fbpx

April 3, 2012

Settlers remain in Hebron home after eviction deadline

Jewish settlers remained in a home near the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, despite the passing of a deadline for them to prove their ownership or vacate the building.

Hours after the Tuesday afternoon deadline for the evacuation of the building passed, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened a meeting with senior government ministers to discuss how to proceed. During a news conference to mark his government’s three years in power, Netanyahu said that he and Defense Minister Ehud Barak were “coordinated”  on the issue.

The previous evening he asked Barak for a delay of the eviction until the several dozen settlers have an opportunity to prove in court their ownership of the house.

Armed with documents that say they purchased the home from its Arab owner, the Jewish families entered the home in the middle of the night on March 28.

The eviction order issued Monday afternoon by the Israeli military’s Civil Administration said the settlers’ presence in the home violates public order. The residents of the home, including families with young children, also did not request nor receive a required purchase permit from the Civil Administration.

Hebron Mayor Khaled Osaily told Army Radio on Tuesday that the sale papers are forged and that the person who sold the house to the Jewish settlers is not the owner.

Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz of the Likud Party visited what is being called the Machpelah house Tuesday morning to express his support for the building’s residents. The Cave of the Patriarchs is known as the Ma’arat HaMachpela in Hebrew.

“We are not making any preparations to evacuate and have no intention of leaving,” Shlomo Levinger, a resident of the house, told Ynet on Monday. “We plan to hold the Passover seder here.”

Settlers remain in Hebron home after eviction deadline Read More »

Opinion: Moral hazards and the health care debate

Last week, many of us followed with much anxiety the Supreme Court debate about the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, referred to in some circles as “Obamacare.”

Of great interest to the average American was the challenge to the requirement that almost all Americans have health insurance coverage. This requirement is needed, economists say, to avoid the situation of “moral hazard”—in this case, the possibility of people putting off buying insurance until after they get sick, thus driving up costs for everyone else. If, however, everyone buys insurance before they actually need it, the risk is spread among sick and healthy alike and premiums are lower.

There are also other “moral hazards” the new law seeks to address. One of them is how to ensure that millions of Americans who are too poor to buy it even with subsidies will have health insurance when they need it.

Those are the people who would continue to flood emergency rooms with problems that could have been treated before they reached expensive crisis proportions. They are the people who lack the resources for routine screening and preventive care, and so develop diseases and conditions that shorten their lives and cause them and their families undue pain and suffering. And they are the ones who are counted among the estimated 45,000 people a year who die sooner because they lacked health insurance.

Our system’s historic inability to provide for all of these people as contributing members of our human society is a moral failing for us all.

The new healthcare law’s answer to this moral dilemma was to require that Medicaid expand from the groups now covered—poor children, pregnant women and the elderly poor in need of nursing care—to all Americans whose incomes fall below a certain level. This expansion to 16 million more people would be financed entirely by the federal government at first, and would eventually require a small contribution from the states if they want to retain the Medicaid program in its entirety.

To the surprise of most legal observers, the Medicaid expansion became the second major constitutional challenge to the law. The Supreme Court chose to hear a challenge by 26 states to that expanded funding, even though the challenge was rejected by all the lower courts.

In the Supreme Court debate, it became clear to all that a conservative block of justices was seriously contemplating reversing the constitutional support not only for the Medicaid expansion but also for similar federal-state programs that have been in place for 75 years.

This is the true moral hazard in the challenge to the Affordable Care Act—the idea that the federal government can do nothing on the scale that is required to ensure that all Americans have access to health care. Furthermore, the even broader danger is the notion that the federal government should not be able to provide money to states with a required match in state funding, no matter the proportion, for anything including transportation, education and many other program categories that rely on federal-state partnerships.

Our view of our responsibility to one other cannot be so constrained or we will surely be back where we started when this whole debate began.

