NJ Governor Phil Murphy’s Agency For Immigrants

Yesterday Democrat Phil Murphy took office in New Jersey, replacing former governor Chris Christe. He has been dubbed a progressive experimenter and someone who wants to push forward a bold and aggressive progressive agenda. One of the more fascinating ideas within this progressive agenda is a new agency for New Jerseyians, an agency that exists to support immigrants including but not limited to undocumented immigrants. I wanted to take some time to explore this idea and write about the various reactions to it as someone who like Phil Murphy is an aggressive progressive and who writes about immigration a lot.

The Office For Immigrant Protection:

As early as the end of January of 2017 Phil Murphy was discussing this idea and making it into a campaign promise and a platform of his. He said that the purpose of this agency was to provide legal services for any New Jersey resident facing detention and the threat of deportation in the wake of Trump’s executive order that was said to be a Muslim Ban. It’s clearly part of Murphy’s campaign to appeal to immigrant voters and to gain the support of those negatively affected by Trump’s reckless executive order that was affecting many immigrants throughout 2017, the so-called Muslim Ban. The language of the announcement here was focused on Muslims and Muslim immigrants so why do conservatives in positions of power dub this agency an agency protecting undocumented immigrants? Because of another announcement.

Immediate Actions To Aid Undocumented Immigrants:

One of the big things that Phil Murphy’s campaign told voters he’d do was provide both statewide ID and drivers licenses to undocumented immigrants. This was a bold promise and one that activists have capitalized on before and in the wake of his inauguration, by demanding the passing of the New Jersey Safe & Responsible Driver Act. This right here is probably the thing that opponents of Murphy will talk about when asked why they think Murphy’s office for immigrant protections is a tool designed to protect undocumented individuals, at least if they know anything beyond simplistic talking points that bash Murphy. It’s worth noting that these licenses and IDs would not be used as identification for federal purposes most notably getting on an airplane. These licenses and IDs are simply for use within New Jersey.

Conservative Backlash To The Agency:

Carlson was smart and got the one individual who couldn’t give a straight answer to any of his questions. That being said, there are advantages to fighting for access to education, including that colleges and universities gain millions of dollars in tuition and fees and to increase the rates at which undocumented individuals graduate from high-schools which also improves how those schools measure up to other schools state and nationwide. Carlson also ignored the other aspects of Murphy’s commitment to education, which is readily visible and accessible on Murphy’s site by practicing selective outrage and blindness to a whole lot of information Murphy’s campaign has provided to anyone who actually wants to know what he stands for. And there are obvious advantages to fighting for access to drivers licenses, including knowing who is on our streets driving and thereby making New Jersey’s streets safer.

Tucker Carlson made a smart choice in selecting the single worst spokesperson for New Jersey’s Democrats but the fact that John McKeon is a bad debater doesn’t undo the fact that there are real and pragmatic advantages to fighting for undocumented immigrants. Just because one Democrat can’t debate to save his life doesn’t make the cause he is there to fight for not worth fighting for.

In the extended video where he chats with Lawrence Jones, he reveals his own selfishness by showing that he doesn’t care about anyone whose votes he feels entitled too. Fortunately, Phil Murphy’s actions are not governed by Tucker Carlson’s selfishness, as evidenced by his actions and his inaugural speech.

First Major Piece Of Gun Legislation Since Las Vegas

This year was the year that the worst mass-shooting this century has taken place. This piece of legislation is the first significant piece of legislation heading towards the Congress floor, specifically the House floor since that shooting took place. It’s also the National Rifle Association’s highest legislative priority, which should be a massive red-flag right from the start. In case you’re wondering what I’m talking about, it’s named the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 and the name should be another red flag. What it does is make it easier for someone to legally move their firearms and keep them on their person as they travel from state to state. Oh, and it makes it possible for off-duty law enforcement to carry concealed firearms into schools, which is weird and really specific but it’s there so there’s that.

