HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 12-04-2006-7aORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: December 4, 2006
Action Agenda
Item No.
SUBJECT: Presentation of the Orange County Women's Agenda for 2006-2007
DEPARTMENT: Human Rights and Relations PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
Department and Orange
County Commission for
Women
ATTACHMENT(S):
Fact Sheet on 2006 Agenda Assembly
NCWU Draft Agenda
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Milan T. Pham, (919) 960-3877
PURPOSE: To present the results of the Orange County Women's Agenda Assembly to the
Board of County Commissioners and ask the Commissioners to prioritize the issues of the
Orange County Women's Agenda as identified by Orange County Women.
BACKGROUND: Once every two years the Orange County Commission for Women, in
conjunction with North Carolina Women United. (NCWU), hosts the Orange County Women's
Agenda Assembly. For approximately the last decade, women's groups in counties across the
state have hosted agenda assemblies the year preceding a legislative long-session. Women
have prioritized their issues by County and the cumulative results of the Agenda are calculated
and presented as the North Carolina Women's Agenda on Women's Advocacy Day.
On Thursday October 12, 2006, Orange County women convened at the Southern Human
Services Center to decide on the Orange County Women's. Agenda for 2007. The agenda was
organized with the assistance of several community partners including. Democracy NC, Planned
Parenthood and the Orange County Rape Crisis Center. Over 85 Orange County women
attended to express their views on the issues of greatest concern for Orange County .
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None
RECOMMENDATION (S): The Manager recommends that the Board accept the Orange
County Women's Agenda.
a
.~...4:__N.
a
~,
a_
2006 ®IVIEI~T' S AGETTDA A~ SE~~~I~Y
On October 12, 2006, the Orange County Corrunission for Women (CFW) and the Department of
Human Rights and Relations, in collaboration with North Carolina Women United and other
Orange County women's organizations, hosted the 2006 ORANGE COUNTY WoMEN's AGENDA
ASSEMBLY at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
This event was open to residents of Orange and surrounding counties and provided a venue in
which issues affecting women were discussed and prioritized. Speakers addressed six major
topics and they were as follows:
REP. VERLA INSKO addressed ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE
MS. KATUSHKA OLAVE addressed CHILD CARE
MS. MOLLY BEACHUM addressed CIVIC PARTICIPATION AND EQUALITY
MS. ERIN BYRD addressed ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY
DR. BARBARA CHAPMAN addressed EDUCATION
MS. CHIMI BOYD addressed VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
The Assembly was an open forum and participants were asked to discuss and prioritize the
aforementioned topics. Once prioritized,, the prioritized list will be submitted to North Carolina
Women United for presentation to the North Carolina Legislature during Advocacy Day 2007.
Eighty-five (85) people (including speakers and staff) attended this event. The attendees
prioritized the topics in the following descending order of importance:
#1 =ECONOMIC SELF SUFFICIENCY
#2 = ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE
#3 =EDUCATION
#4 =CHILD CARE
#5 =VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
#6 =CIVIC PARTICIPATION & EQUALITY
From Evaluation Form responses regarding the Assembly, the attendees voiced appreciation for
the Assembly, i.e., an opportunity to discuss women issues; found the facility (Southern Human
Services Center) an ideal venue to host the Assembly; was pleased with the organization of the
Assembly; and thought the food was a palatable delight.
Community Partners for the event were the Orange County Rape Crisis Center, Democracy
North Carolina, SEANC-District 19, The Women's Center, Carolina Women's Center, North
Carolina Women United, Orange County Democratic Women and PFLAG. Supporting
businesses were Mama Dip's Restaurant, Milltown Restaurant, La Residence and the
Mediterranean Deli.
Draft Women's Agenda
2006-2007
~~
o ~
0
N I WOMEN
C I UNITED
Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Coalition of NC®American Association of University Women NC®Business and
Professional Women of NC®Carteret County Women's Resource Center®Greater NC Coalition of Labor Union
Women®Democracy NC®Equality NC®General Federation of Women's Clubs of NC@IpaseLeague of Women
Voters of NC®Lillian's List of NC®Greensboro Comm. On the Status of Women®NARAL Pro-Choice
NC®National Association of Social Workers NCnInteract~NC Association of Women Attorneys®NC Coalition
Against Domestic ViolenceoNC Coalition Against Sexual Assault ®Meredith College-Dept. of Social Work~NC
Justice and Community Development Center®NC National Organization for Women®NC Gay and Lesbian
Attorneys®Planned Parenthood Health Systems®Onslow County Council for Women ®Orange County
Department of Human Rights and Relations/Commission for Women~Planned Parenthood of Central
NCmTriangle Older Women's League ®The Sisko Foundation®Western Carolina Women's Coalition, Inc. ®The
Women's Center [Triangle/Chapel Hill] ~+Women's International League for Peace and Freedom-Triangle
®Women's Resource Center in Alamance County®Women's Resource Center -Hickory
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I: ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE
AGING ..............:....................................................................................... 1
ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE ......................................................................... 3
ADOLESCENT PREGNANCY .....: ................................................................. 4
MENTAL HEALTH ..................................................................................... S
EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION .................................................................. 7
CHAPTER II: CIVIC PARTICIPATION AND EQUALITY '
EMPLOYMENT DISCR:IMINATION ...................:........................................... 8
EQUAL POLITICAL REPRESENTATION ....................................................... 9
HATE GRIM]ES ......................................................................................... 10
MARRIAGE AND FAMII,Y ........................................................................ 11
EDUCATION :...................................:.........................................:............. 12
CHAPTER III: ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY
~ HOUSING ......................................................................:.........................15
ECONOM[C SELF-SUFFICIENCY ............................................................... 16
CHAPTER IV: VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE .................................................:........................... 18
SEXUAL ASSAULT ..................................................................................19
F~EFERENCE S .................................................. ................: 20
I. Access to Health Care
Chapter I: Access to Health Care
~ Aging
Since Medicaid is the state's largest expense after public education, legislators are always looking for ways to
cut non-entitlement programs and keep eligibility levels low for benefits for the elderly. Ironically, the new
Part D Medicare prescription drug program and increases in Social Security payments have resulted in the loss
of Medicaid for some impoverished elderly North Carolinians. Few doctors, moreover, will accept new
Medicare patients. As a result, despite the federal Medicare and Medicaid programs, many elderly and
disabled residents lack access to the health care they need.
A report in 2006 to the legislative Study Commission on Aging confirmed what was already well known: that
there is an "institutional bias" in funding for long term care. That is, elderly and disabled people prefer to
remain at home, but funding is lacking for home care although available for care in adult care homes and
nursing homes. The Community Alternatives Program for Disabled Adults (CAP/DA), which provides funds
for home care, is limited in the number of persons that can be accepted, as is the Special Assistance In-Home
Project, which provides some funding for persons eligible for care in adult care homes. The Home and
Community Care Block Grant, which is used to provide various services such as Meals on Wheels, personal
care, and transportation, without regard to income (those who can pay are expected to assist with the cost of
their care), has a waiting list of approximately 10,000 persons. Increases in appropriations for this fund are
never adequate to make substantial reductions in the waiting list which continues to grow along with the
elderly population in the state. Adult Day and Adult Day Health Centers, which offer care and stimulating
activities during the day for elderly and disabled persons, constantly struggle with inadequate payments and
difficult costs for transportation. Yet they offer working families a means of keeping elderly or disabled
relatives at home.
