Family & Children: Media Appearances and Press Releases

Child Well-Being Index in Washington Post | For Children, a Better Beginning

Communications — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:32:00 -0400

New America in the News:

Washington Post | For Children, a Better Beginning

In a wide-ranging look at how children have fared in their first decade of life, a study to be released today offers a promising picture of American childhood: Sixth-graders feel safer at school.* Reading and math scores are up for 9-year-olds. More preschoolers are vaccinated. Fewer are poisoned by lead.

The analysis, which created a composite index of more than 25 key national indicators, reports an almost 10 percent boost in children's well-being from 1994 to 2006. This overall improvement comes in spite of two significant negative trends: increased rates of childhood obesity and low-birth-weight babies.

"There are some really encouraging signs of progress," said Ruby Takanishi, president of the nonprofit Foundation for Child Development, which funded the research. "I think it's important as a country . . . to see that there are things that parents can do, that government can do, that institutions can do, to make measurable differences for children." . . .

*The New America Foundation Workforce and Family Program convened an event for the release of the study by FCD. More information is linked here.

Foundation for Child Development Study in Reuters | Obesity and Low Birthweight Mar Health of Kids

Communications — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:59:00 -0400

New America in the News:

Reuters | Obesity and Low Birthweight Mar Health of Kids

Rising obesity rates and a large percentage of children born with low birthweights are dragging down the overall health of American children in their first decade of life, according to a report tracking the health and well-being of young children in the United States.*

While U.S. children overall have seen improvements in their well-being in recent years, American children aged 6 to 11 are four times more likely to be obese than similarly aged children in the 1960s, the report found.

The report, led by researchers at Duke University in North Carolina and the Foundation for Child Development, a private advocacy group, looked at the well-being of children in early childhood, those from birth to age five, and middle childhood, or those aged 6 to 11, from 1994 to 2006.

The researchers found obesity among children in middle childhood is nearly four times more common than in children of the same age in a national survey in 1960s. For children aged 2 to 5, it is three times higher. . .

*The New America Foundation Workforce and Family Program convened an event for the release of the report by the Foundation for Child Development.

Child Well-Being Index in USA Today | 'Report: Black, Hispanic Children Making Gains'

Communications — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:03:00 -0500

New America in the News:

Report: Black, Hispanic Children Making Gains (USA Today)

Black and Hispanic children have made significant gains in health, safety and income over the past two decades, narrowing gaps between them and white children, according to a pioneering report on child development to be released Tuesday.*

They still fare worse overall than whites, but they're catching up in several areas and are less likely to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, abuse drugs or commit suicide, according to the report. It was sponsored by the Foundation for Child Development, a philanthropy that funds research on children.

"There's a long way to go, but this is an enormous closing of the gap," says co-author Donald Hernandez, a sociology professor at the University at Albany, State University of New York. He says the overall gap between black and white children closed by one-fourth, and between Hispanics and whites by one-third. "That's stunning. I was frankly surprised by the extent of it."

The report evaluates how children fared from 1985 to 2004, based on 28 measures of income, education, health, safety, social relationships and community involvement. It combines them for a score known as a child well-being index. It found that children, especially minorities, fared worse in the 1980s but made significant gains in the mid- to late 1990s. more

*New America Foundation Workforce and Family Program convened the event for the release of the report.

Steven Hill's NYT Letter to the Editor Regarding Krugman Column, Europe's Social Contract

adminn — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:22:00 -0500

New America in the News:

Paul Krugman calls Europe the "comeback continent" because of its resurging economy, yet repeats another stereotype -- Americans pay less in taxes than Europeans. The situation actually is more complex.

For their taxes, Europeans receive many benefits for which most Americans must pay additional fees and payments out of pocket. Many Americans, if they have health care at all, are paying for escalating premiums and deductibles. Other Americans are saving $100,000 for each of their children's college education, yet European children attend for free or nearly free.