State Lines & Gun Control:

The biggest aspect of it is that it makes it possible for someone from a state like Missouri (where you don’t need a permit to lawfully conceal carry a firearm) to bring their guns to a state with stricter laws, legally. Now just because that can be the case doesn’t mean it will be and the biggest impact this law will have is allowing people with the regular permits to carry concealed weapons into stricter states, which will only exacerbate the problem of gun violence by making it easier for people who lawfully acquired their firearms for nefarious purposes to move to states with stricter laws and to inflict crime and violence across state lines. This is one of the problems of cities like Chicago which has strict gun control but has neighboring areas with less strict gun laws and where data has shown that at least some of the guns come from other states and cities so local gun legislation doesn’t have a massive impact. This would spread that to the entire country.  If you don’t believe me here even with the sources I’ve already shared here are some more sources talking about the complications of gun laws and state lines.

The bill is likely to pass the House since it has 200 sponsors, but its fate isn’t likely going to be to pass through to President Trump immediately since it has to go through the Senate. The Senate is narrowly Republican controlled so it probably will pass the Senate at some point but there’s still time to challenge it and stop it dead in its tracks if we reach out to Senators right now. We need to talk intelligently and effectively about how this bill makes just about any form of gun control law difficult to enforce at best, and how it could complicate interactions with police (and endanger the lives of both police officers and civilians).

We need to have intelligent conversations that understand the impact state lines have on efforts to curb gun violence at a state by state level and we need to boldly stand against the NRA which if unchallenged will render a lot of gun control far more confusing. Don’t be silent right now because if this passes gun violence could intensify nationwide thanks to lax states like Missouri, Oklahoma, and more. It’s a lot easier to stop this from passing than to undo the damage it could cause so don’t be quiet right now, contact your Senators AND your representatives to get them to either be ready to vote no on H.R. 38 or to actually and vote no on H.R. 38 today.

 

Teacher Pay: Where Progressives Need To Be Aggressive

Education needs to be where progressives aggressively and consistently fight for reform. If there is any single area where progressives can afford to be real fighters its education. Education is where progressives can shine and can be successful. One example of this is teacher pay.

Hay una version en espanol debajo de la version en ingles.

Teacher Pay As A Progressive Policy Priority:

This is probably the most direct way many progressives could support education and educators and one example that I as a person living in North Carolina can give is that progressive politicians in my state could fight to ensure that all teachers who have Master’s Degrees could be given the pay raise they deserve but that some have been denied due to being recent graduates.

This is an issue that affects all teachers who want to be the most highly qualified teachers they could be but is largely underreported because it affects teachers in a specific state. This lack of incentive pay for highly qualified educators has contributed to a localized brain-drain wherein teachers and those who want to be teachers study in North Carolina’s prestigious universities and then leave our state for higher paying teaching jobs elsewhere.

To further underscore this it’s vital that I remind people that teachers in North Carolina (but not exclusively NC, because there are other places such as Oklahoma where teachers in surprising numbers undertake other jobs for the sake of making what they need to survive) sometimes undertake second jobs to make ends meet which prevents them from being fully focused on helping students learn and weakens their ability to make effective lesson plans as well as interfering with how much time teachers have to grade assignments and provide effective feedback to their students. This is not the fault of teachers who boldly decided to work jobs that they and we knew are vital to our continued success as a nation but were also underpaid professions for the importance of the work they were doing but rather at least partially the fault of politicians who make negative choices when it comes to deciding where to allocate resources and sometimes even attack education in areas represented by their opponents instead of bipartisanly coming together to expand education.

Teachers not only deserve pay enough for them to be able to reasonably live off of, teachers need that kind of pay. We can’t expect teachers to provide students with the sort of education they deserve if teachers don’t have the time to focus on teaching because they have another job that they need to make ends meet. And it’s true that NC is improving its teacher pay, in theory, but it’s still stiffing teachers with post-graduate degrees based off of how recently they got their Masters degrees, which frankly makes no sense especially since some teachers gain experience first and then go back to school to get their Masters degrees and for them having a Masters degree and you’d think that newer Masters degrees would be better than older ones for teachers who come into classrooms knowing the current scholarly consensus and having been trained in relevant topics and environments, unlike someone whose Masters degree comes from 10 years ago or even further back.

Progressives who want to earn the respect and trust of teachers, and of parents who understand the importance of education and of supporting teachers however they can need to advocate for better policies for teachers and teacher pay is an important part of that. By increasing teacher pay we not only support existing teachers we make teaching a more viable career option and one that more people want to be a part of.  It’s time that Progressives aggressively fight for teachers.

