21st Century Agenda for America

Yesterday we received news that Sheriff Clarence Dupnik in Pima County, AZ is calling for all schools to answer questions that would effectively turn them into immigration police.  Dupnik wants schools to ask their students whether they are in this country legally.  Even though this idea has been rejected by the Arizona and U.S. Supreme court in the past, the fact that it is even being considered is dangerous.  There is much at stake for teachers in stopping Dupnik and any other sheriff who supports similar measures - schools receive funding based on the number of students per school (regardless of their legal status).  Consequently, the number of teachers hired by schools is based on the size of the student body (again, regardless of the students' legal status).  If we begin inquiring about legal status in schools, we can expect to see panic take over families, communities, and kids will stay home.  If these children stop going to school, the most hurt by this will be teachers, as state and federal funding to schools will decrease in proportion to the number of kids who stay home. 

Luckily, not all Arizona border sheriffs support the idea.  Santa Cruz County Sheriff Tony Estrada said schools "can't afford" to do this.  It is estimated that 60,000-65,000 of the 1.2 million students in Arizona schools are not in the country legally.  This translates to 5.4% of the student population.  If Arizona schools lose 5.4% of the student population, their budget and resources will dimish accordingly, which will make it likely that the schools will also have to sacrifice 5.4% of their teachers.

We will continue to see localities try to grapple with dealing with our broken immigration system until the federal government passes comprehensive immigration reform.

Today in the Senate, Senator Schumer is holding an important hearing: "Comprehensive Immigration Reform in 2009, Can We Do it and How?" Here at NDN, we believe the answer to whether Congress can pass reform this year is "yes." Below are seven reasons why:

1) In tough economic times, we need to remove the "trap door" under the minimum wage.

One of the first acts of the new Democratic Congress back in 2007 was to raise the minimum wage, to help alleviate the downward pressure on wages we had seen throughout the decade even prior to the current Great Recession. The problem with this strategy is that the minimum wage and other worker protections required by American law do not extend to those workers here illegally. With economic times worsening here and in the home countries of the migrants, unscrupulous employers have much more leverage over, and incentive to keep, undocumented workers. With five percent of the current workforce -- amazingly, with one out of every 20 workers now undocumented, this situation creates an unacceptable race to the bottom, downward pressure on wages, at a time when we need to be doing more for those struggling to get by, not less.   

Legalizing the five percent of the work force that is undocumented would create a higher wage and benefit floor than exists today for all workers, further helping, as was intended by the increase in the minimum wage two years ago, to alleviate the downward pressure on wages for those struggling the most in this tough economy.  

Additionally, it needs to be understood that these undocumenteds are already here and working.  If you are undocumented, you are not eligible for welfare. If you are not working, you go home. Thus, in order to remove this "trap door," we need to either kick five percent of existing American workforce out of the country -- a moral and economic impossibility -- or legalize them. There is no third way on this one. They stay and become citizens or we chase them away. 

Finally, what you hear from some of the opponents of immigration reform is that by passing reform, all of these immigrants will come and take the jobs away of everyday Americans. But again, the undocumented immigrants are already here, working, having kids, supporting local businesses. Legalization does not create a flood of new immigrants -- in fact, as discussed earlier, it puts the immigrant worker on a more even playing field with legal American workers. It does the very inverse of what is being suggested -- it creates fairer competition for American workers -- not unfair competition. The status quo is what should be most unacceptable to those who claim they are advocating for the American worker.  

2) In a time of tight budgets, passing immigration reform will bring more money into the federal treasury.  

Putting the undocumented population on the road to citizenship will also increase tax revenue in a time of economic crisis, as the newly legal immigrants will pay fees and fines, and become fully integrated into the U.S. tax-paying system. When immigration reform legislation passed the Senate in 2006, the Congressional Budge Office estimate that accompanied the bill projected Treasury revenues would see a net increase of $44 billion over 10 years. 

3) Reforming our immigration system will increasingly be seen as a critical part of any comprehensive strategy to calm the increasingly violent border region. 

