April, 12 2016, 02:00pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Naomi Dann, Jewish Voice for Peace: naomi@jewishvoiceforpeace.org 845-377-5745
Ramah Kudaimi, US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation:membership@endtheoccupation.org, 703-312-6360
Academics Urge McGraw-Hill Education to Reverse Decision to Destroy Textbook
Dozens of Prominent Academics Urge McGraw-Hill Education to Reverse Decision to Censor Palestinian Loss of Land Maps
Last month, publishing giant McGraw-Hill Education withdrew and destroyed copies of a US college level textbook because of complaints from supporters of Israel over a series of maps showing loss of Palestinian land from 1946, shortly before Israel was established, to 2000.
In response to this shocking and outrageous act of censorship of the Palestinian narrative from US schoolbooks, dozens of respected Palestinian, Israeli, and American academics have signed onto the enclosed open letter calling on McGraw-Hill Education to reverse its decision. Signatories include Rashid Khalidi, Noura Erakat, Noam Chomsky, Judith Butler, Sarah Schulman, Avi Shlaim, Ilan Pappe, and Angela Davis.
Academics Urge McGraw-Hill Education to Reverse Decision to Destroy Textbook
We, the undersigned, urge McGraw-Hill Education to reverse its recent decision to withdraw and destroy the US college level textbook, "Global Politics: Engaging a Complex World", which was made following complaints about a series of maps showing loss of Palestinian land from 1946 to 2000.
This blatant act of censorship, in response to complaints from those who seek to suppress a free exchange of knowledge and ideas about Israel and Palestine, is shocking and unacceptable.
The maps in question are historically accurate and vividly illustrate Israel's dispossession of the Palestinian people and appropriation of their land, which is why the Israeli government and its supporters wish to suppress them. If there were in fact any minor errors with the maps they should have been corrected rather than removed altogether. Last year, in a similar act of censorship, the cable news network MSNBC apologized for airing a similar series of maps and retracted them.
It is imperative that students be able to visualize history, including through the use of maps, in order to learn how to analyze and understand it. Further, it is essential that faculty and students have access to educational materials that speak to the dispossession Palestinians have experienced, and continue to experience today. We cannot have a truly comprehensive understanding of Palestine or Israel without this information.
We urge McGraw-Hill Education to reverse its decision and reinstate the maps and textbooks in question.
Signed,
Nadia Abu-El-Haj, Professor at Barnard College and Columbia University
Rebecca Alpert, Professor of Religion, Temple University
Sofya Aptekar, Assistant Professor of Sociology, University of Massachusetts Boston
Sa'ed Atshan, Visiting Assistant Professor of Peace and Conflict Studies, Swarthmore College
Elsa Auerbach, Professor Emerita, University of Massachusetts Boston
Daniel Boyarin, Hermann P. and Sophia Taubman Professor of Talmudic Culture, Departments of Near Eastern Studies and Rhetoric, University of California at Berkeley
George Bisharat, Emeritus Professor of Law, UC Hastings College of the Law, San Francisco
Judith Butler, Maxine Elliot Professor in the Department of Comparative Literature and the Program of Critical Theory at the University of California, Berkeley
Noam Chomsky, Institute Professor & Professor of Linguistics (Emeritus), Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Omar Dajani, Professor of Law at the University of the Pacific's McGeorge School of Law
Angela Davis, Author and activist
Estelle Disch, Ph.D., Professor Emerita of Sociology, University of Massachusetts Boston
Lisa Duggan, Professor of Social & Cultural Analysis, New York University
Nada Elia, Program Manager, Global Cultures Program, Northwest Language Academy
Noura Erakat, Assistant Professor at George Mason University
Andres Fabian Henao Castro, Political Science Department, University of Massachusetts Boston
Margaret Ferguson, Distinguished Professor of English at the University of California, Davis
Katherine Franke, Sulzbacher Professor of Law, Director of the Open University Project, and member of the steering committee of the Center for Palestine Studies at Columbia University
Marilyn Frankenstein, Professor of Media and Society, University of Massachusetts Boston
Randa Jarrar, President of Radius of Arab American Writers
Rashid Khalidi, Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies, Columbia University
Martha London, University of Massachusetts Boston