Para lectores de español:

La educación tiene que estar donde los progresistas luchan agresivamente y consistentemente por la reforma. Si hay una sola área en la que los progresistas pueden permitirse el lujo de ser verdaderos luchadores es educación. La educación es donde los progresistas pueden brillar y tener éxito. Un ejemplo de esto es el salario de los maestros.

El pago de los maestros como prioridad política progresiva:

Esta es probablemente la manera más directa que muchos progresistas podrían apoyar la educación y los educadores y un ejemplo que yo, como persona que vivo en Carolina del Norte, puedo dar es que los políticos progresistas en mi estado puedan luchar para asegurar que todos los maestros que tienen Maestrías puedan recibir el aumento de sueldo que merecen, pero que algunos han sido negados por ser recién graduados.

Se trata de una cuestión que afecta a todos los profesores que desean ser los profesores más cualificados que podrían ser, pero que en gran medida no se denuncia porque afecta a los profesores de un Estado específico. Esta falta de incentivos para los educadores altamente calificados ha contribuido a un exodo localizada en la que los maestros y aquellos que quieren ser maestros estudian en las prestigiosas universidades de Carolina del Norte y luego abandonan nuestro estado por trabajos de enseñanza mejor remunerados en otros lugares.

Para subrayar aún más esto es vital que recuerde a la gente que los maestros en Carolina del Norte (pero no exclusivamente Carolina del Norte, porque hay otros lugares como Oklahoma, donde los maestros en números sorprendentes realizan otros trabajos por el bien de hacer lo que necesitan para sobrevivir) a veces emprenden trabajos secundarios para llegar a fin de mes, lo que les impide estar completamente enfocados en ayudar a los estudiantes a aprender y debilita su capacidad para hacer planes de lecciones eficaces, así como interferir con el tiempo que los maestros tienen para calificar las tareas y proporcionarles un trabajo efectivo. Esto no es culpa de los maestros que deciden audazmente trabajar trabajos que ellos y nosotros sabíamos que son vitales para nuestro éxito continuo como nación, sino que también eran profesiones mal remuneradas por la importancia del trabajo que estaban haciendo, sino más bien en parte la culpa de los políticos que toman decisiones negativas cuando se trata de decidir dónde asignar recursos y a veces incluso atacar la educación en áreas representadas por sus oponentes en lugar de unirse bipartidariamente para expandir la educación.

Los maestros no sólo merecen que se les pague lo suficiente para poder vivir razonablemente, sino que los maestros necesitan ese tipo de pago. No podemos esperar que los maestros proporcionen a los estudiantes el tipo de educación que merecen si los maestros no tienen el tiempo para centrarse en la enseñanza porque tienen otro trabajo que necesitan para llegar a fin de mes. Y es cierto que NC está mejorando el salario de sus maestros, en teoría, pero sigue siendo dificil con los profesores con posgrados basados en la reciente obtención de sus maestrías, lo que francamente no tiene sentido, sobre todo porque algunos maestros ganan experiencia primero y luego vuelven a la escuela para obtener sus maestrías y para ellos tener una maestría y uno pensaría que los nuevos títulos de maestría serían mejores que los más antiguos para los maestros que llegan a las aulas conociendo al académico actual.

Los progresistas que quieren ganarse el respeto y la confianza de los maestros, y de los padres que entienden la importancia de la educación y de apoyar a los maestros, sin embargo, pueden tener que abogar por mejores políticas para los maestros y el salario de los maestros es una parte importante de eso. Al aumentar el salario de los profesores no sólo apoyamos a los profesores existentes, sino que hacemos que la enseñanza sea una opción profesional más viable y de la que más personas quieran formar parte.  Es hora de que los progresistas luchen agresivamente por los maestros.

The Fight For Evolution In The Classroom Isn’t Over Yet

On November 24th, 1858 Charles Darwin’s book The Origin Of Species was published. This book upended the public’s understanding of mankind’s origin and the history of the myriad species that populate the planet. It would eventually transform how the public conceptualized man’s origins and would impact virtually every field of study in some way or another. Since the time of its publication, Charles Darwin’s book has faced criticism, some of it from the scientific community but much of it from theologians and from those whose criticisms of it didn’t come from science but rather from ideologies and preconceptions about any ideas that differed from their own. The purpose of this post is to remind readers that to some strident creationists the battle to make creationism sneak back into public schools hasn’t yet ended and why that ought to matter to progressives.

