Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Striving for a smooth election

By Miles Rapoport
The Boston Globe

Over the last several weeks, a fierce argument has broken out over voter registration, particularly the registration efforts of ACORN, accusations of voter fraud, and the ability of the election system to handle the surge of voters on Nov. 4.

First, the expected record turnout is a cause for celebration. When I served as Connecticut's secretary of the state in the mid-'90s, my colleagues and I bemoaned low voter participation, especially among young people, and the disengagement it reflected from politics and democratic life. Not this time. Registrations have poured in, turnout in the primaries achieved record levels, and all indications are that the wave will continue through Tuesday. Democracy is vibrant and very much alive.

It is therefore a shame that the issue of ACORN's voter registration work has dominated the news about voting.

To be sure, ACORN bears some responsibility. It had quality controls in place, but should have leaned even further backward to ensure that problems would be minimized. Still, 900,000 valid registrations, including new registrants and changes of address, is an important accomplishment. Of course, all groups doing voter registration would be better served by reporting their results with more precision and a little less hype.

But overall, this is a trumped-up controversy. There has been no attempt by ACORN to encourage fraudulent voting, and on close reading the critics do not even make such a claim. ACORN has done a service by reaching out to people who might have been left out. Why, then, the ferocity of the attack?

In part, it is an element of a coordinated campaign directed against Barack Obama, demonizing ACORN and then linking Obama to the organization as a way to raise doubts about him.

In addition, raising doubts about the validity of registrations fits a pattern of efforts to discourage people from voting - from lawsuits to shut down early voting centers in Indiana and stop same-day registration in Ohio to efforts to purge people from voting rolls because their houses were foreclosed or their names didn't perfectly match error-ridden databases like Social Security. Worse, it could lay the groundwork for wholesale challenges to the results, seeking to throw the legitimacy of the election into question and the results once again into the hands of the courts.

What is needed is action by election officials to ensure that next Tuesday goes as smoothly as possible. Many deserve real credit for doing just that. This preparation includes:

  • accurate lists from which eligible voters have not been purged
  • adequate numbers of machines to avoid long lines, and an ample supply of paper ballots as backups
  • sufficient numbers of poll workers, with trained problem-solvers at each precinct
  • preparation for extended hours if required, to ensure that every voter has a chance to vote
  • fair counting of provisional ballots, so that valid votes are not discounted
  • After the election, Congress, the new president, and state legislators and election officials need to realize it is time to get the election systems right. The nation needs an expansive and reliable voter registration system, which includes Election Day registration (which Massachusetts almost passed earlier this year), proactive implementation of the National Voter Registration Act, "pre-registration" for 17-year-olds, and steps toward universal registration.

    Voting options need to be expanded, including more accessible voting by mail and early voting. Thirty-four states have utilized early voting this year, widening voting opportunities and taking pressure off Election Day itself; others should follow suit.

    Also, strong national standards are needed for election administration, with sustained federal funding to assist states in carrying them out and the enforcement authority to make them stick. We need machines that voters can have full confidence in, list management systems that delete outdated names but protect eligible voters, clear rules for poll workers, and clear standards for counting provisional ballots.

    People care about voting as they haven't in 40 years. By taking the steps needed, officials can capture the surge in participation and give Americans the democracy they deserve.

    Miles Rapoport is the president of Demos, a New York-based public policy center.

  • Thursday, October 16, 2008

    Working class Black and Brown folks caused the housing crisis & the global economic meltdown. Huh?!

    Such baseless, blame-the-victim allegations are nothing less than scapegoating of Jim Crow proportions.

    Blaming inner-city dwelling "high-risk borrowers", ACORN, CRA and others for America's housing crisis is akin to charging rape victims for the rape kit. It's simply unconscionable.

    Did the working class own predatory lending outfits?

    Did the working class dream up the Adjustable Rate Mortgage?

    Did the working class own the media conglomerates and other institutions who since the end of World War II have pounded into every American's skull that home ownership is part and parcel of the increasingly elusive American Dream?

    Did the working class run the real estate industry? The insurance industry? Wall Street? Madison Avenue? K Street? 1600 The White House/Capitol Hill? Hollywood? Or Silicon Valley?

    Oh, one last thing:

    Did the working class buy all those now-foreclosed McMansions in suburbia?

    The following Lending Tree commercial from a few years back was a (now not-so-humorous) augur of America's precarious house of cards that rested on good old-fashion industry- and government-fostered consumerism and addiction to credit.

    See for yourself . . .

    Tuesday, October 07, 2008

    The green collar economy, Blackfolk & America's future

    Greencollareconomybook Afro-Netizen has promoted books before. However, the timing of the publication of "The Green Collar Economy" by GreenForAll founder, Van Jones, the presidential campaign and what's going on between Wall Street, Main Street and MLK Boulevard highlights the importance of Jones' book.

    You have heard Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi -- even Republican political figures reference "green collar jobs" in the rally cry for a new economy built on energy independence and a heightened environmental stewardship that for the next generation of American voters may become an inviolable non-partisan issue like Social Security or, dare I say, Israel.

