As fears of coronavirus grow in U.S., local communities combat discrimination

Chinatowns across the country face revenue losses following the coronavirus outbreak. Washington, D.C.’s Chinatown neighborhood on March 1. (Photo Credit: Adv. Reporting Times’ Ashlyn Peter)

 

WASHINGTON—As the U.S. prepares for the spread of the novel coronavirus, or COVID-19, local governments and individuals are launching campaigns to combat fear and discrimination of Asian-American communities.

 

Chinese-owned businesses across the U.S. have suffered losses in revenue since before the first coronavirus case was reported in the country. Now that widespread transmission of the contagious virus seems a likely reality, local government officials find it necessary to encourage the public to avoid misinformation that could lead to fearmongering.

 

A “Show Some Love to Chinatown” campaign has helped businesses in the area since its Valentine’s Day launch, Gregg Bishop, the commissioner of the department of small business services for the New York City government, said in a phone interview. Bishop’s department heard from Chinese-owned businesses that there was a 40 percent drop in foot traffic, and the campaign has since stabilized the decline.

 

The campaign also introduced a raffle in which individuals can enter if they present a receipt from a Chinatown restaurant or shop, Bishop said. The N.Y.C. effort will continue throughout the month “to encourage people to come out and shop in the boundaries of this business improvement district,” Bishop said.

 

“Any one extra person that we can encourage to come down here is one extra income that the local merchant will deeply appreciate,” Wellington Chen, the executive director of the Chinatown partnership in N.Y.C., said. Chen created the Show Some Love to Chinatown campaign in accordance with Bishop.

 

Across the country in Los Angeles, government officials say that they want to minimize the fear that has led not only to a similar drop in revenue of Chinese-owned restaurants, but also an attack of an Asian American teenager on February 11.

 

“The biggest problem right now is behaviors that are discriminatory and really destroy the very fabric of the diversity of L.A. county,” Barbara Ferrer, the director of public health for L.A. county, said in a phone interview. “Restaurants are half-empty because people have a lot of fear and a lot of misinformation.”

 

Ferrer said that Public Health Department supervisors continue to attend Chinatown events to reassure the public that it is safe to engage with the L.A. community. “We’ve actually made a big effort ourselves to patronize Chinese businesses and to stand with our Chinese friends and neighbors against discrimination,” Ferrer said. “All supervisors [of L.A. county departments] have been attending events in Chinatown and other communities associated with the Lunar New Year, and they have been photographed eating in Chinese restaurants.”

 

Ferrer said department officials have been vigilant about attending town halls and community meetings at places like public schools to prevent the spread of misinformation. Health experts continue to make themselves available on the department’s social media to answer the public’s questions and dispel fear.

 

Other cities have also acted in recent weeks to bring communities and their local governments together. In Boston, city officials organized a large dim-sum brunch on February 15 for residents in the area.  Hundreds of Bostonians came together at a local Chinese restaurant to combat the owner’s reported 80 percent drop in business.

 

Boston’s WCVB wrote that the brunch communicated that people could eat in public spaces together without fear of transmission. Other Chinese restaurant owners were at the event to engage with residents and assure them that they would keep workers home for two weeks if they recently traveled to China.

 

Government leaders are not the only ones organizing events to support Chinatowns: throughout the country; grassroot efforts have materialized as well. Chicagoan Carlos Matias recently led a restaurant tour through the city’s Chinatown after scheduling the event on a Facebook page, The Chicago Tribune reported. Matias said in the article that he has frequented the area since he was a child, and he wanted to support the businesses of owners he now considers friends.

 

This effort comes after Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot attended the Chinese Lunar New Year parade and government departments launched their own marketing campaigns to funnel business back into the area. They modeled their efforts off of the Show Some Love to Chinatown campaign in N.Y.C.

 

Washington, D.C. has not begun a campaign, but Mayor Muriel Bowser addressed concerns of discrimination in a press release on Thursday. “Communicating the facts that viruses do not target specific racial or ethnic groups and how COVID-19 actually spreads can help stop stigma,” Bowser wrote. “Stigma hurts everyone by creating more fear or anger towards ordinary people instead of the disease that is causing the problem.”

