#NNPA BlackPress
COMMENTARY: Toward a Living Wage
NNPA NEWSWIRE — The poverty line for a family of three (a working mom and two children) is $16,910. A woman working full time at the minimum wage is living below the poverty line. She qualifies for SNAP (food stamps), and possibly for federal housing aid if she can get it. All too often, the list for housing subsidies is full, as is public housing, so assistance is not an option. What is a woman earning such a low wage to do, then, living at the economic periphery? She house-shares lives with family or endures homelessness. She lines up to get food at food banks or from other charities. She struggles to make ends meet, while her Congressional Representative earns $174,000 a year whether they produce or not.
By Julianne Malveaux, NNPA Newswire Contributor
It is unfathomable that the federal minimum wage has not been increased in more than a decade, since 2007. That the wage, at $7.25 per hour, has remained flat through recession and recovery, through extremely high unemployment rates and much lower ones. Republicans have absolutely refused to consider minimum wage increases, and in early March rejected a bill that would increase the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2024. Still, with the Democratic majority in Congress, the bill came out of committee on a 28-20 party line vote.
While the federal government drags its feet, six states, the District of Columbia and several other cities now have a minimum wage that will rise to $15 in the next few years. In late March, Maryland joined California, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey and Illinois in increasing the minimum wage, even though Republican governor Larry Hogan vetoed the legislation. Both houses of the Maryland legislature overrode his veto, even though he melodramatically noted that a higher minimum wage would “devastate” the Maryland economy.
Unions, McDonald’s workers, and the Fight for Fifteen have fueled the national push to raise the minimum wage, especially as people have noted that wage stagnation has resulted in an extremely uneven economic recovery. While those at the top are celebrating economic growth, those at the bottom have barely experienced it. And the current minimum wage of $7.25 produces annual pay of $15,080, assuming that someone works a full 40 hours a week all 52 weeks of the year, which is often unlikely because many minimum wage jobs are part-time jobs.
The poverty line for a family of three (a working mom and two children) is $16,910. A woman working full time at the minimum wage is living below the poverty line. She qualifies for SNAP (food stamps), and possibly for federal housing aid if she can get it. All too often, the list for housing subsidies is full, as is public housing, so assistance is not an option. What is a woman earning such a low wage to do, then, living at the economic periphery? She house-shares lives with family or endures homelessness. She lines up to get food at food banks or from other charities. She struggles to make ends meet, while her Congressional Representative earns $174,000 a year whether they produce or not. (I’d suspend Congressional pay when they choose to shut down the government).
Too many of the people who earn the minimum wage, mostly women, are caretakers. They mind our children and our elders, as nannies and home health workers. While we say that our children and elders are precious, we don’t pay the folks who care for them as if they are. Parking lot attendants, who care for our automobiles, often earn more than the people who care for our children, mothers, and grandmothers. And yet the economy depends on them! How many working women would be hard pressed to work if their nannies or home health workers stayed home? And how would the economy adjust to the absence of nearly half of the labor force?
Ai-jen Poo, the Executive Director of the National Domestic Worker’s Alliance, recently spoke about workers in the care industry, how poorly they are paid, and how essential they are. Eighty-eight percent of these workers are women, mostly women of color, and while demand for their services is increasing (with an aging baby boom, and increased births to millennial women), pay is not. All don’t make the minimum wage, but far too many do, and their efforts, though essential, are all too often invisible. Poo and her organization are working to raise the visibility of these workers, not just so we can see them, but so we can ensure that they are adequately paid. Most Americans will have to interact with the care industry at some point in their life, arranging help for elderly relatives or for children. The movement toward a living wage must include these workers.
Kudos to Maryland for taking a step in the right direction. Shame on House Republicans who are enjoying economic recovery, but denying its benefits to those at the bottom. The Fight for Fifteen has momentum now. This is a great time to keep up the pressure on the states and on the federal government. Increasing the minimum wage lifts people out of poverty. Shouldn’t we all be able to support that?