Millions of Americans are scraping to save the amount they will need for retirement beyond Social Security, but the European retirement system is much more generous. Many Americans pay extra for child care, or self-finance their own sick leave or parental leave after a birth, but Europeans receive all of these (and more) from their taxes.

When all these differences are added up, it turns out that many Americans are paying out as much as Europeans -- we just receive a lot less for our money. The "overtaxed European" is another stereotype used to scare Americans away from the European model, so it's unfortunate that Mr. Krugman reinforced that stereotype.

Steven Hill
San Francisco

Sara Mead Featured in Education Week on 10 Ways to Tweak NCLB

Communications — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:47:00 -0500

New America in the News:

Spend Unused NCLB's Tutoring Funds on PreK, Mead Says

Yesterday at the New America Foundation, Sara Mead released a list of 10 ways NCLB could be tweaked to bolster prekindergarten programs. In a panel discussion, which I moderated, she highlighted three items:

Require districts to use their unspent money for tutoring and choice on preK in schools that are in need of improvement;
Allow schools required to restructure to transform into "early education academies" serving preK-3; and
Expand Reading First so districts can use the money for preK literacy.

The ideas aren't meant to be a comprehensive preK agenda, Mead said. They can be "a bridge to get to places that people want to go to get a greater federal investment," she said. ...

For the complete story, please follow this link. Audio from the panel discussion is available here.

New America Releases Two Reports on No Child Left Behind and Federal Education Funding

Jerry Irvine — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:00:00 -0500

The New America Foundation released two reports today on the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) reauthorization and the pending federal education budget. The reports identify steps Congress may choose to pursue in expanding early childhood education and eliminate a budget “gimmick” utilized by Democrats and Republicans in Congress to fund next year’s education program before a full federal budget is created. The reports were released today at an event held at the New America Foundation attended by leading experts on NCLB and federal education policy.

10 New Ideas for Early Education in the NCLB ReauthorizationSara Mead is a… more

Ray Boshara in The Record (NJ) on Child Savings Accounts

Communications — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 08:26:00 -0400

New America in the News:

Concerned about the nation's poor savings rate, lawmakers such as Sen. Hillary Clinton have been talking about getting the government directly involved in establishing savings accounts for children.

The New York senator caused a stir last month when she said she would like to see every newborn receive a $5,000 bond that could be used later for college or a home purchase. Her remarks drew derision, and she has since backed away from that idea. About 4 million babies are born every year in the United States.

Lawmakers have kicked around a more modest plan for several years, one initially co-sponsored in 2004 by Jon Corzine, a Democrat, and Rick Santorum, a Pennsylvania Republican, who were serving in the Senate at the time. That plan would give every newborn $500 in a savings account. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., reintroduced the bill this month.

The proposal calls for creation of an account at birth with a one-time $500 government contribution. Children living in households with incomes below the national median would be eligible for an extra contribution of as much as $500 at birth as well as the opportunity to earn $500 per year in matching funds. The money could be used later for housing, education or a retirement fund. The cost to taxpayers is estimated at $3.25 billion the first year and $37.5 billion over 10 years. When recipients turn 30, they would be required to repay the initial deposit, and that would provide seed money for future accounts.

Ray Boshara, vice president of the non-partisan Washington think tank The New America Foundation, and one of the leading advocates of the bill, said he and other champions of the measure are courting the banking industry for support. "We're working on them, but we haven't yet achieved a broad coalition," he said...

For the complete article, please follow this link.

Ray Boshara and the ASPIRE Act in the Los Angeles Times

Communications — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 03:08:00 -0400

New America in the News:

In 2004, Sens. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) and Jon Corzine (D-N.J.) proposed the America Saving for Personal Investment, Retirement and Education (ASPIRE) Act, legislation that would have given every baby a minimum $500 endowment, untouchable for 18 years, at which time it could be used to help pay for college, put a down payment on a house or start a business....

