by Georgia Center for Opportunity | Feb 7, 2015
In a blog post, the AJC’s Jay Bookman tried to use a case in Kentucky to raise the spectre of what might happen in Georgia if the legislature passed the “Preventing Government Overreach on Religious Expression Act,” its version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), passed by an overwhelming bipartisan Congressional majority in the 1990s.
Heavens to Betsy, Bookman argued, in Kentucky, a religious group is appealing to that state’s RFRA to insist that it has the same right to tourist development dollars as does any secular enterprise. At issue is the effort of the group Answers in Genesis to build a theme park centered on Noah’s Ark. The park will likely attract visitors to the region, and they will spend money at motels and restaurants near the park, as would tourists visiting Six Flags. Answers in Genesis argues that it is entitled to state assistance in the same way as is any secular organization. Their project should be considered for its economic development impact, just like any other project. The state disagrees, as does Mr. Bookman. His principal objection is that the organization is likely to require its theme park employees to sign a statement of faith, which means that the state would be providing funds to support an employer that engaged in discrimination on the basis of religion.
Answers in Genesis has filed a lawsuit in federal court, according to Bookman. Right there he has a problem with the burden of his blog post. If the organization is suing in federal court, the Kentucky law will be entirely irrelevant to that court’s decision. Whatever happens in this case will have absolutely no value for predicting the effect of the Georgia law, as interpreted by Georgia courts.
But let’s take a step back and look at Bookman’s argument a little more closely. Here’s his central contention, the premise that lies at the foundation of his position:
Let’s start the debate by pointing out that tax money and tax incentives shouldn’t be used to promote or advance a particular religious faith. I’d like to think that’s a bedrock principle that most Americans still support, although these days even that might be considered controversial in some quarters.
On one level, it’s hard to disagree with him. If the First Amendment Establishment Clause and its state counterparts mean anything, it’s that no state should establish—provide public support for—a church. But the Supreme Court has, in numerous cases, held that when religious organizations are seeking public funding, they need to be treated in the same way as secular organizations. If they satisfy neutral criteria, established without reference to religion, then they are just as eligible for support as any other entity. To deny religious groups this opportunity to compete for public funding on a level playing field is to engage in “viewpoint discrimination.” Thus in Rosenberger v. Rector, the Court held that a student religious magazine at the University of Virginia was eligible for funding from the student activities fee, just as was any other student organization. That public dollars flowed to a religious group did not imply an establishment of religion, as the Court understood it. The religious group was just one among many receiving support. The state’s thumb was not on the scale favoring religion over against secular alternatives. Rather, to deny the group access to this funding would actually be hostile to religion. If anything, the state’s thumb would be on the scale opposing religion.
The attorneys for Answers in Genesis know what they are doing. They’re on quite solid federal constitutional ground in challenging the state’s decision to deny tax incentives available on the basis of neutral economic development criteria to all but religious groups.
And, as I have argued, if they win, it will have nothing to do with Kentucky’s RFRA, and will predict nothing about what will happen in Georgia.
But let me make one last point regarding an implication of Bookman’s argument. If, as he contends, state and federal money should never go to an organization that uses religious criteria in hiring, then many of the cooperative relationships between government and charitable institutions would have to be torn asunder. Colleges and universities that require statements of faith from faculty shouldn’t have access to federal money in the form of student loans and grants. The Salvation Army wouldn’t be able to be one of the government’s largest partners in anti-poverty and workforce preparedness programs. These organizations receive public funding not because they’re religious, but because they provide a valuable public service. That service is evaluated, not by religious criteria, but by neutral public criteria. To demand that they abandon their religious missions in order to be eligible for public funding is not neutral toward religion, but hostile.
Perhaps Jay Bookman means to be hostile toward religion. I hope not.
by Georgia Center for Opportunity | Dec 15, 2014
GCO’s latest report provides solutions that aim to minimize the role debt has in driving recidivism rates.
Offenders often leave prison owing tens of thousands of dollars in debt, creating serious obstacles to a successful reentry. The state expects returning offenders to pay these debts, though many struggle to simply find a job and a place to live.
Studies have shown average debt amounts in certain jurisdictions in the U.S. to be as high as $20,000 in child support arrears and between $500 and $2,000 in offense-related debt. Carrying an onerous amount of debt and having to immediately repay it puts tremendous financial pressure on recently released offenders. They face the threat of having their driver’s license suspended, having their wages garnished, and being re-incarcerated for failing to pay their obligations. These sanctions can discourage them from seeking legitimate employment and drive them to participate in the underground economy, leading them on a pathway back to prison.
