David Gray: All Publications, Events and Press

Trends in the Well Being of Younger Children

Communications — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 16:00:00 -0400

A New America Event
04/25/2008 - 10:00am

How are the kids doing? Pretty well, according to a new report unveiled at the New America Foundation on April 25th, but experts still have significant concerns about the future. The report, "Trends in Infancy/Early Childhood and Middle Childhood Well-Being, 1994-2006," was authored by Dr. Kenneth Land of Duke University and funded by the Foundation for Child Development (FCD) and is part of an on-going series of events and reports hosted by the New America Foundation designed to raise awareness about the status of children in the United States and spur meaningful action to improve their quality of life. The CWI seeks to measure the well-being of the “whole child,” using seven different quality-of-life indicators: economic well-being, social relationships, health, safety and behavior, education, community connectedness, and emotional/spiritual well-being. This Special Focus Report investigated trends in well-being along three distinct periods in children’s lives: infancy/early childhood, middle childhood (ages 6-11) and adolescence during the years 1994 – 2006. Fasaha Traylor of the Foundation for Childhood Development said that the groundbreaking work of the Child Well-Being Index Project is “fundamental to the nation’s well being.”

Dr. Land, the CWI Project coordinator, said the data reveals good news on several fronts: child mortality rates are down since 1994, as are the numbers of children with elevated lead levels in their blood and the number of mothers who smoke during pregnancy. More kids are enrolled in full-day kindergarten, which may contribute to the better performance of 9 year olds on reading tests. More kids are participating in extra-curricular activities, especially school-related lessons. Children overall are safer and fewer report that they fear being attacked while in school or on their way to and from school.

Amid the good news, however, there are some red flags. The study shows a 12.3 percent increase in the number of low birth weight babies. The number of children and toddlers who are overweight is up sharply, increasing their risk for type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

Sara Mead, senior fellow in the Education Policy Program at the New America Foundation, added that while number of children in state-funded pre-kindergarten programs has grown impressively since 1994, the overall preschool enrollment has decreased slightly. She added that difficult economic circumstances, which affect children’s families directly, can also put pressure on states’ fiscally strained early childhood programs.

Public opinion polls show overwhelming support for federal and state policies that promote child well being, but most child-focused programs at the federal level have seen declining programmatic funds in recent, said Bruce Lesley of First Focus. Mr. Lesley quoted heavily from a new report recently released by First Focus called “Children’s Budget 2008.” Valerie Kaufmann, who directs early childhood programs for the Maryland State Department of Education, described the programs Maryland developed in recent years to successfully boost infant health and school readiness. Lauren Ratner, who oversees Family and Community Health for the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, gave a broader view of the inter-agency efforts underway at the state level to improve child health and academic performance. Ms. Ratner highlighted a variety of policy options available to and used by state legislatures and health officials to combat child health risks, such as those highlighted in the report.

Dr. Land closed the event with a note of caution. Just as the CWI indicators dropped during the 2001 economic downturn, he expects that they will decrease again in 2007 and 2008, as economic hardship once again puts pressure on families and the well-being of America’s youngest citizens.

-Christina Satkowski, Research Associate for Education Policy

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.

The Next Era of American Politics

Communications — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:00:00 -0500

A New America Event
02/29/2008 - 11:00am

Phillip Longman began by framing the core question of the event: are we in a transformative political moment, and what would that mean? Even after a decade of debilitating partisanship, Rovian strategists and Netroots bloggers continue to exacerbate political polarization. Yet, with the likely nominations of John McCain and Barack Obama, observers of all political stripes have sensed the prospect of a political sea-change. Whether it is a government unified around a bold progressive majority, a resurgent and transmuted conservatism, or some kind of “post-partisanship,” the possibility of a new political era in America is very real. Nonetheless, the data show that partisan identification and ideological polarization are as prevalent as ever.

Longman attempted to unravel this knot by tracing the career of that unusual phrase, “post-partisan.” In the 1980s it described an effort to overhaul entitlements, in the 1990s it adopted a cool and detached air from political observers such as JFK, Jr., and in the 2000s it represented the desire of centrist politicians such as Michael Bloomberg and Arnold Schwarzenegger to pursue innovative policy ideas. Now, post-partisanship may reflect a new approach to politics by the “Millenial” generation, who value respect and comity even as they overwhelmingly identify as either liberal or conservative.

