The Obama family visits Dr. King's memorial (White House Photo by Chuck Kennedy)
In 1982, President Reagan signed the law that established a federal holiday to honor Martin Luther King Jr. Because Dr. King's birthday was in January, the authors of the bill thought it made sense for his holiday to be in January as well.
Almost 25 years later, it's time to ask if they got this right. Because schools are closed on Martin Luther King Day, most children likely see his holiday as a break from the classroom rather than an opportunity to learn about Dr. King. Those adults who have a day of paid vacation are likewise not likely to spend it honoring the civil rights leader. What seemed like a fitting tribute to this great American when it was first proposed now seems sorely inadequate.
Without Dr. King, there's no telling when (or if) Congress would have passed either the Civil Rights Act or the Voting Rights Act. Because of these historic laws, the widespread discrimination that was being practiced throughout much of the country was prohibited, and the voting rights of African-Americans and others were finally protected. It is hard to overstate the effect of Dr. King's efforts. In Mississippi-- just to take one example-- voter turnout among African-Americans increased from six percent in 1964 to almost 60 percent by the end of that decade. Throughout the nation, the work of Dr. King and countless others within the civil rights movement helped advance legal and political equality for millions.
Dr. King's heroism helped accomplish a great deal, but his work is far from finished. Since the 1960s, voter turnout is down significantly, especially in non-presidential election years. In the 1966 midterm elections, 48.7 percent of the voting-eligible population cast ballots. In 2014, just 35.9 percent did. While many creative ideas for increasing voter turnout are offered every election season, making it easier for people to get to the polls would be an important step in the right direction.
By moving Martin Luther King Day to election day, we would finally make election day a federal holiday and instantly give millions of Americans more time to vote. The cost of making this switch would be modest, since it would simply involve moving an existing federal holiday, not creating a new one.
It's hard to imagine that Dr. King or his family would be against such a plan. More people would be able to participate in the democratic process, and every person stepping into the voting booth on election day would be honoring his legacy. King would get the holiday he deserves.
***
by John Martin, Republican District Leader, 81st Assembly District.
Mayor de Blasio at his recent minimum wage announcement (photo: Michael Appleton)
Early this month, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced a guaranteed $15 minimum wage for all city government employees by the end of 2018. This is a big win for over 50,000 workers across the city struggling to provide for their families.
Unlike in Seattle and Los Angeles, where city officials are empowered to raise the minimum wage for the entire workforce in their cities, Mayor de Blasio is unable to unilaterally raise wages for all New York City workers. That power lies with Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the state legislature. The governor's efforts to lift the minimum wage to $15 are being hampered by a Republican-controlled state Senate.
De Blasio's decision to raise wages for city employees is a crucial independent step towards a more equitable city - and should be seen as an inspiration for cities around the nation. It also reflects the power and momentum of a groundbreaking worker-led countrywide movement demanding higher wages.
Even as state and federal administrations drag their feet on the inevitable question of a decent minimum wage for working families in the United States, de Blasio's gutsy move shows cities can and should take matters into their own hands.
The mayor's minimum wage raise closely follows his announcement last month giving six weeks paid parental leave, and up to 12 weeks when combined with existing leave, to the city's 20,000 non-unionized employees. The mayor has now moved to negotiate the same benefits with municipal unions. Again, New York City private sector workers must look to Albany or Washington, D.C. to move on paid family leave for all.
Mayor de Blasio's recent actions support his goal of lifting 800,000 New Yorkers out of poverty over ten years. More than 20 percent of the city's population lives in poverty, a huge swath of a city commonly associated with extraordinary wealth.
The last couple of years have seen unparalleled momentum from workers themselves - from New York City to Los Angeles and Chicago - calling for livable wages, resulting in minimum wage raises for fast food workers and other groups.
Workers are not waiting patiently on government officials – they are organizing in an unprecedented way. Progressive mayors like de Blasio are responding with sound policy, while less responsive officials are being put on notice. Cities like Los Angeles, New York City, and Chicago are paving the way, showing that it is possible to act independently of state and federal governments.
In addition, laws raising the minimum wage to more than the pitiful federal standard of $7.25 an hour have passed in a number of states. There are now campaigns to raise the floor and standards for workers being led in 14 states and four cities. This momentum is building into a crescendo that will have deep implications for the 2016 presidential election.
Nearly half of our country's workers earn less than $15 an hour and 43 million are forced to work or place their jobs at risk when sick or faced with a critical care-giving need. Now is the time for cities to listen to their workers and override state and federal passivity to allow millions of hard-working Americans to provide for their families.
***
JoEllen Chernow is minimum wage and paid sick days campaign director at Center for Popular Democracy. On Twitter @popdemoc.
Mayor de Blasio with the city's mental health plan (photo: Mike Appleton)
Recently there has been a great deal of interest in young adult supportive housing without time limits or age caps. We may be witnessing the beginning stages of a paradigm shift in which there is acknowledgement of developmental variations among youth. Both Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and United States Interagency Council on Housing (USICH) consider this as a potentially more effective approach to ending youth homelessness.
Traditionally, housing for youth has been transitional. Even when 'permanent supportive housing' is used, most programs involve length of stay limits (usually 18-24 months), and age caps meant to define true adulthood and capability to live independently without support services.
Transitional programs generally have fairly regimented guidelines with the expectation that "graduation" from the program will enable each youth to move into their own apartment and achieve self-sufficiency. However, many of these youths move in with family or friends "temporarily" or are admitted to another time-limited housing program based on their need of continued services. A large number of these youths/young adults are dealing with past trauma and may have special needs such as mental health and substance abuse issues making it difficult, if not impossible, to live independently.
At West End we believe non-time-limited affordable housing with support services onsite is another effective solution in the spectrum of services for homeless and formerly homeless youth. Our "True Colors" supportive housing programs for formerly homeless LGBT youth are new and innovative examples of this model.
Each residence consists of 30 studio apartments, community space, computer lab/resource library, and laundry facilities. West End staffs each with a program director, clinical case manager, and life skills training manager, along with 24-hour security and a live-in building superintendent.
While tenants must be 18-24 years old upon move-in, they may stay as long as they need or choose providing they comply with their rental lease agreement and basic house rules. Our service delivery involves trauma informed care and harm reduction techniques.
We chose this supportive housing model because we believe the development of independent living skills is an organic process unique to each individual and that arbitrary age and programmatic time frames do not define actual needs or abilities, especially for those who are severely traumatized by homelessness, family rejection, and loss of support.
The success of our residents speaks to the quality and appropriateness of the model. Of the original tenants at the True Colors Residence, which opened four years ago, well over half have moved on to fully independent affordable housing while others still in need of our services remain supportive housing tenants. Equally impressive is the noted decrease in substance abuse, down from 60% to 30%, as well as the reduction of unemployment from 40% to 20%.
The provision of supportive housing without time limits is an effective way to end homelessness for young adults - for more information the USICH webinar on the subject is a great resource. We are pleased by both the Mayor's and the Governor's commitment to increase the supply of supportive housing units and look forward to working with the City and State to provide housing and services for LGBT young adults in need.
***
Colleen Jackson is Chief Executive Officer of West End Residences HDFC, Inc. On Twitter @WestEndResNYC.