During the upcoming Passover Seder, as we begin to tell the story of our transformation from enslavement to a free people, Jews everywhere will lift up the matzah and say, “This is the bread of affliction, which our ancestors ate in the land of Egypt. Let all who are hungry come and eat. Let all who are in need, come and celebrate Passover.” This invitation reminds us that both in our suffering, as slaves in Pharaoh’s land when we remember our oppression and hasty exodus, and in our joy of redemption when we cross the Red Sea to the Promised Land, we have an obligation to remember those in need around us.

Surely in this modern world, that obligation includes finding a way to provide health care to those in most need around us. In the spirit of Passover, let’s remember those who have been left behind because of inadequate access to quality health care and envision a future that avoids “moral hazards.” And let’s all who are in need of help reach the promised land.

Nancy K. Kaufman is the chief executive officer of the National Council of Jewish Women.

Opinion: Moral hazards and the health care debate Read More »

Opinion: In survey of American Jews, questions for right and left

Mark Twain famously distrusted statistics. This was due to their malleability. Ask the question the right way, and you can claim a mandate for anything.

In contemporary society, statistics are often used to provide “unbiased evidence” for our pre-existing viewpoints. This is not to say that statistics tell us nothing useful. I believe they tell us much that is useful. But statistics are most illuminating if you look more intently at the numbers that challenge rather than simply confirm your assumptions.

On Tuesday, the Public Religion Research Institute released a survey of Jewish values and opinions commissioned by the Nathan Cummings Foundation. We underwrote the survey because, as a funder of the Jewish social justice sector, and of Jewish life and values more broadly, the foundation believes it is important to better understand how Jews today understand our experience, engage our values and consider the issues facing our country.

The survey is fascinating. Some of the information confirms conventional wisdom, but not all. Liberals and conservatives who care about the Jewish future would benefit from mulling over the data beyond the headlines.

For example, conservatives might want to grapple with this finding. We asked participants: As a Jew, which of the following qualities do you consider most important to your Jewish identity?

The most popular quality was “a commitment to social equality,” chosen by 46% of American Jews. Support for Israel and religious observance came in second and third with 20% and 17%, respectively.

More and more we do an excellent job meeting the needs of those for whom Israel or religious observance are most important to how they see themselves as Jews. Yet too often we outsource our commitment to social equality to non-Jewish institutions, or make a passing wave at tikkun olam while dramatically underfunding the very Jewish organizations that embody this broadly held commitment. This is in part because conservatives assert that Judaism is—and should be—largely about religious observance and Israel.

Those on the right must rethink their campaign to belittle, delegitimize and excise Jewish social justice from the Jewish community. At a time when we need more avenues into meaningful Jewish life, they are imperiously dismissing almost half of the community. They declare certain conversations or advocacy issues verboten (taxes, human rights in Israel), attack funders who make grants to the social change sector (Open Society Foundations; Ford Foundation) and ridicule those who make connections between Jewish text and contemporary efforts to create a more equitable society.

On the other hand, liberal Jews take for granted popular support within the Jewish community. Often the support is there. But not always.

The survey asked whether or not poor people have become too dependent on government assistance programs. A clear majority (54%) said they had.

So while Jews may support legal abortion and gay marriage in overwhelming numbers (93% and 81% respectively), they also agree with an argument long advanced by conservatives: Social programs create dangerous dependency.

What are the implications of this belief? Consider the fact that much of the money spent by Jewish institutions goes to administer government assistance programs. The entire federation system supports agencies that provide poor people with government-funded health care, food assistance, housing and more. Support for the poor has been at the core of Jewish communal norms for centuries.

Jews who believe that the government has an important role to play in providing a safety net for the poor are losing this argument in their own community, even among those who support most other elements of the liberal agenda. This new majority perception must be engaged.

There is a great deal more to say about the PRRI Jewish values survey. Soon the headlines will assert that some of us are right and others wrong. Instead of falling into self-congratulations, let’s instead take it to our Seder tables and ask a new set of questions about our experience, our values and our distinctive role here in America.

Simon Greer is the president and CEO of the Nathan Cummings Foundation.

