While there are increasing signs of a recovery from the Great Recession, years of economic progress have vanished for many African Americans and Hispanics in particular, and home ownership remains largely out of reach. That has put new energy into efforts to ensure that the economic turnaround is more inclusive.
“The CFPB’s work in the area of fair lending is a priority and has only just begun,” the agency declared. In this presentation, we walk you through some of its biggest impacts.
To learn how you can stay current in today’s rapidly changing banking and financial industries, visit http://www.lexisnexis.com/banking.
For more topics that are transforming the legal industry,
visit http://www.thisisreallaw.com.
Citizens United Is Unconstitutional - Restore Democracy to The PeopleLinda Sturgeon
Visit http://americansforamendment.org/ for more information.
We are not affiliated with MTA, but, this quote is most applicable from https://movetoamend.org/voters-both-parties-object-supreme-court-activism "We’re fed up with the influence of Big Money in our political system. “If anything can unite Americans across party and ideological lines, it should be the arrogant and unprecedented Supreme Court ruling [Citizens United] that corporations [including unions, associations, and other entities] are “persons” with all the protections and rights of the Constitution. In a case trumped up by the court itself, five activist judges reversed 100 years of precedent to allow unlimited, special-interest money to be spent in our local, state and federal elections. Corporations [and other entities] are now free to spend unlimited money on behalf of a candidate they favor, or against one they wish to silence. No grassroots organization will ever be likely to raise enough money for their candidate to compete on a level playing field. Put simply in a New York Times headline, the story comes down to, “Lobbies’ New Power: Cross Us and Our Cash Will Bury You.” As moderate Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, Jr. wrote, “The only proper response to this distortion of our political system by ideologically driven justices is a popular revolt.”The choice is simple. Will government answer to the people, or serve special interests? Will elections be an opportunity for the people to speak powerfully to their government, or will elections become competitions among corporate powers, unions and giant foundations to serve their own interests? And what if corporate interests are tied to an unfriendly foreign power? It is difficult to imagine how our democracy would be strengthened by a large infusion of cash into our political process from such governments as Russia, China or Saudi Arabia. Most outrage at this attack on democracy focuses on national politics. However, the ruling also nullifies protections against corporate domination of elections in the 23 states, including Colorado, that model their laws on the federal Constitution.”
This tutorial was presented by Chris Roush, director of the Carolina Business News Initiative, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. He presented it for the Reynolds Center for Business Journalism in 2009.
While there are increasing signs of a recovery from the Great Recession, years of economic progress have vanished for many African Americans and Hispanics in particular, and home ownership remains largely out of reach. That has put new energy into efforts to ensure that the economic turnaround is more inclusive.
“The CFPB’s work in the area of fair lending is a priority and has only just begun,” the agency declared. In this presentation, we walk you through some of its biggest impacts.
To learn how you can stay current in today’s rapidly changing banking and financial industries, visit http://www.lexisnexis.com/banking.
For more topics that are transforming the legal industry,
visit http://www.thisisreallaw.com.
Citizens United Is Unconstitutional - Restore Democracy to The PeopleLinda Sturgeon
Visit http://americansforamendment.org/ for more information.
We are not affiliated with MTA, but, this quote is most applicable from https://movetoamend.org/voters-both-parties-object-supreme-court-activism "We’re fed up with the influence of Big Money in our political system. “If anything can unite Americans across party and ideological lines, it should be the arrogant and unprecedented Supreme Court ruling [Citizens United] that corporations [including unions, associations, and other entities] are “persons” with all the protections and rights of the Constitution. In a case trumped up by the court itself, five activist judges reversed 100 years of precedent to allow unlimited, special-interest money to be spent in our local, state and federal elections. Corporations [and other entities] are now free to spend unlimited money on behalf of a candidate they favor, or against one they wish to silence. No grassroots organization will ever be likely to raise enough money for their candidate to compete on a level playing field. Put simply in a New York Times headline, the story comes down to, “Lobbies’ New Power: Cross Us and Our Cash Will Bury You.” As moderate Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, Jr. wrote, “The only proper response to this distortion of our political system by ideologically driven justices is a popular revolt.”The choice is simple. Will government answer to the people, or serve special interests? Will elections be an opportunity for the people to speak powerfully to their government, or will elections become competitions among corporate powers, unions and giant foundations to serve their own interests? And what if corporate interests are tied to an unfriendly foreign power? It is difficult to imagine how our democracy would be strengthened by a large infusion of cash into our political process from such governments as Russia, China or Saudi Arabia. Most outrage at this attack on democracy focuses on national politics. However, the ruling also nullifies protections against corporate domination of elections in the 23 states, including Colorado, that model their laws on the federal Constitution.”
