Progressive Candidates Ignore Race Matters By Julianne Malveaux

Feb. 1, 2015

Progressive Candidates Ignore Race Matters
By Julianne Malveaux

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - From everything I read – I like Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). Her progressive ideas are just what we need while Hilary Clinton is straddling the fence, and still cozying up with bankers. Warren says she isn’t running for President, but there are quite a few political action committees urging her to run. And like President Barack Obama, she released a biography (A Fighting Chance) just two years before the 2016 election that provides details of her hardscrabble childhood, her early pregnancy and marriage, and her struggles combining work and family when she had a small child. Men and women can relate to her story, as well as at the ways she became the guru for consumer rights and financial literacy. When senators would not confirm her for the permanent position in the Department of Treasury, she ran for the Senate. Running for office for the first time, and she won.

Warren has consistently articulated a progressive agenda focused on those at the bottom, but she has consistently ignored race matters. Perhaps this is because progressive politicians feel they will alienate part of their base if they talk about race. This makes Warren and the others not much different that conventional politicians, ignoring the economic differences between African Americans and others.

How would Elizabeth Warren deal with declining revenues for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)? Would she step in to close the unemployment rate gap or the achievement gap? Would she deal with the housing discrimination that too many African Americans face? Or would she hide behind the common progressive refrain that when challenges at the bottom are addressed, African Americans are lifted up and their circumstance will change.

The progressive Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) has articulated a progressive agenda from the Senate for more than a decade. He hails from the swing state of Ohio, and many are wondering why he doesn’t command the same kind of attention that Elizabeth Warren does. While his ideas are solid he, too, has pretty much ignored the issue of race.

At the same time that progressives have been ignoring race, we have been barraged with report after report that race matters. Whether we are talking about those in kindergarten or in high schools, African American students face stricter discipline (with some of them, regardless of age, handcuffed and expelled from school), while teachers rely on their sociology classes to justify keeping white kids in school for the same infractions. Conversations about disproportionate rates of incarceration, and racial disparities in the application of the death penalty are rarely raised in Congress unless members of the Congressional Black Caucus bring it up. Progressives should not talk about race matters exclusively, but they exhibit a pathetic myopia when they fail to talk about race at all.

African American Democrats will hold their noses and vote for Elizabeth Warren, or if they are Clinton loyalists, they will vote her instead. Indeed, Elizabeth Warren has as much a change of winning a presidential contest as I do, but her committees will challenge the Clinton positions on domestic public policy. If she is able to get Senator Clinton to alter her positions on just a few matters she will have done her job.

Still, like President Obama, the matter of race is off the table. The President addresses race gingerly, mainly because as an African American President he must debunk the myth that he is racially biased. I don’t agree with position, or the way he dealt with it in the State of the Union address when he had nothing to lose by dealing with race or simply saying the words “African American” or “Black”. Race still matters in our nation. What national leader has the courage to say it? Warren, Clinton and Brown have more leeway than President Obama, but they have as much fear as President Obama does for addressing a key national issue.

There is significant excitement about the role Senator Elizabeth Warren will play in the 2016 election. Maybe she will garner enough delegates to force a roll call, or at least the opportunity to nominate Senator Clinton. Maybe she will have a chance to address the nation in one of the prime-time spots during the convention, just as President Obama did in 2000. Certainly her name will be whispered or even shouted as she gains popular support. But if she is unwilling to talk about race, she will not have met the expectations of some in the African American community.

Julianne Malveaux is an author and economist based in Washington, DC

Remembering the Often Forgotten by Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq.

Feb. 1, 2015

Remembering the Often Forgotten
By Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq.

williams2

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Few who know me would ever think of questioning my respect for right-thinking, strong Black men. I’d never think of undermining their work in our community. As we review and write additional volumes to the story of the civil rights struggle, a better job must be done to include women and youth in the victories achieved.

We do ourselves a huge disservice when we exclude contributions of those who’ve fully participated in the struggle. The national guilt that inspired the social change we saw in the 1950's and 1960's was generated, in large part, by television viewers seeing the barbaric treatment of Black youth and women on the streets of the South.

Through the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, we’ve begun to critically reexamine the injustices of the past. We’re shedding the light of truth and correction upon many of the events that symbolize and sustain the spirit of racism in America. Increasingly, the efforts of those civil rights martyrs pay dividends in our present circumstance.

The film, Selma, has done a lot to refocus attention on the obstacles we fought against and has shed light on the peripheral characters that helped shape a movement.

Some who watch bio-pictures often view peripheral characters as composites of those who were actually involved. The women portrayed in Selma represent actual characters that provided spiritual support, such as Mahalia Jackson with song, or logistical support, as with Ritchie Jean Jackson who shared the bounty of her kitchen. Seemingly small, those and similar efforts, provided a foundation for the ground troops.

