Resources, by Type | Page 183

March 2017

America's Tomorrow Newsletter, March 20

Download pdf

Overview

Banks’ Community Benefits Agreements Bring Billions in Community Reinvestment

March 17, 2017

RESIST Trump’s Disastrous Budget!

The preliminary budget released from the White House yesterday is a NIGHTMARE for the entire nation --- poor and low-income people, middle-income people, people of color, children, seniors, people with disabilities and chronic illnesses, working people, those living in rural areas, those living in urban areas. EVERYONE.

The proposed budget bolsters attacks on immigrants, threatens the well-being of communities, and decimates the values that undergird this country, while prioritizing military spending and tax cuts for the wealthy. If the full budget proposal to be released in May has ANY resemblance to this draconian preliminary budget, it must be considered DEAD ON ARRIVAL.The people of this nation CANNOT allow Congress to pass anything close to what is proposed. Additionally, a mild step back from the proposed budget will not be tolerated. The budget ultimately passed MUST be fundamentally different from what is being proposed by this Administration and must uphold the longstanding values of the country, advance fairness and inclusion, expand opportunity, and protect the nation’s most vulnerable.

Believers in justice, fairness, and decency cannot be silent during these attempts to wipe away years of work toward a more inclusive and equitable society. NOW is the time to unite and organize!! All people, faiths, associations, and organizations who care about people and the nation, must come together to resist this assault on the American people and the fundamentals of responsible governance. We encourage EVERYONE to get involved. Stay alert and watch what is happening with the Trump Administration and Congress, call your congressional members and hold them accountable for your concerns, join efforts in your community to advance important policies, and push back against harmful ones. Click here to find out what is happening in your community and GET INVOLVED today. And, to learn more details about the preliminary budget document released yesterday, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities website has a number of resources.

This is a critical time in our nation’s history. We CANNOT allow the current Administration to destroy progress and inflict suffering on millions of people. Like you, PolicyLink will continue to resist and defend. Just earlier this week, we joined with our partners Public Advocates, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law, and Poverty & Race Research Action Council to launch CarsonWatch, a watchdog effort that will be fighting back against attempts to gut invaluable housing and community development programs and roll back the clock on civil rights protections, including important rules under the Fair Housing Act. We hope you’ll visit the website and join the effort by signing up for alerts.

In the days to come, PolicyLink will announce a framework for our broader resistance efforts that will provide additional ways to take action and be heard. Stay tuned. Be encouraged. We SHALL NOT be defeated.