    Beyond the political rhetoric whose growing lexicon has now subsumed "green collar" this and "green economy that, is the actual substance and context that every voter -- every American -- should understand. Most especially, we as people of color must commit to understand and advocate for our integral inclusion and leadership in the shaping of the social policy and business development in the emerging "green economy".

    As Jones articulates so well, the green economy's success depends on our early and broad involvement as people of color to ensure that the fruits of our country's labor in this area produce not just a more vibrant workforce, but secure the type of "eco-equity" that the mainstream American environmental movement has been conspicuously silent on.

    So, without further ado, here's a taste of a groundbreaking book we all should read and spread the word about with as much zeal as we do the chain letters that (rightly or wrongly) compel us to think, feel or do something away from our computer screens.

    Still not sure what the heck "green collar jobs" are and why we should care?

    Read on . . . (and BUY THIS BOOK TODAY!)

    The possibilities are endless. Someone says “green jobs,” and our minds go to Buck Rogers.

    Let’s be clear, the main piece of technology in the green economy is a caulk gun. Hundreds of thousands of green-collar jobs will be weatherizing and energy-retrofitting every building in the United States. Buildings with leaky windows, ill-fitting doors, poor insulation, and old appliances can gobble up 30 percent more energy.

    That means owners are paying 30 percent more on their heating bills. And it often means that 30 percent more coal-fi red carbon is going into the atmosphere. Drafty buildings create broke, chilly people—and an overheated planet.

    Another bit of high-tech green technology is the clipboard. That tool is used by energy auditors as they point out energy-saving opportunities to homeowners and renters. This job does not require much training and can be an early entry point into the booming world of energy consultation and efficiency. And one consultation can save an owner hundreds—or even thousands—of dollars annually.

    Other green-collar workers can then follow up with other tasks for building owners: wrapping hot-water heaters with blankets, blowing insulation, plugging holes, repairing cracks, hauling out old appliances, replacing old windows with the double-glazed kind.

    Other pieces of green tech are ladders, wrenches, hammers, tool belts, and nonslip work boots. Those are the space-age gadgets used by solar-panel installers every day.

    The point is this. When you think about the emerging green economy, don’t think of George Jetson with a jet pack. Think of Joe Sixpack with a hard hat and lunch bucket, sleeves rolled up, going off to fix America. Think of Rosie the Riveter, manufacturing parts for hybrid buses or wind turbines. Those images will represent the true face of a green-collar America.

    Monday, September 29, 2008

    Why Congresswoman Barbara Lee (and other progressives) opposed the Wall Street bailout

    The following is a press release issued today by one of Congress' most progressive members, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), on the failure of Congress to pass H.R. 3997, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act. (H/T to PublicMarkup.org & the aggressively innovative Sunlight Foundation!)

    Barbaralee1Legislation Would Have Rewarded Predatory and Subprime Lenders

    Washington D.C.- Today Congresswoman Barbara Lee delivered the following statement on the House floor in opposition to the financial bailout bill considered today. The Congresswoman voted against the bill, which failed by a vote of 205-228.   

    “Thank you Madame Speaker and thank you Mr. Frank, the Chairman of the Financial Services Committee, for his efforts to improve the administration’s $700 billion blank check proposal.   

    “As a former member of the House Financial Services Committee for eight years, I can tell you that the situation we find ourselves in is the direct result of the deregulation happy, turn a blind- eye approach of this administration and its allies in Congress.

    “Now we see the horrific price of these reckless deregulation policies.  More than 600,000 Americans have lost their jobs since January.  People need jobs to obtain credit and to pay their rent.   They need jobs to pay their mortgages or to put money in their 401k or retirement account.  Millions of people are living paycheck to paycheck, if they have a paycheck.

    “Home foreclosures are skyrocketing, and home values are plunging, banks are failing and we are still spending more than $10 billion every month on a war in Iraq that should never have been waged.

    “So there is no question that we are confronting an economic and financial crisis.

    “But I’m convinced that this bailout plan is not the solution to this mess. 

    “First, it does little to address the underlying problem – the foreclosure crisis. We need a moratorium on foreclosures and bankruptcy reform to help people stay in their homes.

    “Second, this bill should be paid for by the high-flying industry that created this problem.   $700 billion should not be given to Wall Street and the Bush Administration unless those who cause this mess pay for it. We should also prohibit the tax deductibility -and my bill the Income Equity Act (H.R. 3876) would do this across the board -  of executive compensation in any company where the highest paid corporate officer is paid more than 25 the times the pay of a bailed-out company’s lowest-paid worker. 

    “And third, we need an economic stimulus package to deal with the crushing reality of the recession that is hitting people hard and growing every day.

    “I cannot vote to reward those predatory and subprime lenders who are creating such havoc in the lives of millions of Americans.

    “There is a better way.”