Next, Cliff Zukin, Professor of Public Policy and Political Science at the Rutgers University, presented his paper, “The American Public and the Next Social Contract: Public Opinion and Political Culture in 2007.” He stressed the distinction between public attitudes on current policy debates and enduring values that lie at the core of the American character. These values serve as a kind of passive restraint and guiding structure for policy discussion, and they include a commitment to equality of opportunity, independence and self-reliance, and a wary acceptance of the idea that the government can play a positive role in individuals’ lives. In turn, these values shape public opinion in important issue areas: on education, they believe that it is a democratic entitlement; on social security, they are skeptical of its solvency and open to finding an acceptable working solution; on health care, they are willing to entertain broad overhauls to address costs and coverage; in their jobs, they are satisfied but anxious about basic economic insecurity. Zukin concluded his remarks with a broad caveat for framing the next social contract. Only in moments of crisis does a window of opportunity for sweeping policy change occur, and an unprecedented shift in economic concerns might point to such a moment.

In the subsequent panel, Mark Schmitt, Julian Zelizer, Professor of History and Public Policy at Princeton University, and Susan Milligan, national political reporter for the Boston Globe, discussed the role of institutions on the next political era. Schmitt stressed that, while trends may point to a different political trajectory, it will not be a return to bipartisanship between liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats. Indeed, the last attempt at that kind of cooperation was the implosion of health care reform in 1993. Since then, the “great sorting out” has occurred, with Republicans to the left and Democrats to the right purged in 1994 and 2006, respectively. This development, and the recent Democratic turn in public opinion, may be a welcome change. Post-partisan sentiments may simply reflect “an opportunity for liberalism to engage with an honest version of conservatism.” The cooperation that could emerge from such a debate is of an unprecedented character: not simply reaching across the aisle to cherry pick like-minded senators, but taking seriously and working together with those who disagree.

Professor Zelizer expressed skepticism about any kind of sea-change in politics. First, he said that conservatism will remain entrenched in political institutions and lasting policy victories, even in the face of a possibly overwhelming electoral loss in 2008. Much the same as in the 1970s, when conservatives imagined that liberalism would simply vanish, it is a fantasy to think that conservative gains in media outlets, court appointments, and lowering tax rates will disappear. Second, polarization is unlikely to fade to the background, as it is fueled not only by public opinion, but also by key institutional features such as the committee system, the primary system, and the new 24-hour media cycle. Finally, any progressive or populist movement will face serious challenges: the Democratic party is no longer the party of the working class, it suffers from conflicting philosophies, and it may fall prey to impossibly high expectations.

Susan Milligan then argued that partisanship is less a matter of liberal and conservative ideology than it is a result of power struggles. Since 1994, the margin between legislative control and minority status has been slight, and Democrats and Republicans alike have not been inclined to throw any bones to the other side. Responding to these pitched battles, the public’s preference for candidates like Obama, McCain, and Huckabee shows that the electorate is taking the process back. “They are physically and emotionally exhausted from the red state/blue state divide,” and the growth of independent voters as a key plurality of voters supports this broad change in political attitudes.

Reid Cramer introduced the panel of David Gray, Maya MacGuineas, and Len Nichols, to explore what policies might be possible in a new political era. Cramer opened the discussion by outlining a number of challenges to basic economic security that assets policy might redress. Against the backdrop of increasing income volatility and rising health and energy costs, the burst of the housing bubble has eroded a key source of savings for Americans. In order for individuals to weather this and other economic storms, policymakers should look to the tradition of the Homestead Act and the G.I. Bill and broaden asset ownership. This kind of inclusive savings policy can transcend partisan debates, by embracing the principles of opportunity from the left and ownership from the right. In the short term, sensible solutions such as automatic saving attract support across the political spectrum, and in the long term, big ideas like a universal 401(k) are promising goals for the next political era.