This tutorial was presented by Chris Roush, director of the Carolina Business News Initiative, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. He presented it for the Reynolds Center for Business Journalism in 2009.
Consumer protections exist to prevent fraud, usury, extortion and other financial crimes. Since individuals are not always aware of commercial and legal details surrounding transactions and business communications, undesirable and underhanded access to the wallets and bank accounts of unsuspecting people becomes possible.
Commercial bail works - An Ongoing Research ReportDerek Nelson
Research and history shows that the commercial bail bond industry has been proven to be the most effective means of accountable pretrial release, at no cost to the tax payer and provides greater success towards the reduction of habitual criminal behavior.
Chris Roush presents "Investigating Private Companies" during the four-day, Reynolds Center webinar, "Investigating Private Companies and Nonprofits."
For more information about free training for business journalists, please visit businessjournalism.org.
Consumer protections exist to prevent fraud, usury, extortion and other financial crimes. Since individuals are not always aware of commercial and legal details surrounding transactions and business communications, undesirable and underhanded access to the wallets and bank accounts of unsuspecting people becomes possible.
Commercial bail works - An Ongoing Research ReportDerek Nelson
Research and history shows that the commercial bail bond industry has been proven to be the most effective means of accountable pretrial release, at no cost to the tax payer and provides greater success towards the reduction of habitual criminal behavior.
Chris Roush presents "Investigating Private Companies" during the four-day, Reynolds Center webinar, "Investigating Private Companies and Nonprofits."
For more information about free training for business journalists, please visit businessjournalism.org.
Case Study Grading Rubric – Fall 2015Levels of Quality.docxtidwellveronique
Case Study Grading Rubric – Fall 2015
Levels of Quality
Performance
Criteria
Needs Improvement
Meets Expectations
Exceptional
Structure
0 to 10 points
Disorganized
Needs reorganizing
Well organized, flows logically
Analysis
0 to 40 points
Mostly opinions, arguments not supported
Some arguments supported
All solid arguments with support
Style and Readability
0 to 10 points
Many misspellings, not edited, problems with grammar and sentence structure
Less than 3 misspellings, appears to be edited, grammar and sentence structure acceptable
No misspellings, well edited, grammar and sentence structure excellent, easily readable
Originality
0 to 20 points
Not original, based solely on lectures and readings
Less than 3 original insights and arguments
Many original insights and arguments
Thoroughness
0 to 20 points
Some elements of assignment not completed
All elements of assignment completed
All elements of assignment completed with exceptional thoroughness
Center for Public Integrity
The ‘Citizens United’ decision and why it matters
Nonprofits or political parties?
By John Dunbaremail
By now most folks know that the U.S. Supreme Court did something that changed how money can be spent in elections and by whom, but what happened and why should you care?
The Citizens United ruling, released in January 2010, tossed out the corporate and union ban on making independent expenditures and financing electioneering communications. It gave corporations and unions the green light to spend unlimited sums on ads and other political tools, calling for the election or defeat of individual candidates.
In a nutshell, the high court’s 5-4 decision said that it is OK for corporations and labor unions to spend as much as they want to convince people to vote for or against a candidate.
The decision did not affect contributions. It is still illegal for companies and labor unions to give money directly to candidates for federal office. The court said that because these funds were not being spent in coordination with a campaign, they “do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.”
So if the decision was about spending, why has so much been written about contributions? Like seven and eight-figure donations from people like casino magnate and billionaire Sheldon Adelson who, with his family, has given about $40 million to so-called “super PACs,” formed in the wake of the decision?
For that, we need to look at another court case — SpeechNow.org v. FEC. The lower-court case used the Citizens United case as precedent when it said that limits on contributions to groups that make independent expenditures are unconstitutional.