    What is this elusive "better way" that corporate media and Congressional leaders have refused to include in the recently failed legislation, you ask?

    Click here to read about what we should echo throughout all media outlets, courtesy of the good folks at the online journal, ShelterForce .

    Thursday, September 25, 2008

    Clinton Global Initiative 2008 Focuses on Global Health

    By Mary Dillard

    Guest Contributor

    Today is the third day of the 2008 Clinton Global Initiative.  This year I decided to focus on listening to the global health panels, which have emphasized the goal of expanding the global health workforce. 

    One statistic that was mentioned yesterday is that Africa has 11% of the world’s population, over 20% of the world’s disease burden, but only 3% of the world’s health workers.  This has not always been the case and there are a number of reasons the numbers of health care workers have diminished so precipitously over the past thirty years. These include the Structural Adjustment Programs imposed on a number of African countries during the 1980s and 90s that forced African governments to decrease the amount of money that went into public health.

    A second factor was the so-called brain drain- a controversial term referring to the migration of skilled professionals from developing countries to fill human resource needs in wealthier countries.  This process began in the 1970s but accelerated due to the decline in working conditions for health workers in the 1980s and 90s.   

    Over the past two days, several panel participants have called for private investors to pay more attention to partnering with the public sector, thus challenging the legacy of structural adjustment.  The clearest call for this came yesterday from Paul Farmer, co-founder of Partners in Health who reminded the audience that the CGI goals (Poverty Alleviation, Energy and Climate Change, Education and Global Health) are particularly relevant for impoverished countries in the global south. 

    While Farmer was technically on the panel to speak about global health, he emphasized that the recent devastation that Haiti has faced is due to climate change.  Although this has been little reported in the U.S. corporate press, Haiti has been battered by four hurricanes in the past two months.  These storms have resulted in the deaths of over 1000 people and displacement of close to a million people. 

    Farmer argued that with the splintering of NGO groups, it has been more difficult than ever to coordinate efforts or to share best practices of health care delivery but that it is crucial for people to pay attention to what is happening in Haiti in order to avoid an increasingly dire humanitarian crisis.   

    Given the fact that there are many immediate healthcare crises occurring in the world, it may seem strange to focus the theme of the Global Health panels on recruiting healthcare workers.  However, this need was echoed by most panel participants over the past two days.  Yesterday, Dr. Nancy Aossey, President and Chief Executive Officer of the International Medical Corps (IMC) argued that this is a crucial priority for post-conflict and active conflict zones where IMC works including Chad, the Central African Republic, Liberia and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

    Today was “policy-wonk day” on the health panels.  Most of the speakers on the smaller panels were very well versed in health policy and there was a clear emphasis on practical, replicable solutions to challenges facing health care workers around the world.  This morning’s global health panel featured Craig R. Barrett, Chairman of Intel Corporation,
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Minister of Health, Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, 
Aruna Uprety, Director, Rural Health and Education Service Trust of Nepal and Dr. Lola Dare, Executive Secretary of African Council for Sustainable Health Development (ACOSHED).

    The Ethiopian Minister of Health reported on initiatives that his government is doing to expand the medical corps.  According to Minister Tedros, when the government set priorities,  “We decided to focus on trying to reach the Millennium Development Goals, particularly the goal of ending poverty by 2015.”  Ethiopia’s per capita health expenditure is only one dollar per person.  With such limited funds directed towards the healthcare, increasing the numbers of low and mid-level providers (traditional birth attendants, nurses, physicians assistants) became a priority and the Ministry decided to strategically allocate resources. 

    The current national health plan focuses on what he calls  “Flooding and Retention”.  Flooding refers to exponentially increasing the number of trained doctors, while retention refers to efforts to keep trained healthcare professionals employed in that capacity.  In too many impoverished countries, salaries for health care providers are so low that people cannot afford to work in the sectors where they were trained.  This contributes to skilled workers either leaving the country or finding other employment.  The largest outlay of funds in the health budget will go towards “Flooding” with  the hopes that at least a fraction of the doctors trained will continue to live and work in Ethiopia. It’s a risky strategy but clearly one that the government believes it must take.

    Dr. Lola Dare made one of the most compelling arguments to not only increase the number of health care providers but also to provide those workers with the necessary supplies. She reminded the audience, “I worked in pediatric health and I left because I had no supplies in order to do my job.”  Her comments highlight the fact that the best intentions mean nothing to workers on the ground unless they have the supplies necessary to provide the kind of care that they were trained to provide. 

    Africa has the highest disease burden but also has the lowest number of health workers.  Clearly the Continent has faced tremendous challenges in providing adequate health care over the past thirty years.  Since CGI is about creating “political will” my hope is that one day we will see real progress, by convincing governments around the world to make their health budgets more important than their military budgets.

    Mary Dillard is Associate Professor of African History at Sarah Lawrence College in Bronxville, New York.

