Comment

Grosso: Senators’ Hypocrisy Shocking but Not Surprising

For Immediate Release
March 19, 2015

Contact: Dionne Johnson Calhoun
(202) 724-8105

Grosso: Senators’ Hypocrisy Shocking but Not Surprising

Washington, DC -- Today, Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) issued the following statement in response to the introduction in the Senate of disapproval resolutions targeting two D.C. human rights laws, the Reproductive Health Non-discrimination Amendment Act of 2014 and the Human Rights Amendment Act of 2014:

“It is truly disturbing that Senators Ted Cruz and James Lankford are so interested in defending the right to discriminate. My bill to prevent discrimination against people in the workplace by employers regarding their employees’ reproductive health choices protects residents, especially women. The Human Rights Amendment Act, which I strongly supported, fixes an exception to our city’s robust non-discrimination laws to ensure that all educational institutions treat students fairly, and is in line with a 1987 court decision. It is my strong belief that the First Amendment of the Constitution safeguards both the exercise of an individual’s right to practice religion as well as an individual’s right to be protected from religions.

Equally galling is that just last month Mr. Cruz introduced a bill to allegedly defend states’ rights to set their own laws regarding marriage. On his website, Mr. Cruz describes himself as “a passionate fighter for limited government.” Yet here we find him actively undermining the unanimous votes of D.C.’s elected officials.

I am sick and tired of the grandstanding and political pandering of members of Congress who see meddling in D.C. affairs as an easy way to win partisan points. These Senators wouldn’t dare propose a bill to overturn laws in Texas or Oklahoma. Tactics like these highlight the need for legislative and budget autonomy for the District of Columbia.

In D.C. we stand for the human rights of workers, students, women, LGBT folks, and all people. There is no human right to discriminate. Senators Cruz and Lankford should sort out their ideological confusion and respect the District of Columbia’s self-governance.”

###

 

Comment

Comment

Grosso’s Bill Eliminates Civil Statute of Limitations in Child Sex Abuse Cases

For Immediate Release
March 17, 2015

Contact: Dionne Johnson Calhoun
(202) 724-8105

Grosso’s Bill Eliminates Civil Statute of Limitations in Child Sex Abuse Cases

Washington, D.C. – Today, Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) introduced the Childhood Protection Against Sexual Abuse Amendment Act of 2015. This legislation would eliminate the statute of limitations for the recovery of damages arising out of sexual abuse that occurred when a victim was a minor.  Additionally, the bill creates a two-year window for individuals whose claims were previously time-barred.

“There are few actions more depraved than sexual violence or abuse against children,” said Grosso. “Because most victims of childhood sexual abuse do not come forward until much later in their adult lives, we need to ensure that the statute of limitations is not a barrier to justice.  A person who victimizes a child should never be able to hide behind time.”

Currently there are seven states that no longer have a civil statute of limitations for claims of childhood sexual abuse.  Last week, the Utah state legislature passed similar legislation, removing the statute of limitations for civil actions against perpetrators of child sex abuse.

###

Comment

Comment

Sex work, human rights and law enforcement

By Darby Hickey, Legislative Assistant*

After decades of the ‘war on drugs’ and an obsession with ‘broken windows’ or ‘quality of life’ policing, our country seems to finally be reaching consensus against our over-reliance on incarceration. The devastating effects of mass imprisonment and biased policing are evident around the U.S. and certainly in the District of Columbia. Recent efforts to decriminalize or legalize marijuana, reform the practice of asset forfeiture, and overhaul our approach to juvenile justice have all resulted from this shift in perspective. Our city has begun to look at criminal justice through a lens of human rights, and the country is doing so as well. We are reworking our policies to recognize and address the underlying factors of why people engage in certain activities. We are grappling with the reality that some criminal penalties are worse for our communities than the behaviors that the penalties target. In light of all of this, it is worth reconsidering our policies and practices regarding sex workers and others involved in commercial sex.

On February 15, the Washington Post reported on a new round of arrests of people involved in commercial sex, resulting from online stings conducted by the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD). The MPD official quoted in the article stated, “We could probably do this every weekend and get the same numbers.” This echoed statements made by Assistant Chief Newsham in 2012 that MPD “can’t arrest our way out of” prostitution. In a recent exchange of letters between Councilmember Grosso and MPD Chief Cathy Lanier, the Chief wrote that while “there are very complex individual and socio-economic factors related to sex work, [MPD’s] options related to this are limited [i.e. arrests].”

