Kapitol Hill

When The Mob Rules

    On a warm September morning a young girl stood at the bus stop, textbooks in hand, waiting to make the trek to a new school. Already nervous, full of anxious anticipation about entering a place she was not familiar; she also dealt with an overwhelming sense of fear.  Fear, not of the unknown or if she could handle the educational workload -- she was one of the top students at her old school; but, fear of what stared her in the face -- a loud, angry crowd willing to do or say anything to keep her out of Central High School's front door. Elizabeth Eckford was one of nine black students who would brave the taunts and threats of citizens and the city council for the right to be educated.  Eckford recalled as she walked toward the school and the Arkansas National Guard standing in her way, "Somebody started yelling, 'Lynch her! Lynch her!' I tried to see a friendly face somewhere in the crowd — someone who maybe could help. I looked into the face of an old woman and it seemed a kind face, but when I looked at her again, she spat on me."  The image of her, head down surrounded by a terrifying group of mothers afraid of the change she represented is etched in the American memory. The mob won that day, but the students, with the help of the 101st Airborne, finally entered that school and changed the way students are educated in this country.

On a cold February afternoon, four students sat at a Woolsworth lunch counter and asked to be served.  They were told no, but they returned the next day and the next day and the next, asking the same question, "can we be served."  But each day they returned to the downtown Greensboro counter, the mob met them. Joe McNeil recalled, "they spat on us, our food, called us Nigger and told us to go back to Africa."  But they were not deterred from their quest.  They helped launch similar movements across the country and inspired the "Freedom Riders" and eventually they changed the way people are served in restaurants and in public places in this country.

In the history of the Civil Rights movement the theme of advancement and change being met by the Mob is scattered throughout.  While Justice and Fairness won far more battles than they lost, the time-line is filled with casualties. Between 1860 and 1960 it is estimated some 5,000 African-Americans were lynched by raging mobs.  The stain of the strange fruit is a vivid reminder of what happens when the mob ultimately wins.  For the Mob isn't looking for fairness and justice, it seeks merely to achieve a narrow goal -- relief from the fear change may bring -- at any costs. 

That is why Americans watching the You-tube videos of Health care Town Halls occurring across the country this month, should be concerned.  These citizens have been described as organized corporate peons, meting out an agenda that is anti-reform.  Others have called them concerned citizens with a worry over what reforms may mean to them.  Whether either of those descriptions is true, is beyond the point.  The point is they are there not to gain information but to completely shut down the debate, shout down the issues and merely make their point with no regard or respect of any other point of view.  They would rather lynch the topic, rather than debate the concerns rationally and logically. That is just as un-american as turning away nine students or berating four young men. And, because of that, they should be called a "mob" just as those during the 60s were called, mobs.

Many of these groups have gone to the fringe; hanging one Congressman in effigy; Federal authorities are investigating a death threat on another; and scattered in many of these forums are people holding signs calling President Obama a Nazi and congressional representatives devils.  This is not a sign of reasonable dialog or democracy at work -- this is brewing anarchy.

In the proverbial marketplace of ideas everyone's views and opinions are allowed in, whether they are intellectually defined or illogically formed. Society will ultimately discard those it disagrees with and embrace the others -- that is what happens when the citizenry is informed and engaged.  But in these "Recess Roastings" as some conservatives are gleefully calling them, the marketplace of ideas is being destroyed because no information is being allowed in.  No one should be applauding this outcome and no one should be embracing this tactic -- if they love the idea of American Democracy.

There are plenty of concerns and worries to be expressed over a fundamental shift in the way health-care is delivered in this country.  There is an enormous amount of questions to be asked of our political leaders -- many deserve immediate answers and they should be demanded to give them. 

But when the mob directs the questioning, history has shown that someone is often left hanging from a tree.  Let's all hope that this time Democracy won't be the next victim.

Kapitol Hill publishes a column every week. Feel free to leave comments and check back next week for the latest edition.

Not "Loving" Equal Protection in California

On the very day that 53 percent of the country voted to elect the nation's first African-American as President of the United States -- wiping away more than 200 years of sanctioned racial barriers and providing Barack Obama with a landslide in the Electoral College -- which coincidentally was instituted to give slave-holding states more political influence -- a similar percentage of voters in California was voting to take away a civil right of other citizens.