    Wednesday, September 24, 2008

    Afro-Netizen covers the 2008 Clinton Global Initiative: What a difference a year makes

    By Mary Dillard
    Guest Contributor

    Clintoncgi1 On Wednesday morning, I attended the first full day session of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI), an annual meeting of world leaders, corporate executives, NGO representatives, foundations and research institutions.  Timed to coincide with the opening session of the UN General Assembly, CGI’s goal is to link these various organizations in an effort to direct resources towards sustainable solutions to some of the most vexing global problems. 

    This is my second time blogging for Afro-Netizen about CGI.  I attended last year and was impressed by Bill Clinton’s ability to assimilate a wide range of information, to bring disparate perspectives together in the same room and to speak intelligently on a wide range of topics.  Last year, I diligently followed the education panels because I wanted to hear up close and personal about the latest innovations in girls’ education, especially in Africa. 

    What a difference a year makes. 

    Last year, Clinton sang the praises of Kenya’s President Mwai Kibaki for his efforts to provide universal primary education to all of Kenya’s children.  Today, Kenya is still recovering from its own political crisis at the end of 2007 which displaced thousands of families and set the country back tremendously in terms of its educational and development goals.

    The opening panel session featured Liberian President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, Queen Rania al-Abdalla of Jordan, former U2 member and co-founder of the ONE campaign Bono, E. Nevill Isdell the Chairman of the Board of Directors for Coca Cola, and former Vice President Al Gore.  President Clinton heaped praise on President Ellen Sirleaf-Johnson for the tremendous growth of Liberia’s GDP since she became Africa’s first female head of state in 2006, after the country ended fourteen years of civil war.  President Sirleaf-Johnson’s background as a senior loan officer at the World Bank has certainly enabled her to tap into the various multinational entities that are interested in participating in Liberia’s postwar recovery. 

    Investors have flocked to Liberia because as President Johnson-Sirleaf stated “We are not a poor country, we have tremendous natural resources.”  She argued however, that the country still faces tremendous challenges, particularly in rebuilding infrastructure. In addition, the lack of coordination among donors has hampered smooth implementation of redevelopment efforts. 

    Surprisingly, the most fiery speaker of the morning session was former Vice President Al Gore who linked the current economic crisis in the United States to the continuing climate crisis.  Gore suggested that for years, the American public received misinformation about the potential hazards of sub-prime lending practices.  The Vice President argued that similar misinformation is still being spread by entrenched fossil fuel industry interests about the dangers of climate change and suggested that these companies were committing a type of securities fraud by telling investors that their products were not harmful to the environment.  He then called for civil disobedience by young people to fight the building of any new coal burning power plants.

    Bono began his statements by pointing out that the U.S. government can find $700 billion to bail out Wall Street, but the entire G-8 can’t find $25 billion to make sure that thousands of children don’t continue to die every day of preventable diseases.

    His comments highlight the fact that part of the potential of CGI is that it can help to create the political will to divert more resources to alleviate poverty, bolster global health initiatives, support education and address the question of climate change.  In this respect, CGI is a very important forum for bringing key players together.  However, there also tend to be a lot of contradictions in these types of gatherings.  The winner of today’s “Clueless Africa Comment” prize must go to Bono. 

    Addressing Queen Rania al-Abdallah of Jordan as “your majestyness”  he said, “The biggest problems of your continent are three types of extremes: extreme politics, extreme poverty, and extreme ideology.”  He continued, “Take a situation like Darfur.  I’ve been there. There is nothing there.  It’s just dirt.”

    Clearly, his point was not well made but his words are also a reminder to many Africa specialists of the problems that arise when moderately informed celebrities end up being the last word on African politics.  First of all, Jordan is NOT in Africa.  Secondly, this kind of language obscures the real roots of political conflicts in Africa, giving the impression that Africans are once again fighting over things that don’t really matter.  Do the people of Darfur think there is nothing there? 

    The Chinese government clearly sees something other than dirt in Darfur, or else it would not be continuing to expand its political and economic relationship with the Sudanese government.  Most troubling to me in the many invocations of Darfur that occurred today, was the complete silence on the Democratic Republic of Congo, Africa’s largest war to date.  Could it be because Canadian and American companies (among others) are still benefiting from their trade relationships in Congo?

    There is obviously a lot of good that can come from this summit.  The rest of the week will feature announcements by CGI partners of funding commitments that they will make this year.  I for one, have returned more skeptical this year and will attend the remaining events hoping to hear more informed analyses about Africa and the Caribbean. 

    Mary Dillard is Associate Professor of African History at Sarah Lawrence College in Bronxville, New York. 

    The Wall Street bailout and you

    By Darrell Williams
    Guest Contributor

    Make no mistake, this is historic.  I’m talking high school textbook historic.  I’m talking “where were you when this happened” historic. 

    Regardless of its details, the $700 billion (and possibly up to one trillion dollar) bailout of Wall Street excess being negotiated as you read this will be eclipsed only by the election of Barack Obama on November 4th.  In a plot line dripping with irony, President Obama may indeed be known as “the janitor” charged with cleaning up the mess after the eight-year frat party known as the Bush presidency.