Next, David Gray spoke about the possibilities for a new political era to coalesce around smaller, more manageable issues that “fly under the radar.” These policy areas, such as spending on children and work/family balance, enjoy robust public support from Democrats and Republicans alike. A number of trends point to the promise of policy innovation on this front. Work and family balance has been an important issue on the presidential campaign trail, and it has seen significant progress as an issue at the state level. As military families and entrepreneurial families struggle to maintain balance, work and family policy is growing increasingly salient. Finally, workplace flexibility will allow the elderly to work comfortably later into life, which will shore up their economic security and provide an important component to addressing the long-term fiscal challenges of entitlements.

Maya MacGuineas then described the challenges that tax and fiscal policy face, as well as some promising strategies that might elevate them to the crucial role they will have to play in the coming political era. These issues may lack the freshness of other innovative policy ideas, and “the size of the government is a cleavage issue between the two parties.” Even worse, there is lingering resentment on deficit reduction, because politicians who sacrificed political capital to see a surplus emerge in the 1990s only to rapidly vanish “fear they will get burned again.” Partisan trends continue, and they breed reluctance to face hard policy choices, even while “easy grabs” such as AMT reform and the stimulus package enjoy bipartisan success. The general lesson to draw is that incrementalism fails, and fundamental reform is needed. There are several approaches that might see such reform through. One is a commission that would construct a comprehensive proposal “with enough moving pieces to build a coalition” that could last. Other ideas include redefining budget concepts in favor of fiscal responsibility and building automatic changes, or triggers, into the budget. Perhaps the most important component of reform is a “grand bargain” that would help those who lose out in any fiscal restructuring.

Then, Len Nichols discussed the question of why now is the crucial moment to move forward on perennial issues of cost, access, and quality in health care. First, the cost of doing nothing is growing to staggering proportions. Support for national health care declined in the early 1990s as the economy eased out of recession; now, the current recession only adds to a more fundamental anxiety caused by skyrocketing health care costs. Second, employers are increasingly unable to compete internationally while providing health benefits. Because they cannot push insurance costs into higher prices or lower wages, employer-based health care is giving way. Finally, broad system stress from emergency care costs establishes the linkages between cost, access, and quality with crystal clarity. We see the results of these salient trends on both sides of the presidential campaign, and recent bipartisan success in the form of the Bennett-Wyden bill should offer hope for coming reform. For such cross-partisan cooperation to prevail, the “new math” tells us that a working proposal must enjoy not only 60, but 70 senators who find it acceptable. To make inroads into both parties and to repair our broken health care system, reform must create effective insurance markets, subsidize those who would otherwise lack coverage, and focus on the twin principles of personal and shared responsibility. The inescapable linkages connecting all these issues show that a grand bargain, laying out the next social contract, is critical.

For the final panel, Mark Schmitt introduced David Frum, fellow at AEI and author of Comeback: Conservatism That Can Win Again, and Jonathan Chait, senior editor at The New Republic and author of The Big Con: The True Story of How Washington Got Hoodwinked and Hijacked by Crackpot Economics, to discuss the new direction that the parties will take in the coming political era. Frum described Republican control that began to emerge in the 1990s as “the GOP cashing in on the Reagan revolution of the 1980s.” After a rare succession of elections failing to produce a clear majority for any candidate, George W. Bush sought in his Presidency to assemble a new coalition, turning the GOP into a lasting majority party. The events of September 11, 2001 disrupted this effort, and public opinion trends have begun to favor Democrats. The question remains how the Republican party will respond to this new era, and whether Democrats will overstretch in their victory in 2008.

Jonathan Chait then argued that the key source of this Democratic ascendance is “the disappearance of broadly shared prosperity” in the economy, propelled by the Bush tax cuts. Chait disputed that rising Democratic self-identification is a temporary fluctuation in partisanship, but rather a lasting ideological sea change. Yet, despite these favorable trends, a progressive agenda could encounter a number of obstacles in 2008, principally the filibuster in the senate. In order to meet these challenges, Democrats must develop institutions, such as nonprofits, to respond to ideas from the right. Furthermore, they must mobilize the public to counterbalance the influence of political inertia and self-interested insiders. He cited Barack Obama’s theory of change as one vision to accomplish this task. In response, David Frum argued that a President Obama, like Reagan and Clinton before him, would only be able to make this kind of direct appeal to the public once.

