banner2e top

CBC Hosts National Day of Prayer to End Poverty by Zenitha Prince

CBC Hosts National Day of Prayer to End Poverty
“We cannot hope to win the fight against poverty without tackling inequality….”
By Zenitha Prince
cleaverpraying
Former CBC Chairman Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) was among members
who lead prayers to end poverty. PHOTO: Courtesy/CBC

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

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - As interfaith and government leaders from across the United States gathered in Washington, D.C., for the 61st National Prayer Breakfast on Feb. 6, members of the Congressional Black Caucus hosted the first National Day of Prayer to End Poverty and Income Inequality.

“In my faith tradition, we are called to treat the least among us as we would like to be treated,” Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.) chair emeritus of the caucus, said in an e-mail to the Afro-American Newspaper. “We have a long, hard road ahead of us before we can say we are doing well by the poor.”

Reducing poverty and closing the income gap has long been a top concern of Black lawmakers on Capitol Hill, whose communities are often among the most vulnerable and among those worst hit by the recession.

The specter of poverty has long haunted communities of color. Nearly 10 million African-Americans, including four in 10 Black children, live in poverty and almost 12 percent of African Americans are unemployed. The latter number does not take into consideration those persons who have been so exhausted and disillusioned by their employment search that they are no longer looking for jobs.

Even as the economic outlook for the nation’s poorest is turning bleaker, amid congressional attempts to cut back on food stamps and to deny jobless benefits to more than a million Americans who have been unemployed long-term, the pockets of the very rich are getting fatter.

According to a recent report released by Oxfam International, the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans captured 95 percent of post-recession growth since 2009, while the bottom 90 percent became poorer. The situation is the same across the world as the 85 richest people own the wealth of half of the world’s population.

According to the World Economic Forum’s “Outlook on the Global Agenda 2014,” published in November, this widening wealth disparity is among the top global risks that is “impacting social stability within countries and threatening security on a global scale.”

Only by tackling this income disparity can poverty truly be mitigated, Oxfam Executive Director Winnie Byanyima said in a statement.

“We cannot hope to win the fight against poverty without tackling inequality. Widening inequality is creating a vicious circle where wealth and power are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few, leaving the rest of us to fight over crumbs from the top table,” she said.

“Without a concerted effort to tackle inequality, the cascade of privilege and of disadvantage will continue down the generations [and] we will soon live in a world where equality of opportunity is just a dream,” she added. “In too many countries economic growth already amounts to little more than a ‘winner takes all’ windfall for the richest.”

As part of the Congressional Black Caucus’ ongoing “War on Poverty” in this Congress, the group will continue to advocate for an increased federal minimum wage, or living wage. It will also continue to garner support for the Half in Ten Act, which would create and implement a plan to cut poverty in half within 10 years, and it will continue to lobby for bills that create more high-earning jobs.

The caucus also plans to push for the “10-20-30” initiative, which would require that at least 10 percent of federally appropriated money be spent in those communities where 20 percent or more the population has been locked below the poverty level for at least 30 years.

The issues of poverty and income inequality are not merely political, said Cleaver, who is also a pastor. It is also moral, he says, and the day of prayer was meant to “awaken” the American consciousness and stir support for the cause.

“While we will always have the poor with us, we are in a pitiful and perilous state if we do not do more to end poverty and income inequality,” Cleaver said. “Only the most perverse reading of the gospels would lead one to believe that the 1 [percent] is where Jesus would have used his unbridled Holy Ghost power. A good question for our Congress is this: the big oil companies receive billions of dollars in federal subsidies while the poor cannot even receive a living wage. So, whose side do you think Jesus would take?”

Other CBC Members plan to host similar prayer events in the near future in their districts with members of their local communities.

First African-American to Own Rolls Royce Dealership

Feb. 9, 2014

First African-American to Own Rolls Royce Dealership 

moorehead

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

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Thomas A. Moorehead has made automotive history. He’s the first African-American to own an ultra luxury Rolls-Royce dealership in America.