 

College campuses in D.C. were quick to spread that message to their students and staff members. American University informed its students via email on February 26 that the International Student and Scholar Services “has reached out to students from those countries [with high cases of the coronavirus] to check on them and provide support.” AU’s student body includes over 1,000 international students from China. “Support our fellow Eagles as they may be struggling with this difficult situation,” AU’s email said.

 

Public fear is not the only factor for the drop in business at Chinese restaurants and shops. Many cities often experience fewer tourists in the early months of the year, and fewer Asian tourists visited the U.S. for Lunar New Year celebrations than in previous years due to the virus outbreak.

 

“My concern is that if the irrational behavior continues for an extended period of time, we might see some hyperlocal economic challenges,” Bishop said in regard to how smaller communities could be impacted. “But I have full confidence that once the facts are out and people understand what the virus is, we will start seeing an uptick in consumers who will start patronizing these businesses.”

WASHINGTON – The average cost for a premium subscription on a music streaming app is $10 a month, but a musician only makes around 3/1,000 of a cent per stream depending what app is used.

Andy Valenti, a guitarist and singer in the indie soul band Oh He Dead, says although his band has over 500,000 streams on Spotify, they have only made about $1,500 to $2,000 total from these streams.

He said, in a phone interview, that the band “put our music on Spotify because that is where the listeners are. It is mainly an avenue to get our music in front of people.”

“No one in our shoes expects they will make a living off of streaming, so that’s why we play live shows and sell merch,” Valenti said. “Spotify makes up for not paying their artists by giving us listener data.”

The data given by Spotify to artists on their platform includes listener demographics, what song is streamed the most and what cities around the world have the most people that stream a specific artist.

Valenti said the data given from this service has helped his band decide where they should tour and how they should market their music to specific audiences.

Adam Bradley’s indie pop band,Sub-Radio, has a larger stream count than Oh He Dead with over 2 million streams total since 2016. As a result, Bradley, who does vocals for Sub-Radio, said he and his band mates receive about $150 to $200 every two weeks from multiple streaming services.

When it comes to bands and streaming royalties, the band gets one check and then has to divide it amongst its members. This is the case for Oh He Dead and Sub-Radio.

While Spotify may not pay artists well, it is fairly easy to get on it. An artist or band pays about $20 a year to a third-party music distributor who then puts the music on the app.

“Spotify is good because it is the biggest streaming platform out there,” Bradley said in a phone interview. “However, it does suck that we are putting our music in front of all of these people and do not really get compensated for it.” 

Beginning artists and bands put their music on streaming outlets hoping to get fans and eventually get enough listeners to receive some form of compensation. This is the goal for American University senior Ricardo Vasquez. He uses SoundCloud to publish original songs and electronic dance music remixes of popular songs under the name rickydav3.

Vasquez’s most popular song, titled “Natasha Bedingfield – Pocketful of Sunshine (Rickydav3 Progressive House Remix)”,  has over 4,000 streams on SoundCloud.

“At first, I started putting my stuff on YouTube because I thought that was the place to be,” Vasquez said in an interview. “But, eventually I realized SoundCloud is the play where small musicians go to post their stuff and get recognition.”

The small amount of money paid whenever a song is played makes artists turn

to other ways to get money, including an increase in concert ticket and merchandise prices or limiting the number of albums being made.

The passage of the Music Modernization Act of 2018 would fix this by having a government-sponsored group of music labels and streaming services create a database that makes it easier for musicians to get royalties by January 2021. Once the database is created, the government will enter discussions with these groups to increase the streaming rate.

The government is going to be involved with the streaming amount because it is a hard topic to find common ground with just the record labels and streaming platforms. It is even difficult to find an amount that artists that use streaming platforms agree they deserve.  

“I do not think it is unreasonable to ask for 50 cents a stream (so) that way each person in my band can get 10 cents,” Valenti said. “There needs to be a system where people can pay a fair price to stream music while artists still get compensated.”

He agreed with an interview done by Jack Stratton from the band Vulfpeck when Spotify first went on the stock market. Stratton compared Spotify’s monthly fee of $10 to being able to pay $10 a month to Whole Foods and being allowed to take as many items from the store without paying more.