A continuing problem is the turnover in care givers. Low pay, lack of benefits, very hard working conditions,
and lack of respect are some of the difficulties experienced by aides in stressful jobs in long term care
facilities. They may work at more than one job. This situation translates directly into lower quality care for
residents. A new kind of voluntary licensure for facilities named NOVA (new Organizational Vision Award)
will require those facilities who choose it to provide a supportive workplace, balanced workloads, training, and
career development for aides. Legislation to provide "pass-through" money that would go directly for wages or
benefits of caregivers has failed to gain support from legislators.
The substantial prescription drug benefit offered by the state's Health and Wellness Fund called Senior Care
($1200 a year during the last two years for elderly persons with incomes under 200 percent of Federal Poverty
Level) ended with the beginning of the less-generous Part D Medicare insurance system in 2006.Other states
with substantial benefits made some provision for continuation of a state assistance program; only North
Carolina did not. A continuing subsidy for some low-income persons and funding for medication management
for at-risk persons with multiple prescriptions are possibilities to be explored.
The elderly population in North Carolina is growing rapidly. Of the more than one million citizens over 65,
60.3 percent are women, and of those over 85, 66 percent are women. Aging issues therefore,, are women's
issues. And many of these women live in poverty. Their choices in long term care are limited. Families,
whatever their incomes, should be able to care for elderly relatives in their own homes if possible. When .
institutional care is the only option, the facility should be staffed by well-trained caregivers and provide
excellent care.
2006-2007 Women's Draft Agenda
I. Access to Health Care
.RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
Help North Carolina's older citizens live independent lives by
• Increasing funding for Community Alternatives Program and the Special Assistance In-Home Project to
enable frail elderly persons to live at home instead of in institutional care.
• Providing "pass-through" funds for wages and benefits for aides in long-term care facilities to improve
hiring and retention of trained workers.
• Forming a supplementary plan for a quality permanent prescription drug benefit with medication
management for low-income elderly.
• Increasing funding for the Home and Community Care Block Grant for services to elderly persons living
at home.
•.-_- ~-,,~,e,.,~ tip.
_ .z
~`~ ,~
~ ;~ 4
~ ~~~
~.
~ Y
k.:,~ .
2006-2007 Women's Draft Agenda 2
I. Access to Health Care
0
Access to Health cage
Over twenty-percent or approximately 1 in 5 women of childbearing age in NC is uninsured according to The
Alan Guttmacher Institute, whose fmdings were based on the Current Population Survey. According to 2003
figures recently released by the U.S. Census Bureau, NC had the tenth largest growth in percentage of people
without health insurance. Other studies suggest that even more women are underinsured, which means that
their health insurance does not adequately meet their health needs such as providing coverage for preventive
health care or necessary and costly medical procedures.
The importance of preventive health care, which can aid in earlier diagnosis of disease, cannot be
overestimated. The difference in outcome between women who have access to health care and those who do
not underscores the need for preventive care. According to the 2003 Wo»aen's Health Repo~•t Cap°d, issued by
the NC Program for Women's Health Research, a collaborative program of The School of Medicine, The
School of Public Health, and the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research and the University of NC
at Chapel Hill, while Caucasian women have a higher incidence of breast cancer, minority women have a
much higher death rate from breast cancer. Earlier diagnosis through mammograms often plays a critical role
in preventing death.
The disparity in health care access has devastating results on a statewide basis. According to the Henry Kaiser
Family Foundation, NC has the sixth highest rate of infant mortality in the nation. Almost 24 percent of
African American women attend late or no prenatal care. The "2003 NC Women's Health Report Card" states
that the rate of infant mortality for African Americans in NC is more than double that for white North
Carolinians.
Accessible family planning services help to reduce the rate of infant and maternal mortality by helping women
space pregnancies so that their bodies are better prepared for pregnancy and childbirth. For many women,
reproductive health care is primary health care. Family plamiing services provide not only contraception but
also cancer screening, disease prevention, treatment of sexually transmitted diseases and other public health
services. Unfortunately, despite gains in greater access to family planning services through county health
departments, far too many women remain in need of this basic care.
According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, roughly one-half of the women in NC who are in need of
contraceptive services and supplies are in need of publicly supported services because they can not otherwise
afford this preventive care. Each year, family planning clinics in NC serve almost 200,000 women, including
over 50,000 teenagers. County health departments serve seventy-six percent of the women served by publicly
supported family planning clinics in NC. Studies conducted by the Alan Guttmacher Institute show that every
dollar spent on family planning services saves three dollars in spending on public assistance.
Women who have fewer resources also have fewer reproductive choices. The state of NC once recognized that
a woman's right to make responsible decisions regarding childbearing should not be based solely on her ability
to pay for full reproductive freedom. The State Abortion Fund was established in NC immediately following
the passage of the federal Hyde Amendment in 1976, which barred the use of federal Medicaid money to pay
for abortions in most cases. Initially, the State Abortion Fund was accessible to women based on financial
need alone. In 1995, the fund was decimated. The funding was reduced from over one million dollars to just
$50,000 and restrictions were placed on it that rendered it almost entirely inaccessible. While fair-minded
people may hold different opinions on abortion, the right of a woman to make personal decisions about when
or whether she will become a parent for the first or fourth time should not be based solely on her ability to pay
for that freedom.
According to the 2003 Women Health Repo°t Ca~~d, the rate of sexually transmitted infections, including
HIV/AIDS, has increased among all racial groups. In fact, heterosexual women, especially young women of
color, are the fastest growing population infected with HIV. The bottom line is that too many women in NC
are in jeopardy of poor health outcomes simply because they do not have access to preventive and reliable
health care.
2006-2007 Women's DraftAgenda 3
I. Access to Health Care
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
• Amend the state constitution to recognize health care as a fundamental right.
• Increase funding to Public Health Departments to provide adequate, accessible family planning services
and information to underserved women.
• Remove restrictions and adequate fund the State Abortion Fund.
~ Adolescent Pregnancy
Preventing adolescent pregnancy is an ongoing public policy need in NC. In 2002, more than 18,000 girls ages
10-19 became pregnant -representing 51 teen pregnancies per day. Fortunately, the state's adolescent
pregnancy rates continue to decline, and since 1990, NC's rates have declined by more than 30 percent.
Compromising the news regarding declining rates is the fact that the state still has the thirteenth highest birth
rate for 15-19-year-olds in the US. NC also has the nation's highest birth rate among Hispanic teens. State
officials have taken some important steps to address teen pregnancy, and public funding is provided for
prevention programs and initiatives.
Currently in NC, 61 local programs receive full or partial support from a $3.3 million plus per year
appropriation that supports adolescent pregnancy prevention projects. Federal Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) funds represent $1.5 million of the $3.3 million. Many of these funded projects are
located in the poorest communities with the highest teen pregnancy rates. The funds are used to support
primary prevention programs (meaning prevention of first pregnancies) and secondary prevention programs
(prevention of second pregnancies, including support and encouragement to teen parents in completing high
school or GED requirements, and in the improvement of parenting skills). Before these funds were cut in 2002,
seventy-one (71) local programs were being funded. Funds appropriated during the 2004 Legislative Session,
did not fall below the 2003 level of funding. However, cuts that were made in 2002 have not been restored
and many local communities throughout NC have fewer or no resources to combat teen pregnancies and out-
of-wedlock births. The goal is not only to restore funding to the 2001 level, but also to increase funding for
these important prevention programs so that more young people can be served.