He’s starting his second month as the owner of Rolls-Royce Motor Cars of Sterling, a community in Loudoun County in Northern Virginia. He is one of only 35 Rolls-Royce dealers nationwide.

“This is a very good market,” Moorehead said. “This is the richest market in America, and we’ve done very well. We cover Maryland, Virginia,Pennsylvania, Delaware and the Districtof Columbia.”

A Rolls-Royce sells for anywhere from $250,000 to $550,000, depending on the model and the features. He said he expects to sell four to six new Rolls-Royces each month and six to eight used units.The 69-year-old trailblazer also made history in 2001 when he opened a dua ldealership in Sterling selling BMWs and Mini Coopers. His dealership is the largest minority owned BMW dealership nationwide and ranks among the top 10 percent in sales of the brand.

“When you look at it, Rolls-Royce is the next step up from BMW,” said Moorehead, who also is chairman of the National Association of Minority Automobile Dealers. The first Rolls-Royce he sold was a two-door Wraith coupe for about $330,000. His dealership has sold five since he opened his doors in December.

“We’re looking forward to having a pretty good year,” Moorehead predicted. “For individuals that have been sitting on the sideline due to the down economy, we’re starting to see those individuals come back into the marketplace.”

His success as a dealership owner has earned him the respect of elected officials. He was appointed by then-Gov. Mark R. Warner to serve on theVirginia Automobile Dealer Board in 2005. He served two terms. Prior to becoming a dealer, he was an analyst at Mobile and Chrysler corporations and director of community services at the University of Michigan. Looking for a new challenge, he decided to go into business for him-self.

And he picked automotive sales to make his mark. In 1988, with encouragement from another dealer, he made his start by purchasing Sentry Buick and Isuzu in Omaha, Neb. He owned that for nine years. In 1995, he opened Moorehead Buick-GMC in Decatur, Ill. He owned that for four years before jumping to Northern Virginia with his BMW and Mini Cooper dealership.Besides his success in running car dealerships, he’s also entered the hotel business.

In 2006, he bought the Marriott Residence Inn in National Harbor, Md. Since then, he has bought eight hotels nationwide. Moorehead’s background: He was born in Monroe, La. He earned a bachelor’s degree in business administration from Grambling State University in 1966. He earned a master’s degree in social work from the University of Michigan in 1977. He’s now working on his doctorate from the University of Michigan. He also belongs to the Baltimore Chapter of the National Guardsmen Inc., the Northern Virginia Chapter of Sigma Pi Phi and Kappa Alpha Psi fraternities. He’s also a 33rd degree Mason.

Monetizing a Massacre By Julianne Malveaux

Feb. 9, 2014

Monetizing a Massacre
By Julianne Malveaux

malveaux

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Had he not massacred Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman would be an average White man holding down a mediocre job, living under the radar, and aspiring for a law enforcement job. He and his wife would probably be divorcing (as they are now) on account of his brutality (she cites his beatings in her divorce proceedings).  Nobody, but nobody, would know his name or give a hoot about him.

Zimmerman massacred Trayvon Martin, though, and that’s his claim to fame.  He shot down a Black teen armed only with Skittles and iced tea.  He said he did it because he felt “threatened”.  The police told him not to act after he called them.  He also had time to walk, or even run, away.  Stand your ground laws gave him an excuse to massacre Trayvon Martin.  And so he did.

This ought to be the end of the story.  But George Zimmerman could not give up the limelight so easily.  His “legal defense fund” raised more than six figures and got his wife charged with perjury when she said the family had no assets.  Tens of thousands of that money were used to get Mr. Zimmerman “established” post trial.  Who are these people who not only support Mr. Zimmerman, but are also willing to pay to make their support clear?  Don’t they understand that in supporting Zimmerman they also support the massacre of a young Black man?  Does it matter to them that millions are galled and appalled by their monetary support of Zimmerman?  Or are they “standing their ground”?

Zimmerman’s next venture was to take up painting.  Though his artwork most resembles a child’s etch-a-sketch rendition, the first paining he put on ebay sold for more than $100,000.  The Associated Press has sued him for using their images to create a painting of Angela Corey, the Florida state attorney who decided to try him in the massacre of Trayvon Martin.  Always flippant and out of order, Zimmerman said he will sue AP, putting his threat on Twitter.  Does he not understand that the $100,000 he made on his painting is no threat to the Associated Press?

