North Carolina Newspapers

FORUM N.C. education forecast 2017: choice and opportunity Darrell Allison Guest Columnist The 2016 year is draw ing to a close, but its accomplishments in K-12 education say much about what we can expect in the year ahead. This past year has ush ered in landmark educa tional advancements in North Carolina, setting the stage for unprecedented innovation, choice, and opportunity in 2017. North Carolina families, includ ing many in our African American communities who seek stronger schools and increased options, have reason to believe then voices are being heard. Supporting our public schools tops the list of pri orities, and will continue to do so. This summer the state legislature approved a transformational budget with a historic pay increase for our public school teach ers, affirming the critical role-tttey-ptay in educating 15 million students across North Carolina. Parental school choice will also grow: The state budget increases funding for the Opportunity Scholarship Program, which provides state-fund ed private school scholar ships to low-income and working class families. The program's budget will increase by $10 million annually for the next decade. More North Carolina parents than ever before will thus be empow ered to choose the best school for their child. State funding will enable an additional 2,500 children each year to receive a scholarship through 2028 29. At that time, as many as 36,000 low-income stu dents could attend private school using an Opportunity Scholarship. Why is this important? Parental school choice is nothing new as families have utilized this for years - choosing a school (public or private) that works best for their children. The hard truth is that until now only wealthy families have been able to utilize parental school choice. Today, and with the recent measures passed by the North Carolina General Assembly with the various scholarship programs and nearly 70 percent growth of public charter schools, working-class and middle class families are now able to exercise the right to choose the school that works best for their chil dren? Moreover, the legisla ture's action is a powerful response to parental demand - demand that has grown steadily each year. Since the Opportunity Scholarship Program launched in 2014-15, fami lies statewide have submit ted nearly 24,000 applica tions; they submitted almost 9,400 applications for the 2016-17 school year alone. This program's expan sion surely comes as wel come news to many African-American parents in our state, who tell us they overwhelmingly favor school choice. This summer, our organization. Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina, released a poll of 800 ? African- ? American voters statewide, revealing widespread sup port for choice: 64 percent said parents should be able "to choose the K-12 school their child attends through state-funded scholarships." Not only do African American voters want choice; they also want change. Expect them to keep up the pressure on their elected representa tives to provide it: Fully 82 percent of African American voters in our poll said state lawmakers must do more to expand K-12 options for students in North Carolina. Across the state, con sensus is growing: Parents should be able to choose the best school for their child, regardless of their -address or income. Our African-American families know it. They clearly believe it. And in 2017, more will get to live it. Darrell Allison is the founding president of Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina. Everyone pretends they don't notice Clinton got more votes than Trump Lauren V. Burke Guest Columnist Imagine if Donald Trump got 2 million more votes than Hillary Clinton, but by . some fluke of Electoral College math, Clinton won. What would Trump be saying? The answer is easy: He'd be saying what he said weeks before Election Day: That the election was rigged against him. Why the same isnt true the other way around is anyone's guess. On Nov. 23, we learned that Clinton received 2 mil lion more popular votes than Trump. Yeah, I know: Trump will be the next President. At some point, someone has to ask: Does it make sense that the person who received the most votes isn't the winner? Does it make sense that Clinton has a wider vote margin over Trump than seven people who eventually became President? The talk after the election was that the Democratic Party needs an overhaul and all is lost for the party. But the Democrats should be careful not to over-correct. If receiving 2 million more votes signals a crisis, that's quite something. Just imagine that Democrats received 2 mil lion more votes with an imperfect candidate of the past carrying loads of baggage. The . bigger problem for the Democrats is running establishment candidates at the top of the ticket in an age of anti-establishment politics doesn't work. The 2008 run of Barack Obama should have taught them the value of Hillary Clinton change politics to the American voters. But what did the Democratic Party ? more specifically President Obama |pr ? do instead? As the leader of the party, the President handpicked Hillary Clinton as his successor, put her in the position of Secretary of State, selected a Democratic National Committee Chair who wouldn't get in the way and fought against Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bemie Sanders' efforts during the