Urban News Features

Budget Cuts Will Slow Economy

By Julianne Malveaux

malveaux

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - There is lots of buzz about our nation’s “economic recovery” in these first weeks of 2013. The stock market has been rising, some would say even soaring. We postponed the fiscal cliff crisis, albeit only for a few weeks – March is the new deadline.

The tone and tenor of debt ceiling conversations has shifted slightly, though this will not be an issue easily negotiated. President Obama says that raising the debt ceiling to pay old bills is the right thing to do; Republicans in the House showed no reluctance in authorizing spending for two wars and other matters. Now they don’t want to pay for it.

Recovery? For the first time since 2009 our economy shrunk in the last quarter of 2012, largely because of cuts in defense spending (that were not balanced by increased spending in other areas), a sluggish world economy that could not absorb US exports. Also, inventory grew slowly, suggesting that some retailers are pessimistic about the level of spending this year.

Some economists suggest that this drag is a one-time thing since part of the drag has occurred because of factory and retail store shutdowns due to Hurricane Sandy. Additionally, they say that the economy should adjust to defense spending cuts rather quickly. And they cite strong consumer spending and business investment in the fourth quarter as positives. Even with the fourth-quarter shrinkage, growth in 2012 was higher than growth in 2011, suggesting that we are on the right path to economic recovery.

Just a minute, though. If the economy contracts because of a cut in defense spending, what will happen when federal spending is cut by 7 to 10 percent, either through automatic cuts or budget cutting negotiations. Already, federal departments are making contingency plans for cuts, figuring out ways that three people can do the work of two, and ways programs may be consolidated. While one quarter of contraction is no cause for alarm, it is certainly cause for concern. Two more quarters of contraction, however mild, will lead us into a recession.

There are other factors of concern as we look ahead. Everyone will get a 2 percent pay cut because the Social Security tax has returned to prior levels after we have experienced cuts for two years. A family earning $50,000 a year has $1000 less to spend, and it has already shown up in paychecks for those who are paid biweekly. Less disposable income means less consumer spending, means the possibility of economic slowdown since consumer spending drives more than two-thirds of the economy.

Another factor in the possibility of economic slowdown is the troubled employment situation. Though unemployment rates are lower than they were two years ago, an overall unemployment rate of more than 7 percent is unacceptable. I am writing this in advanced of first Friday numbers, but predictions are the unemployment rate won’t go below seven percent. That means that the African-American unemployment rate is likely to remain between 13 and 14 percent, officially, and more than 25 percent unofficially. While we can certainly point to improvement in the employment situation, the economy is not generating enough jobs to lower unemployment rates. Instead we are treading water.

Congress has not enacted the American Jobs Act, which President Obama introduced in 2011, because they say it costs too much. This is a case of being penny wise and pound-foolish. Employed people pay taxes. Employed people contribute to their communities. Gainfully employed people avoid the social pathologies that come with unemployment. Albert Camus once said, “Without work all life is rotten”. Studies show that unemployed people experience a loss of self-esteem, societal alienation, and depression, among other things. A jobs creation program would be good both for morale and the economy.

Would this be a make-work program? Not necessarily. President Obama spoke about our decaying infrastructure in his 2008 campaign, and if you’ve recently driven on our interstate highways, you can testify to the way that infrastructure has deteriorated. Why not put people to work to repair infrastructure, and work in schools and libraries? Why not put our nation back to work?

The budget cuts Congress insists on may well push our economy back into recession. On the other hand, increased spending on job programs will mean increased consumer spending and therefore economic recovery. The choice is between recession and economic growth. Those who claim to have the best interests of our nation at heart seem not to support a path that will lead us to economic growth. That’s a sorry commentary on the leadership of the Republican-dominated House of Representatives.

Julianne Malveaux is a DC-based economist and author.

An Unjust Treatment Of Dr. Martin Luther King

Reality Check

apeterbailey

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - If one checks out all the platitudes made by many people over the age of 60 during annual King Day celebrations, one would be led to believe that all or at least a huge majority of them were actively involved in the campaign led by Dr. King against White supremacy\racism. That is not so, wrote Dr. King in his conveniently ignored 1967 book, Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos and Community?

Wrote Dr. King; “In assessing the results of the Negro Revolution so far, it can be concluded that Negroes have established a foot hold….The hard truth is that neither Negro nor white has yet done enough to expect the dawn of a new day. While much has been done, it has been accomplished by too few and on a scale too limited for the breadth of the goal….The brunt of the Negro’s past battles was borne by a very small striking force.

Though millions of Negroes were ardent and passionate supporters, only a modest number were actively engaged and these were relatively too few for a broad war against racism, poverty and discrimination. Negroes fought and won, but our engagements were skirmishes not climatic battles. No great victories are won in a war for the transformation of a whole people without total participation. Less than this will not create a new society; it will only evoke more sophisticated token amelioration….”

As for those Black folks who today like to brag about how they have achieved success mainly because the society has changed and because they are willing, to work hard, Dr. King asks a couple of very pertinent questions in his book. “...How many Negroes who have achieved educational and economic security have forgotten that they are what they are because of the support of faceless, unlettered and unheralded Negroes who did ordinary jobs in an extraordinary way?

How many successful Negroes have forgotten that uneducated and poverty-stricken mothers and fathers often worked until their eyebrows were scorched and their hand bruised so that their children could get an education? For any middle class Negro to forget the masses is an act not only of neglect but of shameless ingratitude…. It is time for the Negro middle class to rise up from its stool of indifference, to retreat from its flight into unreality and to bring its full resources- - its heart, its mind and its check book—to the aid of the less fortunate brother…. The salvation of the Negro middle class is ultimately dependent upon the salvation of the Negro masses.”

These are two examples of very perceptive and powerful commentary and observations made by Dr. King in his book. They clearly demonstrate that he was much much more than the Martin Luther “I Have a Dream” King, Jr, people have reduced him to in an annual birthday celebrations. In doing so they have done Dr. King a major historical injustice.

The State of Equality and Justice in America: ‘America Stands at a Crossroads’

Feb. 3, 2013

Editor's Note: "The State of Equality and Justice in America" is a 20-part series of columns written by an all-star list of contributors to commemorate the 50th Anniversary of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

The contributors include: U. S. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) LCCRUL 50th Anniversary Grand Marshal; Ms. Barbara Arnwine, President and Executive Director, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (LCCRUL); Mr. Charles Ogletree, Professor, Harvard University Law School/Director, Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice; the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson Sr., President/CEO, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition; the Rev. Joseph Lowery, Co-founder, Southern Christian Leadership Conference; U. S. Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.); and 14 additional thought leaders and national advocates for equal justice.

Here's the fourth op-ed of the series:
By Rev. Jesse L. Jackson Sr.

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - America stands at a crossroads. We can take the high road toward equal access to high quality public education, reaffirm our commitment to democratically elected public officials, end the failed war on drugs, recommit to the right of workers to bargain for better conditions, lower our dreadful rate of hyper-incarceration and implement the affordable care act. Or we can travel in the opposite direction and move the nation away from equal opportunity and justice.

One reason our political bodies are so sharply divided is over this question of justice. Some Americans seem to believe that we have done enough to achieve justice. Others understand that the struggle for justice and equality is a continuing American project that requires patience and perseverance.

There are some disturbing trends. A decade ago there were 40 million uninsured people. Today the number is closer to 50 million. There is greater income inequality and more poverty. Average Americans have lost trillions of dollars in family wealth – largely the result of unregulated real estate markets. We have not yet regulated exotic Wall Street investments like derivatives. Our incarceration rate continues to grow; we imprison more people than any other developed nation in the world, per capita, while drugs are more plentiful and lower priced than they were a decade ago. Fewer boys are finishing college and the rate at which we produce engineers is dropping. We rank lower in health outcomes than much poorer nations. These trends must be addressed and reversed if we are to continue to prosper and lead the world.

We seem fatigued with questions of racial and ethnic justice. Affirmative action is under attack, again. Racial profiling, abuse of prosecutorial discretion, excessive use of police force, runaway juries, disparate sentencing and selective prosecution are generally accepted as normal, not exceptional. While we celebrate the promise of the Lillie Ledbetter Act, too much race discrimination lurks in our work places. Instead of looking at our immigrant population as a strength to be cultivated, we ignore, or pander to them.

Our civil rights apparatus is fraying. There is a trend away from joining and supporting organizations – churches, unions, and civil rights organizations. Rugged individualism is no substitute for institutional voices for justice and equality. Noah built an ark to withstand the flood. Those who could swim died outside the ark. Those who could not swim survived inside the ark. Good swimmers can’t swim 40 days and 40 nights. We need strong institutional bulwarks to protect us from exclusion and prejudice.

Perhaps the most disturbing trend is away from the universal franchise. The right to vote secures every other right. We are encountering stiff headwinds that threaten to undermine democracy itself. Despite “Citizens United”, money is not speech. Our elections should not be bought and sold like vacation homes and yachts. Latter day, politically driven obstacles – voter suppression – is un-American. There is no political goal that justifies dishonest schemes to disenfranchise American citizens. America is not a race, or a religion, color or language. America is built on a set of noble, but fragile premises: All men are created equal; one person-one vote; majority rule. It is these principles that make the American experiment work – undoing them could unravel the fabric of the nation.