If the electorate hasn't heard about the results regarding Prop. 08, it might be because the country is still aglow at the historic and significant movement the United States made in deciding that it would fulfill Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream of "judging people by the content of their character but the color of their skin."  Newspapers across the country created memorable and remarkable front pages using headlines, which alluded to the profound progress.  The nearly 57 million voters who went to the polls on November 4th clearly enabled that dream and each voter who participated in the election should be proud of such an occasion. 

But that pride is muddled by the contradiction of  California voters' decision to deny that same right to gay and lesbian citizens.  Proposition 8 was a petition driven law to ban same-sex marriage putting the already 18-thousand same-sex marriages cosigned by California law in jeopardy of being legally recognized by state agencies and the companies these couples work for in terms of benefits and services.

The contradiction of accomplishing one historic dream and dashing the hopes of others is even more disturbing by the fact that 70 percent of African-American voters in California approved the notion that a section of the American population should be denied the very right that the Constitution granted them in the fourteenth amendment and certified by the Supreme Court in the 1967 case Loving v. Virginia.

Loving centered on the case of Mr. and Mrs. Richard Loving -- a white man and a black woman who were arrested in violation of a Virginia law that prohibited interracial marriage.  The Supreme Court ruled correctly that the federal rights of individuals under the Constitution forbids states from enacting laws prohibiting a citizen from conducting themselves in the exact way as other citizens merely because of their race.  In other words, if White citizens have the right to marry Whites and Black citizens have the right to marry Blacks, then Black citizens have the right to marry White citizens.

There are some who believe that Loving has no barring on the issue of same-sex marriage and believe it is a case of apples and oranges.  That is a hypocritical belief used by those who wish to debate moral arguments versus legal ones.  No one is suggesting that Churches cannot exercise their first amendment rights to freedom of religion by denying same-sex marriage theological sanction; but if we grant that right to religious institutions to not condone such marriages, we must also grant the same weight to the legal rights of individual citizens under the fourteenth amendment.  The Constitution is a whole document -- not one that can be cut and spliced when our individual moral fibers are frayed.

It was just eight years ago that Alabama became the last state in the Union to erase its interracial ban in 2000.

So how draconian was the Virginia anti-miscegenation statute?  It stated:

"If any white person intermarry with a colored person, or any colored person intermarry with a white person, he shall be guilty of a felony and shall be punished by confinement in the penitentiary for not less than one nor more than five years."

While no one has suggested that same-sex couples be placed in jail for sharing wedding vows it is important to note that 16 other states in the 1960s had the same laws on their books.  This is significantly similar to the various same-sex bans being approved today.

In the 1960s supporters of such laws cited concerns such as: interracial marriages will destroy the sanctity of the institution; they decried the act as immoral and against the will of God -- all too modern arguments used today to denounce same-sex marriage. If the country wishes to have a highly emotional debate over the morality of marriage that is one thing but once the argument seeps into individuals legally protected constitutional rights it becomes a non-emotional one where the scales of justice must be equal for everyone.  

 Are we ready to say that homosexuals are not full citizens -- is anyone ready to proclaim perhaps they are merely three-fifths of a person?

 Chief Justice Earl Warren writing for the majority, which was unanimous, said this of  Loving:

"the State does not contend in its argument before this Court that its powers to regulate marriage are unlimited notwithstanding the commands of the Fourteenth Amendment."... 

and he continues..."we do not accept the State's contention that these statutes should be upheld if there is any possible basis for concluding that they serve a rational purpose."

..and further he adds... "There can be no question but that Virginia's miscegenation statutes rest solely upon distinctions drawn according to race. The statutes proscribe generally accepted conduct if engaged in by members of different races. Over the years, this Court has consistently repudiated "[d]istinctions between citizens solely because of their ancestry" as being "odious to a free people whose institutions are founded upon the doctrine of equality."

... and finally he concludes... "There is patently no legitimate overriding purpose independent of invidious racial discrimination which justifies this classification. The fact that Virginia prohibits only interracial marriages involving white persons demonstrates that the racial classifications must stand on their own justification, as measures designed to maintain White Supremacy... Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State."

Lest we as a nation wish to engage in Heterosexual Supremacy we need to be very careful of the message we send out.  Marriage is not an institution that is merely sanctioned by one's church -- no one believes atheist can't marry  or  polygamy ordained by churches is not illegal -- No,  marriage is a legal partnership defined by legislation and protected by the Constitution.

To suggest the State has a right to define who can participate in this action is to suggest that Earl Warren and the Supreme Court was wrong and Virginia and its Deep South partners in interracial marriage bans were actually correct.