David Lloyd, Distinguished Professor of English, University of California, Riverside
Saree Makdisi, Professor of English and Comparative Literature, UCLA
Ussama S. Makdisi, Professor of History and Arab-American Educational Foundation Chair of Arab Studies, Rice University
Bill V. Mullen, Professor of American Studies, Purdue University
Nadine Naber, Associate Professor, Gender & Women's Studies and Asian American Studies, University of Illinois at Chicago
David Palumbo-Liu, Louise Hewlett Nixon Professor, and Professor of Comparative Literature, Stanford University
Ilan Pappe, Professor with the College of Social Sciences and International Studies at the University of Exeter, director of the university's European Centre for Palestine Studies, and co-director of the Exeter Centre for Ethno-Political Studies
Rachel Rubin, University of Massachusetts Boston
Sarah Schulman, Distinguished Professor of the Humanities, City University of New York, College of Staten Island
Avi Shlaim, Emeritus Professor of International Relations, St. Antony's College, Oxford
C. Heike Schotten, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Massachusetts Boston
Jack Shaheen, Distinguished Visiting Scholar at New York University's Asian/Pacific/American Institute and The Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies
Simona Sharoni, Professor of Gender and Women's Studies at the State University of New York at Plattsburgh
Barry Trachtenberg, Director, Judaic Studies Program, University at Albany - SUNY
Judith E. Tucker, Professor of History, Georgetown University
Jewish Voice for Peace is a national, grassroots organization inspired by Jewish tradition to work for a just and lasting peace according to principles of human rights, equality, and international law for all the people of Israel and Palestine. JVP has over 200,000 online supporters, over 70 chapters, a youth wing, a Rabbinic Council, an Artist Council, an Academic Advisory Council, and an Advisory Board made up of leading U.S. intellectuals and artists.
(510) 465-1777LATEST NEWS
Global System 'Rigged for the Wealthy' Delivers World With 'More Billionaires Than Ever'
New annual report on "ambitions" of billionaires by wealth management giant UBS shows just 2,919 individuals have a combined wealth of $15.8 trillion.
Dec 05, 2025
A new assessment by the international wealth management giant UBS this week shows that the number of billionaires in the world has reached new heights and that the acceleration of inherited wealth represents a new chapter for the ultra-rich in the 21st Century.
The latest UBS Billionaire Ambitions Report, unveiled Thursday, details how just 2,919 individual billionaires have a combined wealth of $15.8 trillion. The number of billionaires in the world is up nearly 9 percent from the previous year. In the United States—where nearly a third of those on the list reside—924 billionaires hold a collective $6.9 trillion in wealth.
The assessment by UBS—which surveyed its own billionaire clients as part of the survey, now its eleventh edition—emphasizes a surge of inherited wealth among the billionaire class. According to the report:
In 2025, 91 heirs (64 of them male and 27 female) inherited a record USD 297.8 billion. That’s 36% more than in 2024, despite fewer people inheriting overall. Globally, inheritance bolstered the number of multigenerational billionaires, with some 860 multi-generational billionaires now overseeing total assets of USD 4.7 trillion. That’s up from 805 with USD 4.2 trillion in 2024.
Across the world, multi-generational billionaires are slowly extending down the generations, with the number of second-generation billionaires growing by 4.6% in the 2025 report, the number of third generation
by 12.3%, and the number of fourth generation and beyond by 10%.
The growing number of billionaires, including a rapidly increasing share who inherited their wealth rather than generating it themselves, says UBS, "heralds a new era" for the ultra-rich as "the great wealth transfer is intensifying as heirs inherit more than ever before.
The coming decades, the report notes, "will see growing numbers of billionaires and centi-millionaires as the Great Wealth Transfer continues to accelerate. Billionaires are estimated to transfer approximately USD 6.9 trillion of wealth globally by 2040, with at least USD 5.9 trillion set to be passed to children—either directly or indirectly through spouses."
Of the $6.9 trillion currently held by US billionaires, the report estimates that $2.8 trillion of that wealth will be passed down to heirs over the next 15 years.
"The world has more billionaires than ever because of a system that’s broken for workers and rigged for the wealthy and CEOs who already make 285 times what workers do," said the AFL-CIO in response to the report.
The union federation says that organized workers winning better collective bargaining is the first step needed to "level the playing field" for working people, while others see the surging fortunes of the ultra-wealthy as just more evidence that taxing the rich must remain at the top of the economic and political agenda both at the national level and internationally.
With the UBS report showing that 91 of the new billionaires created this year arrived at their financial status through inheritance, Hal Singer, economics professor at the University of Utah, said, "That's 91 additional reasons for a wealth tax."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Outrage Grows as Trump Admin Quietly Weighs New 'Tax Windfall for the Biggest Corporations'
"Apparently the Trump administration thinks the trillions they spent on tax cuts for the wealthy wasn't enough."
Dec 05, 2025
The Trump administration's quiet effort to deliver billions more in tax breaks to some of the largest companies in the United States drew fresh scrutiny and outrage this week, with Democratic members of Congress warning that a series of obscure regulatory changes could further undermine efforts to rein in corporate tax dodging.
In a letter to the US Treasury Department unveiled Thursday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) led a group of lawmakers in denouncing the Trump administration's assault on the corporate alternative minimum tax (CAMT), a Biden-era measure that requires highly profitable US corporations to pay a tax of at least 15% on their book profits—the numbers reported to shareholders.
"The Trump administration has consistently chipped away at CAMT to further corporate interests," the lawmakers wrote, pointing to rules issued in recent months exempting many corporations from the tax.
"But these massive giveaways apparently aren’t enough for billionaire corporations and their lobbyists, which are trying to further undermine CAMT," the lawmakers continued.
The Democratic lawmakers, who were joined by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), specifically warned against an ongoing corporate push for a carveout to a research and experimentation (R&E) tax break included in the Trump-GOP budget law enacted over the summer.
Corporations supported the R&E tax break. But as the Wall Street Journal reported last month, the giveaway is driving some companies' "regular taxes down so far that they are pushed into CAMT."
"This is exactly what CAMT was designed to do, the tax’s defenders say," the Journal noted. "Companies are pressing the Treasury Department for relief, particularly on the way that CAMT limits the deduction for research expenses. The National Association of Manufacturers, the R&D Coalition, and the National Foreign Trade Council sent letters urging the administration to write rules that would be favorable to companies."
The Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service are reportedly considering the corporate proposal.
Such a change, Democratic lawmakers warned in their new letter, "egregiously circumvents Congress' intent to set a floor on corporations’ tax liabilities regardless of deductions."
But the Trump administration's hostility to the CAMT, cozy relationship with powerful corporations, and willingness to trample existing law have fueled concerns that it will readily bow to industry demands.
"Apparently the Trump administration thinks the trillions they spent on tax cuts for the wealthy wasn't enough now they're planning another huge tax windfall for the biggest corporations in the country," Beyer said Thursday.
In a social media post, Warren wrote that "giant corporations are lobbying Donald Trump for yet another tax handout—this time for research they've ALREADY DONE."
"Give me a break," Warren added. "The last thing American families need is a tax code rigged even more for billionaires and billionaire corporations."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'MAGA Power Grab': US Supreme Court OKs 2026 Map That Texas GOP Rigged for Trump
One journalist who covers voting rights called the decision upholding the new districts "yet another example" of how the high court "has greenlit the many undemocratic schemes of Trump and his party."
Dec 04, 2025
The US Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority on Thursday gave Texas Republicans a green light to use a political map redrawn at the request of President Donald Trump to help the GOP retain control of Congress in the 2026 midterm elections.
Since Texas lawmakers passed and GOP Gov. Greg Abbott signed the gerrymandering bill in August, Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom and his constituents have responded with updated congressional districts to benefit Democrats, while Republican legislators in Indiana, Missouri, and North Carolina—under pressure from the president—have pursued new maps for their states.
With Texas' candidate filing period set to close next week, a majority of justices on Thursday blocked a previous decision from two of three US district court judges who had ruled against the state map. The decision means that, at least for now, the state can move ahead with the new map, which could ultimately net Republicans five more seats, for its March primary elections.
"Texas is likely to succeed on the merits of its claim that the district court committed at least two serious errors," the Supreme Court's majority wrote. "First, the district court failed to honor the presumption of legislative good faith by construing ambiguous direct and circumstantial evidence against the Legislature."
