Liberty Bank Expands Southern Footprint 

Nov. 3, 2013

Jesse Jackson Jr. Now in N. C. Prison
Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from the Richmond Free Press

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Former Illinois Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr.is now behind bars.Once one of the most promising Black politicians in the United States, he reported to federal prison Oct. 29 to begin serving a 2½-year sentence for misusing campaign funds, according to a bureau spokesman.

Jackson, a former Democratic congressman and the son of civil rights leader the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr., entered a federal correctional facility in Butner, N.C., bureau spokesman Chris Burke said. Jackson had tried to report Monday, but he was turned away for undisclosed reasons. Jackson pleaded guilty in February to misusing about $750,000 in campaign funds to purchase such luxuries as fur capes, celebrity memorabilia, mounted elk heads and a Rolex watch.

His wife, Sandi, a former Chicago City Council member, was sentenced to one year for filing false tax returns that failed to report the campaign money as income.The couple has two children.The judge ordered Mrs. Jackson to report to prison 30 days after her husband is released to reduce the impact on the children.

Former Rep. Jackson served in Congress from1995 until he resigned after re-election in November 2012, citing health reasons.He disappeared from public view in the summer of 2012 and speculation swirled for weeks about his condition. At first, Jackson said he was being treated for exhaustion,and his doctor said in July 2012 he was being treated for a “mood disorder.” Jackson was eventually treated for at least six weeks at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., for bipolar disorder. Jackson was also sentenced to three years supervised release following his prison sentence and ordered to perform 500 hours of community service. Mrs. Jackson was given 12 months supervised release and 200 hours of community service.

Nov. 3, 2013

Money Problems Not Just at Grambling
By Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - The strike of football players at legendary Grambling State University received attention across the world. GSU President Frank Pogue praised the players for providing the “creative tension” needed to bring attention to the plight of Grambling and historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) in general.

The players were protesting poor practice facilities and dilapidated locker rooms, as well as the firing of their coach, Doug Williams, early in the season, but their protest exposed the broader reality facing Grambling and HBCUs: they face a brutal and increasing financial crisis. At Grambling, President Pogue reports, aid from the state of Louisiana has been cut by nearly 60 percent over the last six years.

The school has gone, as its Office of Finance and Administration reports, from a state “funded” institution to a state “assisted” institution — and the assistance isn’t nearly enough. Trying to operate on a budget lower than it was six years ago, Grambling has cut full-time employees by more than one-fourth over five years. The state cutbacks have forced increases in tuition and fees of about 60 percent over the last five years.

At the same time, the state has forced closure of summer school and raised admission requirements to make it harder to get into Grambling. Like most HBCUs, Grambling’s students come largely from lower-income families, and are often the first in their families to go to college.

They cobble together their tuition from financial aid, part-time work and parental loans. And to add to the misery, the Department of Education decided to tighten eligibility requirements for parental PLUS loans, denying applicants with even minor credit blemishes, such as overdue parking tickets or cellphone bills — exactly the kind of difficulties that low-income families often run into.

The inevitable result is that Grambling and other HBCUs are losing students — an estimated 28,000 were denied Parental PLUS loans over the past year — as more and more qualified students simply can’t afford to pay their way. This is a historic reversal. Historically black colleges and universities have provided real opportunity to underserved communities, particularly African Americans. These colleges were founded in the ashes of slavery with a mission — to take the rejected stones and turn them into cornerstones of a freed people. Education, it was assumed, was key to reconstruction.

Now, states are constricting access to college even as they expand entrance to private prisons and jails. They are moving from education and reconstruction to incarceration and separation. Instead of opening paths from poverty, they are locking more young people out by locking them up. This takes place despite the remarkable success of HBCUs. As Lezli Baskerville, president and CEO of the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education, reported in 2008, HCBUs confer 24 percent of all Ph.D’s awarded to African Americans.

They represent 4 percent of all colleges and universities in number, but enroll 16 percent of African Americans in a four-year colleges, graduate 30 percent of all African Americans receiving bachelor’s degrees, 40 percent of those granted degrees in science and math, 50 percent of those graduating in engineering and 50 percent of those granted teaching degrees. Grambling State President Pogue notes that HBCUs “have never been equally funded in this country, and we’re not equally funded today.”

He praises the football players for calling attention to the broader crisis facing Grambling State and other HBCUs, while redoubling his efforts to raise support from the school’s loyal alumni. But neither Pogue nor the alumni can carry this load alone. In many ways, historically black colleges and universities are the proverbial canaries in the mines of college education. What endangered them threatens public colleges across the land. State cutbacks are forcing higher and higher tuition and fees.

More and more students are priced out of the very education they need. We all have a stake in educating the next generation. But with Washington fixated on cutting spending back to levels not seen since the 1950s, and states facing continued budget squeezes, we are asking the young to bear the burden that should be widely shared. Perhaps the strike by the football team of a legendary program will begin to wake us up. 

Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. is president/CEO of the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition.

Nov. 3, 2013

Howard’s Interim President Tells Students to Monitor University Finances
By Jazmyn Cadogan

Dr. Wayne Frederick

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Howard University Interim President Wayne Frederick, has encouraged students to closely monitor University finances in order to be educated about the use of their tuition and fees.

“It is up to students to take advantage of the wealth of knowledge afforded to them and finding out the use of their monies,” Frederick told students at a town hall meeting.

The meeting, organized by the Howard University Student Association, was a question and answer session with an effort to address the concerns of students, alumni, and faculty on various issues following the abrupt resignation of Dr. Sidney A. Ribeau Oct. 1. Ribeau announced he would retire at the end of this year. His announcement followed a three-day meeting of the university’s board of trustees and months of debate and complaints about the management and financial health of the historically Black institution, often called “the mecca” because of its prestige.

