October, 12 2021, 06:09pm EDT
Essential, Low-Wage Women Tell Congress: Look at the People Behind the Numbers in the Build Back Better Plan
The focus of debate about the Build Back Better plan should be on who is helped and not merely the cost, essential, low-wage women said Tuesday at a news conference with the Poor People's Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival.
WASHINGTON
The focus of debate about the Build Back Better plan should be on who is helped and not merely the cost, essential, low-wage women said Tuesday at a news conference with the Poor People's Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival.
"We are the ones who produce so much wealth in this nation, the ones who could not rest during the pandemic. We are the ones who don't have the right to get sick because we cannot miss work, those who run the risk of getting fired if we miss a day to be able to claim decent treatment during our movement," said Marcela Ramirez, a produce packer from Philadelphia and a mother.
She was one of eight women from across the country -- West Virginia, Kentucky, New York, Arizona, Mississippi and Maryland -- who spoke at the news conference held Tuesday on the steps of the U.S. Capitol. Joining them were the co-chairs of the PPC: NCMR, Rev. Dr. William J. Barber II and Rev. Dr. Liz Theoharis, along with economists and faith leaders.
"We shouldn't be talking about trillions of dollars and just in terms of cost," Rev. Barber said. "What we should be talking about is this question: it's now how much does Build Back Better cost but how much does it cost lives and hurt people not to build back better. ... The problem is we have gotten stuck in a numbers argument rather than a people argument."
Before COVID-19, 140 million people lived in poverty or were low-income, and 700 people died a day from poverty. The Build Back Better agenda costs $3.5 trillion over 10 years, or $350 billion a year. That's just an estimated 1.2% of the U.S. GDP over 10 years.
"What we know and what this pandemic has laid bare is that women, people of color, poor communities, have been disproportionately impacted," Rev. Theoharis said. "By stripping the provisions that help women, help people of color, help poor communities, help essential workers recover, that those are standing against us, (Sen. Joe) Manchin, (Sen. Kyrsten) Sinema, all of those folks that have the power in their hands to do something -- they're compromising the lives of essential workers and the poor. They're sending a message that people's lives and their work don't matter when we know that this is a lie."
Women from West Virginia and Arizona -- where Sens. Manchin and Sinema don't support Build Back Better as written and who oppose an end to the non-constitutional filibuster -- also spoke.
Joan Steede of Phoenix said she cares for people as they die, even working extra time without pay for veterans because they deserve her help.
"I hear all these women's stories and they all sound the same. We work much harder than what we get paid for," she said. "We will all some day get old and need care. And I will be there for you, and I will work for less than I'm worth because I care about other people. And I demand Congress back a bill that took so much work and time. Just do your job - build back America."
Kaylen Marie Parker of South Charleston, West Virginia, said she has a master's degree but still must scrounge for pennies in her couch cushions.
"Time has run out for the people in my state. We are literally starving. It's time for Congress to act," she said. "It's hard to see the realities of our lives when you live so comfortably in your ivory towers, but it is time to come down and listen to the people. We're no longer asking for help - we are demanding that you act now. The Build Back Better plan can finally stop the generational poverty that's been forced on Appalachia and people all across the country."
Pam Garrison, a lifelong low-wage worker and tri-chair of the West Virginia Poor People's Campaign, called on Sen. Manchin to recognize that Americans deserve the spending in Build Back Better.
"We will show you that when you invest in the people - that the people will rise and we will work! We are not lazy and we are not asking for a handout. Senator Manchin, do your job. Do your job! Take care of the people! Quit taking care of the corporations!"
Rep. Ro Khannaof Pennsylvania told the women that their voices are needed.
"For too long, this country has not treated people fairly for doing the hardest work, who are on the frontlines. And that must change," he said at the news conference. "There is too much frustration, too much anger out there saying (it's) time to actually be just. Time to pay people what they deserve, to treat people the way they deserve. And so your voices, your stories, in this movement are being heard not just by me but by many in the halls of the Congress to remind us about what is at stake and that is why we must deliver on the president's Build Back Better agenda."
Comments from others who spoke:
Katrina Corbell of New York, a low-wage worker on disability
"This legislation is about me - the legislation is about us. It is about real people, low-wage essential workers. It is shameful that Congress is debating that we cannot afford $350 billion a year for 10 years when we're spending so much more on war when so many of us are not approving of the wars that Congress keeps spending money on. So please listen to your constituents and actually pass the Build Back Better plan as it is."