    And, baby, what a mess it is! 

    Wallstbailout Treasury Secretary Paulson is basically asking for blank check authority to purchase the troubled assets of teetering financial institutions.  These assets are primarily in the form of securities backed by sub-prime mortgages, the kind of mortgages that homeowners can no longer afford to make payments on for various reasons. Because no one can connect any particular mortgage security to any particular set of mortgages, no one can effectively calculate a value for the securities and thus no private sector investor is interested in buying them. 

    So, in order to keep America from falling into an economic depression, taxpayers have to do what investors won’t: buy securities the value of which may be calculated best by a wet finger in the wind.  Secretary Paulson asserts that the tough times likely to result from both the debacle itself and the bailout will not be as apocryphal as the global financial meltdown and economic depression that would likely occur if we did nothing. 

    The tough times might be summed up in one word: recession, which is basically a contraction of economic activity usually resulting in higher unemployment, business financial losses and declining stock prices.  Economic activity is driven in part by the availability and low cost of credit.  If credit is unavailable or too expensive, companies can’t or don’t build inventory, or build plants, or purchase big ticket capital goods.  If companies aren’t building new plants or building inventory, then companies aren’t hiring employees. 

    What makes credit more expensive?  Demand of course. The cost of credit goes up the more people, companies and governments demand credit.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand that in order to finance this bailout, the government is about to start demanding more credit than it ever has before.  Total US federal debt is already $9.7 trillion. (Yes, that’s with a “T”.)  Add to this the cost of the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac bailouts which analysts put at about $200 billion.  As stated, the Wall Street bailout is targeted at $700 billion.  This year’s federal budget deficit is over $400 billion.  Analysts peg the 2009 budget deficit at nearly $550 billion.  The cost of war in Iraq and Afghanistan is $580 billion and climbing.  Add up these and some other minor initiatives (at least by comparison) and we are looking at total federal debt north of $12 trillion

    Compare this to the $5.7 billion of national debt when President Clinton left office.  The public and private sectors will compete for available credit dollars which generally leads to higher interest rates.  For us, that means higher costs for student loans, car notes, mortgages and other consumer credit – assuming there is someone out there still willing to lend after all of this washes through.

    Unfortunately, the pain does not end there.  Secretary Paulson is demanding this authorization without oversight.  The Treasury Department would be the sole arbiter of what your tax dollar (well, the debt dollar that you will eventually pay off with your tax dollar) is used for.  If Paulson gets what he wants, there will be no oversight, no supervision, no pre-established procedure, no veto power, no check or balance.  The Treasury department will be able to buy whatever it wants, at whatever price it wants, whenever it wants, from whomever it wants, using whatever financial institutions it wants to use in executing the purchases.

    So, who is to say if the Treasury Department overpays for assets that Wall Street can’t put a value on?

    Who is to say if the Treasury Department is buying the best of the worst of the assets or the worst of the worst of the assets? 

    Needless to say, the Treasury Department won’t be using any firms that employ anyone you or I know.  Under the Paulson plan, it is quite conceivable that you as a taxpayer pay an investment banker to manage assets that that very same investment banker is selling to you the taxpayer.  Now before you reach for the extra strength Hate-O-Rade, understand that this isn’t a done deal. 

    There is bi-partisan push back on Paulson’s proposal and the end product is likely going to be less of a carte blanche for the Executive Branch.  More important, however, is the impact of this bailout on our collective future, both near and long term. 

    As you know, Senator Obama is promising tax relief for everyone making less than $250,000.  He is also pushing for extensive health care reform, investment in infrastructure and greater support for education. The timing of these laudable efforts is now very much in question as the next president will have a lot of cleaning up to do. 

    For instance, take that $12 trillion number discussed above, multiply it by about 4, and you get the size of our looming Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid obligations.  Frankly, that’s as good as it gets.  I expect Senator Obama’s opponent to maintain many of the policy prescriptions that got us where we are today (maintaining the Bush tax cuts, military spending to support belligerent foreign policy). 

    As I said, these are historic times and the stakes are high, with competing demands, interests and ideologies (including those that got us into this mess in the first place).  We are here in part because 8 million African-Americans are not registered to vote.  Of us who are registered, enough of us stayed home to help put and keep a particular ideology in power, an ideology that is in my opinion indifferent if not hostile to the interests of African Americans not rich enough to live off of capital gains and dividends

    This is the ideology that will stay in power if change does not occur on November 4th.  The choice is ours as will be the blame if we do not act.

    Darrell A. Williams is Managing Member of DuSable Capital LLC, a financial investment and advisory practice targeting growth-oriented companies and the organizations (private equity funds, business development groups, etc.) that support them.

    Tuesday, September 23, 2008

    GA deathrow inmate Troy Anthony Davis' life hangs in the balance

    Troydavis1 At 7:00pET, the State of Georgia is scheduled to execute 39-year old African American, Troy Anthony Davis, despite protestations from such ideologically disparate public figures as former President Jimmy Carter, Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr, and Pope Benedict XVI.