Today, Georgia Center for Opportunity released a report titled A High Price to Pay: Recommendations for Minimizing Debt’s Role in Driving Recidivism Rates, which outlines several steps the state can take to encourage returning citizens to pay current obligations and repay debts in a realistic manner. Such action should result in more money going to support children and victims and result in fewer people ending up back behind bars.
The report’s recommendations include:
- Identify offenders with child support involvement upon entry to prison
- Provide child support information and services to parents during their incarceration
- Provide a 90-day grace period before indigent returning citizens have to pay their obligations and repay debts to ease the transition phase
- Limit the amount of wages to be garnished by the state
- Forgive fines, fees, and surcharges owed to the state for consistent payments of child support and restitution
- Reinstate driver’s licenses that were suspended for non-payment of child support
- Forgive arrears and interest owed to the state for a set number of consecutive payments of current child support***
- Designate a single agency to track and consolidate returning citizens’ debts
GCO will post a series of blogs that highlight different sections of the report, including the various factors that cause offenders to accrue debt, the effect debt can have in driving recidivism rates, and an in-depth look at the recommended policies.
Read the full report: A High Price to Pay: Recommendations for Minimizing Debt’s Role in Driving Recidivism Rates
***Edit to the report: May 6, 2015
At the time of writing the report, the author was unaware that Georgia already has a detailed debt reduction program in place to assist indigent non-custodial parents who owe arrears to the state. The Division of Child Support Services’ (DCSS) State Debt Reduction Program (SDRP) provides non-custodial parents the ability to have a significant percentage of their state-owed arrears reduced if an agent determines that:
(1) “Good cause” existed for the nonpayment of the public assistance debt;
(2) Repayment or enforcement of the debt would result in substantial and unreasonable hardship for the parent owing the debt;
(3) The non-custodial parent is currently unable to pay the debt;
(4) The non-custodial parent is making regular payments of current child support, regardless of the amount.
The amount that eligible non-custodial parents can have their arrears reduced depends upon the amount they owe. Those with a greater amount of arrears owed to the state are eligible to have a greater percentage reduced (with the exception of those who owe less than $100, who can have their entire state-owed arrears balance waived). For example, non-custodial parents with state-owed arrears balances of $9,000 or greater can have their arrears waved or reduced by 75 percent, so long as they pay the remaining 25 percent owed in a lump sum payment or in 24 monthly installments.[i]
While Georgia has a detailed debt reduction program in place, it appears that the participation in the program is limited. In 2014, only 349 out of the 354,427 total non-custodial parents ordered to pay child support in Georgia entered into the plan, based on the 30 DCSS offices that reported.[ii]* More should be done to enroll struggling returning citizens with child support arrears owed to the state into the program. One way the state can do this is by promoting it within the Fatherhood Program and Child Support Problem Solving Courts (PSCs), which returning citizens will be likely to participate in.
Sources:
[i] Division of Child Support Services, “State Debt Reduction Guidelines,” Employee Reference Guide – Standard Operating Procedure 251, Email Release May 24, 2013.
[ii] Erica Thornton, Manager of the Policy and Paternity Unit, Division of Child Support Services, Georgia Department of Human Services, email message to author, February 3, 2015; Georgia Department of Human Services, “Division of Child Support Services: Fact Sheet,” Revised November 2014.
*While not all 354,427 non-custodial parents ordered to pay child support in Georgia owe arrears to the state, the large figure suggests that there may be numerous non-custodial parents (particularly those reentering society from prison) who do (or should) qualify for the program, but are currently being overlooked.
by Georgia Center for Opportunity | Dec 10, 2014
Georgia Center for Opportunity’s annual fundraiser, a Real Chance to Prosper, on December 4th was a great success. It brought together around 200 people at the newly opened College Football Hall of Fame for a night celebrating the legacy of the late Jack Kemp and raising important funds for GCO’s work.
The event provided guests an opportunity to tour the College Football Hall of Fame including many interactive exhibits. During the reception, Jeff and Jimmy Kemp shared stories about their dad and gave insight into the kind of father, football player, and political figure he was.
There were several great items auctioned off throughout the evening from both a live and a silent auction, including a premier cruise excursion, a Peyton Manning signed jersey, an Al Pacino “The Godfather” signed shadowbox, and platinum tickets to the BB&T Atlanta Tennis Open. All donations from the night are used to support our mission to remove barriers to opportunity and ultimately help more Georgians achieve a better life.
