(See the original statement here.)

The Friends Committee on National Legislation has witnessed the conflict in Syria with grave concern. What beganas a powerful nonviolent movement in 2011 has since escalated into a full-blown protracted civil war. We opposeU.S. military intervention, and urge the U.S. government to support a comprehensive diplomatic settlement andgenerous humanitarian aid. FCNL advocates that the U.S. government take the following actions:

The U.S. has a long history of refusing to engage diplomatically with Syria, which has exacerbated regionaltensions. The U.S. needs to reverse course and fully utilize diplomatic approaches to conflict resolution.We are encouraged by the U.S.-Russia Syria Plan intended to secure a negotiated settlement among Syrianregime officials, internal factions and other regional actors to the conflict. It is critical that those diplomaticefforts include sustained communication with all who are party to the conflict.

In particular, the U.S. diplomatic agenda with Iran should be broadened beyond the nuclear issue to addressthe crisis in Syria. Iran has critical influence on the Syrian regime and they could play a role in getting Assadand various parts of the Syrian government to buy in to a transition. Until all key actors are included at thenegotiating table, the political tensions at play will only escalate.

Military intervention—whether through a U.S.-enforced no-fly-zone over Syria, U.S. troops on the ground, orarming of the opposition—would escalate the bloodshed. War is the ultimate human rights violation. Furthermilitarizing the conflict would destabilize an already volatile region.

As former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates pointed out, imposing a no-fly-zone is an act of war. Establishinga no-fly zone would begin with the U.S. bombing Syria’s anti-aircraft system. Given the widespread presenceof Syria’s anti-aircraft systems, this would further endanger vulnerable civilians.

The U.S. government should offer generous humanitarian assistance to help ease the suffering of Syriancivilians. It is essential that this aid be politically neutral, and it must be delivered to impartial humanitarianorganizations. Proposals from Senator John McCain and others to administer aid through the SyrianOpposition Coalition would be disastrous, as it politicizes the aid and further endangers civilians.

Since 1943, FCNL remains steadfastly committed to a world free of war and the threat of war. We will continue to lobby Congress and the administration to help end the unimaginable human suffering in Syria, and for more effective and principled U.S. policies in the Middle East based on equity and justice for all.

Updated May 13, 2103

Under current law, the federal budget includes a $1 trillion cut to Pentagon spending over the next ten years. However, this victory could be undone any day. Some members of Congress are still looking for ways to reallocate more money to the Pentagon and reduce the size of these cuts. We have reason to celebrate, as Congress has accepted that Pentagon spending will be cut at least $500 billion in the next decade, but the debate still rages over whether to keep, reduce or entirely eliminate the other $500 billion in cuts.

How Did We Get Here

Budget Control Act of 2011

In August 2011, in exchange for an increase in the debt limit, Congress passed this legislation which included $1.2 trillion in discretionary spending cuts over the next ten years, from 2013-2021. The cuts were evenly split between pentagon spending, with war spending exempt, and domestic discretionary spending, which includes programs like the National Park Service and Low-Income Housing Vouchers. The Budget Control Act (BCA) also set up a Supercommittee, a bipartisan group of members of congress brought together to craft an alternative to $1.2 trillion in cuts. The Supercommittee failed to reach a compromise, and thus triggered the automatic across-the-board cuts known as sequestration.

American Tax Relief Act of 2012

With no time to spare, Congress passed the American Tax Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA) on January 1, 2013. This bill created $620 billion of new revenue over ten years, mainly by raising taxes for individuals with incomes over $400,000 (and households over $450,000). The deal also extended unemployment insurance for one year and postponed sequestration until March 1. Although this “fiscal cliff deal” dealt with some immediate issues, it failed to permanently address other issues, like sequestration.

Sequestration

Sequestration, or the automatic across the board cuts, created under the BCA began on March 1, 2013. This indiscriminate mechanism automatically cuts all discretionary spending by $1.2 trillion over the next ten years, split evenly between pentagon and domestic spending. Many low-income programs are exempt, but some critical human services are not, and Medicare spending is cut by 2 percent.

Continuing Resolution

Because Congress has not passed a budget in four years, federal programs have been funded by temporary spending measures, or Continuing Resolutions (CR). Congress passed a CR for FY13 that was signed into law on March 26, 2013, the day before the latest CR was set to expire and three weeks after sequestration went into effect.

House Budget

The House of Representatives passed the budget authored by Rep. Paul Ryan (WI) on March 21, 2013. This budget repealed sequestration for the Department of Defense, while drastically cutting vital domestic human needs programs.

Senate Budget

The Senate passed a budget authored by Sen. Patty Murray (WA) on March 23, 2013. It was the first budget to pass the Senate in four years. Senator Murray’s budget replaces sequestration in its entirety and cuts $240 billion from defense.

President’s Fiscal Year 2014 Budget

President Obama released his FY14 budget on April 10, 2013, almost 2 months late. This $1.8 trillion dollar package replaced sequestration in its entirety through a combination of revenue increases and spending cuts.

What’s Next?

The concessions made in President Obama’s budget (mainly on entitlement reform and Pentagon spending) set the stage for the next round of debates on the budget. There is potential for a grand bargain scenario, a 10 year bipartisan agreement that would ideally replace sequestration and reduce the deficit through a combination of spending cuts and revenue increases.

On the hill, we are hearing that entitlement reform coupled with changes in the tax code will be a major part of any such grand bargain scenario. Chances of the House and Senate going to conference on their budget resolutions seem slim, although recently, Senate democrats have been pushing for a return to regular order and a conference on the budget. The approaching debt ceiling deadline, once considered to be the biggest incentive for a bargain, may not prove as such. With default now pushed back from May to October, the likelihood of the debt ceiling limit forcing a grand or mini bargain seems slim. Democrats generally support a clean bill raising the debt limit, while Republicans will argue for further spending reductions to be attached to the debt limit legislation.

Even though the House and Senate have not reconciled their budgets, in mid-May, the House will begin their appropriations process, the process through which Congress allocates money to different agencies. The House plans to mark-up appropriations at $967 billion, while the Senate is sticking to the larger amount of $1.058 trillion. This $91 billion discrepancy opens the opportunity for a wide spectrum of budget deals, from “good” to “bad,” and the negotiations continue.

That is why it is so important YOU stay engaged and encourage your member of congress to maintain support for a $1 trillion cut to the Pentagon.

For a printable pdf of this document, click here.

Usually, these warnings are spot on, even if they’re scary and hard to wrap your head around.

Last week, we hit a milestone that we knew was coming but which is still truly terrible. The New York Times headline read, “Heat-Trapping Gas Passes Milestone, Raising Fears.” It sounded innocuous enough—a little bit like the usual alarmism that’s correct but depressing—until you read further into the article.

Here are some of the salient bits:

Scientific monitors reported that the gas had reached an average daily level that surpassed 400 parts per million — just an odometer moment in one sense, but also a sobering reminder that decades of efforts to bring human-produced emissions under control are faltering.

The best available evidence suggests the amount of the gas in the air has not been this high for at least three million years, before humans evolved, and scientists believe the rise portends large changes in the climate and the level of the sea.

To review: we’ve hit a point where the average daily level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is consistently above 400 parts per million.

The last time there was this much carbon in the air, humans did not yet exist. (Seriously, just think about that for a second!)

To say this is dangerous and unsustainable is to understate the situation in a significant way.

Understanding the magnitude of this new state of the atmosphere requires some context. 350.org explains the situation like this:

We just went over the 400, but what are the other two numbers?

But for a variety of reasons, it will be difficult or unwieldy to get back to 275 ppm. That’s where 350 comes in.

Scientists agree that we’re in a serious pickle. “It symbolizes that so far we have failed miserably in tackling this problem,” said Pieter P. Tans, who runs the monitoring program at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that reported the new reading.

Ralph Keeling, who runs another monitoring program at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, said a continuing rise could be catastrophic. “It means we are quickly losing the possibility of keeping the climate below what people thought were possibly tolerable thresholds,” he said.

Is there anything to be done about this, besides my personal favorite strategy of moping?

Well, yes. Congress could pass significant legislation to address the effects of climate change.

A price on carbon would do this in the most serious and immediate way, but there are other options too.

Legislation helping communities cope with the local impacts of a changing climate can ease the transition until bigger scale legislation is possible. S. 761, the Shaheen-Portman energy efficiency bill, is another good first step; as Sen. Shaheen likes to say, “the best greenhouse gas is the one we never emit in the first place.”

Some moping is allowed after this shocking and, frankly, depressing news, but not too much! Take this moment to write to your representatives or to your local newspaper and ask Congress to consider this their loudest wakeup call yet, and to begin serious work on legislation to price carbon, mitigate the effects of climate change, and on energy efficiency measures like S. 761.

Yes, this is seriously depressing news. But the joke's on us if we don't take this moment to continue pushing for action. Let's get going now so we don't ever see headlines about 450 or 500 parts per million.

FCNL believes that the United States should implement a policy of positive engagement with Afghanistan beyond 2014, but that a military-first relationship enshrined in a Bilateral Strategic Agreement would neglect Afghanistan’s political and economic transitions. These critical flashpoints in Afghan society should be the centerpiece of relations moving forward. Pakistan is among the regional governments that must come together in any lasting Afghan peace. FCNL hopes that Pakistan’s newly elected leadership will use its historic mandate to move towards peace with India and a more constructive role in Afghanistan’s affairs.

April 30, 2013

The Honorable Barack H. Obama
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama:

We are deeply concerned about the ongoing existence of the Guantanamo Bay detention center and the indefinite detention without trial of many of the people imprisoned there. As representatives of U.S. faith groups, we oppose torture and indefinite detention without trial because they are contrary to the inherent dignity of the human person. As the nation’s most visible and painful symbol of torture and indefinite detention, Guantanamo Bay is a constant reminder of a deep moral wound that will heal only when it is permanently closed.

In 2008, both major party candidates, you and John McCain, promised to close the prison at Guantanamo. Two days after your inauguration, you issued an executive order mandating that Guantanamo be shuttered within a year.

Unfortunately, more than four years later, our government has not kept its commitment to close Guantanamo. Congress passed, and you signed, legislation placing restrictions on transferring detainees out of Guantanamo. This year, the Department of State shut down the office responsible for closing the prison. More recently, reports indicate that the military has requested almost $196 million to upgrade facilities at Guantanamo.

In this time of austerity, instead of spending nearly $200 million to upgrade facilities at Guantanamo, our leaders should move forward with transferring detainees and closing the prison there. It is particularly troubling that the 86 cleared detainees remain imprisoned there – in many cases for years after they were cleared. The desperation and hopelessness felt by many of the detainees has recently sparked a hunger strike that is spreading among the detainees – highlighting the growing human tragedy of the detention center.

Guantanamo Bay is a place where our government tortured prisoners, and it continues to be a place where many are detained indefinitely without trial. We believe that our government has a moral obligation to close the prison at Guantanamo. We hope that you share this belief and that you will act expeditiously to close Guantanamo.

Sincerely,

Rev. Richard Killmer
Executive Director
National Religious Campaign Against Torture

Rev. Dr. A. Roy Medley
General Secretary
American Baptist Churches USA

Rabbi David Saperstein
Commission on Social Action of Reformed Judaism

Rev. Dr. Sharon E. Watkins
General Minister and President
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)

Archbisop Vicken Ayzakian
Legate
Armenian Church of America

Rev. Geoffrey Black
General Minister and President
United Church of Christ

Rev. Joel Boot
Executive Director
Christian Reformed Church in North America

Sr. Simone Campbell
Executive Director
NETWORK: A Catholic Social Justice Lobby

Sr. Patricia J. Chappell
Executive Director
Pax Christi USA

Rev. Richard Cizik
President
New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good

Shan Cretin
General Secretary
American Friends Service Committee

Bishop Demetrios of Mokissos
Metropolis of Chicago
Greek Orthodox Church in America

Rev. Paula Clayton Dempsey
Minister for Partnership Relations
Alliance of Baptists

Rabbi Robert Dobrusin
Co-Chair
T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights

Very Rev. John Edmunds, S.T.
President
Conference of Major Superiors of Men

Rabbi Rachel Goldenburg
Co-Chair
T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights

Rabbi Jill Jacobs
Executive Director
T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights

Bruce Knotts
Executive Director
Unitarian Universalist United Nations Office

Kathryn Lohre
President
National Council of Churches

Kathy McNeely
Director
Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns

Rev. Peter Morales
President
Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations

Stanley J. Noffsinger
General Secretary
Church of the Brethren

Rev. Gradye Parsons
Stated Clerk of the General Assembly
The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)

Diane Randall
Executive Secretary
Friends Committee on National Legislation

Kavneet Singh
General Secretary
World Sikh Council - America Region

Dr. Sayyid M. Syeed
National Director of Interfaith & Community Alliances
Islamic Society of North America

Jim Winkler
General Secretary
United Methodist General Board of Church and Society

Rev. Scott Anderson
Executive Director
Wisconsin Council of Churches

Rev. Peg Chemberlin
Executive Director
Minnesota Council of Churches

Rev. Steve Copley
Director
Arkansas Interfaith Alliance

Rev. Brenda Lynn Kneece
Executive Minister
South Carolina Christian Action Council

David Leslie
Executive Director
Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon

Leslie Manning
President
Maine Council of Churches

Rev. Dr. Russ Meyer
Executive Director
Florida Council of Churches

Rev. J. George Reed
Executive Director
North Carolina Council of Churches

Linda Lee Snyder
Interim Executive Director
New Hampshire Council of Churches

Rev. Sandra L. Strauss
Director of Public Advocacy
Pennsylvania Council of Churches

Rev. Dr. Robert White
Interim Executive Director
New York Council of Churches

May 8, 2013

The federal budget is a moral document that reflects and shapes our country’s priorities. Congress should craft it based on the needs of all. In Proverbs (31.9) we are reminded to “Speak up, judge righteously, champion the poor and the needy.” Significant strides have been made in reducing the federal deficit, and while we must continue in this task and replace the harmful cuts of sequestration, the federal budget should reflect a government that provides hope, opportunity, and a place at the table for all, especially for poor and hungry people.

The Interreligious Working Group on Domestic Human Needs (DHN) advocates for a just and sustainable budget – one that protects critical programs for the most vulnerable among us, ensures the long-term fiscal viability of the country, and provides future opportunity to those in most need. DHN’s budget priorities are grounded in three values that together ensure a just foundation upon which to strengthen the economy and our democracy.

1.     Shared Commitment to Meeting Immediate Needs for the Most Vulnerable: The faith community is committed to serving vulnerable populations, but we need government action to end hunger and poverty in the United States. With the unemployment rate still unsustainably high, and even higher for minorities, thousands of households are left with no place to call “home,” and families in every community are struggling to meet basic needs. We must not neglect the very programs that have allowed these families to survive the recession and live in dignity.  Congress has the responsibility, even as it continues to pursue long-term deficit reduction, to adequately fund critical human needs and social service programs; it is both a moral issue and an economic necessity.  

2.     Economic Opportunity and Justice for All: Economic opportunity is a value that defines our nation, but it continues to go unrealized as many people are left out of the recovery.  As President Obama stated in his 2013 State of the Union Address, “But we gather here knowing that there are millions of Americans whose hard work and dedication have not yet been rewarded. Our economy is adding jobs – but too many people still can’t find full-time employment. Corporate profits have rocketed to all-time highs – but for more than a decade, wages and incomes have barely budged.” Even before the recession, too many families were struggling to make ends meet, unable to lift themselves out of poverty. The federal budget must not only respond to families in crisis, it also must strengthen our long-term commitment to meeting human needs, expanding opportunity for all, and providing social service programs to address the underlying causes of poverty and inequality that afflict our nation. We urge Congress to make the long-term investments needed to reduce and eventually end poverty. This requires access to high quality education, sustainable jobs with living wages, and policies that help families build assets.  

3.     Intergenerational Responsibility: The gap between revenues and spending coupled with high health care costs and demographic shifts threatens our fiscal future. We cannot leave our children a legacy of rising debt, but neither can we leave them a legacy of rising poverty and diminished opportunities. Educational programs, adequate housing, health care, nutrition programs, and community services are vital tools for empowering individuals to overcome poverty.  Congress must make it a priority of ongoing budget negotiations to protect and equip the most vulnerable among us. We must pay for the services and investments our country needs through an equitable tax system. As the economy continues to recover, we urge Congress to craft a federal budget that balances long-term fiscal discipline with a plan to not only sustain critical services for those facing hunger and poverty but also with a vision and strategy to end them both.