If that is what we are to conclude then we must realize that Barack Obama might not have ever gotten the opportunity to be President and the 70 percent of Blacks who supported Prop. 08 might not have ever had the right to vote in the first place.  

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week.

Climbing The Spiral Staircase of Progress

Over the course of American history there have been many steps taken to repair the damage of centuries of racial injustice and common fairness and the faded realization of the unique quest embedded in the United States Constitution and founded within the Declaration of Independence that "all mean are created equal" and that each person is "endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, chief among them are the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness."

The spiral upward steps toward that objective are scattered across the historic time-line of the United States.  In the Post-Civil War movement the Union required the Rebel States to adopt the 13th and 14th amendments; bringing in an era of Reconstruction which saw former slaves enter into society as politicians and created pockets of success in places like Oklahoma and Texas in the form of small towns with names like Freedman.  But after eight years the rise of the Klan and the retreat from federal mandates placed that progress on pause.

In the sixties, in places like Montgomery,  older African-Americans stood up and walked instead of riding buses that forced them to the back seats.  In places like Greensboro young African-Americans protested their status  by sitting down at lunch counters where they were told they could not place orders and be true customers.  In places like Birmingham they mourned the death of four little girls who died in a feat of hatred but used those tears to move the country forward by demanding dutifully required rights.  In the end those cries ended with the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act.  But fights over education and busing lead to increased tensions and placed that progress on slow motion.

So society sped up the proverbial tape to November 4th, 2008, where a young man named Barack Obama from the south side of Chicago, who by his own admissions says he was the unlikeliest of candidates was rewarded with an overwhelming victory to become the 44th President of the United States of America and by that very fact became the first African-American to hold the highest elected office in the land.  Throughout his campaign President-elect Obama attracted the truest sense of the "American Melting Pot" while his opponents looked more like a black and white television show except the black was missing.  President-elect Obama proved that at the end of the day the country can truly judge each other by the content of character if given an unfiltered opportunity to do so.  In the end the polls proved correct and the projections of electoral wins proved right -- not one state, which he lead -- even slightly on the Monday before turned on the once-feared Bradley Effect.  Progress has been made. But, the journey is far from complete.

If anything the election of Barack Obama shows what the model of success for a once powerless people should look like and exposes what happens when those opportunities are shut off.  His ability to journey to the best schools and receive a wider view of  access; his foundation on building society up from the ground up and not forgetting the least of those; his abilities to use his talents to increase his income and provide his own children with the same opportunities he has had and thus putting them on the road to success.

The struggle, which his election does not erode is that that door is still barred to too many who look just like him.  In too many inner cities unemployment still stands double the national average and in the even more targeted black male category it is 40 to 50%.  In the halls of too many public schools young minority children still are three and four grade levels behind in math, reading and science and even worse almost six out of ten of them who make it to high school won't end the day with a diploma.  In the neighborhoods the wealth gap is increasing to the point where the black middle class is fleeing its enclaves leaving all but the poor to suffer in crime riddle streets.  

The "Haves" may have more blacks in their mix but the "Have Nots" continue to have more of them -- and the opportunities for them to move to the other side of the line are few and increasingly so.

Only in America could a young man who had to sleep in an alley in New York City less than 20 years ago could one day be President of the United States.  It is undeniable that progress has been made -- the struggle that continues is how to ensure that the progress that made President Obama possible is provided to everyone who wants it and probably more importantly need it.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check in for new columns, news and information.  Contact the editors at kapitolhill@hotmail.com

Who Are These People?

President Bush has an an average approval rating of about 22 percent according to a compilation of  polls recently released.  The latest is a Newsweek poll conducted this past week.  In that survey 23 percent of people approved of the President's performance, 67 percent disapproved and another ten percent of Americans polled said they were unsure whether they approved or disapproved of how George W. Bush has thus far handled his seven plus years in office.

What that boils down to is more than a third of Americans thought the President was doing just fine or didn't have enough information to make a honest choice either way.  I find that curious.  Despite the entire collapse of the financial sector of the country; despite the collapse of the housing market which is predicted to force about two-million people out on the street; despite the increase in people standing in line for unemployment benefits and in many industrial states the unemployment rate totaling twice the rate nationally; despite the warping of the one time non-partisan units of the Justice Department into outlets of political operations; despite the ill-conceived strategy let alone initiation of the War in Iraq, which has lead to more than four-thousand young soldiers' deaths; despite the fact on a pile of Twin Tower rubble the President vowed to bring the villains to justice Osama bin Laden still roams the hills of Pakistan and Afghanistan; despite the increase of infections of  HIV/AIDS; despite the decrease in numbers of children receiving health care; despite the slow action and return to normal in New Orleans and along the Gulf Coast after two major hurricanes; despite it all there are some in this country who are quite proud of the job this President has performed and even more disturbing there is a tenth of the population that need more information to make up their mine.

That curiosity leads me to ask in my Jerry Seinfeld mocking tone: "Who are These People?"  I ask not to be funny because not being able to rationally look at facts and make a logical conclusion from that seems disturbing to someone with even average intelligence.  Perhaps it is just purely for partisan reasons.  In a survey

conducted earlier this year by USAToday, 66 percent of Republicans approved of the President's performance.

Or perhaps even more startling is that these blind-loyalist are those who operate on the fringe of society.  Those who despite glaring facts choose to accept or approve things not because of any valid information but because they find themselves isolated from the rest of society.  They operate on the borders and yet find themselves impacting the rest of us.

Take the October 10th rally Senator McCain held in Minnesota.  This is the one where the red-sweatshirt donned woman suggested she could not trust Senator Obama because he was an arab.  Even the well informed anti-Obama fanatic calls him a radical because muslim doesn't wash with the good pastor Wright of Trinity Church.  What was less reported in that rally was John McCain's on supporters ridiculed him verbally for dismissing the statement for what it was -- at the very least uninformed and probably more accurate -- stupid.  They shouted their disdain and cried out "come on John!"  So much for the attractiveness of  riding the "Straight Talk Express."  Leaving that day's campaign trail, we can only pray that even John McCain had to ask his closest aide, "Who Are These People?"  

Or perhaps they are the people who on October 24th, applauded Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin when she criticized giving funding to scientific exploration of the genetics of fruit flies.  It is amazing that people in the audience would criticize such research when it has been fruit fly experiments, which has lead to the very developments of children's health that Governor Palin was discussing.  It is this type of uninformed behavior that operates on the borders and yet can find itself impacting the rest of us.

The examples of outside the norm thinking can go on forever: Representatives thinking a Eugene McCarthy-esque inquisition should occur to find the "un-American" liberals walking the halls of Congress; or those who believe their are pro and anti parts of this country -- even suggesting Northern Virginia isn't the real Virginia. Yet, the most disturbing example occurred in  Pittsburgh in the form of Ashley Todd.

Ms. Todd apparently told authorities that while at an ATM a huge, dark black man had robbed and assaulted her by carving a B for Barack Obama in her right cheek.  The blogs went wild and Matt Drudge was the first to take the story and run with it-- even the New York Post took the story and gave it full attention.  The ghastliness of such a feat would feed into the fears of many who are concerned about the first African-American taking the chair in the Oval Office.

The problem with the story is it is not true.  A hoax of the most disturbing kind because it is fueled by historical thinking deeply wed to racism and fear.  Ms.Todd has a history of mental issues and said she was only trying to help her candidate.  She travelled all the way from Texas hoping her story would sway voters in the crucial state of Pennsylvania.

 Pittsburgh police took the tale with the grain of salt they should have.  They immediately went to get the video from the security camera near the ATM  where she was attacked -- they found no such assault.  They also gave her a polygraph, which discovered she was hiding the truth.

In a different time the police would have put out an APB, and rounded up every similar looking Black man on the streets to find the perp who had violated the historic crime of assaulting a white woman.  It happened before and what would not make it happen again?

Perhaps that answer lies in the other side of the favorability coin -- the fact that two-thirds of the country does not live on the fringe, does not take irrational thoughts as facts, can make honest and objective decisions not based on partisanship or blind loyalties.

If it is true that some Americans can still look at a highly charged incident and not allow emotions to become high and find out the facts instead of  running with follies.  If that be the case, then we must feel a sense of comfort and say thank God for these people.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week. Please feel free to leave a comment and check back next week for a new column.