Creationism In Charter Schools:

Others have noted that charter schools blur the line between religious and secular education. Charter schools can and occasionally do teach creationism. This is due to the complex rules concerning what is permissible and what isn’t permissible in charter schools, schools that receive public funding but operate independently of the established public school rules and regulations that vary from state to state and are from time to time privately owned.

Charter schools that teach creationism are not particularly common but they exist with one of the highest profile examples being that of Responsive Education Solutions (of which Slate reported on in 2014) a charter school system that operates in Texas and Arkansas, and until the beginning of 2016 also operated schools in Indiana, RES teaches around 17,000 students and despite the ridiculous content they teach to those unfortunate enough to go to their schools their schools receive public funds

Creationism In Conventional Public Schools & Academic Freedom Bills:

Creationism can be taught in public schools in Louisana and in Tennessee due to bills passed in 2008 and 2012 with Louisana’s being 2008 bill entitled the Louisiana Academic Freedom Act and Tennessee’s 2012 H.B. 368/S.B. 893. One of the key terms people need to familiarize themselves with, in this context is “Academic Freedom bills”. An “Academic Freedom bill” is a bill that deregulates the science classroom and makes it permissible to teach ideas that are unscientific alongside scientific ideas and theories in an effort to make the creationism and evolution appear as if they are on equal footing to impressable children.

The only 2 examples of Academic Freedom bills that have survived the vetting of legislative chambers and made it through the whole process by which a bill becomes a law is Louisiana’s Academic Freedom Act and Tennessee’s “Monkey Bill” (due to an article in Tennessee’s state constitution about how bills become laws if the governor doesn’t sign them within 10 days). That hasn’t stopped the legislative chambers of various states from trying to make one of these bills into their latest achievements with examples including Alabama, Oklahoma, Maryland, New Mexico, Florida, Missouri, Michigan, South Carolina, and Iowa. A few of these states have only had 1 attempt (Maryland, South Carolina, and Iowa) and the others had have more than one.

In Alabama, there were multiple attempts, including one that unanimously passed the state senate, and a few that died without being voted on (due to being stuck in committee), and a few that were never passed. In Oklahoma, two different bills that were after the same idea, in theory, were introduced into each chamber of the state legislature but didn’t pass the other chamber (one was introduced by representative Sally Kern and it passed the house but not the Senate, and the other was introduced in the Senate but didn’t pass it). In 2009 in Oklahoma, a new bill highly based off of the Louisana bill which passed in 2008 was introduced but died in committee. In Maryland, a bill was introduced in 2006 but lapsed at the end of the 2006 legislative session. In New Mexico initially, two bills were introduced in 2007 (one for each chamber) but died at the end of the legislative session. In 2009 another bill would be introduced which would die in committee at the end of the legislative session. In Florida, in early 2008 a bill was introduced to the state Senate and to the state House which was based on the Discovery Institute’s model statue but was cleverly used by state-level Senate Democrats to protect the discussion of sex-education which resulted in it being defeated and different from the state House of Representatives version of the bill. In 2008 in Missouri, a member of the state’s Representatives introduced an academic freedom bill which would eventually pass committee but died when the legislative session ended. Another representative would try in 2009 and would fail in the same way. In 2008 in Michigan bills for both state chambers would be introduced but would die at the end of the year without having gathered enough support to be affirmatively voted on. The same would happen for both South Carolina (bill introduced in the state Senate) and Iowa (Senate as well) where both would die in committee but on different years with Iowa’s happening in 2009 and South Carolina’s happening in 2008.

That might seem like a long time ago to some but not only is it not a long time ago but it’s worth noting that in Oklahoma in 2017 another attempt occurred which would be blocked in late April but not before making it through a house panel on general government oversight and accountability. It’s also important to remember that some of the proponents of anti-evolution legislation are still in office, such as Sally Kern, John Moolenaar, and continue to be involved in politics with an example being Alan Hays, one of the proponents and sponsors of the Florida bills (who was elected to be the supervisor of elections of his home in Lake County, Florida).