Missing from the Washington Post article, like most discussions about sex work, is any consideration of the economics of commercial sex. It was also disappointing that the Post failed to interview any sex workers or advocates for this community, who likely would have noted that it is an income-generating activity. People engage in sex trade not out of some deviant mind-set, but as a means of survival--a way to pay rent, put food on the table, buy clothes for kids, and meet other needs. Arresting a sex worker doesn’t address any of these problems and, in fact, it usually exacerbates them.

Many people in D.C. and around the world have argued that a better approach to the complexities of commercial sex would be to focus directly on the individuals involved, and treat them as fully deserving of basic human rights. A human rights response to commercial sex would reframe the discussion—issues of violence against sex workers, police misconduct, public health, and stigma become the focus and sex workers and their activities stop being ‘the problem’.

A key part of a human rights approach is listening to the individuals involved in commercial sex. As Councilmember Grosso emphasized during the public hearing last year on the Sex Trafficking of Minors Prevention Amendment Act, “We must listen and respond to these diverse experiences with compassion and respect, not with arrest or judgment. Youth trading sex for money are already asking for access to low threshold, voluntary services for housing, healthcare, education, legal assistance and more.” The same goes for adult sex workers.

Yet some police officials state that arresting individuals trading sex for money is the best way to link them to such services. For example, in the MPD response to oversight questions from the Committee on the Judiciary, the Chief writes, "arrest is often the tool by which MPD can take the juveniles into custody... so that the juvenile can be connected with a service organization."

This misses the reality that an arrest itself can be traumatizing. In fact, police crack downs, whether on the streets or online, usually make it harder for outreach groups to contact people engaged in commercial sex who may need help. And it ignores the deep-seated mistrust of police and other authorities that exists in these communities. For example, research in Chicago revealed that young people involved in sex trade named police and healthcare officials as the main sources of violence and abuse in their lives.

We should not be arresting a sex worker or a minor engaging in sex trade in order to force them into services or to cooperate in a criminal investigation—a phenomenon noted in a City Paper article just last month. This goes against all we have learned about victim-centered approaches to violence and abuse. That is why Councilmember Grosso argued that the “Sex Trafficking of Minors Prevention Amendment Act” should prohibit police from arresting young people involved in sex trade.

A human rights-based practice would ensure that MPD is adopting proactive community policing. Police should be seeking to build relationships and trust, responding positively and with sensitivity to service calls, not seeking to get an arrest or conviction at all costs but addressing the needs of the survivor.

One place to start would be for MPD to not treat sex workers (or those assumed to be such) as “criminals” when they are victims of violence and are seeking redress. This problem was found to be pervasive in D.C. in a 2008 community-based research project. Respondents reported being told they “got what they deserved” for being sex workers when they were raped, stabbed, or otherwise attacked. This finding is supported by research in other jurisdictions across the country from New York to Los Angeles to New Orleans. A recent report by WAMU highlighted that this remains an issue today.  

Another aspect of a human rights approach to people involved in sex trade has already been partially implemented in D.C.—the policy of MPD that condoms are not to be used as evidence of engaging in prostitution. The community-based research referenced earlier and a subsequent study by Human Rights Watch found that while officially MPD and prosecutors rarely included condoms as evidence, they were used as pretext for arrests or confiscated or destroyed. There was also a widespread perception among residents that possessing more than three condoms would result in a prostitution charge. In 2009, MPD clarified that this was not the case, issued a policy statement to officers, and distributed informational materials throughout the community.

Unfortunately, this important step by MPD had two exceptions—in cases involving human trafficking or minors. Yet individuals in situations of coercion, including young people under the age of 18, are especially in need of access to condoms. Ensuring access to condoms helps reduce the harms they are facing, and the philosophy of harm reduction is based in a human rights framework.

As Councilmember Grosso has consistently stated, MPD needs to think outside the box on this and other issues and change policies and practices accordingly. A great start would be for MPD to shift from a stance that “people experiencing police misconduct should come forward” to one where leadership proactively seeks to identify patterns of mistreatment and abuse. Another step would be engaging with the community, rather than dismissing concerns about how police are interacting with residents. It is also the responsibility of the Council, the Mayor, and residents of the city to do a better job of understanding the human rights issues involved in commercial sex. We have come to recognize and reduce the harms of criminalization in many policy areas from drugs to schools to immigration. The time is now to reconsider the framework in which we handle commercial sex.