From Maverick to Mendacity

I like Senator John McCain.  In fact it could be safe to say that I have great respect and admiration for Senator John McCain.  How could you not say such a man is deserving of our honor and gratitude.  Senator John McCain is the man who spent five years in a prisoner of war camp cell where he endured tremendous amounts of torture.  He was shot down on one of his brave missions for his country trying to stop the spread of communism in a region of the world that desperately needed -- and still needs some stable form of government.  Senator John McCain is the man who after being harshly rebuked for what he himself calls the lowest moment in his career and judgment during the Keating Five Scandal rallied back to help bring about some of the most sweeping campaign fund-raising laws since the Watergate scandal.  Senator John McCain is the man who when his party was demonizing poor Mexicans for trying at all costs-- even illegal ones -- to live the American Dream try and bring about comprehensive immigration reform, which stood on the stage of human decency not xenophobic ideals.  Senator John McCain is the man who during the heated battle for the 2000 Republican Nomination against George W. Bush called the tactics used against him immoral and said, "there is a special place in hell reserved for people" who would try and call his Indonesia adopted daughter an illegitimate black child.  Senator John McCain is the man who called right-wing religious zealots "agents of intolerance."  Senator John McCain is the man who honestly admitted that he was so desperate during that political fight eight years ago that he was a coward and could not rightfully and dutifully say that the Confederate Flag which flies in South Carolina that he did not stand by his principles and publicly say it should come down.  Senator John McCain is the man who called his vote against the Martin L. King Holiday foolish and a mistake.

Senator John McCain is a hard man not to love.

What is disappointing is Senator John McCain is not running for President.  The McCain running for the White House is like a victim of the pea-pods in the "Body Snatchers."  Presidential Candidate John McCain has all but discarded the principles that made him such a solid brand all in himself to grab onto the white hot reins of sleazy politics that many around him believe is necessary to win the right to sit in the Oval Office-- some of them the very people he despised eight years ago.

It is not just the fact that Presidential Candidate McCain has used the politics of distraction to keep the public away from the issues -- that is what happens in politics and anyone who doesn't think that mischaracterizations of your rivals votes, positions and policies doesn't or shouldn't occur is less than a casual observer.  What is disturbing is Presidential Candidate John McCain doesn't seem to have a moral compass.  President Candidate John McCain doesn't seem to have an ethical line he refuses to cross along the campaign trail.

It would be unfair to say that Senator Barack Obama hasn't done his share of skewed political fighting and has made some false claims himself to be sure -- but Senator Obama has kept his attacks squarely fixed on policy differences -- not personal character differences.  Presidential Candidate John McCain has built his entire candidacy on the fact that Senator Obama is not character worthy to be President-- not American enough--not mainstream enough-- not fill-in-the-blank enough.

Not only is that such a vile attack that it is beneath the honor code the old Navy pilot once adhered to -- it is against the very core principle that should attract someone to vote for a president.  If the American public had paid close attention to the 1968 campaign of Richard Nixon, they would have seen the groundwork of Watergate clearly laid out for all of us to see.

In Joe McGinniss account of Nixon's successful 1968 campaign, "The Selling of the President" he outlines the falsehoods Nixon's aides created with the tool of images and television.  In the book a senior aide, William Gavin, explained the crux of the mendacity this way:

"...reason pushes the viewer back, it assaults him, it demands that he agree or disagree; impression can envelop him... he can receive the impression without having to think about it in a linear, structured way... and for most people this is the most difficult work of all. The emotions are more easily roused, closer to the surface, more malleable.  Get the voters to like the guy, and the battle's two thirds won."

In other words how you campaign is an indication of how you will govern.

That simple rule is the key to Presidential Candidate John McCain's victory strategy -- the American people liked him.  He was two-thirds there -- but the  mendacity of the other third -- getting the American people to not like your opponent has now enveloped his entire meaning to run.  In other words he is not running for something he is running against something --something he has falsely created through smears and that is a losing strategy.

This past week has been even more disheartening because the mendacity being utilized is not only lowly but dangerous.  Over the course of the last few days the McCain campaign has resorted to virtually calling Senator Obama a terrorists who will turn the White House into a Mosque.  One supporter even suggested Obama would get someone to paint the White House black.

They use an association with a self-described radical of the 1960s who tried to bomb government buildings to protest the Vietnam War as their primary case.  Governor Sarah Palin described it as "palling around with terrorists."

The fact that connecting the philosophy of Obama to  the actions of William Ayers when Obama was 8 years old living abroad is a trumped up charge worthy of laugh-ability doesn't seem to matter to McCain.

Yet, what is more disturbing is the incitement these outrageous statements have churned and the loud silence from the campaign itself.  When making their attacks people in the crowd screamed: "terrorists" and "kill him" and even verbally assaulted a camera man simply because he was black.  Even if you give McCain and Palin and their on-site aides credit for not hearing these dangerous criticisms when they were widely reported not a word, not a murmur out of the campaign condemning the attacks.