Yet, I remain optimistic. Our union has been in the process of perfecting itself throughout its entire existence. America has been a laboratory experiment in justice and equality. The enslaved never adjusted to being considered less than human. Women never adjusted to second-class citizenship. Workers refused to acquiesce to exploitation. Seniors refused to accept the indignity of poverty after a life of industry. Young people refused to be seen and not heard. That is the genius of the American experiment – we become a better, stronger nation when we insist that the nation live with its conscience.

Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. is President/CEO of the Chicago-based Rainbow/PUSH Coalition. This article – the fourth of a 20-part series - is written in commemoration of the 50^th Anniversary of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. The Lawyers' Committee is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, formed in 1963 at the request of President John F. Kennedy to enlist the private bar's leadership and resources in combating racial discrimination and the resulting inequality of opportunity - work that continues to be vital today. For more information, please visit www.lawyerscommittee.org.

Immigration

By Dr. E. Faye Williams

williams2

(TriceEdneyWire.com) – Focusing on news reports during the last ten years, one could assume that the US had an emerging immigration problem of "Hispanic Hoards" inundating the southern border. An "honest" assessment of the 'immigration problem' shows it as a long-standing problem entwined in issues of racism and xenophobia. Reconciliation of these problems involves squarely facing them and moving to overcome these festering sores.

In 1911, The Dillingham Commission, convened by the government to study immigration policies, issued a report that, arguably, has colored the complexion of immigration policy to date. In 1917, Congress passed the Immigration Act of 1917 (Asiatic Barred Zone Act) that prohibited specific 'undesirables' from entering the country. These so-called undesirables included, but were not limited to alcoholics, anarchists, homosexuals, criminals, epileptics, idiots, insane persons, feeble-minded persons, persons mentally or physically defective, polygamists, professional beggars and "illiterate" immigrants over the age of sixteen. Adding to a prior ban on Chinese, a section of the law prohibited immigration from an "Asiatic Barred Zone.”

In 1921, attempting to limit southern and eastern Europeans, Congress enacted the Emergency Immigration Act, pegging the number of immigrants permitted from each country at 3% of the number of people from that country who had lived in the US in 1910. The Immigration Act of 1924 made American policy more restrictive by setting the national quotas at 2% of the number of people from each country living in the US in 1890.

As echoed in contemporary rhetoric, many white Americans possessed a pathological fear of being overrun by races/nationalities considered inferior. With the exception of the Irish, little emphasis was placed on limiting immigrants from northern Europe. These attitudes are similarly based in the thought that solutions to social problems affecting US urban areas - crime, slums, poverty, illiteracy - are found in regulating immigration to those groups which could most easily assimilate.

If one listens closely to the contemporary dialogue, a common theme is realized between then and now. US immigration reform is based on a southern strategy. Instead of negative characterization of the Italians or Slavs, we now direct comments and place unsavory characteristics on all of those who enter this country from south of the border.

Instead of offering Constitutional amendments or challenging the citizenship protections of the 14th Amendment, Congress should endorse a sane policy that will open a pathway to citizenship for those who have chosen to weave their lives into the fabric of the US.

While states and local municipalities work with extreme enthusiasm to resolve their "Hispanic Problem," it seems that no one is willing to examine our immigration policy related to other nationalities. We’ve forgotten to include our northern border in the process of immigration reform. While we embrace the immigrant who possesses the H-1B visa, we must also welcome the taxpaying farm laborer who makes his/her living with the sweat of his/her brow.

There is little, if no, historical evidence to support the idea that a country can thrive or prosper without control of its borders, but there is also little evidence that national conduct and policies which are rooted in racism or xenophobia can have a long-term benefit to a nation or its citizens. Instead of self-deportation, we must establish a realistic immigration policy based on a strictly-enforced rule of law preventing corporate interests from circumventing established immigration policies and sacrificing immigrants or laws at the altar of corporate greed.

The fact that millions of people, worldwide, remain as attracted to the hope of life in the US, as is a moth to a flame, is testament to our national greatness and our potential for an even brighter future. We must not allow irrational fear or hatred to impede our quest to that brighter future for anyone—especially not we African Americans.