Tackling the growing influence of the drug cartels in Mexico is going to be hard, cost a great deal of money, and take a long time. One quick and early step toward calming the region will be to take decisive action on clearing up one piece of the problem -- the vast illegal trade in undocumented migrants. Legalization will also help give these millions of families a greater stake in the United States, which will make it less likely that they contribute to the spread of the cartels influence.  

4) Fixing the immigration system will help reinforce that it is a "new day" for U.S.-Latin American relations.     

To his credit, President Obama has made it clear that he wants to see a significant improvement in our relations with our Latin neighbors and very clearly communicated that message during his recent trips to Mexico and the Summit of the Americas. Just as offering a new policy toward Cuba is part of establishing that it is truly a "new day" in hemispheric relations, ending the shameful treatment of Latin migrants here in the United States will go a long way in signaling that America is taking its relations with its southern neighbors much more seriously than in the past.  

5) Passing immigration reform this year clears the way for a clean census next year.  

Even though the government is constitutionally required to count everyone living in the United States every 10 years, the national GOP has made it clear that it will block efforts for the Census Bureau to count undocumented immigrants. Conducting a clean and thorough census is hard in any environment. If we add a protracted legal and political battle on top -- think Norm Coleman, a politicized U.S. Attorney process, Bush v Gore -- the chance of a failed or flawed census rises dramatically. This of course would not be good for the nation.  

Passing immigration reform this year would go a long way to ensuring we have a clean and effective census count next year. 

6) The Administration and Congress will grow weary of what we call  "immigration proxy wars," and will want the issue taken off the table.  

With rising violence in Mexico, and the everyday drumbeat of clashes and conflicts over immigration in communities across America, the broken immigration system is not going to fade from public consciousness any time soon. The very vocal minority on the right -- those who put this issue on the table in the first place -- will continue to try to attach amendments to other bills ensuring that various government benefits are not conferred upon undocumenteds. We have already seen battles pop up this year on virtually every major bill Congress has taken up, including SCHIP and the stimulus. By the fall, I think leaders of both parties will grow weary of these proxy battles popping up on every issue and will want to resolve the issue once and for all. Passing immigration reform will become essential to making progress on other much needed societal goals like moving toward universal health insurance. 

7) Finally, in the age of Obama, we must be vigilant to stamp out racism wherever it appears. 

Passing immigration reform this year would help take the air out of the balloon of what is the most virulent form of racism in American society today -- the attacks on Hispanics and undocumented immigrants. It will be increasingly difficult for the President and his allies to somehow argue that watching Glenn Beck act out burning alive of a person on the air over immigration, "left leaning" Ed Schultz give air time to avowed racist Tom Tancredo on MSNBC or Republican ads comparing Mexican immigrants to Islamic terrorists is somehow different from the racially insensitive speech that got Rush Limbaugh kicked off Monday Night Football, or Don Imus kicked off the radio.   

So for those of us who want to see this vexing national problem addressed this year, this important hearing is a critical step forward.  But we still have a long way to, and a lot of work ahead of us if we are to get this done this year.

(Also check out our recently released report, Making the Case for Passing Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year, which succinctly lays out our case for why Congress can -- and should -- pass comprehensive immigration reform this year).

Last Updated 2:22 pm, 4/27/09

I. U.S. Citizens Caught in the Broken Immigration System – A USA Today op-ed follows my post on individuals ICE has detained illegally.

II."There Will Be Immigration Reform With the U.S.," Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs  - In a move that has not been seen since the early days of the Fox Administration, the Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs, Patricia Espinosa, openly discussed the issue of immigration and provided assurances that Mexico will reach agreements with the U.S. on the issue of immigration reform thanks to the renewed relationship between the two countries.  This is an important departure from the Mexican government's traditional stance - it has consistently held that immigration reform is strictly a U.S. domestic issue, and as such it is not its place to intervene in this area of U.S. legislation.   However, binational Mexican citizens in the U.S. are putting increasing pressure on Mexico to work with the U.S. and push for a functional immigration system.  Milenio - a widely circulated national periodical in Mexico - reported Secretary Espinosa "will insist on immigration reform that meets the demands of Mexicans who live abroad."  A large majority of Mexicans in the U.S. are permanent residents or citizens who remain concerned about solving the broken immigration system.  The Secretary delivered these comments before the 13th Annual Meeting of the Advisory Board to the Institute for Mexicans Abroad held April 21-25; she highlighted that Mexico is making progress on the immigration front, including enacting reforms to its own General Law on Population. 