While strides are being made in the state, much more needs to be done. In tandem with preventing teen
pregnancy, more emphasis should be placed on preventing sexually transmitted diseases. NC has, according to
data from the CDC, the - (1) seventh highest rate of syphilis infection in the United States, (2) seventh highest
rate of chlamydia infection in the United States, and (3) fifth highest rate of gonorrhea infection in the United
States. Adolescents in NC are much more likely to become infected with syphilis compared to adolescents in
other states. NC's adolescent population is more likely to become infected with chlamydia compared to
adolescents in other states. (Chlamydia, if untreated, causes sterilization.) Adolescents in the state are more
likely to become infected with gonorrhea compared to adolescents in other states. In addition, according to a
Yale University study, teen girls who have recently had a baby may have a higher risk of contracting an STD
in the year after giving birth. Researchers stress the need for postpartum follow-up for young mothers that
includes STD prevention as well as pregnancy prevention.
Adolescents are the least likely segment of the population to use health services. Without assurances and
access to confidential health services, teenagers often will not seek care or will stop seeking the care they
desire and need. NC law permits adolescents to receive confidential health services related to pregnancy,
sexually transmitted infections including HIV/AIDS, mental health, and substance abuse. Health care
professionals will and are required by law to notify a minor's parents or guardians if the minor's life is in
danger. While it is desirable that teenagers tallc to their parents about important health issues, it is more
2006-2007 Women's D~•aftAgenda 4
1. Access to Health Care
0
important not to delay appropriate medical care. Laws and policies should encourage, not discourage, young
people to seek the health care they need and enable them to talk candidly with health care providers, and that is
why NC's law allowing minors to consent to certain health services should be safeguarded.
Another avenue for addressing teen pregnancy as well as the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases in
adolescents is through responsible age-appropriate sex education in NC's public schools. Comprehensive sex
education provides balanced instruction that includes abstinence as well as accurate information about
contraception and the prevention of sexually transmitted infections. Comprehensive sex education works,
which is why it is supported by most major medical organizations, including the .American Medical
Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Nurses Association. NC's Abstinence
Until Marriage Law (GS 115C-81(el) that was enacted in 1995 contains flaws and inaccurate medical
references to sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS/IIIV. Those errors should be corrected.
Teenagers need accurate and reliable information about their sexual and reproductive health and the prevention
of sexually transmitted infections.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
Restore state funding for pregnancy prevention programs and initiatives to the 2001 funding level, and
then increase these funds to address the growing needs of the state's adolescent population.
Correct the medical errors and flaws in the Abstinence Until Marriage Law (GS 115C-81(el) and support
age-appropriate and developmentally appropriate comprehensive sex education and abstinence-plus sex
education programs that are accurate and honest; promote healthy, positive, and responsible decisions; and
that respect the value and the rights of all individuals..
Safeguard adolescents' access to confidential health care services by preserving the law (General Statute
90-21.5) that allows a minor to consent to limited health services such as diagnosis and treatment of
substance abuse, mental health, sexually transmitted diseases including HIV/AIDS, and pregnancy.
Mental I~ealtli
It is estimated that one in five persons will, over their lifetime, experience a mental illness. However,
according to the Surgeon Generals report on mental health released in 1999, less than one third of adults with a
diagnosable mental disorder and even a smaller proportion of children, receive any mental health services in a
given year. Studies have shown that mental disorders are treatable: the 80% successful treatment rate is higher
than for illnesses like heart disease. Why then the disparity? The stigma attached to mental illness, the cost of
treatment, and the fragmentation and lack of service availability are major factors which prevent people from
getting treatment. The Surgeon General's report also reminds us of the impact of mental illness: "Untreated,
mental disorders can lead to lost productivity, unsuccessful relationships, and significant stress and
dysfunction. Mental illness in adults can have a significant and continuing effect on children in their care."
Mood disorders, including depression, will affect 7 percent of .Americans in a given year. For women;
depression may be of particular concern. Recent studies have shown that women are two and a half times more
likely to experience depression and that depression has a chromosomal link creating this disparity. Two thirds
of those getting treatment for depression do so in primary health care settings and primary care, doctors see
most patients whose depression goes undiagnosed as they come in for routine care.
What many of those with private insurance fmd however is that treatment for mental disorders is treated
differently than that for `physical' disorders. Mental health treatment, when included in health plans, is often
limited by lifetime caps on dollar amounts, caps on the number of annual visits, and or higher co-payments to
visit a mental health professional. In the face of mounting evidence that mental illness is biologically based,
with genetic and chromosomal links, and despite evidence of the higher effective treatment rates for mental
2006-2007 Women's DraftAgenda 5
i. Access to Health Care
~o
health disorders when compared to many physical disorders, insurance companies continue to discriminate
against persons with mental illness seeking treatment.
Those uninsured, or on Medicaid, are dependent on the pubic mental health system in North Carolina. In
March of 2000, in response to a call for reform of North Carolinas public mental health system, the Division of
Mental Health, Developmental disabilities and Substance Abuse Services presented to a Legislative Study
Committee some staggering estimates of deficits in the mental health system; based on epidemiological
studies, waiting lists, and statewide surveys, 670,000 adults and children in North Carolina were in need of
mental health, developmental disability and substance abuse services estimated the at cost 2.5 billion dollars.
Recent figures from Fiscal Research Division at the Legislature estimated that 598,780 adults and children in
North Carolina have a serious mental illness and that 44% of those will seek help from the public. funded
system due to their level of disability and lack of health coverage.
Factoring in federal funding, state appropriations, and local funding, current fmancing of this system is
estimated to serve only the most severely in need. Note that 250,000 people in North Carolina would be left
with unmet mental health service needs and more than likely a large percentage of the 425,000 served would
be left with out some of the needed services. In our current health care system the disabled population is
dependent on institutions and government support. Those with mental illness are at high risk for homelessness
and incarceration, and are less able to fulfill their potential.
In light of research, best practices for mental health care, and the `Olmstead decision" that calls for care in the
least restrictive setting, North Carolina has begun shifting from an institutional focus in providing care to
providing care in community based settings. This shift requires not only a change in where services are
provided but calls for services to be provided with an emphasis on supporting the needs and desires of
consumers. A system in the process of reform requires not only the dedication of consumers and professionals
to making the transition but the commitment of state appropriations to bridge the shift of dollars from the
current institutional care to the development of needed supports and services in the community.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
• Enact comprehensive mental health parity legislation in health coverage ending discriminatory difference
between rr~ental and physical health care
• Urge lawmakers to build on the recent increase in community-based mental health funding to ensure
services to those in need.
• Support polices and programs that connect primary care and mental health services.
2006-2007 Women's Draft Agenda 6
I I
~ Emergency Contraception
Emergency Contraception in the Emergency Room for Survivors of Sexual Assault
An estimated 25,000 women become pregnant as a result of rape each year in the United States.