Viola Lee of Silver Spring, Maryland, a gig worker and DoorDash driver. She is a mother of three, and they are unhoused.
She wants Congress to remember "people are struggling to make ends meet and (who are) threatened with eviction every day who sleep from house to house because they don't earn a living wage."
Emilee Johnson of Pearl, Mississippi, a low-wage worker and advocate for victims of human trafficking.
"I am here to tell Congress, we can no longer rely on states like Mississippi that just abolished slavery in 2013 to do the right thing. Mississippi has shown this country too many times that doing the right thing is not an option. We need laws changed on a federal level. I am a low-wage and essential worker, and I need Congress to address the needs of low-wage and essential workers now and invest in my fair chance. Because I deserve a fair chance."
Adriel Downing of Lexington, Kentucky, a game-day employee at the University of Kentucky.
She said she was there to call on Sen. Mitch McConnell to pass the Build Back Better act. "Please help us. We get tired of asking for help. We don't want to beg you. We shouldn't have to beg you."
Shailly Gupta Barnes, policy director for PPC: NCMR and an economist:
On Friday, PPC: NCMR will release a study of the 2020 presidential election showing the power of poor and low-income voters "whose main concerns are around health and economic well-being and who turned out in historic numbers to vote last year. What does all of this tell us? Economically, ethically, morally and politically, we cannot build back better without building back from the bottom."
Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies:
It's outrageous that "Congress resists spending $350 billion a year on things like children, housing, water, education and yet they don't even blink when we spend $753 billion a year on the military -- on wars that kill people and fail to achieve any of their so-called goals."
Sister Richelle Friedman of the Coalition on Human Needs:
"Build Back Better is an opportunity for us as a nation to do something significant for those who do not have enough to afford adequate food or a place to call home or what is necessary for them to work like affordable child care or who are afraid of losing their job because they have no paid leave and in some cases, no unpaid leave.
"We know what's at stake. Build Back Better is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to invest in low-income families, individuals and communities."
Rabbi Alana Suskin of the Maryland Poor People's Campaign:
"Jewish law asserts that community is responsible for maintaining and distributing resources for the poor. We as a nation are incredibly wealthy, it is a land from which bread comes and has the dust of gold -- just like Sodom. It is a scandal that 140 million poor and low-income people go unheard as they cry out to be heard. ... We are here with the voices of Americans crying out, and it is our responsibility to act.
Rev. Angela Martin of the Maryland Poor People's Campaign:
We've heard the voices of the poor. We've heard the voices crying out, demanding justice. All I want to know right now, Joe Manchin, is which side are you on? Whose side are you on? Are you on the side of poor and low-wealth persons who are crying out, who are suffering in the midst of this pandemic? Or are you here to represent your pockets? It's really just as simple as that.
"If you are a person of faith, you have a moral conscience and an obligation to respond right now."
The Poor People's Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival, is building a generationally transformative digital gathering called the Mass Poor People's Assembly and Moral March on Washington, on June 20, 2020. At that assembly, we will demand that both major political parties address the interlocking injustices of systemic racism, poverty, ecological devastation, militarism and the distorted moral narrative of religious nationalism by implementing our Moral Agenda.
LATEST NEWS
Analysis Shows How GOP Attack on SNAP Could Cut Food Assistance 'From Millions' in Low-Income Households
"With economic uncertainty and the risk of recession rising, now is a particularly bad time for Congress to pursue these harmful changes," according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Apr 30, 2025
As congressional Republicans mull potentially imposing stricter work requirements for adults who rely on federal nutrition aid as part of a push to pass a GOP-backed reconciliation bill, an analysis from the progressive think tank the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities released Wednesday states that such a move could take away food "from millions of people in low-income households" who are having a hard time finding steady employment or face hurdles to finding work.
The analysis is based on a proposal regarding the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) from House Agriculture Committee member Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), which, if enacted, the group estimates would translate into an estimated 6 million people being at risk of losing their food assistance.
"In total, nearly 11 million people—about 1 in 4 SNAP participants, including more than 4 million children and more than half a million adults aged 65 or older and adults with disabilities—live in households that would be at risk of losing at least some of their food assistance" under Johnson's proposed rules, according to the analysis.