III. More on Foreign Workers and the Economy -  Following last week’s discussion on foreign workers and the economy, this week we have more on H-1B legislation introduced by Sens. Durbin and Grassley.  The legislation is specifically damaging to Indian companies because it prohibits firms that have over 50% of staff on H-1B and L-1 visas from hiring more people on these two visas. This would affect all large IT companies, which have branch offices and subsidiaries in the US that are staffed largely by H-1B visa holders.  IT companies are speaking out in opposition to the move, Economic Times reports:

Criticizing the move, commerce & industry minister Kamal Nath said it will restrict the ability of Indian IT companies to compete in the US. “This is certainly not in line with the US President’s stand against protectionism at the recent London G20 meeting and our desire to mainstream development in the Doha negotiations,” Mr. Nath said in a statement on Friday.

Kamal Nath pointed out that besides being the fast-growing market for US exports, Indian IT firms have also helped American companies become globally competitive. “I would, therefore, urge that the lawmakers, administration and the US business community ensure that the contents of the bill do not come in the way of the growing India-US trade partnership,” he said.

Many of the big Indian IT exporters have started recruiting locally but the numbers are still small. Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), for instance, has stepped up its local recruitment in recent years but the number of locals employed by the firm is still around 10,000 globally. 

“What the US needs is comprehensive reform. The number of H-1B visa holders is very small compared to the number of tech and other jobs in the US. It should not be related to job losses in the US,” said Nasscom president Som Mittal. He said the Nasscom was willing to work with US authorities and help them if there was abuse of visas.

An interview on the Satellite radio Bob Edwards show discussed a recent study that found: America's Loss is the World's Gain as the U.S. resists highly talented and skilled foreign professionals.  Researcher Vivek Wadhwa led a group that surveyed 1200 Indian and Chinese immigrants who had worked in the US for a year or more, or had received their education here, only to return to their home countries.  Wadhwa argues that if these skilled workers felt welcomed and stayed here, they would launch companies and create far more jobs for American workers than they leave by heading home or by never coming to the US in the first place.

Reuters writes about how legalizing the undocumented would affect the economy, and a Wall Street Journal op-ed today on Why We Need an Immigration Stimulus:

The pace of lower-skilled migration has slowed due to higher unemployment. This could make it less contentious to ease the path to legalization for the 12 million undocumented workers and their families in the U.S. It's also a good time to ask why we turn away skilled workers, including the ones earning 60% of the advanced degrees in engineering at U.S. universities. It is worth pointing out the demographic shortfall: Immigrants are a smaller proportion of the U.S. population than in periods such as the late 1890s and 1910s, when immigrants gave the economy a jolt of growth. Immigrants have had a disproportionate role in innovation and technology. Companies founded by immigrants include Yahoo, eBay and Google. Half of Silicon Valley start-ups were founded by immigrants, up from 25% a decade ago. Some 40% of patents in the U.S. are awarded to immigrants. A recent study by the Kauffman Foundation found that immigrants are 50% likelier to start businesses than natives. Immigrant-founded technology firms employ 450,000 workers in the U.S. And according to the National Venture Capital Association, immigrants have started one quarter of all U.S. venture-backed firms.

IV. Timing of Immigration Reform - An article by Georgetown University Law Center Dean Aleinikoff:

The Obama administration recently signaled interest in beginning a discussion on comprehensive immigration reform before year's end. It might seem that a severe economic downtown is not the best time for a major legislative initiative on immigration. But starting this conversation now makes sense for several reasons…

The legislative initiative discussed in this article is not precisely CIR.  Dean Aleinikoff believes that Congress should hold off on passing comprehensive legislation and first develop a credible E-verify system and then a legalization program.