 “I do not really know the formula that is used to figure out how much one gets paid for a stream so I can’t give a specific amount,” Bradley said. “But I do think the iTunes model where you pay a miniscule amount to have permanent access to a song is better than the pay per stream system out there now.”

Vasquez, who is a solo artist, said he would like to be paid around 10 cents per stream when he eventually starts getting paid for his music.

“There is a meme in the musician community about streaming that’s like if you could get paid in exposure, then you would be a millionaire,” Vasquez said. “While exposure is great, it doesn’t do as much for you as money could.”

Although these three musicians could not say the perfect amount an artist should receive, they all said that getting more money would allow artists to record more music and be able to make a more of a living on recording music then focusing only on touring.

 In the meantime, each suggested that just following a band or artist on any form of social media and sharing their music with friends goes a long way in supporting smaller acts. Merchandise sold at live performances, such as shirts or CDs, is another way to support small acts because they receive most of the money from the purchase.

While the database for the Music Modernization Act is being created, each of these artists are doing projects that will hopefully get them more money in the meantime.

Oh He Dead is going on a nationwide tour starting in April. Sub-Radio has recently dropped a single and are also going on tour in April. Vasquez hopes to release an album in the upcoming month that will be on Spotify where he will hopefully start getting compensated, regardless of the amount for now.

By Emma Dion // February 29, 2020 // Revised March 27, 2020

WASHINGTON – Kristen Xiao was celebrating the holidays with her family at her home in Wuhan, China when the coronavirus uprooted her plans of traveling to Northern Virginia for school. 

The high school student, along with 11 million other Wuhan residents, has been under lockdown since January 23. 

“We stay at home every day,” explained Xiao, “and the government has issued a pass that every family has the chance to go out every three days.”

The 18-year-old spends most of her time cooped up in the apartment. No one in Xiao’s family has contracted the coronavirus, but she does know a few people who are being affected by it in her community.

Despite being under government lockdown, Xiao has managed to keep up with her classes at Veritas Collegiate Academy in Springfield, Virginia with the help of a video technology device called Swivel. It allows the school’s iPad to follow a teacher around the room, filming lessons and essentially transporting Xiao into the classroom. Sean Elgut said that device was a huge need since Chinese officials weren’t sure how much longer the lockdown may continue.

Xiao uses Swivel to virtually attend all her classes, even though students in Virginia are 13 hours ahead. She puts on her school uniform every day and learns alongside her classmates into the early morning hours from her living room in Wuhan.

“I think I’m very lucky for this situation because now I’m synchronizing video lessons with my classmates on the American campus and so I adjust my life, day and night, upside down,” said Xiao. “My parents and teachers are very supportive, and they have always supported me.”

Maria Elgut explained how Xiao has come out of her situation as a stronger individual, “and that’s kind of the gist what classical education is all about.” According to Maria Elgut, Veritas Collegiate Academy’s classical education “allows students to think globally before they even get to college.”

There are three campuses in Virginia, as well as three others in China. Like Xiao, Chinese students are typically encouraged to study in Virginia at some point during their four years at school. 

Each of the Chinese-based campuses have been shut down in the wake of the coronavirus. Students and faculty in China were away from campus on vacation when the virus caused initial shutdowns back in January.

When news broke of the lack of medical equipment at Wuhan area hospitals, Xiao sounded the alarm for her peers across the world at Veritas to help raise money for relief aid. So far, the school has raised over $30,000. 

Xiao is part of a leadership group at Veritas Collegiate Academy and figured that if they organized something, her school could make an impact in Wuhan. She pitched the idea of a Wuhan Relief project because “as a student leader who is temporarily trapped in Wuhan, I think the best thing I can do now is to show up and call for more people’s support.” 

Sean Elgut and Maria Elgut said that the Veritas community has sprung to action since then. Most donors have been from the close-knit school community- parents, teachers and many students themselves.

According to Sean Elgut, the spread of the coronavirus has “really unified the students on our various campuses,” which is why the school community has been able to raise so much money. “We’re really one big family. And so, when one of us is being, you know, hurt, we all want to be able to be part of the healing process.”

