Mediaboss Marketing

Cities struggling to house their homeless are asking the federal government to rethink its cornerstone homelessness program amid concerns about burdensome reporting requirements and inadequate funding.

An internal government report calls for the so-called Homelessness Partnering Strategy to provide different levels of funding to rural communities, which must house people over vast areas, and to urban centres struggling with skyrocketing real estate prices.

The issue of red tape bogging down the funding also came up repeatedly in meetings last year that were detailed in a briefing note to a senior official at Employment and Social Development Canada.

Cities asked the government to simplify reporting requirements about how money was being used, or provide extra cash to cover administrative costs, said the note, obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act.

The homelessness strategy isnt up for renewal until 2019, but Social Development Minister Jean-Yves Duclos has asked officials to begin work now in order to have it ready sooner, said spokesman Mathieu Filion.

Those in the anti-poverty sector expect funding will stay the same under the revamped strategy, which will likely emphasize prevention, something experts have promoted during the Liberals time in office.

A separate briefing note to Duclos suggests that officials wanted the strategy to help fund clinical supports for so-called housing first clients, including teams of doctors, nurses, psychiatrists and substance abuse specialists.

The federal government cant directly fund such supports because they fall under provincial jurisdiction.

The Liberal governments first budget in 2016 set aside $111.8-million over two years for the strategy to give cities more flexibility in battling homelessness.

Those municipal strategies will be reshaped next year following the second federally organized point-in-time count of the homeless population in 59 cities, up from 32 that took part in the first count last year.

An internal government report says some cities had problems spending the 2016 money during the last fiscal period, which ended in March, because the cash wasnt available at the start of the fiscal year.

At a mid-year meeting about the money, cities big and small told federal officials that the strategys focus on housing first find housing and services for people right away, rather than requiring them to seek treatment first was becoming more difficult to meet.

Larger urban centres reported that a lack of available affordable housing options, including market rental units, was a major hindrance. In rural and remote communities, the challenge was housing people over large geographic areas.

Funding was also a problem in Aboriginal communities.

Indigenous leaders said the housing first approach didnt recognize the unique needs of their communities, including the need for multi-generational housing and communal homes.

Jenny Gerbasi, president of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, said the report illustrates the challenges with the federal strategy, which is also likely to play a key role in the national housing strategy the Liberals will release later this year.

Cities need to be given the maximum flexibility needed to use federal funds on local needs, including deciding the extent to which they deliver programs with a housing first approach, Gerbasi said.

Three decades after the approach was first introduced, an international body of research suggests it works. In 2008, the federal government funded the largest such study a five-year examination of more than 2,200 previously homeless people across five cities.

It found those who received housing first help retained housing at much higher rates than those who received what investigators called treatment as usual, and scored higher on measures of quality of life.

As a result of the study, housing first became a focus of the Homelessness Partnering Strategy.

A follow-up study last year found a significant gap between current federal and provincial funding and what was provided in the original study period.

Go here to see the original:
Cities urge Liberals to rethink homeless strategy - The Globe and Mail

Members of a leftist group backed by deep-pocketed unions loudly protested outside of Republican Congressman Jason Lewiss home in Woodbury, Minnesota on Wednesday, spurring frightened neighbors to call the police.

The group, Take Action Minnesota, which is funded by SEUI and other unions and progressive groups, chanted and protested outside of Lewiss home, where his wife and two daughters live, over proposed cuts to Medicaid and other entitlement programs that are driving the United States deeper into debt.

After attempting to deliver a letter to Lewis in person at his home, Take Action protestors then stood on his porch and his driveway as two elderly women explained how they rely on Medicaid for about five minutes. They then began to chant and yell rallying cries as they waved signs.

When care givers are under attack, what do we do? The young woman prompted. Stand up! Fight back! the other protestors responded.

As they walked away, protestors yelled: Well be back!

The group streamed their protest via Facebook Live.

In a statement posted on his Facebook page, Lewis said the demonstration prompted his neighbor to call the police.

Appalled to find out my home and private property were invaded today by protestors while I was working in my congressional district. Suffice it to say it is more than a bit disturbing to get a call from your neighbor saying his daughters were afraid and called him to contact the police.

In a statement, Take Action said they showed up at his home because Lewis hasnt done a town hall event to talk about the proposed cuts.

For months, constituents have asked for a town hall, Take Action said in a statement. His constituents would rather have a conversation at a town hall, than deliver a letter to his door.

Town hall events featuring Republican congressman have become increasingly dangerous. In May, police escorted two attendees at a North Dakota town hall event after they got physical with a Republican congressman.

Earlier this year, the Utah Republican Party issued a statement urging GOP Congressmen to delay town hall meetings after numerous violent actions took place at previous events.

This isnt just immature anymore; this is a dangerous ramping up of rhetoric that already has one of my House colleagues in rehab from a vicious attack, Lewis said, referring to Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), who nearly died from a gunshot wound inflicted by a crazed Bernie Sanders supporter. Beyond increasing security measures, we are investigating what action to take. But this dangerous targeting of people, staffs, associates and now families must stop. And stop now.