V. Latin America Has the Highest Levels of Migration – According to a recent study by the World Bank, Latin America and the Caribbean have the highest levels of net migration among all developing regions.  Migration from these countries to developed countries totaled 18.5 million persons between 2000 and 2005.  The World Bank also found that remittances sent to developing countries totaled $300 billion last year - Latin American countries received 63 billion dollars in remittances in 2007, second only to the region of East Asia and the Pacific.  Mexico received 43% of total remittances in 2007.  As the world faces a severe financial crisis, developing countries that had enjoyed a period of consistent growth and prosperity now face the same challenges that affect developed nations.

VI. Lawyer Makes Case Against Immigrant Myths – Dallas Morning News covered a new book, Hispanic Heresy: What Is the Impact of America's Largest Population of Immigrants? – released in January and written by a Dallas lawyer and two Texas Tech University business professors.   The book aims to dispel many of the myths about immigrants and Hispanics that have received too much air time on TV talk shows other media:

While politicians may debate the merits of immigration reform, many economists and researchers have already made up their minds: Immigrants contribute far more to the U.S. economy than they take.

Yesterday, House Democratic Caucus Chair John Larson introduced H.R. 2060, The Community College Technology Access Act of 2009. This legislation is based on a paper written by NDN Globalization Initiative Chair Dr. Robert Shapiro entitled Tapping the Resources of America’s Community Colleges: A Modest Proposal to Provide Universal Computer Training. Also, I'd like to recommend our upcoming livestream on Monday of a major address from the United Kingdom's Secretary of State for International Development Douglas Alexander. For more information on that event, click here.

In the spirit of both of these major events, please enjoy this backgrounder on 21st century skills and a new approach to international development, complete with the Friday videos you've come to expect here on the NDN blog.

• Rep. Larson Offers Bill Based on NDN Proposal to Improve Workers' Computer Skills, 4/23/2009 - NDN's press release on the introduction of H.R. 2060, The Community College Technology Access Act of 2009.

• The Fallout of the Great Recession for Trade by Dr. Robert Shapiro, 2/11/2009 - Shapiro argues that the world is currently experiencing the economic symptoms of protectionism without actual protectionist measures being put in place, which could have dangerous consequences for the global economy.

• More Ideas for the Stimulus: Free Computer Training for All Americans by Simon Rosenberg, 12/14/2008 - Rosenberg argues that successfully transitioning America and its people to a technology-rich economy is one of the incoming President's most daunting challenges, and one he seems to understand.

• The Global Economic Crisis and Future Ambassadorial Appointments by Simon Rosenberg, 11/26/2008 - With the mammoth task of rebuilding international financial architecture and recovering from a global recession awaiting the new President, Rosenberg points out the the ambassadors to the G20 nations will be key members of the economic team.

• A Stimulus for the Long Run by Simon Rosenberg and Dr. Robert Shapiro, 11/14/2008 – This important essay lays out the now widely agreed-upon argument that the upcoming economic stimulus package must include investments in the basic elements of growth for the next decade, including elements that create a low-carbon, energy-efficient economy.

• Making the Struggle of Every Day People the Central Focus of the National Debate by Simon Rosenberg, 8/17/2008 - As the 2008 presidential campaign entered a crucial phase, Rosenberg argued that political leaders must focus on raising the wages and incomes of Americans. 

• Harnessing the Mobile Revolution by Tom Kalil, 10/9/2008 - Tom Kalil, now the Associate Director for Policy of the White House Office of Science and Technology, authored this paper for the New Policy Institute. The paper argued that mobile communications technology can be a powerful tool for addressing some of the greatest challenges of the 21st century.
• NDN Endorses the Global Povery Act, 4/30/2008 - NDN endorsed legislation sponsored by Rep. Adam Smith and Sen. Barack Obama that was designed to help the United States achieve the UN Millenium Development Goals.

• Senator Obama Embraces Key NDN Proposal, 11/19/2007 - As a presidential candidate, then-Senator Barack Obama endorsed an NDN proposal to utlize the nation's community colleges for worker IT training.

• The New Landscape of Globalization: The Real Foundations of American Prosperity in the 21st Century by Dr. Robert Shapiro, 6/20/2007 – Shapiro offers this forward-looking paper on the current state of globalization and how America can thrive in this new economic era.

