Feb. 1, 2015

Women Mayors Around the Nation Embrace D.C. Mayor Bowser

By James Wright 

Mayor Muriel Bowser

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from the Afro American Newspaper

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, facing tough, early tests, received plenty of support and advice during a gathering of female mayors, recently. Bowser is a new member of the U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM), who met in the District for their annual winter meeting. She is also a member of the USCM’s Women Mayors’ Caucus and had the opportunity to network with female elected leaders of cities from around the country at its meeting.

“I plan on being very active with this caucus while I am the mayor of the District,” Bowser said. “We host this winter meeting every year and I will participate with this caucus and the U.S. Conference of Mayors for the benefit of the residents of the District of Columbia.”

The USCM is an organization of mayors of cities with populations of 30,000 and above. The organization was founded in 1932 to promote an urban/suburban agenda to the federal government as well as provide leadership training and an idea forum for mayors.

The women’s caucus was founded in 1983 by then San Francisco Mayor Dianne Feinstein, who is now a Democratic U.S. senator from California. Its purpose is to encourage women mayors to become leaders in the USCM and foster networking relationships.

The chair of the women’s caucus is Mayor Mary Ann Lutz of Monrovia, Calif. Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake is an active member of the caucus and is serving as the vice chair of the USCM.

There are 68 female mayors in the USCM that includes cities such as Houston (Annise Parker) Oakland (Libby Schaaf), Minneapolis (Betsy Hodges), and San Antonio (Ivy Taylor). Nevertheless, women mayors constitute only 18 percent of mayors in the USCM, according to organization statistics.

Sharon Pratt Kelly, who served as the District’s first female mayor from 1991-1995 and was the first Black woman to lead a major city, was active with the women’s caucus.

Rawlings-Blake was one of the first mayors to congratulate Bowser when she won the April 1 Democratic mayoral primary last year and sat on the front row on Jan. 2 when Bowser took the oath of office. Rawlings-Blake said that she “felt like a proud mother” when she saw Bowser officially become the District mayor that day. Rawlings-Blake said her new colleague is capable of handling the job.

“Muriel Bowser is a seasoned elected official,” she said. Rawlings-Blake, who like Bowser, served as a former city council member, said. “I have certainly made myself available, even though I don’t give unsolicited advice.”

Rawlings-Blake said that she has advised Bowser to get involved in the women’s caucus because “we have this formal network to support each other.”

Shirley Franklin, the Barbara Jordan Visiting Professor of Ethics and Political Values at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin, attended the women’s caucus meeting. Franklin served as mayor of Atlanta from 2002-2010 and was the first Black woman to lead a major Southern city.

In 2005, Franklin was named one of the five best big-city American mayors by {Time Magazine}, and was included in the {U.S. News and World Report} “Best Leaders of 2005″ issue. She also received the prestigious 2005 Profile in Courage Award by the John F. Kennedy Foundation for her fiscal management and high ethical standards as mayor of Atlanta.

Franklin said she has simple advice for Bowser. “I would tell her to work hard, be honest and listen,” Franklin said. “Listen more than talk.”

Bowser said she consulted privately with Franklin, who has served as chair of the women’s caucus, before she took office.

“I flew to Atlanta and visited Shirley last year and we had a long conversation,” Bowser said. “She has given me some great advice. We talked about what worked for her as the female mayor of a large city and she advised me on such issues as getting the Olympics to come to D.C. and even what jewelry to wear in public.”

Bowser was given a rousing ovation during the meeting and was greeted by almost all of her colleagues after it ended. Many took pictures with Bowser and offered her advice and contact information.

East Palo Alto, Calif. Mayor Lisa Gauthier said that Bowser must stay in engaged with her residents in order to be successful as a mayor. “Even though Washington, D.C. is larger than East Palo Alto and the issues faced by those cities are different, I would advise her to do what works for me,” Gauthier said. “Mayor Bowser needs to stay engaged and to remember that she was elected by the people. She should hold town hall meetings to listen to residents and understand what they need.”

Feb. 1, 2015

Beyond the Bridge: The Suppression Never Ended
By Jesse Jackson

Feb. 1, 2015

U. S. 'Green Berets' to Assist Africa in Counter-Terror Operations

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from Global Information Network

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - U.S. Army Special Forces, America’s highly-trained operatives in unconventional warfare, direct action, reconnaissance and counter-terrorism, are preparing for one of their biggest exercises of the year in Africa.

Under the name “Flintlock 2015”, the exercise is a multinational training of troops in several West African countries including Niger, Nigeria, Cameroon and Tunisia.  It kicks off Feb. 26 in N’Djamena, the capital of Chad.

Niger, Nigeria, Cameroon and Chad are all frontline states battling Boko Haram, the insurgent group that kidnapped hundreds of girl children in Nigeria and which has extended its field of operations outward to the neighboring states.

According to the online Defense News, the exercise will bring together approximately 1,300 troops from African and NATO countries, including 673 African forces, 365 NATO forces and 255 US personnel who will take part in a variety of tactical engagements to improve interoperability, communication and humanitarian response capabilities.

Special Forces, also known as “Green Berets,” date back to 1952, when they began to build their reputation in counter-insurgency actions in Vietnam, El Salvador, Panama, Haiti, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, the Philippines, and in Operation Enduring Freedom – Horn of Africa.

