ones the nation has been wondering about since the hashtag #WhereAreTheGirls spread across social media. As the Trump administration scrambles to comply with a court order to reunite nearly 3,000 migrant children with their parents by the end of the month, officials have kept the whereabouts of female migrant children shrouded in mystery, allowing journalists to view only the boys’ facilities.

When asked about the location of the girls at a press conference, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said simply, “I don’t know.” She then added that she knew they were in the custody of the Department of Health and Human Services, to whom Homeland Security transfers most children within 72 hours.

This beige-colored house stands in stark contrast to some of the tent cities and cages where Central American children are kept in Texas. Yellow butterflies flit along a slope of sea figs leading up to the driveway. Mourning doves coo in the trees. A Zillow listing for the five-bedroom, three-bathroom house estimates the value of the property at nearly $900,000. Since 2006, the facility has been operated by Southwest Key. Critics have noted that the nonprofit has made $458 million in profit from detaining children.

Southwest Key declined to comment on the girls’ shelter or to let me inside. I found the house by cross-referencing publicly available documents and interviewing Southwest Key employees who spoke on condition of anonymity. Before it housed migrant children, the site was a group home for abused or neglected boys.

How many of the girls who are staying here were separated from their parents? Southwest Key has said that about 10 percent of the children at its 27 facilities in Arizona, California, and Texas fit that profile. The rest arrived at the border alone, classified as “unaccompanied.” Children who arrived with their parents but were separated from them at the border are now considered to fall under the same umbrella.

The Department of Health and Human Services has attributed its secrecy regarding its facilities for migrant minors to a need to “safeguard the privacy” of the children in its custody. But the girls’ three-level backyard—with lounge furniture, a swing set, a slide, and a basketball court—is clearly visible from the backyard of several neighbors. Both male and female residents of the neighborhood said they could see the girls playing games and doing exercises in the backyard.

Does this make the girls uncomfortable? Or are they just glad to have a view of the neighborhood, and of the sky? I don’t know. I can’t ask them.

Several neighbors have “No Parking” signs in front of their homes. Hollis Barber, 82, said he placed a “Tow-Away Zone” sign on his chain link fence because Border Patrol and unmarked vehicles visiting the girls often fill up the street and block his driveway.

“They take the girls somewhere, somewhere in the mornings,” he said. “And they come back in the evenings.”

Any of the girls who were separated from their parents must be reunited with them by the end of July. They will either need to be released or placed in family detention centers. If the latter option unfolds, they could be facing a downgrade in their living conditions. The Trump administration is planning to house families together in camps on military bases—a far cry from this large house.

I imagine that for a girl who misses her parents, such a downgrade might not be a downgrade at all. Perhaps the hardest part of all of this is being apart from mom and dad.

But I don’t know. I can’t speak to any of the girls.

Jean Guerrero is the Fronteras reporter for KPBS and the author of Crux: A Cross-Border Memoir.



Source link

Categories
Health

Donald Trump Once Said Government Shutdowns Are the Result of Incompetent Presidents


A government shutdown is officially upon us, and while Republicans and Democrats are busy exchanging aisle-crossing death stares as they negotiate the budget, the American public has been graced with a five-year-old, gloriously ironic Fox News clip of now-president Donald J. Trump offering sage advice on how a president should act when faced with looming federal paralysis.

While appearing on Fox’s On The Record in October 2013, the Apprentice host crowed his thoughts to anchor Greta Van Susteren on how to bypass a government freeze—condemning then-president Barack Obama for his inability to do so and reminding the country that the art of the deal when it comes to shutdowns on Capital Hill is simply that “you have to be a leader.”

“You have to get everybody in a room. The president has to lead,” Trump told former Fox News Host Greta Van Susteren during the on-air interview. “You have to be nice and be angry and be wild and conjole and do all sorts of things, but you have to get a deal. And, unfortunately, [Obama] has never been a dealmaker. That wasn’t his expertise before he went into politics and it’s obviously not his expertise now.”

Right.

As a reminder: The catalyst behind the current standstill in Washington stems from an inability of both sides of the aisle to agree on pending budget plans, and Trump’s inability to, well, “conjole,” as they say.