Julianne Malveaux is an author and economist. Her latest book “Are We Better Off? Race, Obama and Public Policy” is available via www.amazon.com for booking, wholesale inquiries or for more info visit www.juliannemalveaux.com
#NNPA BlackPress
Recently Approved Budget Plan Favors Wealthy, Slashes Aid to Low-Income Americans
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts

By Stacy M. Brown
BlackPressUSA.com Senior National Correspondent
The new budget framework approved by Congress may result in sweeping changes to the federal safety net and tax code. The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts. A new analysis from Yale University’s Budget Lab shows the proposals in the House’s Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Resolution would lead to a drop in after-tax-and-transfer income for the poorest households while significantly boosting revenue for the wealthiest Americans. Last month, Congress passed its Concurrent Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2025 (H. Con. Res. 14), setting revenue and spending targets for the next decade. The resolution outlines $1.5 trillion in gross spending cuts and $4.5 trillion in tax reductions between FY2025 and FY2034, along with $500 billion in unspecified deficit reduction.
Congressional Committees have now been instructed to identify policy changes that align with these goals. Three of the most impactful committees—Agriculture, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means—have been tasked with proposing major changes. The Agriculture Committee is charged with finding $230 billion in savings, likely through changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps. Energy and Commerce must deliver $880 billion in savings, likely through Medicaid reductions. Meanwhile, the Ways and Means Committee must craft tax changes totaling no more than $4.5 trillion in new deficits, most likely through extending provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Although the resolution does not specify precise changes, reports suggest lawmakers are eyeing steep cuts to SNAP and Medicaid benefits while seeking to make permanent tax provisions that primarily benefit high-income individuals and corporations.
To examine the potential real-world impact, Yale’s Budget Lab modeled four policy changes that align with the resolution’s goals:
- A 30 percent across-the-board cut in SNAP funding.
- A 15 percent cut in Medicaid funding.
- Permanent extension of the individual and estate tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
- Permanent extension of business tax provisions including 100% bonus depreciation, expense of R&D, and relaxed limits on interest deductions.
Yale researchers determined that the combined effect of these policies would reduce the after-tax-and-transfer income of the bottom 20 percent of earners by 5 percent in the calendar year 2026. Households in the middle would see a modest 0.6 percent gain. However, the top five percent of earners would experience a 3 percent increase in their after-tax-and-transfer income.
Moreover, the analysis concluded that more than 100 percent of the net fiscal benefit from these changes would go to households in the top 20 percent of the income distribution. This happens because lower-income groups would lose more in government benefits than they would gain from any tax cuts. At the same time, high-income households would enjoy significant tax reductions with little or no loss in benefits.
“These results indicate a shift in resources away from low-income tax units toward those with higher incomes,” the Budget Lab report states. “In particular, making the TCJA provisions permanent for high earners while reducing spending on SNAP and Medicaid leads to a regressive overall effect.” The report notes that policymakers have floated a range of options to reduce SNAP and Medicaid outlays, such as lowering per-beneficiary benefits or tightening eligibility rules. While the Budget Lab did not assess each proposal individually, the modeling assumes legislation consistent with the resolution’s instructions. “The burden of deficit reduction would fall largely on those least able to bear it,” the report concluded.
#NNPA BlackPress
A Threat to Pre-emptive Pardons
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process.

By April Ryan
President Trump is working to undo the traditional presidential pardon powers by questioning the Biden administration’s pre-emptive pardons issued just days before January 20, 2025. President Trump is seeking retribution against the January 6th House Select Committee. The Trump Justice Department has been tasked to find loopholes to overturn the pardons that could lead to legal battles for the Republican and Democratic nine-member committee. Legal scholars and those closely familiar with the pardon process worked with the Biden administration to ensure the preemptive pardons would stand against any retaliatory knocks from the incoming Trump administration. A source close to the Biden administration’s pardons said, in January 2025, “I think pardons are all valid. The power is unreviewable by the courts.”
