Devastating, Yet Distinguished Decade
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
December 20-27, 2009
As we approach the end of the first ten years of the 21stcentury it is useful to remember the legal lows and the historic highs of the past decade for the policy interest of Black people in America. My father’s advice to me is still applicable: “ do not to forget your ‘Egypt’". What my father meant was that no matter how high you ascend, do not lose memory of from whence you came. His lesson to me is timely for African Americans today.
In 2000, the presidential election saw the winner lose, and the loser win. Despite Vice President Al Gore receiving more popular votes than the incumbent, George Bush, the United States Supreme Court ruled on December 12, 2000 that there is “no individually protected right to vote in the United States Constitution, and therefore, Florida state officials (Katherine Harris) had full authority to determine the presidential outcome. Katherine Harris just happened to be a campaign worker for George W. Bush and was appointed to the position of Florida Secretary of State by the candidate’s brother, Governor Jeb Bush. More importantly, American states were affirmed by the highest court in the nation for their control of federal elections. The ruling was devastating to electoral politics.
If the stolen election of 2000 was bad enough, the same electoral crime occurred in 2004, only this time with crime tape around the precincts in the state of Ohio. Where the Florida crime was an African American Secretary of State for Ohio, Kenneth Blackwell, cleverly pulled off an historic heist at high noon. Ohio’s offense was utilizing rigged voting machines and limiting voting machines in African American precincts. Both the Florida and Ohio stolen elections should remind Black people that when the “referees” of a contest—whether in politics or on the playing field—wear one of the team colors objectivity is at least compromised, if not lost all together.
A somewhat bright year of the decade occurred in 2006 when the expiring provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were renewed by Congress for 25 years and signed into law by the White House. The Rosa Parks, Corretta Scott King, and Fannie Lou Hamer voting rights legislation meant a lot to African Americans due to its history. After all, Black people in the United States received their state right to vote in 1870. However, 95 years passed until the state right to vote was made constitutional by the Voting Rights Act of 1965, allowing all citizens—regardless of color—to exercise their right to vote. The renewal of federal voting rights protections marked a high point for Black people in the Bush Administration, although massive demonstrations by the Rainbow PUSH Coalition and the NAACP were needed to apply the national pressure for the Bush White House.
As Black people were losing lives in unjust and illegal foreign wars; losing jobs and homes in America; and losing faith in America Barack Hussein Obama appeared out of the political fog to become the first African American president of the United States of America. With his election, the tune of James Weldon Johnson’s, Lift Every Voice and Sing; a McFadden and Whitehead’s Ain’t No Stopping Us Now became the harmonic score for historic election. Celebratory pride lifted Black people to where we belonged—the main stream of American politics.
Yet, one year and after a legion of legislative initiatives by the Obama Administration, Black people are beginning to move from celebration to mobilization around the pain of undelivered political promises.
Most recently, apparent failed promise of a public option (or competition for private health insurance policies) in health care reform should remind African Americans that if politicians do no respect our legislative concerns, they should not expect us on their next election day.
While Black people began the year with electoral elation we must move to awareness of accountability of people we elect. Democracy percolates upward; and does not trickle downward.
In 2010, let’s begin to exercise our civic strength at the local, state, nation, and international level.
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
633 Pennsylvania Ave
5th Floor
Washington, DC 20004
Office: 202.689.1965
Fax: 202.689.1954
Cell: 773.230.3554
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Monday, November 23, 2009
Congress Should Check Convenience Stores
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
November 23-29, 2009
As we prepare for Thanksgiving, and to advocate for universal health care in the United States Senate one issue that impacts people’s health is the quality of food available to them. Wealthy people tend to have better health in part due to their diet of quality foods. Conversely, poor peoples’ poor health is usually predicated on their choices in food.
One reality for poor people of all pigments is that they have less choices of good food in their neighborhoods. Unlike well-to-do neighborhoods with gourmet grocers and organic options, poor people must, in many cases, use convenience stores to purchase produce and meats. For most poor people of color high quality meats and produce is virtually non-existent. The results are predictable.
The consumption of healthy foods—particularly fresh produce—is a key element to disease prevention. Likewise, eating bad food has bad health results. It does not take a “rocket scientist” to figure out the connection between diet and disease. The phrase, “you are what you eat”, plays out every day in poor neighborhoods. Predictably, diabetes, high-blood pressure, and obesity plague poor neighborhoods, disproportionately African American.
According to the Office of Minority Health, Black women are 70% more likely to be obese than White women; African Americans are 30% more likely to have Diabetes than Whites; and Black men are 30% more likely than their White counterparts acquire heart disease. Many of these maladies arise from poor diets. Poor diets arise from junk food. Convenience stores jack up Black diets by selling junk food.
Convenience stores are central culprits in not only offering low-quality food products but also by jacking up their prices. On average, poor people pay a territory tax on food because of the perception of crime in low-income areas (of course low-income neighborhoods have more crime due to the lack of lack of jobs and capital, but I will save the subject for another column). Research reveals that poor people pay as much as 20% more than the national average for food. Some experts assert that such jacked up prices amount to $1200 more for the poor.
National chain grocery stores avoid poor neighborhoods as if poor people do not deserve high-quality food. Ten years ago I remember working on a “New Markets Initiative” project in 1999 with the Rainbow PUSH Coalition to locate a Pathmark Grocery Store in Harlem, New York. At that time, no national grocery chain store existed in Harlem. The reasons given were the perception of crime and the high cost of building. Our point was that such a store location would allow the national chain to do well by the residents of Harlem and do well by the business bottom line. Years later, the highest grossing Pathmark store in the nation was the one located in Harlem. So successful was the store that a second Pathmark was sited there.
Black communities have half as much access to chain supermarkets than White neighborhoods. Latinos have 30% less access to chain stores than Whites. With the absence of national chain stores allows for small convenience stores predominate poor communities.
Congress should enact legislation to end racial redlining in retail food stores by regulating convenience stores that sell junk food. For example, regulating junk food in the same manner that was done for tobacco and alcohol would go along way in reducing disease diets in Black communities. Why not require junk food producers in convenience stores to print warning labels reading, “EATING THIS PRODUCT COULD LEAD TO DIABETES, HIGH-BLOOD PRESSURE OR OBESITY”?
Congress should check convenience stores into compliance with reasonable costs and healthy contents.
In linking leadership,
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
November 23-29, 2009
As we prepare for Thanksgiving, and to advocate for universal health care in the United States Senate one issue that impacts people’s health is the quality of food available to them. Wealthy people tend to have better health in part due to their diet of quality foods. Conversely, poor peoples’ poor health is usually predicated on their choices in food.
One reality for poor people of all pigments is that they have less choices of good food in their neighborhoods. Unlike well-to-do neighborhoods with gourmet grocers and organic options, poor people must, in many cases, use convenience stores to purchase produce and meats. For most poor people of color high quality meats and produce is virtually non-existent. The results are predictable.
The consumption of healthy foods—particularly fresh produce—is a key element to disease prevention. Likewise, eating bad food has bad health results. It does not take a “rocket scientist” to figure out the connection between diet and disease. The phrase, “you are what you eat”, plays out every day in poor neighborhoods. Predictably, diabetes, high-blood pressure, and obesity plague poor neighborhoods, disproportionately African American.
According to the Office of Minority Health, Black women are 70% more likely to be obese than White women; African Americans are 30% more likely to have Diabetes than Whites; and Black men are 30% more likely than their White counterparts acquire heart disease. Many of these maladies arise from poor diets. Poor diets arise from junk food. Convenience stores jack up Black diets by selling junk food.
Convenience stores are central culprits in not only offering low-quality food products but also by jacking up their prices. On average, poor people pay a territory tax on food because of the perception of crime in low-income areas (of course low-income neighborhoods have more crime due to the lack of lack of jobs and capital, but I will save the subject for another column). Research reveals that poor people pay as much as 20% more than the national average for food. Some experts assert that such jacked up prices amount to $1200 more for the poor.
National chain grocery stores avoid poor neighborhoods as if poor people do not deserve high-quality food. Ten years ago I remember working on a “New Markets Initiative” project in 1999 with the Rainbow PUSH Coalition to locate a Pathmark Grocery Store in Harlem, New York. At that time, no national grocery chain store existed in Harlem. The reasons given were the perception of crime and the high cost of building. Our point was that such a store location would allow the national chain to do well by the residents of Harlem and do well by the business bottom line. Years later, the highest grossing Pathmark store in the nation was the one located in Harlem. So successful was the store that a second Pathmark was sited there.
Black communities have half as much access to chain supermarkets than White neighborhoods. Latinos have 30% less access to chain stores than Whites. With the absence of national chain stores allows for small convenience stores predominate poor communities.
Congress should enact legislation to end racial redlining in retail food stores by regulating convenience stores that sell junk food. For example, regulating junk food in the same manner that was done for tobacco and alcohol would go along way in reducing disease diets in Black communities. Why not require junk food producers in convenience stores to print warning labels reading, “EATING THIS PRODUCT COULD LEAD TO DIABETES, HIGH-BLOOD PRESSURE OR OBESITY”?
Congress should check convenience stores into compliance with reasonable costs and healthy contents.
In linking leadership,
Monday, November 16, 2009
Junk Food Stores are Jacked Up
Junk Food Stores are Jacked Up
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
November 15-22, 2009
“The poor pay more for less, while living under stress, and die early”
Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.
As we prepare to advocate for universal health care in the United States Senate one issue that impacts people’s health is the quality of food available to them. Wealthy people tend to have better health in part due to their diet of quality foods. Conversely, poor peoples’ poor health is usually predicated on their choices in food.
One reality for poor people of all pigments is that they have less choices of good food in their neighborhoods. Unlike well-to-do neighborhoods with gourmet grocers and organic options, poor people must, in many cases, use convenient stores to purchase produce and meats. For most poor people of color high quality meats and produce is virtually non-existent. The results are predictable.
The consumption of healthy foods—particularly fresh produce—is a key element to disease prevention. Likewise, eating bad food has bad health results. It does not take a “rocket scientist” to figure out the connection between diet and disease. The phrase, “you are what you eat”, plays out every day in poor neighborhoods. Predictably, diabetes, high-blood pressure, and obesity plague poor neighborhoods, disproportionately African American.
According to the Office of Minority Health, Black women are 70% more likely to be obese than White women; African Americans are 30% more likely to have Diabetes than Whites; and Black men are 30% more likely than their White counterparts of acquire heart disease. Many of these maladies arise from poor diets. Poor diets arise from junk food. Convenience stores jack up Black diets by selling junk food.
Convenience stores are central culprits in not only offering low-quality food products but also by jacking up their prices. On average, poor people pay a territory tax on food because of the perception of crime in low-income areas (of course low-income neighborhoods have more crime due to the lack of lack of jobs and capital, but I will save the subject for another column). Research reveals that poor people pay as much as 20% more than the national average for food. Some experts assert that such jacked up prices amount to $1200 more for the poor.