Per CBPP, current SNAP rules mandate that most adults ages 18-54 without children may receive food benefits for only three months in a three-year period unless they prove they are participating in a 20-hour-per-week work program or prove they have a qualifying exemption.
Under Johnson's proposal, work requirements would apply to adults ages 18-65, and they would also be expanded to adults who have children over the age of seven. Per CBPP, Johnson's proposal would also "virtually eliminate" the ability of states to waive the three-month time limit in response to local labor market conditions, like in cases where there are insufficient jobs
According to CBPP, its report is based on analysis of "the number of participants meeting the age and other characteristics of the populations that would be newly subject to the work requirement under U.S. Department of Agriculture 2022 SNAP Household Characteristics data," as well as the number of participants potentially subject to work requirements in areas that are typically subject to the waivers mentioned above.
The House Agriculture Committee, which oversees SNAP—formerly known as food stamps—has been tasked with finding $230 billion in cuts as part of a House budget reconciliation plan. To come up with that amount, the committee would need to enact steep cuts to SNAP.
According to CBPP, most SNAP recipients who can work are already working, or are temporarily in between jobs. Per the report, U.S. Department of Agriculture data undercount the SNAP households who are working because the numbers come from SNAP's "Quality Control" sample, which gives point-in-time data about a household in a given month.
This snapshot does "not indicate whether a household had earnings before or after the sample month, nor do they show how long a household participates in SNAP."
What's more, "with economic uncertainty and the risk of recession rising, now is a particularly bad time for Congress to pursue these harmful changes," according to the authors of the analysis.
Keep ReadingShow Less
SOS: Migrants Awaiting Deportation Use Their Bodies to Cry for Help
The 31 men were nearly deported earlier this month before the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration to return them to a detention facility in Texas.
Apr 30, 2025
Ten days after a U.S. Supreme Court order forced buses carrying dozens of Venezuelan migrants to an airport in Texas to immediately turn around and return them to Bluebonnet Detention Facility in the small city of Anson, 31 of the men formed the letters SOS by standing in the detention center's dirt yard.
As Reutersreported, the families of several of the men have denied that they are members of the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang, contrary to the Trump administration's claims.
Immigration enforcement agents have detained and expelled numerous people with no criminal records, basing accusations that they're members of Tren de Aragua and MS-13 solely on the fact that they have tattoos in some cases.
After the reprieve from the Supreme Court earlier this month, with the justices ordering the government "not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this court," the migrants still face potential deportation to El Salvador's notorious Terrorism Confinement Center under the Alien Enemies Act.
Reuters flew a drone over Bluebonnet in recent days to capture images of the migrants, after being denied access to the facility. One flight captured the men forming the letters—the internationally used distress signal.
Reuters spoke to one of the men, 19-year-old Jeferson Escalona, after identifying him with the drone images.
He was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement in January and initially sent to the U.S. migrant detention center at Guantánamo Bay before being transferred to Bluebonnet. A Department of Homeland Security official said, without providing evidence, that he was a "self-admitted" member of Tren de Aragua, but Escalona vehemently denied the claim and told Reuters he had trained to be a police officer in Venezuela before coming to the United States.
"They're making false accusations about me. I don't belong to any gang," he told Reuters, adding that he has asked to return to his home country but has been denied.
"I fear for my life here," he told the outlet. "I want to go to Venezuela."
Earlier this month in a separate decision, the Supreme Court ruled that migrants being deported under the Alien Enemies Act must be provided with due process to challenge their removal.
"Remember," said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick of the American Immigration Council, "the Trump administration refuses to give these men a chance to day in court, despite the Supreme Court telling them that they must give people a chance to take their case in front of a judge!"
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Supreme Court Could OK Religious Public Charter School in Oklahoma
"Allowing taxpayer dollars to fund religious charter schools would put both public education and religious freedom at risk," warned one teachers union leader.
Apr 30, 2025
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday heard arguments over what could become the country's first taxpayer-funded religious charter school—and opponents of the St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School renewed their warnings about the proposal.
Faith leaders, parents, and educators celebrated last June, when the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled against establishing St. Isidore. The test case for all such schools has now advanced to the country's highest court, which has a right-wing supermajority.