    According to one Davis attorney (separate from his defense team), Carol Gray, the state has still not sought to find and interview perhaps the only eyewitness to the murder of a White police officer for which Mr. Davis has been convicted and sentenced to death.

    Afro-Netizen has received a press release overnight from Ms. Davis that puts forth the an argument for why a stay of execution for Mr. Davis is imperative:

    Attorney Carol Gray, who assisted the Troy Davis defense team by interviewing and taking statements from key witnesses, is urging that Davis’ Tuesday 7PM death sentence be stayed to allow time to interview a critical witness to the murder who has never been spoken to by the prosecution or defense.   

    Gray had done extensive investigation of the Davis case including interviewing and taking a statement from a lead prosecution witness, Dorothy Ferrell, who claimed at trial that she saw Davis shoot Officer Mark Allen MacPhail in 1989.   Ferrell recanted this testimony to Gray and signed a statement admitting that she never saw who killed the officer but had been pressured to identify Davis by the police who were threatening to revoke her parole if she did not cooperate. 

    In addition, Gray reports that “there is a critical witness who has never been spoken to by the prosecution or the defense.  I know this because I investigated this case in depth seven years ago assisting the defense team.”   

    According to Gray, “Davis was convicted of killing Officer Timothy MacPhail in 1989.  The shooting happened in the parking lot of a Burger King across from a motel called The Thunderbird.  Two of the people in that parking lot were Troy Davis and Sylvester Coles.   Coles went to the police department the day after the shooting with a lawyer saying that Davis shot the officer.  In the decade that followed, Coles confessed to several people that it was he (Coles) who shot the officer.  In addition, 7 of the 9 witnesses from trial who testified against Davis have recanted their testimony.”

    “But no one has spoken with perhaps the best witness of all:  the clerk at the motel right across from the Burger King parking.  According to another witness, the clerk screamed when the shooting happened.   Her office had a large window facing the parking lot, so she likely saw the shooting.  I searched at length for this witness, but was unable to find out who or where she was.  However there is a sure way to find her:  subpoena the tax records for that motel for the year Officer MacPhail was killed.  Both the state and federal tax records for the Thunderbird should have this woman listed as an employee, along with her social security number.  With her social security number, she could be located through various investigative databases.   

    Gray reported that there was no record of any attempt to interview the Thunderbird clerk in any of the police reports in the Davis case. “Either the police were completely incompetent in missing this critical witness or they did speak to her but she did not help their case so no report was created.  The hiding of such information would be a grave constitutional violation that would likely result in a new trial.“ 

    “It would be unconscionable for Troy Davis to be executed without making all efforts to interview this critical witness.  Tomorrow’s execution should be stayed and this critical witness should be found,” Gray concluded.

    Gray, now in Amherst, MA, received her JD from Northeastern University School of Law and LLM from Georgetown University Law Center.  She has a decade of criminal defense experience as an attorney or investigator, including with the Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services.
     

    Listen to Troy Davis' side of the story in his own words.

    Unlike both major party candidates, Afro-Netizen opposes the death penalty -- even if it were ever to be administered in a non-discriminatory manner irrespective of defendants' race or class.

    EMAIL ADDRESSES FOR THE FIVE MEMBERS OF THE GEORGIA STATE BOARD OF PARDONS & PAROLES:

    Chairperson L. Gale Buckner

    gale_buckner@pap.state.ga.us

    Garland Hunt

    garland_hunt@pap.state.ga.us

    Robert Keller

    robert_keller@pap.state.ga.us

    Milton Nix

    milton_nix@pap.state.ga.us

    Garfield Hammonds

    garfield_hammonds@pap.state.ga.us

    FAX NUMBERS FOR THE GEORGIA STATE BOARD OF PARDONS & PAROLES:

    (404) 651-8502

    (404) 651-5282

    (404) 463-6627

    Thursday, September 18, 2008

    Explaining White Privilege

    (Or, Your Defense Mechanism is Showing)

    Timwise1 By Tim Wise

    Sigh.

    I guess I should have expected it, seeing as how it's nothing new. I write a piece on racism and white privilege (namely, the recently viral, "This is Your Nation on White Privilege"), lots of folks read it, many of them like it, and others e-mail me in fits of apoplexy, or post scathing critiques on message boards in which they invite me to die, to perform various sexual acts upon myself that I feel confident are impossible, or, best of all, to "go live in the ghetto," whereupon I will come to "truly appreciate the animals" for whom I have so much affection (the phrase they use for me and that affection, of course, sounds a bit different, and I'll leave it to your imagination to conjure the quip yourself).

    Though I have no desire to debate the points made in the original piece, I would like to address some of the more glaring, and yet reasonable, misunderstandings that many seem to have about the subject of white privilege. That many white folks don't take well to the term is an understatement, and quite understandable. For those of us in the dominant group, the notion that we may receive certain advantages generally not received by others is a jarring, sometimes maddening concept. And if we don't understand what the term means, and what those who use it mean as they deploy it, our misunderstandings can generate anger and heat, where really, none is called for. So let me take this opportunity to explain what I mean by white privilege.