OUR BUDGET PRIORITIES

1.     Protect programs that serve the most vulnerable.
·      Social safety net programs such as nutrition and housing programs, unemployment insurance, and refundable tax credits, which make up only 13 percent of the federal budget, are indispensable and must be preserved. Cuts to these programs threaten the stability of our communities and do little to reduce the deficit.
·      Low-income programs help sustain recovery by increasing consumer demand and supporting local economies. Cuts to these programs, however, weaken not only the economy but also the lives that depend upon them.  

2.     Invest in the Economy by:
·      Creating good, sustainable jobs, emphasizing public/private partnerships where possible;
·      Focusing job training and job creation on the individuals and distressed communities hardest hit by the recession and on industries that are most needed for this country’s future, including health care, renewable energy, infrastructure, education, and childcare;
·      Expanding workplace protections so that all individuals can know the dignity of a good job; and
·      Preparing the next generation of workers by improving child welfare, child support programs, low-income tax credits, and education.  

3.     Take a balanced and responsible approach to deficit reduction that:
·       Replaces the harmful consequences of sequestration with a balanced approach that includes responsible spending cuts and new revenues;
·       Recognizes that under current law we have enacted $2.5 trillion of deficit reduction, over half the amount recommended to stabilize the debt, and that even without including sequestration cuts 72 percent of all deficit reduction enacted over the past two years has come from spending cuts. Non-defense discretionary spending makes up a fraction of the federal budget, but has provided the majority of savings achieved;
·       Gives scrutiny to both military and non-military spending;
·       Does not disproportionately rely on spending cuts over revenues; and
·       Preserves the integrity of safety net programs — like Medicaid and SNAP — to ensure that poor and middle income families are able to meet their most basic needs.

Congress must craft the federal budget as a moral document to ensure that all are able to live in dignity and participate in the nation’s economy; that all federal programs — military and non-military — are examined for their efficient and effective responses to the actual needs of the nation; and that those whose income and wealth make them most able to support the shared needs of the whole society are called upon to do so. Our faith traditions command us to look after those who are most vulnerable to the nation’s action or inaction. We urge you to do the same.

American Friends Service Committee
Bread for the World
Church of the Brethren
Disciples Justice Action Network
The Episcopal Church
Faithful Reform in Health Care
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Jewish Council for Public Affairs
Islamic Society of North America
Mennonite Central Committee U.S. Washington Office
National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd
National Council of Jewish Women
NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby
Office of Social Justice, Christian Reformed Church
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
Sisters of Mercy of the Americas Institute Justice Team
Union for Reform Judaism
Unitarian Universalist Association
United Methodist Church – General Board of Church and Society

Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and Center for Civilians in Conflict

“The Civilian Impact of Drones: Unexamined Costs, Unanswered Questions” Fall 2012

This report focuses primarily on accountability and humanitarian implications for the drones program, particularly the danger drone strikes pose for civilians and the likely inability of the US to identify or address these matters in a way that is consistent with the laws of war, let alone with the ethics of a humanitarian society.

FCNL shares many of the concerns of the authors of this report. The inability to identify and acknowledge the killing of innocents is not only troubling in its own right, but challenges the dignity of people who live under the threat of drone strikes. Greater public and congressional oversight of the administration and the military is the only way to effectively challenge the morally and strategically problematic drones program.

Click here for the pdf version of our analysis.

International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic (Stanford Law School) and Global Justice Clinic (NYU School of Law)

"Living Under Drones: Death, Injury, and Trauma to Civilians from U.S. Drone Practice in Pakistan" September 2012

Interviewing residents of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) whose lives remain intimately affected by the CIA’s drone campaign in their communities, a team of researchers from the International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic (Stanford Law School) and the Global Justice Clinic (NYU School of Law) was able to highlight and verify many of the allegations against the U.S. government regarding the impact of drones on individuals and their already-fragile communities.

Click here for the pdf version of our analysis.

May 6, 2013

Dear Member of Congress:

We, the undersigned organizations, urge you to oppose the so-called Working Families Flexibility Act of 2013 (H.R. 1406), a smoke-and-mirrors bill that offers a pay cut for workers without any guaranteed flexibility or time off to care for their families or themselves. As members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have acknowledged, people today are struggling to meet the demands of job and family, as well as to make ends meet. Americans urgently need lawmakers to take the next step on the road to a family friendly nation. But H.R. 1406 is not what the nation needs. It is, at best, an empty promise and it would cause considerably more harm than good.

The Working Families Flexibility Act offers a false choice between time and pay. The bill’s supporters claim H.R. 1406 would give hourly workers more flexibility and time with their loved ones by allowing them to choose paid time off, rather than time-and-a-half wages, as compensation for working more than 40 hours in one week (“comp time”). But the irony is that workers will only get more time with their families after they’ve spent long hours away at work. And there is nothing in H.R. 1406 that guarantees that workers will be able to use the comp time they have earned when they need it.

The worker flexibility offered by H.R. 1406 is nothing more than a mirage. That’s because this proposal gives the employer, not the employee, the “flexibility” to decide when and even if comp time can be used. The bill permits the employer to deny the request entirely if the employee’s use of comp time would “unduly disrupt” operations or to grant leave on a day other than the day requested by the employee. This means that H.R. 1406 provides no guarant ee that workers can use their earned time when a child falls ill, to attend a parent-teacher conference, or to help an aging parent settle in to a nursing home. Employers can veto an employee’s request to use comp time even in cases of urgent need.

H.R. 14 06 would put workers at very real risk and provide s an interest - free loan to employers. An employee who does not accept comp time could be penalized with fewer hours, bad shifts and loss of overtime hours. And because it is cheaper to provide comp time tha n to pay overtime wages, there is a significant incentive for employers to hire fewer people and rely on overtime hours – paid for in future comp time – to get work done. It would permit employers to defer compensation for unused comp time for as long as 1 3 months, creating an interest - free loan for employers and hardships for workers.

H.R. 1406 provides few protections for workers and no additional resources to the U.S. Department of Labor for education, investigations and enforcement. While this bill add s significant new provisions to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), it provides no additional funds for the education and enforcement efforts the new provisions will require. W orkers would have few remedies in cases of employer misconduct or bankruptcy. The problem of wage theft (the non-payment or underpayment of wages for hours worked) would be exacerbated by making it easier for employers to avoid overtime compensation obligations.

The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) currently allows employers to provide workers with flexibility and time off without compromising their right to be paid fairly for the hours they work. The types of flexibility allowable under the FLSA include alternative start and end times, compressed or variable work hours within a week, split shifts, work at multiple locations and paid or unpaid time off. The proponents of H.R. 1406 set up a false dichotomy that would force workers to choose between flexibility and overtime pay when, in reality, the FLSA does nothing to prevent employers from offering both.

Instead of wasting time on smoke and mirrors, Congress should focus on policy solutions that have been proven to work. We urge Congress to adopt policies that will provide families with the economic security and the time that they need:

• The Healthy Families Act (H.R. 1286/S. 631), which makes earned paid sick days available to millions of workers;
• Paid family and medical leave insurance modeled on successful state programs in California and New Jersey;
• Expanded access to the FMLA f or more workers for more reasons, and so parents could, in fact, have the time they need to attend parent-teacher conferences without risking their jobs;
• The Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R. 1010 /S. 460) which brings the minimum wage back to a reasonable level and, in so doing, provides businesses with customers, improve s our economy, and help local s communities thrive;
• The Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 377/S. 84), which helps close the gender-based wage gap; and
• Measures to encourage fairer and more predictable work hours and prohibit mandatory overtime.

Workers simply should not have to put in extra time beyond a 40 - hour week and forgo pay to earn time to care for themselves or their loved ones. We urge Congress to reject H.R. 1406 and instead adopt family friendly policies that provide true flexibility for working families, not an empty promise that would make life appreciably harder for families that are already struggling.