-David McNamee is a Program Associate for the Next Social Contract.

Sergio Vieira de Mello and the Fight to Save the World

Communications — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:00:00 -0500

A New America Event
02/19/2008 - 1:00pm

When Samantha Power won the 2003 Pulitzer Prize for A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide, many people wondered what she would write for an encore. Her answer is a groundbreaking biography of Sergio Vieira de Mello. In nearly four decades of work for the United Nations, Sergio distinguished himself as the consummate humanitarian, able to negotiate with-and often charm-cold war military dictators, Marxist jungle radicals, reckless warlords, and nationalist and sectarian militia leaders. His life, and death in a terrorist attack on UN Headquarters in Iraq in 2003, helps frame many of the world's crises and humanitarian challenges of the last few decades.

By taking the measure of this remarkable man's life and career, Power offers a fascinating answer to the question: Who possesses the moral authority, the political sense, and the military and economic heft to protect human life and bring peace to the unruly new world order?

In one of Power's first appearances since the publication of Chasing the Flame, she will discuss her new book, genocide, the state of U.S. foreign policy and the 2008 Presidential election.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Child Well-Being

Communications — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:30:00 -0500

A New America Event
01/29/2008 - 10:30am

Parents and policy makers have long looked to close the educational, health, economic and other gaps in child well-being between children of different backgrounds. As the 2008 campaign heats up, many are wondering about the increasingly diverse generation of America’s children and asking: Where is policy helping and failing to close the gaps between children of different backgrounds? Where do the gaps currently exist? What changes could have the greatest impact?

On January 29th, we released a report detailing some surprising results about the true state of the disparities between children. This new report is the first to analyze trends in the well-being of black, Hispanic, and white children over a nearly two-decade span.

At the New America event, hosted by the Workforce and Family Program, Dr. Donald Hernandez of the University of Albany presented the results of his new study. Among the key findings:

Black, Hispanic, and white children experienced overall improvements in the quality of life.
Both black children and Hispanic children were advantaged compared to white children in the emotional/spiritual well-being domain.
Black and Hispanic children also benefited from advances in the safety-behavioral domain, including reduced cigarette smoking, drinking alcohol, and use of illicit drugs.
Gaps in family economic well-being narrowed for both black and Hispanic children as parental employment and health insurance coverage increased.

According to Dr. Hernandez’ research, gaps in the well-being of our children are not intractable. Pending the pace of progress, racial and ethnic gaps in child well-being could be closed in as little as 18 years, in more than 50 years, or not at all. Dr. Hernandez used this finding to emphasize that progress is in no way guaranteed, and that the well-being of children must remain an issue at the fore of our consciousness.

Following the presentation of the report, Rev. David Gray moderated a distinguished panel of experts in a discussion that explored the survey results and implications.

Ms. Melissa Pardue, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Human Services Policy at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services gave an in-depth overview of the child-focused programs run by HHS. She focused specifically on the TANF program and the changes in child well-being since the enactment of welfare reform legislation. Other areas where she cited progress include the increasing number of children served in Head Start since the mid-1990’s and the large increase in State-funded pre-Kindergarten programs. Ms. Pardue also expressed the Department’s pleasure at the continuing drop in teen birth rates since the early 1990’s and improvements in the Child Welfare system, including an increase in the adoption rate for Hispanic children in foster care.

Ms. Miriam Calderon, Associate Director of the Policy Analysis Center at the National Council of La Raza emphasized the growing population of Hispanic and black children, noting that America will become a “majority minority” country in the future. A major issue for all children is the potential for economic downturn, as many issues of child well-being are clearly related to family economic status. In addition, Ms. Calderon pointed out NCLR’s commitment to working on issues of immigration, including the challenges faced by citizen children with non-citizen parents. A looming issue for many children whose parents do not speak English is the coming reauthorization of No Child Left Behind and its programs directed at English Language-Learners.