Approximately 88 percent, or 22,000 of these unintended pregnancies could be prevented if victims are
provided access to emergency contraception (EC). In NCWU's 2004-2005 study regarding the dispensation
of EC to victims of sexual assault in emergency rooms, one in four hospitals in North Carolina do not provide
EC to survivors of sexual assault. With 5,000 sexual assault victims seeking help at emergency rooms in
North Carolina each year, this results in 1,000 rape victims who are sent away without being provided
emergency contraception. Sexual assault victims living in rural counties will disproportionately encounter
hospitals which do not have a standard policy to dispense EC. Also relevant to the administration of EC is the
availability of a SANE program. According to NCWU's research, hospitals with a SANE program are more
likely to offer information and provide EC than hospitals without a program.
The Federal Drug Administration has found Plan B, the brand name for emergency contraception, to be a safe,
effective, and approved method of preventing pregnancy after unprotected intercourse. Emergency
contraception is a high dose of birth control that does not affect an already established pregnancy, but instead
prevents an impending pregnancy by inhibiting ovulation, fertilization, or by preventing implantation of a
fertilized egg. Providing EC in emergency rooms to sexual assault victims is imperative because EC is time
sensitive. EC reduces the likelihood of pregnancy by 89% if taken within 72 hours of intercourse (although it
can be effective up to even 120 hours).
Nine states -California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina
and Washington -mandate that hospital providers offer EC to women after sexual assault. In 2005, Congress
introduced two bills (HR 2928 and S 1264) which would require federally funded hospitals to offer EC to
victims of sexual assault. The House found in HR 2928 that many hospitals routinely do riot offer EC to
women seeking treatment and that nine out often women of reproductive age are unaware of EC, increasing
the importance that hospitals offer EC because most women are unlikely to ask for it.
The America College of Emergency Physicians, American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and the
American Medical Association all support making EC available in emergency rooms. The American College
of Emergency Physicians includes dispensation of EC' to rape victims in its standard protocol. All hospitals in
North Carolina should provide EC in their standard ER care for survivors of sexual assault. regardless of the
physician on duty.
Health care providers have a duty to ensure that patients receive accurate information and appropriate care.
Failure to provide this care jeopardizes women's health and violates medical ethics. Medical ethics and sound
science -not religious ideology- should determine~medical decisions.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
The General Assembly should support legislation that requires hospitals to provide EC to survivors of sexual
assault on-site regardless of the physician on duty.
2006-2007 YVonzen's D~~aftAgenda 7
II: Civic Participation and Equality
l`a
Chapter 11: Civic Participation and Equality
~ Employment Discrimination
Acts of discrimination and hatred are daily occurrences in the lives of American women, particularly women
of color, immigrants, poor and disabled women, aging women and lesbian, bisexual and transgender women.
According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC),
discrimination iri employment based on gender and pregnancy are,
becoming more prevalent rather than less. In addition, there is a
substantial increase in the number of complaints filed under the Equal
Pay Act and because of sexual harassment. Women still experience
problems with the glass ceiling and are still paid only 75 cents on the
dollar for equal work with their male counterparts. .
County and municipal governments should promote equal treatment of all individuals by improving
complainants and respondents access to the administrative process for employment discrimination related
complaints; increasing opportunities for mediation of claims; providing parties with a faster, less expensive
and more effective resolution to complaints; and providing more technical assistance ;to businesses, employers,
and housing providers to prevent discriminatory practices through educational workshops and seminars. Local
ordinances should protect all people from being discriminated against because of their race, color, sex,
religion, national origin, familial status, age, disability, veteran's status, sexual orientation, and gender
identity/expression. Counties and municipal governments should offer remedies available under existing state
and federal law; a jury or a court cannot award punitive damages unless they can be awarded under existing
federal or state law:
Recent litigation has curtailed enforcement efforts of localities seeking to
enforce antidiscrimination ordinances. This estoppel has created backlogs
of employment discrimination complaints and inadequate resolutions of
other complaints. '
Currently, state and federal law offer no protection against discrimination
based on sexual orientation or gender identity/expression. In 2005, House
Bill 1203, State Government Equal Employment Opportunity, sought to
-- -- amend the State Personnel Act to ensure that state and local government
employees could work free from fear of discrimination. This legislation should be reintroduced and passed,
along with broader legislation
barring discrimination by private employers.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
General Assembly should support Anti-Discrimination Ordinances legislation. This bill gives county and
municipal governments with populations of 100,000 or more, clear authority to adopt ordinances that
prevent discrimination in the areas of housing, employment and public accommodations and gives
residents a private right of action.
General Assembly should pass legislation guaranteeing that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people
are free to work free from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity/expression in
both public and private employment.
2006-2007 Women's Draft Agenda
I1: Civic Participation and Equality
-3
~ Equal Political Representation
SO MUCH AT STAKE, YET SO LITTLE SAY
Women have a tremendous amount at stake in our current political system. Their active participation as voters
and candidates can impact important issues, including domestic violence, pay equity and health care, that
affect their daily lives. Even though 55% of the registered voters in Nortli Carolina are women, they are sorely
scarce in elected offices. Women hold less than one-fourth of the seats in the N.C. General Assembly, less than
one-sixth of all elected offices and one-third of appointed seats on boards and commissions, despite research
showing that a majority of likely voters are supportive of women as candidates. Voting is not enough. To gain
real political power, we must elect people who truly understand women's concerns.
REMOVING BARRIERS TO EQUAL PARTICIl'ATION
We can help to even the playing field by expanding "Clean Elections," increasing voter participation and
advocating women's appointment to state and local boards and commissions.
Money is one reason that the composition ofpolicy-making bodies does not reflect women's voting strength.
As campaign costs rise, those traditionally excluded from the political process -including women- are at a
disadvantage and our voices are not heard. In NC, female candidates raise, on average, 85% of what male
candidates raise and the candidate who raises the most wins nearly 90% of the time, leaving women facing
stiff odds.
"Clean Elections," as adopted in 2000 by Maine and Arizona, provide an alternative to the money chase,
offering optional public funding to candidates who demonstrate broad community support and accept strict
fundraising and spending limits. These states enjoyed an increase in women legislative candidates. Even .
Arizona's governor, Janet Napolitano, ran as a Clean Elections. candidate. In 2002, the NC General Assembly
passed the Judicial Campaign Reform Act, providing this alternative for NC appellate court candidates. In the
2005-2006 sessions, we must work to defend and fully fund the program and expand it to include other NC
races.
Women must also increase our role as voters. NC ranks among the worst 15 states in the nation for voter
participation. While 55% of voters are women, hundreds of thousands of women currently don't vote. Same-
day registration, a practical reform that was introduced in the 2005 session, is aUeady offered in the six states
with. substantially higher voter participation than ours. Adoption would allow an unregistered, eligible voter to
register and vote at an Early Voting Site -- all at the same time.
Finally, we must encourage the appointment of qualified women to state and local boards and commissions
and demand accurate and timely reporting of demographic data on appointees. Legislation passed in 1998
mandates proportional gender representation and requires annual reporting to the Secretary of State. We must
urge the General Assembly to appropriate funds for this effort and to create a website to alert all NC citizens to
openings on boards and commissions.
RECOM~LIENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
• The General Assembly should expand the Judicial Campaign Reform program to include General
Assembly, Council of State, and Gubernatorial candidates, and authorize local communities to provide a
public funding option in local races.
2006-2007 Women's D~°aftAgenda 9
II: Civic Participation and Equality
lit'
• The General Assembly should authorize the phasing in of Same-Day Registration beginning with early
voting sites in all 100 counties, and expanding as quickly as is feasible.
