Supporting standards comprise 35% of the U. S. History Test 19 (D)

1. Supporting standards comprise 35% of the U. S. History Test 19 (D)

2. Supporting Standard (19)The student understands changes over time in the role of government. The Student is expected to: (D) Discuss the role of contemporary government legislation in the private & public sectors such as the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, & the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009

3. Supporting Standard (19)The student understands changes over time in the role of government. The Student is expected to: (D) 1 Discuss the role of contemporary government legislation in the private & public sectors such as the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977

4. Community Reinvestment Act, 1977 The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA, P.L. 95-128, 91 Stat. 1147, title VIII of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1977,  is a U. S. federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to help meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. Congress passed the Act in 1977 to reduce discriminatory credit practices against low-income neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining. The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA, P.L. 95-128, 91 Stat. 1147, title VIII of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1977,  is a U. S. federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to help meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. Congress passed the Act in 1977 to reduce discriminatory credit practices against low-income neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining.

5. The Act instructs the appropriate federal financial supervisory agencies to encourage regulated financial institutions to help meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered, consistent with safe and sound operation. To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions. The Act instructs the appropriate federal financial supervisory agencies to encourage regulated financial institutions to help meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered, consistent with safe and sound operation. To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions.

6. The original Act was passed by the 95th U. S. Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on October 12, 1977. The CRA was passed as a result of national pressure to address the deteriorating conditions of American cities—particularly lower-income and minority neighborhoods. Community activists, such as Gale Cincotta of National People’s Action in Chicago, had led the national fight to pass, and later to enforce the Act. Several legislative and regulatory revisions have since been enacted. The CRA followed similar laws passed to reduce discrimination in the credit and housing markets including the Fair Housing Act of 1968, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974 and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 (HMDA). The original Act was passed by the 95th U. S. Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on October 12, 1977. The CRA was passed as a result of national pressure to address the deteriorating conditions of American cities—particularly lower-income and minority neighborhoods. Community activists, such as Gale Cincotta of National People’s Action in Chicago, had led the national fight to pass, and later to enforce the Act. Several legislative and regulatory revisions have since been enacted. The CRA followed similar laws passed to reduce discrimination in the credit and housing markets including the Fair Housing Act of 1968, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974 and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 (HMDA).

7. The CRA was passed to discourage redlining, a practice originally based on Home Owners’ Loan Corporation ”residential security maps,” like this 1937 security map of Philadelphia.

8. Controversies and criticisms The effects of the Community Reinvestment Act on the housing markets are controversial for a number of reasons. Economists have wondered if the CRA was – or at least had become – irrelevant, because it was not needed to encourage banks to make profitable loans to a variety of borrowers. In a 2003 research paper, economists at the Federal Reserve could not find clear evidence that the CRA increased lending and home ownership more in low income neighborhoods than in higher income ones. A 2008 Competitive Enterprise Institute study resulted in a similar finding. Further, results of a Chicago Fed study failed to support a hypothesis that banks respond to public and regulatory pressure exerted as a result of a downgrade in CRA rating by increasing low-income mortgage lending. Federal Reserve chair Ben Bernanke has stated that an underlying assumption of the CRA – that more lending equals better outcomes for local communities – may not always be true, pointing to “recent problems in mortgage markets.” However, he also notes that at least in some instances, “the CRA has served as a catalyst, inducing banks to enter under-served markets that they might otherwise have ignored.” The effects of the Community Reinvestment Act on the housing markets are controversial for a number of reasons. Economists have wondered if the CRA was – or at least had become – irrelevant, because it was not needed to encourage banks to make profitable loans to a variety of borrowers. In a 2003 research paper, economists at the Federal Reserve could not find clear evidence that the CRA increased lending and home ownership more in low income neighborhoods than in higher income ones. A 2008 Competitive Enterprise Institute study resulted in a similar finding. Further, results of a Chicago Fed study failed to support a hypothesis that banks respond to public and regulatory pressure exerted as a result of a downgrade in CRA rating by increasing low-income mortgage lending. Federal Reserve chair Ben Bernanke has stated that an underlying assumption of the CRA – that more lending equals better outcomes for local communities – may not always be true, pointing to “recent problems in mortgage markets.” However, he also notes that at least in some instances, “the CRA has served as a catalyst, inducing banks to enter under-served markets that they might otherwise have ignored.”