Jack Kemp’s beliefs that we must reach every heart and ensure all individuals have the opportunity to reach their God-given potential are ones that we hold dear at GCO. That’s why we’re involved in the work of removing barriers to opportunity by promoting strong families, access to quality education, and steady employment, and why we’re so grateful for the sponsors, attendees, and volunteers who helped make this event a success.
If you would like to support GCO’s important work, we invite you to make a gift now.
Make a Gift
by Kimberly Sawatka | Nov 4, 2014
Over the past year, Georgia Center for Opportunity has hosted a series of luncheons aimed at encouraging local educators and business leaders to think outside of the traditional education reform box. Past keynote speakers have shared ways educators can work within their schools to become “cage-busting” leaders, and how business professionals can form coalitions to support quality education.
In this same vein, GCO recently had the pleasure to host Sajan George, the founder and CEO of Matchbook Learning. Sajan not only introduced the unique Matchbook blended-learning model, but he also shared ways his “turnaround” methodology can be applied to even the most underperforming schools in Georgia.
What is different about Matchbook Learning?
For students at a Matchbook school, grades are virtually irrelevant. Instead, the emphasis is placed on instructional levels of learning. Rather than go through curriculums associated with the grade they are in (i.e., 3rd grade), students begin lessons based on their skill level, which may be higher or lower than the actual grade they are in (e.g., they may be at a 1st or 4th grade level). Students advance from their individual starting points based on their ability to master a skill at a pace that is independent of other students’ progress in the classroom. This concept is commonly referred to as competency-based education.
By using online learning platforms, Matchbook Learning has created a revolutionary learning system that does not just treat the symptoms of failing schools, but addresses the root cause of failure. Far too often schools focus on one-size-fits all instruction and traditional seat-time to improve student outcomes. However, what is truly needed is the ability to customize learning paths to meet students where they are. This system has already proven its ability to propel struggling students to new heights academically by not overwhelming them with instruction far beyond their ability and by allowing them to progress at their own pace.
What is special about Matchbook Learning is that is does not just give struggling students the autonomy to work independently, it also frees up teachers to work with students on a more engaged level. Through the online platform, teachers always know where their students are in their learning and can arrange their classes with ease to provide more help to students who need it.
Matchbook has already scaled turnaround success in classrooms, schools, and school systems in places like Detroit, MI and Newark, NJ.
Can the Matchbook model turnaround Georgia?
To apply these turnaround methods in Georgia, Sajan noted that a more innovative vision of education is needed across the state. One possible starting point, however, could be Gov. Deal’s proposed recovery schools districts. Looking to the Matchbook Learning system as a best practice for these would-be state charter schools could provide the much needed guidance to transform low-performing schools into student-centered learning environments.
Through collaboration with innovators such as Sajan George, Georgia Center for Opportunity continues to remove barriers to quality education by promoting solutions that have been proven to work. Considering models like that of Matchbook Learning are a much needed step in the right direction for giving Georgia a real chance to prosper.
by Eric Cochling | Oct 29, 2014
The following is a special report for Georgia Center for Opportunity by Mike Klein. Mike’s other work may be found here.
Video from the Atlanta session may be seen here:
While voters fixate on an election next week that could change Washington’s balance of power, some also are looking ahead to next year’s Federal Election Commission agenda that will include an effort by incoming chair Ann Ravel to overhaul campaign finance disclosure law. Ravel has established her target-of-choice: corporate political action committees and super PAC expenditures after a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court opinion that ended independent spending limits.
Thousands of non-profit groups could become caught in a tidal wave of proposed changes that might impact how local, state and national organizations can advocate for children’s welfare, education, health care and virtually any other policy. The concept of the “anonymous donor” who makes community projects and thinking happen could be derailed without considerable care to protect the rights individuals have to use their personal money as they desire.
“Dark money” is the pejorative term opponents created to talk about corporate political action committee and super PAC spending. Ravel speaks openly about “problems we have with these dark money groups” and her view that “people are getting disgusted about what’s happening.” She says, “Polls have shown that elected officials are primarily serving their large contributors and not their constituents. That view is held equally by Republicans and Democrats.”
The FEC vice chair was at Emory University in Atlanta last week on the final leg of a three-city swing described as a listening tour to gather public input before her 2015 planned initiative. Other stops were Denver in early October and the University of Chicago’s new Institute of Politics that was founded by President Barack Obama’s political operative David Axelrod. Obama appointed Ravel to the six-member Federal Election Commission in October 2013. The FEC has three Republican and three Democratic commissioners. Ravel becomes chair in 2015.