Reporting on over two hours of arguments Wednesday, Law Dork's Chris Geidner wrote that "the religious supremacy movement from the right's majority on the U.S. Supreme Court—with its outside helpers—appeared likely to... OK the first religious charter school in the country."
"Justices Clarence Thomas, Sam Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh appeared eager to do so, and Justice Neil Gorsuch's past writing in a related case signaled his alignment with the move, at least in principle," Geidner detailed. "Chief Justice John Roberts—the key vote then since Justice Amy Coney Barrett has recused herself from the case—appeared to be open to the idea as well."
Other legal reporters also concluded that Roberts appears to be the "key vote," given that the three liberals—Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor—all "expressed significant reservations" about allowing a religious charter school.
It appears very likely that the Supreme Court will force Oklahoma to approve and fund a Catholic charter school that reserves the right to indoctrinate students in Catholicism, force them to attend mass, and discriminate against non-Catholics. The three liberals sound increasingly exasperated.
— Mark Joseph Stern ( @mjsdc.bsky.social) April 30, 2025 at 11:52 AM
According toThe Associated Press:
If Roberts sides with the liberals, the court would be tied 4-4, an outcome that would leave the state court decision in place, but would leave the issue unresolved nationally.
If he joins his conservative colleagues, on the other hand, the court could find that the taxpayer-funded school is in line with a string of high court decisions that have allowed public funds to flow to religious entities. Those rulings were based on a different part of the First Amendment that protects religious freedom.
Roberts wrote the last three of those decisions. He acknowledged at one point that the court had previously ruled that states "couldn't exclude religious participants," suggesting support for St. Isidore.
But he also said the state's involvement in this case is "much more comprehensive" than in the earlier ones, a point that could lead him in the other direction.
American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten said in a statement after the arguments that "we respect religious education and the Founders' intention in separating church and state."
"Public schools, including public charter schools, are funded by taxpayer dollars because they are dedicated to helping all—not just some—children have a shot at success," the union leader said. "They are the bedrock of our democracy, and states have long worked to ensure that they remain secular, open, and accessible to all. They are not, and never have been, Sunday schools."
"The petitioners are seeking to change that," Weingarten warned. "Religious schools should be able to operate in the U.S., but they are not public schools, and they shouldn't be able to get the benefits and the funding yet ignore the obligations and responsibilities."
"Our hope is that the justices will uphold the Supreme Court of Oklahoma's decision, correctly siding with religious pluralism over sectarianism," she concluded. "A reversal would be a devastating blow to public education and the 90% of young people who rely on it. We must preserve and nurture the roots of our democracy, not tear up its very foundations."
The country's other leading teachers union also opposes the establishment of the Oklahoma school. National Education Association president Becky Pringle said in a statement this week that "every student—no matter where they live, what they look like, or their religion—deserves access to a fully funded neighborhood public school that gives them a sense of belonging and prepares them with the lessons and life skills they need."
"Allowing taxpayer dollars to fund religious charter schools would put both public education and religious freedom at risk," Pringle asserted, "opening the door to more privatization that undermines our public education system."
Proud to join @faithfulamerica.bsky.social outside of SCOTUS ahead of oral arguments in the OK religious charter school case, which challenges whether public funds can be used to support religious charter schools. As religious Americans, we say the separation of church and state is good for both!
[image or embed]
— Interfaith Alliance (@interfaithalliance.org) April 30, 2025 at 10:12 AM
Chris Yarrell, an attorney at the Center for Law and Education, similarly warned in a Common Dreams opinion piece earlier this month that "if the court sides with St. Isidore, the ripple effects could be seismic, triggering a wave of religious charter school applications and fundamentally altering the landscape of public education."
In addition to fighting for a taxpayer-funded religious school, Christian nationalists in Oklahoma want to put Bibles in public school classrooms—an effort the state Supreme Court has temporarily impeded.
The court last month blocked Oklahoma's superintendent of public instruction, Ryan Walters, and education department from spending taxpayer dollars on Bibles and Bible-infused instructional materials.
“This victory is an important step toward protecting the religious freedom of every student and parent in Oklahoma," legal groups supporting plaintiffs who challenged the policy
said at the time. "Walters has been abusing his power, and the court checked those abuses today. Our diverse coalition of families and clergy remains united against Walters' extremism and in favor of a core First Amendment principle: the separation of church and state."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular