banner2e top

Some Black Men Believe They are Viewed as "Less Valuable" By Kelly-Ann Brown, Brelaun Douglas and Jasmine Rennie

March 16, 2014

Some Black Men Believe They are Viewed as "Less Valuable"
By Kelly-Ann Brown, Brelaun Douglas and Jasmine Rennie

black males - crump
Christopher Crump: Recent verdicts indicate the justice system is "not meant for us."

 
black males - richards
Gregory Richards says Black males are sometimes "unconscious of our personalities" around people who are different.

 
black males - randall1
Marcus Randall says he is always "cautious of my actions and mindful of my surroundings."

(TriceEdneyWire.com) – As the national focus continues on high profiled shootings of unarmed young Black men, some say the controversies have caused them to fear attack even when they are doing what is right and normal.

With fallout from the Florida-based Jordan Davis and Trayvon Martin cases - and the not so recent, but still relevant, Sean Bell and Oscar Grant cases - all brimming with racial undertones - Black males seem to be in danger of being killed for that reason alone - being Black.

Most recently, Michael Dunn, 43, of Jacksonville, Fla., shot and killed 17-year-old Jordan Davis during an argument at a gas station. Dunn opened fire, shooting toward an SUV carrying Davis and three friends. He claimed he thought he saw a gun during a dispute over the teens’ loud music.

Though convicted by a jury of three counts of attempted murder, the jury could not reach a verdict on the first degree murder charge in relation to Davis’s death. Dun’s sentencing has been delayed until he is retried on the remaining first-degree murder charge May 5.

The case of Jordan Davis is reminiscent of scenarios that civil rights leaders argue the Black community has heard far too often. That scenario is that a young African-American male is unjustly killed and the trial often ends in a disappointing verdict.

As heartbreaking as the verdict had been, many young Black men were not surprised by the Dunn outcome at all, noting a culture of attacks against innocent Black me by those who stereotype or profile them.

Joshua Lanier, 25, a community supervision assistant for the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency in Washington, D.C., notes a common theme among the Jordan Davis case and others like it:

“A Black male’s life seems to be less valuable than anybody else's in this country,” says Lanier. “Anytime you hear a case involving a young Black male [and] the police, he always seems to get the short end of the stick.”

For many it seems the outcomes of these cases – including the George Zimmerman acquittal in the killing of Trayvon Martin - have only reaffirmed what many Black men have considered to be true: “The justice system…is not meant for us,” says Christopher Crump, 19- year-old California resident attending Hampton University.

Though law officials pride themselves on objectivity, by nature people are judgmental and often unable to separate their emotions and personal experiences from their decision making as well as their views of others.

“Times haven’t changed,” says Nicholas Taylor, a 19-year-old Texas native attending Howard University. “There’s still an innate fear of African-American males … whether you are [a] law enforcement [official] or an average citizen.”

But when it comes to being a Black male in America, to what extent does race effect their interactions with others?

“I think many of us are unconscious of our personalities around people who are not like us, especially Caucasians,” says Gregory Richards, 24, an accounts receivable representative from The Bronx, N.Y.

Lanier, the community supervision assistant, agrees. He believes that Black males are feared “more than any other race and gender” because society has depicted the Black man to be aggressive and unpredictable. In response to this often false depiction, other races can be overly aggressive when attempting to diffuse a minor conflict; especially when it escalates to a killing.

Stresses related to being stereotyped and profiled are also known to affect the health of Black men, according to Dr. Waldo E. Johnson Jr., associate professor at the School of Social Service Administration and faculty affiliate in the Center for the Study of Race, Politics and Culture at the University of Chicago.

At a symposium at the university last month, Johnson said African-American men suffer from much higher rates of depression because of trauma compared to their white counterparts, and many Black men don't recognize that they have been traumatized, according to an article on TheNorthStarNews.com

According to the article, “Because young Black men and Black men rarely find places where they can feel safe, they are on hyper-surveillance concerning their surroundings, and they are hyper-vigilant to any signs of danger coming from the police, or individuals who act like the police, such as a George Zimmerman, security guards following them in stores and other individuals in positions of authority, Dr. Johnson said. He added that black men always are under intense surveillance by others.”

Recent high-profiled cases shed light on the belief that young Black men are apparently being killed because of their culture, such as Davis’s loud music which irritated Dunn, or their physical appearance, like Martin’s Hoodie which apparently caused shooter George Zimmerman to see him as suspicious. The stereotypical conclusion: Black men pose a threat.

As a result, some Black men change themselves to meet the expectations of others.

“Regardless of the situation they are going to see us as something we are not,” said 21-year-old Philadelphia resident Marcus Randall currently attending Penn State. “At the end of the day, I just have to be cautious of my surroundings and mindful of my actions.”

Through advice and personal experiences, many Black males have found strategies to combat these prejudices in hopes of making themselves seem less intimidating. “It’s not always about staying true to who you are, it’s about adapting. Adaptation doesn’t mean selling out,” says Taylor, the Howard student.

“I can understand not wanting to change because that’s who they are,” Taylor said. He concluded, but even “animals that don’t change go extinct.”



My Brother's Keeper from a Single Father and Business Owner's Perspective By Ron Busby

March 17, 2014

My Brother's Keeper from a Single Father and Business Owner's Perspective
By Ron Busby

ronbusby

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - I must admit, being a single father of two Black boys isn't easy, especially since my wife passed away 12 years ago. From breaking up fights, to discussing college and career choices, I've learned that being a good father means more than just "being there." Decisions are made, things happen, but despite the inevitable bumps in the road of parenthood, I am always proud to see how my two sons have grown into bright young men. Recently, you have heard lots about President Obama's laudable effort to ensure bright futures for America's young men "of color."  We agree it makes sense to use his bully pulpit to highlight the challenges faced by Black and Latino males and to galvanize solution providers around a common work plan.

What makes a lot less sense to us is how - in the face of dwindling contract awards to Black-owned businesses - we are to remain hopeful that equitable opportunity is within the grasp of Black businesses. For sure, there is lots of happy talk in the President's proposed budget about commitments to SBA loan guarantees, certified development companies (CDCs) and small business investment companies (SBICs)... billions to infrastructure rehab and surface transportation projects... millions to the Minority Business Development Agency for technical assistance and money for expansion of Promise Zones designed to focus federal resources in targeted areas, both urban and rural.

Against the backdrop of these huge outlays across education, healthcare/social services, infrastructure and transportation, let's suppose that the targeted young Black and Latino males successfully scale all the hurdles facing them... that they graduate from high school, matriculate to a community college, four-year institution or trade school and set out to pursue their career aspirations. What awaits them?

Shrinking federal contract awards to Black and Hispanic-owned businesses seem to preclude any opportunity at supplying their goods/services to government agencies. Kauffman Foundation researcher Alicia Robb, said in her study of SBA lending  that minority borrowers are "turning to mainstream lenders less because they have a fear of denial, which is warranted." So, it appears that even commitments of loan guarantees won't be enough to open access to capital. Tuition costs are skyrocketing while low-income students face cuts in the availability of tuition assistance. Therefore, repayment without improved employment/entrepreneurial prospects will exacerbate the challenge.

To complicate matters, within minutes of President Obama's announcement, his political opponents cranked up their "anti-anything-Obama" screed and pronounced My Brother's Keeper not only socialist, but racist, as well. While the program is decidedly neither, it may serve to distract from more immediate, short term fixes.

Growing businesses need employees. Black (and Brown) businesses, given access to the tools that fuel expansion, are far more likely to extend job opportunities to young minority males.  Hence, it makes at least as much sense to expend effort to ensure that federal, state and local contracts are awarded fairly. And, as always, we will contend that healthy, growing, vibrant Black-owned businesses are the best cure for Black unemployment.

Among the more hopeful signs of support for My Brother's Keeper is the announcement from  The Opportunity Finance Network (OFN). OFN, which represents more than 225 community development financial institutions, will pledge $1 billion ot expand financing for organizations and initiatives working to help young minority men.  While Opportunity Finance Network CEO Mark Pinsky has yet to define how his organization will allocate dollars raised from network members, we will engage his organization to encourage more business lending, rather than program development.

There absolutely is room in the national marketplace for a program such as My Brother's Keeper. The challenges faced by young, ethnic minority males are well documented. The futures of these young men - and the future well being of the nation - deserve the kind of focused solution-searching described in the blueprint for the effort.

In the meantime, though, Black business owners - males AND females - face the daunting task of building and sustaining enterprises without the safety net implicit in My Brother's Keeper. If we, as a nation, continue to fall short of fostering the healthy economic environment that we know is essential to long-term prosperity for ALL Americans, then the work of "My Brother's Keeper" shall be in vain. Let's put our actions - and dollars - where our economic futures are, for James 1:22 (KJV) says, "But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves."

