Still Cleaning Up: White House Replaces USAID Administrator Kent Hill

Jodi Jacobson

White House starts to clean house at USAID; "faith-based" administrator Kent Hill gets the boot.

Kent Hill is gone.

This morning the White House reported that Kent Hill, Acting Administrator of USAID under President Bush since the departure of Henrietta Fore, was replaced effective immediately and until further notice by Alonzo Fulgham, Chief Operating Officer and Executive
Secretary.  Fulgham will perform the duties of the Office of the Administrator of
USAID pending choice of a successor.

Hill, who as USAID Administrator oversaw all funds for reproductive health, contraceptive delivery, maternal and child health and related issues, was no friend of women’s rights or evidence-based programs.  But he was very cozy with the religious right. 

During his tenure, Hill met or held phone calls weekly with New Jersey Republican Chris Smith (the architect of the global gag rule, prostitution pledge, and other useful policies) and at least quarterly with Austin Ruse (president of the anti-choice Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute), while declining any meetings with progressive groups.  He was a big supporter of natural family planning…not that there is anything wrong with that, unless you deny people other options.

Appreciate our work?

Vote now! And help Rewire earn a bigger grant from CREDO:

VOTE NOW

He did. 

For example, seeking to placate the Family Research Council and other bastions of women’s rights, Hill created havoc with the delivery of emergency contraception in Peru in part by deciding to redefine EC as an abortifacient, despite defintions to the contrary by the World Health Organization, and despite USAID’s own policy of funding and supporting training in delivery of the method.

At international AIDS conferences he defended publicly the separation of family planning services from HIV prevention and waxed long and not-so-eloquently about the abstinence strategy under PEPFAR. He created hi-tech computer games to teach HIV prevention in Kenya, where the majority of youth have no access to computers.

Hill also brought religion to USAID.  In the crazed effort to give as much money as possible to "faith-based groups" without regard to their ability to carry out the work for which they were being funded but for a wing and a prayer, Hill, for example, insisted that a group known as the Children’s
AIDS Society get $10 million dollars in PEFPAR funding even after they were denied a contract because they
completely failed the technical review.  The group was founded and run by Anita Smith, who was given a seat on the President’s Advisory Council for HIV and AIDS, and whose husband, Shepherd Smith, was a big supporter of the President.  After those nasty technical review people turned down the CAS proposal for lack of merit, Hill made a
call to then-Global AIDS Coordinator Randall Tobias and insisted the group be funded anyway.  They got the money.  Hill then loaded the technical review committees with faith-based representatives to, you know, level the playing field.

He will not be missed.

News Economic Justice

Wage Theft on Capitol Hill: Cafeteria Workers to Receive $1 Million in Back Pay

Michelle D. Anderson

“Most struggle to afford life’s basic expenses and pay their bills; they shouldn’t have to deal with paychecks that don’t accurately reflect their hard work and the wages to which they are legally entitled,” said David Weil of the U.S. Department of Labor.

Hundreds of people who work in cafeterias that serve U.S. senators and their legislative staffers on Capitol Hill will reportedly receive $1 million in back pay in connection to a United States Department of Labor wage theft investigation.

According to a Washington Post report, 674 food service workers will receive their owed compensation. The back wages break down to about $1,500 per worker.

Officials from the department’s Wage and Hour Division last week said an investigation had revealed the workers were denied prevailing wages that contractor Restaurant Associates and subcontractor, Personnel Plus, were obligated to pay under federal labor law.

Architect of the Capitol, the federal agency that runs the United States Capitol Complex, had contracted the employers.

Appreciate our work?

Vote now! And help Rewire earn a bigger grant from CREDO:

VOTE NOW

The Labor Department said Restaurant Associates and Personnel Plus violated by the McNamara-O’Hara Service Contract Act (SCA) and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by improperly classifying workers so that they could be paid wages for lower-paying jobs and by requiring employees to work prior to their scheduled starting times.

One cafeteria worker told the Washington Post in January that his hourly wage dropped to $13.80 an hour from $17.45 after his job title changed from “cook” to “food service worker.”

The employer also failed to pay required health and welfare benefits and violated SCA, which applies to every U.S. government contract valued in excess of $2,500, by failing to adhere to the law’s record keeping requirements.

David Weil, the department’s Wage and Hour Division administrator, said in a statement last week that restaurant industry workers are among the lowest-paid workers in the U.S. economy.

“Most struggle to afford life’s basic expenses and pay their bills; they shouldn’t have to deal with paychecks that don’t accurately reflect their hard work and the wages to which they are legally entitled,” Weil said.

The division is reviewing its findings to determine whether it will keep the Restaurant Associates from securing any more contracts with the federal government.

Labor Department spokesperson Joanna Hawkins told Rewire that the case is still open. She said SCA requires contractors guilty of this violation to be debarred unless the Labor Department’s Wage and Hour Division recommends otherwise “because of unusual circumstances.”

Restaurant Associates spokesman Sam Souccar told Rewire in an emailed statement that the misclassifications were largely attributable to “administrative technicalities related to our Associates’ evolving day-to-day work responsibilities, which in some cases crossed multiple job categories.”

Souccar said the company has since corrected the problem and was “100 percent committed to ensuring classifications [were] accurate going forward.” He also said Restaurants Associates valued its contract with the Architect of the Capitol and implied that the company wanted to continue working with the federal government.

Robert Guiney, president of Personnel Plus and Just Temps Staffing, disagreed with the Labor Department’s assessment. He denied any wrongdoing.

“Restaurant Associates admitted responsibility for the whole thing and they pay our employees,” Guiney said in a phone interview with Rewire. He declined to comment further.

Guiney said the Labor Department had given his company, Personnel Plus, a “clean bill of health,” according to a Courthouse News Service report.

Hawkins said Restaurant Associates is the prime contractor on the government contract in question. She said it was the company’s responsibility to formally advise subcontractor Personnel Plus of the SCA requirements.

“In this case, Restaurant Associates failed to do so. Restaurant Associates took responsibility for that and agreed to pay the back wages owed to the employees of Personnel Plus. Nonetheless, Personnel Plus also failed to pay all of its workers for all hours worked which resulted in additional back wages,” Hawkins said.

Paco Fabián, a spokes for Good Jobs Nation, an advocacy project of the Change to Win labor coalition that focuses organizing federal contract workers who work for low wages, told Rewire via phone interview that policy changes will help prevent wage theft violations.

He cited three labor-related executive actions signed by President Barack Obama, including one that raised the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour.

“It sort of kicked off an increase in minimum wage across the country because he led by example,” said Fabián, who noted that the cafeteria workers remain without union representation.

Fabián said policy changes should aim to create a system in which the most ethical bidder, rather than the lowest bidder, will be awarded a government contractor. Lowest bidders are more likely to engage in wage theft violations, Fabián said. “We want to create a system that gives preferences to companies that provide living wages and benefits and to freedom to form unions without retaliation,” he said.

Joseph Geevarghese, director of Good Jobs Nation, said in an emailed statement the recent $1 million award was the result of activism. In recent years, U.S contract workers and allies have gone on strike and filed legal multiple complaints.

“This shows that when workers act, workers can win,” Geevarghese said.

Last year, for example, more than two dozen Senate aides brought their own lunches to work and boycotted meals being served on Capitol Hill during a union drive among the cafeteria employees. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) was among those to join the boycott, according to Al Jazeera.

Sens. Brian Schatz (D-HI) and Harry Reid (D-NV) are among lawmakers who have shown support for reform on behalf of the food workers. Reid has said the federal government should stop working with the Restaurant Associates, according to an Associated Press report.

Geevarghese urged Obama to sign the Model Employer Executive Order that was recently added to the Democratic Party platform.

Roundups Politics

The House Freedom Fund Bankrolls Some of Congress’ Most Anti-Choice Candidates

Ally Boguhn

With the 2016 election cycle underway, the political action committee seems to be working tirelessly to ensure the House Freedom Caucus maintains a radical anti-choice legacy.