*This post is part of an ongoing series of posts by Councilmember Grosso’s staff to support professional development. All posts are approved and endorsed by Councilmember Grosso.

Comment

Comment

Oversight letter to the Child and Family Services Agency

It is performance oversight season again at the D.C. Council, with each committee hearing from the public and the agencies under its purview about the agencies' performance. After a hearing, Councilmembers often send letters to agencies with further questions. Here is Councilmember Grosso's letter to the D.C. Child and Family Services Agency

Comment

1 Comment

Kicking off Women’s History Month, Grosso Introduces Bill to Ensure Gender Equity in D.C.

For Immediate Release
March 3, 2015

Contact: Dionne Johnson Calhoun
(202) 724-8105

Kicking off Women’s History Month, Grosso Introduces Bill to Ensure Gender Equity in D.C.

Washington, D.C. — Today, in honor of Women’s History Month and the International Women’s Day on March 8, Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) introduced the Local Implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) Amendment Act of 2015. The United Nations General Assembly adopted CEDAW in 1979 and President Carter signed the treaty on behalf of the United States in 1980; however, the United States Senate has not yet ratified CEDAW. In 2014, municipalities across the nation began signing onto the Cities for CEDAW initiative, pledging to implement the principles of CEDAW at the local level in light of the Senate’s failure to act.  The U.S. is one of only eight countries that has not ratified the treaty. Countries that ratify CEDAW are mandated to condemn all forms of discrimination against women and girls and to ensure gender equality in the civil, political, economic, educational,  social and cultural arenas.

“In D.C., we already have some of the strongest human rights protections for women and girls in the country,” said Grosso. “In honor of Women’s History Month, I am introducing this legislation to ensure that all of our government agencies are working proactively for gender equality.”

Under the legislation, D.C. government agencies will be required to conduct gender analysis reporting, including data analysis, to assess gender equity in their operations. The bill also calls for an annual citywide action plan to address any deficiencies identified in the gender analysis reporting. Such analysis and evaluation will help identify and remedy structural gender inequalities in the D.C. government.

Additionally, March 3 is the International Sex Worker Rights Day and CEDAW notes how sex workers are particularly vulnerable to violence and other human rights abuses due to stigma and criminalization. Grosso has previously called for a greater emphasis on protecting the human rights of those involved in commercial sex.

1 Comment

Comment

DHS responds to Grosso's questions about homeless services budget and homeless youth

In December, Councilmember Grosso sent a letter to the D.C. Department of Human Services requesting on update on funds allocated by the Council in its FY15 budget for homeless services. After an oversight hearing on the issue of homelessness at the end of January with the new administration, Grosso sent a new letter with the same questions as well as some additional questions regarding homeless students, homeless youth, and homeless LGBTQ youth.

Comment

1 Comment

Grosso statement on MPD "jump outs"

Councilmember Grosso (I-At Large) released the following statement in advance of the "Justice for Ralphael Briscoe and Tamir Rice" Rally on Sunday, February 22, 2015:

As has been demonstrated through the evidence revealed during the Ralphael Briscoe case, “jump outs” are still happening and must stop immediately. The Metropolitan Police Department’s (MPD) denial about the continuing existence of jump-outs is disturbing. The fact is, if you live east of 16th Street NW, chances are you have witnessed a jump-out or the aftermath of such in a neighborhood. This practice is one that is taking place now, and we cannot continue to turn a blind eye to its use and its detrimental impact on our communities.

The jump-out tactic is the antithesis to the community policing model that MPD promotes. Not only does it immediately escalate the tension between an individual and the police, but it makes our residents fearful of doing everyday things like walking down the street or sitting on the stoop to talk with friends.

Between the field hearing the Committee on the Judiciary hosted last year, advocacy group reports and ongoing communication with residents, it is clear that there is a disconnect between how MPD views itself and the perception communities have of MPD's policing practices. As I consistently state, MPD should shift its approach from the use of violent tactics to community-based efforts and trust building. Ending the use of jump outs would be a great start towards creating a more non-violent approach to policing in D.C.. I will continue to work with my colleagues to find the best way to accomplish this change.