Ron Busby, Sr. is president of U.S. Black Chambers, Inc.

 

 

 

Holder Calls for Changes in Federal Low-Level Drug Sentences by Frederick H. Lowe

March 16, 2014

Holder Calls for Changes in Federal Low-Level Drug Sentences
By Frederick H. Lowe

eric_holder_official_portrait

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from TheNorthStarNews.com

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder today endorsed proposed changes that would cut federal sentences for low-level drug offenders and dramatically reduce the Bureau of Prisons population over the next five years if adopted.

Holder, who testified before the U.S. Sentencing Commission, supports changes to Federal Sentencing Guidelines that would reserve the harshest penalties for the most serious drug offenders.

In addition, Holder's proposal would lower by two levels the base offense associated with various drug quantities involved in drug trafficking crimes.

If adopted, the change would affect nearly 70 percent of all drug trafficking offenders and reduce the average sentence by 11 months, or nearly 18% , according to the Sentencing Commission.

Commission members also project that the Bureau of Prisons population would drop by 6,550 inmates at the end of five years.

"This is a straightforward adjustment to sentencing ranges --- while measured in scope --- would nonetheless send a strong message about the fairness of our criminal justice system," Holder testified. "And it would help to rein in federal prison spending while focusing limited resources on the most serious threats to public safety."

The move is Holder's latest step to alter the federal government's approach to dealing with non-violent drug offenders.
Last August, Holder announced his "Smart on Crime" initiative, which included a major change to the department's charging policy intended to reserve strict, mandatory minimum sentences for high-level or violent-drug traffickers.

Holder noted that state and federal governments spent a combined $80 billion on incarceration during 2010 alone. He added that of the more than 216,000 current federal inmates, nearly half are serving time for drug-related crimes.

"This focused reliance on incarceration is not just financially unsustainable --- it comes with human and moral costs that are impossible to calculate," Holder said."The United States comprises five percent of the world's population, but it incarcerates almost a quarter of the world's prisoners."

Commission members are scheduled to vote on the proposals in April.

Nearing March 31 Deadline, Forty Percent Rise in Healthcare Website by Zenitha Prince

March 17, 2014

Nearing March 31 Deadline, Forty Percent Rise in Healthcare Website 
Spike Linked to ‘Between Two Ferns’ Appearance

By Zenitha Prince

obama and galifianakis
President Barack Obama participates in an interview with Zach Galifianakis for "Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifianakis," in the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House, Feb. 24, 2014.  PHOTO: Pete Souza/The White House

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - According to the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which manages Healthcare.gov, 4.2 million Americans have enrolled for health insurance through the federal marketplace as of March 11. That's apparently because, from running presidential campaigns to running the government in the White House, the Obama machine has always found unique ways to achieve its goals.

In an attempt to promote the Affordable Care Act and encourage younger Americans to sign up for health insurance before the March 31 deadline, President Obama appeared in Zach Galifianakis’ “Between Two Ferns” show on comic website Funny or Die, bypassing more traditional media outlets. The video was meant to “reach Americans where they live,” said White House press secretary Jay Carney in a press briefing on March 11.

"Gone are the days when your broadcasts …. can reach everybody that we need to reach," Carney said to broadcast journalists at the briefing.

He added, “We're involved in a multifaceted effort to reach communities out there of folks who can benefit from quality, affordable health insurance, can avail themselves of the options that they’ll find on healthcare.gov. And we're looking for creative ways to do that. This was one of them.”

In the satirical six-minute skit, “The Hangover” star posed awkward questions and traded insults with the commander-in-chief.

"What's it like to be the last Black president?" Galifianakis asked.

"Seriously?" Obama deadpans. "What's it like for this to be the last time you ever talk to a president?"

Halfway through the clip, as the president begins urging young people to sign up for health care, the comedian sighs heavily and mutters, “Here we go,” and comments later amid Obama’s plug, “Is this what they mean by drones?”

"I think it's fair to say I wouldn't be here today if I didn't have something to plug," Obama said in one sally.

The president’s comedic outing drew criticism from all corners of the spectrum.

Former Fox News journalist Roger Friedman said in his Showbiz411 website column that Obama’s performance was “less presidential than Richard Nixon saying ‘Sock it to me on ‘Laugh In,’” and that he “should not quit his day job.”