Now, Celebrity Boxing owner Damon Feidman, is considering a three-round, Pay-per-View fight between Zimmerman and rapper DMX (sorry, I had not heard about him until the fight came up.  George Zimmerman just wants headlines.  What is the DMX agenda?  Doesn’t he understand that if he looks even close to losing the fight, he might have a stand your ground massacre in his hands?  Furthermore, doesn’t he understand, don’t we all, that this is all about monetizing a massacre, allowing Zimmerman to gain because his notoriety is directly connected to the killing of Trayvon Martin.

From my understanding, people who participate in Pay-per-View programs earn a lump sum and a percentage of the monies spent to watch the “event”.  Thousands of people say they are interested in seeing this fight.  If they are at all interested in sending a murderer a signal, they ought to miss the opportunity to watch this drama.  Every dollar spent on this Pay per View debacle, is a dollar transferred to the man who not only killed Trayvon Martin but also has no shame about profiting from that massacre.

In our haven of capitalism anybody has a right to attempt to monetize anything.  But markets depend on supply and demand.  Mr. Zimmerman can supply all the nonsense he wants to in an open market.  His massacre can only be monetized when consumers demand it.  The same people who stood by Trayvon Martin need now stand against George Zimmerman and actively jettison his plan to monetize his murder of an innocent and unarmed black teen.

Memo to DMX and the other 15,000 people who said they wanted to fight George Zimmerman.  When this murderer understands that the market will not embrace him, he will have to go back under the radar and get a job like everyone else.   He’ll learn that his traffic tickets and his wife beating are not national news.  He will learn that he cannot reap rewards from massacring a child.

Julianne Malveaux is a DC based economist and author.  She is President Emerita of Bennett College for Women.

How Civil Rights Movement Made Super Bowl Possible by Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

Feb. 9, 2014

How Civil Rights Movement Made Super Bowl Possible
By Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

Jesse3

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - The Super Bowl is our national festival. Some 70 percent of all TVs were tuned to the game last night. Each of the last four Super Bowls set a new record for the most watched show in history.

More women watch the Super Bowl than men and women combined watch the Academy Awards. Advertisers pay billions to peddle their wares. The halftime features American flags, children’s choirs and tributes to our military.

The players are so big that Tim Tebow is featured in an ad because he doesn’t have a contract. Why is this spectacle so captivating? This is a time when Americans create their own communities, select from hundreds of channels, pick their own Facebook friends, select their own music and search out their own sources of information.

Why does the Super Bowl transcend this? One reason, of course, is the violent competition itself. But more importantly, the Super Bowl brings us all together to root for players on the basis of the color of their jerseys. As Brian Rolapp, executive vice president of NFL Media put it, “At a time of division in the rest of life, by socioeconomics, by race, by class, by gender, every which way that people tend to get divided by, the NFL cuts through a lot of that. Everyone you know is cheering for a team.

There are very few things like that right now.” What are the roots of this unifying festival? In many ways, it is a product of the civil rights movement. Sounds odd, but think about it. Without the civil rights movement, segregation would have blocked the inclusion of the Atlanta Falcons, Dallas Cowboys, Tennessee Titans, Miami Dolphins, Houston Texans, Jacksonville Jaguars, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Carolina Panthers and the New Orleans Saints. Integrated teams would have been controversial, if not impossible.

A national playoff would have broadcast our divisions, not our unity. It took the civil rights movement to bring down the cotton curtain of legal segregation, free the new South and unify America across the Mason-Dixon line. The owners didn’t push this transformation. League officials didn’t force it.

Brave men and women who risked their lives to make America better created it. Similarly, players gained free agency not by the generosity of the owners nor the foresight of league officials. Free agency was forced by a star baseball player, Curt Flood, a St. Louis Cardinal who refused a trade to Philadelphia and sacrificed much of his athletic career to challenge, in the courts, a system that he said treated athletes like chattel slaves.