The notion of a baby bond is grounded, according to supporters, in the concept of the American ownership society, which was a tenet of President Bush's 2004 campaign (when the practical application was privatizing Social Security).

"The intellectual history of this idea is property ownership -- the Homestead Act, the GI Bill -- conscious efforts to spread property ownership through the population," said Ray Boshara, director of the Asset Building Program at the nonpartisan New America Foundation, which helped craft the ASPIRE legislation and advised British officials on their program. "That has broad bipartisan support."

The idea, he said, is to put children on a path toward lifetime savings and wealth accumulation, a notion that appeals to conservatives and liberals.

On Wednesday, in fact, the ASPIRE legislation was quietly reintroduced in the House of Representatives by a bipartisan coalition. Boshara said the reaction to Clinton's remarks --especially Giuliani's -- made some Republican supporters nervous.

"Even if Rudy Giuliani thinks it's a good idea, he's not going to say that," said Boshara. "This is a campaign, and this was an easy target. I suspect that $500 would not have received quite the denunciation that $5,000 did."

Slightly more than 4 million babies are born in this country every year. Money in a baby bond plan would be invested and augmented by matching funds. Financial education would be part of the program. The goal would be to have around $20,000 available to each young adult when he or she turns 18.

"If you have assets as a kid, it changes your mind-set and your orientation, and conservatives love that part of the idea," said Boshara. "For Democrats, it's more about opportunity. When everyone was talking about Social Security and savings and retirement security, this was the only idea that brought Democrats and Republicans together..."

For the complete article, please visit the Los Angeles Times website.

Bipartisan Lawmakers Introduce 'KIDS Account' Bill to Build Savings, Financial Education, and Retirement Security

Communications — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 05:28:00 -0400

A bipartisan coalition introduced the America Saving for Personal Investment, Retirement, and Education Act (“The ASPIRE Act”) which would set up a “KIDS Account” at birth for every child in America which they can later use to pursue post-secondary education, buy their first home, or build up a nest-egg for retirement. The ASPIRE Act, which primarily benefits low-income kids, is based on research provided by the New America Foundation’s Asset Building Program. Representatives Patrick Kennedy (D-RI), Phil English (R-PA), Jim Cooper (D-TN), Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), and Tom Petri (R-WI) introduced the ASPIRE Act in the House on Wednesday.… more

Marketplace Interviews Ray Boshara on Kids' Savings

Communications — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 04:17:00 -0400

New America in the News:

Scott Jagow: A bill being introduced in Congress this morning might breathe new life into an old idea: Savings accounts for children…

Sarah Gardner: The idea is simple: give every American newborn $500 in a tax-free savings account. At age 18, kids can use it for college -- or they can sock it away until later for a first home or retirement.

Supporter Ray Boshara at the New America Foundation says more than a third of children grow up in households without investments.

Ray Boshara: If we don't endow these kids with assets at birth, I think their opportunities for a better life are diminished. So-called "baby bonds" have high-profile support. Hillary Clinton recently proposed giving everyone $5,000 at birth…

To listen to the interview with Ray Boshara, please visit Marketplace's website, or download the attached MP3 file below.

Ray Boshara is director of New America's Asset Building Program. For more information on child savings accounts, please visit www.aspireact.org.

The Los Angeles Times Writer Quotes Len Nichols on Bush and SCHIP

Communications — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 04:12:00 -0400

New America in the News:

After Democrats and Republicans reach a compromise, the president says it could lay the groundwork for national health coverage...

***

Known nationally as the State Children's Health Insurance Program -- in California as Healthy Families -- the plan started as an attempt to salvage something positive from the rancorous collapse of the 1990s national healthcare reform debate. States got generous federal matching funds and flexibility to design their own coverage.

At first, the program was aimed at uninsured children whose parents earned too much to qualify for coverage under Medicaid but too little to afford private coverage. The goal was to reach families earning up to twice the federal poverty level, now about $41,000 for a family of four. The vast majority of children covered by the program are still in that category.