The courage of the women of the movement was reflected in the portrayal of Annie Lee Cooper by Oprah Winfrey. Her participation in civil rights activities was varied, but she’s famously known for punching the rabidly racist Sheriff Jim Clark. Considering the time, her act of resistance was life-threatening and inspirational. Her tenacity for life and justice lasted until she reached the age of 100. Oprah stated that she took the role "because of the magnificence of Ms. Cooper and what her courage meant to an entire movement.

Amelia Boynton, portrayed by actress Lorraine Toussaint, was another pivotal character in Selma. Her home and office became the center of Selma's civil rights battles and was used to plan demonstrations for civil and voting rights. Of Selma's population of 50 percent Blacks, only 1 percent had been allowed to register to vote. In protest, Ms. Boynton and others organized a march to Montgomery which resulted in the March 7, 1965 "Bloody Sunday March." Ms. Boynton was beaten unconscious. Those who watched the 2015 SOTU Address caught a glimpse of 103 year old Ms. Boynton in the gallery as a guest of President Obama. Her presence stood in stark contrast to the 1965 photo of her lying beaten and bloody, on the Edmund Pettis Bridge.

Women and youth weren’t the only unsung heroes. In Rock Hill, SC, 54 years after being convicted and jailed for participating in a lunch counter sit-in, 9 former college protesters had their convictions vacated. They set a precedent that would serve as a model for civil rights resistance. Instead of paying the fine for their protests, they chose to serve the sentence of 30 days of hard labor.

Known as the "Friendship 9," the men stood as symbols of a justice system gone awry. Judge John C. Hayes III said, “We cannot rewrite history, but we can right history. Now, as to the Friendship 9, is the time and opportunity to do so. Now is the time to recognize that justice is not temporal, but is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.”

Prosecutor Kevin Brackett said pardoning the men was inappropriate. A pardon implies forgiveness, and these men did nothing wrong. Let us keep their memory alive.

(E. Faye Williams is President of the National Congress of Black Women, Inc. www.nationalcongressbw.org)

The Four-Letter Word Politicians Avoid: Poor by Williams Spriggs

Jan. 27, 2015

The Four-Letter Word Politicians Avoid: Poor
By Williams Spriggs

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - In his State of the Union address on Jan. 20, President Barack Obama never used the word "poor" and only used the word "poverty" once, which was in the context of fighting "extreme poverty" globally, in emphasizing the recent Ebola outbreak in West Africa.

The previous week, most Americans were shocked by a report from the Southern Education Foundation suggesting that low-income students were now the majority in America's public schools. What the report actually found was that the majority of America's school children were eligible to receive free or reduced price lunches at their schools. Some of the eligible poor students are living in poverty, others are at near-poverty levels and the rest go to schools with high concentrations of poor students. So, maybe that explains why this report didn't influence the president to change his State of the Union to mention the word poor, or poverty.

Nonetheless, the dire situation of America's children means we must move to a new accounting framework. Economists have favored real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita-the value of all goods and services produced by a country adjusted for population size and inflation. For economists, this figure marks what is possible for a nation, since it measures the resources available to address problems-whether an outbreak of Ebola or the need to build roads and bridges or educate a nation.

In January 1964, the real GDP per capita of the United States stood at $19,233, when President Lyndon B. Johnson, in his State of the Union address, told America that:

This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America. I urge this Congress and all Americans to join with me in that effort. It will not be a short or easy struggle, no single weapon or strategy will suffice, but we shall not rest until that war is won. The richest nation on earth [emphasis added] can afford to win it. We cannot afford to lose it.

I added emphasis to the "richest nation on earth," because the United States real GDP per capita was the largest at the time. And, so, as President Johnson said, "we can afford" to defeat poverty.

This January, the real GDP per capita for the United States is more than $50,805. Given the poverty level for a family of four is $23,850, it is a real puzzle how, with output per person growing by $31,572, poverty was not eradicated. Clearly the fruits of growth didn't spread very wide.

Instead, we began 2013 with 19.9 percent of America's children living in poverty. Sadly, 7.6 percent of America's children live in a household below the poverty line, where at least one family member works year-round full-time; a clear testament to the effects of falling and stagnant wages for all workers. Falling wages have pushed the rings of the middle-income ladder on top of the collapsing rungs of the falling minimum wage and the working poor. But there was no mention of the word "poor" or ending poverty, though clearly "we can afford" to end it.

The silver lining in the story on the high share of American children getting subsidized lunches is that it is a sign we can get it: that the wealth of the United States can solve some problems-it can help feed our children. And it shows a use of the "commons," in the sense that many of our states are "commonwealths"-as the U.S. Constitution puts it to "promote the general welfare."