• A Laptop in Every Backpack by Simon Rosenberg and Alec Ross, 5/1/2007 – Rosenberg and the One Economy Corporation’s Ross offer a modest proposal for putting a laptop in the backpack of every American sixth grader, as connectivity to and facility with the global communications network are essential for success in the 21st century.

• Alec Ross, now the Senior Advisor for Innovation to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Congressman Larson spoke about the importance of worker skills as a July, 2007 NDN forum on Capitol Hill.

In March, NDN proudly hosted the first "Preview to the Summit of the Americas," in Washington, D.C. At the event, moderated by Mr. Nelson Cunningham, we gained valuable insight from our distinguished panelists. 

Our keynote speaker, U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez, has been a long-time friend of NDN's and inspired what has developed into the Latin America Policy Initiative at NDN, founded on a core principle: as stated by Sen. Menendez, "In the age of globalization, we are inextricably linked to the rest of the world – and to no people are we more closely connected than to our neighbors in Latin America." Below, an excerpt of Sen. Menendez's remarks at the "Preview to the Summit of the Americas":

[The Summit of the Americas] meeting isn’t just an opportunity to tackle our common challenges — it’s another chance to be reminded how connected we all are. Those of us who advocate strong cooperation across borders always have the challenge of explaining to a taxpayer in New Jersey why they might be asked to support a program in Nuevo Leon. The Summit is going to help the entire region remember why...Giving greater mutual focus to institution-building, cross-border development and democracy is a strategy meant to improve the quality of life of our citizens. But maybe above all, finding that focus represents an opportunity to build a new trust between us, to substitute unnecessary tension for a new bond of hope.

Click here for the entire address.

As we reflect on the Summit that just passed, we would like to recap the event and share the ideas presented by our rich panel.  Please access the video of each speaker:

U.S. Rep. Eliot Engel, Chairman of the House of Representatives Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere
Ambassador Jeffrey Davidow
Hon. Samuel Lewis Navarro, First Vice President and Foreign Minister of Panama
Jane Thery, Head of OAS – USA Relations, Secretariat for External Relations of the Organization of American States (OAS) in Washington, DC.
Dr. Paul Byam, Deputy Chief of Mission of the Embassy of Trinidad and Tobago
Ambassador Jose Pinelo, Ambassador of Bolivia to the Organization of the American States
Ambassador Carolina Barco, Ambassador of Colombia to the United States of America
Ambassador Luis Gallegos, Ambassador of Ecuador to the United States of America

In a word - yes. On NPR's Morning Edition today, Simon elaborates on our Case for Passage of Immigration Reform This Year, highlighting the increasing urgency of passing reform as a tool to revive the U.S. economy.  NDN has long sustained that undocumented immigrants suffer under the current broken immigration system because they fall victim to bad-actor employers.  These individuals make up about 5% of the U.S. labor force - that means 5% of workers fall outside of the protection of U.S. wage and labor laws, in addition to not being able to receive benefits or organize with labor unions.  We can implement a number of economic plans, but there will remain a trap door under wages until we fix the broken immigration system: 

Simon Rosenberg, of the Democratic think-tank NDN, says legalizing immigrants would go a long way..."The people who are not playing on an even playing field are the undocumented, because they can be paid less than you. They can be given less benefits. They can be forced to work 60, 70 hours by unscrupulous employers," he says.

Legalization Means New Revenue

Rosenberg and others also point to a Congressional Budget Office study that found legalizing the estimated 6 or 7 million unauthorized workers and their families would add tens of billions to the U.S. Treasury. It would come through more taxes paid, plus the fees and fines likely in any legalization package.

David Kallick, of the Fiscal Policy Institute in New York, says when 5 percent of the workforce lacks legal status, the economy takes another kind of hit.

"It means they can start an entry level job, but they can't really make the step to improve their education, get to the next level," he says. "And so you're essentially holding a whole contingent of people back from contributing even more to the economy than they do."

Immigration Proxy Wars

Both sides do agree on this - absent any larger solution, immigration will keep coming up on almost anything lawmakers touch. It's already happened this year on debates over children's healthcare and the stimulus package, and Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg predicts more battles over the census, Mexican border security and especially healthcare.