However, as healthcare costs soared, states began to grapple with knowing that many families -- especially in urban areas where the cost of living is higher than average -- had trouble paying for private insurance even though they earned more than twice the poverty level.

Fourteen states now have higher eligibility cutoffs. The pending bill would allow states to go to three times the poverty level, about $60,000 for a family of four.

Conservative Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), one of the creators of the original program, said that was well short of providing what the White House said it feared: government-financed healthcare for the middle class.

He joined forces with liberal senators such as Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and John D. "Jay" Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) to push the compromise.

"The administration [is] making it clear they do not want it to be morphed into one-size-fits-all government healthcare, but to be honest with you, this bill doesn't do that," Hatch said. "I believe the president has had bad advice on this, but I understand the president's desire to keep spending under control."

Health economist Len Nichols of the nonpartisan New America Foundation said he thought a lot of Republicans were "perplexed by the White House stand on this issue..."

Len Nichols is Director of the Health Policy Program at New America. For the complete article, please visit the Los Angeles Times web site. This article also appeared in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette (9/27/07).

WTOP Radio Interviews David Gray on Balancing Work and Family

Communications — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:08:00 -0400

New America in the News:

DIMITRI SOTIS: WTOP news time 7:17. No matter what else changes, we all find a challenge in properly balancing our work and family lives. The folks at the New America Foundation are having a symposium on that next week and we’ll be telling you more about that in a moment.

On the line now is David Gray, Director of the Workforce and Family Program at the New America Foundation.

SOTIS: David, should parents with small kids minimize the time they spend with their kids in child care?

DAVID GRAY: Well, our study finds something very interesting. About 2/3rds of parents feel they are not spending enough time with their kids. And yet when compared to a generation ago, parents are actually spending about as much time as they were in the past with their children. So we began to wonder why parents had this feeling of not spending enough time with their kids. It turns about the quality of time in many cases is falling.

SOTIS: What are parents doing then?

GRAY: Well, there are still only 24 hours in a day. And parents are working harder than a generation ago and yet are spending the same amount of time with their kids. So what gives? What they are cutting out is time as a couple, time on housework and time to oneself. Parents are spending 20% less time on housework than 1977, for example, and 40% less personal time to oneself than a generation ago.

SOTIS: So if I’m hearing you correctly, David, perhaps parents should be spending less time with their kids and having more time to themselves?

GRAY: Well, what we are finding is parents are spending more time working, the same amount of time with kids but they are now multi-tasking. Technology is making it possible for parents to be working while they are technically spending time with their children, but the quality of that time might be reduced. So when you ask the children about their time, surveys show that children report that 45% of the time their interaction with their mother is “rushed or distracted,” 37% of the time the same is true with their father. And when you ask children for their greatest concerns or wishes, they don’t now say “more time with my parents,” but “more uninterrupted time.”

SOTIS: So it seems like a pretty simply adjustment, and I say this not being a parent myself now, just turn off that cell phone, turn off that blackberry, and sit down on the floor and play with your kids.

GRAY: It’s harder than it seems, it’s the encroachment of work on family life that is the blessing and the curse of technology. Technology makes it easier for us to work remotely but it’s also harder to get away because we need the discipline to turn off our phones. And we find in our study that it actually has some negative effects on health.

SOTIS: As a single parent, when I was bringing up my daughter, I found I might be working on my computer in one room and she might be watching television in the other room and we counted that as time together.

GRAY: Exactly, so there is a change in the quality of time. Think about meal times, there has been a tripling in the percentage of time parents go out to eat each week from a generation ago. People are more distracted and rushed when eating out, particularly in eating fast food. And it’s no coincidence we think that this increase in people eating meals out coincides with the explosion of obesity among children.