National chain grocery stores avoid poor neighborhoods as if poor people do not deserve high-quality food. Ten years ago I remember working on a “New Markets Initiative” project in 1999 with the Rainbow PUSH Coalition to locate a Pathmark Grocery Store in Harlem, New York. At that time, no national grocery chain store existed in Harlem. The reasons given were the perception of crime and the high cost of building. Our point was that such a store location would allow the national chain to do well by the residents of Harlem and do well by the business bottom line. Years later, the highest grossing Pathmark store in the nation was the one located in Harlem. So successful was the store that a second Pathmark was sited there.
Black communities have half as much access to chain supermarkets than White neighborhoods. Latinos have 30% less access to chain stores than Whites. With the absence of national chain stores allows for small convenience stores predominate poor communities.
Congress should enact legislation to end racial redlining in retail food stores by regulating convenience stores that sell junk food. For example, regulating junk food in the same manner that was done for tobacco and alcohol would go along way in reducing disease diets in Black communities. Why not require junk food producers in convenience stores to print warning labels reading, “EATING THIS PRODUCT COULD LEAD TO DIABETES, HIGH-BLOOD PRESSURE OR OBESITY”?
Congress should jack up convenience stores and junk food peddlers.
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
November 15-22, 2009
“The poor pay more for less, while living under stress, and die early”
Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.
As we prepare to advocate for universal health care in the United States Senate one issue that impacts people’s health is the quality of food available to them. Wealthy people tend to have better health in part due to their diet of quality foods. Conversely, poor peoples’ poor health is usually predicated on their choices in food.
One reality for poor people of all pigments is that they have less choices of good food in their neighborhoods. Unlike well-to-do neighborhoods with gourmet grocers and organic options, poor people must, in many cases, use convenient stores to purchase produce and meats. For most poor people of color high quality meats and produce is virtually non-existent. The results are predictable.
The consumption of healthy foods—particularly fresh produce—is a key element to disease prevention. Likewise, eating bad food has bad health results. It does not take a “rocket scientist” to figure out the connection between diet and disease. The phrase, “you are what you eat”, plays out every day in poor neighborhoods. Predictably, diabetes, high-blood pressure, and obesity plague poor neighborhoods, disproportionately African American.
According to the Office of Minority Health, Black women are 70% more likely to be obese than White women; African Americans are 30% more likely to have Diabetes than Whites; and Black men are 30% more likely than their White counterparts of acquire heart disease. Many of these maladies arise from poor diets. Poor diets arise from junk food. Convenience stores jack up Black diets by selling junk food.
Convenience stores are central culprits in not only offering low-quality food products but also by jacking up their prices. On average, poor people pay a territory tax on food because of the perception of crime in low-income areas (of course low-income neighborhoods have more crime due to the lack of lack of jobs and capital, but I will save the subject for another column). Research reveals that poor people pay as much as 20% more than the national average for food. Some experts assert that such jacked up prices amount to $1200 more for the poor.
National chain grocery stores avoid poor neighborhoods as if poor people do not deserve high-quality food. Ten years ago I remember working on a “New Markets Initiative” project in 1999 with the Rainbow PUSH Coalition to locate a Pathmark Grocery Store in Harlem, New York. At that time, no national grocery chain store existed in Harlem. The reasons given were the perception of crime and the high cost of building. Our point was that such a store location would allow the national chain to do well by the residents of Harlem and do well by the business bottom line. Years later, the highest grossing Pathmark store in the nation was the one located in Harlem. So successful was the store that a second Pathmark was sited there.
Black communities have half as much access to chain supermarkets than White neighborhoods. Latinos have 30% less access to chain stores than Whites. With the absence of national chain stores allows for small convenience stores predominate poor communities.
Congress should enact legislation to end racial redlining in retail food stores by regulating convenience stores that sell junk food. For example, regulating junk food in the same manner that was done for tobacco and alcohol would go along way in reducing disease diets in Black communities. Why not require junk food producers in convenience stores to print warning labels reading, “EATING THIS PRODUCT COULD LEAD TO DIABETES, HIGH-BLOOD PRESSURE OR OBESITY”?
Congress should jack up convenience stores and junk food peddlers.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
From Celebration to Mobilization
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
November 8-15, 2009
One year ago, the Americans joined the world community in celebrating the election of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States of America. After years of preference to the greedy over policies for the needy we all embraced a new Administration, committed to pitching a wider tent under which all Americans could fit.
The highest policy priority of President Obama’s Administration has been health care reform. Throughout the summer of 2008 Congressional Committees in the United States Senate and House of Representatives worked on crafting legislative bills that could be enacted into law. As legislators worked, so did the leaders of the Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
This week, the United States House of Representatives voted to pass a health care reform bill, notwithstanding an amendment to restrict the provision of abortions in health policies.
Prior to the vote, the 51 Member Organizations of the Black Leadership Forum moved from celebration to mobilization.
Led by the National Urban League, National NAACP, Congressional Black Caucus, National Conference of Black Mayors, National Council of Negro Women, National Coalition of Black Civic Participation, Rainbow PUSH Coalition, National Action Network, and the National Dental Association, the Black Leadership Forum moved from reactive to proactive.
A “civil rights war room” was established in Washington, DC to mobilize chapters and affiliates of the Black Leadership Forum to contact their Congressional members and demand progressive health care reform. One key element needed in the final legislation is an option to private health care providers—a government-run public option.
A strong public option is critical in countervailing the negative impact of private health insurers’ ability to make health care un-accessible and un-affordable. Currently, the health care industry is exempt from anti-trust laws. In other words, health providers can set fees “willy-nilly”, without violating laws. In many states, there are one or two health providers from which the public can choose. Such is not a choice at all. I submit that health care bullies violate moral laws by profiting on the backs of working people.
Health care in the United States of America should be a right and not a privilege. Congressman John Lewis, on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives said it best: “We have a mission, a mandate, and a moral obligation to lead this nation into a new era, where health care is a right and not a privilege.”
Accordingly, the war room provided talking points and a toll-free telephone number connecting callers to their respective members of Congress. Member Organizations designated people to staff the war room for 10 critical days prior to the vote in the House of Representatives. In the best tradition of unity, Member Organizations left their individual “logos at the door” and worked in tandem to push for a strong public option in the legislation.
In the end, we proved that, contrary to naysayers; national Black organizations can (and do) work together to produce policies for the public good. Moreover, the Black Leadership Forum sent a message to our adversaries that we are proactive as leaders on legislation for the people.
In the words of the music-recording artist known as the O’Jays: “…got to give the people, give the people what they want.” The American people (over 65% according to CNN) want and need health care reform. In particular, the nation needs healthcare that is accessible and affordable. Now!
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
November 8-15, 2009
One year ago, the Americans joined the world community in celebrating the election of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States of America. After years of preference to the greedy over policies for the needy we all embraced a new Administration, committed to pitching a wider tent under which all Americans could fit.
The highest policy priority of President Obama’s Administration has been health care reform. Throughout the summer of 2008 Congressional Committees in the United States Senate and House of Representatives worked on crafting legislative bills that could be enacted into law. As legislators worked, so did the leaders of the Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
This week, the United States House of Representatives voted to pass a health care reform bill, notwithstanding an amendment to restrict the provision of abortions in health policies.
Prior to the vote, the 51 Member Organizations of the Black Leadership Forum moved from celebration to mobilization.
Led by the National Urban League, National NAACP, Congressional Black Caucus, National Conference of Black Mayors, National Council of Negro Women, National Coalition of Black Civic Participation, Rainbow PUSH Coalition, National Action Network, and the National Dental Association, the Black Leadership Forum moved from reactive to proactive.
A “civil rights war room” was established in Washington, DC to mobilize chapters and affiliates of the Black Leadership Forum to contact their Congressional members and demand progressive health care reform. One key element needed in the final legislation is an option to private health care providers—a government-run public option.
A strong public option is critical in countervailing the negative impact of private health insurers’ ability to make health care un-accessible and un-affordable. Currently, the health care industry is exempt from anti-trust laws. In other words, health providers can set fees “willy-nilly”, without violating laws. In many states, there are one or two health providers from which the public can choose. Such is not a choice at all. I submit that health care bullies violate moral laws by profiting on the backs of working people.
Health care in the United States of America should be a right and not a privilege. Congressman John Lewis, on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives said it best: “We have a mission, a mandate, and a moral obligation to lead this nation into a new era, where health care is a right and not a privilege.”
Accordingly, the war room provided talking points and a toll-free telephone number connecting callers to their respective members of Congress. Member Organizations designated people to staff the war room for 10 critical days prior to the vote in the House of Representatives. In the best tradition of unity, Member Organizations left their individual “logos at the door” and worked in tandem to push for a strong public option in the legislation.
In the end, we proved that, contrary to naysayers; national Black organizations can (and do) work together to produce policies for the public good. Moreover, the Black Leadership Forum sent a message to our adversaries that we are proactive as leaders on legislation for the people.
In the words of the music-recording artist known as the O’Jays: “…got to give the people, give the people what they want.” The American people (over 65% according to CNN) want and need health care reform. In particular, the nation needs healthcare that is accessible and affordable. Now!
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
DNA Testing: Today's Get-Out-Of Jail Card
DNA Testing: Today’s Get-Out-of-Jail Card
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
October 11-19, 2009
This week, United States Attorney General Eric Holder directed the United States Department of Justice to review a Bush Administration policy virtually excluding DNA testing from defendants in federal cases. In addition, the U.S. Attorney General favors the expanded use of DNA testing is federal courts.
In 2004, the Innocence Protection Act of 2004 was enacted by the United States Congress to ensure greater protections under law for the wrongfully convicted. The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Act nearly in tact; however, the U.S. Senate conjured up a catch—waivers to DNA tests that could provide exonerating evidence by defendants in consideration for lesser sentences.
In response to the Innocence Protection Act, the Bush Administration via U.S. Attorneys’ offices required some defendants to waive their right to DNA, despite such a right provided for by the Act. Although waivers were only filed in cases where guilty pleas were entered, the plausibility of coerced confessions of guilt or cases where defendants pled guilty to charges in exchange for lesser prison sentences were not considered. The process was politicized.
The most diabolical aspect of the policy was that defendants who filed DNA waivers were barred from ever asking for DNA tests, notwithstanding the existence of exculpatory evidence in such tests. In other words, a defendant was forced to waive science for a softer sentence, even in cases where their innocence existed. Seriously?
The use of DNA evidence became widely used around 2003 and has had a dramatic affect on exonerating innocent people wrongly convicted of crimes. For example, following the conviction last year of high-ranking police officers in Chicago of coercing confessions through torturing the accused several people have been released from prison as DNA evidence was admitted and exonerated them from the crimes they were forced to admit.
However, the full effect of DNA testing in federal courts is yet to be witnessed. So far, 243 people in the United States have been exonerated by DNA evidence (25% of which gave false confessions, and 16 of that number pled guilty). Seventeen wrongly convicted people have been exonerated. All 243 who have been exonerated have been in state cases. In fact, 97% of federal convictions arise from guilty pleas, thereby eliminating the use of DNA tests.
Most federal court districts have enacted legislation allowing inmates to request DNA testing, and the majority of cases permit petitions, post guilty pleas. Some high-volume federal districts such as the District of Columbia, Manhattan, New York, and Alexandria, Virginia commonly use waivers. Twenty-four U.S. Attorneys do not use waivers at all.
However, help is on the way.
The DNA process will soon expand to include biological data. Currently, DNA data does not reveal whether the DNA sample originated in semen, blood, or other tissue. The improvements in science are way overdue for the wrongly convicted—disproportionately African Americans and Latinos.
In 2009, the inmate population in the United States is over 2 million, with nearly 75% ethnically Black or Brown.
In the board game Monopoly a “Get-Out-of-Jail Card” is won on the chance the player rolls the dice and lands on the appropriate box of the board. The reality for defendants of being wrongfully convicted due to poverty, poor legal representation, or overly ambitious prosecutors should not depend on a “roll of the dice” or is it appropriate that so many are jailed for so little evidence. The playing field for the falsely accused and convicted should be leveled so that scientific evidence is available in order to ensure the nation’s promise of liberty and justice for all.
Today, science in the form of DNA testing provides a genetic “Get-Out-of-Jail Card” or better still: a “Not-Go-to-Jail Card.” I love the proper use of science for just public policy!
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
October 11-19, 2009
This week, United States Attorney General Eric Holder directed the United States Department of Justice to review a Bush Administration policy virtually excluding DNA testing from defendants in federal cases. In addition, the U.S. Attorney General favors the expanded use of DNA testing is federal courts.
In 2004, the Innocence Protection Act of 2004 was enacted by the United States Congress to ensure greater protections under law for the wrongfully convicted. The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Act nearly in tact; however, the U.S. Senate conjured up a catch—waivers to DNA tests that could provide exonerating evidence by defendants in consideration for lesser sentences.
In response to the Innocence Protection Act, the Bush Administration via U.S. Attorneys’ offices required some defendants to waive their right to DNA, despite such a right provided for by the Act. Although waivers were only filed in cases where guilty pleas were entered, the plausibility of coerced confessions of guilt or cases where defendants pled guilty to charges in exchange for lesser prison sentences were not considered. The process was politicized.
The most diabolical aspect of the policy was that defendants who filed DNA waivers were barred from ever asking for DNA tests, notwithstanding the existence of exculpatory evidence in such tests. In other words, a defendant was forced to waive science for a softer sentence, even in cases where their innocence existed. Seriously?
The use of DNA evidence became widely used around 2003 and has had a dramatic affect on exonerating innocent people wrongly convicted of crimes. For example, following the conviction last year of high-ranking police officers in Chicago of coercing confessions through torturing the accused several people have been released from prison as DNA evidence was admitted and exonerated them from the crimes they were forced to admit.
However, the full effect of DNA testing in federal courts is yet to be witnessed. So far, 243 people in the United States have been exonerated by DNA evidence (25% of which gave false confessions, and 16 of that number pled guilty). Seventeen wrongly convicted people have been exonerated. All 243 who have been exonerated have been in state cases. In fact, 97% of federal convictions arise from guilty pleas, thereby eliminating the use of DNA tests.
Most federal court districts have enacted legislation allowing inmates to request DNA testing, and the majority of cases permit petitions, post guilty pleas. Some high-volume federal districts such as the District of Columbia, Manhattan, New York, and Alexandria, Virginia commonly use waivers. Twenty-four U.S. Attorneys do not use waivers at all.
However, help is on the way.
The DNA process will soon expand to include biological data. Currently, DNA data does not reveal whether the DNA sample originated in semen, blood, or other tissue. The improvements in science are way overdue for the wrongly convicted—disproportionately African Americans and Latinos.
In 2009, the inmate population in the United States is over 2 million, with nearly 75% ethnically Black or Brown.
In the board game Monopoly a “Get-Out-of-Jail Card” is won on the chance the player rolls the dice and lands on the appropriate box of the board. The reality for defendants of being wrongfully convicted due to poverty, poor legal representation, or overly ambitious prosecutors should not depend on a “roll of the dice” or is it appropriate that so many are jailed for so little evidence. The playing field for the falsely accused and convicted should be leveled so that scientific evidence is available in order to ensure the nation’s promise of liberty and justice for all.
Today, science in the form of DNA testing provides a genetic “Get-Out-of-Jail Card” or better still: a “Not-Go-to-Jail Card.” I love the proper use of science for just public policy!
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Partial to Public or Private?
Below is my column entitled "Partial to Public or Private?"
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
September 27-October 3, 2009
Today’s debate over legislative issues such as health care, education, and energy boil down to whether public interests or private interests will benefit.
I am partial to public.
The word public is an adjective pertaining to, or affecting the people of a community, state, or nation. Many believe the Latin phrase res publica is the origin of the word republic (i.e. Democratic Republic), under which the United States of America is governed.
Historically, Roman authors used the word to describe the period of time (epoch) between the Roman Kingdom and the Roman Empire. Later, the Greeks translated the term into politeia (the organization process of a city-state).
Of course, the word public is found in the name of the political party known as Republican. In 1854, when the Republican Party was established the legislative agenda was centered on the public good. For example, Abraham Lincoln campaigned for the Presidency on, in part, an anti-slavery political platform. By 1960, following the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court ruling, the people and priorities of Republican Party moved to private interest.
Rather than comply with the law of the land to racially desegregate schools, many southerners established private educational academies in churches to maintain all-White classrooms. For example, the Commonwealth of Virginia closed entire school districts rather than have Black and White students learn together.
When President Richard Nixon was elected in 1968 he ushered in the concept of private health insurance through his relationship with Edward Kaiser who founded Kaiser Permanente. The idea was for private health insurance companies to profit by denying—not providing—health insurance to the public.
Since then, privatized health insurance provider have bazillions of dollars on the broken backs of pubic. Recent research provided by Amy Goodman on the Pacifica Radio Network show “Democracy Now” reveals that California health insurance companies’ denial rate for health insurance claims ranges between 25% and 39%. Each denial of the policyholders represents more profit for the private company.
Therefore, when President Obama stated his preference for the “public option” in health insurance the Re-public-ans held public rallies to preserve private profits. Does such make any sense?
Some argued that the President’s plan was the beginning of socialized medicine in a capitalist economy. Actually, my studies of capitalism bear out that two of the primary tenets of capitalism are choice and competition. Duh? If the
the public has the option to choose health providers which include a government-run health insurance, it seems to me to be consistent with free market capitalism.
Like Michael Moore, I believe capitalism is inherently un-Godly and un-American. Greed should not trump need.
Predictably, I believe in public access, public broadcasting, public domain, public Internet, public safety, public education, public interest, and most of all, public good.
Politics can be defined as who gets what, and how much. American policy should benefit the masses. Power to the people!
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
September 27-October 3, 2009
Today’s debate over legislative issues such as health care, education, and energy boil down to whether public interests or private interests will benefit.
I am partial to public.
The word public is an adjective pertaining to, or affecting the people of a community, state, or nation. Many believe the Latin phrase res publica is the origin of the word republic (i.e. Democratic Republic), under which the United States of America is governed.
Historically, Roman authors used the word to describe the period of time (epoch) between the Roman Kingdom and the Roman Empire. Later, the Greeks translated the term into politeia (the organization process of a city-state).
Of course, the word public is found in the name of the political party known as Republican. In 1854, when the Republican Party was established the legislative agenda was centered on the public good. For example, Abraham Lincoln campaigned for the Presidency on, in part, an anti-slavery political platform. By 1960, following the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court ruling, the people and priorities of Republican Party moved to private interest.
Rather than comply with the law of the land to racially desegregate schools, many southerners established private educational academies in churches to maintain all-White classrooms. For example, the Commonwealth of Virginia closed entire school districts rather than have Black and White students learn together.
When President Richard Nixon was elected in 1968 he ushered in the concept of private health insurance through his relationship with Edward Kaiser who founded Kaiser Permanente. The idea was for private health insurance companies to profit by denying—not providing—health insurance to the public.
Since then, privatized health insurance provider have bazillions of dollars on the broken backs of pubic. Recent research provided by Amy Goodman on the Pacifica Radio Network show “Democracy Now” reveals that California health insurance companies’ denial rate for health insurance claims ranges between 25% and 39%. Each denial of the policyholders represents more profit for the private company.
Therefore, when President Obama stated his preference for the “public option” in health insurance the Re-public-ans held public rallies to preserve private profits. Does such make any sense?
Some argued that the President’s plan was the beginning of socialized medicine in a capitalist economy. Actually, my studies of capitalism bear out that two of the primary tenets of capitalism are choice and competition. Duh? If the
the public has the option to choose health providers which include a government-run health insurance, it seems to me to be consistent with free market capitalism.
Like Michael Moore, I believe capitalism is inherently un-Godly and un-American. Greed should not trump need.
Predictably, I believe in public access, public broadcasting, public domain, public Internet, public safety, public education, public interest, and most of all, public good.
Politics can be defined as who gets what, and how much. American policy should benefit the masses. Power to the people!
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Race:On Civil Discourse and Decorum
By Gary L Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
I read with breathtaking bafflement an editorial by Kathleen Parker in the Washington Post (dated Sunday, September 20, 2009) entitled “Playing the Racial Deck.” In sum, Ms. Parker asserts that while Congressman Joe Wilson’s exclamation, “you lie” to President Obama was a “rude display”; the comment was not necessarily racist. With all due respect, is she serious?
In short, I agree with Reverend Al Sharpton when he said: “One cannot play the ‘race card’ if every card in the American deck is racial.”
A review of world history reminds us that civilization is barbarianism all grown up. From the earliest civilizations of humans on the Continent of Africa to more recent nations, all have respected differing opinions by codification of social mores and rules of decorum.
With centuries of civility behind us, the un-civility of Representative Joe Wilson is averse to the American way of amicability, and not a good look for our nation as the “civil police” of the planet. As a relative “baby” of the world family, the United States of America at 230-something years old has established, for the most part, civil codes of behavior. Of course, I am aware of the rape, pillage, and plunder of Native Americans, the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade, the American Civil War, and the racial Apartheid system that followed are uncivilized behavior at its worst.
Yet, America has always at least sought honor—albeit by hypocrisy—through civil discourse. For example, the American transference of leadership without bloodshed is commendable. The discouragement of personal attacks in writing with the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution is a good thing. Thus, the American agreement to disagree with temperance is our nation’s contribution to world civilization. Not to do so is inherently un-American.
