You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Murphy Institute’ category.
To all of the veterans, active troops, and military families in the SPS community, we thank you! Returning home and making higher education a goal is not always easy. We asked alum Armando Vega, and current student Enrique Diaz to share some of their thoughts on being student veterans.
1. What branch of the United States Military did you serve, and for how many years were you enlisted?
I was in the U.S. Navy, and I served honorably for 4 years (1994 – 1998).
2. What CUNY SPS program did you receive a degree in, when, and how has that changed your life?
I earned an MA in Labor Studies. My desire is to work in Human Resources and the Labor Relations department. My dream is to one day become the HR manager and or director of a reputable corporation.
3. Were your experiences as a student affected by also being a veteran?
Not really because I returned to school much later in life, and my classmates where older working class adults. I try to keep my veteran status private for the most part.
4. What does Veterans Day mean to you?
Veterans Day is close to being the most important day of the year next to July 4th. It is a day of remembrance for the sacrifices made by the many brave men and women that has enabled this great nation to remain free from tyranny.
5. What advice do you have for newly returning veterans?
To be resilient, and realize that the civilian world is not very kind to returning veterans, and that finding employment is very difficult right now. Keep the faith and seek help from the Veterans Administration.
Any additional thoughts?
For me to attend CUNY and earn my Masters degree was a worthwhile accomplishment, and hopefully I can use it to advance in my career.
1. What branch of the United States Military did you serve, and for how many years were you enlisted?
I served 6 years as a Religious Program Specialist (RP) with the United States Navy and 4 years as an 0111 (Administrative Specialist) with the United States Marine Corps.
2. What CUNY SPS program did you receive a degree in, when, and how has that changed your life?
Currently enrolled in the Public Administration Certificate Program, once completed, June 2013, I plan on transferring to Brooklyn College for a bachelor’s degree in Political Science. Once I have earned my degree in Political Science, I hope to use it to advance my career within City government.
3. Were your experiences as a student affected by also being a veteran?
My yearning for learning was nurtured while I was on active duty. As a veteran, I now have more time to pursue my desire to learn.
4. What does Veterans Day mean to you?
It’s a day of reflection. I think back to my time served, my friends and family who have served and those who have made the ultimate sacrifice so that I could live in a land where the only one holding me back is myself. All the opportunities are there for the taking.
5. What advice do you have for newly returning veterans?
Take advantage of any programs available to you. Use your GI Bill to further your education and make yourself more marketable. As sad as it is to say, being a veteran is simply not enough anymore to obtain a good paying job to sustain yourself and your family.
All across the country, states are facing budget crises and are looking to fix the situation. However, the focus of many of the “fixes” is to attack public sector unions and erode labor rights in general. The justification is that public sector workers supposedly have inflated benefit packages, and they must finally “pay their fair share.” In reality, this is hogwash. It is nothing more than an excuse to bust unions, rollback social safety nets, all while giving tax cuts to the rich. On the Rachel Maddow Show, Naomi Klein brilliantly describes what is really going on. The recent massive demonstrations in Wisconsin, and the threat of a general strike by some labor leaders, show that this time workers aren’t necessarily going to sit back and take the beating.
Most of the ant-union bills are happening under Republican governors. But working people are under attack, under the pretext of addressing a fiscal crisis, even under the reign Democratic local governments. In Providence, RI, for example, a labor-backed mayor recently handed all of the public school teachers pink slips. This was to prepare for firings and school closings that are said to be imminent and necessary to address the deficit. I just wrote something on the situation.
I propose one “fix” that would both help solve some of these economic woes and be fair. It focuses on going after those who bask in great wealth even during the economic crisis that they caused. We need to raise taxes on corporations and the rich. We need to collect the taxes that they owe and close the loopholes that allow them to shield money from taxes. The reality is that many corporations pay little to no taxes, and the rich pay taxes almost a third lower than they did in the 1950s—a time of great economic growth.