And that’s what led to the creation of the super PACs, which act as shadow political parties. They accept unlimited donations from billionaires, corporations and unions and use it to buy advertising, most of it negative.
The Supreme Court kept limits on disclosure in place, and super PACs are requi ...
A true Washington Lobbyist takes part in promoting the causes he/she truly believes in. He/she may play a role in influencing health reforms, educational funding, pharmaceutical research and so on for or against it. Recently, a significant number of lobbyists has doubled manifesting how important this sector is in terms of decision making and getting the bills passed quickly.
Controlling the Growth of Payday Lending Through Local O.docxdickonsondorris
Controlling the Growth of Payday Lending
Through Local Ordinances and Resolutions
A Guide for Advocacy Groups and Government Officials
October 2012
Written By:
Kelly Griffith, Co-Director
Southwest Center for Economic Integrity
[email protected]
Linda Hilton, Director
Coalition of Religious Communities
Crossroads Urban Center - Utah
[email protected]
Lynn Drysdale, Staff Attorney
Jacksonville Area Legal Aid - Florida
[email protected]
Preface
Neighborhoods across America are witnessing the resurgence of predatory small loan operations.
In the last twenty years or so, payday lenders have exploited deregulated interest rates, won special
treatment from state legislatures, or designed products that slip through legislative or regulatory
loopholes. As a result, payday lending legally operates in 32 states, while 18 states either prohibit it,
curb it with rate caps, or have other restrictions that disrupt the payday loan business model costing
consumers as much as $7.46 billion a year in interest for over $44 billion in loans from both storefront
and online lenders. Payday loans cost cash-strapped borrowers triple- digit interest rates, trap borrowers
in repeat loans, foster coercive debt collection practices, and endanger bank account ownership for
families that live on the financial edge.
Payday lending has become increasingly controversial as the consequences of this defective
financial product have become painfully apparent. Payday lenders now outnumber Starbucks and
Burger King outlets across the country. Billions of dollars in usurious interest flows out of communities
to the national chain lenders. Mapping of payday loan locations by neighborhood characteristics and
studies of payday loan use issued by regulators and academics document that these high cost loans
disproportionately harm minority families and low to moderate-income borrowers. (For more
information, please visit Consumer Federation of America's www.paydayloaninfo.org)
Local leaders see the impact of payday lending on economic development, requests for financial
assistance, and financial distress in communities with high levels of low-to-moderate income and
minority families. While industry lobbying and campaign contributions have thwarted reform in many
state legislatures, local officials are taking action to stop payday lenders from exploiting their
neighborhoods by enacting restrictive zoning requirements and local ordinances.
Local policymakers interested in preventing predatory payday lending can also lend their support
to state-level reform efforts to cap annual interest rates at an all-inclusive 36 percent or repeal payday
loan authorization outright. As documented in North Carolina, reinstating small loan caps allows
responsible credit to flow, while saving consumers the billions of dollars now lost to predatory payday
lenders. Resolutions urging state legisla.
Respond to each peer initial post and question at the end with a resmickietanger
Respond to each peer initial post and question at the end with a response about 3-4 sentences long.
Peer 1
Voluntary organizations funded by public contributions have existed since the seventeenth century; however, didn’t become a unified sector until the 1970s (Renz, 2016, pg. 7). Because non-profits are diverse and complex it can be difficult to define and make inclusive to one definition. It can refer to charitable tax-exempt organizations, civic organizations that do not allow the deductibility of donations, and unincorporated organizations (Renz, 2016, pg. 3).
The non-profit sector covers a broad spectrum of public services such as hospitals, foundations, charities, religious institutions, and disaster relief organizations. Acknowledging the importance of non-profits is easy as these organizations attempt to address the issues of millions of people whether it be donations, programs, or services. Although tax exempt, government policies play a crucial role in the growing number of nonprofit organizations either indirectly by providing incentives or directly through grants and contracts (Renz, 2016, pg. 17). Non-profits don’t exist to make a profit but to use excess resources to meet needs that the government alone cannot fulfill. These organizations are not prohibited from earning revenue as long as the profit-making activities are related to the recognized program purpose.