"It's impossible to understand how we have universal health insurance in America without first fixing the broken immigration system," he says. "Because what the healthcare fight will become is a debate over whether universal healthcare covers illegal immigrants."

To find out more about what legalization of the undocumented would mean for the economy, check out the Immigration Policy Institute's latest report and fact check on the issue.  Opponents of reform, like Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, will argue that tax benefits will outweigh the cost of all the social services newly legalized workers would be eligible for.  This contention has been proven incorrect by the Congressional Budget Office, cited by Simon, which has stated a legalization program would provide a net benefit of dozens of billions of dollars. 

Continuing the discussion over reform and its impact on the economy, an excellent editorial in today's New York Times reiterates the same fundamental principles that have constituted NDN's proposal for CIR:

Immigration Reform and Hard Times
The Obama administration said last week that it would begin a major push for immigration reform this year. The country's two big labor federations just announced that they are joining forces to support that effort, which includes a path to citizenship for undocumented workers. That's double good news.

The administration is saying that it will keep its promise to fix the broken system, even if it means pushing the hottest of hot buttons: legalization, the dreaded "amnesty" that sets the Republican right wing ablaze and makes many Democrats quiver.

We are also heartened that American labor is speaking with a united voice in hard times, rejecting the false claim that fixing the immigration system will somehow hurt American workers. Even in a bad economy - especially in a bad economy - getting undocumented immigrants on the right side of the law only makes sense.

Administration officials said President Obama planned to speak publicly about the issue next month and would convene working groups this summer, à la health care, to begin discussing future legislation. Immigrant advocates were ecstatic, though it is important to note that this was not a promise to move a bill, only to start the debate. Even that is not going to be easy. Reform was thwarted in the last two Congresses by obstructionist Republicans committed to the delusion that expelling 12 million people amounts to a realistic policy.

The country has suffered mightily in the meantime. American workers and businesses continue to be undercut by the underground economy. The economic potential of some of the country's most industrious workers is thwarted. Working off the books - and living in constant fear of apprehension - they earn less, spend less, pay less in taxes and have little ability to report abuses or to improve their skills or job prospects.

The ingredients of reform are clear: legalization for the 12 million, to yield bumper crops of new citizens, to make it easier to weed out criminals and to end the fear and hopelessness of life in the shadows; sensible enforcement at the border that focuses resources on fighting crime, drugs and violence; a strengthened employment system that punishes businesses that exploit illegal labor; and a future flow of workers that is attuned to the economy's needs and fully protects workers' rights.

The last point has been a sticky one with some unions. The agreement between the A.F.L.-C.I.O. and Change to Win - a rival federation that includes service employees, the Teamsters and carpenters - will center on a new approach to future immigration, a compromise in which an independent national commission calibrates the size of temporary-worker programs each year, based on conditions in labor markets. It may not be a perfect plan, but after years of vitriol, it's encouraging to hear calmer voices outlining smart reform.

We expect to hear more from Mr. Obama soon.

The editorial goes on to highlight that, "It will take courage to defend the wisdom and necessity of fixing the immigration system. It will take even more courage to engage in the serious fight to do so."  This is true, and we are all ready to join in the conversation - not to fight, but to pass immigration reform because, "It is what the country needs and what American voters elected Mr. Obama to do." 

Cable news seems to be multiplying blatantly racist shows, as opposed to shutting them down.  By accident I happened to catch some of the new "Ed" show, 6pm time slot on MSNBC and was less than happy to see the man who almost had to resign for recommending the U.S. bomb Mecca - Tom Tancredo - on with him to discuss immigration reform of all things.  I mean, even Fox news no longer has Tancredo on.  Mind you, one thing is to have a healthy debate and someone on the show who opposes reform, but Tom Tancredo does not know healthy debate. He is no opponent of immigration, he is a proponent of hate and mass destruction.  Lest we forget his campaign ad equating immigrants and Hispanics with "Islamic terrorists."  On the bright side, bring him on - keep bringing on the Tancredos out there - there will be no better tool to pass CIR.  As Simon has said before, anti-immigrant positions don't deliver politically.  Hence Tancredo was at 1% favorability among  Republicans during his vie for his Party's nomination.   His anti-immigrant stance and hatred towards other cultures is not popular.  He did so poorly in the race for the Republican Presidential nomination and in his own district, that he didn't even attempt to run for re-election in 2008.  A post on Kos pretty much expresses the same reaction to seeing Tancredo on the air, re-posted below.  So we are left with the question? Is Ed going to be MSNBC's Lou Dobbs?  Don't networks want to report actual news stories, or riveting educational pieces as opposed to serving as a space for bigoted individuals to air their frustrations? 