After Xiao suggested starting the project, students Asiimwe Kamuntu and Joanbry Santos began fundraising efforts back in Virginia. The two created a GoFundMe page for the project, which has found much success. Kamuntu and Santos also designed a bracelet for the cause, with the hashtag #WuhanStrong written across the front. The hashtag has become increasingly popular worldwide since the coronavirus outbreak began. 

“Red is just sort of a color that people associate with relief projects, and the Red Cross, so we thought red is a good color here. And then we did the hashtag #WuhanStrong because we wanted to be able to kind of spread it around. We want people to post on Instagram, post on Facebook, Twitter, hashtag #WuhanStrong,” said Santos. 

Kamuntu said that her association with Veritas’ Chinese campuses has grown a lot since fundraising began, even though her and Santos have never met Xiao or most of the other Chinese students in person. 

“People have lost hope, and we want to, like, rebuild that because there’s a connection that you build when you just feel someone battling with something else,” said Kamuntu.

Santos added that he is more in tune with news coming from China now more than ever before, thanks to their relief project. 

“I’m more concerned with what’s happening with Chinese people, what’s happening with China in general. Before I was a bit more neutral on it. But now since I’m actually you know, researching and seeing the effects of the coronavirus, what it’s having on people, I do feel more connected with it.”

For the entire Veritas Community, it is about much more than just fundraising. Students say they want to educate their communities about the needs in Wuhan, but also about the coronavirus in general. 

As for the student-led fundraising, Xiao hopes that “after we finish this Wuhan Relief Project, we will also have the opportunity to do other projects.” Xiao’s classmates agree that once the coronavirus has come and gone, they hope to someday concentrate on sending aid to other areas of the world in need. 

Perhaps the most important thing to remember, according to Xiao, is that the project’s goal is bigger than battling the coronavirus in China. “We are here to express our solidarity with the people of the world who are suffering from disasters, and I hope to provide them with help as much as we can.”

###

By: Molly Greenstone

When you walk into any grocery store you can find an array of products like plant-based burgers, sausages, chicken nuggets, and more. These products are in the meat and dairy section of the market but are 100% vegan-friendly, meaning these products do not contain any meat or dairy. It is evident that imitation meat is expanding into the market.

 

Sales of plant-based meat products grew by 40% from 2017 to 2019, and three months after going public, the plant-based burger company, Beyond Meat, saw its share price surge 500%. Despite the rise in popularity, vegetarians, vegans, and meat-eaters continue to question the content of plant-based meat. Because these products are relatively new, consumers do not know how these products affect our bodies in the long run. 

 

In late July 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration amended its rule to call the use of soy leghemoglobin safe as a color additive in imitation meat. The FDA reviewed a petition submitted in 2018 by Impossible Foods, a company that develops plant-based meat substitutes, and concluded that there is no harm from the use of soy leghemoglobin as a color additive. By approving this additive, Impossible Foods are able to sell their raw products inside grocery stores.

 

“A culture behind the consumption of plant-based meat exists. For example, in Europe genetically modified foods do not sell well because of cultural differences in the acceptance of processed foods, whereas in the U.S these artificial products are more appealing. Just because this food appears to be fine doesn’t necessarily mean this is how people in other countries perceive it,” Madison Calkins, a Resource Mobilization Associate at the International Fund for Agricultural Development, said in an interview. 

 

Calkins said the cultural differences in accepting fake meat will determine how popular the products become. It is evident that the FDA has approved the additive that makes fake meat look and feel like a real burger, but there is a lack of certainty that point to the long-term effects of plant-based meat.

 

Advocates of products that appear and taste like real meat, such as Beyond Meat, claim they are solving issues involving the environment and public health. According to Beyond Meat’s mission, by shifting from animal to plant-based meat, they are improving human health, climate change, constraints on natural resources and animal welfare. Indeed meat can be damaging to our health, but according to some reports, these fake meat products are not the solution toward decreasing high-fat diets. 

 

A study on sustainable and healthy diets found that there is an increased risk of heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and stroke linked to the consumption of animal-based meat products. The study also found that processed foods made of refined grains and sugars can have similar damaging effects.