Dr. Joseph Youngblood, Director of the John S. Watson Institute for Public Policy at Thomas Edison State College brought a state-wide perspective to the discussion, focused on New Jersey, one of the most populous and diverse states in the nation. Dr. Youngblood talked about a vision of education and services for children that is multi-generational, multi-institutional, and focused on the whole family. He emphasized the need to raise expectations and create the conditions necessary for success in the educational field. Through his experience with the Abbott districts and education in general in New Jersey, Dr. Youngblood talked about the need for teachers to be both of high quality and possessing of cultural competencies that will allow them to effectively reach and teach their students. He also emphasized the need for federal policy to be effectively communicated to and connected with local decision-making units, especially mayors, as they control many of the levers of power needed to create positive change at the local level.

Julia Isaacs, Child and Family Policy Fellow at the Brookings Institution presented results from her recent study on economic mobility across generations of Americans. Her findings show that, in general, two of three Americans do better economically than their parents. However, much of this growth in recent decades has been due to women entering the workforce, and that these gains have generally not manifested themselves among African-Americans. Ms. Isaacs entire study is available at the Brookings Institution’s website. As a policy matter, Ms. Isaacs highlighted the importance of high-quality pre-Kindergarten and education generally.

The presentations of the panelists were followed by a lively question and answer session with the audience that covered a wide variety of topics and engendered some excellent discussions among the panelists. To view this discussion, please click on the video at right.

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.

America’s Changing Social Contract

adminn — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 09:00:00 -0500

A New America Event
12/03/2007 - 9:00am

Despite the sustained economic growth of recent years, Americans are increasingly concerned with economic security. Even before economists began reporting signs of recession, skyrocketing health care costs, faltering pensions, and burgeoning inequality frayed the fabric of the American social contract. America's social contract is an evolving, complex web of legal and informal relationships between households, employers, government, and civil society that extends beyond particular federal programs. Now is the time to strike a new bargain between these sectors, rethinking the rights and responsibilities of each. Breathing new life into the American social contract is needed to keep pace with our 21st century economy and build the conditions for sustained growth and healthy families.

On Dec. 3, the New America Foundation convened 200 guests at the Mayflower Hotel to explore the intellectual framework of the next social contract. Andy Stern, President of the SEIU, and Carl Camden, CEO of Kelly Services, began the conversation by outlining the promise and the challenges that this coming social contract will encounter. Speaking from the divergent sectors of labor, business and the growing contingent workforce, both leaders issued bold calls for reform and reflected on the turbulent economic challenges that the America social contract faces. Mr. Stern addressed the rights and responsibilities of workers and employers, particularly the important realms of pensions and health care. Mr. Camden offered the perspective of the millions of American temporary and freelance workers and comment on the promise and innovation of flexible, citizen-based benefits.

In response to these opening remarks was a panel discussion to further hash out the rights and responsibilities of employers. Michael Calabrese, Joe Minarik, Donna Klein, and Thomas Kochan addressed the particular responsibilities such as child care and workplace flexibility, the importance of wages and benefits providing for basic economic security, and their potential burden on the global economic competitiveness of American firms.

Next, Brian Gallagher and Diana Aviv offered their perspective on the role of civil society, in a discussion moderated by Michael Lipsky. They focused on the key issues of shared responsibility, wealth, and philanthropy in the social contract. It is important for the social contract to provide certain goods outside of the purview of government, and panel clarified the role of civil society in performing this task.

During a lunchtime conversation, Michael Lind offered a global view of the social contract and how it evolves over time. Mr. Lind articulated the logic of one of the next social contract’s bedrock principles: that the grand bargain between citizens be citizen-based.

Mark Schmitt led a panel on the role of government, including Jacob Hacker, Karen Kornbluh, William Galston, and Reihan Salam. They discussed the government’s role in providing economic security to citizens, the increasing risk and uncertainty that Americans families face, and how confronting these challenges with the language of the social contract can transform our politics.

Finally, David Gray, along with a panel of Jane Waldfogel, Phil Longman, Kelleen Kaye, and Christine Kim discussed the role of the family in the social contract. Changes in the workforce and demography create challenges for government and business to help families balance work and life. Together, the panelists discussed what the status of the two-parent family is in America, what challenges young adult parents face, and where family formation and choices in child rearing intersect with policy.