9. Supporting Standard (19)The student understands changes over time in the role of government. The Student is expected to: (D) 2 Discuss the role of contemporary government legislation in the private & public sectors such as the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 See also 19 B (5)

10. 4. Abuse of the Patriot Act— Several provisions of the Patriot Act were set to expire at the end of 2005 and, despite opposition from across the political spectrum and more than 400 community and state resolutions expressing concern about the Patriot Act, Congress reauthorized the law without reforming its most flawed provisions to bring these extraordinary powers back in line with the Constitution. Since then, the Justice Department’s Inspector General found that the FBI has issued hundreds of thousands of national security letters, a majority against U.S. persons, and many without any connection to terrorism at all. In September 2007, the ACLU won a landmark victory when a judge struck down the national security letter provision of the Patriot Act because part of the statute violated both the First Amendment and the separation of powers doctrine. 4. Abuse of the Patriot Act— Several provisions of the Patriot Act were set to expire at the end of 2005 and, despite opposition from across the political spectrum and more than 400 community and state resolutions expressing concern about the Patriot Act, Congress reauthorized the law without reforming its most flawed provisions to bring these extraordinary powers back in line with the Constitution. Since then, the Justice Department’s Inspector General found that the FBI has issued hundreds of thousands of national security letters, a majority against U.S. persons, and many without any connection to terrorism at all. In September 2007, the ACLU won a landmark victory when a judge struck down the national security letter provision of the Patriot Act because part of the statute violated both the First Amendment and the separation of powers doctrine.

11. The Patriot Act The USA PATRIOT Act is an Act of Congress that was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. The title of the act is a ten-letter backronym (USA PATRIOT) that stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001. The USA PATRIOT Act is an Act of Congress that was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. The title of the act is a ten-letter backronym (USA PATRIOT) that stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001. On May 26, 2011, President Barack Obama signed the PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act of 2011, a four-year extension of three key provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act: roving wiretaps, searches of business records (the “library records provision”), and conducting surveillance of “lone wolves”—individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities not linked to terrorist groups. On May 26, 2011, President Barack Obama signed the PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act of 2011, a four-year extension of three key provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act: roving wiretaps, searches of business records (the “library records provision”),and conducting surveillance of “lone wolves”—individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities not linked to terrorist groups.

12. 5. Government Secrecy — The Bush administration has been one of the most secretive and nontransparent in our history. The Freedom of Information Act has been weakened , the administration has led a campaign of reclassification and increased secrecy by federal agencies (including the expansion of a catch-all category of “sensitive but unclassified”), and has made sweeping claims of “state secrets” to stymie judicial review of many of its policies that infringe on civil liberties. It even refused to grant government investigators the security clearances they needed to investigate the illegal and unconstitutional NSA wiretapping program. The administration has also expressed interest in prosecuting journalists under the Espionage Act of 1917: essentially trying to quell the media’s role in exposing questionable, illegal and unconstitutional conduct, including the maintenance of secret CIA prisons abroad and the NSA wiretapping program. 5. Government Secrecy — The Bush administration has been one of the most secretive and nontransparent in our history. The Freedom of Information Act has been weakened , the administration has led a campaign of reclassification and increased secrecy by federal agencies (including the expansion of a catch-all category of “sensitive but unclassified”), and has made sweeping claims of “state secrets” to stymie judicial review of many of its policies that infringe on civil liberties. It even refused to grant government investigators the security clearances they needed to investigate the illegal and unconstitutional NSA wiretapping program. The administration has also expressed interest in prosecuting journalists under the Espionage Act of 1917: essentially trying to quell the media’s role in exposing questionable, illegal and unconstitutional conduct, including the maintenance of secret CIA prisons abroad and the NSA wiretapping program.

13. 6. Real ID — The 2005 Real ID Act, rammed through Congress by being attached to a unrelated, “must pass” bill, lays the foundation for a national ID card and makes it more difficult for persecuted people to seek asylum. Under the law, states are required to standardize their drivers licenses (according to a still undetermined standard) and link to databases to be shared with every federal, state and local government official in every other state. Conservative estimates place the cost of the program at $10 to 12 billion. Opposition to the bill and its implementation remains fierce, and comes from groups such as the National Governor’s Association and the National Council of State Legislators. 6. Real ID — The 2005 Real ID Act, rammed through Congress by being attached to a unrelated, “must pass” bill, lays the foundation for a national ID card and makes it more difficult for persecuted people to seek asylum. Under the law, states are required to standardize their drivers licenses (according to a still undetermined standard) and link to databases to be shared with every federal, state and local government official in every other state. Conservative estimates place the cost of the program at $10 to 12 billion. Opposition to the bill and its implementation remains fierce, and comes from groups such as the National Governor’s Association and the National Council of State Legislators.