 

At the same time, Harvard article from 2018 suggested that one can avoid meat products and still have an unhealthy diet. Refined grains and foods packed with sugar can be harmful to the body and are ultimately associated with significant health risks.

 

“The truth is plant-based meats should not be considered a healthy food substitute because of the highly processed ingredients within them. Many plant-based meat products contain just as much fat, sodium, and calories found in real meat,” Lucy Taylor, a clinical nutritionist, said in an interview.  

 

Taylor suggests mock meat is not a part of a healthy vegetarian diet. “In my opinion, a healthy vegetarian diet consists of pulses/legumes (beans, lentils, chickpeas, and peas in their products, including tofu and tempeh), whole grains, vegetables, fruit, nuts, and seeds,” Taylor said. 

 

Yet despite the high levels of fat in plant-based meats, some find it difficult to incorporate Taylor’s recommended healthy foods in their everyday diet. According to Georgie Bradley, a vegetarian and environmental-science studies student at American University, mock meat products are conveniently available in grocery stores and make the perfect dinner at the end of a busy day. 

 

“When I have classes all day and an internship on other days the last thing I can be asked to do is cook for myself. It’s so much easier to just throw a veggie burger on the stove that I know will be ready in a matter of seconds,” she said. 

 

Seeing as though Bradley along with many other vegetarians and vegans are leading and living busy lives, convenience may outweigh any other concerns that come with eating packaged fake meat. This kind of consumer behavior could explain why plant-based meat companies are growing in general.

 

A study by data bridge market research suggests that the global meat substitutes market will reach 7.36 billion USD by 2025. With this growth in mind, the study found that the expansion of the fake meat industry not only aims to provide vegetarians and vegans with satisfying options but also encourages people in general to lower their meat consumption. 

 

According to Ethan Brown, Beyond Meat’s CEO, 93 percent of consumers in conventional grocery stores that buy a Beyond Meat product are also putting animal meat in their baskets. Looking at this consumer behavior, Brown focuses less on providing a product to please the needs of vegetarians and more on a replacement that will meet the wants of meat consumers. By offering realistic fake burgers and fake sausages, Brown hopes to reduce meat consumption globally. 

 

Although the success rate and growth of Beyond Meat and other plant-based meat companies appears to be moving in a positive direction, the long-term growth of the fake meat industry is uncertain. It will be interesting to see what happens next for the fake meat industry. 

 

A bulletin board outside of American University’s Counseling Center with a suicide prevention lifeline.

Continue reading “Revised: Multiple Barriers Hinder College Students from Mental Health Services”

By Isabella Goodman

WASHINGTON — On Tuesday, The Committee on Foreign Affairs heard many arguments for and against the Mexico City policy, a policy that cuts foreign aid to countries providing abortion services. 

President Donald Trump reinstated the Mexico City policy, or the global gag rule, in 2017. The expanded version, called “Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance,” states that all foreign nongovernmental organizations that use their own funding to provide abortions or abortion-related services will no longer receive U.S. foreign aid. The policy was first enacted by Ronald Reagan in 1984. 

There were several humanitarian workers and policy experts who served as witnesses for the hearing, “Unique Challenges Women Face in Global Health.”

U.S. Rep Nita Lowey (D-NY) and Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) gave the opening remarks.

“The number of obstacles that women around the world face in their pursuit of health services is almost too many to list,” Lowey said. “Instead of tackling these issues, President Trump simply created more barriers when he quickly imposed the dangerous, ill-informed, Mexico City policy.”

Lowey urged the committee to consider her bill, H.R. 1055, or the Global Health Empowerment and Rights Act, which would permanently repeal the global gag rule. 

“Passing this legislation would restore our country’s role as an international leader and ensure that women, men, and children around the world are able to access the health care they so desperately need,” Lowey said.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) testified that the U.S. should not be paying for abortions.

“The only organizations to not receive funding under ‘Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance’ are those who have chosen not to accept the policy restrictions that come with U.S. assistance,” Rodgers said. It means we are using resources for the healthcare and lifesaving care of both women and children.”