Opinion: In survey of American Jews, questions for right and left Read More »

Netanyahu says sanctions hurting Iran but not enough

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday that international sanctions were hurting Iran’s economy but not enough to persuade it to curb its nuclear ambitions even slightly.

“The Iranian government … is having economic troubles but it has yet to move backward, even a millimeter, in its nuclear program,” Netanyahu told a news conference he called to mark his right-wing government’s third anniversary in power.

“Will these difficulties bring the government in Tehran to stop its nuclear program? Time will tell. I cannot say to you that this will happen. I know there are difficulties, but there has yet to be a change.”

His comments came after a senior Revolutionary Guards commander was quoted as saying that the United States would not be safe from retaliation if Washington attacked Iran in an attempt to blunt its nuclear program.

On Friday, U.S. President Barack Obama vowed to press ahead with tough sanctions on Tehran, saying there was sufficient oil supply in the world market to allow countries to cut Iranian imports.

In his own remarks, Netanyahu shed no new light on how Israel might deal with what he has said is Iran’s intention to build atomic weapons that could threaten the existence of the Jewish state.

Both Israel, widely believed to be the Middle East’s only nuclear power, and its main ally, the United States, have held out the prospect of military action against Iran if sanctions do not work. Iran has said it is enriching uranium for peaceful purposes.

Returning to a familiar theme in Israel’s discourse on Iran, Netanyahu contrasted the helplessness of Jews during the Nazi Holocaust to the military strength and diplomatic influence of the Jewish state founded after World War Two.

“The Jewish people did not have these capabilities seventy, eighty ears ago. We did not have these tools. Today these tools exist, and it is our duty to use them in order to thwart the nefarious intentions of our enemies,” he said, without referring directly to Iran.

A rash of public comments two months ago by Israeli officials suggesting time was running out for Israel to mount any effective military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities, some of which have been moved underground, stoked international concern.

But more recently, Israel has cautiously welcomed the planned resumption later this month of big-power nuclear talks with Iran.

“I will do all I can to fend off this danger,” Netanyahu said in reference to Iran’s nuclear program, “I hope we will be able to do this together with the leading players in the international community, it is a great danger to them, but first and foremost it is a danger to us.”

Additional reporting by Maayan Lubell; Writing by Jeffrey Heller

Netanyahu says sanctions hurting Iran but not enough Read More »

Tzipi Livni’s fall followed meteoric political rise

Tzipi Livni’s resounding fall in the leadership vote for Kadima, Israel’s largest political party, was as dramatic as her rise to political power.

Ahead of last week’s vote, most polls were predicting that Livni would defeat Shaul Mofaz, a former Israel Defense Forces chief of staff. Most also showed that Kadima headed by Livni would fare at least slightly better in next year’s general elections than it would with Mofaz at the helm. And just last month, Newsweek and The Daily Beast counted Livni as one of the 150 Women Who Shake the World and called her one of the most powerful women in the country.

Yet on March 27, in a low turnout of 40 percent of Kadima’s 95,000 members, Mofaz trounced Livni, taking 61.7 percent of votes. Now Livni’s political future is unclear.

This week, Livni told a reporter camped outside her Tel Aviv home that “I am on vacation, sweetheart.” And she was conspicuously absent from Kadima’s first faction meeting since the leadership primary.

Livni’s rapid climb to power — comparable to the political careers of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak — was remarkable. Just two years after leaving her commercial law practice to become a Knesset member in the Likud Party, Livni was given a ministerial portfolio. By 2006, as foreign minister, she was second in command of Kadima, Israel’s ruling party, and in the 2009 general election — just a decade after entering politics — Livni led Kadima to garner 28 Knesset seats, one seat more than the second-largest party, Netanyahu’s Likud.

Livni, who admitted in an interview with Yediot Ahronot to being a Mossad agent in Paris in the early 1980s, grew up in an ardently right-wing household. Her father and mother were members of the pre-state Irgun, a paramilitary organization affiliated with Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s Revisionist Zionist movement that was the ideological precursor to today’s Likud.

With some other leading members of Likud, she came to believe that Israel had to cede control over areas populated by Palestinians in order to remain a Jewish state. Livni joined Prime Minister Ariel Sharon when he left the Likud to form Kadima in November 2005 in the wake of his Gaza disengagement.

She advanced within the party’s leadership as a result of a series of upheavals that included Sharon’s paralyzing stroke in January 2005, just months before the March 2006 general elections, and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s July 2008 announcement that he would resign in the wake of corruption allegations.

At a time when Olmert’s ordeal was making headlines, along with the rape charges against President Moshe Katsav and a corruption case involving a finance minister, it was the Israeli public’s perception of Livni as honest and clean — a Time profile of her in 2010 was titled “Israel’s Mrs. Clean” — that boosted her status.

“Under the immediate circumstances, Livni’s was an alarming anointment, effectively implemented by a well-known advertising and PR firm that had more to do with appearances than with substance,” said Amotz Asa-El, a Hartman Institute fellow and a former executive editor of The Jerusalem Post.

“They played up her Mrs. Clean image, emphasized her femininity, changed her hairdo and dressed her in business suits. But she was a shallow politician who could not seriously debate anything,” he said. “She was no match for Bibi.”

The beginning of Livni’s downfall was her inability after the 2009 general elections to form a coalition, despite winning a plurality of the votes. A bloc of several religious and right-wing parties made it much easier for Netanyahu to form a coalition.

Meanwhile, left-wing parties Labor and Meretz, which had lost votes to Kadima, declined to support Livni because they were concerned she would form a coalition with Avigdor Liberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu. Negotiations for a rotation government that included Likud and Kadima fell through in part due to Livni’s opposition to the idea. Ironically, if the deal had been finalized, Livni would have started her stint as prime minister this week. Instead, Kadima remained in the opposition.

Livni also managed to make many enemies within Kadima. In one incident caught on camera, Livni repeatedly interrupted Mofaz as he attempted to present his diplomatic plan for solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to Kadima lawmakers in November 2009.

“Shaul had worked hard on that plan, going into great details on all the key issues from borders and security arrangement to Jerusalem and meeting with [Palestinian Authority Prime Minister] Salam Fayyad,” said Ronit Tirosh, a Kadima Knesset member aligned with Mofaz.

“Shaul does not know how to work without people, she does not know how to work with them,” Tirosh said, regarding Livni. “She has a deficit in emotional intelligence.”

However, Moshe Debby, the head of a public relations firm that advised Livni on strategy, insists that Livni remained more popular than Mofaz until the end, as evidenced by the polls. Rather it was Mofaz’s behind-the-scenes deal-making among Kadima members that clinched him the leadership vote.

“Tzipi was a woman of ideology and values who was concerned primarily with the betterment of the nation,” Debby said. “She did not go to bar mitzvahs and weddings, she did not call people on their birthdays, she did not engage in the internal politics of back scratching. And that’s why she lost.”

Tzipi Livni’s fall followed meteoric political rise Read More »

Obama cites Lubavitcher rebbe in proclamation

President Obama underlined the accomplishments of the late Lubavitcher rebbe in his proclamation of Education and Sharing Day.

In Tuesday’s proclamation, Obama highlighted the teachings of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson and said that Schneerson embodied a “humanitarian spirit.”

“As a tireless advocate for youth around the world, he inspired millions to lift the cause of education, to practice kindness and generosity, and to aspire toward their highest ideals,” Obama said in the proclamation. “His enduring legacy lives on in those he touched, and today, we resolve to carry forward his dedication to service and scholarship.”

In addition, Obama reiterated the importance of pursuing knowledge and cultivating character that has enriched American progress.

“In a global economy where more than half of new jobs will demand higher education or advanced training, we must do everything we can to equip our children with the tools for success,” the president said. “Our nation’s prosperity grows with theirs, and by ensuring every child has access to a world-class education, we reach for a brighter future for all Americans.”

Obama cites Lubavitcher rebbe in proclamation Read More »

“Jacob and Jack” combines laughs and soul

“Jacob and Jack” is part backstage farce, part Yiddish soul, part time travel and, mixed together, a barrel of fun.

The play by James Sherman (“The God of Isaac,” “Beau Jest”) is set in Chicago in 1935, and then 75 years later in the present, with each of the six characters jumping from one era to another and back.

In the titles role, Bruce Katzman is both the stentorian Yiddish actor Jacob Shemerinsky and his present-day grandson Jack Shore.

Neither incarnation is a marquee name. Jack makes a living doing TV commercials, and when he got a chance to play in “The Diary of Anne Frank,” he recalls, “there were more people in the attic than in the audience.”

What ties the two time zones together is that Jack has been persuaded by his forceful mother to stage a tribute performance for her ladies club, commemorating his grandfather Jacob.

Facilitating the switches between past and present on the small stage of the Zephyr Theatre are five constantly slammed doors connecting the time-traveling characters in their dressing rooms and with the outside world.

Revolving around Jacob/Jack are his long-suffering wife and actress Lisa/Leah (Veronica Alicino), who, with good reason, suspects her husband of infidelities, and charming ingénue Deborah Knox, the object of desire in both the 20th and 21st centuries.

Nan Tapper, who doubles as the mother of both Jack and of the ingénue in different eras, is the no-nonsense Jewish matriarch, who gets her descendants out of their frequent scrapes.

Tepper displays a finely-honed comic edge as well as a grasp of graphic Yiddish, which cannot be printed in a family publication, either in English or in the mamaloshen.

Rounding out the talented cast are Matthew Gottlieb as Jack’s agent and a stage manager, and young Matthew Scott Montgomery, alternating as a novice stage manager and as Moishe/Mickey, a hopeful, Hollywood-bound actor.

Director Lee Sankowich keeps the fast-paced action and the constant character rotations from devolving into bafflement. Adam Hunter gets credit for the ingenious set and Joanna Leskow for the costumes.

Performances of “Jacob and Jack” continue through May 6 at the Zephyr Theatre, 7456 Melrose Ave., between Fairfax and La Brea Aves.

Show times are Friday and Saturday evenings at 8 p.m., and Sundays at 3 p.m. For information and tickets call (800) 838-3006, or visit “Jacob and Jack” combines laughs and soul Read More »

Sherman releases new poll showing 2-to-1 lead over Berman

A new poll released by Rep. Brad Sherman’s (D – Sherman Oaks) campaign shows him far ahead of his fellow Democrat and rival in the 30th district, Rep. Howard Berman (D – Van Nuys). The poll also suggests that Berman and Sherman will advance from the June 5 primary to face off again in November’s general election.

In a poll taken last month, 52 percent of voters chose Sherman in a head-to-head race, with Berman getting 25 percent, and the remaining 23 percent of voters undecided. In the release of the results, Sherman’s pollster, Diane Feldman, pointed out that this margin is effectively identical to the results of a similar poll conducted for Sherman’s campaign in August 2011, in which 51 percent of voters chose Sherman and 26 percent chose Berman.

More immediately relevant, however, is the second set of results released in the new poll.

Back in August 2011, when Feldman asked voters about a three-way race between Sherman, Berman and Republican Mark Reed, Sherman won 42 percent of votes, Reed came in second with 26 percent and Berman came in third with 17 percent.

But under new California election law, all voters are allowed to vote in the June 5 primary, regardless of party registration, and they will be able to choose from a wide variety of candidates from multiple parties. Seven candidates will appear on the ballot in this new open-primary, and with three Republicans running—Reed, writer Susan Shelley, and businessman Navraj Singh—the top-two are Sherman-Berman.

That result would pave the way for a Berman v. Sherman general election in November.

In an email announcing the poll results, Sherman’s newly hired PR guy, former journalist John Schwada, downplayed in advance the upcoming release of recent campaign fundraising and spending data, scheduled to be released on April 15.

“The Sherman campaign has elected to save its campaign resources for the November general election,” Schwada wrote.

The Sherman-sponsored poll of 500 likely voters in California’s new 30th Congressional district was conducted between March 26-28 The Feldman Group, Inc. The margin of error was plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.

Here are the results:

Head to head:

Brad Sherman, Democrat 51% (52 % in August 2011)

Howard Berman, Democrat 26% (25% in August 2011)

Undecided 23% (23% in August 2011)

Full field for the June primary (all numbers from March 2012 poll):

Democrat Brad Sherman 40%

Democrat Howard Berman 17%

Democrat Vince Gilmore 1%

Republican Mark Reed 12%

Republican Susan Shelley 5%

Republican Navraj Singh 4%

Green Party member Michael Powelson 2%

Undecided 20%

Sherman releases new poll showing 2-to-1 lead over Berman Read More »

Following basketball controversy, press is on Texas school group to be more inclusive

Comments by the head of a Texas school association at the center of a controversy over Sabbath accommodations is fueling a drive by its members to be more open to the needs of Jewish and Muslim schools.

Edd Burleson, the director of the The Texas Association of Private and Parochial Schools, revived the controversy over the Robert M. Beren Academy of Houston’s participation in the state boys’ basketball tournament last month when he told the Dallas Morning News in an interview published Sunday that the predominantly Christian association “shouldn’t have accepted (Beren) in the first place.”

The Houston Chronicle reported that the TAPPS board could decide next month whether to penalize the Beren Academy for a rules violation for failing to withdraw from the tournament last month. Beren had requested a time change for the 2A tournament’s semifinals and finals, which were scheduled for a Friday night and Saturday afternoon, to accommodate Sabbath observance. TAPPS agreed to do so only after several players and their parents filed a lawsuit.

It wasn’t the first religious controversy for TAPPS. In 2010, its board denied membership to a Muslim school after asking the Iman Academy SW to complete an application with questions about Islam, The New York Times reported.

In an interview with JTA, Burleson defended both the comments about Beren Academy and the decision by TAPPS to exclude the Muslim school. Burleson said TAPPS was upholding its rules, not engaging in religious discrimination.

But now TAPPS member schools are pushing the association to become more accommodating. Some, including the Texas Catholic Conference, which represents the state’s Catholic schools, are threatening to withdraw if their concerns are not resolved.

“As an organization of private and parochial schools, we should be open to everyone, allow all students to participate and be sensitive to their needs,” said Jeffery Patterson, executive director of the Texas Catholic Conference, which asked TAPPS to let the member schools review TAPPS’ operations. “If this doesn’t get resolved appropriately, certainly it will bring into question whether Catholic schools will continue our affiliation with TAPPS.”

Rabbi Harry Sinoff, head of school at Beren Academy, declined to comment on Burleson’s remarks but said the school would like to remain in TAPPS.

“They’re at a crossroads now, reflecting on what their mission should be,” Sinoff said. “A broad mission of inclusiveness, bringing together lots of different schools and making accommodations that would be reasonable, or do they want to be a more homogeneous, narrowly focused organization? … We hope they go for inclusiveness so we can be part of it.”

Sinoff said he did not know the details of the cases involving the Muslim school but that he would like to see all the schools included in TAPPS—Jewish, Muslim, Christian or others. “There should be objective criteria for admission, and all schools who meet that criteria should be admitted without reference to religion or race,” he said.

TAPPS, which was created in 1978, has approximately 220 member schools, nearly all Christian, that compete in athletic and arts competitions.

Burleson maintains that he does not object to a Jewish school, but said that when Beren Academy joined the league three years ago, school officials said they understood that it would not be able to participate in the playoffs.

“Three years later there was a lot of controversy, a lot of hard feelings, a lot of changes that had to be made to accommodate the school that told us up front they would not request these accommodations,” Burleson said.

Nathan Lewin, a prominent Washington attorney who represented the Beren parents and players, said Burleson’s comments confirmed that “he has a very jaundiced, and I can only say bigoted, view about people other than his own kind.”