So not only does the level of mendacity not seem to matter, the fact that the campaign's level of deceit creates such historically dangerous rhetoric doesn't seem to reach a level of the campaign even caring.  The only relief we may have is that the Secret Service does care and is investigating the incidents as possible threats.

I would like to think that this is just another South Carolina Confederate flag flap; another Martin L. King holiday misstep; a temporary set aside of principled stances Senator John McCain ever made from his disapproval of torture to pushing up to agents of intolerance at Bob Jones University; a brief Hail Mary like the suspension of his campaign at the height of the Wall Street crisis. 

I pray that one day Senator McCain will wake up and say to himself that this is wrong, I made a mistake, I became an ogre trying to grab the precious golden ring, that he will stand tall and apologize to those who once believed in his maverick brand and admired his willingness to compromise policy but not his principles.

Mendacity has costs -- and for Presidential Candidate John McCain  he may have lost his last chance at the White House -- But perhaps he hasn't lost the map to where he left Senator John McCain.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week. Feel free to leave a comment and remember to return next week to read the next installment.

From Broyard to Barack

Anatole Broyard was a unique character in cultural history.  He was a very pale skinned Creole whose family roots were grown in New Orleans.  His parents, also very light, during the hardest of times moved north to Brooklyn, New York in order to find more decent work in order to give their children -- Anatole and his two sisters -- a life that would be better than the one they had in Louisiana.

They settled into a middle class black enclave -- socialized with their darker skinned neighbors and raised their children to be aware of a world that treated those not white as less than.  The harsh realities of the 1930s and 40s.  Because of their lighter complexion they had a unique benefit of slipping into the larger white society and finding jobs and opportunities they would not otherwise come across.  Yet after work they returned to their lives as they were -- not as they pretended.  In essence they were part-time "passers."  Passing was not a unique trait back then.  According to a University of Ohio study there were at least a million people of African decent living this same way during the 1940s and 50s.

Yet, temporary passage did not suit Anatole.  He did not wish to be constrained by his heritage so he used his color to escape the world his blood limited.  He soon after leaving the military no longer struggled -- as he had in his earlier years -- and made the conscious decision to live his life as a White man -- a white writer who could describe the passion and emotion of the colored community with profound insight -- none of his white counterparts suspecting the secret to his deep and personal touch.

He escaped the prison of his color and lived a false life -- so much so that his own children believed themselves to be pure WASP growing up in toney enclaves of Connecticut -- even daring to feel comfortable enough to tell racist jokes in their private school cafeterias.

Broyard was able to accomplish this because in his era the idea of post-racialization -- where ones color did not matter -- was never a forethought.  It always mattered.

Which is why I find it quite interesting that many suggest the rise of Barack Obama signals that that post racial era is in full swing.  To conclude such a beginning would lead one to point to some profound evidence that color now is irrelevant to ones life and decisions.

It is true that unlike many later aged baby boomers, Obama does not wear his color on his sleeve -- he better than anyone doesn't have to because in order to do so he would have to wear two sleeves on the same arm.  His father is African and his Mother a white Kansan.  He grew up with his white grandparents, learned his values and built his foundation in their world view.  It is precisely why he is the cool, intellectual person who believes in pragmatic change more so than revolution.

Yet for all of that upbringing for Obama to suggest he is more white than black would seem ludicrous.  If one looked at his life on paper it would be easy for him to choose -- but his skin tone dictates otherwise.  Decades after Anatole was able to make his choice Obama has only one -- yet it is Obama who is supposed to be living in the more enlightened age.

Which proves that we are not in a post-racial era.  We are where we were when in the early 1950s Broyard made his choice -- color always matters.

No where recently is this reality played out than  in a unique Associated Press survey, which tries to tackle how much of a factor race is playing in Obama's presidential bid.  According to the poll less than 20 percent of Whites believe Blacks are the victim of a lot of racism, while Blacks who answered the same way reach as high as 60 percent.  Is this directly related to the color of the prism of world view?

What visibly translates into a more pressing point is the question of admiration for one another.  In the poll one in five whites have felt admiration for blacks "very" or "extremely" often.   But seventy percent of blacks have felt the same about whites.

This exhibits itself in the election polls each cycle.  It is curious that African-Americans are being  treated as a group of sheep merely because 90 percent of them support Barack Obama.  When 89% of Blacks supported Kerry in 2004 that was because of close agreement on democratic policies -- not because Kerry was white.  African-Americans have proven each election year that they -- despite their believe in racism, that not all white folk are to blame and can enthusiastically support a white person if they agree with them on the issues -- from the local school board to President of the United States.