The first witness was Dr. Jennifer Kates, who works for the Kaiser Family Foundation.

According to Kates, an analysis done by the Kaiser Foundation found that more than half of the countries in which the U.S. provides global healthcare access had abortion laws that were more permissive than the policy allowed.

Kates testified that the Mexico City policy would be counter-intuitive to the goals of the policy. Kates said people were less likely to use contraception when their reproductive education was cut. 

“The reinstated and expanded Mexico City policy for the first time applies to nearly all bilateral U.S. global health assistance,” Kates said. “A recent empirical analysis found that when in place in the past, abortion rates rose, and the use of modern contraception fell in the countries most exposed to the policy.”

A 2019 Lancet study has found that restriction on U.S. assistance to family planning organizations, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, increases abortion within those countries. 

Lisa Bos of World Vision, a faith-based humanitarian organization that provides aid to countries internally, said that while World Vision is a pro-life organization, they have not taken a position on the Mexico City Policy.

“We believe all that all mothers, and their babies, deserve to have the basic information, medical support and care needed to ensure safe deliveries and protection from preventable disease,” Bos said.

Although Bos answered many questions from the committee relating to anti-abortion, her focus largely remained on maternal health and the importance of education and medical services for women and young girls.

 In her testimony, Sheba Crocker, the Vice President for Humanitarian Policy and Practice at CARE USA, focused on addressing gender inequalities. 

She addressed four challenges to women and girls in humanitarian settings: inadequate funding, lack of access from humanitarian workers to populations in need, social norms that expose women and girls to greater health risks and issues that heavily and uniquely impact women — particularly gender-based violence and access to sexual and reproductive health services.

“Policies that restrict non-governmental organizations’ ability to provide lifesaving health services, such as the Mexico City policy, have been seen to reduce access to care and lead to poor outcomes for women,” Crocker said. “CARE calls for this policy’s repeal.” 

Mulumba Moses, who works for the Center for Health, Human Rights and Development testified about his experience with healthcare. Growing up in Uganda, Moses saw firsthand how hard it could be to get good access to healthcare. 

“The global gag rule demonstrates how repressive political decisions from other countries can affect population health and well-being in countries like Uganda,” Moses said. 

After their initial testimonies, the witnesses then answered questions concerning women’s health on a global scale – from gender-based violence in Venezuela to infant mortality rates in Yemen.

While many of the representatives from the Committee of Foreign Affairs could not agree on whether or not the Mexico City policy should be in place, almost all who asked questions made it clear that the issue of women’s health globally is often understated and overlooked.

There was a large audience turnout of almost entirely women, many wearing black Planned Parenthood t-shirts with the slogan, “end the global gag rule” written on the front. Planned Parenthood is currently petitioning to end the global gag rule. 

Minaal Farrukh, 21, was one of the women in attendance. She’s a student at Texas A&M University and currently works as an intern for Health and Human Services. 

“I wasn’t aware of the global gag rule and the effect it has on humanitarians and their ability to offer their services in some areas. I wrote a paper on prioritizing aid as foreign policy, so it’s interesting to learn that it’s supported but there are still so many nuances and obstacles to think about,” Farrukh said.

By Emma Dion // February 27, 2020

WASHINGTON – The Joint Economic Committee heard testimony from four sociology experts on Tuesday afternoon at a hearing to discuss improving family stability for the wellbeing of American children. Much of the hearing focused on the current family-related policy in the United States, which experts said lacks the ability to support non-traditional and minority families. The testimony panel discussed various solutions to fix this problem for over two hours. 

Dr. Rashawn Ray, a David M. Rubenstein Fellow from The Brookings Institution, a liberal-leaning think tank in Washington DC, was the only person of color to provide testimony at the hearing and began his testimony with a question for those in the room to consider.   

“I grew up in a single parent household and have never seen my biological father before. I am now happily married to my high school sweetheart with two smart and talented boys. How did I get here?” 

Dr. Ray credited his successful upbringing to the determination of his single mother, Joslyn Talley, and the childcare and support that he received from his grandparents and aunt. 