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

Economists, Scholars Call on Obama to Deal With Economic Discrimination

By Hazel Trice Edney
econforum-carr

James H. Carr
(TriceEdneyWire.com) – A day-long summit to scrutinize the economic policies of the Obama administration has ended with clarion calls for the President to become more specific in dealing with racial discrimination that is causing economic and social injustices.
“As of last year, babies born in America are now majority children of color…This is really imperative and it’s a point that we need to really drive home to make more clear to policy makers,” said James H. Carr, a housing finance, banking and urban policy consultant with Opportunity Agenda, a New York City-based research center. “If we have a financial system – particularly housing finance - that can’t accommodate the fastest-growing ultimately majority population, can that be long-term healthy for the U.S. financial system? It certainly won’t be long-term healthy for wealth-growth and economic mobility in America.”
Carr was the luncheon keynote speaker for the nine-hour summit, sponsored by Howard University, Feb.1. It drew hundreds of economists, activists and public policy makers to the campus from around the country. Carr told the audience that the “single largest contributor to the racial wealth gap” is the home ownership rates of Latinos and African-Americans in comparison to Whites.
The home ownership rate for Latinos and African-Americans is in the mid to low 40 percentile in comparison to Whites, which is around 75 percent, Carr said. He called it “silly” to argue that people of color have reached the bounds of homeownership. “There’s a lot more room for home ownership among our population and that’s where the wealth creator is.”
Throughout the day, expert panelists outlined statistics and struggled to present solutions. But, most resolved that just about every new answer presents a new problem.
“We have to make sure that when we pay for these new tax cuts that we voted for, that we do it in a rational and comprehensive way,” said U. S. Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.), who serves on the House Committee on Education and Workforce. “The last thing we want to do is to cut Social Security, Medicare, or education - things like that - in order to provide for these tax cuts and not have any money left over for a jobs bill.”
The economic summit was the fourth in a series and the second at Howard during the Obama Administration. In his first term, the summit was held to specifically discuss jobs.
At times, the experts appeared to struggle to explain why the Obama administration is not more forthcoming on the issue of race and the part it plays in America’s economic pains.
“The administration seems to be following an indirect approach for assisting distressed members of the community,” said Rodney Green, an urban economics professor at Howard who also serves as executive director of the university’s Center for Urban Progress. “A more direct approach would seem appropriate,” he said. “Racial inequalities have deepened in the last decade. While incomes for African-Americans have fallen 10 percent, they have fallen only 1 percent for White families. Relative Black wealth has fallen even further.”
Howard professor of political science, Lorenzo Morris, predicted that the President will eventually come around on the specific issue of race, but, by then it may be too late to invoke policies to deal with it. “I certainly believe he will find his voice, but he won’t have a big stick to carry with it. It will just be a voice,” Morris said.
Perhaps the strongest outright criticism of the Obama administration came from economist Bernard E. Anderson, a professor emeritus at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania.
“Let’s be clear about what we’re talking about here,” Anderson said. “We’re talking about an economic system that is shot through with institutional discrimination against Black people that denies them opportunity to participate fully in this economy. And until we attack that head on we are going to continue to have racial inequality.”
He continued, “That’s why I think we need to not let the President off the hook in his second term. Black people are smart. They gave him a pass in the first term because they knew that if he ever raised the question of race that if he ever raised the question in the first term, he would never have a hope of being re-elected. I like to be candid about this. I’m unusually frank about this. He is not going to run again for anything. He does not deserve a pass anymore. Let him not only find his voice, but summon his carriage and use his political capital to address racial inequality. He owes that to the African-American community.”
Anderson pointed to the President’s inaugural address as clear evidence that he will continue to keep the issue of race on the back burner.
“What were the priorities he mentioned in his second inaugural address – wage equality for women, gay rights, immigration and energy; not a single blessed word on race,” he said. “Don’t let him off the hook. He doesn’t deserve to be let off the hook. I am not going to understand why he will not address this issue.”
Carr concluded his luncheon remarks with a list of recommendations on how to close the housing/wealth gap. Among his points:

Make sure that the system actually provides credit to alternative forms of housing like cooperatives and small rental properties. “These are things that people of color, low income can afford to buy but they’re not supported by the mortgage finance systems of today.”
Support comprehensive community reinvestments such as a housing and community infrastructure bank that has been proposed by Opportunity Agenda.
Make sure that the system does something radically different than it does today like to support comprehensive community reinvestment.

Comprehensive community reinvestment is something that President Obama has stressed since his first term, but it needs to broaden to America’s grassroots communities, Carr said.
“The president when he was candidate Obama was eloquent and masterful in explaining all the reasons why investment in infrastructure as a stimulant for the economy would actually create long-term jobs and real economic growth and prosperity across race, ethnicity, income and wealth,” he said. “But, we also believe there needs to be an infrastructure bank that is on a more local level that focuses on the rehabilitation and new construction of rental and owner-occupied units that are designed for community residents.”
This redevelopment would include repairs of streets, roads, sewers, schools and perhaps even local mass transit opportunities, he said. Carr concluded that it would make no sense to argue that there’s no money for such initiatives.
“We had no money for the wars we just fought but we spent a whole lot of it,” he said to applause from the audience. “We need to ask for what we need… We need to make sure that the market is designed to take care of the need and the aspirations of people of color. And when it does, it will only be taking care of the needs and aspirations of the majority of America.”