However, today that same source had a different statement on the nuances of the new Trump pardon attack. That attack places questions about Biden’s use of an autopen for the pardons. The Trump argument is that Biden did not know who was pardoned as he did not sign the documents. Instead, the pardons were allegedly signed by an autopen. The same source close to the pardon issue said this week, “unless he [Trump] can prove Biden didn’t know what was being done in his name. All of this is in uncharted territory. “ Meanwhile, an autopen is used to make automatic or remote signatures. It has been used for decades by public figures and celebrities.
Months before the Biden pardon announcement, those in the Biden White House Counsel’s Office, staff, and the Justice Department were conferring tirelessly around the clock on who to pardon and how. The concern for the preemptive pardons was how to make them irrevocable in an unprecedented process. At one point in the lead-up to the preemptive pardon releases, it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process. President Trump began the threat of an investigation for the January 6th Select Committee during the Hill proceedings. Trump has threatened members with investigation or jail.
#NNPA BlackPress
Reaction to The Education EO
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking a higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college.

By April Ryan
There are plenty of negative reactions to President Donald Trump’s latest Executive Order abolishing the Department of Education. As Democrats call yesterday’s action performative, it would take an act of Congress for the Education Department to close permanently. “This blatantly unconstitutional executive order is just another piece of evidence that Trump has absolutely no respect for the Constitution,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) who is the ranking member on the House Financial Services Committee. “By dismantling ED, President Trump is implementing his own philosophy on education, which can be summed up in his own words, ‘I love the poorly educated.’ I am adamantly opposed to this reckless action, said Rep. Bobby Scott who is the most senior Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee.
Morgan State University President Dr. David Wilson chimed in saying “I’m deeply concerned about efforts to shift federal oversight in education back to the states, particularly regarding equity, justice, and fairness. History has shown us what happens when states are left unchecked—Black and poor children are too often denied access to the high-quality education they deserve. In 1979 then President Jimmy Carter signed a law creating the Department of Education. Arne Duncan, former Obama Education Secretary, reminds us that both Democratic and Republican presidents have kept education a non-political issue until now. However, Duncan stressed Republican presidents have contributed greatly to moving education forward in this country.
During a CNN interview this week Duncan said during the Civil War President Abraham “Lincoln created the land grant system” for colleges like Tennessee State University. “President Ford brought in IDEA.” And “Nixon signed Pell Grants into law.” In 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush which increased federal oversight of schools through standardized testing. Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college. Wilson details, “that 40 percent of all college students rely on Pell Grants and student loans.”
Rep. Alma Adams (D-NC) says this Trump action “impacts students pursuing higher education and threatens 26 million students across the country, taking billions away from their educational futures. Meanwhile, During the president’s speech in the East Room of the White House Thursday, Trump criticized Baltimore City, and its math test scores with critical words. Governor West Moore, who is opposed to the EO action, said about dismantling the Department of Education, “Leadership means lifting people up, not punching them down.”
-
#NNPA BlackPress3 weeks ago
Target Takes a Hit: $12.4 Billion Wiped Out as Boycotts Grow
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Undocumented Workers Are Struggling to Feed Themselves. Slashed Budgets and New Immigration Policies Bring Fresh Challenges
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
BREAKING Groundbreaking Singer Angie Stone Dies in Car Accident at 63
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of February 26 – March 4, 2025
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
NAACP Legend and Freedom Fighter Hazel Dukes Passes
-
Arts and Culture3 weeks ago
Beverly Lorraine Greene: A Pioneering Architect and Symbol of Possibility and Progress
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
Trump Kicks the Ukrainian President Out of the White House
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
Apple Shareholders Reject Effort to Dismantle DEI Initiatives, Approve $500 Billion U.S. Investment Plan