What is troubling in this so-called post-racial era is that the same cannot be said about the white portion of the electorate.  The AP poll may answer that mystery a bit when it was illustrated that 30 percent of whites felt racial tensions in this country was a direct result of black responsibility.  It  is not surprising that less than 10 percent of Blacks felt the same way.

So perhaps White voters -- no matter how much they can admit that injustice has been done to African-Americans -- still hold a level of resentment that is directly related to race and the more visible the race the harder it is for them to embrace.

It says a lot that Obama's ability to come within striking distance of the Oval office is on full display with a month to go in the election -- its a sign of progress that cannot be denied. 

But one is lfet only to wonder outloud that perhaps if it was Anatole and not Barack running for President-- the election might not be as close as it is today.

Kapitol Hill published a new commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave feedback in the comment section and check back for the next installment.

Birth of A Nation(al Campaign)

The first major motion picture blockbuster was a silent movie directed by D.W. Griffith called "Birth of A Nation."  The movie was released in 1915 and has long been touted on the pureness of its cinematics as an innovative film, which gave rise to directional technology that laid the path for all other films to come.

But deep within it was a brutally hateful message of fear of newly freed slaves -- particularly violently sex crazed black men who placed their lustful sights on the fair innocent white women of the South.  In the movie this was illustrated through the controversial relationship between a freed slave named Gus and the death of a woman named Flora who rather than be raped by Gus leaps to her death.

In the movie, the patriotic band of Brothers known as the Klan lynch Gus in defense of Flora's innocence and in the name of putting the safety of their country first above the new protections Reconstruction had given to such a renegade race.

When the film was shown in major cities like Boston and Philadelphia it sparked riots and caused such an outrage against Blacks that the NAACP launched boycotts and protests -- St. Louis theaters refused to even show it.  The fears ignited in that film still haunt the residue of the American psyche and small subtle hints still resonate with many voters.

In 2006, the so-called "Call Me Harold" political ad which showed a flirtatious blond woman winking to then Senatorial candidate, Harold Ford, Jr. sparked outrage but some analysts suggest it also costs him votes in a very close election in Tennessee.

While, nothing as blatant has been used against Barack Obama -- at least nothing that has risen to the public pulse -- there have been images which makes one wonder whether Senator Obama is the new Gus.

In this campaign, Senator John McCain has used his military experience as a plus and embedded the idea that he is the one that will place the "Country First" at the forefront of his bid for the White House.  That framing logically leads one to conclude that Senator Obama does not put his country first and therefore is less patriotic and therefore less American -- a renegade of the American political landscape.

With that stage clearly set we must evaluate a few other things:

(1) The skipping of Obama's 12 years as an Illinois State Senator to identify him not as a small time legislator; but, a small time "community organizer."

(2) The images of Barack Obama onlooking a class of young white boys and girls in an ad that suggests he wants to  teach young children about SEX.

(3) The fact that the McCain campaign had an ad connecting him to former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson already cut and ready to roll but decided its first critical connection ad would link him to former Fannie CEO Franklin Raines. The difference between the two CEOs -- one is white and the black CEO actually wasn't an adviser to Obama.

So in the final point -- they put an ad on the shelf, which does show a solid connection to Obama to instead air one that connects two black men together who have no other concrete connection outside of skin tone.

One would like to believe that McCain campaign, and particularly the candidate when he said in April of this year that he would run an honorable campaign -- particularly when just eight years ago members of his own party used the dark skin town of his adopted Indonesian daughter to suggest he had birthed a black baby during the South Carolina primary.

In that case analyst suggest that type of  attacked helped George W. Bush recover from his New Hampshire loss and go on and win the Republican nomination in 2000.  So if such vile attacks work against a white candidate, is it not possible to assume even the most subtle hints to bad ole' Gus will derail an African-American candidate?

With polls continually showing that somewhere between 10 - 20 percent of voters outwardly saying that they would not vote for a black candidate or at the very least have reservations about the prospect, it would be politically prudent for the non-black candidate to try and take any advantage he can in what is bound to be another 50-49 Presidential election.

But just because "Birth of a Nation" was a masterful piece of film work and its innovation and forward moving story board and use of technology  has been highly praised doesn't mean that it didn't serve to not only stall the progress of race relations in this country nor should it be forgiven for giving rise to thousands of citizens who felt justified in taking justice into their own hands or rather own ropes in the hanging of hundreds of black citizens.

