State of economic decline

The projections are not exactly good for the next year — with the economy is likely to continue its downward spiral. As Rutgers professors James W. Hughes and Joseph J. Seneca point out, “2009 will be a difficult and dangerous year for New Jersey, reflecting the old adage that economic wild parties are often followed by prolonged economic hangovers.”

“The driving forces now affecting New Jersey,” Hughes and Seneca say, “are very powerful negative global and national economic tides.”

It will be very difficult for state government policies to substantially deflect them. Only massive federal intervention can stabilize the situation.

The chances of turning things around, however, appear out of the state’s hands, which could mean that this year’s gubernatorial election may turn on issues that neither Gov. Jon Corzine or state legislators of both parties have much control over.

A hand up and a hand out are needed

Though more and more people are struggling in this failing economy — the Crisis Ministry of Princeton and Trenton, for instance, reports that it served 1,400 families in October — there is a core group that had been struggling even when we were experiencing what Wall Street had been painting as good times.

Consider these figures from the Mercer Alliance to End Homelessness:

  • On any given day in Mercer County, over 1200 people experience homelessness. (Homeless Resource Advisory Council, HRAC, COC 2008
  • Homeless survey snapshots from February 2002 through August 2004 by HRAC show 3 relatively consistent numbers of sheltered homeless in Mercer County: See links to recent surveys. (2003 Survey) (2004 Survey)
  • Over the course of a year, more than 3,000 men, women, and children in Mercer County receive services in the homeless system. (Mercer County Homeless Resources Advisory Council (HRAC)
  • Approximately 20% of homeless children do not attend school regularly. (National Center on Family Homelessness)
  • Homeless children are 3 times more likely than other children to have emotional of behavioral problems. (National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty)
  • Homeless children are twice as likely to experience hunger than non-homeless children. (National Center on Family Homelessness)

That’s why a concerted effort to battle homelessness is needed, including income supports and expanded support services, an aggressive effort to build more affordable housing and universal, single-payer healthcare that takes medical bills out of the equation as one of the leading causes of bankruptcy and homelessness.

In the short term, however, legislation that recently passed the state Assembly — A3101 — and awaits a Senate vote could help. The legislation, called the “County Homelessness Trust Fund Act,” would allow the state’s 21 counties to create to

impose a surcharge of $3 on each document recorded with a county, for deposit into a county homelessness trust fund, five per cent of which may be used annually for administrative costs related to the administration of the fund, and the remainder of the monies in the fund may be used solely for the operation of a homelessness housing grant program established in order to provide:

  • for the acquisition,construction, or rehabilitation of housing projects, or units within housing projects, that supply permanent affordable housing for homeless persons or families, including those at risk of homelessness;
  • rental assistance vouchers, including tenant and project based subsidies, for affordable housing projects or units within housing projects that provide permanent affordable housing for homeless persons or families, including those at risk of homelessness;
  • supportive services as may be required by homeless individuals or families in order to obtain or maintain, or both, permanent affordable housing;
    and
  • prevention services for at risk homeless individuals or families so that they can obtain and maintain permanent affordable housing.

Grants awarded by the governing body of the county shall be used to support projects that:

  • measurably reduce homelessness;
  • demonstrate government cost savings over time;
  • employ evidence-based models;
  • can be replicated in other counties;
  • include an outcome measurement component;
  • are consistent with the local homelessness housing plan; or
  • fund the acquisition, construction, or rehabilitation of projects that will serve homeless individuals or families for a period of at least 30 years or equal to the longest term of affordability required by other funding sources.

The trust funds, according to the NJ Advocacy Network to End Homelessness, would “leverage … scarce funding” and “help thousands of families and individuals in New Jersey move into permanent housing.”

States across the country have helped localities dramatically reduce their homeless populations by enabling them to fund the implementation of local plans to end homelessness through local Trust Funds. In these states, this has resulted in a reduction of costs to the public sector and community. A recent example is the King County Homeless Housing and Services Fund, created when the Washington State
Legislature passed the Homeless Housing and Assistance Act of 2005 (ESSHB 2163) establishing an additional $10 document recording fee dedicated to funding homeless initiatives. This year this assisted more than 200 low-income, homeless individuals and their families will be able to move into stable housing where they can receive the supportive services they need to maintain that housing. The goal of the legislation in
Washington State was to reduce homelessness by 50% in ten years.

The same results can and will happen in New Jersey.

The Senate Community and Urban Affairs Committee endorsed the legislation by a 4-0 vote, with one abstention. It now awaits a vote of the full Senate, where it is likely to pass.

In the meantime, do what you can to help out groups like the Crisis Ministry, the Mercer Alliance, Coming Home in Middlesex County and all of the other groups working to aid those in the direst of need.

Tenants have rights — even when landlords face foreclosure

This would seem to be common fairness — but then, there are no guarantees that landlords will be fair. So the state public advocate has to remind landlords that they can’t kick their tenants to the curb when they go into foreclosure.

As foreclosures continue to rise across New Jersey, Public Advocate Ronald K. Chen and Banking and Insurance Commissioner Steven M. Goldman said today landlords and others who force tenants out without a legal eviction order face both civil and criminal charges. Likewise, they said, lawyers and real estate agents who try to force tenants out could lose their licenses and face fines.

“We have had reports that tenants are being informed by real estate agents, attorneys, and others acting on behalf of a lender that they must move because their building has been foreclosed upon,” Chen said. “We have already reached out to several of these organizations and individuals to put them on notice that their actions are illegal.”