The event agenda can be found below. Video of the first half of this all-day event is available at right; the afternoon sessions can be viewed by clicking here. An MP3 audio recording of the complete event can be played below, or downloaded via this link.

The Next Social Contract Initiative aims to reinvent American social policy for the twenty-first century. Through a program of research and public education, the initiative will explore the origins of our modern social contract, articulate the guiding principles for constructing a new contract, and advance a set of promising policy reforms. To learn more about this initiative, please click here.

Christianity and the Social Crisis in the 21st Century

Communications — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:30:00 -0500

A New America Event
11/28/2007 - 12:30pm

First published in 1907, Walter Rauschenbusch’s Christianity and the Social Crisis became one of the most influential religious documents of the 20th century, in inspiring leaders such as Martin Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, Reinhold Niebuhr and Desmond Tutu towards promoting social justice. On the 100th anniversary of the publication of this seminal work, Rauschenbusch’s great-grandson has released an updated version that includes new commentary by leading social justice thinkers of our time.

Rev. Paul Rauschenbusch, a pastor and social justice advocate, has been touring the country and has an important perspective on the state of inequality in America and the role of faith in the 2008 Presidential campaign. Please join the New America Foundation for an intriguing look at the role of faith in politics and social justice.

The Politics of Parental Leave

Communications — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 12:30:00 -0500

A New America Event
11/15/2007 - 12:30pm

U.S. political candidates are beginning to produce work and family policy positions in response to what most Americans feel -- that work and family balance is a major issue facing American families. Women in particular struggle with such balance and with achieving equality in the workplace. From the floors of Congress to the campaign trails Mandating paid parental leave has often been suggested as a possible solution to such struggles. But is this approach best for women as a whole?

To further this debate, Rev. David Gray, director of the Work Force and Family Program at New America Foundation welcomed Dr. Charmaine Yoest of the Family Research Council for a timely discussion of the politics of parental leave.

Dr. Yoest presented research from her time as the Project Director of the Family, Gender, and Tenure research project at the University of Virginia, which focused on the effectiveness of paid parental leave in academia.

For Dr. Yoest, academia was “crucial case,” to assess whether paid parental leave could really level the playing field for women. “If there’s going to be any place in America where you’d expect paid leave to work, it would be in academia,” she said.

Dr. Yoest’s research centered on a survey of assistant professors with children under the age of two in tenure track positions at universities that offered paid leave policies. Her results questioned several of the traditional assumptions about paid parental leave.

Universities with paid parental leave policies did not have higher levels of female faculty and that paid parental leave policies were not associated with higher rates of promotion for women to more senior faculty positions.

In fact, Dr. Yoest argued paid leave policies may have been detrimental to leveling the playing field. The majority of leave-taking women felt they had less-time for research and writing when they returned and were more likely than their non-leave taking peers to consider dropping off the tenure track. The majority of leave-takers felt such policies made almost no difference in their efforts to receive tenure and some suggested there was a stigma associated with taking a paid leave.

Based on these findings, Dr. Yoest concluded that, “Paid leave may operate as a political fig leaf. The institutional results indicate that the policy by itself does not result in higher levels of achievement for women, making the use of political capital to establish the policy, a poor investment.”

Dr. Yoest’s provocative presentation was followed by lively round of question and answers.

-Paul Testa, Research Associate to the Health Policy Program

Serving Our Young Adults

Articles — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:44:00 -0400

Many churches are developing programs to serve young adults. Many are investing in young adult coordinators in order to help grow their church.

However, there is another reason for churches to focus on young adults -- the critical needs of the early young adult population in our nation.

The violence at Virginia Tech last April perpetrated by a disturbed young adult is a tragedy beyond belief. It calls attention to the challenges faced by an often overlooked age group.

While American society has appropriately focused on the needs of teenagers in recent years, we should not lose sight of the needs of… more

Teach Your Children About Interfaith

Articles — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:45:00 -0400

One of the great fears that parents and church leaders have about their youth engaging in interfaith dialog is that they will lose their connection to their own religion and will end up rejecting and leaving their faith, maybe even converting to another religion as a result. My experience as a Christian pastor has been just the opposite -- I have watched young people become stronger in their own faith through exposure to other traditions.