14. 7. No Fly and Selectee Lists — The No-Fly list was established to keep track of people the government prohibits from traveling because they have been labeled as security risks. Since 9/11 the number of similar watch lists has mushroomed to about 720,000 names, all with mysterious or ill-defined criteria for how names are placed on the lists, and with little recourse for innocent travelers seeking to be taken off them. These lists name an estimated 30,000 to 50,000 people. The lists are so erroneous several members of Congress, including the late Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA), have been flagged. 7. No Fly and Selectee Lists — The No-Fly list was established to keep track of people the government prohibits from traveling because they have been labeled as security risks. Since 9/11 the number of similar watch lists has mushroomed to about 720,000 names, all with mysterious or ill-defined criteria for how names are placed on the lists, and with little recourse for innocent travelers seeking to be taken off them. These lists name an estimated 30,000 to 50,000 people. The lists are so erroneous several members of Congress, including the late Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA), have been flagged.

15. 8. Political Spying — Government agencies — including the FBI and the Department of Defense — have conducted their own spying on innocent and law-abiding Americans. Through the Freedom of Information Act, the ACLU learned the FBI had been consistently monitoring peaceful groups such Quakers, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Greenpeace, the Arab American Anti-Defamation Committee and, indeed, the ACLU itself. In August 2007 the Pentagon announced that it would be shutting down its TALON database program, which illegally gathered information on anti-war activists across the country. 8. Political Spying — Government agencies — including the FBI and the Department of Defense — have conducted their own spying on innocent and law-abiding Americans. Through the Freedom of Information Act, the ACLU learned the FBI had been consistently monitoring peaceful groups such Quakers, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Greenpeace, the Arab American Anti-Defamation Committee and, indeed, the ACLU itself. In August 2007 the Pentagon announced that it would be shutting down its TALON database program, which illegally gathered information on anti-war activists across the country.

16. Supporting Standard (19)The student understands changes over time in the role of government. The Student is expected to: (D) 3 Discuss the role of contemporary government legislation in the private & public sectors such as the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009

17. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), commonly referred to as the Stimulus or The Recovery Act, was an economic stimulus package enacted by the 111th United States Congress in February 2009 and signed into law on February 17, 2009, by President Barack Obama. To respond to the Great Recession, the primary objective for ARRA was to save and create jobs almost immediately. Secondary objectives were to provide temporary relief programs for those most impacted by the recession and invest in infrastructure, education, health, and renewable energy. The approximate cost of the economic stimulus package was estimated to be $787 billion at the time of passage, later revised to $831 billion between 2009 and 2019. The Act included direct spending in infrastructure, education, health, and energy, federal tax incentives, and expansion of unemployment benefits and other social welfare provisions. It also created the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), commonly referred to as the Stimulus or The Recovery Act, was an economic stimulus package enacted by the 111th United States Congress in February 2009 and signed into law on February 17, 2009, by President Barack Obama. To respond to the Great Recession, the primary objective for ARRA was to save and create jobs almost immediately. Secondary objectives were to provide temporary relief programs for those most impacted by the recession and invest in infrastructure, education, health, and renewable energy. The approximate cost of the economic stimulus package was estimated to be $787 billion at the time of passage, later revised to $831 billion between 2009 and 2019. The Act included direct spending in infrastructure, education, health, and energy, federal tax incentives, and expansion of unemployment benefits and other social welfare provisions. It also created the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board.

18. In addition to the Vice President Biden’s oversight role, a high-level advisory body, the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board (later renamed and reconstituted as the “President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness”), was named concurrent to the passage of the act. As well, the President named Inspector General of the United States Department of the Interior Earl Devaney and the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board to monitor administration of the Act. Eleven other inspectors general served on the RATB, and the board also had a Recovery Independent Advisory Panel. In late 2011, Devaney and his fellow inspectors general on RATB, and more who were not, were credited with avoiding any major scandals in the administration of the Act, in the eyes of one Washington observer. In addition to the Vice President Biden’s oversight role, a high-level advisory body, the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board (later renamed and reconstituted as the “President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness”), was named concurrent to the passage of the act. As well, the President named Inspector General of the United States Department of the Interior Earl Devaney and the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board to monitor administration of the Act. Eleven other inspectors general served on the RATB, and the board also had a Recovery Independent Advisory Panel. In late 2011, Devaney and his fellow inspectors general on RATB, and more who were not, were credited with avoiding any major scandals in the administration of the Act, in the eyes of one Washington observer.