In its short existence, the House Freedom Caucus (HFC) has made a name for itself through endless efforts to push Congress further to the right, particularly when it comes to reproductive health. Now with the 2016 election cycle underway, the caucus’ political action committee, the House Freedom Fund, seems to be working just as tirelessly to ensure the caucus maintains a radical anti-choice legacy.

Since its founding by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) in January 2015, the group of ultra-conservative lawmakers that make up the caucus has ballooned from just nine members to at least 36 members, as of October 2015, who have confirmed their own inclusion—though the group keeps its official roster secret. These numbers may seem small, but they pack a punch in the House, where they have enough votes to block major legislation pushed by other parts of the Republican party.

And now, the group is seeking to add to its ranks in order to wield even more power in Congress.

“The goal is to grow it by, and I think it’s realistic, to grow it by 20 to 30 members,” Rep. Matt Salmon (R-AZ), one of HFC’s founding members, told Politico in April. “All new members.”

Appreciate our work?

Vote now! And help Rewire earn a bigger grant from CREDO:

VOTE NOW

While the caucus itself reportedly does not endorse candidates, its unofficial PAC has already thrown money behind defending the seats of some of the group’s most notoriously anti-choice members, as well as a few new faces.

According to OpenSecrets.org, the Center for Responsive Politics’ campaign finance database, thus far in 2016, the House Freedom Fund has invested in seven congressional candidates currently vying to keep a seat in the House of Representatives: Rep. Rod Blum (R-IA), Rep. Dave Brat (R-VA), Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), Rep. Scott Desjarlais (R-TN), Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ), and Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ). The PAC’s website also highlights two candidates hoping to move from their state legislatures to the House: Republican Indiana state senator Jim Banks and Georgia state Senator Mike Crane. The PAC is also backing the Republican candidate for Florida’s 2nd Congressional District, Mary Thomas; and Republican candidate for North Carolina’s 13th Congressional District, Ted Budd.

Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH), who won a special election in early June to replace former House speaker John Boehner, also received funding from the PAC. He joined the House Freedom Caucus that same week.

The Republican Party actively works to deny access to virtually all forms of reproductive health care, so it is not surprising that the candidates supported by the House Freedom Fund, whose confirmed members are all members of the GOP, share similarly radical views on reproductive rights and health.

Here are some of the House Freedom Fund’s most alarming candidates:

Rep. Rod Blum

Rep. Blum, a freshman congressman from Iowa, considers his opposition to reproductive choice one of the “cornerstones” of his campaign. “It is unconscionable that government would aid in the taking of innocent life. I strongly oppose any federal funding for abortion and I will vote against any of our tax dollars flowing to groups who perform or advocate abortions on demand,” asserts Blum’s campaign site. The Hyde Amendment already bans most federal funding for abortion care.

Blum spent much of his first year in the House attempting to push through a series of anti-choice bills. The representative co-sponsored the medically unsupported Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would have enacted a federal ban on abortion at or beyond 20 weeks of pregnancy, in January 2015. He signed on as a co-sponsor for the failed Life at Conception Act, a so-called personhood measure that would have granted legal rights to fetuses and zygotes, thus potentially outlawing abortion and many forms of contraception, in March of that year. That July, Blum co-sponsored the Defund Planned Parenthood Act of 2015, which would have stripped the reproductive health organization of all federal funding for one year so that Congress could investigate it in the wake of the Center for Medical Progress’ (CMP) discredited videos smearing the provider. 

Blum’s co-sponsorship of anti-choice legislation was accompanied by a long series of like-minded votes throughout 2015, such as a January vote in favor of the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2015, which, among other things, would have made the Hyde Amendment’s annually renewed ban on most federal funding for abortion care permanent. He also voted to block Washington, D.C.’s Reproductive Health non-discrimination law, and in favor of a measure allowing states to exclude from Medicaid funding any health provider that provided abortions, as well as other anti-choice measures.