See the article here:
Watch These Liberals Protest Outside Of A Congressman's Home Where His Wife, Daughters Live - The Federalist

Wall Street Journal (subscription)

Liberalism's Summer of '17 - WSJ Wall Street Journal (subscription) Liberals whine about being governed by Trump. Pity those governed by them. and more »

More:
Liberalism's Summer of '17 - WSJ - Wall Street Journal (subscription)

We knew it would be an interesting show, and had a pretty good idea that Keillor would be taking a "victory lap" over the win. We listened politely to the opening monolog and the "Amazing day for everybody" comment and later disparaging remarks about Bush and Cheney.

We did not hold up signs, protest, or shout down Keillor; they won and we lost, we accepted that is how the peaceful transfer of power happens in a Constitutional Republic.

All the people across this land who did not vote for Obama, did not riot on Wednesday after the 2008 election, nor Thursday, the next week, next year, destroy businesses, burn buildings, or shut down liberal speech on campuses. No, they went back to work doing what they were doing the day before the election.

We who live in "flyover" country endured the left's sanctimonious remarks and lived our lives for the eight years of Obama's administration, with increased regulations, the Affordable Care Act, where "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan," "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor," and "you will save $2,500 on average per year." All untrue, but still we did not riot or destroy property, we continued to work to pay our bills, save something for retirement, and to pass something onto our children and grandchildren.

So, us "deplorables" as we have become known, protested at the ballot box in 2016, and elected a "non-politician" who was saying many of the things we believed in, "repeal and replace Obama Care, roll back regulations, secure our borders, fix the VA, increase jobs and get the economy growing at a faster pace."

Now it is your turn, and the people on your side, to allow our duly elected president to move the country in the direction he and his voter believe is the correct direction. If you don't like the direction the country is moving, just as we who voted Trump in didn't like the direction of the last eight years, you can vote him out in three and a half years. You didn't win at the ballot box and now you are trying to use Russian collusion, a special counsel and obstruction to undo the will of the Trump voters.

I'm not quite sure what President Trump had to do with your high school reunion article, other than his name didn't come up, but you used the opportunity to denigrate the President and his family. Maybe you should have another tomato.

Butts lives in Bismarck.

Read more from the original source:
Letter: Liberals are the ones acting deplorable - INFORUM

Aug. 10, 2017 at 6:47 AM

In the past few months, Democrats have been on a search for saviors who can lead them out of the wilderness. Even though nationally its still unclear who will take on the partys mantle in 2020 Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden, Cory Booker and countless others have been floated as possibilities theres been an uptick in the number of Democrats writ large who want to run for office on the local level. In the midst of this surge of enthusiasm, Ive noticed that a particular crop of white young men from state-level offices have captured national attention. Their prominence, coupled with their appeal to a certain kind of voter, has left me wondering what these men say about the strategic direction of the Democratic Party.

Self-possessed, serious, maybe a little self-serious these politicians seem to be taking stylistic cues from the dominating political figure of their era, President Obama. Army veteran Jason Kander proved masterful in creating a compelling personal political narrative during his bid for a Missouri Senate seat; a campaign ad showing him assembling a rifle while blindfolded went viral. Jon Ossoff, who ran in a special House election in Georgia, admitted that his careful parsing of language, often about Americans coming together, made him sound a little like Obama. Tom Perriello, a candidate in the Virginia gubernatorial primary, spent formative time abroad and came home adamant about creating a new kind of Democratic politics. Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, is a well-credentialed (Rhodes Scholar, Naval Reservist) Midwesterner who seemed to come out of nowhere to wide, approving attention as he sought the chair of the Democratic National Committee in February.

President Obama in 2004, before he was elected as a U.S. senator.

Getty images

They are all, as Obama was when he burst onto the national scene, young, well pedigreed, and varying degrees of attractive on the Brooks Brothers scale; each inoffensively clean cut, the sort of guy who cuts himself off after two light beers because he has to wake up early.

These men are figures of relative obscurity who have capitalized on a political moment to vault their careers several levels up. The same could be said for Illinois state Sen. Obama, who made waves in 2004 with a blockbuster convention speech. This groups moment is different than Obamas, though these politicians caught the Democrats magpie eye following the rise of Donald Trump, though it should be noted that all did so while losing elections.

Each has claimed in his campaign that he is a droplet of that fresh blood needed to reinvigorate the party, a clean slate upon which to write the Democratic compact of the future. This was more or less Obamas line when he entered the Democratic primary against Hillary Clinton all those years ago; he had no Iraq War vote to sully his record, no decades of political battles weighing him down.

But Obama, of course, was a figure of incredible historical import the first black major party nominee and then the first black president. His promise of change was economic he was the (relative) outsider fixing the mess of the financial crisis created by craven New York and D.C. insiders but also cultural: voters, black and white, could cast a ballot for him and be a part of history.

Kander, Ossoff, Perriello, and Buttigieg offer the promise of change as well, but the meaning of that change is more vaguely implied. Each has promised to bring the message of the Democratic Party back to the people it has forgotten. Thats all well and good, but who exactly are those people?