Ed Schultz: Why Tancredo?
by ademption

Thu Apr 09, 2009 at 06:43:22 PM PDT
This diary is about the new Ed Schultz show on MSNBC called "The Ed Show" which airs at 6 pm EST in place of the 1600 Penn Ave hosted by David Schuster. I have watched the Ed Show since its inception and for the most part I've enjoyed it. The Ed Show's main focus is topics related to the middle class. For instance, one day he discussed the rising costs of healthcare and had Senator Wyden of Oregon to discuss his healthcare plan. Another day, he discussed the EFCA and had a union guy as a guest. On Wednesday, he talked with Secretary of Education Arne Duncan on how to fix the education system. Until today, I liked Ed's topics and guests.

Unfortunately, today's show I think Big Ed may have jumped the shark with his invite of Tom Tancredo to appear on his show.

ademption's diary :: ::
Now I understand that immigration is a very divisive issue, even among Democrats. I also gather from today's show that Big Ed does not support comprehensive immigration reform like Obama. That's fine. We as progressives can't always agree on everything. I can understand Ed Schultz wanting to discuss the topic of immigration and even invite a guest that shares his viewpoint on the topic. But I cannot accept his choice of guest to discuss the issue tonight.

Tom Tancredo was the absolute wrong choice to discuss immigration. I can't understand why a professed progressive like Ed Schultz would give a divisive figure like Tancredo a platform for his show. Does Big Ed recall his insane remarks about bombing Mecca? His likening Miami, Florida to be a third world country? Tom Tancredo is so radioactive that even he and Karl Rove had a falling out. That is how much of a cretin that Tancredo is. I am absolutely flabbergasted that Tancredo was even invited on a so called progressive show. I don't even think that Fox News has Tancredo on the air anymore. Maybe I'm wrong, but I haven't even heard about Tancredo since the Republican primaries in 2007. I thought that he had fallen off the face of the earth until I watched the Ed show today.

I know that the Ed Show has gotten really decent ratings in his first week on MSNBC. But I don't think that having Tom Tancredo on his show helps. I am so offended by Ed Schultz having Tancredo appear as a guest that I am seriously considering not watching the show ever again. And again, I like the show. But having Tancredo appear really touched a nerve. I'm not only writing my concerns on Dailykos, but I'm going to let MSNBC know as well.

For those who watched Big Ed during his regular timeslot at 6 pm or his guest stint on Countdown at 8 pm EST, do you think it was appropriate for Ed Schultz to invite Tom Tancredo to appear on his show?

With President Obama meeting with his top economic advisers today, NDN is pleased to present some of our recent and most important economic analysis.

• Time to Face the Facts: The Economy Probably Won’t Get Better For Quite a While by Dr. Robert Shapiro, 4/9/2009 – Shapiro's most recent economic analysis says that the economy could be stuck in the Great Recession for long period of time, and that a v-shaped recovery is unlikely.

• Thoughts on Wall Street 2.0 by Simon Rosenberg, 4/9/2009 - Roseberg explored the crisis of trust between the American people, the world, and Wall Street.

• Friedman on a Carbon Tax by Michael Moynihan, 4/8/2009 - Moynihan discusses Thomas Friedman's column calling for a carbon tax and delves into the politics of pricing carbon.

• Carbonomics by Michael Moynihan, 4/2/2009 - Moynihan looks at the connection between pricing carbon and the future of the American automobile industry.

• Is Cap and Trade a Dead Policy Walking?, 4/1/2009 - Shapiro arguest that the political calculus behind cap and trade has changed and that the time has come for a simple carbon-based tax.