Despite the controversies that preceded Ribeau’s announcement, board Chairman Barry Rand said, “Howard has remained academically, financially and operationally strong and one of the most respected institutions in higher education” because of Ribeau’s presidency.

At the late October town hall meeting, Frederick touched on a multitude of issues, including transparency of finances, campus safety, and student affairs. But foremost on the minds of students was the question of accountability.

When asked by HUSA President Anthony Miller, how the university plans to be more transparent with handling funds, Frederick responded, “Finances are audited and published each year as a legal requirement.”

Frederick is deemed an expert in this area. He has served as Howard’s chief academic officer and provost since June 18, 2012 and he has been broadly active in academic planning with oversight of Howard's 13 schools and colleges as well as the health sciences enterprise. He is highly respected as a scholar, surgeon, researcher and administrator. Former director of the Howard University Cancer Center, Frederick is often described as a “master teacher” in the Department of Surgery at Howard. He is also a three-time Howard alum, having earned his Bachelor of Science degree in zoology from Howard as well as his medical degree  and his master’s in business administration.

Fredrick described the university’s funding source as strong; yet dependent on sources outside of student tuitions and fees, private grants and alumni contributions.

“Over 70 percent of annual revenue is from federal sources, thus lacking stability in crucial economic times,” he said.

This means that in times such as the recent government shutdown, the university experiences a deficiency in cash flow. Frederick explained that the university’s three main sources of revenue are medical fees, federal appropriations, and tuition/fees contrary to a public educational institution where the main income should be tuition.

“We are currently looking to staff a full-time employee as CFO, continue renovations within the infrastructure, and increase revenue to create a better community within and around Howard University,” Frederick said.

 In response to a question from the audience about the direction of the university away from dependency on government funding, Frederick said, “We are looking to outsource some of our services to provide better service and attract for business.”

Essentially the university is looking for business partners in areas such as the hospital management and renovations. He hopes such a move would increase efficiency of the hospital management; thus create a larger cliental and more cash flow.

A special committee of the board is currently overseeing the transition and a national search for a permanent successor. Meanwhile, Frederick urged students, faculty and administrators to take part in doing all they can to make Howard a success: “It is essential for Howard University to be here and be strong because it paves the way for dreams like mine.”

Nov. 3, 2013

The Worst Justice
By Dr. E. Faye Williams

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Our Constitution outlines the Founders’ vision for the structure of our government. At the time it was written, our Constitution guaranteed liberties for individuals that were not to be abridged.  It provided for a Legislative Branch responsible for passing laws to benefit all.  The Executive Branch was structured to execute laws passed by the Legislative Branch in a fair and equitable manner. The Judicial Branch is to interpret the constitutionality of laws and assure their equitable application.

Throughout history, there’ve been questionable actions by each branch that demonstrate deviation from the letter of the law.  When personal freedom was touted as foundational principle and the country endorsed the institution of slavery to the recent recognition of full rights of citizenship for LGBT communities, our nation has been in a transformative evolution of laws and culture.

Once, the Judicial Branch was the branch of government Black people relied on for protection of our rights.  Mostly, this branch, specifically the Supreme Court, has been a responsible partner in securing and directing the application of laws in a manner that would guarantee full rights of citizenship to us.  We’ve depended on the selection and judgment of Constitutional scholars who had a realistic perspective on real-life application of laws and their impact on real people.  We’ve depended on Justices who could issue rulings not colored by their own biases, but were based on the most realistic interpretation of law.  This control of personal bias was demonstrated in the much heralded Brown v Board of Education ruling issued, despite the presence of known racist Justices, with a unanimous verdict.

Our latest crops of Supreme Court Justices (The Roberts’ Court) have issued rulings that seem to indicate a shift in perspective.  The Citizens United ruling indicates a regressive shift in philosophy to the principles of the Taney Court which issued the dreaded Dred Scott decision.

There’s debate as to which among the current crop of Justices is the greatest enemy of civil rights.  Some would say the smooth indifference of the Chief Justice to the more reactionary of his colleagues would tag him with that label.  Others would say Samuel Alito’s reserved acerbic manner would give him the title.  Others would give the nod to Clarence Thomas.  After all, the height of arrogant indifference is to deny others the opportunity to receive the same benefits that led to one’s own success.  Although each of these Justices merits consideration as the greatest enemy of civil rights, I would award it to Justice Antonin Scalia.  Scalia’s public utterances are as offensive as his official decisions and give clear indication to his bias and racial animus.

Recently, Scalia demonstrated the depth of his contempt for Blacks when he described the protections of the Voting Rights Act as “the perpetuation of racial entitlement.”  This is among the greatest insults he could direct to us. He says instead of a guaranteed right of citizenship, the right of Blacks to vote is an undeserved privileged granted by the benevolence of some long ago written law.  There’s no other group that would allow an inherent right of citizenship to be denigrated by likening it to a perk, nor do I suspect Scalia would classify his own voting right as a racial entitlement granted because of the historical tradition of privileged whites.  As a child of Italian immigrants, it would seem Scalia would have greater empathy for the challenges of citizenship faced by “out” groups and that he’d acknowledge the difference between a right and an entitlement.

Recently, Scalia stated that the 14th Amendment doesn't protect "only the blacks." Students of history will counter his position with the correct argument that the Amendment was ratified to do just that. It affirmed citizenship and established voting rights for former slaves.

(Dr. E. Faye Williams is Chair of the National Congress of Black Women. 202/678-6788.  www.nationalcongressbw.org)