March 16, 2017

New Travel Ban Blocked By the Courts, Still Biased against Muslims

The Trump Administration’s revised “travel ban” executive order (a.k.a., the “Muslim ban”) was scheduled to go into effect today.  Yesterday and early this morning, federal district courts in Hawaii and Maryland blocked the order’s implementation, on a nationwide basis. These court opinions emphasized the many public statements by the Administration indicating discriminatory intent against Muslims. Both courts held that the revised executive order, like the original one, likely violates the Establishment Clause of the constitution.  “The clearest command of the Establishment Clause is that one religious denomination cannot be officially preferred over another.”  (<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/03/15/us/politics/document-Orde... v Trump order</a>, p. 29. )As we <a href="http://www.policylink.org/blog/new-executive-order-same-illegal-discrimi... the revised executive order was released, its central purpose remains discriminatory.The executive order singles out majority-Muslim countries and discriminates against individuals based on religion, race, and national origin.  It violates multiple constitutional provisions, and several federal laws.  (See <a href="http://www.policylink.org/blog/new-executive-order-same-illegal-discrimi... a full list of legal claims likely to be brought against the executive order, and a detailed description of its provisions.)Yesterday’s court opinions emphasized the plainly discriminatory purpose and effect of the Administration’s action, and highlighted the lack of any evidence that the order was based on valid national security objectives.  Both courts focused on Administration figures’ multiple public statements indicating that the executive order intentionally targets Muslims:<ul><li>The court record “includes significant and unrebutted evidence of religious animus driving the promulgation of the executive order…”  (<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/03/15/us/politics/document-Orde... v Trump order</a>, p. 33.)  </li><li>“These statements, which include explicit, direct statements of President Trump's animus toward Muslims and intention to impose a ban on Muslims entering the United States, present a convincing case that the first executive order was issued to accomplish, as nearly as possible, President Trump's promised Muslim ban … In particular, the direct statements by President Trump and (former New York City Mayor Rudy) Giuliani's account of his conversations with President Trump reveal that the plan had been to bar the entry of nationals of predominantly Muslim countries deemed to constitute dangerous territory in order to approximate a Muslim ban without calling it one precisely the form of the travel ban in the first executive order."  (<a href="http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/read-the-federal-jud... Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump order</a>, p. 29.)   </li></ul>PolicyLink stands with advocates for immigrant communities and families around the world in opposing the discriminatory and needless revision of our nation’s longstanding immigration and refugee programs.  As these courts have indicated, the travel ban is plainly discriminatory, and violates the most basic principles on which the country was founded.  We are confident that courts will continue to protect individual rights against the excesses of this Administration.<div style="text-align:start; -webkit-text-stroke-width:0px; margin:0px">Advocacy Resources  </div><div style="text-align:start; -webkit-text-stroke-width:0px; margin:0px">Following are some of the many organizations working to protect our immigrant communities.</div><div style="text-align:start; -webkit-text-stroke-width:0px; margin:0px"> </div><div style="text-align:start; -webkit-text-stroke-width:0px; margin:0px"><div style="text-align:start; -webkit-text-stroke-width:0px"><div><div><ul style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"><li style="margin:0px"><a href="https://www.nilc.org">National Immigration Law Center</a></li><li style="margin:0px"><a href="https://www.ilrc.org/">Immigrant Legal Resource Center</a></li><li style="margin:0px"><a href="https://www.aclu.org/issues/immigrants-rights">ACLU Immigrants'  Rights Project</a></li><li style="margin:0px"><a href="https://www.cair.com/" target="_blank">Council on American-Islamic Relations</a></li><li style="margin:0px"><a href="https://www.immigrationadvocates.org">Immigration Advocates Network</a></li><li style="margin:0px"><a href="http://www.advancingjustice.org/" target="_blank">Asian Americans Advancing Justice</a></li><li style="margin:0px"><a href="https://www.nationalimmigrationproject.org/" target="_blank">National Immigration Project</a></li><li style="margin:0px"><a href="https://nobannowallnoraids.wordpress.com/resources/know-your-rights/" target="_blank">#NoBanNoWallNoRaids</a></li><li style="margin:0px"><a href="http://altotrump.com/resources/know-your-rights" target="_blank">AltoTrump</a></li></ul></div></div></div></div>

March 2017

Creating Change through Arts, Culture, and Equitable Development

Download pdf

Overview

“Creating Change through Arts, Culture, and Equitable Development: A Policy and Practice Primer” highlights both promising and proven practices that demonstrate equity-focused arts and culture policies, strategies, and tools. The report describes the role of arts and culture across the nine sectors. Within each policy chart there are goals, policies, and implementation strategies that can help achieve communities of opportunity.

The primer was excerpted in Inside Arts magazine's Summer 2018 "Knowledge" issue and the Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporation Magazine's 2018 "Art, Equity and Place" issue.

Download EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

March 14, 2017

Arts and Culture, Achieving Equity

Across the nation, artistic and cultural practices are helping to define the sustainability of urban, rural, and suburban neighborhoods. In the design of parks and open spaces; the building of public transit, housing, and supermarkets; in plans for addressing needs for community health and healing trauma; communities are embracing arts and culture strategies to help create equitable communities of opportunity where everyone can participate, prosper, and achieve their full potential. And artists are seeing themselves — and being seen by others — as integral community members whose talents, crafts, and insights pave the way to support community engagement and cohesion.

Creating Change through Arts, Culture, and Equitable Development: A Policy and Practice Primer provides examples of these efforts by describing how equity policies working in tandem with arts and culture strategies are achieving equity goals. This is especially true among communities of color and low-income communities, where resources have seldom reached the level of support received by major arts institutions, nationally or locally.

The report describes the role of arts and culture across many sectors: transportation, housing, economic development and financial security, health and food, youth and education, open space and recreation, and technology and information access. Each section offers examples of promising practices that have yielded such outcomes as support for Native artists in reservation-based cultural economies, creation of a citywide cultural plan, engaging low-income youth of color in using digital media, and efforts to address redevelopment, employment, food access, and environmental justice.

From the percent-for-arts programs created during the Great Depression to support artists, public works, and infrastructure to the establishment of the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities in the mid-1960s, the United States has a history of making investments in arts and culture. That history foreshadows the expanded opportunity that now exists to achieve equity by uniting community development to arts and cultural strategies. In the coming weeks, PolicyLink will announce a webinar that will further share the promising and proven practices highlighted in Creating Change through Arts, Culture, and Equitable Development: A Policy and Practice Primer.

March 13, 2017

PolicyLink Joins Public Advocates to Launch CarsonWatch

Will you help?

Today, PolicyLink is partnering with Public Advocates, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law, and the Poverty and Race Research Action Council to launch CarsonWatch to monitor activities at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Too much is at stake to let HUD’s activities go unmonitored.

The agency is being led by Dr. Ben Carson, a fair housing skeptic with zero housing or federal agency experience, who was appointed by President Trump and confirmed by the Senate to lead an agency whose impact will be felt among veterans, the elderly, and disabled as well as homeless families across the country. Already there are promises to cut $6 billion from the agency’s budget. Communities around the country are in jeopardy of losing flexible redevelopment funds that have received bipartisan support for decades.

Secretary Carson has the power to roll back the clock on civil rights protections – and has likened existing fair housing protections to “social engineering.” He could undermine programs that enable countless Americans to make their rent each month – and has called poverty a “choice.” The lives of many of the 100 million people in the United States currently living in poverty, which includes those living in rural and urban areas, will be further and unnecessarily disrupted by these cuts. Communities will face shortfalls for services they can’t cover. Families will be forced to struggle to further tighten insufficient budgets to make ends meet.

Secretary Carson also has the power to steer taxpayer support to Trump business interests, lining his boss’s pockets in the process. He even refused to rule out such unethical actions during his Senate confirmation hearing. We are deeply concerned about this appointment and worry that Americans may be at risk of losing their homes and watching their civil liberties dismantled before their eyes.

That’s why we’re proud to join Public Advocates, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and the Poverty and Race Research Action Council in the launch of CarsonWatch. We hope you will, too.

Thank you for your support.

March 7, 2017

New Executive Order, Same Illegal Discrimination

Yesterday the Trump Administration released a new executive order, “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States.” This order revises the infamous “Muslim Ban” executive order from late January, which was blocked by the courts. We are confident that the courts will similarly block enforcement of the revised executive order.

The new executive order makes some changes aimed at withstanding court scrutiny, but the basics of the order remain in place – including its illegal discrimination against immigrants from predominantly Muslim countries, without any factual basis in national security needs. (The Administration has stated that the new executive order will advance “the same basic policy outcome” as the prior order.) The Administration’s changes constitute tinkering around the edges, while leaving in place the order’s central, discriminatory purpose and effect.

Following is more detail regarding the new executive order, including a short explanation of legal claims against the order that are likely to be addressed by courts. We have also included a list of some of the national advocacy organizations advancing legal and non-legal strategies to protect immigrants and refugees from the devastating effects of the Trump Administration’s hasty and baseless actions.

PolicyLink stands with advocates for immigrant communities and families around the world in opposing the discriminatory and needless revision of our nation’s longstanding immigration and refugee programs. To better serve the Equity Network in these challenging times, PolicyLink has added a seasoned public interest attorney, Julian Gross, to our staff. The information below was prepared by Julian, PolicyLink James O. Gibson Innovation Fellow, based in the PolicyLink Oakland office.

Changes in the New Executive Order

The new executive order is drafted more carefully than the prior order, and contains some changes clearly aimed at helping the order withstand court challenge. The new order is somewhat more limited in scope than the prior order: it applies only to individuals who are outside the United States as of March 16, and who do not have or have not recently had a valid visa. In addition, there are explicit exceptions to the new travel ban for many classes of people, including lawful permanent residents, others permissibly in the country, certain dual nationals and diplomats, persons who have already been granted asylum or refugee status, and others. Finally, there is a new “waiver” section, allowing discretionary case-by-case waivers for several other categories of people, including those needing immediate medical care, those who have provided assistance to the U.S. Government, and those working for international organizations, etc.

This narrower version eliminates some situations in which the prior order was obviously overbroad and plainly unrelated to valid security concerns. However, the core provisions of the prior order are still in place, and the majority of the legal claims that were raised in multiple lawsuits challenging the prior order are just as strong with regard to the new executive order. These claims are described below.

Crucially, the legal claim that was the main basis of the nationwide injunction against the prior executive order is not affected by the changes made by the Administration. (The Ninth Circuit upheld a nationwide injunction against the prior order based primarily on a holding that the order violated individuals’ procedural due process rights.) This and other claims are sure to be raised against the new executive order, either in existing cases or in new litigation, on behalf of states and affected individuals.

Legal Claims Against the New Executive Order

The following legal claims were raised against the January 27 executive order. These and others will likely be raised against the new executive order as well.

Equal Protection. The Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection requires “strict scrutiny” of government classifications based on national origin or religion. Strict scrutiny is the highest constitutional standard, making it very difficult for the government to justify its actions and have them upheld by courts.
- Claim: The executive order explicitly discriminates against individuals based on national origin, without adequate justification.
- Claim: Based on the choice of countries the executive order targets, the executive order discriminates against individuals based on religion, without adequate justification. Note that the Administration attempted to partially address this claim in the revised executive order by removing the original order’s “religious minority” exemption, which was seemingly aimed at benefitting Christians, given the countries at issue. This claim still applies to other aspects of the new executive order, however, including the choice of countries affected.
Establishment Clause. The First Amendment prohibits the federal government from establishing a state-endorsed religion, or limiting the free exercise of religion. Government actions that discriminate between religions can be challenged under the establishment clause.
- Claim: By singling out majority-Muslim nations without legitimate basis, the executive order discriminates between religions, in violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment.
- As noted above, the Administration attempted to partially address this claim in the revised executive order by removing the original order’s “religious minority” exemption, which was seemingly aimed at benefitting Christians, given the countries at issue. This claim still applies to other aspects of the new executive order, however.

Procedural Due Process (Fifth Amendment). The Constitution’s due process clause requires a fair process before the government denies important personal rights and interests, often including adequate notice, court hearings, right to counsel, avoidance of arbitrary action, and so forth.
- Claim: The executive order affects individuals’ protected rights without providing them adequate opportunity to defend themselves.
- This claim is crucial, in that it focuses on the reality of how the order will be implemented, including the degree of access to courts and judicial oversight.
Immigration and Nationality Act. This law, passed by Congress in 1965, sets rules that the executive branch has to follow in dealing with immigration issues.
- Claim: The executive order violates the INA, which prohibits the executive branch from discriminating between countries in issuance of visas, and which establishes rights to asylum for certain individuals.
Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). This federal statute requires courts to apply strict scrutiny in reviewing actions that inhibit individuals’ free exercise of religion.
- Claim: The executive order violates the RFRA’s prohibition of government substantially burdening exercise of religion.
- This claim is based on the executive order’s exclusive focus on majority-Muslim countries, and other aspects of its design and implementation.
- As noted above, the Administration attempted to partially address this claim in the revised executive order by removing the original order’s “religious minority” exemption, which was seemingly aimed at benefitting Christians, given the countries at issue. This claim still applies to other aspects of the new executive order, however.

In addition to the above claims against the executive order, there are crucial legal issues that courts will have to address based on the Administration’s defense of the executive order. These include:

how much judicial review is permissible with regard to the executive’s actions assertedly related to national security and the country’s borders;
the ability of states to bring claims on their own behalf or on behalf of others; and
which of the above legal claims may be raised by non-citizens

Details Regarding Content of the Executive Order

The executive order suspends entry into the United States of non-citizens from Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Iran, Sudan, and Syria. (Executive Order Section 2(c).) The suspension initially runs for 90 days from March 16, 2017.