The 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act is the cornerstone of U.S. election law. Perhaps more appropriately, it has become at least a time capsule and perhaps even a tomb as the FECA has not been amended since 1979. Changes to national election finance laws have mainly occurred because of FEC rules and regulations or because federal courts decided various questions brought over three and one-half decades.
In 2010 the U.S. Supreme Court (Citizens United vs. FEC) struck down limits on independent campaign spending by corporations and unions. It opened the door to spending by non-profit groups to support or oppose a candidate without having to disclose donors who could be individuals or other entities including corporations. The Center for Competitive Politics says that spending accounted for $311 million of the $7.3 billion spent in the 2012 election cycle.
Georgia State University law school professor Anne Tucker cited higher numbers when she joined Ravel onstage in Atlanta. Tucker said corporate political action committees spent $360 million in the 2012 election cycle and she said super PAC funds accounted for another $75 million. Tucker said 1,220 super PACs that do not disclose their donors raised over $520 million for the 2014 midterm elections. Tucker like Ravel supports the expansion of disclosure.
Thursday evening’s Emory event was far from a balanced discussion. Twenty-eight speakers approached the microphone and nearly all said the same thing: Someone must stop the inflow of corporate and other big money into politics. “I tell people your vote is your voice but I recently have come to believe that I am wrong. Sadly today your dollar is your voice,” said Robin Collins. “We argue that corporate spending in elections should not be equated to the First Amendment rights of individual citizens,” said Cindy Strickland. Another speaker noted she was “invited to this and also reminded” to attend.
Context is often lost where passion prevails. There was important context from William Loughery who knows of what he speaks. Now living in Georgia, the soft-spoken Loughery is a former chief of staff to United States Senator Arlen Spector, a former FEC staffer and he participated in writing the 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act which as noted above has not been amended in thirty-five years.
“When we wrote the Federal Election Campaign Act there never was any enforcement so why would anyone waste time on independent expenditures,” said Loughery. “The fundamental problem is nobody wants to change the law, nobody wants to make a significant radical change to update it because basically, the whole process would be captive of the current members of Congress and even the members of the Commission are basically captives of Congress. Technology has changed, a lot of other things have changed and there’s nothing being done to update the law.”
Battle plans have specific objectives but battles produce collateral damage. Non-profit groups that focus entirely on policies could become swept up in a federal election campaign law disclosure reform movement. As a young Emory student told the panel, “You have to look for the unintended consequences and protect individual rights, freedom of speech and the legitimacy of our democracy. That’s not an easy task.”
by Georgia Center for Opportunity | Oct 28, 2014
GCO is thrilled to have Jeff and Jimmy Kemp join us at our annual fundraiser on December 4, 2014 at the College Football Hall of Fame in Atlanta. Jeff and Jimmy will be with us to share recollections of their father, the late Jack Kemp, and discuss why his legacy matters today. We will also show how GCO is working each and every day to make Georgia a state where ALL have a real chance to prosper. We look forward to you joining us on December 4, 2014. Register to Attend.
I believe the ultimate imperative for growth and opportunity is to advance human dignity. – Jack Kemp
JEFF KEMP
Jeff Kemp is a quarterback for the family. He is an Ivy League graduate who played eleven seasons as a Quarterback in the National Football League with the Los Angeles Rams, San Francisco Forty-Niners, Seattle Seahawks and the Philadelphia Eagles. Today he is more passionate than ever about strengthening marriages and families and bringing groups and teams together for exciting results.
In 2012, Jeff joined FamilyLife as a Vice President and Catalyst for helping others strengthen families. FamilyLife, based in Little Rock, AR. is a national ministry leader in resources to build and enrich marriages and families along with radio outreach, marriage conferences and other resources to heal and strengthen families. Prior to joining FamilyLife, Jeff founded and led a dynamic organization, named Stronger Families, in the Pacific Northwest from 1993-2010.
JIMMY KEMP
James Kemp (Jimmy) is President of the Jack Kemp Foundation. He is responsible for the creation of the Foundation and secured the donation of his father’s papers to the Library of Congress.
Jimmy serves as a Director of Strategic Business Initiatives at Squire Patton Boggs LLP. He co-founded Kemp Partners, a strategic consulting firm based in Washington, DC, assisting Fortune 500 companies as well as burgeoning firms before Congress, the White House and several federal agencies. He is also an Executive Vice President at Group 47.
Jimmy spent eight seasons as a quarterback in the Canadian Football League, finishing his career in 2001 with the Toronto Argonauts. He also serves as Chairman of the Board for the Hope Community Charter School located in northeast Washington, DC. The school serves 735 pre-K through 8th grade students and has been operating since September 2005.