As a former field director, and activist for progressive public policy, I understand that policy protest is healthy for our democratic republic. However, there are rules. Congressman Wilson traveled way across the line.
That is why the argument of Mr. Wilson’s comments not being race-oriented falls short of believability. In her historical journalistic sojourn, Ms. Parker admits that the Congressman: 1) Is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans; 2) Referred to the revelation of Senator Strom Thurman’s African American daughter out of wedlock as a “smear” on the Senator’s legacy; and 3) his opposition to remove the Confederate flag from the grounds of the South Carolina State Capitol. She also admits South Carolina’s support of the racially disenfranchising policy known as the Southern Strategy that baited southern whites to vote against politicians who supported racially inclusive legislation.
To view such public positions as anything but racist is at least naïve. Perhaps, as a South Carolina resident, Ms. Parker cannot view such anti-Americanism with objectivity. By the way, it is illegal to fly the swastika flag is Germany. So too should be the case relative to the Confederate flag in America.
After all, the Confederate flag symbolized slavery, succession, sedition, and racial segregation. Notwithstanding her point that many southerners view the Confederate flag as a symbol of their ancestors’ valor, I, too, am from a former Confederate state, Virginia (the Capital of the Confederacy).
Truth is, the Confederate flag was not publicly displayed until after the Brown v. Board Supreme Court ruling in 1954. Why? The “symbols of vanquished nations” must be surrendered after losing a war. South Carolina and the south lost the war. After 1954, White southerners, sympathetic to the traitorous Confederacy, used the flag to represent their racial hatred and opposition to racial desegregation of public facilities.
There is a direct historical connection to Congressman Joe Wilson’s racially rude outburst and a sign I saw at one of the Tea Party gatherings. A woman held a sign reading, “We want our country back.” We? She was White, and definitely not Cherokee, Blackfoot, or Apache. The glaring historical reality is that some people in this nation have never—and may never—accept that the United States of America is the embodiment of the Latin phrase, I pluribus Unum (out of many, one).
Congressman Joe Wilson and his Confederate supporters should come across the American bridge and get over it!
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
I read with breathtaking bafflement an editorial by Kathleen Parker in the Washington Post (dated Sunday, September 20, 2009) entitled “Playing the Racial Deck.” In sum, Ms. Parker asserts that while Congressman Joe Wilson’s exclamation, “you lie” to President Obama was a “rude display”; the comment was not necessarily racist. With all due respect, is she serious?
In short, I agree with Reverend Al Sharpton when he said: “One cannot play the ‘race card’ if every card in the American deck is racial.”
A review of world history reminds us that civilization is barbarianism all grown up. From the earliest civilizations of humans on the Continent of Africa to more recent nations, all have respected differing opinions by codification of social mores and rules of decorum.
With centuries of civility behind us, the un-civility of Representative Joe Wilson is averse to the American way of amicability, and not a good look for our nation as the “civil police” of the planet. As a relative “baby” of the world family, the United States of America at 230-something years old has established, for the most part, civil codes of behavior. Of course, I am aware of the rape, pillage, and plunder of Native Americans, the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade, the American Civil War, and the racial Apartheid system that followed are uncivilized behavior at its worst.
Yet, America has always at least sought honor—albeit by hypocrisy—through civil discourse. For example, the American transference of leadership without bloodshed is commendable. The discouragement of personal attacks in writing with the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution is a good thing. Thus, the American agreement to disagree with temperance is our nation’s contribution to world civilization. Not to do so is inherently un-American.
As a former field director, and activist for progressive public policy, I understand that policy protest is healthy for our democratic republic. However, there are rules. Congressman Wilson traveled way across the line.
That is why the argument of Mr. Wilson’s comments not being race-oriented falls short of believability. In her historical journalistic sojourn, Ms. Parker admits that the Congressman: 1) Is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans; 2) Referred to the revelation of Senator Strom Thurman’s African American daughter out of wedlock as a “smear” on the Senator’s legacy; and 3) his opposition to remove the Confederate flag from the grounds of the South Carolina State Capitol. She also admits South Carolina’s support of the racially disenfranchising policy known as the Southern Strategy that baited southern whites to vote against politicians who supported racially inclusive legislation.
To view such public positions as anything but racist is at least naïve. Perhaps, as a South Carolina resident, Ms. Parker cannot view such anti-Americanism with objectivity. By the way, it is illegal to fly the swastika flag is Germany. So too should be the case relative to the Confederate flag in America.
After all, the Confederate flag symbolized slavery, succession, sedition, and racial segregation. Notwithstanding her point that many southerners view the Confederate flag as a symbol of their ancestors’ valor, I, too, am from a former Confederate state, Virginia (the Capital of the Confederacy).
Truth is, the Confederate flag was not publicly displayed until after the Brown v. Board Supreme Court ruling in 1954. Why? The “symbols of vanquished nations” must be surrendered after losing a war. South Carolina and the south lost the war. After 1954, White southerners, sympathetic to the traitorous Confederacy, used the flag to represent their racial hatred and opposition to racial desegregation of public facilities.
There is a direct historical connection to Congressman Joe Wilson’s racially rude outburst and a sign I saw at one of the Tea Party gatherings. A woman held a sign reading, “We want our country back.” We? She was White, and definitely not Cherokee, Blackfoot, or Apache. The glaring historical reality is that some people in this nation have never—and may never—accept that the United States of America is the embodiment of the Latin phrase, I pluribus Unum (out of many, one).
Congressman Joe Wilson and his Confederate supporters should come across the American bridge and get over it!
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Health Care: Private Profits vs. Policy Prophets
Health Care: Private Profits vs. Policy Prophets
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
We the conscious people of the United States of America, in order to form a more perfect union, must, by way of votes of our elected representatives in Congress embrace the need of health care recipients rather than the greed of the health care providers.
America must listen to policy prophets rather than be victimized by the profits of privateers. To do so is not new for Black America.
For Black Americans who are Christian they need look no further than the Biblical book of Jeremiah in which, according to scripture, the Prophet Jeremiah initially carried immense favor amongst the people until his vision for their well being led him to expose views that were not popular. Scripture holds that God’s blessing of the Prophet’s plan was greater than the evil of his adversaries due to the righteousness of his words (not unlike Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s speech, “Difference Does Not Denote Difference”). In order to move his people forward he chose to speak truth to power.
President Barack Obama must do as the Prophet Jeremiah did relative to his policy priority of insurance reform in health care—be audacious enough to challenge the status quo and throw a policy punch in the fat belly of the insurance industry that rakes in enormous profits by denying health care to needy Americans.
After all, change is spelled with the bended line of a C, Inadequate is spelled with a straight line of an I. In other words: if there is not a single payer/public option in the final health care legislation, the promise of meaningful change in the cost and delivery of health care will be reduced to rhetoric, and thereby inadequate to the ill.
Yet, throughout the continuum of public policy leadership within the Black community men and women have influenced legislation based on the needs of the people and not what was politically expedient.
For example, just after the formation of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in 1909, Dr. W.E.B. Dubois and Ida B. Wells joined forces to push for a federal policy outlawing the lynching of Black people. They won.
During the height of the Civil Rights Movement of African Americans Dr. Martin Luther King and Dr. Dorothy Height partnered to influence the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
In the 1970’s and 1980’s Reverend Jesse Jackson, Sr., and Dr, Marian Edelman teamed up to bring about legislation to increase educational and health opportunities for poor children of color, resulting in the PUSH for Excellence Program and the Children’s Health Insurance Policy (CHIP) in each state.
This week, President Barack Obama (with the assistance of Senior White House Advisor Valerie Jarrett) prophetically clarified the Administration’s plan reform the insurance industry by offering Americans the option of purchasing health insurance from the government (much like the Medicare Program or Veteran’s benefits). Makes sense to me. Without such a public option profits will soar while the people remain sore of no health care.
After watching the movie John Q starring Denzel Washington and Michael Moore’s documentary Sicko a few years ago I was baffled as to how the insurance industry could predicate their enormous profits on the by denying coverage to ordinary people, and do so in the wealthiest nation on earth. The equivalent would be to only offer fire protection to those who could afford fire insurance. Imagine that?
We as a nation must join the world community in providing—not denying—health care to all of our citizens.
And for those who shout down supporters of a single payer/public option, the Prophet Jeremiah symbolizes that one need not be guilty to be vilified.
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
Washington, DC 20004
Office: 202.689.1965
Fax: 202.689.1954
Cell: 773.230.3554
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
We the conscious people of the United States of America, in order to form a more perfect union, must, by way of votes of our elected representatives in Congress embrace the need of health care recipients rather than the greed of the health care providers.
America must listen to policy prophets rather than be victimized by the profits of privateers. To do so is not new for Black America.
For Black Americans who are Christian they need look no further than the Biblical book of Jeremiah in which, according to scripture, the Prophet Jeremiah initially carried immense favor amongst the people until his vision for their well being led him to expose views that were not popular. Scripture holds that God’s blessing of the Prophet’s plan was greater than the evil of his adversaries due to the righteousness of his words (not unlike Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s speech, “Difference Does Not Denote Difference”). In order to move his people forward he chose to speak truth to power.
President Barack Obama must do as the Prophet Jeremiah did relative to his policy priority of insurance reform in health care—be audacious enough to challenge the status quo and throw a policy punch in the fat belly of the insurance industry that rakes in enormous profits by denying health care to needy Americans.
After all, change is spelled with the bended line of a C, Inadequate is spelled with a straight line of an I. In other words: if there is not a single payer/public option in the final health care legislation, the promise of meaningful change in the cost and delivery of health care will be reduced to rhetoric, and thereby inadequate to the ill.
Yet, throughout the continuum of public policy leadership within the Black community men and women have influenced legislation based on the needs of the people and not what was politically expedient.
For example, just after the formation of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in 1909, Dr. W.E.B. Dubois and Ida B. Wells joined forces to push for a federal policy outlawing the lynching of Black people. They won.
During the height of the Civil Rights Movement of African Americans Dr. Martin Luther King and Dr. Dorothy Height partnered to influence the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
In the 1970’s and 1980’s Reverend Jesse Jackson, Sr., and Dr, Marian Edelman teamed up to bring about legislation to increase educational and health opportunities for poor children of color, resulting in the PUSH for Excellence Program and the Children’s Health Insurance Policy (CHIP) in each state.
This week, President Barack Obama (with the assistance of Senior White House Advisor Valerie Jarrett) prophetically clarified the Administration’s plan reform the insurance industry by offering Americans the option of purchasing health insurance from the government (much like the Medicare Program or Veteran’s benefits). Makes sense to me. Without such a public option profits will soar while the people remain sore of no health care.
After watching the movie John Q starring Denzel Washington and Michael Moore’s documentary Sicko a few years ago I was baffled as to how the insurance industry could predicate their enormous profits on the by denying coverage to ordinary people, and do so in the wealthiest nation on earth. The equivalent would be to only offer fire protection to those who could afford fire insurance. Imagine that?