Yes, taxes need to be cut. We need to extend the tax cuts for the bottom 80% of the population–I would even settle for extending them for the bottom 95%. However, the top percentiles’ taxes need to be increased, so here are a few reasons why we should raise (and collect!) taxes on the rich, not cut them.
First, history shows that they can handle it. In the golden age of capitalism–a time where GDP growth rates vastly outpaced those of the last 30 years–the top tax brackets paid taxes as high as 94% of their income. High rates lasted up until as late as the early 1970s, with them paying 70%.
Second, it is good for the economy and the budget. It provides government income that can be used to provided vital services to the working class–like unemployment benefits, subsidized housing and healthcare, increasing the minimum wage, etc.–as well as be a source of funding for infrastructure spending–which we need badly, especially in addressing the ecological crisis. Both of these things stimulate the economy and provide jobs. Providing the social services reducing inequality and decreases the chances of economic meltdown. It also puts more dispensable income in the hands of people who will spend it, increasing demand and stimulating the economy. Infrastructure spending will directly create jobs–that’s an easy one.
Third, tax cuts for the wealthy do not create jobs at the level we need, if any at all. Wealthy people do not put their money into the economy the same way that working class and middle income people do. They are more likely to save it or sit on it to wait for more profitable times in the market. For example, reports came out recently stating that non-financial companies are sitting on over a TRILLION DOLLARS. Yet, they are not hiring people. This is because they don’t have confidence in the market. They don’t think they’ll make the profits the want. Here’s the link to the article.
What we need is a high road, wage-led growth, not low road, profit-led growth. The latter is what we’ve had since the 70s–the neoliberal era. This can be done in the short term by providing adequate fiscal stimulus–much, much, larger than has already been provided–and taxing the wealthy and cutting wasteful spending can pay for it (a few wars come to mind). Also, the government needs to have a more active role in creating jobs through infrastructure spending, etc. Trickle-down economics just doesn’t work.
But here’s the catch. It is going to be difficult to for anything to happen on the federal level in the next two years. We couldn’t get meaningful economic legislation passed under a Democratic majority, never mind under a Republican controlled house. We need to consolidate our forces on the ground and build so we can pressure for change from below now, as well as get some people elected in 2012. This does not, however, suggest extending tax cuts for the wealthy and cutting spending on social programs becomes the only option. That will only exacerbate the crisis even more. We need to buckle down and make sure that they DON”T get extended, that labor rights are not taken away, that teachers don’t get fired, and defend all of the other programs that are good–like social security. Also, there is room for us to wage battles on the state level. If we show our power in the streets, as they have done in Wisconsin, we can make them listen to us. A state-wide or nation-wide general strike certainly would shift some power to our hands.
The first step is to break away from the narrative that says solving the economic crisis “will require shared sacrifice across our community,” to quote Providence, RI’s Mayor Taveras. Working people are always sacrificing. It’s time for those who caused the current crisis—and for those who benefit from the perpetual crisis working people face laboring under an oppressive system like capitalism—to pay. Let’s draw a line in the sand and pick sides. Which side will you choose?
John Cronan Jr is a restaurant worker, organizer, and a masters student at the Murphy Institute for Worker Education and Labor Studies. Currently, he is a volunteer organizer for the Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York (ROC-NY). John is also an avid Boston sports fan.
While the relationship between President Obama‘s administration and labor has at times appeared strained, there have been significant steps made toward fulfilling campaign promises and the broader labor agenda, but there is plenty of unfinished business.
This was the theme of a special breakfast forum, “Labor Under Obama,” on Friday, Jan. 21, at the Murphy Institute, part of the CUNY School of Professional Studies.
The presentation and lively discussion were led by Bill Samuel, director of government affairs at AFL-CIO, and Anne Marie Lofaso, associate professor of law at West Virginia University College of Law.
Samuel’s presentation included an examination of labor’s relationship with the administration and what is likely to happen in the wake of the recent midterm elections, labor’s expectations and demands, and missed opportunities on the part of both labor and the government.