Personal relationships matter a great deal in influencing how individuals come to faith, switch faiths or grow in faith. Most of us are part of the… more

Obesity and Child Well Being

Communications — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 00:45:00 -0400

A New America Event
10/04/2007 - 10:45am

There is no greater problem facing America’s children than the epidemic of overweight and obesity. The Foundation for Child Development’s Child Well Being Index has concluded that the increase is obesity and overweight among children since 1975 has decreased the overall well being of children by more than 30%.

Researchers at the Center for Human Nutrition at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health released a study this summer predicting that unless behaviors change, by 2015, 75% of adults and nearly 24% of children and adolescents in the United States will be overweight or obese. This could result in serious health, family and fiscal consequences for our nation.

What is causing this epidemic? What are its implications? What should America do about it?

This New America event, held in conjunction with the Foundation for Child Development and the offices of Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), featured a discussion of obesity and child well-being, and the communities that are most impacted. Panelists discussed the role of government and explored innovative programs at the state and local levels that are making a difference.

Video of the event is available at right, while an MP3 audio recording can be downloaded below.

The Missing Class

Communications — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 08:30:00 -0400

A New America Event
10/01/2007 - 12:30pm

There is an increase in national attention being paid to inequality in America. While U.S. government programs help the poor and politicians on both sides raise funds from the fortunate, the “Missing Class,” those making between $20,000 to $40,000 dollars a year for a family of four, is largely ignored.

Through their experiences with nine families, Princeton professor Katherine Newman and Inthefray magazine editor Victor Tan Chen trace the unique challenges faced by this growing demographic in their new book, The Missing Class. Newman and Chen explain where these families come from, how they’ve struggled and why they are stuck in the fraying safety net.

The New America Foundation’s Next Social Contract Initiative and Workforce and Family Program hosted this discussion with Katherine Newman, Victor Tan Chen and David Gray on the lives, stories and policies that impact the 54 million Americans -- including 21 percent of the nation’s children -- who might be considered the "missing class," and what this says about inequality and the American dream. Video of the event is available at right, while an MP3 audio recording is available below.

The Stress of Balancing Work and Family

Communications — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 06:00:00 -0400

A New America Event
09/19/2007 - 12:00pm

Americans know from their own lives the stress of balancing work and family obligations. Extensive rhetoric from the media and academic worlds is difficult to disentangle, sometimes pointing to seemingly different conclusions regarding the state of work and family balance, the time parents are spending with their children, and the impacts such conflicts have on individual and family health.

The New America Foundation’s Next Social Contract Initiative and Workforce and Family Program seek to cut through the rhetoric with an analysis of the research through their paper, “The Stress of Balancing Work and Family: Impacts on Parent and Child Health.” At this event, Kelleen Kaye and David Gray discussed where the research leads us in examining the stress of work and family conflict.

Kelleen Kaye is an analyst and policy expert on family structure and family relationships as they relate to child, youth, and parental well-being. Video of the event is available at right, while an MP3 audio recording can be downloaded below.

The Stress of Balancing Work and Family

Workforce and Family — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 06:12:00 -0400

Executive Summary

American families confront major challenges in balancing work and family life. Workers report that they would prefer fewer hours, while new technological capabilities require parents to bring more job responsibilities home with them. Mothers and fathers encounter strain in work and home environments alike. Polling and surveillance data confirm that the balance between work and family care needs attention. Some of the most quantifiable and severe costs of this burden on families are adverse health outcomes. This paper catalogues a number of factors linked to job stress and work/family conflict: metabolic syndrome, hypertension, heart disease, poor dietary habits,… more

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

Help Kids via Junk Food Tax

Articles — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:41:00 -0400

In a few days, Congress will return to reauthorize the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP. The program will pay for expanded coverage for children through an increase in cigarette taxes. The logic is to raise revenue while discouraging a behavior harmful to child health. Instead of a cigarette tax, however, Congress should address the health problem that research indicates is the greatest crisis facing America’s young people by taxing junk food instead.

The new epidemic facing American children is obesity. The Foundation for Child Development’s 2007 Child Well-Being Index has found that the overall health of America’s children… 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.