The debate hasn’t ended. Politicians who’d threaten the time and resources of science teachers continue to wait in office, and would undoubtedly make another attempt to deregulate our science classrooms and urge science teachers to behave like creationism and evolution are on equal footing if voters, scientists, science communicators, and more don’t pressure them to not waste tax-payer dollars on their ideological campaigns to deregulate our classrooms. Don’t be indifferent and don’t arrogantly think they’ve given up until they are all out of office.

Secular Humanism & Skepticism Inform My Politics

Similar to many young Hispanic progressives my personal politics have gone from moderately conservative to progressive. This is in part due to my personal evolution as a learner, researcher, and the evolution of my opinions on religion, and history. I went from thinking simplistically about the nature of the world due to my limited information and a hyperinflation of how much I thought I knew relative to all the information out there to having thoughts that border on complex about intersectionality, history, religion, and an overwhelming desire to learn more in general which also brings with it an understanding of the importance of losing the arrogance I held as a child.

As someone who is both a skeptic of organized religion and someone who firmly believes that humanity does not need God or any other gods to come up with valid moral principals and engage in moral behavior toward ourselves and the world we live in, these positions inform my politics. That’s not to say that believers can’t share my political views because believers DO share my political views, but it is to say that as a person my politics come from a distinct worldview that led me to where I am now and continues to guide me as I grow.

My secular humanism is a greater motivator for me to be progressive than my non-denominational Christianity was. My skepticism is what led me to acknowledge that the past and the politics of the past didn’t work for a lot of people and that politics, in general, ought to focus on creating the most good for as many people as possible.

My skepticism pushed me to think more critically about the political values I held at the time I stopped believing. That internal skepticism of mine pushed me away from religion and was (and is) applied consistently to the rest of the views I held (and hold) within my worldview and it led to more thorough thoughts about politics and for me to constantly check my thoughts for contradictions and for faulty logic which led me to my current position.

Skepticism being my innate position allows me to hear political and sociological claims and to investigate them objectively no matter who the claimant is and whatever my relationship with or feelings happen to be towards the claimants. That’s a good thing. It allows me to have a more thorough understanding of Chicago’s gun violence problem than “gun laws don’t work”. It allows me to realize that “freedom of speech” isn’t just someone being bullied and society allowing the bullies to mercilessly continue their bullying but rather that freedom of speech means the government shouldn’t censor the bully’s speech but that others can react to it appropriately and should step in to protect the victim of bullying or to push for the victim to improve their skills until they can do it themselves, and that freedom of speech isn’t neutrality in the face of oppression. Skepticism being innate means I understand that people who in theory hold views similar to mine fall for hoaxes like when people claimed that the Army football team was kneeling with Kaepernick but it was actually the Navy football team kneeling in prayer.

Secular humanism pushes me to think not only about my own interests but the interests of others. It encourages me to behave morally and to do things which result in greater good for people other than myself. Secular humanism (to me at least) pushes me to believe that others will behave morally and intelligently and to work so that others live happier and better lives. Secular humanism is what leads me to note that an individualistic skepticism is not enough but that compassionate skepticism is necessary. My understanding of and the importance I place in compassionate and group-based skepticism comes from the same place as my secular humanism. Secular humanism is what made me into a progressive who wants a country that works for as many people as possible. It’s what leads me to be a political activist and to not be indifferent to how politics affects myself and others.

I value truth and I value moral behavior and those things push me to be progressive. My progressivism is a product of secular humanism and skepticism and that’s a wonderful thing.

Introducing The Puerto Rican Progressive

Welcome to the Puerto Rican Progressive! This is a political blog authored primarily by Luciano Gonzalez with the occasional guest post created by various other Puerto Rican progressives.

The purpose of this blog is to create a space for Puerto Rican Progressives to talk about both trending and non-trending political issues and for us to boldly and aggressively state our opinions and discuss them online with both those who agree with us and those who disagree with us.

In this blog, we’ll discuss issues relevant to Puerto Ricans and other Hispanics in and out of the United States. If you’re interested in that bookmark this blog and check back for all sorts of new blog posts covering elections & races all over the country and Latin America. If you’re interested in contributing or in getting in touch check out the contact page!