The order includes new provisions indicating that the travel ban applies only to individuals from the listed countries who meet all of the following criteria:
   (i) are outside the United States on March 16, 2017;
   (ii) did not have a valid visa at 5:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time on January 27, 2017; and
   (iii) do not have a valid visa on March 16, 2017.
   (Section 3(a).)
In addition, the order includes new provisions indicating that the travel ban does not apply to individuals from the listed countries who meet any of the following criteria:
   (i) any lawful permanent resident of the United States;
   (ii) any foreign national who is admitted to or paroled into the United States on or after March 16;
   (iii) any foreign national who has a document other than a visa, valid on the effective date of this order or issued on any date thereafter, that permits him or her to travel to the United States and seek entry or admission, such as an advance parole document;
   (iv) any dual national of a listed country when the individual is traveling on a passport issued by a non-listed country;
   (v) any foreign national traveling on a diplomatic or diplomatic-type visa, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visa, C-2 visa for travel to the United Nations, or G-1, G-2, G-3, or G-4 visa; or
   (vi) any foreign national who has been granted asylum; any refugee who has already been admitted to the United States; or any individual who has been granted withholding of removal, advance parole, or protection under the Convention Against Torture.
(Section 3(b).)
The executive order includes a new waiver provision, allowing discretionary waiver, on a case-by-case basis, of the travel ban for individuals in any of several categories, including:
   (i) previously admitted for specific activities;
   (ii) previously established significant contacts with the United States but is outside the United States on the effective date of this order for work, study, or other lawful activity;
   (iii) seeks to enter the United States for significant business or professional obligations and the denial of entry during the suspension period would impair those obligations;
   (iv) seeks to enter the United States to visit or reside with a close family member (e.g., a spouse, child, or parent) who is a United States citizen, lawful permanent resident, or alien lawfully admitted on a valid nonimmigrant visa, and the denial of entry during the suspension period would cause undue hardship;
   (v) an infant, a young child or adoptee, an individual needing urgent medical care, or someone whose entry is otherwise justified by the special circumstances of the case;
   (vi) employed by, or on behalf of, the United States Government (or is an eligible dependent of such an employee) and the employee can document that he or she has provided faithful and valuable service to the United States Government;
   (vii) traveling for purposes related to an international organization or to conduct business with the U.S. Government;
   (viii) landed Canadian immigrant who applies for a visa at a location within Canada;
   (ix) traveling as a United States Government-sponsored exchange visitor.
   (Section 3(c).)
The executive order indicates that Iraqi nationals “should be subjected to thorough review,” but does not impose a presumptive ban, the way the order does with regard to the six listed countries. (Section 4.) This is a change from the prior executive order.
The executive order formally revokes the prior executive order, no. 13,769. (Section 13.)
The executive order instructs the Department of Homeland Security to request from other countries information it deems relevant to security evaluations of applicants for entry, and contemplates blocking entry of individuals from countries that do not comply with such information requests. (Sections 2.(a), (b), (d)-(f).)
The executive order instructs the Department of Homeland Security to develop a uniform, enhanced screening program “to identify individuals seeking to enter the United States on a fraudulent basis with the intent to cause harm, or who are at risk of causing harm subsequent to their admission.” (Section 5.)
The executive order suspends admissions under the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for 120 days. The order requires review of security procedures for screening individuals in the program, and indicates that the program may only be resumed “for nationals of countries for which the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence have jointly determined that such additional procedures are adequate to ensure the security and welfare of the United States.” (Section 6(a).) The new order removes the prior order’s legally questionable provision that future refugee admissions be prioritized for individuals facing religion-based persecution, but only where the person’s religion is a minority religion in the country in question.
The executive order caps the total number of refugees that can be admitted at 50,000. (Section 6(b).) The prior order’s permanent suspension of admission for refugees from Syria has been removed.
The executive order suspends the Visa Interview Waiver Program. (Section 9.)
The executive order contains other provisions relating to federal government reporting and reconsideration of certain programs and positions. (Sections 7 and 8.)
The executive order requires the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Attorney General to track and report a range of crimes and actions taken by foreign nationals. (Section 11.)

Advocacy Resources

Following are some of the many organizations working to protect our immigrant communities.

March 2017

An Equity Profile of the Los Angeles Region

Download pdf

Overview

The 2017 Equity Profile of the Los Angeles Region, highlights the widening inequities in income, wealth, health and opportunity in Los Angeles County. This summary and full report was developed by PolicyLink and the Program for Environmental and Regional Equity (PERE) at USC, and is supported by the Weingart Foundation.