Last March, the Los Angeles Times reported on dozens of U.S. military deployments in Africa, often to tiny and temporary outposts. Small-scale operations by the Pentagon's Africa Command (AFRICOM), the paper wrote, reflect an effort to avoid “blowback” or deadly actions against the U.S. sparked by the activities of U.S. troops abroad.

U.S. operations in Africa initially met strong opposition from some leaders and the African public.

"We've got a big image problem down there," a state department official told The Guardian newspaper in 2007. "Public opinion is really against getting into bed with the US. They just don't trust the US."

US economic incentives, including the prospect of hundreds of local jobs, failed to persuade leaders in Algeria, Morocco, Egypt, Djibouti, among others.

But with the advances of Islamist groups, national leaders may have quietly welcomed U.S. military units, abandoning hope for African solutions such as the African Union serving as the continent’s common security structure.

In an interview with the NY Times, Brig. Gen. James B. Linder said: “My job is to look at Africa and see where the threat to the United States is… I see Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, the Libyan problem set, Al Shabab in Somalia, Boko Haram in Nigeria, Ansar al-Sharia in Tunisia, Benghazi and Darna.”

“We have a real global threat,” Linder said. “The problems in Africa are going to land on our doorstep if we’re not careful.”

Despite what AFRICOM officials say, wrote Nick Turse in Mother Jones magazine, a careful reading of internal briefings, contracts, and other official documents, as well as open source information, including the command's own press releases and news items, reveals that military operations in Africa are already vast and will be expanding for the foreseeable future.

To Be Equal 

It’s Time for Hollywood to Act Like Diversity Matters
By Marc H. Morial

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - “Diversity is basically a description of independence.  Diversity is what moves the ball for me, and I thought ‘give people a chance that have different points of view.  Let the audience decide whether they like it or not.  But give those voices a chance to be seen and heard.” – Robert Redford, actor, director, and co-founder of Sundance Film Festival

Hosted by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the 87th annual Academy Awards ceremony – better known as the Oscars – will either best be remembered for the uproar incited by this year’s homogenous nominations, or as a seminal moment for change in the Academy’s long, non-inclusive history.

For the first time since 1998, the stage has been set for our nation to celebrate its least diverse Oscars.  In a year that saw Oscar-worthy turns from several actors of color, none were nominated in the acting categories, with all 20 acting nominations going to white actors.  But the story doesn’t end there.  Not a single woman stood among the five directors and 14 screenwriters nominated in those categories.

In a nation where nearly 51 percent of the population is female, how can formidable directors like Ava DuVernay for Selma and Angelina Jolie for Unbroken find themselves on the cutting room floor of the nomination selection?  In a nation where, according to a 2014 Pew Research Center survey, “Some 43% of Millennial adults are non-white, the highest share of any generation,” how does the Academy’s nominees not reflect Hollywood’s audience base or the nation in which we live?

In response to the outcry surrounding this year’s Oscar nominations, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, the first African American and third female president of the Academy, spoke to the Associated Press and pointed to progress in the Academy’s efforts to reflect our nation’s diverse, movie-going audience.  She noted, “In the last two years, we’ve made greater strides than we ever have in the past toward becoming a more diverse and inclusive organization through admitting new members and more inclusive classes of members,” adding, “I would love to see and look forward to see a greater cultural diversity among all our nominees in all of our categories.”  I share her vision, but the question remains of when those words will be put into a plan of action – and championed by the broader industry.

A much-cited 2012 survey of the Academy by the Los Angeles Times demonstrates the crux of the problem.  According to the survey, the estimated 7,000 Academy members are 94 percent White, 77 percent male and have a median age of 62 – hardly a representative reflection of the nation.

While my role is not to question the film credentials of the Academy’s members, I do question the ability of such a homogenous body to reflect the perspectives, lives, and stories of a diverse pool of moviemakers – and moviegoers.  I would also question the ability of the Academy to monitor itself and become a more inclusive body without the pressure of public scrutiny and advocacy.

Here are a few things to note about Academy membership: membership is “limited to film artists working in the production of theatrically-released motion pictures…The Academy’s membership process is by sponsorship, not application. Candidates must be sponsored by two Academy members from the branch to which the candidate seeks admission. Additionally, Academy Award nominees are automatically considered for membership and do not require sponsors…The Board decides which individuals will receive invitations.”

The Academy’s membership requirements are both an indictment and call to action.  When women and minorities are snubbed at the Oscars, it means much more than wounded gender or ethnic pride.  It means that we, as a nation, have lost an opportunity to reflect our unique diversity via a medium that touches so many of our lives.  It means we have lost another seat at the proverbial Oscar table.

This is about more than awards deferred; it is about dreams deferred.  It is about the lack of racial and gender diversity we find both behind the screen and in front of it.  It is about the inevitable way the Academy’s membership roll directly influences who gets nominated and who wins.

What it is not about is an unfair advantage, but instead, a fair chance to have the work of a wider swath of our filmmakers, casts and crews considered.  That must begin with a significant change in the composition of the Academy.

I would be remiss not to acknowledge the strides the Academy has begun to make to address its diversity issues.  Hiring Boone Isaacs as its president was an important step on the road to diversifying, and her decision to remove a cap on the number of Academy members and push for Academy members to invite a more diverse pool of people to apply are the first of many important steps that must be taken on the journey towards inclusion.  But more must be done.

Progress rarely comes as a result of being passive.  I urge you to join me in efforts to ensure more inclusion in Hollywood so that we can look back on the 2015 Oscars as the catalyst that spurred action for much-needed industry reform.