• Spend? Save? The debate continues by Simon Rosenberg, 2/11/2009 - Building on a previous post, Rosenberg follows the growing debate about whether American families should be focusing on saving.

• The Utter Bankruptcy of Today's Republican Party by Simon Rosenberg, 1/28/09 - Rosenberg argues that Republican opposition to the economic recovery package represents the ideological bankruptcy of the party.

• A Stimulus for the Long Run by Simon Rosenberg and Dr. Robert Shapiro, 11/14/2008 – This important essay lays out the now widely agreed-upon argument that the upcoming economic stimulus package must include investments in the basic elements of growth for the next decade, including elements that create a low-carbon, energy-efficient economy.

• Accelerating the Development of a 21st Century Economy: Investing in Clean Infrastructure by Michael Moynihan, 10/18/2008 – NDN Green Project Director Michael Moynihan outlines a strategy for investing in clean infrastructure that will help create long-term prosperity.

• Back to Basics: The Treasury Plan Won't Work by Dr. Robert Shapiro, 9/24/2008 - As the financial crisis unfolded and the Bush Administration offered its response, Shapiro argued that, while major action was needed, the Treasury's plan would be ineffective.

• Keep People in Their Homes by Simon Rosenberg and Dr. Robert Shapiro, 9/23/2008 – At the beginning of the financial collapse, NDN offered this narrative-shaping essay and campaign on the economic need to stabilize the housing market.

• Making the Struggle of Every Day People the Central Focus of the National Debate by Simon Rosenberg, 8/17/2008 - As the 2008 presidential campaign entered a crucial phase, Rosenberg argued that political leaders must focus on raising the wages and incomes of Americans.

Commenting on a discussion between Brad DeLong and Tyler Cowen on the ability of the fiscal stimulus to be effective, Matt Yglesias writes:

I think that when considering these issues it's perhaps useful to think back to 2006 and 2007. I don’t recall that many market-oriented economists were saying back then that there were huge underlying structural problems with the United States economy. I recall some people saying that, mostly on the left, mostly being dismissed as unduly pessimistic and/or motivated by partisanship, and generally now supportive of fiscal stimulus.

Well, maybe there weren’t that many, but certainly NDN's Dr. Robert Shapiro (who is inarguably a market-oriented economist) did make that argument, pointing out that globalization had created structural changes in the economy that allowed wages to stagnate and incomes to decline even as GDP and productivity increased over the last eight years. In June of 2007, Shapiro wrote:

We cannot entirely avoid these hidden costs of globalization, but we can outsmart and outrun them. There are many proposals to cushion their effects, through measures such as wage insurance. Those measures may help for a while, but by themselves they tacitly accept the underlying dynamics as inevitable and inalterable. A better approach focuses directly on affecting those dynamics. To begin, we will have to relieve some of the cost pressures on businesses which in the more intensely-competitive environment of globalization, hold down wages and job creation even as growth and productivity increase. Reforming our health care and energy practices, in short, is now the number one jobs and incomes issue, and one on which American workers and American businesses have real common cause. Both areas are already major public policy issues. Recognizing how the enormous increases in health care and energy costs of recent years directly and substantially affect wages and jobs should give greater sense of urgency to finally addressing both areas, in specific ways that will slow those increases.

In addition, we also should expand our public investments and other commitments in those areas in which American workers and businesses have advantages in the global economy. In an increasingly idea-based economy, the education of every American child should specifically include advanced skills in information technologies...

Shapiro's crucial policy recommendations go on, you can read them here.

Of course, NDN supported President Obama's stimulus, but I don't see that as contradictory to seeing problematic structural dynamics in the American economy. As Shapiro wrote this fall, the stimulus should work for the long run by correcting some of structural problems through investing in the prerequisites to economic growth that he outlines above. Indeed, the priorities Shapiro and Simon Rosenberg lay out in this memo track well with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The most important part of ARRA may ultimately be the "Reinvestment" that, as Obama works to reduce health care costs, invest in infrastructure, and reform America's energy policy, leads America past recovery and to a truly 21st century economy.