Blum’s brief time in Congress has been marked by such extremism that Emily’s List, an organization that works to elect pro-choice women, put Blum on their “On Notice” list in July 2015, signaling their intention to prioritize unseating the Iowa Representative. “In less than five months into the 114th Congress, we have seen Representative Blum lead the crusade to restrict women’s access to healthcare, most notably when he cosponsored a national abortion ban,” explained the organization in a press release on its decision to target Blum. “It’s clear that Congressman Blum is more focused on prioritizing an extreme ideological agenda over enacting policies that benefit more women and families in Iowa’s First Congressional District.”

Rep. Dave Brat

Rep. Dave Brat gained notoriety for his win against incumbent representative and then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in 2014, a victory considered one of “the biggest political upset[s] in recent memory.” Like many of his HFC colleagues, Brat has co-sponsored several pieces of anti-choice legislation, including the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act in 2015 and the Conscience Protection Act of 2016, which claimed to “protect” against “governmental discrimination against providers of health services” who refuse to provide abortion care. Brat’s voting record in Congress earned him a 100 percent rating from the National Right to Life Committee.

In April of this year, the Virginia representative signed on to a letter with Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and other anti-choice legislators, such as House Freedom Fund candidate Rep. Meadows expressing “serious concerns” about the Food and Drug Administration’s decision to update the label of abortion drug mifepristone to bring it in line with scientific research and evidence-based medicine. Though medication abortions are safe and result in complications in fewer than 0.4 percent of patients, the lawmakers nonetheless claimed that the regulation change could be dangerous, noting that the drug was originally approved during the Clinton administration and demanding a list of information about it.

In the wake of the deadly shooting at a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood facility in November, when the alleged shooter parroted the same violent rhetoric about the reproductive health organization popularized by the CMP’s discredited videos, many in Congress called for the panel investigating Planned Parenthood to be disbanded and for lawmakers to distance themselves from the videos. Brat, however, saw no reason the anti-choice violence should affect the conservative crusade to shut down access to reproductive health care. “Principles are principles,” Brat said at the time according to the Huffington Post. “They don’t change on a news cycle.”

Rep. Tim Huelskamp

Kansas Rep. Tim Huelskamp has been an anti-choice advocate since graduate school, when, according to the biography provided on his website, he was “active in assisting women in crisis pregnancies” while working toward a doctoral degree at American University. His advocacy continued as he made his way to Congress, eventually leading him to become the congressional “Pro-Life Caucus” whip.

Though he has cast plenty of anti-choice votes, the congressman’s most notable moment when it comes to reproductive rights may be a 2012 speech on the House floor, in when he compared abortion to slavery and accused Planned Parenthood and the Obama administration of being racist. “Perhaps the biggest war against our liberties is the war that is being waged against those that are not here today, the unborn,” claimed Huelskamp. “Besides slavery, abortion is the other darkest stain on our nation’s character and this president is looking for every way possible to make abortion more available and more frequent. And he wants you to pay for it. Even if you disagree with it.”

Huelskamp went on to falsely accuse Planned Parenthood of targeting people of color. “I am the adoptive father of four children, each of them either Black, Hispanic, Native American, and I am incensed that this president pays money to an entity that was created for the sole purpose of killing children that look like mine; a racist organization and it continues to target minorities for abortion destruction,” said the congressman. “Shame on this president and shame on that party.”

It wouldn’t be the last time Huelskamp exploited race in order to promote his anti-choice agenda. In 2015, the Kansas Representative lashed out at those who accepted awards from Planned Parenthood, tweeting that they were supporting a “racist” agenda.

Rep. Mark Meadows

Rep. Mark Meadows, who has a 100 percent rating from the National Right to Life Committee, co-sponsored anti-choice measures such as the House’s 2015 fetal pain bill, the 2015 Life at Conception Act, and the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2016 (PRENDA). He also once badgered a pregnant doctor testifying during a House committee hearing about the importance of offering maternity coverage through the Affordable Care Act. However, the congressman’s recent vendetta against Planned Parenthood stands out the most.