SOTIS: David, I want to pick up on something you mentioned a moment ago in terms of health, in fact you touched on one effect in terms of obesity, but beyond obesity, what are some of the harmful effects?

GRAY: We find a large increase in parental stress and in the number of worker compensation claims for stress filed by workers. We find large increases in anxiety, and a doubling of substance abuse cases for workers suffering from work and family stress. There are mental and emotional challenges for such parents, who then bring home this stress to their children. The rise in overweight and obese children pushes down the overall well being of American kids by 30% since 1975. The work and family conflict further exacerbates the problem as parents take less time to take kids to the doctor or to breastfeed, things doctors say are important.

SOTIS: David Gray, Director of the Workforce and Family Program at the New America Foundation. Thank you David for your time. And you can attend a forum on this subject on Wednesday, September 19 at noon at the Foundation on Connecticut Avenue in northwest, D.C.

An MP3 audio recording of this interview is available below. For the full broadcast, please visit the WTOP Radio website.

For more information on the Sept. 19 forum where this study will be presented, please click here.

New America Contest Highlights the Need for Increased Focus on America’s Children

Communications — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:06:00 -0400

The New America Foundation’s Workforce and Family Program is launching a contest for high school seniors to provide their views on the best way to improve the lives of America’s young people.

Starting this fall in Washington D.C., New America will be offering $1,000 to the student who best answers the question, “You have just been elected the President of the United States. What is the most important thing you will do to improve the lives of America's children?"

“This contest provides a unique opportunity for students to articulate their hopes for improving children’s lives,” stated Rev. David Gray, Director… more

WTOP Radio Interviews David Gray on Well Being of Children

Communications — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 10:29:00 -0400

New America in the News:

MICHELLE BASCH, CO-HOST: On the line now tonight with us is David Gray, Director of the Workforce and Family Program at the New America Foundation here in D.C. Now David let’s begin broadly and then get more specific. You’re looking at the well being of kids in the US, and that of kids in Canada, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand. In general terms, what have you learned about them?

DAVID GRAY, NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: Well our comparison shows that we have a very mixed picture. America is doing well in terms of the percentage of parents who are working and children who have lower suicide rates, and we are generally doing a better job of reducing teen birth rates as well as the use of cigarette use and alcohol. But we have real trouble in terms of the poverty rate and the gap between the rich and poor. In terms of overall health, as measured in infant mortality and in particularly looking at overweight children, the epidemic there as shown in all of our studies has been a real problem. And then in terms of testing and education, America’s math and reading scores are not what they should be when compared to other countries.

DIMITRI SOTIS, CO-HOST: You had talked about childhood obesity, or at least touched upon it. Is poverty the root of that? Is that the real problem here? Or do even affluent families have trouble with overweight kids?

GRAY: I think that it goes much broader. There is a disparity that does link somewhat to economic background, but there really is a broader story going on here. Where people of a variety of backgrounds and a variety of areas of the country are showing that the eating habits and exercise habits aren’t what they should be and even behavioral habits are not what they should be. In other words, there is a correlation that we show that kids are being more safe, in other words lower teen pregnancy, reduced violence and lower alcohol consumption because they may be spending more time indoors and less time getting in trouble outdoors. But because they’re spending less time outdoors they tend to play more video games and consume more soda and as a result become overweight.

BASCH: You are also looking at suicide and violent crime rates. What are those indicators of?

GRAY: Emotional well-being is where we look in terms of suicide rates. And in general, the United States in terms of its teenagers is in the middle of the pack. That’s one of the indicators we look at in terms of being better than some, but worse than others, it’s a middle indicator for us. In terms of safety, we generally are doing pretty well. It’s one of those that goes into that story I was saying a minute ago, our children are generally safer, maybe doing less stuff outside, but because they are indoors they are more likely to be overweight.

SOTIS: Now if we were conducting this interview in the UK or New Zealand, would we also have a mixed-picture? Are other countries doing everything better than we are? Or do other countries also have their low points?