But with so many of our children poor, near poor and in school systems with high concentrations of poor children, the "general welfare" becomes even more important. Unless we act, too many of our children will be priced out of the education our nation needs them to attain to sustain our economy and run our complex defense systems, or add to our cultural riches or cure our sick.

We need a national accounting that measures what the nation needs. And with so many poor children, the deficits we face if we let people be "priced out" will not be close.

Instead, what we are now hearing from Congress is that the richest nation on earth that sent people safely into outer space, launched the interstate highway system and found the vaccine to polio when its per capita GDP was less than half its current size, cannot now afford to educate its children.

My paternal grandmother grew up in Fayette County, Iowa, at the turn of the past century. The motto of West Union High of Fayette in 1919 was: Impossible is un-American. Maybe that is why Congress has such a low rating?

Follow Spriggs on Twitter: @WSpriggs. Contact: Amaya Smith-Tune Acting Director, Media Outreach AFL-CIO 202-637-5142.

Black Men's Jobless Rate Drops, But Remains High By Frederick H. Lowe

Jan. 27, 2015

Black Men's Jobless Rate Drops, But Remains High

By Frederick H. Lowe

The unemployment rate dropped for African-American men over 20 last month, but it remains high.

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from NorthStarNewsToday.com

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - The unemployment rate for African-American men 20 years old and older dropped slightly in December compared to November, but the jobless rate for black men still remains twice as high as that of other major worker groups, which includes whites, Hispanics and Asians.

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Friday that last month’s unemployment rate for black men was 11.0 percent compared to 11.2 percent in November. The labor-participation rate, or how many black men were actively applying for jobs, improved to 67.8 percent in December, compared with 66.9 percent in November, according to BLS’s monthly household survey.

The BLS reported that nonfarm payroll employment rose by 252,000 jobs in December and the unemployment rate fell to 5.6 percent. Most job gains occurred in professional and business services, construction, food services, bars and manufacturing.

Officials at the Brookings Institution, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, said the December numbers capped the best year for employment since 1999. More than 95 percent of job gains in December and throughout the year came from the private sector.

Brookings officials also noted that the job market was further helped by government hiring. “Government agencies added 12,000 (workers) to their payrolls in December and an average of 8,000 employees a month over the course of the year,” said Gary Burtless, senior fellow at Brookings. In contrast, 2013, the number of public employees fell 3,000 per month in 2013, making it the fifth successive year that government payrolls shrank.

The downside to the good news was that there was scant improvement in wages. “The average hourly wage of all employees was $24.57 in December, 1.7 percent higher than the average hourly pay in December 2013,” Burtless said.

The unemployment rate for black women 20 years old and older was 8.2 percent in December compared withto 9.5 percent in November. The labor-participation for African-American women declined to 61.2 percent in December from 61.9 percent in November.

The improving jobs picture helped lower the overall African-American unemployment rate to 10.4 percent in December compared withto 11.0 percent in November.

Still, the African-American jobless rate on a seasonally adjusted basis remains much higher than the white unemployment rate of 4.8 percent. The Hispanic rate was 6.5 percent, and the Asian unemployment rate on a non-seasonally adjusted basis was 4.2 percent.

Justice Department Unlikely to Bring Civil Rights Charges Against Darren Wilson in Michael Brown Slaying by Zenitha Prince

Jan. 26, 2015

Justice Department Unlikely to Bring Civil Rights Charges Against Darren Wilson in Michael Brown Slaying
By Zenitha Prince

Michael Brown

Officer Darren Wilson

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

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - The U.S. Department of Justice will not file civil rights charges against former Ferguson, Mo., Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of unarmed Black teenager Michael Brown, The New York Times reported this week.

The Justice Department declined comment on the report. However, the publication cited officials who said Justice prosecutors are preparing a memo recommending that no charges be filed against Wilson, after an FBI investigation apparently found no evidence supporting such charges.

The outcome mirrors that of a parallel but independent probe by Missouri state law enforcement, which resulted in a St. Louis grand jury declining to file charges against Wilson in November.

The development could signal an end to the highly explosive case that spawned protests, a national debate around the use of excessive force by police against African Americans and ongoing social activism.

Benjamin Crump, a lawyer for Brown’s family, said the family is awaiting official word from the Justice Department before they make any comment.

“The family won’t address speculation from anonymous sources,” Crump said in a statement posted on Twitter.

While the Justice Department’s civil rights probe into Wilson’s actions may be completed, the federal agency is still pursuing a broader civil rights investigation into the Ferguson Police Department’s alleged patterns and practices of discrimination against the city’s majority Black population.