The three main sectors private, non-profit, and the government share several similarities and key differences. One of the main differences is how their resources are handled. A non-profit organizations’ money is legally required to support its mission while private entities are able to distribute their resources to shareholders. Government agencies redirect their surplus resources back into government initiatives. Political shifts also highlight additional differences. As the political power changes so do the priorities in governmental agencies and the availability of public sector programs (The role of non-profits vs government and for profit sectors, 2015). Political shifts can garner more support and funding for non-profits but because the organizations secure funding from outside sources, programs can continue indefinitely as long as resources are available without any effect of a political change.
Non-profits are typically restricted with their work inside of the community as long as its business and mission related. Most restrictions imposed on non-profits are administered through state and federal government agencies through tax compliance, incorporation rules, and political participation.
Peer 2
What is the nonprofit sector? A nonprofit sector is an organization that provides a service(s) that is not conducted for the purpose of making a profit. The organization is sustained by donations, sales of goods and services, or by revenue from the government (Wolfe). The United States has three sectors government, private, and nonprofit. The private nonp ...
In response to the financial crisis of 2008, the Dodd-Frank Act included the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to ensure that banks, lenders, and financial companies treat consumers fairly by providing greater protection and establishing rights to consumers of financial products. Is that purpose and role now in jeopardy?
1 P a g e ‘Fight for $15’ Protests Prepare for Step.docxhoney725342
1 | P a g e
‘Fight for $15’ Protests: Prepare for Stepped-Up Pay Demands
By Allen Smith
4/15/2015
The “Fight for $15” protests on April 15, 2015, which pressed companies to pay their workers a
minimum of $15 per hour, were expected to include 60,000 protesters in 200 cities and 40 countries.
The movement has moved beyond just fast-food workers to include retail employees, childcare
workers, adjunct professors, home care providers and airport workers.
Molita Spaulding, a home care worker from Miami, said, “I’ve dedicated my career to caring for other
people. I love my work, and it matters a lot to a lot of families. But my job pays me so little that it’s
harder and harder to make ends meet. I stepped up to join the Fight for $15 with my co-workers to
speak out for stable, quality home care [and] a wage we can live on. We help people live with
dignity. We should be paid enough to pay our own bills.”
“HR should care because this is the new union movement,” Michael Lotito, an attorney with Littler in
San Francisco, told SHRM Online. “It is more credible with the income inequality theme, the new
election rules, e-mail use for employees for union activity, new FLSA [Fair Labor Standards Act]
rules coming out, micro units and the most activist pro-union NLRB [National Labor Relations Board]
in decades, coupled with the last two years of a very friendly administration toward labor.
“The April 15 protests will be worldwide,” he said, continuing with reasons why these particular
protests are expected to be so significant: “The recent pay increase announcements [at McDonald’s
and Wal-Mart], the April 15 date (for $15), the fact it is on tax day (income inequality) and
McDonald’s 60th anniversary suggest this is going to be real big.”
Lotito surmised that “Few employees will participate, but the SEIU [Service Employees International
Union] will bring together rent-a-protestors to make the media splashes they are known for. Further,
the new NLRB election rules become effective on April 14, so I am anticipating election filings before
the NLRB too. Could be a significant zoo.”
‘Nothing Is Ever Enough’
Lotito said, “Much of this is hype. But the SEIU is patient.” He added, “Nothing is ever enough for the
SEIU, and they are not known for stopping unless their target punches back hard.”
While the SEIU-funded Fight for $15 movement took credit for McDonald’s recent raise at its 1,500
restaurants run by company headquarters (though not for employees at its 12,500 franchisees), for
example, it simultaneously criticized the raise of just under $10 an hour as a “publicity stunt.”
And in talking about Fight for $15 on March 31, 2015, SEIU President Mary Kay Henry said, “I want
to share some of the words from leaders who inspired me last night. We heard from courageous
workers like Dunkin’ Donuts worker Erica Concepcion, who set the room on fire when she said, ‘I’m
fighting for $15 now, but after we win, I’ll be fig ...
Payday lenders throw millions at powerful politicians to get their way
1. Payday lenders throw millions at powerful politicians to get
their way
My Thoughts About This Article:
Yes paydayloans might be "bad" for many people have, but in truth here is the only alternative. So
can you ask them to pay an insane interest or somewhat the debtor get without food or heat for the
week? From a legal viewpoint they're having not a problem although for me it is a call that is robust.
