Beau Underwood, Faith in Public Life’s Partnership and Outreach Coordinator, holds graduate degrees in religion and public policy and worked on several political campaigns before joining FPL. He blogs about faith in the public square, public theology, and workers’ rights and other economic issues at Bold Faith Type.
Another week, another outrageous story about the NYPD targeting Muslim Americans based solely on their religious identity. The latest revelation comes from an Associated Press story detailing NYPD efforts to monitor Muslim student groups far beyond New York City, and without basis in credible intelligence:
Police trawled daily through student websites run by Muslim student groups at Yale, the University of Pennsylvania, Rutgers and 13 other colleges in the Northeast. They talked with local authorities about professors in Buffalo and even sent an undercover agent on a whitewater rafting trip, where he recorded students’ names and noted in police intelligence files how many times they prayed.
As Rep. Keith Ellison wrote last week, these tactics fray relations between the Muslim community and the police, making the city and its residents less safe — not to mention the civil rights questions and privacy issues raised by the NYPD’s profiling and intrusiveness.
Given everything that has come to light, perhaps the most disturbing questions are why hasn’t Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly been held responsible for these abuses and why does Mayor Michael Bloomberg continue to defend these ethically questionable activities?
The news that the NYPD showed an extremely Islamophobic film as part of its training and then tried to cover up the extent of its use remains alarming. Faith leaders have called for an investigation to ensure such mistakes won’t be repeated. Today, Rep. Keith Ellison weighed in with the important reminder these episodes actually make us less safe. The Congressman writes:
The NYPD’s use of “The Third Jihad” is disturbing because it leaves officers with the impression that American Muslims are the enemy, not an ally against terrorism. This notion hurts the ability of law enforcement to do its job. No one knows this better than the brave officers who have stood up to such bigotry – it was NYPD officers who objected to the screening of the film, just as it was FBI agents who recently objected to using equally harmful training materials at the bureau.
…
Now more than ever, it is critical that law enforcement build relationships with the Muslim community to better fight against terrorism. In my hometown of Minneapolis, the relationship between law enforcement and the Muslim community is so strong that international dignitaries have visited to learn about our model. Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak has said he was able to solve several high-profile crimes only because Muslim community members voluntarily came forward to share information with the police.
Last week, attorneys general of forty-nine states agreed to a $26 billion settlement with five of the country’s biggest banks over their shocking practices of foreclosing on and evicting homeowners without having the documentation or authority to do so. While the size of the agreement sounds stunning, the actual compensation and relief it will bring those harmed by the banks is quite small.
As part of the deal the New York Times reports, “750,000 people who lost their homes to foreclosure from September 2008 to the end of 2011 will receive checks for about $2,000.” You read that correctly. Americans who were thrown out of their homes by the Big Banks pushing risky loans will be compensated a whopping $2,000 for the pain, suffering, and upheaval in their lives. Put in perspective, the $26 billion looks rather paltry.
Contrasting the agreement with all the bailouts Wall Street has received, which one report believes is over $29 trillion, provides further perspective. When the banks drove themselves and the economy to the brink of collapse because of their own poor choices and insatiable greed, the bailout spigot flowed freely. Now, suffering homeowners are finally promised relief only to discover the banks have again been the main beneficiaries of a gift from the government.
Adding to the disappointment, many homeowners who suffered because of the financial crisis caused by the irresponsible activity of Wall Street Banks won’t benefit at all, as borrowers whose mortgages are owned by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are excluded.
The havoc wreaked on our economy by Wall Street’s reckless behavior has cost our nation trillions of dollars, but the personal costs to American families runs even deeper. The banks may view the houses as assets, but for families a home is where children are raised, memories are made, and celebrations happen. Both the government officials and banks involved in this deal need to understand this isn’t just about the cost of a house or the terms of a loan. It is a debate about the type of society we want to be and the values we hold in common. This deal fails to adequately punish the greed and selfishness of Wall Street and fails to sufficiently compensate the homeowners who saw their retirements evaporate and their families upended because of foreclosure and eviction. America deserves better.
A new report conducted by a researcher at the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Alabama finds that flight of Alabama’s immigrant community since the passage of anti-immigrant law HB 56 has cost the state tens of thousands of jobs and tens of millions of dollars in lost sales tax revenues.
Dr. Samuel Addy, the author of the report, puts it bluntly:
While the law’s costs are certain and some are large, it is not clear that the benefits will be realized. From an economist’s perspective, the question Alabama and its legislature have to ponder is this: Are the benefits of the new immigration law worth the costs?
The analysis stands as a stark rebuttal to Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, the author of the legislation. In an interview with Think Progress this week, Kobach (who also authored a similar bill in Arizona) boldly asserted that he believes the law is having “no negative impact.”
Clearly Kobach is unwilling to let facts get in the way of his anti-immigrant ideology. Yet focusing narrowly only on the economic costs misses the larger point. Such draconian and hateful legislation undermines our values and blemishes our character. The economic costs are significant, but the moral costs are greater.
As the Republican presidential candidates court Latino voters in Florida and discuss their policy proposals for handling the immigration questions facing the U.S., the stakes for families suffering under our broken system could not be higher.
During a recent event on religion’s role in the 2012 elections held at the Center for American Progress, Rev. Gabriel Salguero, President of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition and executive member of the Latino Leadership Circle, noted the consistent support for immigration reform among the faith community and the broader American electorate. Salguero also discussed the potential political consequences of the staking out hardline, anti-immigrant positions on the campaign trail.
Another week, another outrageous story about the NYPD targeting Muslim Americans based solely on their religious identity. The latest revelation comes from an Associated Press story detailing NYPD efforts to monitor Muslim student groups far beyond New York City, and without basis in credible intelligence:
