By Rev. Jesse L. Jackson Sr.

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - We are shocked and saddened by the massacre in Aurora, Colo. But Aurora is part of a pattern, not an isolated incident. Two days earlier, 17 were hurt outside a bar in Tuscaloosa, Ala., when a gunman opened fire.

There is no safe zone.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and 18 others were shot in a Tucson, Ariz., shopping center. Virginia Tech students were mowed down on campus. In Chicago, 228 people have already lost their lives to gun violence as of mid-June. Nationwide, there have been 60 mass shootings since the Tucson horror, according to the Brady Campaign. Every year, about 100,000 Americans are victims of gun violence, with about 30,000 killed. Aurora is shocking — but the shock has become routine.

We fixate on the details of the killer. James Holmes was an honor student who ran into trouble, dropped out of school, apparently suffered depression. He saw himself as the Joker, the villain without a cause, eager only to sow violence and disruption for its own sake. Dressed in black body armor, he walked into the movie theater playing the new Batman movie carrying two handguns, a shotgun and an assault rifle. There was no defense when he opened fire.

Our leaders offer condolences and prayers, as President Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney did immediately. But we need both prayer and policy to provide for domestic tranquility. Depression isn’t isolated. Mass depression and mass access to guns is a recipe for massacre. We must do more than mourn. We must act to limit domestic terrorism.

Holmes purchased the four guns he carried in local Colorado gun shops along with 6,000 rounds of ammunition in the last 60 days. How could he arm himself with an assault rifle that is useful only to hunt humans? It was easy because in Colorado, it was perfectly legal. According to the Brady Campaign, this is the current state of gun laws in Colorado:

There is no ban on assault weapons, no ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines, no registration requirements, no gun owner licensing requirements, no background checks for Internet sales, no “good cause” required for a concealed carry permit, no limit on the number of handguns you can buy in one purchase.

Our police chiefs campaign hard for a ban on assault weapons that put them at risk. A weak federal assault weapons ban existed from 1994 until George Bush let it lapse in 2004. During that time, the number of crimes committed with assault weapons declined dramatically. But the National Rifle Association — the powerful gun lobby — campaigned hard against the ban and intimidated politicians in both parties.

Now the gun lobby has won. People have begun arming themselves, as if that would protect them. Last year, nearly half (47 percent) of Americans said they have a gun in their home. In 1959, 60 percent of Americans supported a law to ban possession of handguns except by police and other authorized persons. By 2011, only 26 percent supported it. Last year for the first time, a majority of Americans said they were opposed to a law to make it illegal to manufacture, sell or possess assault weapons.

In “The Second Coming,” the poet William Butler Yeats captured our time when he warned “the ceremony of innocence is drowned; the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

How many must die before “the best” stand and speak? We must revive the ban on assault weapons in America. The Joker’s goal of creating chaos through violence is not a joke. Arming ourselves is not a solution; it is a defeat. We must demand action to defend the domestic tranquility against a gun industry, lobby and culture that now pose a clear and present danger.

By Maureen Costello 

Commentary

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from the Southern Poverty Law Center

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - The face of America is changing. In 40 years, the United States will become a minority-majority nation – a remarkable milestone for a country that already boasts one of the most religiously, ethnically and racially diverse societies in the world.

But you wouldn’t know it looking at our nation’s schools. Census and school data tell a very different story:

•The average White student goes to a school that is more than three-quarters White.

•One in four children in poverty attends schools with few middle- and upper-middle class schoolmates.

•One-third of Black and Latino students attend schools with 90 to 100 percent minority populations. In the Northeast, over half of black students are in majority black schools.

This re-segregation of America’s schools has only been accelerated by a U.S. Supreme Court decision that marks its fifth anniversary this year – Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District.

That 2007 decision found that districts cannot use race as a factor in assigning children to schools – eliminating a powerful tool for integration. Sadly, some school districts aren’t using the few remaining tools. We’ve seen school districts – such as the Wake County, N.C., district – dismantle successful programs that use economic diversity to assign students to schools.