Lawmakers are seeking to crackdown on lenders.
And it appears to be working.
Since the beginning of 2013, high-cost loan providers and those with ties to the industry have spent
more than $13 million on lobbying and campaign donations to at least 50 lawmakers, according to a
new report from the nonprofit Americans for Financial Reform.
Recipients include big names on both sides of the aisle, like House Speaker John Boehner and
Democrat Debbie Wasserman Schultz, though lesser-known lawmakers received some of the biggest
contributions.
One major lender, Cash America International (CSH), has spent nearly $1.8 million on lobbying
efforts and donations. Meanwhile, a leading trade group, the Online Lenders Alliance, has spent
another $1.8 million, which it told CNNMoney is part of its "federal outreach [to] educate
policymakers."
All of this money has been pouring in as consumer groups and federal regulators have ramped up
scrutiny of short-term, high-cost loans, like payday loans -- which are infamous for carrying fees that
translate into triple-digit interest rates and trapping consumers in cycles of debt.
2. Related: Payday loan borrowers pay more in fees than original loan
Last year, the Department of Justice launched "Operation Choke Point," an initiative aimed at
cracking down on banks that do business with fraudulent companies, including payday lenders that
break state or federal laws.
The payday lending industry argues that the crackdown is unfair and that even legal operators are
targeted as part of the initiative. The government is "bullying banks into choking off legal businesses
because they simply didn't like the industry," Online Lenders Alliance said in a recent statement.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has also started taking enforcement actions against
payday lenders. And next year, the consumer watchdog is expected to announce a variety of new
rules for the industry.
To get the government off their backs, these "quick-fix consumer lenders" are attempting to cash in
on the "$13 million tab" they've built up through lobbying and campaign contributions over the last
two years, says Gynnie Robnett, campaign director at AFR and one of the report's authors.
The Online Lenders Alliance, for example, has ramped up its lobbying efforts significantly. Between
2012 and 2013, its spending jumped more than 40%, according to lobbying records.
"They have no problem using the money they make off of vulnerable cash-strapped consumers to
curry favor in D.C.," said Robnett.
Related: Debt collection horror stories
The report found at least 50 lawmakers, political parties and committees who have received
campaign contributions from payday lending industry groups and companies.
While any amount of lobbying or donations from a controversial industry can prompt questions of
influence, these politicians raise million of dollars each election from a variety of sources, so
contributions from payday lenders represent a small fraction.
Republican Jeb Hensarling, a representative from Texas and a vocal critic of the CFPB, has received
$183,400 from the payday lending industry since the beginning of 2013 (directly and through his
political action committee). That's more than any other lawmaker, the report found.
As chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services, Hensarling is in charge of
Congressional oversight of government agencies like the Federal Reserve and Federal Deposit
Insurance Commission.
A spokesperson said Hensarling was not available for comment.
Meanwhile, dozens of other lawmakers have also received money from the industry -- up to $90,000
a head for the 2014 election.
Some have signed letters to the DOJ questioning Operation Choke Point or have sponsored bills that
would end the initiative altogether. Others have pushed for laws that would allow payday lenders to
circumvent state laws and introduced legislation that would weaken the CFPB.
Consumer groups and Attorneys General across the country have slammed these efforts, saying that
3. current and new protections are needed to keep the industry from preying on the nation's most
vulnerable consumers.
"We hope that those in Congress who work most closely with the payday industry shouldn't have to
be reminded that they work for all of us, not just those with the money to influence elections,"
Robnett said.
The AFR report analyzed lobbying and donations to political candidates, their political action
committees and other political groups. This money came from payday lenders, installment and auto
title loan providers (all categorized as short-term, high-cost loan providers), as well as their industry
groups and related companies and employees.
For a list of top recipients and donors, view the full report here.
CNNMoney (New York) December 18, 2014: 11:31 AM ET
http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/18/pf/payday-lenders-contributions/
Final Thoughts:
As you are able to start to see the news source above says regulators are prepared to crack the whip
on cash advance lenders. I am wondering what you are thoughts are on this?