Of the 50,000 foreclosures anticipated in New Jersey this year, between 20,000 to 23,000 tenants are affected, said Matt Shapiro, executive director of the New Jersey Tenants Organization.

Chen and Goldman are fighting back by targeting letters from landlords, real estate firms and lawyers telling tenants they must vacate their apartments because of a foreclosure or offering “cash for keys.”

Tenants should not be intimidated. And if they feel they are being intimidated they should call the New Jersey Tenants Organization.

Auto bailout plan as anti-union cudgel

We have an auto bailout. The broad outlines:

The plan pumps $13.4 billion by mid-January into the companies from the fund that Congress authorized to rescue the financial industry. But the two companies have until March 31 to produce a plan for long-term profitability, including concessions from unions, creditors, suppliers and dealers.

The bailout plan sets “targets” rather than concrete requirements about what those concessions may be, meaning that Mr. Obama and his advisers have enormous latitude to decide how to define long-term viability.

It includes, of course, a little gift from the anti-labor Bush administration to the UAW:

Already, Ron Gettelfinger, the president of the United Automobile Workers union, said he was “pleased” that the administration acted on the loan requests, but said the President added “unfair conditions” that singled out blue-collar workers.

Mr. Gettelfinger said the union expects to appeal to Mr. Obama to alter the expectations for wage and benefit cuts. According to Treasury Department officials who drafted the wording, Mr. Obama would be free to change the requirements and loosen the standards, especially on how much workers will have to give up.

Empty Wheel offers this:

The President of the United States just dictated that American corporations pay their employees significantly less than the employees of foreign owned manufacturers. And/or, he dictated that American corporations pick the pocket of their senior retirees.

The union wage target, Empty Wheel adds, is part of an effort to break the union and require that “employees of American-owned companies make significantly less than the employees of Japanese-owned companies.”

Bush is demanding is that the UAW lower wages plus pensions to the level of Japanese wages plus pension (though since they have very few retirees, their pension number is basically zero). Alternately, they could lower this number by basically picking the pocket of a bunch of seniors, by taking away pension money those seniors already earned while they were still working. But one or the other will have to happen.

“In other words,” dday at Hullabaloo writes, the plan creates a race to the bottom because

the UAW must take wages and work rules that are the same as non-union plants, and since “wages” include benefits and legacy costs, and the Big 3 have quite a bit more of those than their Japanese counterparts, this would depress wages FAR BELOW non-union plants.

It’s a pretty bald move by an outgoing president who had told Congress that he had supported its earlier bailout plan, which did not include the union clause.

On small ‘d’ democracy

http://www.liveleak.com/e/096_1222744802
Consider recent events:

The list could go on.

Are we witnessing a new populist movement, one growing from anger over the growing wealth disparities in this country? With the economy teetering at the edge of an abyss and the likelihood that the downturn we are in will get worse long before it gets better, it is important that American workers — and by that I mean not just blue-collar folks, but middle managers and everyone who puts in their 40-plus and gets a paycheck — make their voices heard.

That’s essentially what Emma Coleman Jordan (pictured, at right) — editor of the soon-to-be published book, The Short End of the Stick, and a professor of commercial law and economic justice at Georgetown University — told Bill Moyers this week. I was listening to Bill Moyers’ Journal this morning on a podcast — I rarely have time to watch it live — and was struck by something she said to close their discussion. The economy, she said, is fragile, especially with the auto industry on its final legs (or wheels, I guess). If the industry fails — “is allowed to fail,” she said — “it would create a death spiral of consequences that are so interlinked that we can’t properly calculate what the full impact would be.”

That, she said, will result in despair — a despair, however, that “is going to be dissipated by action by citizens, like those people who went into the plant – Republic Windows and Doors in Chicago.”

People have got to stand up. They’ve got to demand accountability. And I believe frankly that this past election was the beginning of a process of standing up by citizens who were tired of being disappointed in what they were told about the reasons for going to war, who were tired of getting stagnant wages when the highest paid people in our economy were getting windfall compensation packages for failure. And they decided that… enough. They wanted a different way of political leadership.
And I believe that this era of accountability is not over. And our new president-elect will see from this nearly energized democratic, small “d,” Republicans and Democrats and Independents, all insisting on his accountability. So he’s unleashed a set of energies in the country that will hold him accountable as well.

Energy — that would be refreshing.

I’ve been watching and following politics for much of my adult life and energy has not been the hallmark of our times. Rather, we have been dealing with a level of complacency and self-centered ignorance that has resulted in tremendous damage being done to the public sector. It is not just eight years of George W. Bush that have left us in these straits. It has been a decades-long effort that goes back to Jimmy Carter and has continued unabated.

Liberals who have come to romanticize the Clinton years do themselves — and workers — a disservice when they call for a return to the 1990s. The Clinton years slowed the acceleration of this movement, but did not stop it. Rather, with its support of Nafta and various banking and telecom “reforms,” it helped lay the groundwork for the damage that Bush has wrought.

The incoming Obama administration has an opportunity to reverse this movement — but it will require a vigilant citizenry applying pressure to keep him moving in the right direction. As I’ve written before, Obama appears to have solid progressive instincts that are at war with his more moderate and pragmatic self. The pragmatists — some of the old Clinton hands around him — cannot be allowed to dominate. It is up to us, the people working paycheck to paycheck, to push back against the Rubinites.