In July 2015, in the wake of CMP’s deceptively edited videos, Meadows latched onto the discredited films in order to justify defunding Planned Parenthood. “In addition to cutting funding for abortion providers, I strongly urge Congress to investigate the legality of the practices engaged in by Planned Parenthood,” said Meadows at the time.

In September, as Congress faced the looming threat of a possible government shutdown if they didn’t pass a budget bill, Meadows exploited the opportunity to push for Planned Parenthood to be defunded, no matter the cost. With the South Carolina congressman leading the charge, pressure from conservatives to pull funding for the reproductive health-care provider played a role in prompting then-House Speaker John Boehner to resign his position. Meadows was a co-sponsor of the Defund Planned Parenthood Act of 2015, which passed in the House as part of a compromise to narrowly escape the shutdown. 

But Meadows’ quest to attack Planned Parenthood didn’t end there. In September, the congressman also participated in the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s hearing to “examine the use of taxpayer funding” by Planned Parenthood and its affiliates, a sham hearing used by the GOP to repeatedly push misinformation about the organization.

Rep. Scott Desjarlais

Rep. Scott Desjarlais, a medical doctor, is perhaps best known for his attempt to pressure his patient, with whom he was having an affair, into having an abortion when she became pregnant. While the congressman has repeatedly run on his anti-abortion credentials, his divorce papers also revealed he had supported his wife in having two abortions. Politico‘s Chas Sisk labeled DeJarlais  “the biggest hypocrite in Congress.”

Desjarlais made headlines again in 2015 for voting for a later abortion ban. A spokesperson for the Tennessee Republican told the Times Free Press that the vote was in accordance with the congressman’s record:

“Congressman DesJarlais was proud to vote in favor of this legislation,” said his spokesman Robert Jameson, who added that DesJarlais has maintained a “100 percent pro-life voting record” during his five years in Congress and “has always advocated for pro-life values.”

Indiana State Sen. Jim Banks

Indiana state Sen. Jim Banks (R-Columbia City) is one of the few candidates backed by the House Freedom Fund that has yet to win federal office, but his time in the state legislature has given him more than ample opportunity to demonstrate his opposition to reproductive health and rights.

Banks’ campaign website highlights the candidate’s “pro-life” position as a key issue for his race for the House, providing an extensive record of his anti-choice credentials and claiming that he is “running for Congress so that northeast Indiana continues to have a strong voice for innocent lives in Washington, D.C.” That page includes a laundry list of campaign promises, including amending the U.S. Constitution to give a fetus legal human rights, which could outlaw abortion and many forms of contraception; banning federal funding for abortion, though such a ban already exists; eliminating federal funding for any organization that performs abortions domestically or abroad; and opposing any change to the Republican platform on abortion.

The state senator’s site goes on to suggest that “it has been far too long since the Supreme Court discovered that women have a ‘right’ to have an abortion,” lamenting that much of the anti-choice movement’s work to shutter access to abortion in state legislatures hasn’t been replicated on a federal level and promising to address the issue if elected.

Included in his anti-choice resumé is a note that both Banks and his wife have been working in the movement to oppose choice since graduating college, when the two joined Focus on the Family, an organization that has spent millions of dollars promoting its extreme agenda, even devoting $2.5 million to run an anti-abortion ad during the 2010 Super Bowl. The two also worked together on the Allen County Right to Life Board of Directors, and Banks’ wife, Amanda, remains the board’s vice president.

But most extreme of all was the legislation Banks spearheaded while in the state legislature, which included several targeted regulation of abortion providers (TRAP) measures. Most recently the state senator sponsored Indiana’s SB 144, a bill that would modify the state’s 20-week abortion ban to outlaw the procedure once a fetal heartbeat could be detected, typically around six weeks’ gestation. In a statement on the bill, Banks claimed the law was needed because it “would protect unborn Hoosiers’ right to life and also includes important women’s health protections.”

credo_rewire_vote_3

Vote for Rewire and Help Us Earn Money

Rewire is in the running for a CREDO Mobile grant. More votes for Rewire means more CREDO grant money to support our work. Please take a few seconds to help us out!

VOTE!

Thank you for supporting our work!