1 Comment

Comment

Grosso Supports Deputy Mayor’s Plan for Community Academy Public Charter School Closure

For Immediate Release
February 19, 2015

Contact: Dionne Johnson Calhoun
(202) 724-8105

 

Grosso Supports Deputy Mayor’s Plan for Community Academy Public Charter School Closure

Councilmember Grosso (I-At Large), Chairman of the Committee on Education released the following statement regarding the vote today by the District of Columbia Public Charter School Board (PCSB) to revoke the charter for Community Academy Public Charter School (CAPCS):

This morning, the PCSB voted to revoke the charter of CAPCS.  The Deputy Mayor for Education announced a collaborative plan for school year 2016-2017 that includes Friendship Public Charter Schools, D.C. Bilingual Public Charter School, and the Chancellor of D.C. Public Schools that will ensure continuity of education services for all students enrolled at CAPCS campuses or the online program.  The CAPCS charter will remain effective until June 30, 2015. 

I have been fully briefed by Deputy Mayor Niles on the future plans for the CAPCS campuses and the steps that will be taken to move the process forward to meet the needs of each student.  I will work closely with the Deputy Mayor and the Public Charter School Board to ensure that all of the necessary systems are in place for the successful implementation of this plan.

###

Comment

Comment

D.C., other cities debate whether legal immigrants should have voting rights

By Pamela Constable February 9, 2015, Washington Post

David Nolan and Helen Searls are a professional couple in the District, active in their children’s school and local civic associations. As taxpayers and longtime residents, they feel they have a duty to be involved in public life. But as legal immigrants who have not become U.S. citizens, they have no right to vote — even in local elections.

“It’s frustrating at election time to have no say in what’s happening,” said the British-born Searls, 54, who works at a media company. “Washington has people from all over the world. If they are engaged and participating in public issues, it benefits the city.”

Searls and Nolan are among 54,000 immigrants in the District — and about 12 million nationwide — who have been granted green cards that allow them to remain in the United States permanently. Most are sponsored by relatives or employers. They pay taxes and serve in the armed forces. Yet in all but a handful of localities, they have no voting rights.

Last month, for the third time in a decade, a bill was introduced in the D.C. Council to allow legal immigrants to vote locally. The measure has little chance of passage, but it is illustrative of a growing movement to expand local voting rights to noncitizens that has spawned similar proposals in several dozen communities across the country.

Most immigrant groups focus on promoting citizenship as the path to political influence, and the effort to enfranchise noncitizens remains controversial. It has succeeded in only a handful of places, including Chicago and Takoma Park, Md., but has been gaining traction recently in others, including New York City and Burlington, Vt., as the population of settled legal immigrants grows.

Student Maria Ferreira goes over her study book, which has questions about American history that she will need to know for a citizenship test. (Michael S. Williamson/The Washington Post)

Proponents point out that noncitizen voting was the norm early in American history, when new regions needed people to populate them. It was abandoned only after spates of anti-foreign sentiment in the 1860s and 1920s. Proponents have not urged that immigrants be allowed to vote for president, which is against federal law; they want them to be permitted a political role in their communities.

But opponents assert that the right to vote at any level is a defining quality of citizenship. They say it should not be easily granted to the foreign-born, who might have divided loyalties and insufficient knowledge of American democracy. And they point out that any legal permanent resident can apply to become a U.S. citizen with full voting rights after a five-year wait.

“To be a voter is to signify that you have cleared hurdles and that you understand what it means to be an American, with responsibilities as well as rights,” said Carl Horowitz, president of the National Legal and Policy Center, a conservative think tank in Falls Church, Va. Allowing noncitizens to vote, he said, “renders the idea of citizenship meaningless.”

Some opponents also think the campaign is part of a political scheme to create more Latino voters, who polls show tend to prefer Democrats — a concern that has spread with the protracted debate over illegal immigration. The largest numbers of green-card holders are from Mexico, followed by China, India and the Philippines.

D.C. Council member David Grosso (I-At Large), who introduced the immigrant voting bill last month, said his attempt in 2013 met with a “huge backlash,” and he acknowledged that the new proposal is unlikely to go far. A similar bill in 2004 also died.

“This is the right thing to do, but a lot of people still have a misguided understanding of what it’s about,” Grosso said. “I get e-mails and tweets from around the country saying I want to give the vote to people who snuck over the border.”