GRAY: There is no country that across the board is doing better than the US. There are strengths and weaknesses in all the countries, and they all point to success that different countries are having in terms of how communities and families are looking at their children, and in terms of how policymakers are either succeeding or failing their children. We will be looking at this in some detail next Tuesday at 10:30 at the New America Foundation in Washington, DC, and we have got some experts there who have some strong background and have spent some time in those countries that we have mentioned who have gotten a strong perspective on how those countries are faring and what they might say if they were asked the question that you asked me.

SOTIS: President Bush is trying to extend his No Child Left Behind Act, is there any evidence that that has done good for kids in recent years?

GRAY: You know it is interesting in the education area, the goal of trying to get more students to complete high school has been somewhat successful, it is a little early to tell in terms of the effect of No Child Left Behind, in terms of our statistics. We have done a better job as a country in terms of having students complete their high school education than many of the other countries but the real testing that No Child Left Behind is focused on, which is the outcomes and the success in tests, we have not been as successful, but its early. And so, as an immediate indicator, it would be hard to tell, but there is certainly little evidence that the scores have gone up from our study as a result from recent changes, but I think it’s a little early to see the full effect of No Child Left Behind in our work compared to the other countries.

BASCH: This weekend, in every home in Washington, what could parents do to improve something slightly?

GRAY: I think the biggest thing that they could do is to spend time with their children, reading to them and working on homework, and spending time with them outdoors. I think that for parents, there are some clear things we think for policymakers as well, and policymakers need to get engaged. I think that parents need to push their policymakers to make children a high priority, and they themselves need to spend more time with their children to help them exercise and help them learn.

Please visit the WTOP Radio website.

David Gray and Justin King in The Christian Science Monitor

Communications — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 07:11:00 -0400

New America in the News:

We completely agree with the July 10 article, "America becomes a more 'adult-centered' nation." Not only are couples showing less interest in children but so are policymakers. The Urban Institute recently released a report detailing that from 1960 to 2006, federal spending on children's programs declined from 20.1 to 15.4 percent of domestic spending. Federal spending on children's programs is projected to decline from 2.6 to 2.1 percent of gross domestic product in the next 10 years.

Family economic well-being and educational outcomes have essentially flat-lined. Child health is in a steep decline because of the epidemic of overweight children. The increased prevalence of single parent households continues to negatively affect children's social relationships. Children also face deep and persistent disparities in their quality of life depending on race and ethnicity. America should become more child-centered. The quality of life of American children should be a top priority for presidential candidates, policymakers, and parents.

David Gray and Justin King
New America Foundation
Washington

Please visit The Christian Science Monitor website for that edition's full Letters to the Editor section.

Roanoke Times Quotes Sara Mead on Educating Boys

Communications — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 09:52:00 -0400

New America in the News:

Reports of a "boy crisis" in America's classrooms make for alarming headlines. But a new analysis of long-term trends finds that, at least by national testing standards, boys are doing better than ever by most measures -- if, that is, they are white and privileged.

It's just that girls, too, are doing better than ever in school, sometimes even better than boys.

And that, argues Sara Mead, the author of a study titled "The Truth About Boys and Girls," goes a long way toward explaining a battle of the sexes among education experts, many of whom have busied themselves in the last few years with how schools can change to adapt teaching methods to better serve boys...

For the complete article, please visit The Roanoke Times website.

The National Journal Profiles Sara Mead

Communications — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 09:23:00 -0400

New America in the News:

Education wonk Sara Mead is joining the New America Foundation as a senior research fellow studying education, workforce, and family issues.