• The General Assembly should appropriate money for the Secretary of State's office for reporting and
tracking of demographic data on appointees, and to provide for a state website to publicize current
openings on appointed boards and commissions.
Hate Crimes
According to the Southern Poverty and Law Center (SPCC), every hour a hate crime is committed. Experts
recognize that hate crimes are undercounted. Of those reported, eight blacks, three whites, three gays, three
Jews, and one Latino become hate crime victims everyday. (Did these experts count women?)
Although progress has been made in improving inter-group relations in the
United States and in NC, stereotypes accompanied by fear remain
commonplace. Without education as well as constructive steps to build
understanding on a personal level, stereotypes will lead to discrimination,
racist policies, and eventually, hate crimes. Organizations that promote
and nurture hatred of others because of their race, religion, sex, disability,
or sexual orientation are loosely referred to as hate groups. According to an
Intelligence Report from the SPCC, there are only six states with more
known hate groups than NC. There are 22 active hate groups in NC, among which are ten Ku Klux Klan and
six Neo=Nazi groups
Women must respond to the challenge of hate groups and hate violence. Women's organizations are often in
an ideal position to build alliances with people of color and their organizations around issues of community
safety.. For. example, women have historically raised issues of community safety with local police. This
relationship can be leveraged to secure greater access to the police for others who are. victims of harassment
and hate crimes. Alliances of mutual understanding built on open and frank communication need to be
developed. There are many models for cross-cultural communication being used today; e.g. the Study Circles
Program
Communities have the ability to accomplish a great deal in reducing hate crimes. Communities can inquire if
local police have personnel trained by the NC Justice Academy on hate crime reporting and verification as
well as encourage untrained officers to obtain such training. Also, local media can be enlisted to support
officer training in identifying and reporting hate crimes, while giving positive local support and publicity. to
officers who receive this training. The State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) -Division of Criminal Information
will provide technical assistance to local agencies for hate crime reporting. Although none of this training is
mandatory, without it, the SBI's Division of Criminal Information cannot accept crime reports to local police
departments. This contributes to the undercount of hate crimes in the NC.
NC's Ethnic Intimidation Act, our state hate crime law, fails to address hate crimes and bias related incidents.
against women. The current law provides protections only for crimes motivated by race, color, religion,
national origin and ethnicity, failing to address crimes motivated by bias based on sex, age, sexual orientation,
gender identity/expression, and disability status.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
• General Assembly should support legislation that would add sex, age, sexual orientation, gender, gender
identity/expression, and disability status to the existing Ethnic Intimidation law. ,
• Assure that local schools have access to SPLC's "Teaching Tolerance" curricula or other similar materials.
2006-2007 Women's Draft Agenda 10
II: Civic Participation and Equality
-S
~ Marriage and Family
The 2000 census identified more than 16,000 same-sex couples in NC, including at least one male and one
female couple in every county. These numbers are thought to be a substantial undercount, as many same-sex
couples do not wish to self-identify to a government that discriminates against them. These couples are denied
equal protection under the law under the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOHA). Because same-sex
couples are denied access to civil marriage in NC, they are unable to access hundreds of state rights and
benefits and more than 1100 federal rights and benefits.
These policies are especially hard on lesbian families, due to the income disparity between men and women.
When family emergencies arise, these families don't have the same rights and resources to help them cope as
heterosexual families. Although more than one third of lesbian couples are raising children, NC does not allow
the same-sex partner of a legal parent to adopt their partner's children as a second parent. Children of gay and
lesbian parents can be denied access to their second parent's health insurance and other benefits, potentially
burdening the state with additional uninsured minors. Laws governing adoption, artificial insemination, and
family planning should not discriminate against lesbian, bisexual, transgender women, same-sex couples, or
single heterosexual women to ensure that all children have the opportunity to grow up in a loving family.
Recently, conservative legislators have attempted to write discrimination into the state and federal
constitutions by amending them to deny same-sex couples access to marriage or any similar form of
relationship recognition. If legislators are allowed to use the constitutions to address hot-button social issues
such as same-sex marriage, surely amendments seeking to limit a woman's right to choose or to end
affirmative action cannot be far behind. The state and federal constitutions should be used to protect rights, not
diminish them.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
General Assembly should oppose any efforts to use the state or federal constitution to diminish the rights .
of any group of people, including denying recognition of marriage or similar relationships to same-sex
couples:
Local governments should adopt policies extending equal benefits to domestic partners of their employees.
~'
2006-2007 Women's D~~aftAgenda 11
!~
~ North Carolina Public Education K - I Z
The original Constitution of North Carolina, adopted on December 18, 1776 included the specific
provision "that a school or schools shall be established by the legislature, for the convenient instruction
of youth." The NC Supreme Court reaffirmed in 2004 that every child in NC is entitled to an equal
opporhanity to receive a sound basic education. The disagreement is on the question of how many
dollars are needed to provide this equal sound basic education.
NC EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS (current)
ABCs: The ABCs of Public Education. The ABCs is North Carolina's comprehensive plan to improve public
schools that is based on three goals: strong Accountability, an emphasis on student mastery of Basic skills, and
as much local Control as possible. The model focuses on schools meeting growth expectations for student
achievement as well as on the overall percentage of students who scored at or above grade level. The model uses
end-of--grade tests in grades 3-8 in reading and mathematics to measure growth at the elementary and middle
school levels and end-of-course tests to measure growth at the high school level and at the middle school level
where appropriate. Certified staff receive bonuses based on student growth and schools receive recognition
based on the percentage of students' scores at or above grade level. New growth formulas and performance
composites will be used for ABC calculations beginning for 2005-06 assessment results
NCLB: No Child Left Behind. NCLB is the more recent reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary
Authorization Act and represents a sweeping cliange in the federal govermnent's role in local public education.
NCLB has a variety of goals, but the most dominant ones are for every school to be at 100 percent proficiency
by 2013-14 as measured by student achievement on state tests and for every child to be taught by a "Highly
Qualified" teacher.. The new law emphasizes new standards for teachers and new consequences for Title I
schools that do not meet student achievement standards for two or more consecutive years. North Carolina is
one of five states approved to participate in a national pilot to switch the order of the first two years of sanctions
that the No Child Left Behind federal law applies to schools in Title I School Improvement, according to notice
received by State Superintendent June Atkinson from the U.S. Department of Education. The pilot allows seven
districts in North Carolina to offer supplemental educational services, or free tutoring, to economically
disadvantaged students in the first year a school is in Title I School Improvement instead of public school choice
options, the usual first year sanction. The seven districts in the pilot are: Burke, Cumberland, Durham, Guilford,
Northampton, Pitt and Robeson. In public school choice, parents are given the option to transfer their children
to another school designated by the district that is not in Title I School Improvement. When both the public
school choice and tutoring options are available to a family, parents may choose the transfer option or tutoring
services, but not both. Public school choice is offered to all students in a Title I school. Extra tutoring services,
or supplemental educational services, are offered only to economically disadvantaged students, regardless of the
level of their academic performance. In North Carolina, economically disadvantaged is defined as qualifying for
free or reduced-price lunch. More information about NCLB, Title I, SES and other related topics is available at
www.ncpublicschools.or nclb. Questions also may be directed to the NC Department of Public Instruction
(NCDPl) Communications division at 919.807.3450.