Lofaso offered a retrospective analysis of the government’s performance with regard to labor, how it has fared in terms of protecting worker rights and job security, the key appointments and interventions in the labor market, and legislative actions that have been of particular importance to unionization and to working people.
Lofaso said that although Obama missed many legislative opportunities, he has made excellent executive appointments that help labor. Further, she said, Obama’s less publicized actions show his support for labor.
Samuel praised Obama as the best educated president on labor the country has had, but he also pointed out that among the challenges that the president faces are some immovable objects on Capitol Hill on labor issues, such as the Free Choice Act.
Martin A. Mbugua is the Communications and Marketing Manager at the Murphy Institute, part of the CUNY School of Professional Studies. He is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists and the Northeastern Political Science Association.
The CUNY School of Professional Studies Alumni Association’s inaugural event was held on Wednesday December 15, 2010. It was an intimate gathering of alumni, the Alumni Relations Council members, the deans and SPS staff and faculty. We celebrated the holiday season together with a festive potluck and took the opportunity to get to know bit more about one another and the programs from which we graduated.
There were alumni from all corners of the SPS community: graduates from the Online Communication & Culture and Business BA’s, the Applied Theater MA, various Certificate programs, and the Off Campus College. Some people were surprised that there were alumni from other academic programs at the event, having previously assumed it was an alumni event for their program. This is what is so great about the new SPS Alumni Association: we’re building community from the diverse people coming from disparate parts of SPS.
The dessert table! Assorted cookies, an amazing Flan made by Online BA alum Marco Castro (who is also a professional photographer and photographed the event for the Alumni Association), a beautiful heart cake brought by Off-Campus College alum Lillian Flecha, sugar cookies baked by Online BA alum Sara Morgano (pictured above with Dean Mogulescu), and a spectacular gluten-free rum cake made by me! Rachel Smith, Online BA alum. Recipes are being cooked up to make a book, which will be available soon!
Dean John Mogulescu (pictured standing, left) and Associate Dean Brian Peterson (pictured standing, center) spoke briefly about the Alumni Association, noting that it’s quite exciting that SPS has enough graduates now to actually build an Alumni Association and an ever growing student population to keep it going for years to come. Then Brian Peterson gave us the great news that we’re well on our way to meeting the goal for the Alumni Association’s first fundraiser!
Maggie Keenan-Bolger and Garret Scally (pictured right), alumni of the MA in Applied Theater Program, led our group in a series of “icebreaker” games. When we were planning the event and they volunteered to do the icebreakers I had no idea that they would be so much fun, so engaging and ultimately so wildly successful! As we moved around the room telling our stories, laughing, and discovering that some of us have fallen in love with the same parts of the globe or live down the street from one another, I realized that hours of mingling would never have resulted in the kind of camaraderie Maggie and Garret helped to foster (thanks so much to the both of you and your MA in Applied Theater!).
Bringing everyone together on a chilly December evening was not an easy task but it was well worth the effort. What started out as a tentative group of strangers ended up as a jovial gathering of new friends who discovered they had more in common than they thought.
I’m so looking forward to our next event and I sincerely hope to see you all there!
Rachel Smith is a marketing and design professional in New York City. She graduated from the SPS BA in Communications and Culture in 2009. Currently she is a founding member of the Alumni Relations Council and By Laws Task Force. Rachel loved the BA program which inspired her to work towards fostering community and collaboration among Alumni at SPS.
“There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.” –Warren Buffet
Almost four years to the day after billionaire Warren Buffet candidly spoke those words, a bailout package was agreed upon by the European Union and IMF to give to Ireland[i], at the tune of $89. 4 billion (euro67.5 billion) in loans. It is meant to help the country with its massive banking crisis that has sent the Celtic Tiger crawling back to its cage. The money, however, comes with some conditions.
First, Ireland will have to repay the money at an average 5.8% interest rate, which is higher than the 5.2% Greece agreed to pay out. In other words, it is an astronomically high and unfair rate to enforce. Even with reasonable growth, it would be unaffordable. Speaking of growth, what are the other conditions?
Second, the EU and the IMF will require that Ireland engage in fiscal austerity. With the pretext of reducing the deficit, the government will have to basically cut social spending. This is going to have horrendous effects on the Irish economy, especially affecting the working class. Economist Robin Hahnel said, “This is going to do nothing but aggravate the recessionary pressures within those economies and … increase their rates of unemployment. Production is going to drop further, income will drop and that means tax revenues are going to drop.” But, hey, what really is important is that the private investors and the richer nations, like Germany and the United States, get their money back. Also part of this austerity program involves raising the sales, or value-added, tax to 23 percent, while the government pledges not to raise the already low corporate tax from 12 percent. Political economist Leo Panitch describes this situation of inequality, and how the United States corporations play a role:
And I might point out that the American corporations that have been the largest investors in Ireland in terms of manufacturing investment and exports from Ireland are threatening they’ll pull out unless this 12 percent corporate tax is maintained. So you see the enormous class inequity that’s built into this, the enormous demonstrations that have taken place in Ireland. And they’re not new.
This is where Buffet’s brutally honest words come in. The conditions of this bailout, and the circumstances that created the need for a bailout, amount to nothing less than class warfare; and unless popular forces can resist it, the capitalists and their states who are waging it are going to come out on top, at the expense of the great majority of the population.
It is here that the Irish people have a chance to shine, and they have already been getting the ball rolling. On November 3rd, tens of thousands of students from all over Ireland flooded the streets of Dublin to protest the proposed increase of registration fees, even resulting in an occupation of the Department of Finance. On November 27th, over a 100,000 people came out on the streets of Dublin to protest the austerity measures. It was organized by the mainstream, moderate trade union leaders, but they did so knowing that they had to—the people were angry. Moreover, leftwing forces showed a strong showing, pointing out that more radical action is required if the Irish people are to weather the storm. Furthermore, the Irish people can shine if they are able to mobilize even greater numbers of people, and create a situation where their voices are not only heard but action in their favor is taken.
To do this, they need a plan of action and an alternative. Given the likely effects on the economy due to austerity, described above, Ireland’s best bet, according to economist Dean Baker, is to learn from Argentina and default on its debt and break from the euro. He says,
Ireland should study the lessons of Argentina. Breaking from the euro would have consequences, but it is getting increasingly likely that the pain from the break is less than the pain of staying in…What the people of Ireland and every country must realize is that if they agree to play by the bankers’ rules, they will lose.
Then, Ireland should nationalize its banking system and turn it into a public utility under the democratic control of the populace. This does not mean merely putting public money into banks while demanding no executive powers. Panitch, discussing such a proposal for all countries, says, “I mean taking the banks properly into public ownership and changing the function of the banks, as Mitterrand did not do in France in the 1980s, so that the criteria on which they invest are redefined as social purposes, to be democratically determined.”
The people of Ireland are at a crossroads. They can accept austerity and watch their economic situation deteriorate; or they can take bold action and do what is necessary to limit the long-term suffering of the majority, as well as protect against further crises. They have the opportunity to set an example for the countries that are next on the austerity hit list—notably Spain and Portugal—and for the people in the richer countries, like the United States, as well. They can show us that when Warren Buffet’s class, the rich, capitalist class, wages war on the working class, there will be resistance, and we do have an alternative.[ii] Will they be able to exclaim with confidence, “We won’t pay! We will win!”?
[i] For the sake of this blog, I will use the term “Ireland” to describe the 26 counties that compromise the south of Ireland but are referred to as the “Republic of Ireland.” The true Republic of Ireland also consists of the 6 counties of Northern Ireland that are still under colonial British rule. Many of the progressive forces fighting austerity also seek a united 32 County Ireland, myself included.
[ii] This is a link to an article I wrote on an alternative economic system to capitalism, called participatory economics.
John Cronan Jr is a restaurant worker, organizer, and a masters student at the Murphy Institute for Worker Education and Labor Studies. Currently, he is a volunteer organizer for the Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York (ROC-NY). John is also an avid Boston sports fan.
Today is Election Day, and we could quite possibly see many changes in Congress and in governships. It’s just not the kind of change that President Obama and his supporters were hoping for. See, the Democrats are on track to lose seats in both the House and the Senate, with a very good chance of losing control of one or both of them. The writing has been on the wall for months, as unemployment continues to remain high and foreclosures hit record numbers. This has made people angry, very angry, and they are targeting their anger at the party in power—the Democrats.
The most visible, and I stress visible, example of citizen outrage has been the Tea Party. Some have argued that their size and strength are not as massive as the media has made it out to be. Regardless, their message has received immense media coverage. Tea Party supporters not only call for a reduction in government spending and tower taxes but also accuse the President of being a socialist. The latter, and of course the former, are most vocally expressed by Fox News personalities like Bill O’Reilly and Glen Beck.
The first casualty of voter backlash happened in January, in Massachusetts, when Republican Scott Brown, in a special election, won the vacant U.S. Senate seat formerly held by Ted Kennedy—a hero among liberal Democrats. Brown campaigned on a platform that railed against the healthcare bill and decried the woes of government spending. Now enter organized labor.
The very next day, the president of the AFL-CIO, Rich Trumka, released a video discussing the results in Massachusetts. He rightfully pointed out that pundits in the corporate media were going to attribute the outcome to voters punishing the Democrats for overreaching in policy-making, when the opposite is true. For example, on issues like healthcare, many Americans feel that the bill did not go far enough! Trumka stressed that working people feel like Wall Street and the bankers are being taken care of but working people are not. He said that Scott Brown’s victory should be a wake-up call to both Democrats and Labor. It signaled that people want action and not excuses. It was an excellent address. However, what kind of action would Labor take as part of their wake-up call?
Well, even before the Brown victory, Trumka threatened to cut support for Democrats who didn’t push for a more comprehensive healthcare bill and who didn’t back the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Specifically concerning healthcare, Trumka issued a threat:
Well, we need to send them a special message: it’s that you may have forgotten what the labor movement did to get you elected; but, by God, we never will! And if you stab us in the back on health care this year don’t you dare ask us for our support next year!
Fast forward to the present. What has happened? Healthcare passed without a public option, EFCA is not even being talked about, and the government is not taking adequate measures to spur job creation—like something along the lines of a public works project of some sort. Then, don’t forget that we have two wars going on and something called climate change. Oh, boy! Watch out! Labor must be planning to run more progressive candidates against Democratic incumbents who did not follow through, right? Wrong.
Instead, all of the blame is being put only on Republicans and Fox News. Labor is scrambling, at the tune of millions of dollars, to get the very same Democrats who should be on the chopping block re-elected. Is it just me, or is there something wrong with this situation? Didn’t these people betray us?
I am in no way advocating that Labor throw their support behind the Republicans as a way to smite the Democrats. I am saying that if Labor truly wants to fight on behalf of working-class people, it needs to be able to flex its muscle and make good on its promises (and threats). Otherwise, our elected officials have no reason to listen to us. As Trumka, himself, noted, Americans truly want change in a progressive direction. The labor movement should be at the forefront of providing a vehicle for that change, and to get on that path, the unions out there might want to question their relationship to the Democratic Party.
I would also like to make a suggestion to labor leaders and rank-and-file workers, alike. We should always work to get the most pro-labor candidates in office, but time after time, we see politicians fall very short on their promises. There is a way, however, to increase the chances that our voices are heard and our demands met. And that way is to mobilize the power we have as workers outside of the ballot box. Sometimes we need to vote with our feet in the streets. We could definitely learn from our fellow workers in France about that.
John Cronan Jr is a restaurant worker, organizer, and a masters student at the Murphy Institute for Worker Education and Labor Studies. Currently, he is a volunteer organizer for the Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York (ROC-NY). John is also an avid Boston sports fan.