Despite such fears, advocates said the political impact of the noncitizen vote has often been marginal. In many cases, the impetus has come from liberal or civic groups, while the beneficiaries may be less enthusiastic or aware of the benefits.

Washingtonians David J. Nolan and his wife, Helen Searls, say they hope to become U.S. citizens so they can vote. (Michael S. Williamson/The Washington Post)

The pioneering community was Takoma Park, which gave legal immigrants voting rights in a 1991 referendum. Sean Whittaker, 46, a Canadian-born engineer who lives there, said that being able to vote made him feel as if he truly belonged in the community. In the town’s most recent election, the district candidate he supported won by six votes. “Maybe I made a difference,” Whittaker said.

Since then, four other Maryland towns have approved similar policies, although noncitizens cannot vote in state elections. In 2012, Del. Patrick L. McDonough (R-Baltimore County) sponsored a bill to ban noncitizens from voting in any Maryland locality, warning hyperbolically that even Osama bin Laden would have been allowed to vote in Takoma Park.

But the repercussions from Maryland’s experiment have been far from dire. Takoma Park officials say no more than a handful of immigrants have voted in any local election, where turnout is also generally low among citizens, too.

“This has not fulfilled either the worst predictions of critics nor the great hopes of supporters,” said state Sen. Jamin Raskin (D-Montgomery), a law professor who helped pave the legal path for the initiative. Still, he said, “it has remained an important statement of welcome, a way to give people a taste for the democratic process.”

Elsewhere in the United States, efforts to enfranchise foreign-born residents have spread to scattered municipalities, including liberal college towns such as Madison, Wis., and Amherst, Mass., and cities with large immigrant populations.

But such proposals have also encountered an array of hurdles, including conflicts with state laws, public antipathy and lack of awareness among immigrant groups. In 2010, voters in Portland, Maine, narrowly rejected a proposal for noncitizen voting in local elections, and a ballot measure in San Francisco to allow noncitizen parents to vote for school board members lost by 55 to 45 percent.

In Amherst, activist Vladi­mir Morales, who has spent a decade promoting the cause, said the idea has wide local support but continues to meet resistance from state legislators, who would have to amend home-rule laws to allow it.

“There is fear. The subject is immigration, and the representatives don’t want to touch it. It just keeps dying in committee,” said Morales, a U.S. citizen from Puerto Rico and a retired Amherst school board member.

In New York, home to about 1.3 million legal permanent residents, noncitizens were allowed to vote in school board elections from 1969 to 2003, when the board system was abolished. In recent years, a coalition of academic, political and immigrant groups has been trying to revive noncitizen voting rights and expand them to all local offices. Advocates said they are close to securing enough city council support to pass legislation this spring, but they lamented that the area’s major immigrant groups have not gotten involved.

“It’s hard to sell,” said David Andersson, the coalition coordinator. “Most voters don’t understand what legal immigrants are, and a lot of immigrant groups are focused on issues like deportation and wages. Sadly, voting is just not a priority.”

In the Washington area, few people know about Grosso’s proposal and few groups have expressed support, except the Service Employees International Union. But many of its members are not legal residents, and the union is strongly identified with illegal-immigrant causes.

Still, a variety of legal immigrants in the District said they would welcome being able to vote for city council and Board of Education members. Some said they wanted to become citizens but had difficulty passing the required tests in English.

At the Central American Resource Center in Northwest Washington, a half-dozen middle-aged Latinos bent over citizenship test workbooks one night last week, struggling with questions that ranged from “What is your current occupation?” to “Why did the colonists come to America?” and “What rights are in the Declaration of Independence?”

Maria Carpio, 57, a retired office cleaner from El Salvador, has been a legal resident since 1987. She said she had failed the citizenship test because of her limited eyesight and poor English, but that she volunteered to pass out fliers for a Latino school board candidate in November.

“I have worked hard here all my life,” Carpio said. “I should have the right to express my opinion.”

Comment

Comment

Chairman Grosso's Opening Remarks at Committee on Education Hearing on the Pre-K Student Discipline Amendment Act

I first introduced the Pre-K Student Discipline Amendment Act last year after the Office of the State Superintendent of Education released a report on out-of-school suspensions and expulsions in the District, which I had required in the Attendance Accountability Amendment Act of 2013. The report found that during the 2012-2013 school year, over 10,000 of the District’s public school students were suspended at least once.

Comment