MORE AT FOUR: The More at Four Program is North Carolina's statewide pre-kindergarten initiative for at-
risk 4-year-olds, designed to help children be more successful when they enter school. The purpose of More at
Four is to provide a high quality educational program for at-risk children in the year before kindergarten entry.
Children are eligible for More at Four based on poverty status and other risk factors with priority for service
given to children who are otherwise unserved in a preschool program. To learn more about the More at Four
Program, please contact the More at Four State Office. Parents or caregivers interested in enrolling a child in
More at Four should call 1-866-NC-PREK4.
2006-2007 Women's DraftAgenda 12
17
SMART START: Smart Start is apublic-private initiative that provides early education funding to all of the
state's 100 counties. Smart Start funds are administered at the local level through local nonprofit organizations
called Local Partnerships. The North Carolina Partnership for Children (NCPC) is the statewide non-profit
organization that provides oversight and technical assistance for local partnerships. Services at the local level
range depending on local needs. Funding for Smart Start is currently $202.5 million in state funds. Smart Start
has raised more than $257 million in donations since it began.
Currently; 79 local partnerships are established throughout the state to administer funding and programs. Smart
Start funds are used to improve the quality of child care, make child care more affordable and accessible,
provide access to health services and offer family support. Smart Start has achieved tremendous results in these
areas and continues to strive to reach all children in North Carolina.
Smart Start has garnered much national recognition and is considered a model for comprehensive early
childhood education initiatives. In 2001, the NCPC established a National Technical Assistance Cerrter to assist
other states with the development of an early education initiative.
PART II LEAIVDRO DECISION
Background In 1994
parents, school boards and students from five low-wealth counties filed a lawsuit saying that the State did not
provide enough money for them to provide a quality education for their children. •Six urban school districts also
asked to be parties to the Leandro lawsuit. The urban counties said that the state funding formula did not
provide them with sufficient money to educate their at-risk students and students for whom English is their
second language. In 2004 the state Supreme Court reaffirmed the constitutional right of every student to have
the opportunity to receive a sound basic education and ordered the state to assume responsibility for the
educational deficiencies.
Minimum Leandro Requirements
Every classroom must be staffed with a competent, certified, well-trained teacher who is teaching the
Standard Course of Study by implementing effective educational methods that provide differentiated,
individualized instruction, assessment and remediation to the students iri that class.
A well-trained competent principal with the leadership skills and the ability to hire and to retain
competent, certified and well trained teachers must lead every class room.
Every school must be provided, in the most cost effective manner, the resources necessary to support
effective instruction within that school to meet the needs of all children, including at-risk children.
2006 Update EDUCATION BUDGET ITEMS
Disadvantaged Student Supplemental Funding (DSSF) Adds $27 million to local school systems to help
students at risk of academic failure and will be distributed among 99 districts in the state. The original 16
plaintiff districts will continue to receive DSSF at the same level as in 2005, $22.5 million.
Low Wealth Supplemental Funding $41.9 million will be provided to low wealth counties for local school
districts
Restore Base Budge Funding Eliminates the $44 million discretionary cut to school budgets
More at Four $84.6 million will allow 3200 new program slots and increase funding per slot by $200.
2006-2007 Women's Draft Agenda 13
~S
ABC bonuses $90 million for schools that met or exceeded expected growth. Gives additional funds to support
evaluation of the effectiveness of schools' use of DSSF and Low Wealth monies and how the Dept of
Instruction (DPI) assists schools in using the money most effectively.
Director of High School Turnaround Provides funds for a coordinator to assist districts in improving
composite scores of persistently low performing high schools
School Nurse Funding Adds 65 more school nurse positions
Exceptional Children Increases funding per special needs student to $2972.
Communities in Schools $1 million for non-profit programs to help at risk students succeed in school
Literacy Coaches $4.8 million for hiring 100 school based literacy coaches. The State Board of Education will
allocate positions to 100 schools with the lowest average scored on 8~' grade end-of--grade test in reading.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
The 2006 -07 increased funding for education is excellent, but we need to follow the money. Communities
need to ask these questions:
• How much money is my local school receiving?
• What are the plans for this money?
• ,Who is responsible for ensuring that the plans are followed?
• At the years end will you be able to trace how and where the funds were spent?
• Has education been improved for all students in the school district?
"North Carolina stands at a critical crossroads. A combination of powerful forces -economic changes, federal
law and it's own constitution -demand dramatic improvements to the system of public education. For North
Carolina to succeed, state leaders must facilitate the development of a comprehensive plan for progressing from
where we are to the desired educational objective. The plan must be based upon ari honest and straightforward
assessment of what it will really cost to produce the kind of student achievement and success in all corners of
the state that both the law and the 21St century economy demand."
*Quote from "Common Ground", a report published by the NC Justice Center. The entire report can be found at
http://www.ncjustice.orJmedia/librarv/40 commonsrd04.pdf
Special Thanks to the following organizations for information included in this paper (prepared by Mary Peterson, American
Association of University Women, North Carolina):
NC Justice Center www.ncjustice.org
The Public School Forum of NC www.ncforum.or~
Smart Start website www.smartstart-nc.orQ .
Public Schools of NC www.ncpublicschools.org
More At Four www.Qovernor.state.nc.us/OfficeBducation/Home.asp
2006-2007 Women 's .Draft Agenda 14
Iq
Chapter III: Economic Self-Sufficiency
~ Housing
One of the most severe problems facing hard-working but low-income North Carolinians is fmding affordable
housing. Often they must live with relatives or friends, do without necessities to pay their rent, or stay in homes
that are in poor condition and sometimes even unsafe. Across North Carolina the cost of housing has risen faster
than wages, putting affordable housing out of reach for thousands of families. Over 600,000 low- income
families live in homes they cannot afford. Over 300,000 households pay more than half their income for
housing. A family must earn at least $60,000/year to afford the average home price. According to the 2003 NC
Justice Center report, "Working Hard is Still Not Enough," 20 percent of homes do not have full plumbing or
are overcrowded or cost more than 30% of the family income. Of North Carolina families with children, 25
percent do not have safe, affordable, comfortable housing. Population. in homeless shelters has been increasing,
with homeless children being the fastest-growing segment of this population.
Women make up a disproportionate share of those who live in low-income housing. In 1998, IiUD reported that
84% of recipients of federally subsidized housing in North Carolina were in female-headed households. Elderly
housing includes a high percentage of women, as females tend to outlive males and have lower incomes. In
fiscal year 2000, women and children. composed 50 percent of the homeless persons in shelters receiving federal
grants.
One of the best ways to create affordable housing is through Housing Trust Funds (HTF's). There are currently
more than 300 HTF's in cities, counties and states throughout the US. HTFs are generally distinct accounts that
receive dedicated sources of public funds to support affordable housing. North Carolina's HTF received only $3
million in'the last budget cycle, and if the state has any hope of improving housing, available funding for the NC
Housing Trust Fund must increase substantially.
While North Carolina faces a challenge in creating affordable housing, increasing layoffs and predatory lending
practices have contributed to a staggering increase in home foreclosures. In the six years between 1998 and
2004, foreclosure filings in the state have increased 189 percent, with some counties experiencing an increase of
over 500 percent. In response, the revised state budget for 2004 included $1.75 million for a NC Home
Protection pilot program to help people avoid home foreclosure after losing a job. Under the pilot program,
homeowners who have lost their jobs owing to the State's changing economic conditions would be able to apply
for a bridge loan to help pay monthly mortgage payments while they look for new employment.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION.. .