19. The rationale for ARRA was from Keynesian macroeconomic theory, which argues that, during recessions, the government should offset the decrease in private spending with an increase in public spending in order to save jobs and stop further economic deterioration. Shortly after the law was passed, however, Nobel laureate Paul Krugman while supportive of the law, criticized the law for being too weak because it did not “even cover one third of the (spending) gap.” In February 2014, the White House stated that the Act saved or created an average of 1.6 million jobs a year between 2009 and 2012, thus averting another Great Depression in their view. The rationale for ARRA was from Keynesian macroeconomic theory, which argues that, duringrecessions, the government should offset the decrease in private spending with an increase in public spending in order to save jobs and stop further economic deterioration. Shortly after the law was passed, however, Nobel laureate Paul Krugman while supportive of the law, criticized the law for being too weak because it did not “even cover one third of the (spending) gap.” In February 2014, the White House stated that the Act saved or created an average of 1.6 million jobs a year between 2009 and 2012, thus averting another Great Depression in their view.

20. Both the House and the Senate versions of the bills were primarily written by Democratic Congressional committee leaders and their staffs. Because work on the bills started before President Obama officially took office on January 20, 2009, top aides to President-Elect Obama held multiple meetings with committee leaders and staffers. On January 10, 2009, President-Elect Obama’s administration released a report that provided a preliminary analysis of the impact to jobs of some of the prototypical recovery packages that were being considered. Both the House and the Senate versions of the bills were primarily written by Democratic Congressional committee leaders and their staffs. Because work on the bills started before President Obama officially took office on January 20, 2009, top aides to President-Elect Obama held multiple meetings with committee leaders and staffers. On January 10, 2009, President-Elect Obama’s administration released a report that provided a preliminary analysis of the impact to jobs of some of the prototypical recovery packages that were being considered.

21. Economists such as Martin Feldstein, Daron Acemoğlu, National Economic Council director Larry Summers, and Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences winners Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman favored a larger economic stimulus to counter the economic downturn. While in favor of a stimulus package, Feldstein expressed concern over the act as written, saying it needed revision to address consumer spending and unemployment more directly. Just after the bill was enacted, Krugman wrote that the stimulus was too small to deal with the problem, adding, “And it’s widely believed that political considerations led to a plan that was weaker and contains more tax cuts than it should have — that Mr. Obama compromised in advance in the hope of gaining broad bipartisan support.” Conservative economist John Lott was more critical of the government spending. Economists such as Martin Feldstein, Daron Acemoğlu, National Economic Council director Larry Summers, and Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences winners Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman favored a larger economic stimulus to counter the economic downturn. While in favor of a stimulus package, Feldstein expressed concern over the act as written, saying it needed revision to address consumer spending and unemployment more directly. Just after the bill was enacted, Krugman wrote that the stimulus was too small to deal with the problem, adding, “And it’s widely believed that political considerations led to a plan that was weaker and contains more tax cuts than it should have — that Mr. Obama compromised in advance in the hope of gaining broad bipartisan support.” Conservative economist John Lott was more critical of the government spending.

22. On January 28, 2009, a full-page advertisement with the names of approximately 200 economists who were against Obama’s plan appeared in The New York Timesand The Wall Street Journal. This included Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences laureates Edward C. Prescott, Vernon L. Smith, Gary Becker, and James M. Buchanan. The economists denied the quoted statement by President Obama that there was “no disagreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan that will help to jumpstart the economy.” Instead, the signers believed that “to improve the economy, policymakers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.” The funding for this advertisement came from the Cato Institute.

23. On February 8, 2009, a letter to Congress signed by about 200 economists in favor of the stimulus, written by the Center for American Progress Action Fund, said that Obama’s plan “proposes important investments that can start to overcome the nation’s damaging loss of jobs,” and would “put the United States back onto a sustainable long-term-growth path.” This letter was signed by Nobel Memorial laureates Kenneth Arrow, Lawrence R. Klein, Eric Maskin, Daniel McFadden, Paul Samuelson and Robert Solow. The New York Times published projections from IHS Global Insight, Moodys.com, Economy.com and Macroeconomic Advisers that indicated that the economy may have been worse without the ARRA. On February 8, 2009, a letter to Congress signed by about 200 economists in favor of the stimulus, written by the Center for American Progress Action Fund, said that Obama’s plan “proposes important investments that can start to overcome the nation’s damaging loss of jobs,” and would “put the United States back onto a sustainable long-term-growth path.” This letter was signed by Nobel Memorial laureates Kenneth Arrow, Lawrence R. Klein, Eric Maskin, Daniel McFadden, Paul Samuelson and Robert Solow. The New York Times published projections from IHS Global Insight, Moodys.com, Economy.com and Macroeconomic Advisers that indicated that the economy may have been worse without the ARRA.

24. Fini