Sincerely,

National Organizations

National Partnership for Women & Families
9to5
A Better Balance: The Work and Family Legal Center
African American Ministers In Action (AAMIA)
African American Ministers Leadership Council (AAMLC)
American Association of University Women (AAUW)
American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE)
AFL-CIO American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)
American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO
The Arc
Business and Professional Women's Foundation
Campaign for Community Change
Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
Coalition of Labor Union Women
Coalition on Human Needs
Demos
Direct Care Alliance
Equal Rights Advocates
The Every Child Matters Education Fund
Family Equality Council
Family Values @ Work Consortium
Feminist Majority
Food Chain Workers Alliance
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Half in Ten
HIV Prevention Justice Alliance
Human Rights Campaign
Interfaith Worker Justice
Jewish Women International
Jobs with Justice/American Rights at Work
Labor Council for Latin American Advancement
Labor Project for Working Families
Leadership Center for the Common Good
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Legal Momentum
LULAC
Main Street Alliance
Maternity Care Coalition
MomsRising
NAACP
National Action Network
National Association of Social Workers
National Consumers League
National Council of Jewish Women
National Council of La Raza (NCLR)
National Council of Women's Organizations
National Domestic Workers Alliance
National Employment Law Project
National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA)
National Hispanic Council on Aging
National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health (NLIRH)
National Organization for Women (NOW)
National Primitive Baptist Convention, USA, Inc.
National Research Center for Women & Families
National Women's Law Center
NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby
Partnership for Working Families
People For the American Way
PICO National Network
Progressive National Baptist Convention, Inc. (PNBC)
Progressive States Network
Restaurant Opportunities Centers United
RESULTS
Service Employees International Union (SEIU)
United Steelworkers (USW)
USAction
VESSELS
Wider Opportunities for Women
Women Employed
Working America

State and Local Organizations

Arkansas
Little Rock National Organization for Women Northwest Arkansas Workers' Justice Center

Arizona
Sun City/West Valley National Organization for Women

California
9to5
California Center on Policy Initiatives
Legal Aid Society-Employment Law Center

Colorado
9to5 Colorado
Colorado Fiscal Institute
Colorado Organization for Latina Opportunity and Reproductive Rights (COLOR)
Colorado Progressive Coalition
FRESC: Good Jobs, Strong Communities
Interfaith Worker Justice Committee of Colorado
NAACP Colorado/Montana/Wyoming State Conference

Connecticut
Connecticut Working Families Party

District of Columbia
D.C. Employment Justice Center

Florida
Broward County Chapter of the National Organization for Women
Farmworker Association of Florida
Florida National Organization for Women
Organize Now
Palm Beach County National Organization for Women
Pasco National Organization for Women
Tampa Chapter of the National Organization for Women

Georgia
9to5 Atlanta
Victory for the World Church

Illinois
AIDS Foundation of Chicago
Chicago Chapter Coalition of Labor Union Women
Human Action Community Organization (HACO)
Illinois State CLUW
SEIU HealthCare Illinois & Indiana

Indiana
Central Indiana CLUW Chapter
Central Indiana Labor Council
Community, Faith & Labor Coalition

Maine
Maine Women's Lobby

Maryland
Baltimore National Organization for Women
Job Opportunities Task Force
Public Justice Center

Massachusetts
Jewish Alliance for Law & Social Action
Massachusetts Paid Leave Coalition
St. Paul A.M.E. Church

Michigan
Wayne County Chapter of National Organization for Women

Minnesota
Uptown National Organization for Women

Mississippi
The Mississippi Workers' Center for Human Rights

New Hampshire
NH Sisters of Solidarity
NH National Alliance for Direct Support Professionals

New Jersey
Grace Cathedral Family Worship Center, Inc.
Greater New Jersey CLUW Chapter
Hope House Family Life Ministry
New Jersey Citizen Action
New Jersey Tenants Organization
Northern NJ Chapter of National Organization for Women

New York
Catalyst
Gay Men's Health Crisis (GMHC)
New York Paid Leave Coalition
New York State Nurses Association
Progressive States Network
Rockland County Chapter of National Organization for Women

North Carolina
Fayetteville National Organization for Women
North Carolina Justice Center

Ohio
Akron Area National Organization for Women
National Organization for Women, Greater Cleveland Chapter
Ohio National Organization for Women
Southeast Seventh-day Adventist Church
Toledo Chapter, National Organization for Women
Woodland Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
Zion Hill Missionary Baptist Church

Oregon
Central Oregon Coast National Organization for Women
Family Forward Oregon

Pennsylvania
Micah Leadership Council
New Hope Baptist Church
Ni-ta-nee National Organization for Women
Northeast Williamsport National Organization for Women
PathWays PA
Pennsylvania Association of Staff Nurses & Allied Professionals (PASNAP)
Pennsylvania Council of Churches
Philadelphia Coalition of Labor Union Women
Pittsburgh UNITED
Women's Law Project

Texas
Equal Justice Center
North Dallas National Organization for Women
Workers Defense Project

Vermont
Voices for Vermont’s Children

Virginia
Charlottesville Chapter of the National Organization for Women (CNOW)
NoVA National Organization for Women
Vienna Area National Organization for Women
Virginia National Organization for Women

Washington
Puget Sound Advocates for Retirement Action
Thurston County Chapter, National Organization for Women
WA State National Organization for Women

Wisconsin
9to5 Milwaukee
SEIU HealthCare Wisconsin
Wisconsin National Organization for Women
Workers' Rights Center

FCNL recognizes that the complex political realities in Afghanistan will be difficult to resolve, but these developments make us confident that war is not the answer. Newly-appointed U.S. Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan James Dobbins would do well to pay attention to these events and use his new position to promote the well-being of Afghanistan against these unpopular, but well-armed, outside influences. The future of the region and U.S. interests are best served by giving the Afghan people a chance to come through the transition and break out of the cycle of war and violence they have known for so long.

May 3, 2013

As people of faith, we continue to be concerned about our country’s slow economic recovery. With this month’s release of unemployment rates, we see yet another sign that while economists may say that the recession has ended, the reality of unemployment and under-employment remains true for millions of Americans—particularly those often left on the margins of the conversation about economic recovery.

The unemployment rate in the month of April decreased to 7.5%. While the total jobless number is 11.7 million, 165,000 jobs were created in April. Still there remains a startling 4.4 million who are long term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) — 37.4% of the unemployed population. Among specific worker groups the unemployment for adult men was 7.1%, adult women 6.7%, whites 6.7%, blacks 13.2%, Hispanics 9%, and Asians 5.1%.

It used to be that if you worked hard and went to school, upon graduation (be it from high school or college), you could find a job and be well on your way to gainful employment. Yet in recent years, one of the groups most deeply affected by the recession and the trickling recovery is teenage and young adult workers aged 16-24. As it turns out, the struggle for younger workers to find a job started long before the most recent recession. According to the April 2013 Center for American Progress Study, “The High Cost of Youth Unemployment, “Over the past several decades, employment and labor-force participation among Americans ages 16-24 have declined, while the unemployment rate for this group has risen. During that same time period, these employment measures have remained stable or even improved for Americans in the prime working age group of 25-54, indicating that the youth-employment problem cannot be attributed solely to a worsening economy.”

While the worsening economy is not solely to blame, it was the recent recession that dramatically worsened employment opportunities for younger workers. Last month, the Wall Street Journal noted, “When the recession began in December, 2007, 59.2% of the under-25 population was in the labor force, meaning they were either working or looking for work. Today, that figure has fallen to 54.55. That may not sound like a big drop, but it makes a huge difference. If the so-called participation rate had remained unchanged, there would be 1.8 million more young people in the labor force today than there actually are.” This problem still persists through the recovery. Just this month the unemployment rate for 16-19 year-olds is 24.1% and 20-24 year olds is 13.1%.

When you dig down deeper into the sub-populations of young workers, statistics suggest that minority youth and young workers with lower levels of education are experiencing even larger occurrences of unemployment. A March 2013 Bureau of Labor Statistics report on America’s youth at 25 found that, “By their 26th birthday, 5 percent of youth who had not received a high school diploma, had never held a job since the time they turned 18. Of all jobs held by high school dropouts since age 18, nearly two-thirds lasted less than a year…Those with more education were more likely to be employed in civilian jobs and less likely to be out of the labor force.” A Center for American Progress study states, “Unemployment is a major problem for young Americans in general, but it’s an even bigger problem for young people of color. While the overall unemployment rate for teenagers is 25.1 percent, the unemployment rate for black teens is 43.1 percent. And fully half of black males ages 16-19 are looking for work but unable to find a job.”

The long-term effects of unemployment and underemployment among young workers are quite striking. The Center for American Progress states that, “A young person who has been unemployed for six months can expect to earn about $22,000 less over the next 10 years that they could have expected to earn had they not experienced a lengthy period of unemployment.” This is on top of the mounting costs for student loans, healthcare, housing, and child care.