Dr. Ray’s testimony spoke to the fact that when minority families are facing economic hardship, they turn to extended family arrangements for help. His research suggests that racially diverse families today are more likely to consider extended kin and grandparents as part of their family. However, Dr. Ray pointed to the lack of government support and recognition for extended family members, such as aunts, uncles and grandparents as parental figures in a child’s upbringing. 

Vice Chairman Don Beyer (D-VA) openly stated that government policy currently in place does not recognize extended family arrangements as a form of childcare. As said in his opening remarks, “the share of multi-generational households has grown, but our policies haven’t changed. Grandparents, aunts and uncles are taking care of kids and are often doing it because the cost of childcare is unbelievable.” 

Dr. Ray called for policy that recognizes extended family arrangements, since the American economic market has created an environment in which African American and Latino families often live under these circumstances as a “structural survival strategy in an economic market that has rarely provided them with opportunities to live in autonomous, self-sufficient households.” 

Dr. Betsey Stevenson, Professor of Economics and Public Policy at the University of Michigan, also called for better recognition and support for broader kinship relationships in her testimony. Stevenson pointed out that because trends are showing that grandparents are playing an important role in childrearing both for married and single parents, government policy needs to reflect that. 

“Research shows that couples who live away from their parents are more likely to move toward their parents – the grandparents – once children are born. Public policy needs to consider the ways in which the role and responsibilities taken on by grandparents can be better supported and recognized,” said Stevenson near the end of her opening testimony. 

Joint Economic Committee member and U.S. Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-WA) asked Dr. Ray how policy makers should recognize the role of grandparents, aunts and uncles in providing care for kids. Dr. Ray suggested that “there needs to be greater flexibility and malleability in grandparents’ ability to take on some of the recourses and tax breaks associated with raising children.”  

Over the course of the hearing, other panelists gave different solutions for increasing family stability. Kay Hymowitz, a William E. Simon Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, brought attention to something she considers to be “an underappreciated part of the story.” Instead of focusing on extended familial relationships, the government needs to prioritize on bringing up better eligible bachelors and father figures. Hymowitz calls this the “marriageable men problem.” 

According to Hymowitz, as more and more women are getting higher education and entering the workforce, they are searching for men who also have higher education and well-paying jobs. Since Hymowitz’s research shows that men and women both prefer marriages where husbands earn as much or more income as wives, there are less “economically desirable men” for highly educated women to marry.  Therefore, there is a “mismatch between what women might want [in a marriage], and the men available.” 

Hymowitz suggested policy ideas that offer methods to bring up more highly educated and highly paid men in society- “to ensure more children grow up in stable, two-parent families, we need to focus our attention on young men.” According to Hymowitz, that means improving their education starting from a young age to technical training and apprenticeships later in life. 

Hymowitz also drew attention to a necessary fix that is “less amenable to government policy but is no less crucial to addressing the marriageable men problem.” In her testimony, Hymowitz brought up the need to re-affirm the importance of fathers and male contributions to the American family household. 

Dr. Ray did not have a father in his childhood upbringing. In his testimony, he recalled his mother saying, “I’m a woman. I can’t necessarily show you what it means to be a man, in particular a black man in society, but I can put you around other people who can.” Dr. Ray confirmed that showing young children what fatherly figures look and act like is “something we should really, really do.”  

As the hearing was coming to a close, Congresswoman Herrera Beutler expressed her belief that mutual love and respect is “ultimately how we get to more stable relationships and marriages.” 

Representative Beyer addressed the fact that Congress has been working to pass legislation to improve economic stability for families, such as the National Defense Authorization Act. Beyer also recognized that current government oversight still needs work, saying that upholding fatherly figures in the household is essential for future legislation. “Making paid family leave a reality for women and men will be another important step.” 

WASHINGTON – Witness and members of the Workforce Protections Subcommittee debated whether the provisions of the Family and Medical Leave Act should be changed to include those that are in the FAMILY Act.

 The hearing featured testimony from two policy fellows, a member of the North Carolina General Assembly and a small business owner.

The FMLA was created in 1993 under the Clinton Administration to provide unpaid leave in the event of an illness or birth of a child. To be eligible for FMLA, an employee must have worked for the company for the past year, worked at least 1,250 hours in the past year and work for a company that has at least 50 other employees.