primaries. And we all know what happened next. It's unlikely all of that would happen again, but after President Obama made the DNC an afterthought in favor of his Obama for America (OFA) affinity project, who knows what the future holds. "Mr. Trump is unfit to serve. His scapegoating of so many Americans, and his impulsivity, bullying, lying, admitted history of sexual assault, and utter lack of expe rience make him a danger," wrote Elijah Berg, who has launched the petition urging electors to vote for Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. The petition now has over 4.6 million people signed on. Former Green Party candidate for President Jill Stein has raised $5 million for recount efforts in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan. You can bet that the two states with Republican governor, Wisconsin and Michigan, will reject a recount for fear of what they might find. Lauren Victoria Burke is a political analyst who speaks on politics and African American leadership. She can be contacted at LBurke007@gmail.com and on Twitter at ?LVBurke. Bill seeks financial justice for defrauded Wells Fargo victims Charlene Crowell Guest Columnist A series of develop ments following the Wells Fargo scandal has now led to the introduction of legis lation designed to bring financial justice to the mil lions of consumers affected by fees and fraudulent accounts they never authorized, nor opened. On Dec. 1, Ohio U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown, introduced a bill that would grant Wells Fargo victims their own day in court - even if they signed con tracts that included arbitra tion for legitimately opened accounts with the bank. Titled the "Justice for Victims of Fraud Act of 2016," the bill would work hand-in-hand with provi sions of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's proposed over sight rule. While CFPB's rule would apply to credit contracts signed after the rule took effect, Brown's legislation would apply only to cases of fraud like those affected by the Wells Fargo scandal that preced ed the record $185 million CFPB fine. A companion bill was also filed in the House of Representatives by U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman of California. "I want to thank Senate Banking Committee Ranking Member Sherrod Brown for working with me to introduce the "Justice for Victims of Fraud Act of 2016." This bill will give defrauded Wells Fargo customers the opportunity for their day in court," said Sherman. "If customers never authorized the opening of a phony i credit card or checking account, there is no reason they should be bound by the arbitration agreement they were forced to sign when they set up their legitimate account." "Forced arbitration is shielding Wells Fargo from being held accountable for tanking customers' credit scores and charging them fraudulent fines," Brown said. "Wells Fargo's cus tomers never intended to sign away their right to fight back against fraud and deceit. We need to give customers back their abili ty to seek justice in court so they can be made whole again." The legislative initia tive follows earlier con gressional testimony by John Stumpf, the former CEO of Wells Fargo, who said that the bank would continue its practice of forced arbitration, despite Brown pressing for clear answers as to how cheated i customers with damaged credit scores would be treated. The nation's third largest bank by assets, Wells Fargo fraudu lently created an estimated 2 million credit card and deposit accounts. Forced arbitration authorizes an arbitrator selected and paid by the bank to settle customer dis putes. It is also an approach that is usually hidden in the fine printed details of con sumer credit agreements. If a consumer is dissatisfied with the decision of the arbitrator, he/she is denied the right tcr sue or further question the decision. Already, Brown's bill has support of 14 Senate Brown co-sponsors representing Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island. Vermont and Virginia. Additionally, the meas ure is supported by a grow ing list of organizations that include the NAACP, California Reinvestment Coalition, Public Justice, the Franciscan Action Network, the Economic Policy Institute, National Consumer Law Center and Americans for Financial Reform. Speaking on behalf of the Center for Responsible Lending, another organiza tional supporter, Melissa Stegman, a senior policy counsel, said, "This legis lation gives these defraud ed customers the opportu nity to seek justice in court and is a step in the right direction in bringing fair ness to consumer finance ... Opening fraudulent accounts is not the only abusive tactic Wells Fargo has committed - they are also notorious for manipu lating transactions in oider to chaise excessive over draft fees to their cus tomers." Defrauded con sumers do not deserved to be financially victimized a second time. Instead of try ing to minimize the costs Wells Fargo will accrue, both the bank's long-term interests and its customers would be better served by fully acknowledging its actions, providing fair restitution, and enacting reforms to ensure that these kinds of illegal actions will not happen again. Charlene Crowell is communications deputy director with the Center far Responsible Lending and an NNPA Newswire colum nist. She can be reached at charlene erowell@ respon - siblelending org.