We as a nation must join the world community in providing—not denying—health care to all of our citizens.
And for those who shout down supporters of a single payer/public option, the Prophet Jeremiah symbolizes that one need not be guilty to be vilified.
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
Washington, DC 20004
Office: 202.689.1965
Fax: 202.689.1954
Cell: 773.230.3554
Monday, August 31, 2009
Back to School; Black to Basics
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
August 23-30, 2009
This week, many students returned to school for another academic year. They did so after two and a half months of summer vacation. Vacation? People who are employed take vacations from work (but that is another column for another week). Students study. Let’s stay right there, According to most educational indices African American students—especially Black males—underperform their classroom counterparts. Thus, as Black students return to technology-filled schools, educational stakeholders (parents and school administrators) should go Black to basics.
Prior to directing the Black Leadership Forum, Inc., I served as a vice president of the Rainbow PUSH Coalition in Chicago, IL. Reverend Jesse Jackson, Sr., under the PUSH for Excellence (PUSHExcel) Program, developed a 7-point educational plan that speaks to a central element of the educational equation—parental involvement.
The idea was to ask parents to:
1. Take their children to school;
2. Meet their children’s teachers;
3. Exchange home numbers with their children’s teachers;
4. Pick up report cards at the end of grading period;
5. Turn of televisions 2 hours per night;
6. Read to their children at least 1 hour per night; and
7. Take their children to a place of worship once a week
While not to sound sanctimonious and exclaim, “when I was a grade-school student my parents did all seven without encouragement”, my parents did so. Notwithstanding other societal factors facing today’s parents (economy, technology and others) adult involvement outside of school is critical to a student’s learning curve.
Take you child to school – Children remember more of where a parent takes them than what a parent purchases for them.
Meet your child’s teacher – Children’s academic performance tends to dramatically improve when parents meet their teachers
Exchange personal contact information with your child’s teacher – As cell parents share phone and email information and teachers information may be shared without the necessity of physical presence of parents outside of report card pick-up
Pick up report cards each grading period – The presence of parents in retrieving their child’s report card reflects their concern for academic accountability
Limit television viewing by your child – Television in most instances slows scholastic skill set development
Read to your child one hour per night – Reading is still fundamental. A child who reads well tends to excel in most subjects.
Take your child to a place of worship – Many behavioral problems student exemplify suggest the child is never in an environment that requires discipline. Places of worship demand discipline. Discipline and diligence determines a path to a degree.
Some parents react to such plans by rerouting responsibility to school administrators and external factors. No. The lenses through with a child views the world are focused by family. Yes, many poorer children have family members who lack educational skills, but that is no excuse for finding people or institutions that are equipped to assist.
Within the Black Leadership Forum, for example, the Rainbow PUSH Coalition, National Council of Negro Women, 100 Black Men of America, and National Pan Hellenic Association (Black fraternities and sororities) have excellent programs designed to assist all students, regardless of socio-educational make-up of a particular family.
As for public policy, this nation cannot codify concern by parents. However, we can pass a Constitutional Amendment for an individual right to an equal and high quality education for ALL students (Black, White, Red, Yellow, and Brown), raise teacher pay, reduce classroom sizes, and equalize equipment in all public schools. Passage of such legislation would improve the educational climate, but parents alone must be equal partners.
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
August 23-30, 2009
This week, many students returned to school for another academic year. They did so after two and a half months of summer vacation. Vacation? People who are employed take vacations from work (but that is another column for another week). Students study. Let’s stay right there, According to most educational indices African American students—especially Black males—underperform their classroom counterparts. Thus, as Black students return to technology-filled schools, educational stakeholders (parents and school administrators) should go Black to basics.
Prior to directing the Black Leadership Forum, Inc., I served as a vice president of the Rainbow PUSH Coalition in Chicago, IL. Reverend Jesse Jackson, Sr., under the PUSH for Excellence (PUSHExcel) Program, developed a 7-point educational plan that speaks to a central element of the educational equation—parental involvement.
The idea was to ask parents to:
1. Take their children to school;
2. Meet their children’s teachers;
3. Exchange home numbers with their children’s teachers;
4. Pick up report cards at the end of grading period;
5. Turn of televisions 2 hours per night;
6. Read to their children at least 1 hour per night; and
7. Take their children to a place of worship once a week
While not to sound sanctimonious and exclaim, “when I was a grade-school student my parents did all seven without encouragement”, my parents did so. Notwithstanding other societal factors facing today’s parents (economy, technology and others) adult involvement outside of school is critical to a student’s learning curve.
Take you child to school – Children remember more of where a parent takes them than what a parent purchases for them.
Meet your child’s teacher – Children’s academic performance tends to dramatically improve when parents meet their teachers
Exchange personal contact information with your child’s teacher – As cell parents share phone and email information and teachers information may be shared without the necessity of physical presence of parents outside of report card pick-up
Pick up report cards each grading period – The presence of parents in retrieving their child’s report card reflects their concern for academic accountability
Limit television viewing by your child – Television in most instances slows scholastic skill set development
Read to your child one hour per night – Reading is still fundamental. A child who reads well tends to excel in most subjects.
Take your child to a place of worship – Many behavioral problems student exemplify suggest the child is never in an environment that requires discipline. Places of worship demand discipline. Discipline and diligence determines a path to a degree.
Some parents react to such plans by rerouting responsibility to school administrators and external factors. No. The lenses through with a child views the world are focused by family. Yes, many poorer children have family members who lack educational skills, but that is no excuse for finding people or institutions that are equipped to assist.
Within the Black Leadership Forum, for example, the Rainbow PUSH Coalition, National Council of Negro Women, 100 Black Men of America, and National Pan Hellenic Association (Black fraternities and sororities) have excellent programs designed to assist all students, regardless of socio-educational make-up of a particular family.
As for public policy, this nation cannot codify concern by parents. However, we can pass a Constitutional Amendment for an individual right to an equal and high quality education for ALL students (Black, White, Red, Yellow, and Brown), raise teacher pay, reduce classroom sizes, and equalize equipment in all public schools. Passage of such legislation would improve the educational climate, but parents alone must be equal partners.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Awareness of African Ancestry
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
August 9-16, 2009
Many African Americans beginning with this writer have wondered exactly where in Africa our roots can be traced. I had a heritage honor last week to present to my mother’s side of our family DNA results of our origin on the Motherland. Words cannot express my feelings in learning the most probable basis of our family’s lineage.
In 1976, as a thirteen year-old I watched with fascination Alex Haley’s Roots. I remember entire families—of all ethnicities—collectively musing about their family origins. For African Americans, Roots began, in earnest, a nationwide discussion of exactly where on the Continent of Africa we originated. My paternal uncle used “property” records, church records, and Census data to proceed on the avenue of ancestry. However, Roots symbolized the on ramp the genetic highway of heritage.
I began my DNA journey by researching companies offering DNA testing. I found that most of the DNA companies began to test in 2003. I remember viewing television shows on which celebrities were tested and their results aired publicly. Among the several options of DNA companies I selected one that focuses on mitochondrial DNA (tracing DNA of the mother’s side of the family). My rationale was that since European men raped an untold number of African women during the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade the most reliable predictor for African origin would be found in the DNA of African American women.
As a good researcher I also probed in to doubts of companies’ methodology. For example, mitochondrial DNA is widely thought to be reliable for identifying a region of origin and not necessarily a specific people (tribe). However, most scholars find that DNA research combined with genealogical tools such as historical records, archeology, and folklore provides families with the best chance of identifying their ethnic origin.
As the second part of our ancestor recognition at my maternal family reunion in Richmond, Virginia, my cousin and i unsealed the results: our matrilineal (mother’s side) roots are most probably connected to the Balanta people of the nation of Guinea-Bissau, and to the Mende people of the country Sierra Leone. Our patrilineal (father’s side) people of origin are most likely the Bamileke people of Cameroon. A sacred silence permeated the family gathering upon learning one more piece to the puzzle of our people’s past.
Relatives were provided research material that pulled demographic information form African countries genetically connected to our family. However, one of my cousins wanted to know: How are the genetic results read? Not being a scientist I explained that DNA is read in sequences. Because most humans have similar sequences (i.e. TGTACG an TCTACA) the DNA symbol that is different is considered a mutation. DNA mutation place in the sequence is then matched with a mutation in the same place of the DNA sequence found in African countries, and among specific regions and ethnic groups. Whew, that is as simple as I can make it!
Therefore, I recommend that ALL African American families purchase a test from some DNA company and dig deeper into their roots in African countries. As my cousin stated, “I was always wanted to know how to answer the ‘ancestor’ question without merely saying my people were ‘from Africa’. Now I can not only answer with a Continent but a country and a community.”
Awareness of African Ancestry is awesome!
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
August 9-16, 2009
Many African Americans beginning with this writer have wondered exactly where in Africa our roots can be traced. I had a heritage honor last week to present to my mother’s side of our family DNA results of our origin on the Motherland. Words cannot express my feelings in learning the most probable basis of our family’s lineage.
In 1976, as a thirteen year-old I watched with fascination Alex Haley’s Roots. I remember entire families—of all ethnicities—collectively musing about their family origins. For African Americans, Roots began, in earnest, a nationwide discussion of exactly where on the Continent of Africa we originated. My paternal uncle used “property” records, church records, and Census data to proceed on the avenue of ancestry. However, Roots symbolized the on ramp the genetic highway of heritage.
I began my DNA journey by researching companies offering DNA testing. I found that most of the DNA companies began to test in 2003. I remember viewing television shows on which celebrities were tested and their results aired publicly. Among the several options of DNA companies I selected one that focuses on mitochondrial DNA (tracing DNA of the mother’s side of the family). My rationale was that since European men raped an untold number of African women during the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade the most reliable predictor for African origin would be found in the DNA of African American women.
As a good researcher I also probed in to doubts of companies’ methodology. For example, mitochondrial DNA is widely thought to be reliable for identifying a region of origin and not necessarily a specific people (tribe). However, most scholars find that DNA research combined with genealogical tools such as historical records, archeology, and folklore provides families with the best chance of identifying their ethnic origin.
As the second part of our ancestor recognition at my maternal family reunion in Richmond, Virginia, my cousin and i unsealed the results: our matrilineal (mother’s side) roots are most probably connected to the Balanta people of the nation of Guinea-Bissau, and to the Mende people of the country Sierra Leone. Our patrilineal (father’s side) people of origin are most likely the Bamileke people of Cameroon. A sacred silence permeated the family gathering upon learning one more piece to the puzzle of our people’s past.
Relatives were provided research material that pulled demographic information form African countries genetically connected to our family. However, one of my cousins wanted to know: How are the genetic results read? Not being a scientist I explained that DNA is read in sequences. Because most humans have similar sequences (i.e. TGTACG an TCTACA) the DNA symbol that is different is considered a mutation. DNA mutation place in the sequence is then matched with a mutation in the same place of the DNA sequence found in African countries, and among specific regions and ethnic groups. Whew, that is as simple as I can make it!
Therefore, I recommend that ALL African American families purchase a test from some DNA company and dig deeper into their roots in African countries. As my cousin stated, “I was always wanted to know how to answer the ‘ancestor’ question without merely saying my people were ‘from Africa’. Now I can not only answer with a Continent but a country and a community.”
Awareness of African Ancestry is awesome!
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Profiling of a Professor’s Pigment
By Gary Flowers
Executive Director and CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc
July 26 – August 1, 2009
Professor Henry Louis Gates has arguably learned and taught his most profound lesson of his academically acclaimed career in handcuffs.
Dr. Gates’ arrest last week by the Cambridge, MA Police Department has generated a renewed national discussion relative to the issue f racial profiling of people of color. Although Dr. Gates and the officer Crowley, the arresting officer, have conflicting accounts of what was said by whom, the essential facts are not in dispute.
Officer Crowley responded to a call from one of Dr. Gates’ neighbors who reported a possible break-in occurring by two Black men at Dr. Gates’ home. Upon arrival of the officers, Dr. Gates was in his home and produced his driver’s license bearing his home address and a Harvard University faculty identification card. Dr. Gates asked for officer Crowley’s name and badge number and was told to step out of the house to receive the information. Upon stepping on to the porch Dr. Gates was arrested for disorderly conduct.
Under Massachusetts law, an individual cannot be charged with disorderly conduct inside of his home (thus officer Crowley conditioned the provision of his name and badge number on Dr. Gates’ exiting his house only to arrest him). Therein lies the central issue: officer Crowley acted improperly (I agree with “stupidly” as President Obama opined) by luring Dr. Gates into custody on an unrelated charge to the original call to police of a possible break-in of Dr. Gates’ home.
Once Dr. Gates produced his identification the officer should have left the home (or at least asked nicely to search the home for any burglars). Instead officer Crowley racial profiled the professor’s pigment and made yet another unnecessary arrest of a Black man.
Racial profiling of Black and Brown people in the United States has been-and is-a daily occurrence by police and private citizens. During the Transatlantic Slave Trade, Africans were racially profiled and subjected to the most atrocious dehumanization in world history. Following the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution outlawing slavery, southern corporations seeking cheap labor racially profiled African Americans into virtual enslavement in the form of sharecropping and actual neo-slavery. Corporations such as U.S. Steel, 1st National Bank (Sun Trust), Alabama Coal Company, and Southern Brick Company worked with southern sheriffs to enforce “vagrancy” laws on Black men alone on street and roads in the South. Black men would be bonded to White executives and worked for free until the “bond” was paid (determined arbitrarily by the sheriff). Such practices are exposed in the Pulitzer Prize-winning book, Slavery by Another Name (Blackmon).
According to the National Black Police Association (member of the Black Leadership Forum), Black men have a far greater chance of being racially profiled and arrested than any other ethnic demographic.
According to Amnesty International, approximately 32 million people (near the population of Canada) are victims of racial profiling, and excessive force by police officers, which actually undermines law enforcement efforts. Moreover, racial profiling is a human rights violation of the Standards Against Non-Discrimination in treaties signed by the United States. Among them are the UN Convention of the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) and the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
In the case of Dr. Gates, and although the preponderance of blame should be shouldered by the officer Crowley, he is not the lone culprit. Dr. Gates exacerbated the situation by exclaiming, “Do you know who I am?” Was he serious?
Such a statement implies that, if officer Crowley “knew” of his cerebral celebrity, he should have treated him with more respect. No! If professor Gates is a true advocate for the victories of racial oppression then it should not matter “who [he] is.” All citizens of the United States of America-regardless of race or resources- should not be subject to racial profiling. No one!
The biggest lesson learned by Dr. Gates may well be that he was misinterpreted Dr. W.E.B. Dubois’ view of a “talented tenth” within the Black America. Dr. Dubois suggested that the Black intelligence should lead the masses in fighting oppression, not that the Black elite should expect a “pigment pass” due to their academic acumen.
But, in the final analysis, how far down the “post racial” road is American society when today there are racially charged placards planted in front of Dr. Gates’ home. Hmm….
By Gary Flowers
Executive Director and CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc
July 26 – August 1, 2009
Professor Henry Louis Gates has arguably learned and taught his most profound lesson of his academically acclaimed career in handcuffs.
Dr. Gates’ arrest last week by the Cambridge, MA Police Department has generated a renewed national discussion relative to the issue f racial profiling of people of color. Although Dr. Gates and the officer Crowley, the arresting officer, have conflicting accounts of what was said by whom, the essential facts are not in dispute.
Officer Crowley responded to a call from one of Dr. Gates’ neighbors who reported a possible break-in occurring by two Black men at Dr. Gates’ home. Upon arrival of the officers, Dr. Gates was in his home and produced his driver’s license bearing his home address and a Harvard University faculty identification card. Dr. Gates asked for officer Crowley’s name and badge number and was told to step out of the house to receive the information. Upon stepping on to the porch Dr. Gates was arrested for disorderly conduct.
Under Massachusetts law, an individual cannot be charged with disorderly conduct inside of his home (thus officer Crowley conditioned the provision of his name and badge number on Dr. Gates’ exiting his house only to arrest him). Therein lies the central issue: officer Crowley acted improperly (I agree with “stupidly” as President Obama opined) by luring Dr. Gates into custody on an unrelated charge to the original call to police of a possible break-in of Dr. Gates’ home.
Once Dr. Gates produced his identification the officer should have left the home (or at least asked nicely to search the home for any burglars). Instead officer Crowley racial profiled the professor’s pigment and made yet another unnecessary arrest of a Black man.
Racial profiling of Black and Brown people in the United States has been-and is-a daily occurrence by police and private citizens. During the Transatlantic Slave Trade, Africans were racially profiled and subjected to the most atrocious dehumanization in world history. Following the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution outlawing slavery, southern corporations seeking cheap labor racially profiled African Americans into virtual enslavement in the form of sharecropping and actual neo-slavery. Corporations such as U.S. Steel, 1st National Bank (Sun Trust), Alabama Coal Company, and Southern Brick Company worked with southern sheriffs to enforce “vagrancy” laws on Black men alone on street and roads in the South. Black men would be bonded to White executives and worked for free until the “bond” was paid (determined arbitrarily by the sheriff). Such practices are exposed in the Pulitzer Prize-winning book, Slavery by Another Name (Blackmon).
According to the National Black Police Association (member of the Black Leadership Forum), Black men have a far greater chance of being racially profiled and arrested than any other ethnic demographic.
According to Amnesty International, approximately 32 million people (near the population of Canada) are victims of racial profiling, and excessive force by police officers, which actually undermines law enforcement efforts. Moreover, racial profiling is a human rights violation of the Standards Against Non-Discrimination in treaties signed by the United States. Among them are the UN Convention of the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) and the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
In the case of Dr. Gates, and although the preponderance of blame should be shouldered by the officer Crowley, he is not the lone culprit. Dr. Gates exacerbated the situation by exclaiming, “Do you know who I am?” Was he serious?
Such a statement implies that, if officer Crowley “knew” of his cerebral celebrity, he should have treated him with more respect. No! If professor Gates is a true advocate for the victories of racial oppression then it should not matter “who [he] is.” All citizens of the United States of America-regardless of race or resources- should not be subject to racial profiling. No one!
The biggest lesson learned by Dr. Gates may well be that he was misinterpreted Dr. W.E.B. Dubois’ view of a “talented tenth” within the Black America. Dr. Dubois suggested that the Black intelligence should lead the masses in fighting oppression, not that the Black elite should expect a “pigment pass” due to their academic acumen.
But, in the final analysis, how far down the “post racial” road is American society when today there are racially charged placards planted in front of Dr. Gates’ home. Hmm….
Monday, July 13, 2009
Africa: Over Exploited, Not Underdeveloped
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
July 12 – 19, 2009
This week, the worldwide media reported that President Barack Obama visited “Africa” for the first time. Wrong. Egypt was, is, and all ways will be in Africa. Correctly stated, President Obama is the first African American president of the United States of America to visit the first post-colonial independent nation on the African continent—Ghana. The lasting message from President Obama’s visit: Over exploitation of the Continent by neo-colonial countries must be met with the willingness to once again develop democratic institutions in African nations.
Today, many African nations are often portrayed as “under developed.” The opposite is true. In most cases, countries with inferior infrastructure, commerce, and production capability are the victims of “over exploitation.”
As the world community learned of southern Arica’s epidemic rise is HIV AIDS nearly 10 years ago I remember learning from pharmaceutical companies of the infrastructure barriers in delivering medical supplies due to the lack of adequate roads and bridges. As a result, jumbo-jet loads of medicines sat on tarmacs, unable to be delivered to most needy of people.
Likewise, I remember learning from rice farmers in Ghana of the inability to sell their crops because the price of imported Chinese rice was cheaper. By undermining the rice market in Ghana, farmer’s production capability was stunted, negatively impacting the Ghanaian economy.
Global technology advances are in large measure moved by minerals found in African soil. For example, columbite-tantalite (or tantalum) found in the African Congo is a key component of I Pods, cell phones, computer circuit boards, and television VCR’s. Forces in African nations that advocate for African companies, rather than American or European ones, controlling mining operations are often labeled as “rebels.”
Africa remains the Cradle of Civilization. As such, rather than exploitation, the global community should court African countries with respect as elder members of the world family. For example, if ancient African nations such as Mali (Nigeria), Nubia (Sudan), and Kemet (Egypt) once were world leaders in commerce, math, and science, why are their descendants excluded from economic meetings of global leaders (i.e. G-9 and G-20)?
In part, I agree with President Obama’s assertion that “Africa’s future is up to Africans”, and that former colonizing nations are not responsible for all of Africa’s woes, but much of what plagues the Mother Continent now is too much debt and not enough development. The result of which is a virtual “sharecropping” arrangement between African nations and the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, wherein Black nations in Africa cannot develop due to derived debt, not of their own making, entirely.
President Obama should be careful not to “blame the victim” by suggesting African nations’ biggest problem is corruption. As an allegory to Reverend Al Sharpton’s message to Michael Jackson’s children, African countries are not corrupt as much as the corruption in the powerful nations that control them. Sons and daughters of Africa must be aware of such.
If African nations were to produce and market natural minerals to the world (as it once did) their economic viability would be strengthened. Over exploitation of Africa must be addressed by the United States Government. Not to due so is to turn away from justice
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
July 12 – 19, 2009
This week, the worldwide media reported that President Barack Obama visited “Africa” for the first time. Wrong. Egypt was, is, and all ways will be in Africa. Correctly stated, President Obama is the first African American president of the United States of America to visit the first post-colonial independent nation on the African continent—Ghana. The lasting message from President Obama’s visit: Over exploitation of the Continent by neo-colonial countries must be met with the willingness to once again develop democratic institutions in African nations.
Today, many African nations are often portrayed as “under developed.” The opposite is true. In most cases, countries with inferior infrastructure, commerce, and production capability are the victims of “over exploitation.”
As the world community learned of southern Arica’s epidemic rise is HIV AIDS nearly 10 years ago I remember learning from pharmaceutical companies of the infrastructure barriers in delivering medical supplies due to the lack of adequate roads and bridges. As a result, jumbo-jet loads of medicines sat on tarmacs, unable to be delivered to most needy of people.
Likewise, I remember learning from rice farmers in Ghana of the inability to sell their crops because the price of imported Chinese rice was cheaper. By undermining the rice market in Ghana, farmer’s production capability was stunted, negatively impacting the Ghanaian economy.
Global technology advances are in large measure moved by minerals found in African soil. For example, columbite-tantalite (or tantalum) found in the African Congo is a key component of I Pods, cell phones, computer circuit boards, and television VCR’s. Forces in African nations that advocate for African companies, rather than American or European ones, controlling mining operations are often labeled as “rebels.”
Africa remains the Cradle of Civilization. As such, rather than exploitation, the global community should court African countries with respect as elder members of the world family. For example, if ancient African nations such as Mali (Nigeria), Nubia (Sudan), and Kemet (Egypt) once were world leaders in commerce, math, and science, why are their descendants excluded from economic meetings of global leaders (i.e. G-9 and G-20)?
In part, I agree with President Obama’s assertion that “Africa’s future is up to Africans”, and that former colonizing nations are not responsible for all of Africa’s woes, but much of what plagues the Mother Continent now is too much debt and not enough development. The result of which is a virtual “sharecropping” arrangement between African nations and the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, wherein Black nations in Africa cannot develop due to derived debt, not of their own making, entirely.
President Obama should be careful not to “blame the victim” by suggesting African nations’ biggest problem is corruption. As an allegory to Reverend Al Sharpton’s message to Michael Jackson’s children, African countries are not corrupt as much as the corruption in the powerful nations that control them. Sons and daughters of Africa must be aware of such.
If African nations were to produce and market natural minerals to the world (as it once did) their economic viability would be strengthened. Over exploitation of Africa must be addressed by the United States Government. Not to due so is to turn away from justice
Africa: Over Exploited, Not Underdeveloped
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
This week, the worldwide media reported that President Barack Obama visited “Africa” for the first time. Wrong. Egypt was, is, and all ways will be in Africa. Correctly stated, President Obama is the first African American president of the United States of America to visit the first post-colonial independent nation on the African continent—Ghana. The lasting message from President Obama’s visit: Over exploitation of the Continent by neo-colonial countries must be met with the willingness to once again develop democratic institutions in African nations.
Today, many African nations are often portrayed as “under developed.” The opposite is true. In most cases, countries with inferior infrastructure, commerce, and production capability are the victims of “over exploitation.”
As the world community learned of southern Arica’s epidemic rise is HIV AIDS nearly 10 years ago I remember learning from pharmaceutical companies of the infrastructure barriers in delivering medical supplies due to the lack of adequate roads and bridges. As a result, jumbo-jet loads of medicines sat on tarmacs, unable to be delivered to most needy of people.
Likewise, I remember learning from rice farmers in Ghana of the inability to sell their crops because the price of imported Chinese rice was cheaper. By undermining the rice market in Ghana, farmer’s production capability was stunted, negatively impacting the Ghanaian economy.
Global technology advances are in large measure moved by minerals found in African soil. For example, columbite-tantalite (or tantalum) found in the African Congo is a key component of I Pods, cell phones, computer circuit boards, and television VCR’s. Forces in African nations that advocate for African companies, rather than American or European ones, controlling mining operations are often labeled as “rebels.”
Africa remains the Cradle of Civilization. As such, rather than exploitation, the global community should court African countries with respect as elder members of the world family. For example, if ancient African nations such as Mali (Nigeria), Nubia (Sudan), and Kemet (Egypt) once were world leaders in commerce, math, and science, why are their descendants excluded from economic meetings of global leaders (i.e. G-9 and G-20)?
In part, I agree with President Obama’s assertion that “Africa’s future is up to Africans”, and that former colonizing nations are not responsible for all of Africa’s woes, but much of what plagues the Mother Continent now is too much debt and not enough development. The result of which is a virtual “sharecropping” arrangement between African nations and the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, wherein Black nations in Africa cannot develop due to derived debt, not of their own making, entirely.
President Obama should be careful not to “blame the victim” by suggesting African nations’ biggest problem is corruption. As an allegory to Reverend Al Sharpton’s message to Michael Jackson’s children, African countries are not corrupt as much as the corruption in the powerful nations that control them. Sons and daughters of Africa must be aware of such.
If African nations were to produce and market natural minerals to the world (as it once did) their economic viability would be strengthened. Over exploitation of Africa must be addressed by the United States Government. Not to due so is to turn away from justice
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
This week, the worldwide media reported that President Barack Obama visited “Africa” for the first time. Wrong. Egypt was, is, and all ways will be in Africa. Correctly stated, President Obama is the first African American president of the United States of America to visit the first post-colonial independent nation on the African continent—Ghana. The lasting message from President Obama’s visit: Over exploitation of the Continent by neo-colonial countries must be met with the willingness to once again develop democratic institutions in African nations.
Today, many African nations are often portrayed as “under developed.” The opposite is true. In most cases, countries with inferior infrastructure, commerce, and production capability are the victims of “over exploitation.”
As the world community learned of southern Arica’s epidemic rise is HIV AIDS nearly 10 years ago I remember learning from pharmaceutical companies of the infrastructure barriers in delivering medical supplies due to the lack of adequate roads and bridges. As a result, jumbo-jet loads of medicines sat on tarmacs, unable to be delivered to most needy of people.
Likewise, I remember learning from rice farmers in Ghana of the inability to sell their crops because the price of imported Chinese rice was cheaper. By undermining the rice market in Ghana, farmer’s production capability was stunted, negatively impacting the Ghanaian economy.
Global technology advances are in large measure moved by minerals found in African soil. For example, columbite-tantalite (or tantalum) found in the African Congo is a key component of I Pods, cell phones, computer circuit boards, and television VCR’s. Forces in African nations that advocate for African companies, rather than American or European ones, controlling mining operations are often labeled as “rebels.”
Africa remains the Cradle of Civilization. As such, rather than exploitation, the global community should court African countries with respect as elder members of the world family. For example, if ancient African nations such as Mali (Nigeria), Nubia (Sudan), and Kemet (Egypt) once were world leaders in commerce, math, and science, why are their descendants excluded from economic meetings of global leaders (i.e. G-9 and G-20)?
In part, I agree with President Obama’s assertion that “Africa’s future is up to Africans”, and that former colonizing nations are not responsible for all of Africa’s woes, but much of what plagues the Mother Continent now is too much debt and not enough development. The result of which is a virtual “sharecropping” arrangement between African nations and the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, wherein Black nations in Africa cannot develop due to derived debt, not of their own making, entirely.
President Obama should be careful not to “blame the victim” by suggesting African nations’ biggest problem is corruption. As an allegory to Reverend Al Sharpton’s message to Michael Jackson’s children, African countries are not corrupt as much as the corruption in the powerful nations that control them. Sons and daughters of Africa must be aware of such.
If African nations were to produce and market natural minerals to the world (as it once did) their economic viability would be strengthened. Over exploitation of Africa must be addressed by the United States Government. Not to due so is to turn away from justice
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Black Males Matter in Classrooms
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
July 5 – 12, 2009
“I think it is necessary for students to be exposed to a knowledge transfer system that is diverse in terms of those who are transferring the knowledge. And that diversity should look like the community.”
Dr. Alvin Thornton
Provost, Howard University
Research reveals that nearly 50% of Black boys fail to complete high school; score lower on standardized tests; enrolled less in advanced placement classes; are suspended and expelled more than their White, Latino, and Asian classmates. According to the Urban League’s State of Black America, Black 4th graders perform at 87% of White boys in the same grade. By the 12th grade, Black male performance in74% that of Whites.
Many believe, as does this writer, that the presence (or lack thereof) of Black male teachers matters monumentally. According to Dr. Jawanza Kunjufu, “America has designed a female teaching style.” He cites that 83% of elementary school teachers are White females; 6% are African American; and only 2% are Black and male.
In my native city of Richmond, Virginia I was the beneficiary of Black male teachers, counselors, principals, and school superintendants. In fact, my father and uncle were educators. Yet, I am the exception rather than the rule relative to other African American males in the United States of America.
Today, the percentage of Black male teachers in Virginia is 2.6%, compared to 2% in South Carolina, and 9% in Maryland and Washington, DC, respectively. Such statistics are a vastly different to earlier points in history.
Since the end of slavery in America, Black people have had a righteous reverence for education. In 1900, nearly all Black university graduates entered the teaching profession. The trend toward teaching continued until 1954 when the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court ruling was issued that helped to racially desegregate many industries besides education. However, for African Americans, as the advent of professional opportunities increasing, the number of Black teachers decreased, especially African American males.
Across the country initiatives have been launched to incentize Black males to teach. The Call Me Mister program is gaining national attention in the state of South Carolina between Clemson University and three Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Benedict University, Claflin College, and Morris College. Across the nation, 15 other colleges and universities are participating in Call Me Mister.
As President Obama has focused his policy attention to ensuring that the United States will by the most literate nation in the world there is a lot that Congress and state legislatures can do to increase the number of Black male teachers. Similar to the Call Me Mister program, lawmakers should recruit future teachers in high school, offer student loans at 1%, tie college scholarships to teacher education majors, and significantly increase teacher pay for secondary and college professors.
American educators should look like America.
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
633 Pennsylvania Ave
5th Floor
Washington, DC 20004
Office: 202.689.1965
Fax: 202.689.1954
Cell: 773.230.3554
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
July 5 – 12, 2009
“I think it is necessary for students to be exposed to a knowledge transfer system that is diverse in terms of those who are transferring the knowledge. And that diversity should look like the community.”
Dr. Alvin Thornton
Provost, Howard University
Research reveals that nearly 50% of Black boys fail to complete high school; score lower on standardized tests; enrolled less in advanced placement classes; are suspended and expelled more than their White, Latino, and Asian classmates. According to the Urban League’s State of Black America, Black 4th graders perform at 87% of White boys in the same grade. By the 12th grade, Black male performance in74% that of Whites.
Many believe, as does this writer, that the presence (or lack thereof) of Black male teachers matters monumentally. According to Dr. Jawanza Kunjufu, “America has designed a female teaching style.” He cites that 83% of elementary school teachers are White females; 6% are African American; and only 2% are Black and male.