Lewin compared Beren’s agreeing not to dispute the schedule to a civil rights case regarding an unconstitutional property deed barring a sale to a black person.

“You can’t be barred from exercising your constitutional right because somebody has had a biased and illegal provision in their bylaws and contract when you’ve come in,” Lewin said. (While the school asked TAPPS for an accommodation, it was parents and the players, not the school, who filed suit.)

The denial of membership to Iman Academy SW, The New York Times reported, came after the school was asked to submit an application that asked such questions as, “Does the Koran actually state that the Bible is polluted?” The Times reported that at least two other Islamic schools were given similar questionnaires but declined to complete them.

Burleson said the board denied Iman Academy’s application because the school had no experience in athletic competition.

But he said that TAPPS has never made an effort to determine whether its members want the organization to include schools of all faiths. It is now doing so, holding two member meetings and distributing a survey asking schools if they want the association to be all inclusive and whether they are willing to make accommodations.

The New York Times reported that TAPPS surveyed members in 2010 about whether to include Muslim schools. Of the 83 schools that responded, 63 percent said it was not in TAPPS’ best interest, the paper reported.

“Over the 20 years I’ve been associated with TAPPS, there’s been no direction from our membership to be all inclusive,” Burleson told JTA.

Bill McGee, the headmaster of Hill Country Christian School in Austin, which faced Beren in the playoffs and moved its game time to accommodate the Beren community’s Shabbat observance, spoke at a March 27 TAPPS meeting in favor of inclusivity.

He said the United States was built on religious tolerance and that his school had no problem accommodating the religious beliefs of Beren students.

“The general membership desires to be inclusive, and that seems to be at odds with the leadership of the organization,” McGee told JTA. “An organization which is primarily athletic or competitive in nature, there’s no reason for those organizations to be exclusive.”

Larry Taylor, head of TAPPS member school Prestonwood Christian Academy in Plano, believes the association would be strengthened by the involvement of all non-public schools.

“The sheer number strengthens the quality of our competition,” Taylor said. And, he added, “The diversity provides an experience for our students that’s very important for their preparation for college and for life.”

To some members, inclusion is a religious obligation. Connie Wootton, executive director of the Southwestern Association of Episcopal Schools, said a major tenet of an Episcopal education is racial, ethnic, economic and religious diversity.

“If we expect others to respect our beliefs, we have to respect theirs, too,” she said. “That’s the Christian model.”

Martin Cominsky, regional director for the Anti-Defamation League’s Southwest Region, said his agency was disappointed by TAPPS’ attitude toward Muslim and Jewish schools.

“I believe TAPPS should use universal admissions criteria that are not discriminatory against any particular religion,” Cominsky said. “Those politics ought to reflect the ever-increasing diversity in the state of Texas.”

Following basketball controversy, press is on Texas school group to be more inclusive Read More »

Survey: Jewish voters want Obama back, see economy as top concern

Jewish registered voters see the economy as the most important issue, and nearly two-thirds support President Barack Obama’s re-election, according to a new survey.

The 62 percent of Jewish voters backing Obama’s return was more than twice the number who said they would prefer a Republican candidate, according to the survey released April 3 at a National Press Club briefing. The poll of 1,004 American Jews was conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute.

Mitt Romney, at 58 percent, had the greatest support among Jews who would vote Republican. Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul trail with 15 percent, 13 percent and 12 percent, respectively. Seven percent of Jews who voted for Obama in 2008 said they would prefer a Republican candidate in 2012.

The survey looked at how Jewish values, experiences and identity are shaping political beliefs and behavior, as well as influencing social action in the Jewish community.

Some 51 percent of Jewish voters said the economy would be most important to their vote for the next president. Fifteen percent cited the gap between rich and the poor, 10 percent said health care, and 7 percent saw the federal deficit as being important to their vote.  

The survey also found 84 percent saying that pursuing justice and 80 percent saying that caring for the widow and orphan are somewhat or very important values that inform their political beliefs and activities.

Survey: Jewish voters want Obama back, see economy as top concern Read More »