As we consider these monthly reflections of our economy’s health, we remind our elected officials that they must act now on legislation that aims to create jobs and strengthen our economy for those who are at greatest risk of impoverishment and hardship, especially young workers. As scripture tells us, “For I know well the plans I have in mind for you, says the LORD, plans for your welfare, not for woe! Plans to give you a future full of hope.”Jeremiah 29:11

You can find DHN’s Jobs Statement of Principles here.

American Friends Service Committee

Bread for the World

Church of the Brethren

Disciples Justice Action Network

Friends Committee on National Legislation

Interfaith Worker Justice

Islamic Society of North America

Jewish Council for Public Affairs

The Jewish Federations of North America

Mennonite Central Committee U.S. Washington Office

National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd

National Council of Churches

National Council of Jewish Women

NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby

The Office of Social Justice of the Christian Reformed Church

Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)

Sisters of Mercy of the Americas, Institute Justice Team

Union for Reform Judaism

The Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations

United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries

The United Methodist Church General Board of Church and Society

Some of the specific savings mentioned were:

You can read the entire SANE Act here to find out more ways in which the nuclear arsenal can be cut safely and smartly. Introduced just last month, it already has 39 cosponsors. See the list here.

The Cold War has been over for more than twenty years. It is time to rethink and re-evaluate the nuclear weapons budget. The United States is set to spend more than $600 billion over the next decade on nuclear weapons and related spending. In this time of fiscal constraint and changing threats, it is insane to spend billions of dollars on weapons systems that are unnecessary. The United States currently has thousands of nuclear weapons deployed and in storage. Many of them are on constant high-alert, ready to launch at any moment’s notice. The insanity needs to end.

You can read FCNL’s factsheet on the SANE Act when it was introduced in the last Congress here.

May 2, 2013

Dear Member of Congress:

For decades, SNAP has helped ensure vulnerable low-income people in our nation can put food on the table. We urge Congress to continue the longstanding bipartisan commitment to protect and support SNAP, specifically by opposing proposals to cap or reduce funding, restrict eligibility, reduce benefits, or make harmful structural changes in the upcoming Farm Bill and any other legislation. If anything, as the recent Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on SNAP benefit inadequacy showed, the program needs to be strengthened through additional benefits to make allotments sufficient to purchase a nutritionally adequate diet.

If SNAP is weakened, many millions of low‐income Americans will be harmed – people with disabilities, children, seniors and struggling parents – those who work, as well as those who are unemployed or underemployed. If SNAP is weakened, our nation will see more hunger and food insecurity, worse health and educational outcomes, and higher health costs.

As our nation's first line of defense against hunger, SNAP has extraordinary strengths:

• SNAP responds effectively in times of economic downturns and in the wake of natural disasters. SNAP's responsiveness to unemployment proved it to be one of the most effective safety net programs during the recession, providing newly needy families with a stable source of food. Similarly, SNAP quickly and efficiently gets nutrition assistance to people recovering from hurricanes and other disasters.
• SNAP reaches the neediest and most vulnerable people in our country. The average household has an income of only 58.5 percent of the federal poverty level and 83 percent of all benefits go to households with a child, senior, or disabled person.
• SNAP fights poverty and improves health. SNAP lifted 3.9 million Americans above the poverty line in 2011, including 1.7 million children and 280,000 seniors. Extensive research also shows that SNAP improves dietary intake and health, especially among children, and with lasting effects. Recent studies find that early exposure to SNAP in childhood has favorable impacts on metabolic and economic outcomes in adulthood. And national food consumption data (as measured by USDA's Healthy Eating Index) show that each additional SNAP dollar increased a household's score for overall dietary quality.
• SNAP stimulates local economies.Because SNAP benefits are so urgently needed, they are spent quickly - 97 percent of benefits are redeemed by the end of the month of issuance. Moody's Analytics and USDA estimate that the economic growth impact of SNAP ranges from $1.73 to $1.79 per $1 of SNAP benefits.
• SNAP is a public/private partnership that works efficiently and accurately. SNAP makes good use of regular channels of commerce - retail stores and Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) systems. SNAP's payment accuracy rate is an all-time high of over 96 percent.

Our nation can ill afford to see SNAP weakened in the Farm Bill or other legislation. Already, benefits that currently average less than $1.50 per person per meal are scheduled to drop on November 1, 2013, with termination of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) benefit boost. Recognizing the importance of SNAP benefits, the President has included an extension of the SNAP ARRA benefit boost in his FY2014 budget. Overwhelmed food banks, pantries, religious congregations and other emergency food providers across the country cannot fill the significant gaps in nutrition assistance that weakening SNAP would leave.

We call on you to support and protect SNAP and to oppose any proposals that would weaken SNAP's structure or cut its funding.

AARP
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
AFL-CIO
Alliance for a Just Society
Alliance to End Hunger
American Commodity Distribution Association
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)
American Federation of Teachers (AFT)
American Public Health Association (APHA)
American Society for Nutrition
Americans for Democratic Action (ADA)
Association of Farmworker Opportunity Programs (AFOP)
Association of Jewish Family & Children's Agencies
Association of State & Territorial Public Health Nutrition Directors (ASTPHND)
Bread for the World
Campaign for Better Health Care
Campaign for Community Change
Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
Child Care Development Services, Inc.
Children's Defense Fund (CDF)
Children's HealthWatch
Coalition on Human Needs (CHN)
Community Action Partnership (CAP)
Congressional Hunger Center (CHC)
Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO
Disciples Home Missions Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
Disciples Justice Action Network
E S Foods
End Hunger Network
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Every Child Matters
Families USA
Feed the Children
Feeding America
First Focus Campaign for Children
Food Research and Action Center (FRAC)
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Generations United
Heartland Alliance for Human Needs and Human Rights
Heartland Health Outreach, Inc.
International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers
International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW)
Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA)
Jewish Federations of North America
Johns Hopkins University Center for a Livable Future
Justice and Witness Ministries, United Church of Christ
LeadingAge
Legal Momentum
MAZON: A Jewish Response to Hunger
Meals On Wheels Association of America
National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd
National Association for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC)
National Association of County and City Health Officials
National Association of County Human Services Administrators
National Association of Nutrition and Aging Services Programs (NANASP)
National Association of States United for Aging and Disabilities
National CACFP Sponsors Forum
National Catholic Rural Life Conference
National Center for Law and Economic Justice
National Council of Jewish Women (NCJW)
National Council of La Raza (NCLR)
National Council on Aging
National CSFP Association
National Education Association (NEA)
National Employment Law Project (NELP)
National Health Care for the Homeless  Council
National Immigration Law Center (NILC)
National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty
National Partnership for Women & Families
National Urban League
National WIC Association (NWICA)
National Women’s Law Center
NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby
New England Consortium Regional Poverty Reduction Initiative
Northeast Regional Anti-Hunger Network (NERAHN)
OWL-The Voice of Midlife and Older Women
Provincial Council for the Clerics of St. Viator (Viatorians)
Public Justice Center
RESULTS
School Food FOCUS National Office
School Nutrition Association (SNA)
Service Employees International Union (SEIU)
Share Our Strength (SOS)
Sisters of Charity of Nazareth
Sisters of Mercy of the Americas, Institute Justice Team
Social Security Works
Society of St. Andrew
Sojourners
The Episcopal Church
Trust for America’s Health
Union for Reform Judaism
United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries
United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW)
United Neighborhood Centers of America
United Way Worldwide
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
U.S. Conference of Mayors
Voices for America's Children
Western Region Anti-Hunger Coalition (WRAHC)
WhyHunger
Wider Opportunities for Women

May 1st, 2013

President Barack Obama
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama,

On behalf of a growing constituency of Americans dedicated to the prevention of genocide and mass atrocities, we write to congratulate you on the important progress you continue to make with Presidential Study Directive 10 (PSD-10) and the Atrocities Prevention Board (APB). One year since the public launch of the Board and announcement of the still classified PSD-10 report, the APB has created an impressive interagency architecture to spur long-term reforms that increase the United States’ ability to help prevent mass atrocities. Unfortunately, there has been limited information shared with the public about the U.S. government’s overriding strategy for preventing atrocities.