    Of course, the original piece only mentioned examples of white privilege that were directly implicated in the current presidential campaign. It made no claims beyond that. Yet many who wrote to me took issue with the notion that there was such a thing, arguing, for instance that there are lots of poor white people who have no privilege, and many folks of color who are wealthy, who do. But what this argument misses is that race and class privilege are not the same thing.

    Though we are used to thinking of privilege as a mere monetary issue, it is more than that. Yes, there are rich black and brown folks, but even they are subject to racial profiling and stereotyping (especially because those who encounter them often don't know they're rich and so view them as decidedly not), as well as bias in mortgage lending, and unequal treatment in schools. So, for instance, even the children of well-off black families are more likely to be suspended or expelled from school than the children of poor whites, and this is true despite the fact that there is no statistically significant difference in the rates of serious school rule infractions between white kids or black kids that could justify the disparity (according to fourteen different studies examined by Russ Skiba at Indiana University).

    As for poor whites, though they certainly are suffering economically, this doesn't mean they lack racial privilege. I grew up in a very modest apartment, and economically was far from privileged. Yet I received better treatment in school (placement in advanced track classes even when I wasn't a good student), better treatment by law enforcement officers, and indeed more job opportunities because of connections I was able to take advantage of, that were pretty much unavailable to the folks of color I knew growing up. Likewise, low income whites everywhere are able to clean up, go to a job interview and be seen as just another white person, whereas a person of color, even who isn't low-income, has to wonder whether or not they might trip some negative stereotype about their group when they go for an interview or sit in the classroom answering questions from the teacher. Oh, and not to put too fine a point on it, but even low-income whites are more likely to own their own home than middle income black families, thanks to past advantages in housing and asset accumulation, which has allowed those whites to receive a small piece of property from their families.

    The point is, privilege is as much a psychological matter as a material one. Whites have the luxury of not having to worry that our race is going to mark us negatively when looking for work, going to school, shopping, looking for a place to live, or driving for that matter: things that folks of color can't take for granted.

    Let me share an analogy to make the point.

    Taking things out of the racial context for a minute: imagine persons who are able bodied, as opposed to those with disabilities. If I were to say that able-bodied persons have certain advantages, certain privileges if you will, which disabled persons do not, who would argue the point? I imagine that no one would. It's too obvious, right? To be disabled is to face numerous obstacles. And although many persons with disabilities overcome those obstacles, this fact doesn't take away from the fact that they exist. Likewise, that persons with disabilities can and do overcome obstacles every day, doesn't deny that those of us who are able-bodied have an edge. We have one less thing to think and worry about as we enter a building, go to a workplace, or just try and navigate the contours of daily life. The fact that there are lots of able-bodied people who are poor, and some disabled folks who are rich, doesn't alter the general rule: on balance, it pays to be able-bodied.

    That's all I'm saying about white privilege: on balance, it pays to be a member of the dominant racial group. It doesn't mean that a white person will get everything they want in life, or win every competition, but it does mean that there are general advantages that we receive.

    So, for instance, studies have found that job applicants with white sounding names are 50% more likely to receive a call-back for a job interview than applicants with black-sounding names, even when all job-related qualifications and credentials are the same.

    Other studies have found that white men with a criminal record are more likely to get a call-back for an interview than black male job applicants who don't have one, even when all requisite qualifications, demeanor and communication styles are the same.

    Others have found that white women are far more likely than black women to be hired for work through temporary agencies, even when the black women have more experience and are more qualified.

    Evidence from housing markets has found that there are about two million cases of race-based discrimination against people of color every year in the United States. That's not just bad for folks of color; the flipside is that there are, as a result, millions more places I can live as a white person.

    Or consider criminal justice. Although data from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration indicates that whites are equally or more likely than blacks or Latinos to use drugs, it is people of color (blacks and Latinos mostly) who comprise about 90 percent of the persons incarcerated for a drug possession offense. Despite the fact that white men are more likely to be caught with drugs in our car (on those occasions when we are searched), black men remain about four times more likely than white men to be searched in the first place, according to Justice Department findings. That's privilege for the dominant group.

    That's the point: privilege is the flipside of discrimination. If people of color face discrimination, in housing, employment and elsewhere, then the rest of us are receiving a de facto subsidy, a privilege, an advantage in those realms of daily life. There can be no down without an up, in other words.

    None of this means that white folks don't face challenges. Of course we do, and some of them (based on class, gender, sexual orientation, disability status, or other factors) are systemic and institutionalized. But on balance, we can take for granted that we will receive a leg-up on those persons of color with whom we share a nation.

    And no, affirmative action doesn't change any of this.

