banner2e top

Study: African-American Homeownership Increasingly Less Stable, More Risky

July 27 2014

Study: African-American Homeownership Increasingly Less Stable, More Risky

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from The Seattle Medium

(TriceEdneyWire.com) – While historical barriers that excluded Black America from the homeowner market for decades have crumbled, there are signs that emerging types of racial inequality are making homeownership an increasingly risky investment for African-American home seekers. A new study from sociologists at Rice University and Cornell University found that African-Americans are 45 percent more likely than Whites to switch from owning their homes to renting them.

The study, “Emerging Forms of Racial Inequality in Homeownership Exit, 1968-2009,” examines racial inequality in transitions out of homeownership over the last four decades. The authors used data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics for the period 1968 to 2009, with a study sample of 6,994 non-Hispanic Whites and 3,158 Black homeowners.

The research revealed that despite modest gains in attaining homeownership over time, the racial gap in the likelihood of changing from ownership to renting began to widen in the 1990s. During the next two decades, African-American homebuyers were consistently over 45 percent more likely than Whites to transition out of homeownership. The authors claim that their findings point to a historical shift in racial stratification in American housing markets, from a system of overt market exclusion to, more recently, one of market exploitation.

“The 1968 passage of the Fair Housing Act outlawed housing market discrimination based on race,” said Gregory Sharp, a postdoctoral fellow in Rice’s Department of Sociology and the study’s lead author. “African-American homeowners who purchased their homes in the late 1960s or 1970s were no more or less likely to become renters than were White owners. However, emerging racial disparities over the next three decades resulted in Black owners who bought their homes in the 2000s being 50 percent more likely to lose their homeowner status than similar white owners.”

Sharp noted that these inequalities in homeownership exit held even after adjusting for an extensive set of life-cycle traits, socioeconomic characteristics, characteristics of housing units and debt loads, as well as events that prompt giving up homeownership, such as going through a divorce or losing a job.

Sharp said the deregulation of the mortgage markets in the 1980s – when Congress removed interest rate caps on first-lien home mortgages and permitted banks to offer loans with variable interest rate schedules – and subsequent emergence of the subprime market are likely reasons Blacks were at an elevated risk of losing their homeowner status. In 2000, African-Americans were more than twice as likely as Whites with similar incomes to sign subprime loans; among lower-income Blacks, more than half of home refinance loans were subprime.

“African-American homeowners’ heightened subprime rates were not only due to their relatively weaker socioeconomic position, but also because lenders specifically targeted minority neighborhoods,” Sharp said.

Sharp and his coauthor hope the research will prompt further analysis of additional factors that potentially contribute to racial disparities in homeownership exit, such as household wealth and residential location.

The study will appear in the August edition of Social Problems and was co-authored by Matthew Hall, a demographer and assistant professor of public policy at Cornell University.

Ordered to Prison Sept. 8, Ray Nagin Files Appeal Notice

July 27, 2014

Ordered to Prison Sept. 8, Ray Nagin Files Appeal Notice

c.raynagin

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from the Louisiana Weekly

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin last week filed a formal notice of appeal  in the corruption case that resulted in a guilty verdict on 20 of 21 criminal counts and a 10-year prison sentence, The Associated Press reported.

Nagin, a Democrat and businessman who campaigned for mayor on an anti-corruption platform, was convicted in February on charges including conspiracy, bribery, money laundering, wire fraud and filing false tax returns. The charges stem from his two terms as mayor from 2002 to 2010 — including the Hurricane Katrina disaster in 2005.

During his first term in office, Nagin often referred to himself as a “change agent” who was committed to rooting out public corruption.

With the support and backing of the New Orleans business community, Nagin was able to move up from the back of a crowded field of mayoral candidates to defeat former NOPD Supt. Richard Pennington in the 2002 mayoral race.

Three years later, the mayor’s woes began to mount with the colossal challenge of rebuilding New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina flooded 80 percent of the city. With the pressures growing to make it possible for displaced New Orleanians to return home and get the city back up and running, Nagin tried to reassure displaced Black residents that they would always be welcome in post-Katrina New Orleans by uttering his now-infamous comments about New Orleans always being a “Chocolate City.”

The brief notice said the appeal will cover the verdict, the sentence and an order that Nagin forfeit over $500,000 acquired illegally, as well as court rulings prior to the verdict.

The notice was filed in U.S. District Court, and the appeal will be considered by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

According to court papers, the appeal is “including but not limited to the court’s judgment on the jury’s verdict, sentencing, fine, assessment and forfeiture, as well as all other prejudgment interlocutory orders and rulings in this case.”