During the White House briefing on March 10, the press corps grilled Carney about the faux interview, questioning whether the “dignity” of the presidential office had been “damaged".

"We obviously assess opportunities that we have and, you know, look at whether they're going to be successful and wise," Carney replied. "And I think we made the right call here."

The evidence seems to bear that out as, despite the detractors, the president’s use of a comedic platform seemed to achieve its purpose. According to tweets from Healthcare.gov, hourly traffic spiked on the day the video premiered; and there were 32,000 Funny or Die referrals and 575,000 site visits by 6 p.m. March 10. The next day, visits to Healthcare.gov were up by 40 percent. And, the video had 15 million views and had acquired “immortal” status—meaning it was popular and highly rated—as of March 13.


Put the Right to Vote Into the Constitution By Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

March 16, 2014

Put the Right to Vote Into the Constitution
By Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

Jesse3

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Monday morning I woke up — not with Georgia — but with Selma on my mind. Selma bears witness to the bloody and murderous struggle to end discrimination in voting on the basis of race. The demonstrations there led directly to President Lyndon Baines Johnson signing the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

The 1965 Voting Rights Act was historic, designed to redress the unique history of discrimination against African Americans. But it was limited. It did not give each and every American citizen the explicit, constitutionally guaranteed federal right to vote.

The 1965 Voting Rights Act has been effective and efficient. Sections 4 and 5 were its heart and soul because they provided for a prior review that prevented racial discrimination in voting. In the recent Shelby decision, a conservative majority of the Supreme Court cut the heart (Section 4) out of the law and left its soul (Section 5) as exposed as a cadaver on a funeral director’s table. Shelby said you can keep the car but you can’t have the keys. The car looks great, but it’s not going anywhere.

Now we must all join together in an effort to fix the damage done by Shelby, and revive the heart of the Voting Rights Act. But we should also take a step back and see what we’re really facing. A text out of context is a pretext. What’s the context of America’s voting rights? The context is that we have a “states’ rights” voting system — 50 states (plus D.C.), 3,143 counties, 13,000 election jurisdictions that administer 186,000 precincts, all in “separate and unequal” local voting jurisdictions.

But if the legal principle of “separate and unequal” was unacceptable for education in 1954, it’s also unacceptable for voting in 2014, since voting is the foundation of our democracy. Most Americans assume that they have a “right” to vote — and they’re partially correct. Except for ex-felon laws in certain states, most Americans do have a state right to vote, but they don’t have a citizenship right to vote.

In Alabama, they have an Alabama right to vote, but not an American right to vote. It’s because of this “states’ rights” voting system that, since 2010, 34 states have been able to pass new voting laws that are mostly designed to suppress or make it more difficult for certain Americans to vote — specifically minorities, young people, workers, poor people and the disabled. The intent of these mostly efforts driven by Republican governors and Republican-controlled legislatures is to disenfranchise Democrats (big “D”), but the effect undermines all democrats (small “d”) and our democracy.

Congressional efforts to “fix” the damage done by Shelby to the Voting Rights Act are essential. But the remedy will inevitably will leave the Voting Rights Act in a weaker state than it was before Shelby. We should not have to protect the “right to vote” piecemeal — state-by-state, county-by-county, voting district-by-voting district, year-after-year. So I argue that even as we mobilize to end the damage done to the Voting Rights Act, we should be fighting for a constitutional amendment to guarantee the right to vote to all.

Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution is there an explicit guarantee of the right to vote. Prior to becoming president of the United States, Barack Obama, as a professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago, began each of his constitutional law classes stunning his students with the surprising fact that a “citizenship or individual right to vote” is not in the Constitution. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment does guarantee the individual right to a gun.

So we have the bizarre situation that in one of the world’s leading democracies, citizens have a guaranteed right to a gun, but not the right to vote. Reps. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., and Keith Ellison, D-Minn., have introduced in Congress a constitutional amendment that would guarantee the right to vote. Its language is sensible plain and clear:

SECTION 1: Every citizen of the United States, who is of legal voting age, shall have the fundamental right to vote in any public election held in the jurisdiction in which the citizen resides.

SECTION 2: Congress shall have the power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation. Passing a constitutional amendment isn’t easy. It must be supported for ratification by two-thirds of the members of both the House and the Senate, and then ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures.

No amendment can pass without a broad consensus. But guaranteeing the right to vote isn’t partisan or ideological or a special interest agenda. It is fundamental to all Americans. It is the foundation of our democracy. And it is long past due.

X