• Increase funding for the North Carolina Housing Trust Fund to $50 million yearly to expand affordable
housing for low-income families.
• Increase funding for the Home Protection Pilot Program and support improvements to North Carolina's
foreclosure program.
2006-2007 Women's DraftAgenda 15
a~
~ Economic Self-Sufficiency
The economic growth that has occurred in North Carolina since the 2001 recession has largely bypassed the
state's working families. According to a 2005 report from the NC Justice Center, "Failing Jobs, Falling Wages"
(by John Quinterno and Elizabeth Jordan), on average North Carolina parents caring for their children must earn
$12.32/hour to meet their family's most basic needs. Unfortunately, almost half of North Carolina's families
with children are not earning this living wage and women are more likely to be among them. Female-headed
households make up only 13% of all North Carolina households but 37% of all households in poverty.
Minimum Wage: North Carolina's minimum wage will rise from $5.15 to $6.15 an hour in 2007, thanks to a
formidable lobbying effort by some dedicated legislators and by grassroots supporters throughout the state. This
significant effort to restore the value of fair pay for hard work will benefit 139,000 workers, the bulls of whom
are women. Despite the victory, the minimum wage still buys less than it did in 1968 and is not a living wage.
The campaign must begin all over again for an additional raise-and equally important, for indexing the wage to
inflation so that its value is maintained over time.
Work First/TANF: Welfare reforms of the 1990's successfully decreased North Carolina's welfare rolls, but
have not moved families out of poverty. North Carolina's cash assistance program, called Work First, cut its
caseload over 73 percent from about 132,000 cases in January 2005 to 32;000 now. This reduction was
perceived as healthy during the booming economy of the late 1990s, but showed its dire consequences when the
recession began in 2001. Poverty among NC families with minor children went from 15% in 2000 to 19% in
2004, but the Work First caseload continued to drop 25% during that same period. Families are not receiving
Work First in spite of their need for help due to three primary reasons: 1) North Carolina's extremely low
benefit levels -less than one-fifth of poverty level or $236/month -- do not motivate families to endure the
embarrassing and detailed application process; 2) welfare reform's emphasis on requiring families to work
regardless of the pay and 3) time limits on the receipt of benefits. Those receiving Work First cash assistance
may do so for only two years. They can return to the Work First rolls after being off for a while but will still
have a federal life-time limit of five years for assistance.
At this time, the program isrn transition because of new federal rules. In July 2006, US HHS issued very
restrictive new work requirements for the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Slock Grant, which
is the funding source for North Carolina's Work First program. The new rules require states to have more of
their cash assistance caseload participating in a narrower range of work activities than previously required.
They also do not give states credit for having reduced their caseload by getting previous years' recipients into
jobs. The end result is that North Carolina and many other states will likely fmd it very hard to meet the federal
work participation requirements and could face financial penalties. A penalty for North Carolina could amount
to a loss of $15 million in the first year and more thereafter. The narrowly drawn rules are expected to further
reduce the number of welfare recipients, potentially leaving many more low-income families with no source for
cash assistance aid.
Education and Training: Education is a prerequisite for success in today's service-based economy. While
education alone is insufficient to guarantee economic success, it is an essential building block. Yet one-third of
the state's low-income working families contain at least one parent who did not fmish high school, nor complete
a GED. Some adults are barely literate. More attention needs to be devoted to enrolling adults in community
college and job training programs to connect them to occupations that pay a living wage, provide basic benefits,
and offer a chance at upward mobility.
Earned Income Tax Credit: The problems of workers earning low wages are aggravated by an unfair tax
burden. State and local taxes in 2003 took almost 11 percent of incomes of these workers, while the rich were
taxed only about nine percent. About 20 percent of all those who filed federal income taxes in the state in 2002
took advantage of the federal Earned Income Tax Credit, which provides refunds of taxes for low-income
workers who qualify. This cash credit (available to eligible workers even if they did not pay taxes) is considered
2006-2007 Women's Draft Agenda 16
a~
the federal benefit most useful in raising working families out of poverty. A state-level earned income tax credit,
set at a percentage of the federal credit, could lessen the tax burden of families earning less than $29,000 a year.
Pay Equity: In 2005, a woman earned only 77 cents for every dollar a man earned. According to the National
Committee on Pay Equity, women earned on the average $31,221, while men earned $41,798. The disparity was
greater for women of color. In 2004, African-American women earned on the average $27,730, Latinas $23,444,
and Asian-American women $35,975. Pay inequities between men's and women's earnings and segregation of
women in low-paying jobs classified as "women's work," are important reasons why women are always coming
from behind in the effort to achieve a living wage. Although the federal Equal Pay Act of 1963 prohibited
unequal pay for equal or "substantially. equal work," disparities persist.
The.wage gap affects how working women and their families live. It affects their ability to provide affordable
quality child care, good health care, higher income, and a secure retirement. Since Social Security benefits are
directly tied to earnings, women who live longer than men and earn less are likely to have an insecure old age.
One significant area in which a pay equity study is most possible is in state employment where wage scales are
public records. In 19.82 a report from the Office of State Personnel, "Patterns of Pay in N.C. State Government,"
demonstrated that white males earned more than either black or white females and minority men. Legislation
providing for a comparable worth study was passed in 1984 but repealed the next year. Salary inequities were
again brought to light in the "Comprehensive Pay Plan" of 1993 but never addressed. A recent OSP report in
2004 brought the same bad news. It showed that women are 48.9 percent of the state workforce subject to the
State Personnel Act but make up 71.5 percent of those in the low wage brackets. As for African-American
women, they are 16 percent of the state SPA workforce but 3 5 percent of those in the lowest salary grades.
NCWU members helped to get a bill introduced which raised the minimum salary for a state SPA worker about
$2000 to $20,112. The bill also called for a pay equity study commission to look at disparities in male and
female salaries of state workers; so far that legislation has not been passed. Such a study, using a point system
of evaluation, would examine whether different jobs with requirements for similar education, skill, and
responsibility received equal pay. This study in state government, the state's largest employer, would be one
step leading to pay equity in North Carolina.
RECOA~NDATIONS FOR ACTION...
• The legislature should provide an increment of another dollar in the minimum wage and index the wage
to inflation.
• The legislature should pass a state Earned Income Tax Credit.
• The legislature and NC Department of Health and Human Services should make every effort to continue
cash- assistance benefits for low-income families with minor children.
• The General Assembly should support a pay equity study of jobs in state government and implement
any recommendations resulting from the study.
• The General Assembly should create a state program allowing families to keep public assistance and
child care subsidy benefits while completing their education orjob-retraining.