Flood lost his case in the Supreme Court, but his challenge helped force the changes that ended with Congress passing the Curt Flood Act in 1998 that formally forced owners to compete in negotiating player contracts. These victories are America’s true triumph. Our Constitution provides sufficient small “d” democratic space for people to mobilize, organize and make the country better.

That’s worth remembering when we watch the Super Bowl and root for different teams, not caring about the race or religion or region of the players. And it’s worth remembering as a nation as we turn to addressing Martin Luther King’s unfinished business — the need for economic justice, not just racial inclusion. In a society where the richest 1 percent is capturing 95 percent of the income growth, while working families are struggling to stay afloat, inequality surely is, as President Obama stated, the “defining challenge of our time.”

But enlightened bankers, or generous CEOs, won’t rectify it. Politicians acting on their own won’t fix it. We will rebuild an economy that works for the many and not just the few only when people decide it is time for change, and begin to organize and mobilize and march and demand that change. What the Super Bowl and the new South show is that change can bring us together economically, not drive us apart socially.

 

 

New York to End Stop-and-Frisk As We Know It By Marc H. Morial

Feb. 8, 2014

To Be Equal 
New York to End Stop-and-Frisk As We Know It

By Marc H. Morial

marcmorial
(TriceEdneyWire.com) - “We believe in respecting every New Yorker’s rights, regardless of what neighborhood they live in or the color of their skin.  And we believe in ending the overuse of stop-and-frisk that has unfairly targeted young African American and Latino men.” New York Mayor Bill de Blasio

Elections have consequences.  Never has that been more clearly demonstrated than last week when New York’s new mayor, Bill de Blasio, announced an agreement to reform the stop-and-frisk practice of the city’s police department, tactics which have disproportionately targeted African American and Latino young men for years.  Last Thursday, at the Brownsville Recreation Center in Brooklyn, a community burdened with more police stops than any other in the city, the mayor fulfilled a campaign promise and announced that his administration would drop an appeal of the August 2013 ruling by Judge Shira Scheindlin, who found the policy unconstitutional and an example of “indirect racial profiling.”

Mayor de Blasio made stop-and-frisk reform a major issue in his 2013 campaign, and the agreement he announced last week represents a dramatic reversal of the previous administration’s staunch defense of the policy.  The agreement calls for the commencement of a dialogue between police and community leaders to ensure that policies driving the police and community apart are cooperatively addressed.  Furthermore, for the next three years, a court-appointed monitor will oversee the NYPD’s compliance with constitutional law.  The mayor explained that once the resolution is confirmed by the Federal District Court, New York City will officially drop the appeal that was put in motion by the Bloomberg administration.

Let me be clear.  As the former mayor of New Orleans, I fully understand that the first obligation of government is to protect its citizens, and I believe in community policing – done intelligently.  But New York’s stop-and-frisk policy was counterproductive and violated basic constitutional principles.  According to statistics compiled by the New York Civil Liberties Union, “From 2002 to 2011, Black and Latino residents made up close to 90 percent of people stopped, and about 88 percent of stops – more than 3.8 million – were of innocent New Yorkers.  Even in neighborhoods that are predominantly white, Black and Latino New Yorkers face the disproportionate brunt… This, on its face, is discriminatory.”

The city’s new police commissioner, Bill Bratton, underscored the mayor’s commitment to reform, noting that instead of securing confidence, legitimacy and justice, in recent years the city’s stop-and-frisk practices have “raised doubts and concerns about the police force in this city.”  He added, “We will not break the law to enforce the law.”

The National Urban League has been among those calling for stop-and-frisk reform in New York City.  This new agreement essentially marks the beginning of the end of this discriminatory practice as we know it.  We applaud Mayor de Blasio, Commissioner Bratton and especially the people of New York who voted for change and got it.  By paving the way to a reduction in racial profiling, a greater guarantee of equal treatment under the law, and better relations between police and the community, this move offers a guide to other cities across the nation committed to ensuring safety, justice and fairness for all citizens.

X