At a time when we should be preparing our children for a diverse nation, more communities are seeing their schools segregate. It’s not that people are suddenly rallying around an explicit call to return to Jim Crow-era school segregation, but that we have lost sight of the value of integration.

We’ve started viewing education as nothing more than another consumer choice. Across the country, you can find communities promoting plans marketed as “school choice” or “neighborhood schooling” – plans that supposedly give parents more options for their child’s education.

But we cannot treat public education as a consumer choice that’s no different than picking a calling plan for your smart phone. A public education isn’t a consumer choice that affects only the individual student; it affects all of us.

If we do not instill in today’s students an appreciation for diversity, it will be difficult if not impossible for our country to succeed in the 21st Century economy, where perhaps the most important job skill is the ability to collaborate with others. The benefits of instilling a respect for diversity cannot be overstated. But to do it, children must experience diversity in every school and every classroom. Unfortunately, those opportunities are evaporating.

They’re even disappearing outside the classroom. In 1970, 65 percent of U.S. neighborhoods could be considered mixed income; today, only 44 percent fit that description, according to Stanford University researchers. Of course, these statistics shouldn’t come as a surprise – it’s been 80 years since this country has seen so much income in the hands of so few, according to economist Emmanual Saez.

Also, several new studies, including one from the Brookings Institution, show a link between higher housing prices and strict zoning practices and access to high-quality schools. Quite simply, the socio-economically diverse neighborhood and school is disappearing from our nation.

Of course, skeptics dismiss the value of diversity and prefer to focus on raising student achievement. So, let’s focus on what has been found in diverse schools: Schools with policies that deliberately increase racial integration and mix low-income and middle-class students have documented benefits.

These schools are the best bet for African-American and Latino children to close the achievement gap in math and reading, according to data from the National Coalition for School Diversity. For these students, attending integrated schools increases the chances of going to college and graduating – and decreases the chances of being incarcerated. By virtually all measures, they outperform students in racially isolated minority schools.

Research also shows integrated schools have less violence, provide a better environment for students and ensure more stable teaching populations than high-poverty schools or racially isolated minority schools.

So far, the benefits might appear to accrue mainly to African-American and Latino children, but that’s reason enough to support deliberate integration policies. Currently, these students often attend poorly funded schools with inexperienced teachers. But they will soon be the majority of students in this country. They are the foundation for our nation’s future success.

And their classmates benefit, too. Research shows that students attending racially and socioeconomically diverse schools have higher academic achievement across the board. There is no evidence that integrated schools harm any group of students. We must renew our national commitment to diverse schools. The future demands it. And our children deserve it.

Maureen Costello is director of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Teaching Tolerance project.

By Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq.

(TriceEdneyWire.com) -- As I’ve traveled around the country the past few months, it’s clear that there are so many procedures for voting. There are 51 state plans, 1,300+ county plans and over 13,000 municipality plans. No wonder there is so much confusion! Even federal offices are controlled by state officials often hostile to their opposing party’s candidates. We know from Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, and over 30 other states these state laws have created a lot of confusion.

We were put on notice after the Supreme Court challenge in Bush v. Gore that pursuant to the 10^th Amendment of the Constitution there’s no affirmative right to vote in federal elections. The case revealed the Constitutional authority of states to control federal elections of president, vice president, and Congress. Consider all that’s going on now to decrease the number of voters and no matter which party holds our allegiance, we should be alarmed. In order to fill the glaring gap in federal elections, we should make an effort to influence our party’s platform. All parties should support state and federal Constitutional Amendments for an affirmative right to vote for all citizens. This Amendment would require a unitary electoral system for federal elections to include one ballot, one voting machine for all jurisdictions casting votes for Constitutional officers, and allow federal oversight at every level over these elections.

It would decrease irrational forms of voter suppression. We can’t continue the risk of having governors cause hardships for the most vulnerable when it comes to casting a vote. Our ancestors gave blood, sweat and tears to allow us to vote—and it’s not right to have anyone playing dangerous games with that right. When we are active in our party’s platform formation, we should tell leaders to spare nothing in protecting not just our voting rights, but also the rights of women, seniors, people with disabilities, poor people and everyone without a level playing field. Those who enlarge our electorate are the true patriots—not those who decrease it.

In our community we have many concerns and would like to see the party of our choice support and address them strongly enough to include them in party platforms so that platforms support our interests.

Another concern is Wall Street Regulation. The financial collapse of 2008 in large part was caused by weak regulation of financial institutions and un-enforced existing regulations. Three platform planks should be adopted: 1) Regulations to separate commercial banks from investment banks similar to the Glass-Stegal legislation put forth in 1933 by the Roosevelt Administration, 2) Restriction of trading of derivatives—the culprit of the home mortgage challenges from which many of us are still reeling, and 3) Requiring justification of year-end financial bonuses commensurate with financial standing of institutions. Middle class and poor people don’t get bonuses unless they’ve performed extraordinarily well—and not always then. Why should Wall Street have bonuses when the job they’re doing is dragging down the nation’s financial health?

Both parties should have a platform plank that speaks to employment and what the party plans to do to increase jobs. Up to now, Republicans have blocked every proposal put forth to resolve the jobs crisis without coming up with a plan of their own. Parties should support the Humphrey Hawkins 21^st Century Full Employment Act legislation offered by Rep. John Conyers. The bill places a small tax on speculative transactions, and raises about 1.5 billion dollars that could be used for jobs. Full employment would greatly benefit our nation’s financial health and eliminate some of the fear that’s causing otherwise good people to act irrationally. Get involved in your party’s platform development because it’ll determine what the party supports for the next 4 years.

(Dr. Williams can be reached at 202/678-6788 or see www.nationalcongressbw.org. For BLF, seewww.blackleadershipforum.org .)

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

Courtesy photo

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Voting rights activists have been saying it all along: voter ID laws carry the taint of racial discrimination. Now, according to the findings of a recent poll conducted by the University of Delaware, support for voter ID laws prevails among those who harbor negative feelings toward African Americans.

In the study, done by the university’s Center for Political Communication, participants were asked a number of questions about African Americans, and those responses used to develop a matrix of “racial resentment.” Those who scored higher along that spectrum tended to show more support for voter ID laws.

“It’s not surprising,” said Hillary Shelton, the NAACP’s Washington bureau director and senior vice president for policy and advocacy, about the results.

The NAACP has been one of the chief opponents of the wave of new voter ID laws that has swept the nation. He added, “All data indicates that minority voters are disproportionately impacted. For example, 25 percent of all voting age African Americans do not have an ID to vote under these new stringent voter ID laws.”

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 32 out of 50 states now have some form of voter ID law, at least 11 of them statutes that were enacted after Republicans won control of several state governments in 2010. The laws have varying degrees of strictness, with Texas’ regarded as one of the most restrictive. Attorney General Eric Holder labeled provisions of the Lone Star State’s revised election law a “poll tax.”

Shelton agreed with Holder’s characterization of voter ID laws as a legacy of Jim Crow-era weapons against Black voters.

“Realizing African Americans were disproportionately poor they (racist Whites) realized it (the tax levied against Blacks at the ballot box) was a good tool to include in the disenfranchisement arsenal,” Shelton said. Voter ID laws do the same, he continued, since people have to pay both for a birth documents, then for an ID. “Those that want to find ways to discount the issues, concerns and interests of African Americans would support these laws that threaten to disenfranchise millions of voters.”

Just as GOP lawmakers and officials tend to champion these laws, Republicans are more likely to demonstrate “racial resentment” and to support voter ID measures, according to the study. And Democrats and Independents scored lower on the racial resentment matrix and are less likely to support the laws.

David. C. Wilson, the center's coordinator of public opinion initiatives and supervisor of the study said, "Who votes in America has always been controversial; so much so that the U.S. Constitution has been amended a number of times to protect voting eligibility and rights. It comes as no surprise that Republicans support these laws more than Democrats; but, what is surprising is the level at which Democrats and liberals also support the laws."

The University of Delaware’s study was based on a national telephone survey of 906 Americans from May 20-June 6, 2012. Research faculty David C. Wilson and Paul Brewer supervised the study.