2006-2007 Women's DraftAgenda 17
as
Chapter IV: Violence Against Women
~ Domestic Violence
Domestic violence is a serious, widespread social problem in our country and in our state. Nearly 25% of
American women report being raped and/or physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting
partner, or date at some time in their lifetime, according to the National Violence Against Women Surveys
Women of all races and socioeconomic backgrounds are vulnerable to violence by an intimate partner. In North
Carolina, local domestic violence programs responded to over 104,000 crisis calls and provided services to over
50,000 victims in FY 04-05, a 42% increase since 1997.2 Without appropriate intervention and services,
domestic violence often escalates into homicide. On average, more than three women are murdered by their
husbands or boyfriends in this country every days In North Carolina, 82 domestic violence related homicides
were reported in 2004 and 69 homicides were reported in 2005 a North Carolina ranked 16th in the nation for
the number of per capita homicides committed by men against women in 2003, according to the Violence Policy
Centers
North Carolina has made tremendous progress in recent years, including landmark legislation that was passed in
2004 through the efforts of the House Select Committee on Domestic Violence. This legislation created a new
felony crime of non-fatal strangulation, enhanced safety for children by improving custody laws, and mandated
training for law enforcement. In 2005, North Carolina became the 2na state in the nation to pass comprehensive
tenancy laws to protect victims. These important efforts are being continued through the work of the Joint
Legislative Committee on Domestic Violence appointed in 2006.
The Joint Committee has proposed legislation to increase funding for the following: 1) shelter construction to
meet the demand for shelter space; 2) visitation centers so that visitation can occur in a safe setting; and 3)
family courts. In addition, the Joint Committee has recommended legislation that would increase the penalty for
a second violation of a protective order to a felony. Some of the additional issues that we hope to address in the
2007 session include: increased funding for domestic violence programs, TANF, and the Housing Trust Fund to
improve services to Work First participants and increase access to affordable housing; equal access and
protection under Chapter SOB for all victims of domestic violence; strengthening criminal penalties for domestic
violence; and requiring probationary sentences for offenders to be supervised to improve safety and
accountability.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
• Support the recommendations, ofthe Joint Legislative Committee on Domestic Violence.
• Support the Legislative Agenda of the North Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence
(www.nccadv.or~).
r The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and The National Institute of Justice, Extent, Nature, and Consequences of
Intimate Partner Violence, July 2000. '
z North Cnrolina Council for Women, Domestic Violence Stntistical Report, 2004-05.
s In 2000, approximately 1,687 murders were attributed to intimates, and 1,247 victims were women. US Department of Justice,
Intimate Partner Violence, 1993-2001, http;//www.ojp.usdoj.aov/bjs/abstrnct/ipvOl.htm.
" Dnta collected by the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence based on news reports across the stnte.
5 Violence Policy Center, When Men Murder Women: An Anolysis of 2003 Homicide Dato, September 2005.
2006-2007 Women's Dr~aftAgenda 18
a3
Sexual Assault
Over the last 7 years NC Rape Crisis Centers have seen a 28% increase in victims seeking services. Since then,
Rape Crisis Centers have received only one increase in funding from the General Fund and one non-recurring
appropriation. In 1999, the North Carolina General Assembly increased funding from $838,500 to its current
level of $1,117,500. When this increase was allocated only 65 programs shared the money. In 2006, there are
73 Rape Crisis Centers; all sharing the same $1,117,500. These funds are critical for supporting sexual assault
programs' 24-hour hotlines, crisis counseling, support groups, community education and prevention efforts, as
well as victim accompaniment during medical treatment and throughout the legal process. The average salary of
NC rape crisis first responder/victim advocates, who are on ca1124 hours a day, seven days a week, is only
$21,033 6 The cost of preventing sexual violence is FAR LESS than treating its effects-medical treatment,
counseling, work absenteeism, law enforcement time, prosecution and court costs.
Since the inception of Permanent Civil No-Contact Orders (SOCs) in December of 2004, there have been
approximately 10,000 such orders filed. However, there have been less than fifty reports of violations of these
orders'. However, in 2004 and 2005 over 3700 people were convicted on violation of the SOB order against
them8. The difference is that the onus for reporting violations of SOCs is on the victim, who must file a
contempt of court order and attend a hearing. Conversely, violations of SOBs are reported to the police for
criminal action.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION...
Provide stable and adequate funding for new and existing sexual assault programs.
Criminalize SOC violations.
6 Salary Survey Results for Local Rape Crisis Centers. NCCASA. (2000)
~ NC AOC. Raleigh, NC. July 2006.
s "Tally of Offense Codes Used in the Crimina]/Infraction Index in 2005". NC AOC, Raleigh, NC. February 2006
2006-2007 Women's Draft Agenda 19
References
~ 4'
Aging: Submitted by North Carolina Justice & Community Development Center info@ncjustice.org
http://www.ncjustice.org (919) 856-2570 PO Box 28068 224 S. Dawson St. Raleigh, NC
27611-8068
Access to Health Care: Submitted by Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina
ppcnc@mindspring.com http://www.plannedparenthood.org/ppcnc/ (919) 929-5402 1765
Dobbins Drive PO Box 3258 Chapel Hill, NC 27515-3258
Adolescent Pregnancy: Submitted by Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Coalition of North Carolina
http://www.appcnc.org (919) 923-9885 10001 Main St. Suite D- Southern Village Chapel Hill,
NC 27516
Mental Health: Submitted by the Women's Resource Center in Alamance County. Information
provided by John Tote, Executive Director of Mental Health Association in NC, 9/21/04
Employment Discrimination: Submitted by Equality NC info@equalitync.org
.http://www.equalitync.org (919) 829-0343 PO Box 28768 Raleigh, NC 27611
Equal Political Representation: Submitted by Democracy North Carolina info@democracy-nc.org
http://www.democracy-nc.org/ (919) 967-9942 105 West Main Street Carrboro, NC 27510
Hate Crimes: Submitted by Equality NC info@equalitync.org http://www.equalitync.org (919) 829-
0343 PO Box 28768 Raleigh, NC 27611
Marriage and Family: Submitted by Equality NC info@equalitync.org http://www.equalitync.org
(919) 829=0343 PO Box 28768 Raleigh, NC 27611
Housing: Submitted by North Carolina Housing Coalition http://www.nchousing.org (919) 881-0707
224 S. Dawson St. Raleigh, NC 27601.
Economic Self-Sufficiency: Submitted by North Carolina Justice & Community Development Center
info@ncjustice.org http://www.ncjustice.org (919) 856-2570 PO Box 28068 224 S. Dawson St.
Raleigh, NC 27611=8068
Pay Equity: Submitted by NC Alliance for Economic Justice 3824 Barrett Drive, Suite 312, Raleigh,
NC 27609 Tel: 919 786 1345
Domestic Violence: Submitted by North Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence
http://www.nccadv.org/ (919) 956-9124 1.15 Market Street Suite 400 Durham, NC 27701
Sexual Assault: Submitted by NC Coalition Against Sexual Assault info@nccasa.org
http://www.nccasa.org 183 Wind Chime Ct, Raleigh, NC 27615 (888) 737-CASA.
2006-2007 Women 's D~°aft Agenda 20
as
The papers in this 2006 Draft Agenda were solicited from
the organizations who are members of
North Carolina Women United.
They represent a cross section of the issues important to
the women of North Carolina and will form the basis for
the discussions at the "Women's Agenda Assemblies"
held across the state in the fall of 2006.
For more information on the process
and updates to these papers as issues evolve
during the 2006-2007 Legislative session,
see the NC Women United web site.
North Carolina Women United
PO Box 613, Elon, NC 27244
info@ncwu.org, (866) 518-7657
www.ncwu.org
2006-2007 Women's DraftAgenda 21