There is currently a piece of legislation, H.R. 1185 FAMILY Act, in front of the House Ways and Means Committee that would allow for every employee, regardless if full-time or part-time, to take a paid leave from their job for up to 12 weeks. The payments received would equal an employee’s monthly wage and will be distributed by the Social Security Administration.

Testimony began after opening remarks from Chairwoman Alma S. Adams (D-N.C.) and Rep. Ben Cline (R-Va.). Adams argued for the expansion of the act to cover all employees regardless of their employment status would have positive impacts for all parts of society.

“For families, paid family and medical leave mean improved maternal and infant health as well as better long-term outcomes for children,” Adams said. “For businesses, it means stronger work recruitment, increase in employee loyalty and reduced employee turnover rate. For the economy, … means more money in the pockets of American consumers and a reduced need for public assistance.”

While Cline agreed that there is a need to revise FMLA, he believes that one set policy will not work for every business in the country.

Cline said, “The bottom line is that Congress should avoid burdening the American taxpayer and employers through additional ‘Washington knows best’ federal mandates when the private sector is already innovating solutions to create workplace flexibility for employees.”

According to witness Elisabeth Jacobs, a senior fellow at the independent think-tank Urban Institute, “these qualifications restrict 44% of workers in the country from using FMLA.”

Rep. Sydney Batch from the North Carolina General Assembly was the first to testify in support of the expansion of FMLA and the passage of the FAMILY Act. Batch is also an owner of a small legal firm and has used FMLA in the past. She said this had shaped her opinions on the topic.

“Ensuring all workers—including those who work at a small business, those who work part-time, and those that are recent hires—have job protection through the FMLA is essential,” said Batch.  “The FAMILY Act is the best paid family and medical leave insurance leave bill; its passage is a priority for families and small businesses.”

Batch also described how there is a proposed bill in the North Carolina legislature that would provide paid leave for all employees in the state. She is an advocate for this bill but said she wishes federal legislation would pass that way every American would have access to paid leave.

Anthony Sandkamp, a small woodshop owner from Jersey City, New Jersey, also gave testimony in support of the expansion of FMLA and the passage of the FAMILY Act. He said that his woodshop adapted to the paid leave act issued by the state of New Jersey in 2009 for proof that small businesses can prosper while still contributing to paid leave insurance. Employees at his business have used this program and were able to return to their jobs after.

“I have not had a single employee quit since the family leave has been available in the state of New Jersey,” Sandkamp said. “That is a huge cost savings to me as an employer in terms of productivity and the costs to train a new employee.”

Rachel Greszler, an economic research fellow from the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation, had a more critical approach to the expansion of FMLA and the passage of the FAMILY Act. She expressed that the government cannot make a one size fits all plan for businesses.

Greszler said, “The FMLA and other regulations that put politicians and bureaucrats in charge of decisions … end up limiting the ability for workers and employers to sit down together to figure out work plans that balance both of their needs.”

Geszler maintained that the definitions for what constitutes an illness in FMLA are too broad and this causes people to abuse the system. “In current FMLA, a serious medical condition is not well defined,” she said. “And employers have had employees report conditions, such as a hurt toe or migraine or a sever cough, that end up resulting in FMLA certification.”  

She also does not support the FAMILY Act because “paid family and medical leave can’t be free.” The Heritage Foundation did a report on paid family leave where they showed it would raise the short-term deficit by $3 million and weaken the social security system

The last witness was Elisabeth Jacobs, a senior fellow at the independent think-tank Urban Institute, who supported both measures.

“The historic passage of the FMLA in 1993 has had important positive effects for families and workers with minimal evidence of negative consequence for business or economic growth,” Jacobs testified.

She also argued that FMLA and the FAMILY Act would improve federal labor laws for the 21^st century and would create uniform policy. There are some paid leave laws on the state level, but not every state has them. The FAMILY Act would create a federal policy that would not vary from state to state.

Jacobs said, “A federal program with uniform eligibility requirements, protections and benefit schedules would eliminate the unevenness between the states and create a level playing field for state finances for employers and for workers.”