Working with congressional and civil society supporters and engaging the American public will help deflect criticism that misrepresents the purpose of PSD-10 and the APB, and will increase the prospects of these important new structures living beyond your administration. We urge you to take these immediate steps toward greater transparency, including:

1. Release an Executive Order on Atrocities Prevention that articulates the U.S. government’s comprehensive strategy for preventing mass atrocities and the key functions of those overseeing its implementation. The White House Fact Sheet released in April 2012 was a good start, providing steps taken by specific agencies, but the overall function of the body tasked with implementing that strategy remains a mystery. In the Fact Sheet you committed the APB to begin work on an Executive Order within six months. A year since that announcement, the time for an Executive Order has come. It should serve to further institutionalize the structural progress that has been made, but also comprise the next step in public engagement that could be followed by the public release each year of the APB’s Annual Report to the President.

2. Consult meaningfully with NGOs, the American public and Congress. In order to create a constituency for the APB, it is critical to engage a variety of stakeholders. A year after the APB was established, a clear mechanism for civil society to feed into the APB process does not exist. More specifically, we recommend a framework of annual meetings between the APB and NGOs, quarterly meetings with the sub-APB, and an annual public dialogue exploring countries and cases that should be on the APB’s agenda in the coming year. Additionally, Congress has not been consistently consulted or briefed, turning many potential bipartisan allies into growing critics. Our organizations will be engaging Congress, seeking hearings on atrocities prevention and exploring ways to further institutionalize the U.S. government’s atrocities prevention efforts—including through possible resolutions and legislation. Finally, engaging the American public will be essential to shoring up further support in Congress, for securing the resources needed for atrocities prevention efforts to succeed, and toward your atrocities prevention efforts living beyond your time in office. With surveys showing that 7 in 10 Americans think the U.S. should prevent or stop genocide/mass atrocities from occurring in other parts of the world, engagement with the American public is an untapped resource of support. Many of our organizations will be actively messaging to our growing anti-genocide grassroots constituencies on the importance of the right policy to prevent genocide and mass atrocities.

3. Coordinate with international partners. As stated by the Genocide Prevention Task Force, the U.S. has an interest in promoting strong global norms against genocide and mass atrocities, and coordinated international action is needed for effective prevention. Transparency as to the purpose and function of the Board and broader U.S. government efforts will serve to strengthen the U.S. argument to international partners for the need of similar national strategies that can enhance coordination for a strengthened global effort to prevent genocide and mass atrocities.

In addition, developments in atrocities prevention initiatives at the UN, within regional organizations, and in other capitals offer important points for collaboration and shared learning that cannot be leveraged without more direct and open engagement.

4. Recommit publicly to atrocities prevention as a moral responsibility and national security priority. As the crisis in Syria continues, on the occasion of genocide prevention month, one year since the establishment of the APB, 10 years since the genocide began in Darfur, and nearly 20 years since the Rwanda genocide, we urge you to speak to the American public about your continued prioritization of genocide and atrocity prevention efforts.

Our organizations are passionate about the success of the APB because we want to see real and measurable change on the ground. Ongoing atrocities in Syria, attacks on civilians and blocking of humanitarian aid in Sudan, a renewed cycle of violence in Congo, and recent incitement of anti-Muslim violence in Burma are just a few of the many emergencies around the world that continue to shock our conscience. We believe that the APB can play a powerful role in spurring bold leadership and proactive policy attention to these ongoing atrocities, as well as building capacity throughout the interagency to prevent future crises before the killing begins.

Again we thank you, Mr. President, for your leadership and the important accomplishments you have overseen in the U.S. government’s ability to prevent atrocities. The time to secure and build upon those accomplishments is now. It is time to show the American public what progress has been made, to reiterate your continued commitment to atrocities prevention, and to fully engage the many allies you have in this important task. As organizations dedicated to preventing and stopping genocide and mass atrocities, we are eager to support you and your administration in those efforts.

Sincerely,

3P Human Security
Alliance for Peacebuilding
Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation
Better World Campaign
Conference of Major Superiors of Men (CMSM)
Enough Project
Freedom House
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Genocide Watch
Georgia Coalition to Prevent Genocide
Global Rights
Humanity United
Invisible Children
Physicians for Human Rights
Sisters of Mercy of the Americas – Institute Justice Team
STAND
The Peace Alliance
United to End Genocide

April was an important month for energy legislation. Two senators, Democrat Jeanne Shaheen (NH) and Republican Rob Portman (OH) introduced the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2013 (S. 761). Similar in many ways to a bill introduced last Congress (S. 1000), this bipartisan bill is a significant step forward in the ongoing effort to pass energy legislation that might reduce greenhouse gas emissions through Congress. Read more about Shaheen-Portman and how your lobbying made it happen. Then ask your senators to support the legislation.

What's up with the carbon tax?

FCNL continues to push for a carbon tax. Presently, we pay tremendous social, ecological, and health costs as a result of the pollution caused by carbon emissions, but we do not pay in economic terms. This is what economists call a “market failure.” A carbon tax would correct this market failure by placing a tax on carbon dioxide pollution resulting from fossil fuel production and use. FCNL continues to publicly support the carbon tax. Despite present insufficient political support for such a tax, we believe it is important to advocate for a policy that would realign fundamental economic principles and the regulations that govern our economy. Read more about our efforts to pass a carbon tax and tell your senators that a carbon tax is an important framework for action on climate change.

Spring Lobby Weekend Round-Up

In March, over 100 students and committed environmental activists joined us here in Washington for our annual Spring Lobby Weekend. Congress told us that we’re doing exactly what’s necessary but that we can’t -- and shouldn’t -- let up now. Please consider joining us and the incredible citizen lobbyists to make a difference on climate change. Further, in the time since Spring Lobby Weekend, one of the bills we lobbied on has been introduced! Read all about S. 761, the Shaheen-Portman energy efficiency bill, or relive the awesome movements from Spring Lobby Weekend!

National Partnership on Climate Solutions and Climate Summit

FCNL continues to work with the National Partnership on Climate Solutions, asking President Obama to host a summit on climate solutions. The Partnership has a broad representation from many sectors, including faith, labor, military and business. We continue to urge the White House to hold a summit because it would offer the President the opportunity to set the tone for the nation and for Congress on climate change. Read more about the climate summit movement.

This Month on Capitol Hill and at FCNL:

• FCNL provided comments to the House Ways and Means Committee during their tax reform process and provided guidance to the Bicameral Task Force on Climate Change.
• Senator Whitehouse (RI) mentioned and quoted FCNL on the Senate floor. Watch his speech.
• FCNL's Director of Foreign Policy Michael Shank and I penned an op-ed supporting a carbon tax.
• Tough times are ahead on Keystone XL.
• Earth Day was in April! Do you know about the history of Earth Day?

Even More!

• We're having a telephone party! We invite you to join a conference call to hear about and discuss the recent work of the Sustainable Energy and Environment program on Thursday, May 18, from 8:00 to 9:00 pm EDT. Please contact Hannah if you’d like to participate.
• Couldn't make it to Spring Lobby Weekend? You can watch Monday's diversity briefing.
• Want to read more about the history of Earth Day and the present predicament of the environmental movement? The New Yorker has you covered.

February 2013

Executive Summary

As the U.S. winds down two wars, acknowledges changing national needs, and deals with federal spending constraints, the Pentagon and its contractors will definitely feel the effects. The coming defense downsizing will be challenging for the many communities across the country whose economies have been shaped by the sharp increases in military spending of the post-9/11 period. They will need help adjusting and creating new economic opportunities to replace a jobs base that has become dependent on surging military budgets.

This white paper offers a menu of choices that will be of interest to members of Congress who are concerned about the loss of jobs that may be anticipated as the result of changes in the Pentagon budget. Many of these resources, of course, would also be available to communities recovering from other economic losses. While these programs are small and typically underfunded compared to their potential, they come with records of experience and success. When the availability – and possibility – of these programs is coupled with the opportunity for industrial growth presented by climate-related challenges, they suggest a positive way forward for communities around the country.

The framework is presented in three parts:

Strengthen existing programs.

The Department of Commerce provides technical assistance (through a network of Manufacturing Extension Partnership centers) and grants funds for community planning. These programs are available to communities undergoing economic dislocations. In addition, the Department of Labor’s Employment and Training administration coordinates federal jobs programs, which could benefit from adequate funding and adjustments for dislocated defense workers. Finally, three departments – Commerce, Energy, and Treasury – administer grant and loan programs for economic development.

Restore programs that were effective in easing the transition from recent Defense Department drawdowns.

Between 1990 and 1997, the federal government made nearly $20 billion available for purposes related to post Cold War downsizing. A multi-agency program known as the Technology Reinvestment Project sought to facilitate the transfer of defense technologies to the civilian sector. The Defense Department and Labor Department coordinated community adjustment and worker retraining assistance, helping employers restructure, retool, and retrain to avoid layoffs. The Defense Department also transferred a modest amount to the Small Business Administration to underwrite approximately $1 billion in loans for small and medium-sized defense businesses seeking to move into commercial areas.

Initiate programs to fill critical gaps and to respond to current conditions.

The president has proposed a “National Network for Manufacturing” program to promote innovative manufacturing through 15 “institutes” around the country. A pilot institute is now funded by a grant from several departments. Another promising development, some of the national labs are moving toward the development of clean energy technologies. Finally, employment and education assistance to veterans coming home from the two wars will help to strengthen the economy and ease their transition into recovering communities.

Author: Miriam Pemberton, Research Fellow, Institute for Policy Studies, 202-787-5214, miriam@ips-dc.org

Additional Contact: Ruth Flower, Friends Committee on National Legislation, 202-903-2524, flower@fcnl.org

For a printable pdf of this document, click here.

To read a longer version explaining the framework in detail, click here.

As the U.S. winds down two wars, acknowledges changing national needs, and deals with federal spending constraints, the Pentagon and military-related industries will definitely feel the effects. The coming defense downsizing will be challenging for the many communities across the country whose economies have been shaped by the sharp increases in military spending of the post-9/11 period. They will need help adjusting and creating new economic opportunities to replace a jobs base that has become dependent on surging military budgets.

In normal circumstances, market forces are reasonably efficient at reallocating resources. If a product is no longer needed (e.g. buggy whips), the manufacturers switch to producing products in demand. But when the federal government has been the primary or only customer for a product, it has a responsibility to ease the transition for companies and communities that would be adversely affected.

Fortunately, new economic opportunities are emerging as the nation looks for ways to respond to rapid environmental changes. In a year of record droughts and attendant crop failures, followed by the punishing winds and waves of Hurricane Sandy, the signs of climate stress, and the need for a transition to clean energy, energy conservation, and efficient transportation, are unmistakable. As we seek to turn toward nation-building at home, a framework for federal initiatives to assist defense-dependent communities should help these communities find opportunities for economic development in the emerging clean energy and transportation economy.

The Framework

1. Strengthen existing programs useful for community economic transition

2. Restore programs that were the most effective in smoothing the previous defense drawdown

3. Initiate new programs to fill critical gaps and respond to current conditions

Legislation based on this framework could be attached, in whole or in part, to a job creation bill in the new congressional session, or to regular legislation such as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), or could be introduced as stand-alone legislation. Some portions could be implemented administratively. One option for funding would follow the precedent of the previous post-Cold War defense downsizing with legislation to transfer funds from the Department of Defense to the Departments of Labor and Commerce.

1. Strengthen existing programs

Federal assistance relevant to defense community economic transition is currently available in four areas: community planning, technical assistance, job retraining and finance.

Community Planning
The Commerce Department offers planning grants to help communities undergoing economic dislocations to examine existing local and regional economic strengths and new areas of development. Implementation grants are also available. Special emphasis is given to “national strategic priorities” including initiatives for job growth and business expansion in clean energy, green technologies and sustainable manufacturing.

Recommendation: Revise the program objectives to give higher priority to helping communities adjust to private sector defense downsizing.

Through its Office of Economic Adjustment the Defense Department also offers planning grants, technical assistance and community development block grants for communities undergoing defense transitions, both for base closure and redevelopment, and for adjustment to private sector defense job loss. In recent years this office’s work has focused almost exclusively on base closure redevelopment.

Recommendation: For the coming period, shift the focus of the OEA toward helping communities that are adjusting to loss of defense jobs in the private sector. In the event a new Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC) process is authorized, balance the agency’s focus between base community and private sector defense community economic development. Also, modify the assistance model to put more emphasis on working with local planning entities and to integrate planning for defense downsizing with existing local master plans.

Technical Assistance. The Commerce Department administers a network of Manufacturing Extension Partnership centers (MEP) helping small- and medium-sized manufacturers to innovate and grow. MEP calculates each dollar of its investment generates an average of $30 in new sales growth for its client companies.

A new Energy Regional Innovation Cluster (E-RIC) pilot program through MEP is intended to spur regional economic growth through the development of energy efficient building technologies, designs and systems.

Recommendation: Increase funding for MEP. Restore the expertise that MEPs developed in the post-Cold War period to assist companies adjusting to the loss of defense contracts. Add a focus on helping these companies adapt their capabilities for green technology manufacture.

Job Retraining
The Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration coordinates federal job training programs. The Recovery Act funded training focused on creating a skilled energy efficiency and renewable energy workforce. These funds have expired, and job-training funds in general have been cut back.

Recommendation: Preserve and expand job retraining programs focused on green jobs and adjustment for dislocated defense workers.

Finance
The Commerce, Energy and Treasury Departments all administer programs offering grants and loans for economic development focused on the clean energy and transportation sectors. Some were funded by the Recovery Act, now expired.

Recommendation: Expand funding and improve coordination among programs offering support for a transition to a clean energy and transportation economy.

Additional information on all of these programs is available at: http://www.fpif.org/files/5073/federal-resources.doc.

2. Restore previously effective programs

Between 1990 and 1997, nearly $20 billion was spent for purposes broadly related to the post-Cold War downsizing. Of this, $8.6 billion did not facilitate a transition to production for the civilian sector, but rather was devoted to new defense technology initiatives. Of the remaining $12.4 billion that was well-targeted to facilitate the defense transition, $3.8 billion went for separation benefits for demobilizing military personnel; nearly $1.6 billion went to assist defense workers and communities, and about $5.7 billion went to stimulate new high-tech industries. These proportions are reasonable; since the defense economy is now much larger, the amounts must be adjusted accordingly.

Technology Transfer
One of the largest and most innovative parts of the program was the Technology Reinvestment Project (TRP). It was a multi-agency program offering nearly $800 million in grants to consortia of large and small manufacturers in both the defense and commercial sectors, nonprofits and labor unions, universities, national labs and other partners to facilitate the transfer of defense technologies to the civilian sector. While the program had many important successes, they were limited by the excessively high priority given to dual-use projects—that is, projects designed to produce technologies applicable to both the defense and civilian sectors.

Recommendation: Recoup some of the nation’s investment in increased defense R&D spending by instituting a new Technology Reinvestment Project whose priority is developing new civilian uses for defense technology. Selection criteria should prioritize job creation, green economy transition and technological development that contributes to the productivity of the US economy as a whole, and to the revival of U.S. manufacturing, not military use or dual-use.

Community Adjustment and Worker Retraining
Of the core programs offering community adjustment and worker retraining assistance, the best were a small subsection of pilot programs funded by the Defense Department and administered through the Labor Department. They funded projects testing innovative ways to help employers retool, restructure and retrain to avoid layoffs; retraining defense workers for new jobs; helping communities develop comprehensive plans to help dislocated workers; and supporting locally-initiated strategies for defense transition.

Recommendation: Establish a fund for projects adapting these models to the conditions of the 21st century, and prioritizing the transition of defense workers and technologies to the needs of a transition to a clean energy and transportation economy.

Finance
The Defense Department transferred a modest amount to the Small Business Administration to underwrite approximately $1 billion in loans for small and medium-sized defense businesses seeking to move into commercial areas. While some of these loans achieved their purpose, the program was, like the TRP, hamstrung by the excessive focus on military and dual-use technology.

Recommendation: Recreate this program and refocus it toward providing small and medium-sized defense contractor companies with financial assistance to diversify into production for the commercial sector, giving priority to energy efficiency and clean energy and transportation technology.

3. Initiate new programs filling critical gaps and responding to current conditions

National Network for Manufacturing
While the defense-dependent economy is multi-faceted, its core—and the source of most of its high-wage, high-skill jobs—is manufacturing. The Obama administration has prioritized the revival of U.S. manufacturing. and has proposed a National Network for Manufacturing which would establish as many as 15 Institutes for Manufacturing Innovation, one of which focuses on environmentally sustainable technology. The proposal is as yet unfunded, though a pilot institute is supported by an investment of $45 million from the Departments of Defense, Energy and Commerce and the National Science Foundation. The priorities for the initiative include an increased role for workers and communities in creating and sharing in the gains from innovative manufacturing.