    Despite white fears to the contrary, even with affirmative action in place (which, contrary to popular belief does not allow quotas or formal set-asides except in those rare cases where blatant discrimination has been proven) whites hold about ninety percent of all the management level jobs in this country, receive about ninety-four percent of government contract dollars, and hold ninety percent of tenured faculty positions on college campuses. And in spite of affirmative action programs, whites are more likely than members of any other racial group to be admitted to their college of first choice.* And according to a study released last year, for every student of color who received even the slightest consideration from an affirmative action program in college, there are two whites who failed to meet normal qualification requirements at the same school, but who got in anyway because of parental influence, alumni status or because other favors were done.

    Furthermore, although white students often think that so-called minority scholarships are a substantial drain on financial aid resources that would otherwise be available to them, nothing could be further from the truth. According to a national study by the General Accounting Office, less than four percent of scholarship money in the U.S. is represented by awards that consider race as a factor at all, while only 0.25 percent (that's one quarter of one percent for the math challenged) of all undergrad scholarship dollars come from awards that are restricted to persons of color alone. What's more, the idea that large numbers of students of color receive the benefits of race-based scholarships is lunacy of the highest order. In truth, only 3.5 percent of college students of color receive any scholarship even partly based on race, suggesting that such programs remain a pathetically small piece of the financial aid picture in this country, irrespective of what a gaggle of reactionary white folks might believe.**

    In other words, despite the notion that somehow we have attained an equal opportunity, or color-blind society, the fact is, we are far from an equitable nation. People of color continue to face obstacles based solely on color, and whites continue to reap benefits from the same. None of this makes whites bad people, and none of it means we should feel guilty or beat ourselves up. But it does mean we need to figure out how we're going to be accountable for our unearned advantages. One way is by fighting for a society in which those privileges will no longer exist, and in which we will be able to stand on our own two feet, without the artificial crutch of racial advantage to prop us up. We need to commit to fighting for racial equity and challenging injustice at every turn, not only because it harms others, but because it diminishes us as well (even as it pays dividends), and because it squanders the promise of fairness and equity to which we claim to adhere as Americans.

    It's about responsibility, not guilt. And if one can't see the difference between those two things, there is little that this or any other article can probably do. Perhaps starting with a dictionary would be better.

    * U.S Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, Good for Business: Making Full Use of the Nation's Human Capital. (Washington DC: Bureau of National Affairs, March 1995); Fred L. Pincus, Reverse Discrimination: Dismantling the Myth. (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2003), 18; Roberta J. Hill, "Far More Than Frybread," in Race in the College Classroom: Pedagogy and Politics, ed. Bonnie TuSmith and Maureen T. Reddy. (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press), 169; Sylvia Hurtado and Christine Navia, "Reconciling College Access and the Affirmative Action Debate," in Affirmative Action's Testament of Hope, ed. Mildred Garcia (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1997), 115.

    ** U.S. General Accounting Office, 1994. "Information on Minority Targeted Scholarships," B251634. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, January; Stephen L. Carter, "Color-Blind and Color-Active," 1992. The Recorder. January 3.

    Tuesday, September 16, 2008

    NAACP's new president wastes no time reaching out to the Black netroots

    Naacplogo On only his second day on the job as the NAACP's new president, 35-year old Benjamin Todd Jealous convened a conference call where members of the Black press and some Black bloggers were given the opportunity to ask him questions about the NAACP's response to Hurricane Ike as well as its new online voter registration drive called Upload to Uplift.

    Veteran journalists and neophyte bloggers were afforded the same access and respect -- a perhaps prescient dynamic of which other venerable Black institutions should take notice.

    Benjealous1Mr. Jealous, a Generation X'er and himself a fifth-generous NAACP member, follows the brief tenure of Corporate America refugee Bruce Gordon whose outgoing memo to the NAACP's bloated board of directors was leaked first to Afro-Netizen earlier this year.

    It is true that over the years, Afro-Netizen has been critical of the NAACP and its waning primacy in the lives of African Americans on a national level. However, as the proud grandson of a former national board member for 12 years (Dr. Maurice F. Rabb, Sr.), I am neither prepared to -- nor want to -- eulogize this historic civil rights organization. I recognize, however, that when some people read "historic" they think "relic". This is as much a problem of perception that Mr. Jealous will have to strategically address as it is an organizational one that is not likely to change overnight -- or in an election cycle.

    After all, change is on the lips of many Americans these days. But as an organizational productivity consultant (my day job) as well as from my perspective as a former, long-serving board member of a 115-year old family business, I know quite well that indeed most people fear change -- and organizations tend to loathe it. It goes without saying that old, traditional and highly hierarchical organizations loathe change that much more -- even when they know it's inevitable.

    That said, I am confident that Mr. Jealous' vision and activist credentials will help put the NAACP on a path towards fully leveraging 21st Century assets and tactics while honoring the long, proud traditions that represent the best of what our community has accomplished when we have kept our eyes on the prize and marched steadfastly towards social justice.

    Site Search

    Dimensions

    aN blogroll

    Thanx for stopping by!