Clockwise from upper left: Jon Ossoff, Tom Perriello, Jason Kander, Pete Buttigieg.

Getty images

Since the election, a debate has been raging in the Democratic Party about the best path to electoral victory: appeal to whites who voted for Obama and later Trump, or turn out those who stayed home in 2016, namely black voters?

This group of newcomers appeal is in part to white voters, and the attention given to Kander, Ossoff, Perriello and Buttigieg in recent months suggests Democrats are, consciously or not, leaning most toward the plan of winning back white voters. Election results for these men do show certain promising patterns. Though Kander lost his Senate race, he outperformed Clintons 2016 and Obamas 2012 showing in a number of places and outright won counties that neither Clinton nor Obama could swing, namely Platte and Clay, outside Kansas City. Both Platte and Clay are wealthy and white places each is 87 percent white, and the median income is $68,254 in Platte, $62,099 in Clay and are in Missouris 6th Congressional District, represented by Republican Sam Graves. Graves won reelection in 2016 with 68 percent of the vote in the district.

The counties have similar demographics to Georgias 6th Congressional District, where Ossoff campaigned and lost, but by a slim margin. Republican Karen Handel won that race by about 4 percentage points, a notable result since only a few months before, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price overwhelmingly won reelection in the district with 62 percent of the vote. Ossoff ate into Republicans support substantially in the district.

The Kander/Ossoff appeal to suburban voters (Kander helped Ossoff campaign) seems built in part on their ability to assure voters with a more rightward cultural bent that Democrats arent to be disdained. Kanders ad showing him assembling a rifle blindfolded became a sort of shorthand for his understanding of a certain milieu gun owners and Second Amendment advocates while Ossoff became known for his keen ability to say almost nothing controversial. Young, handsome, kind of preppy, it made him a nice blank slate onto whom voters could project their desires.

Perriello, too, has demonstrated success with white voters, despite losing the Virginia primary against Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam. He performed best in the parts of the state that are largely white and rural. Northam (who had the advantage of being a party insider) won areas like Hamton Roads, which are filled with black voters, the kind that swung the state blue for Obama in 2008. Perriello courted rural Virginians specifically, spending far more time in the states non-urban areas than Northam did, according to a candidate tracker from the Virginia Public Access Project.

Given that Buttigieg has only been elected as mayor, its more difficult to know if he has broader appeal, though South Bend is whiter than many other urban areas 61 percent and solidly Democratic.

Theres a risk that in hyping the effort to win back white Obama/Trump voters, black candidates get lost in the shuffle or female candidates are passed over because of a Hillary Clinton hangover. (The fear of the complicated challenges that women face when running for office is real.) Nina Turner articulated this view to me back in January: African-Americans, no matter what, will vote hook or crook for Democrats, and so that particular demographic is owed a lot more by the Democratic Party than what we have gotten, and what I mean by that is no African-American woman has ever been governor in this country. Democrats need to be making sure that happens.

Thrown into relief against Turners sentiments, the attention that Kander et al. have received seems significant. Buttigieg, known pretty much only to the good people of South Bend prior to this winter, was recently on Late Night with Seth Meyers talking about Republicans appropriation of the idea of freedom and on Chelsea Handlers show chatting about what its like to be a Democratic mayor in a deep-red state. Kander had enough grist coming off of his loss to start a voting rights group, Let America Vote, and be named the head of a DNC voting rights commission. A Nexis dive of coverage from the last six months finds him quoted in numerous national outlets on voting rights issues The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Washington Times, the Houston Chronicle but also written about as a potential presidential contender in The Hill and in a recent Washington Post profile.

Ossoffs campaign is now infamous for how much press attention and money it received, while Perriello got endorsements from a series of high-profile Obama administration officials and was profiled in national outlets. (I wrote about him in March.) Pod Save America, the brainchild of former Obama staffers that has become a de facto outlet for Democratic politicians, the fireside chat for the Resistance, has hosted and promoted all of these young, white Democrats.

And its not as if there is a dearth of minority talent. Turner herself has been floated as a potential 2018 Ohio gubernatorial candidate, while Stacey Abrams, another black woman, is making a bid for the Georgia governors mansion, and Ben Jealous, former head of the NAACP, recently announced a long-awaited bid for Maryland governor. Where is their national party hype machine?

It might be that at the heart of the matter, Democrats have internalized most acutely the accusation that they shamed and alienated white constituencies by elevating cultural conversations around issues like the Black Lives Matter movement and gay rights. The more subtle argument, that exciting the partys base namely, minority groups could be just as electorally rewarding, has been less interrogated. There are years left for younger Democratic talent to develop, and perhaps for the party to again focus on strengthening its base. But for now, at least in its promotion of rising talent, it seems the Democratic approach is lopsided.

CORRECTION (Aug. 10, 1:40 p.m.): An earlier version of this article incorrectly said that Pete Buttigieg had not run in a statewide election. He ran for state treasurer in 2010.

Continue reading here:
The Future Of The Democratic Party Is White Guys? - FiveThirtyEight