Recommendation: Increase the focus of this initiative on manufacturing to make the U.S. a leader in the growing world market for clean energy, lightweight materials, and efficient appliances, lights, computers, and vehicles. And develop mechanisms for incorporating in this initiative the national objective of creating new economic opportunity for currently defense-dependent communities.

Technology Transfer
Several of the national labs have developed a focus on clean energy technologies. One, the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) is devoted solely to this purpose. For others it is a sidelight to their main focus on developing defense technology. In the post-cold war period the labs began to set up Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs) with private entrepreneurs to facilitate the commercialization of this technology.

Recommendation: To align the labs’ operations with the national need to strengthen the economy during a period of defense downsizing, prioritize the goal of facilitating the commercialization of defense technology. The Defense Department is spending about $1.2 billion a year from an “Operational Energy” budget to increase the energy efficiency of its own operations. These expenditures offer potential benefits for clean energy innovation for the economy as a whole.

Recommendation: In setting selection criteria for technologies to fulfill DoD’s own clean energy goals, require that the agency establish a preference for those that hold an advantage in adaptability to the civilian energy sector. Assistance to Demobilizing Service Members Recent experience indicates that service members demobilizing in the downsizing will face special challenges in securing civilian employment.

Recommendation: Fix the current GI Bill by expanding the benefit to include vocational training. Pass legislation similar to the Veteran Employment Assistance Act of 2010 considered in the 111th Congress to provide direct assistance to veteran-owned small businesses, improve DoD’s Transition Assistance Program, help veterans secure vocational certificates based on their service, and provide a tax credit to employers who hire veterans.

Conclusion

As our nation begins its post-Iraq and Afghanistan war defense downsizing, we must provide for the workers and communities that will be affected. If we do this right, this challenge can become an opportunity to support the clean energy and transportation transition we must undertake.


Author: Miriam Pemberton, Research Fellow, Institute for Policy Studies, 202-787-5214, miriam@ips-dc.org

Additional Contact: Ruth Flower, Friends Committee on National Legislation, 202-903-2524, flower@fcnl.org

For a printable pdf of this document, click here.

To read a shorter Executive Summary, click here.

We met with White House officials in January about the prospect of a summit, but this and subsequent smaller meetings have not yet resulted in a decision. We continue our advocacy on this front, and are undertaking other efforts including:

On the last point, NPCS issued a report Jobs vs. Jobs: The Refusal to Rapidly Cut Greenhouse Gas Emission Is Destroying Jobs, The Economy, and The Climate, finding that the failure to cut emissions destroys jobs right now and sacrifices the growth of millions of future jobs. For example, Sandy caused tens of thousands of job losses as businesses were flooded, physically damaged, or destroyed. The ongoing historic drought has cost more than $35 billion in the Midwest alone so far, pushed up the price of many commodities, and forced many farms and food processing firms into bankruptcy. Details are available on the NPCS website.

A carbon tax is the simplest, fairest way to correct the market failure that results when we do not pay to pollute—the current situation. It would set the nation on the necessary path of solutions to climate disruption by reducing carbon dioxide pollution - the greatest contributor to national greenhouse gas emissions - and paving the way for an earnest transition to renewable energy deployment across the country.

Support for such a tax has been expressed by representatives from various sectors and political parties and for various reasons. Though Senators Boxer and Sanders have introduced a carbon tax bill (S. 332), this broad based support for the concept has not yet manifest into bipartisan support in Congress. Rather, thus far, an oppositional reaction was manifest in the House. Recently, FCNL quite publicly expressed its support for a tax on carbon pollution.  We also provided comments to the House Ways and Means Committee’s request for public input in its deliberation of comprehensive tax reform. Additional justifications for this tax and for action on climate disruption generally from FCNL and other faith organizations can be found here.

Despite presently insufficient political support for a tax on carbon pollution, we believe it important to continue advocacy for it because among other things, the lack of a tax is a contraction of established economic principles that economic activity which causes harm to others be held accountable for such harms in order to maximize social and economic benefits for society as a whole. Thus, for example, we pay for the economic, health and environmental costs for many polluting activities such as the disposal of some solid and hazardous wastes, to balance out the costs and benefits of such activities.

No balance exists regarding anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide, the leading contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Producers and users of fossil fuels pay no price for the harmful impacts of such use as is increasingly manifest by the unprecedented and runaway increases in global temperatures and other manifestations of climate disruption. And indeed, according to many scientists, a 4 degree Celsius increase will destabilize world societies in ways such as widespread crop failures and malnutrition and the dislocation of large numbers of people from land inundated by rising seas. A tax on carbon pollution in the United States and elsewhere is one efficient, effective, and economic way to avert future catastrophe.

What would the bill do?

Title I, one of the most important provisions of the bill, establishes the standards for the development of federal building codes, and provides state and tribal governments with processes and resources to develop their own, should they so choose. These provisions govern what kind of materials may be used in construction, how retrofits must be done—in short, how efficiently our buildings run.

Shaheen-Portman would “strengthen the national building model codes to make new homes and commercial buildings more efficient” while simultaneously working to make the code-writing process more transparent. The goal is to achieve net-zero-energy building by 2030. Shaheen-Portman would help manufacturers become more competitive by establishing a loan program to help finance efficiency upgrades by ensuring a supply chain of energy-efficient building materials. Further, the bill would encourage the Department of Energy to work with private sector partners to invest in research and development of innovative energy technology.

As the federal government is the single largest energy user in the country, S. 761 would require it to adopt energy saving techniques for a wide array of technologies. Agencies would be better able to share “best practices” and to better monitor energy use. An official summary of S. 761 hasn’t been released yet, but if you’re feeling intrepid you can read the text of the legislation here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:S.761: However, a one page summary of S. 1000, which is similar to S. 761, can be found at http://www.ase.org/resources/shaheen-portman-s1000-one-page-summary

Why should we care?

Shaheen-Portman isn’t just the first attempt at getting Congress to consider energy legislation—though that is true, and the importance of this fact cannot be overstated. Shaheen -Portman is a bipartisan bill with all kinds of civilian support behind it, from manufacturers to chemical companies, from environmental groups to Big Business.

Shaheen-Portman is also, substantively, a very strong bill. In endorsing the bill, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) noted that “energy efficiency costs less than new power generation, saves families and businesses money, and creates jobs.”It creates jobs, saves money, and reduces GHG emissions.

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) did a study on this bill’s predecessor, S. 1000, finding that it could have “produced 80,000 net jobs and saved consumers $4 billion on their energy bills in 2020. In 2030, 159,000 net jobs would have been created and consumers would have saved $20 billion on their energy bills.”

It has a reasonable chance of passage

In this hyper-partisan Congress, this is a bold statement. The Shaheen –Portman legislation is a bipartisan bill with a tremendous amount of civilian support behind it, from manufacturers and chemical companies to environmental groups and the faith community. Last Congress’ version of the bill passed the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee by an 18-3 vote. This year’s version contains language reflecting continued compromise between the parties.

In addition to these clear economic benefits, S. 761 will bring more intangible benefits to our communities. By helping businesses and families become more energy efficient, we can reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy. We can begin to stem the tide of destructive events that are tied to climate change, including droughts and rising sea levels; when these events are less frequent and less destructive, our communities will be safer and more sound, strengthening the security of the United States and positively impacting our standing in the world.

FCNL is thrilled to work with Senators Shaheen and Portman to pass S. 761. We hope you’ll join us by taking action today. Write to your senator to ask them to cosponsor S. 761, and watch this space for updates as the bill progresses through the committee process.

A bipartisan group of eight senators has introduced a comprehensive immigration reform bill, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013 (S. 744). The bill is 844 pages long, and covers three general topics: border security, fixing the legal immigration system, and addressing the status of 11 million people in the U.S. without authorization. The Senate Judiciary Committee will begin considering amendments to the bill on May 7, and will continue with “mark-up” sessions every Tuesday and Thursday through the month of May. The bill could come to the Senate floor as soon as early June, after the Memorial Day recess.

Many provisions in the bill are very positive; some will cause greater problems. Here is a summary of the bill and concerns that FCNL is raising about some sections.