Mead, 28, has received notice for contending that the "crisis" in boys' education is overblown and for her criticism, with Andrew Rotherham, of the ranking system used annually to determine Newsweek's "100 Best High Schools." "We have found that many schools in Newsweek's ranking have high dropout rates or glaring achievement gaps between racial and ethnic groups," they wrote last week on Washingtonpost.com. "At the same time, many schools that fail to make the Newsweek list may be doing a better job educating all of their students." Most recently, Mead and Rotherham have been involved in Education Sector, a think tank that Rotherham founded in 2005 with former U.S. News & World Report writer Thomas Toch. Before that, both Mead and Rotherham were with the Democratic Leadership Council's Progressive Policy Institute...

At New America, Mead will be working with Michael Dannenberg, a former education aide to Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and David Gray, a onetime assistant secretary for policy at the Labor Department..

For the complete article, please visit The National Journal website.

L.A. Times Quotes Len Nichols on President's Health Care Remarks

Communications — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 06:48:00 -0400

New America in the News:

WASHINGTON — Laying down a marker on healthcare, President Bush on Wednesday strongly criticized a push by Democrats and some moderate Republicans to broaden a popular children's insurance program. Bush called the plan a step toward a government takeover of medicine.

After months of watching from the sidelines as Congress ignored his healthcare ideas, Bush forcefully reinserted himself into the debate. His bottom line: Government healthcare programs should focus on the poor and near-poor, not on middle-class families...

Health economist Len Nichols of the New America Foundation, who also attended the White House event, said Bush accused Democrats of being "single-payer advocates," a term for supporters of government-run systems such as Canada's.

"That is a funny way to get cooperation," Nichols said.

For the complete article, please visit the Los Angeles Times website.

Columnist Neal Peirce Extols Ray Boshara, Kids Savings Accounts

Communications — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 10:12:00 -0400

New America in the News:

Are the bad old days back? Read the headlines and you'd think so: "Violent Crime Blazing Back in America" and "Big-city murders way up since '04..."

Let's assume the recent rise is serious. What's happening? Lots of competing explanations get offered: Gang problems are now growing in smaller cities. Gun laws are loose and the politicos fear to stiffen them. Because we have the world's highest incarceration rate, rising numbers of inmates are being released from prisons — far too few rehabilitated or able to land a job...

Everyone wants truly dangerous criminals behind bars — indeed for as long as possible...

How about prevention — investing early, systematically in kids and families? This is the issue all the alarming crime headlines, and quick political fixes, ignore. Poverty, broken families, poor education and significant crime are inextricably bundled. Early childhood nutrition, care and education can pay off hugely later...

What of the argument that we can't "afford" the depth of early-childhood services such as other advanced nations provide?

Ray Boshara of the New America Foundation has a radically better idea: Establish an "American Stakeholder Account" for every child at birth — initial government deposit $6,000, plus eligibility for dollar-for-dollar matching funds for voluntary contributions up to $500 a year. Assuming modest but steady contributions, a young person might have $20,000 by age 18 for college tuition, a home, starting a business, or long-term savings.

What does such an idea have to do with crime? A lot, I'd think — building a mindset of hope is the best conceivable antidote to the lure of the streets, gangs and drug dependency. The ultimate benefits to the U.S. economy, in added wage earners and taxpayers, and fewer mired in lives of desperation, could be immense. America's surest road to a safer society is what we always claimed to be the best at — building opportunity...

For the complete article, please visit The Seattle Times website.

Hoover Insitution Confirms that Insured Californians Pay 'Hidden Tax' for the Uninsured

Communications — Mon, 21 May 2007 11:58:00 -0400

SACRAMENTO, CA (May 21, 2007) -- Insured Californians pay a "hidden tax" for the uninsured, a study released today by the Hoover Institution confirms. However, an analysis by the New America Foundation finds that the Hoover study underestimates the size of this tax. The New America analysis shows that the reasonable range of estimates of the "hidden tax" is between 6% and 11%, but the Hoover Institution's estimate falls well below this range.

In order to provide uncompensated health care for the uninsured, providers charge higher prices to insurers, who then charge higher prices to insured families - resulting… more