The new report underscores that, over the past several decades, long-standing inequities in income, wealth, health, and opportunity have reached historic levels. And while many have been affected by this growing inequality, communities of color have felt the greatest pains as the economy has shifted and stagnated. Read the full profile and the policy brief, and see the press release.

Media: California Again Outpaces U.S. in Job Growth as State Unemployment Rate Drops to 5.1% (Los Angeles Times), Report: L.A. Income Inequality Seventh-Highest in Nation (Los Angeles Business Journal), Inequalities in Los Angeles County Reach ‘Unprecedented Levels,’ Joint Study Finds (MyNewsLA.com), L.A.'s Income Inequality Gap Widens And Racial Inequality Persists, Study Shows (Hollywood Patch), Inequality In LA Is On The Rise (LA West Media)

March 1, 2017

Together We Can Build a More Equitable Tax Code

Annually, the federal government returns upwards of $640 billion directly back to households to help increase financial security through the tax code. Of that, nearly 80 percent goes back to households who are already wealthy. Current tax reform proposals aim to increase the amount going to wealthy families, leaving low-income people and people of color further behind.

Now, more than ever, we must work together to build a more equitable tax code that benefits all Americans. The Tax Alliance for Economic Mobility, led by PolicyLink and CFED, along with nearly 40 national advocacy organizations, racial justice groups, and tax experts, has just launched a new website that identifies priorities to expand savings and investment opportunities for lower-income households through reform of the U.S. tax code.

Today, the Alliance is pleased to announce four briefs on tax credits for low-income workers, higher education and college savings, housing and homeownership, and retirement savings. The briefs feature recommendations to build a more equitable tax code focused on the near- and longer-term security of families, communities, and the national economy.

Tax Credits for Low-Income Workers: Unlike many other poorly designed tax exemptions and deductions that deliver the bulk of their benefits to the highest-income filers, the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC) both work well to help low-income working families. But there are opportunities to strengthen the credits and build on their success, including filling the gap for workers not raising children and making the CTC fully refundable. Congress should also reject proposals that purport to reduce improper payments when in actuality they make the credit more difficult to claim or cut benefits.
Housing and Homeownership: The Tax Alliance has adopted a set of principles for reforming the Mortgage Interest Deduction (MID), a homeownership subsidy provided through the tax code. Recommendations include expanding access for lower-income Americans, increasing benefits for renters, helping communities of color build wealth, and reducing subsidies for high-income households.
Higher Education and College Savings: Higher education is a pathway to economic mobility, but existing higher education tax expenditures disproportionately benefit above-median income households, who own nearly 99 percent of all savings in tax-subsidized college savings accounts. The Alliance has adopted a set of principles for reforming these tax expenditures, with the goal of increasing tax-based aid and college savings support for lower-income students, providing aid before expenses are incurred, increasing take-up, incorporating automatic enrollment features, and eliminating programmatic features that disadvantage lower-income students.
Retirement Savings: For low-income communities and communities of color, financial insecurity in retirement is exacerbated by lower earnings over the course of their work history, and reduced access to employer-sponsored retirement benefits. The Tax Alliance has adopted a set of principles for reforming existing retirement savings tax expenditures to expand access to subsidized accounts for lower-income Americans, subsidize the savings for these Americans, and make reforms to limit expenditures for high-income households.

To learn more about these principles and to access resources for creating a more equitable tax code, visit The Alliance’s website: www.taxallianceforeconomicmobility.org and sign up for the Tax Alliance newsletter.

February 2017

America's Tomorrow Newsletter, February 23

Download pdf

Overview

Can Other U.S. Cities Follow in NYC’s Footsteps to Help Renters?; Growing Jobs in the Urban Forest to Advance an Inclusive Economy

Lifting Up What Works^®

March 2017

America's Tomorrow Newsletter, March 20

Overview

RESIST Trump’s Disastrous Budget!

New Travel Ban Blocked By the Courts, Still Biased against Muslims

March 2017

Creating Change through Arts, Culture, and Equitable Development

Overview

Arts and Culture, Achieving Equity

PolicyLink Joins Public Advocates to Launch CarsonWatch

New Executive Order, Same Illegal Discrimination

March 2017

An Equity Profile of the Los Angeles Region

Overview

Together We Can Build a More Equitable Tax Code

February 2017

America's Tomorrow Newsletter, February 23

Overview

Pages