Democrats will pass the proposed budget plan only if it includes funding for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients (the federal program allowing immigrants who’ve come to the U.S. illegally as children to remain, study and work without fear of deportation). But Trump’s not having it; so herein lies the rub.

Naturally, the recirculation of this Fox News clip has given rise to burns like this:

On Twitter, the shutdown in Washington has been informally renamed as “Trump’s Shutdown,” with the hashtag “#TrumpShutdown” becoming the top-trending hashtag worldwide. Take a look:

During the conclusion of his Fox News interview, Trump says, regarding Obama’s alleged presidential incompetence at the time: “Unfortunately, this country is not moving in the right direction. It all starts with competence. You need great competence.”

Words to live by!

Watch the entire clip, below:

MORE: What the Government Shutdown Actually Means for You





Source link

Categories
Health

Government Shutdown: What Is It and Will It Affect You?


You may have heard a thing or two about the potential for a “government shutdown” but aren’t exactly sure what it means—for the world, for the nation, for you. In a nutshell, it means that all non-essential government employees will no longer be working if the clock strikes midnight tonight and the Democrats and Republicans haven’t come to an agreement on a budget deal. It sounds like a Capitol Hill Problem, yes, but if it goes into effect, it could potentially screw things up for a lot of people who plan to travel, receive health care, or want to file taxes early. Keep reading to learn what’ll happen, and who will be affected most if the government really does shut down.

Why are Democrats and Republicans arguing?

Both parties would like to see the government stay open, but they want it to happen on their terms. Democrats are happy to pass a budget, so long as it includes funding for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients, the extremely popular program that has allowed immigrants brought to the United States illegally as children to stay, study and work without the fear of deportation. In fact, Democrats were even willing to pass a budget that included funding for both DACA and President Donald Trump’s border wall, but alas, Trump said he didn’t like the plan.

Some Republicans are also upset at the idea of passing another short-term funding solution as they believe it will hurt the military.

“My Democratic colleagues’ demand on illegal immigration at the behest of their far-left base have crowded out all other important business,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters. “I think the American people clearly would not expect us to act this way.”

However, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer disagreed saying, “The leader is looking to deflect blame. But it just won’t work. We all know what the problem is. It’s complete disarray on the Republican side.”

Has a government shutdown happened before?

Yes, many times. The last shutdown happened in 2013 under President Barack Obama and lasted for 16 days.

What will happen if the government shuts down?

All non-essential government personnel will be put on furlough, meaning they will not be paid, but not be fired either. These people include national park, national museum and national zoo staff members, people who issue passports, and those who issue small business loans, according to CNN. So, if you need an emergency passport, already have a trip planned to a national park, or are looking for assistance for your business, you may simply need to wait out the shutdown.

In a more dire situation, the National Institute of Health could be greatly impacted by a shutdown. In 2013, the shutdown meant that “Hundreds of patients were prevented from enrolling in clinical trials,” according to an impact analysis by the Obama administration. This time, it could hinder the agency’s ability to get news and information out about this year’s deadly flu season.

The 2013 shutdown also caused almost $4 billion in tax refunds to be delayed, which could happen again now, and both the Food and Drug Administration to the Environmental Protection Agency had to cancel health and safety inspections. So, maybe don’t eat at any new restaurants if the government shuts down.

For reference, during the 2013 shutdown, an estimated 850,000 people were put on furlough per day. They were, however, paid back once the shutdown ended.

Who will keep working?

Despite what Trump tweets, members of the military are still considered “essential” staff so they will not be put on leave. Civilian members of the military, however, will be sent home. The U.S. Postal Service will also continue to operate, so don’t worry, you’ll still get your mail. Oh, and in an ironic twist, while other civil servants won’t be paid during the shutdown, members of Congress will, as they wrote it into law.

How much could this cost America?

According to PBS, during the last shutdown the United States economy lost a staggering $24 billion. Moreover, 120,000 private sector jobs were lost during that time as well.

How long could this shut down last if it happens?

That is really anyone’s guess. It’s up to how quickly Republicans, Democrats and the president himself can come to an agreement.

Related Content:
Want to Get More Women Elected? According to a New Study, This Is How You Can Help
Here’s Exactly What You Can Do When You Don’t Like What Congress Is Up To
What is DACA? Here Are 5 Key Things to Know About the Immigration Program Trump Is Ending





Source link