"Second, the district court failed to draw a dispositive or near-dispositive adverse inference against respondents even though they did not produce a viable alternative map that met the state's avowedly partisan goals," the majority continued. "The district court improperly inserted itself into an active primary campaign, causing much confusion and upsetting the delicate federal-state balance in elections."
Texas clearly did a racial gerrymander, which is illegal.A district court found that Texas did a racial gerrymander, rejecting the new map because it is illegal.But the Supreme Court reversed it.Because? Must assume the gerrymanderers were acting in good faith (despite the evidence otherwise).
[image or embed]
— Nicholas Grossman (@nicholasgrossman.bsky.social) December 4, 2025 at 6:18 PM
The court's three liberals—Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor—dissented. Contrasting the three-month process that led to the map initially being struck down and the majority's move to reverse "that judgment based on its perusal, over a holiday weekend, of a cold paper record," Kagan wrote for the trio that "we are a higher court than the district court, but we are not a better one when it comes to making such a fact-based decision."
"Today's order disrespects the work of a district court that did everything one could ask to carry out its charge—that put aside every consideration except getting the issue before it right," Kagan asserted. "And today's order disserves the millions of Texans whom the district court found were assigned to their new districts based on their race."
"This court's stay guarantees that Texas' new map, with all its enhanced partisan advantage, will govern next year's elections for the House of Representatives. And this court's stay ensures that many Texas citizens, for no good reason, will be placed in electoral districts because of their race," she warned. "And that result, as this court has pronounced year in and year out, is a violation of the Constitution."
Simply amazing that the Supreme Court declared an end to legal race discrimination in the affirmative action case two years ago and now allows overt racism in both immigration arrests and redistricting.Using race to help minorities? Bad. Using it to discriminate against them? Very, very good.
[image or embed]
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjsdc.bsky.social) December 4, 2025 at 6:52 PM
Top Democrats in the state and country swiftly condemned the court's majority. Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin called it "wrong—both morally and legally," and argued that "once again, the Supreme Court gave Trump exactly what he wanted: a rigged map to help Republicans avoid accountability in the midterms for turning their backs on the American people."
"But it will backfire," Martin predicted. "Texas Democrats fought every step of the way against these unlawful, rigged congressional maps and sparked a national movement. Democrats are fighting back, responding in kind to even the playing field across the country. Republicans are about to be taught one valuable lesson: Don't mess with Texas voters."
Texas House Minority Leader Gene Wu (D-137) declared that "the Supreme Court failed Texas voters today, and they failed American democracy. This is what the end of the Voting Rights Act looks like: courts that won't protect minority communities even when the evidence is staring them in the face."
"I'm angry about this ruling. Every Texan who testified against these maps should be angry. Every community that fought for generations to build political power and watched Republicans try to gerrymander it away should be angry. But anger without action is just noise, and Democrats are taking action to fight back," he continued, pointing to California's passage of Proposition 50 and organizing in other states, including Illinois, New York, and Virginia. "A nationwide movement is being built that says if Republicans want to play this game, Democrats will play it better."
SCOTUS conservative justices upholding Texas gerrymander is yet another example of how Roberts court has greenlit the many undemocratic schemes of Trump and his partyThey’ve now ruled for Trump and his allies in 90 percent of shadow docket opinions www.motherjones.com/politics/202...
[image or embed]
— Ari Berman (@ariberman.bsky.social) December 4, 2025 at 6:52 PM
Christina Harvey, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, said in a statement that "the right-wing majority on the Supreme Court just handed Republicans five new seats in Congress, rubber-stamping Texas Republicans' MAGA power grab. Make no mistake: This isn't about fair representation for Texans. It is about sidelining voters of color and helping Trump and Republican politicians dodge accountability for their unpopular agenda."
"In America, voters get to choose their representatives, not the other way around," she stressed. "But this captured court undermines this basic democratic principle at every turn. We deserve a Supreme Court that protects the freedom to vote and strengthens democracy instead of enabling partisan politics. It's time for Democrats in Congress to get serious about plans for Supreme Court reform once Trump leaves office, including term limits, an enforceable code of ethics, and expanding the court."
Various journalists and political observers also suggested that, despite Thursday's decision in favor of politically motivated mid-decade redistricting, the high court's right-wing majority may ultimately rule against the California map—which, if allowed to stand, could cancel out the impact of Texas gerrymandering by likely erasing five Republican districts.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