Nagin, 58, has been ordered to report to the federal prison in Oakdale, La. on September 8.

A defiant Nagin continues to insist he is innocent and that he is paying the price for standing up to powerful people in New Orleans. On the local WBOK radio station, Nagin has talked often about a “shadow government” that controls everything that happens in the Crescent City.

His remarks puzzled some residents who disapproved after Nagin huddled with wealthy White business owners from New Orleans in Dallas, Texas shortly after Hurricane Katrina to devise a blueprint for post-Katrina New Orleans, When criticized by some residents and questioned by the media, Nagin said he saw nothing wrong with Blacks not being a part of that meeting because Blacks don’t participate in New Orleans’ economy in a meaningful way.

Until his indictment in 2013, Nagin was perhaps best known for a widely heard, profanity-laced radio interview in which he angrily blasted the federal response in the days after levee breaches flooded most of the city during Katrina.

He had been elected as a reformer, but prosecutors said graft in his administration pre-dated Hurricane Katrina and flourished afterward. The bribes came in the form of money, free vacations and truckloads of free granite for his family business, Stone Age, LLC.

While Nagin appeals his case, prosecutors may appeal as well. They had pushed for a sentence of about 20 years, pointing out that the former convicted mayor has shown no remorse. Federal prosecutors objected when U.S. District Judge Helen Berrigan departed from federal guidelines with the 10-year sentence.

Robert Jenkins, Nagin’s lead attorney, had argued that Nagin should be spared a stiffer sentence because he was a first-time offender for whom a 20-year sentence would be a “virtual life sentence.”

Judge Berrigan seemed to agree, explaining that she didn’t believe Nagin was a criminal ringleader and perhaps made questionable decisions because of his desire to help those around him.

A decision on whether to appeal will be made by the U.S. Solicitor General in Washington, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

“It’s interesting that Ray Nagin has been painted like some kind of champion of Black people’s rights in New Orleans because his record as mayor does not reflect that,” Ramessu Merriamen Aha, a New Orleans businessman and former congressional candidate, told The Louisiana Weekly. “During his tenure, cops were killing Black people like we were going out of style, the Road Home program was methodically shortchanging many Black homeowners in New Orleans, thousands of Black teachers, administrators and school staffers were fired by the state and the city’s housing projects were torn down without any input from the people who lived there.

“White people are now disappointed that Nagin just received a 10-year prison sentence, but that vendetta was sparked by the ‘Chocolate City’ remark,” Aha added. “Many people seem to forget that it was the white business community that went out and found Ray Nagin, recruited him to run for mayor and threw its support behind him to catapult him to victory. Those same people in the business community now take no responsibility for putting Ray Nagin in the driver’s seat at City Hall.”

‘Power Grab’ in Campaign Against Three Tennessee Judges Could Have National Implications by Hazel Trice Edney

July 22, 2014

‘Power Grab’ in Campaign Against Three Tennessee Judges Could Have National Implications

By Hazel Trice Edney

charlesgrant2

(TriceEdneyWire.com) – An attempt to unseat three judges in an upcoming Nashville, Tenn. election is nothing less than a “raw power grab” by right wing special interests using big money to buy control of the courts, says the head of a non-partisan organization of lawyers this week.

“It is a raw power grab is what it is. Their campaign against these justices are based on a series of lies, half-truths, misstatements and material omissions,” says Charles Grant, president of the bi-partisan Nashville Bar Association (NBA), which has endorsed the retention of the judges. It has huge implications nationally because if they can do it here, they can do it anywhere.”

The situation involves three Tennessee Supreme Court Justices Cornelia A. Clark, Sharon Gail Lee and Gary R. Wade, all up for retention on the court by the vote on Aug. 7. They were originally appointed by Democratic Gov. Phil Bredesen.

Opposing the judges are namely Republican Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey and other Republicans backed by wealthy political operatives, some from outside the state, including the billionaire Koch brothers of Wichita, Kans., according to widespread media reports. Among Ramsey’s tools is a 30-page Power Point that attempts to scare voters by claiming – in part – that the three judges are soft on the death penalty and “anti-business”.

Grant says the claims in the Power Point are blatantly false and undermines the integrity of the process.

“It is chock full of misstatements, it’s misleading, it has substantial omissions, sometimes it attributes to these judges opinions that were written by the Court of Appeals for example. And when confronted with all of this misleading information that he is putting out to the public about the quality of these justices’ work, he will come right out and say, ‘It’s not my job to tell their side of the story,’” says Grant, the NBA’s first Black president. “What is it that they hope to accomplish? They hope to control the court. That’s what they hope to accomplish. They don’t want independence. They want control.”

In Tennessee media reports, Ramsey has defended his conduct by saying, “I’m telling my side of the story and they’ll get to tell their side of the story. Every campaign tells half of the story…They tell their side of the story and the people decide.”

Adding to the difficulty of clarifying their records is the fact that judges can’t speak out to defend themselves in the same manner as someone running for a political office. Because of codes of conduct, they must appear impartial at all times and avoid public confrontations that could warrant a conflict of interest later. They can’t speak publically on specific cases. Neither can they ask for financial contributions.

Voters would need to research deeply to unearth the real facts pertaining to the three judges, Grant says. For example, though Ramsey contends they are soft on the death penalty, they have actually affirmed 90 percent of the death penalty cases before them, Grant says. As for the “anti-business” charge, “It is not the justices’ jobs to be leaning one way or the other. That is not what we want them to do. We want them to decide the cases based on the facts and the law without favor, without prejudice to one side or the other.”

The historic principles that have allowed for major progress in America are also at stake, Grant says.

“If Supreme Court judges had been subject to special interests, we would never have had Brown verses Board of Education. We would never have had the landmark decision that dismantled segregation and state-enforced discrimination through laws like Jim Crow and racially restrictive covenants and red-lining by banks and all of those things that enforce racism and racial oppression. So we need to have some kind of check on this power to make sure the basic constitutional rights and the bill of rights are protected.”

In a nutshell, the 40-year-old “merit selection” process by which judges are chosen in Tennessee is quite common in states across the U. S.  Candidates are intensely vetted through a bi-partisan nine-member judicial evaluation commission, which then recommends three judges to the governor for any vacancy on the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court.

When the eight-year term is up, the judges are re-evaluated by a commission which then makes a public recommendation on whether the judge should be retained. If the commission decides against the retainer, the judge is subject to a popular election. If the commission decides for the retainer; then the judges go on the ballot for the public to review their record and to review the recommendations and to determine whether or not they should be replaced.

After this rigorous process, Clark, Lee and Wade were all recommended for retainer by the commission of non-partisan lawyers and citizens. Yet, the judges are now under a partisan attack.

With the rigorous campaign to unseat and replace them, Grant fears the judges’ retention bids could realistically fail because of the potency of the smear campaign and the money that is backing it.

“It is about buying influence. They are going after these justices because these justices do not cow tow to special interests. They do their jobs. They call the balls and strikes as they see them,” Grant says. “When a special interest or group wants to target a judge, it’s kind of easy to identify, to take one of their one hundred opinions or whatever, to misstate the facts or misstate the law or completely mislead.”

Grant and the NBA are not alone in their advocacy for fairness in the process. On July 15, a bi-partisan group of district attorneys came forward to support the three judges saying they have outstanding records and deserve to be retained. Also, Republican Mickey Barker a former chief justice of the Tennessee Supreme Court, has been quoted as calling the anti-retention campaign “frightening” because it would turn the Tennessee Supreme Court into a "partisan branch of government."

Trial lawyer Lew Conner, also a Republican, recently held a fund-raiser of his own to assist the judges in their retention bid. “This is about a system being wrongfully attacked, and Ramsey is the attacker,” Conner was quoted in the Tennessee Watchdog.

Grant says the bi-partisan outrage is simply due to the knowledge that a politicized judiciary could lead to a rogue court which could make decisions based on political whims and allegiances instead of the facts of the cases before them.

He concludes, “Lawyers don’t want judges beholding to special interests. None of us do. Lawyers don’t want to walk into court thinking that the scales of justice are already tilted toward one party before we’ve had an opportunity to present our case,” Grant concludes. “The only way to win is to educate the population. If you want an independent judiciary; you have to understand when it’s under attack by partisan special interests.”

Voter Suppression Key Topic at National NAACP Convention

July 27, 2014

Voter Suppression Key Topic at National NAACP Convention

brooksatnaacp
NAACP President Cornell William Brooks gives his first speech at the NAACP Convention. PHOTO: Courtesy/NAACP  

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from the Richmond Free Press

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Stopping voter suppression. That was a primary topic at the 2014 NAACP national convention as participants looked ahead to the crucial midterm elections in November that will decide control of both the U.S. House and Senate.

In a speech to convention attendees in Las Vegas, new NAACP President and CEO Cornell William Brooks stressed that each vote will have an even bigger impact this fall — making voter protections more critical. He said the NAACP would focus on turning out the vote this fall and rallying support to restore the full power of the Voting Rights Act that the U.S. Supreme Court gutted.

Lighter turnouts in “off-year elections only emphasize the degree to which we need a full and robust Voting Rights Act,” Brooks told the convention. In 2012, Black voters turned out at a higher rate than White voters for the first time in American history, helping re-elect President Obama.

But in the 2010 midterm elections, Black voter participation was considerably lower, and the GOP took control of the U.S. House, along with many state and local offices.

“As a result, we saw a wave of voter suppression laws,” Jotaka Eaddy, the NAACP’s voting rights director, said at a panel discussion focusing on the issue. Some 22 states have new and more restrictive voting laws that will go into effect before the Nov. 4 election, she said. She cited Republican-controlled North Carolina, Kansas, Arizona, Texas, Florida and Tennessee as examples of states that are making it more difficult for Democratic-leaning African-Americans and young people to cast ballots.

The NAACP cited the efforts of the Obama administration to oppose the wave of restrictions. Attorney General Eric Holder drew praise for his pre-convention announcement that the U.S. Department of Justice would intervene to support court challenges to laws in Wisconsin and Ohio that limit voting. Hilary O. Shelton, vice president for policy and advocacy for the NAACP, said that the wave of laws that mostly GOP governors are pushing are aimed at keeping low-income and minority voters out of the voting booth.

“In many areas of our country, it’s very difficult to elect an African-American. And some people are saying, ‘Why bother?’” Shelton said.This year’s convention coincides with the 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act and “Freedom Summer,” a 1964 effort to overcome White supremacist control of Mississippi by registering African-Americans to vote. Last year, the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision threw out a section of the Voting Rights Act that required certain states with a history of discrimination to get federal clearance before changing voting laws and practices — a case that opened the door for states to impose the new restrictions.Virginia is one of those states.

The Republican dominated General Assembly has pushed through a bill requiring voters to show photo IDs to cast ballots as a result of the high court’s decision. Shelton said he believes the GOP is pushing voter suppression because the party is threatened by the rising tide of young voters,Latinos and African-Americans and those groups lean heavily Democratic. He said the GOP would have to align itself more with issues important to Black people,including efforts to help them obtain jobs, housing and education, if the party wants to attract such voters.

“It’s like, you can invite me to the party, but if you’re not serving the food I want to eat or playing the music I want to dance to, I’m not coming,” Shelton said. One highlight of this year’s convention was an address by Vice President Joe Biden, who spoke on Wednesday, the closing day. U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and two Nevada House members, Dina Titus and Steven Horsford, the state’s first Black congressman,also spoke at the convention.

Malala, a Taliban Victim, Finds Sisterhood With Nigeria's Missing Girls

July 21, 2014

Malala, a Taliban Victim, Finds Sisterhood With Nigeria's Missing Girls

amalala

Malala Yousafzai, right, is now advocating for the freedom and education of Nigerian girls.

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from Global Information Network

(TriceEdneyWire.com) – A Pakistani teen who survived certain death from a terrorist’s gunshot to her face has met with the mothers of Nigerian schoolgirls kidnapped by elements of the group Boko Haram.

On the first leg of a three day visit, Malala Yousafzai, now 17, and her father, Ziauddin, spoke with some of the mothers, telling them she saw the more than 200 kidnapped girls as her sisters and would stand up for them. Malala’s recovery led to her advocacy for education for girls.

Speaking with the Nigerian News Agency, she said: “On my 17th birthday, my wish is to see every child go to school and I want to see my Nigerian sisters being released from their abduction and I want them to be free to go to school and continue their education.”

Though it recently became the leading economy in Africa, Nigeria has one of the world's worst records for education. More than 10 million children aged between 6 and 11 are not in school. There is a shortage of more than 200,000 primary school teachers.

At a meeting this week with Malala, President Goodluck Jonathan disputed criticism that his government was not doing enough to find the girls. He called it "wrong and misplaced," according to a presidential statement.

Jonathan has not met with any of the parents, though some regularly make the dangerous drive from Chibok to join activists who have held daily rallies in Abuja.

Parents of the missing girls were quoted this week by The New York Times pleading for international support. “American, France, China, they say they are helping, but on the ground we don’t see anything,” said Lawan Zanah, father of one missing girls. His frustration was echoed by the school principal, Asabe Kwambura who feared that the international campaign #BringBackOurGirls was slacking.

“Continue the campaign,” she urged. “Our students are still living in the woods. We want the international community to talk to the government of Nigeria to do something because they are doing nothing.”

The government, the Times reports, has just hired an American public relations firm for $1.2 million. “That money could be better used to pay for security at schools,” observed Nicholas Kristof, Times journalist.

Meanwhile, a San Francisco-based charity promoting education for girls in Africa received $900,000 after articles that appeared in the Times. Camfed – or Campaign for Female Education – says the money will help 3,000 girls continue in high school across the continent.

X