In my native city of Richmond, Virginia I was the beneficiary of Black male teachers, counselors, principals, and school superintendants. In fact, my father and uncle were educators. Yet, I am the exception rather than the rule relative to other African American males in the United States of America.
Today, the percentage of Black male teachers in Virginia is 2.6%, compared to 2% in South Carolina, and 9% in Maryland and Washington, DC, respectively. Such statistics are a vastly different to earlier points in history.
Since the end of slavery in America, Black people have had a righteous reverence for education. In 1900, nearly all Black university graduates entered the teaching profession. The trend toward teaching continued until 1954 when the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court ruling was issued that helped to racially desegregate many industries besides education. However, for African Americans, as the advent of professional opportunities increasing, the number of Black teachers decreased, especially African American males.
Across the country initiatives have been launched to incentize Black males to teach. The Call Me Mister program is gaining national attention in the state of South Carolina between Clemson University and three Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Benedict University, Claflin College, and Morris College. Across the nation, 15 other colleges and universities are participating in Call Me Mister.
As President Obama has focused his policy attention to ensuring that the United States will by the most literate nation in the world there is a lot that Congress and state legislatures can do to increase the number of Black male teachers. Similar to the Call Me Mister program, lawmakers should recruit future teachers in high school, offer student loans at 1%, tie college scholarships to teacher education majors, and significantly increase teacher pay for secondary and college professors.
American educators should look like America.
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
633 Pennsylvania Ave
5th Floor
Washington, DC 20004
Office: 202.689.1965
Fax: 202.689.1954
Cell: 773.230.3554
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Fenced in Fathers
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
June 14 – 21, 2009
“No civilized society would insist upon maintaining the anachronism of the death penalty. An imperfect system cannot ask for a perfect punishment, which is death. Therefore, any country that maintains the anachronism of the death penalty by that very fact is an uncivilized society.”
Rubin “Hurricane” Carter
As I celebrated Father’s Day with my parents last week I felt a certain sense of security knowing lessons learned from growing up with my father (and grandfather) were deeply instilled in me. Yet, I mused on how many sons have insecure upbringings because their fathers are incarcerated behind security bars.
America in general, and the African American community in particular, has too many fenced-in fathers. For every father behind bars is a son who either must navigate the trail from boyhood to manhood alone or erroneously emulate men who use incarceration as a rite of manhood on the street. There of 1.7 million children (under 18 years old) whose fathers are locked up in federal or state facilities.
Factors for fenced-in fathers are poverty (over 1/3 of inmates earned less than $5,000 a year, prior to arrest), inadequate lawyers (often do not provide effective counsel), racial profiling (the probability of incarceration for Blacks, Latinos, and Whites is 29%, 16%, and 4%, respectfully), non-violent crimes, (over 65% of American inmates are serving time for non-violent crimes).
The United States of America leads the world community in prisoners per capita with over 2.3 million, 60% of whom are fathers of color. In fact, America incarcerates and executes more people per capita than any other country on earth (750 per 100,000 citizens). Such percentages are more than China, Europe, and Africa. One out of every Black male is under the control of the penal system. More startling is that while African Americans constitute 14% of the nation’s population, 43% of Death Row prisoners are Black.
Within industrial nations, the moral cache America has garnered over the years is increasingly diminished by the continuation of the death penalty.
Fact is: the death penalty is state-sponsored murder. If murder is a crime punishable by the government, why is not the capital punishment imposed by the state a crime against civility?
Since 1976, America has resumed the barbaric and ineffective system of capital punishment. Relevant research reveals that the death penalty is racially biased, economically inefficient, and does not serve as a deterrent to crime. I agree with the American Civil Liberties Union who oppose the death penalty:
· The death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment – It is cruel as a relic of the earliest days of European penology. It is unusual because the United States is the only industrialized nation which employs capital punishment
· The death penalty denies due process of law – Often the imposition of the death penalty is arbitrary and deprives convicts the benefit of new evidence or science which could overturn ruling
· Opposing the death penalty does not equate to sympathy for convicted murderers – State-sponsored murder is immoral and perpetuates violence as a means to solve the question of punishment
In particular, the death penalty is irreversible. Enough said.
America must end an “eye for an eye” penal policy system. In the words of Reverend Jesse Jackson, Sr. “an eye for an eye leaves people blind.” Our nation must visualize a more civil and humane approach to punishment.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
A Return of a Pharaoh
A Return of a Pharaoh
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
May 31 – June 7, 2009
“Ethnically homogeneous, Africa’s civilizing role, even in pre-historic times, is increasing affirmed by the most distinguished scholars.”
Cheikh Diop, The African Origins of Civilization
Scholars agree that Ancient Africa by way of Kemet (Nubian and Egypt) was the cradle of world civilization, from the first democracies to the introduction of written language, science, mathematics, medicine, and art. Arguably, the United States of America has advanced civilization more than any other global dynasty.
It is therefore fitting that the United States President Barack Hussein Obama, a son of Kenya and Kansas, has returned to the Motherland and delivered a seminal speech promoting his platform for peace in the “Middle East.”
His Sankofa (return to the source) marks the return of a Pharaoh.
Upon taking the oath of office as president on January 20, 2009, Barack Obama became the most powerful man in world history. The most. America remains the most powerful global superpower in terms of military might and the delegation of democracy. As such, President Obama’s power exceeds the mighty men and women of African antiquity.
Nubia (land of gold) located in Upper Egypt is recorded to have operated from a 14,000 year-old calendar in the year 4236 B.C. The Ta-Seti Kingdom and other civilizations formed what is today Egypt. From records pieced together following the pillaging (Alexander) and destruction (Julius Caesar) of African libraries, Nubian civilization emerged around 3800 B.C. and produced powerful and remarkable leaders and kings (Pharaohs) who ruled the civilized world (most of Europe was in the uncivilized Barbarian Age, without written language.
For example, in the 1st Nubian Dynasty (recorded) King Narmer (Menes) unified Upper Egypt (now northern Sudan) and Lower Egypt (now southern Egypt) and declared Memphis to be its capital. In the 4th Dynasty, King Khufu (Cheops) built the Great Pyramids of Giza (near which President Obama delivered his speech). In the 11th Dynasty, King Mentuhotep II re-unified Egypt and moves capital to the City of Thebes which housed the Royal Library of Luxor. Also, in the 11th Dynasty King Senworset expanded Egyptian rule and established an Egyptian colony in Athens, Greece.
In the 18th Dynasty, Thutmose I further expanded Egyptian governance to Persia (now Iraq) and developed the world’s first written alphabet. Likewise, in the 18th Dynasty, Queen Hatshepsut became the first female Pharaoh. Later Akhenaton and his wife/co-Pharaoh Nefertiti introduced monotheologism (belief in one God) and the dual-gender system of government. After their mysterious deaths, King Tutankhamen (“The Boy King”) returned Egypt to polytheologism (belief in several Gods). In the 19th Dynasty, Ramses II, with his Queen Nefertari further developed literature and art, to be shared with the world.
Despite the enormous power ancient kings and queens, none have the amassed arsenal of military and mentality possessed by President Obama. Like his predecessors of power, President Obama governs by assembling the best and the brightest to advance national interests and the greater good. However, he does not abuse power for the few and the filthy rich, but rather understands that true power percolates upward from the people whose trust he must continually earn through political and policy accountability.
Collectively, policies put forth by President Obama I royally resemble the ancient African system of Ma’at in Nubia and Egypt. Under Ma’at, truth, justice, and righteousness were the tenets of Pharonic public policy. As he seeks to advance the coexistence of Palestinians and Israelis and stabilize the entire region, while right-siding domestic policy, the memory of Ma’at is essential. From discontinuing torture and exorbitant credit card fees to promoting educational excellence American policy formation is predicated is predicated on the greater good.
As the world once looked at African Kings as global leaders, people around the planet now are awed by the brilliance and fairness of a regal American president. Let justice reign.
Friday, May 29, 2009
The Poor Pay More, Too
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
May 22-31, 2009
Throughout United States history economic exploitation of the poor has been a constant. Whether it was the exploitation of Native Americans for food cultivation and military intelligence, or Africans in cotton fields, or Latinos in fruit fields, or Asians on the railroad, the poor have paid an extraordinary price of patriotism. In each case, it was not the work that was exploitive per se, but rather the lack of fair compensation, which has stained this nation’s honor.
Today, economic profiling by race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status is a reality. According to the United States Census, there are 37 million poor people (under the federal standard of $15,000 per household of 3) in America. Contrary to the American promise of equal protection under the law, the pigmented poor are targeted and taxed at a higher rate than affluent Americans. The poor still pay more.
I live in one of the last remaining sections of Capitol Hill in Washington, DC that is primarily African American in residences. Over the years I have noticed that two phenomenon: The poor are taxed as “have-nots”; while the more affluent are afforded lower prices as “haves.”
For example, the purchase of household goods such as food, paper products and trash bag has two realities: Those with money have more options to save money; those without must pay more. Due to the fact that nearly all middle class households have at least one automobile, they can drive to mega discount stores and buy in bulk, as they need to do so.
On the other hand, poor households do not own cars and either have to walk to the closest store or take public transportation. Not only does such usually cost more per item due to “pilfer” taxes (additional charges assessed in poor neighborhoods to offset the lost by theft), but the poor are limited by how many bags they can reasonably handle. By travel limitations and price exploitations, the not so poor are targeted by predators.
What differentiates the poor and the not so poor are typified by the possession of bank accounts and automobiles, which accounts for another set schemes. Yet, poor is poor.
The not so poor are exploited in their purchase of insurance, automobiles, and the use of money. Many insurance companies maintain “standard” and “premium” polices. Of course, “premium” policies cost more and are usually levied on the poor based on zip code. Likewise, if the poor make it to the car dealership they face another level of exploitation. Auto dealers are permitted to employ “discretionary financing” on questionable loans. However, the dealers determine when to exact the tax, based on “credit worthiness.”
Notwithstanding how the poor pay more for food, insurance, and automobiles, the most egregious exploitation of the poor has been the cost of money for the pigmented and the poor. After all, race, in addition to household income and credit worthiness, has led to the meltdown of the American economy. Predatory lenders targeted poor people of color (African American and Latino) with inflated loans (sub-prime) when many qualified for prime one. Predatory lenders—not unlike “loan sharks”—applied exorbitant fees and invented “loan swaps” to tax the poor. Most recently, the oxygen found in money is now being pumped to the poorer veins of America.
In particular, I was proud to witness President Obama sign new credit card legislation that will prohibit credit card companies from charging over 24% interest, raising interest rates on existing balances under 60 days notice. By signing the legislation, President Obama began the process of protecting the poor from being preyed upon.
If we are to be the nation we boast, why not help the poor get off of the floor first? The house America builds by protecting the poor will be on solid ground.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