You'd like to give Griffith the benefit of the doubt -- that wasn't the intended consequence of his film -- But history seems to not be that kind -- we will have to wait to see whether history will judge Senator McCain's actions in the same vain.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and check back next week: Coming Up: "Broyard to Barack"

Two Boys From Chicago

On the date of August 28th a number of decades ago, history was made, which changed the path of the United States -- forever making a turn that would ignite a strong wind on a pathway to courage and conviction.  On that date of August 28th the world's eyes turned to the horror of Jim Crow, of Inequality and the Brutality of a Society that chose not to fulfill its promise.

While many on this date of  2008 reach back 45 years to a young Morehouse bred preacher from Georgia who on that day gave a speech that inspired a nation;  it should not be lost that on August 28th, 1955 a young boy, who's father was gone (killed serving in the military) by the time he was 10, left to be raised by a single mother  struggling to make due from the South Side of Chicago -- who sent him down south to Money, Mississippi to escape the depressions and dangers of a big city -- had his young life taken from him simply because he was Black.

It was 53 years ago, Emmett "Bobo" Till was beaten, drowned, and shot at the age of 14.  It was that death, that tragedy, that violent and senseless murder of a young boy from Chicago that made Rosa Parks too "tired" to give up her seat. It was the death of that young innocent boy that helped inspire the first protest segregation along 125th Street in Harlem; to provide courage to the Greensboro boys to do the first sit-in and eventually to provide the podium for Martin L. King, Jr.  to stand tall to give his oration in which he said that America had given the Negro people a bad check.

That is why it is worth noting that on another August 28th,  another young man from the South Side Chicago deposited that check  King eloquently  spoke of once again in the bank of American hope and aspirations.  Another young man from the south side on another August 28th also stood on the podium provided by young Till and accepted the Democratic Party nomination for President of the United States.

In 1955 Mother Till showed the courage to say to the world, Emmett will have an open casket so, "the world can see what they did to my boy."  It's fitting that the world is watching again.

That disfigured image is forever stained on the American conscience and for millions it stayed as the moral compass for generations to come.  Now Americans have a new image to be ingrained on our minds -- one that doesn't in no way replace the horrific images of Emmett's young face in a velvet casket --  but stands next to it as a shining example of how far this country has come.  They are not bookends -- but merely significant periods on the time-line -- a line that runs limitlessly toward progress.

Personally, as a young boy from the south side of Chicago, who grew up without his father, I am personally indebted and gratified to be included on that time-line-- to add my talents to the progress -- and can only pray that my son will continue the legacy.

In anticipation of such a historic night, rushing home I could not help but notice pockets of young black boys were standing on the corners and in building doorways, doing nothing but sitting, standing, smoking and wasting time -- its how they spent the Summer outside of my Harlem apartment window til 2am quite often.  I took a bet with myself that they would disappoint me -- that the optimism of Obama's feat would cause them to flee to their own homes to be apart of history.  Fifteen minutes to the speech they were still there and just five minutes before the speech I peeked out my window one last time in what I thought would be disgust -- but the doorways and streets were empty.  I raced downstairs and looked east and west down the street and the sidewalks and cars once occupied by leaning and resting teens were all vacant.  Harlem -- or at least my block of it was dead quiet.

Whether these young men left to go home and watch Obama OR left the block because they were too embarrassed to be confronted by some elderly man or woman for not being home watching his nomination speech, I don't know.  But I will lean toward the optimistic view because like Bill Clinton, I believe in a place called Hope

And, more importantly, I believe that that young 14 year old boy from Chicago did not die in vain and that 47 year old man from Chicago did not accomplish his political feat for naught.

In my eyes not only did those two young boys from Chicago move America, they moved the young boys on my block.  So no matter what one's political leanings may be, we all should pause and for at least one night give a prayer and some praise -- prayer that we will never see another day like August 28th, 1955 and praise that it will not be the last day we see that looks like August 28th, 2008.

KapitolHill publishes a new commentary every week. Please feel free to leave comments and check back next week for a new installment.

A Place Called "Hope"

In GARHI KHUDA BAKSH, Pakistan a place most Americans have never heard of, there were echos of similar desires.  Thousands mourning the death of their aspiring leader chanted for justice; thousands called for peace; thousands more cried for the loss of what they considered their last chance for a decent level of democracy.  While Benazir Bhutto had not even completely cleaned the exiled dust off her shoes -- exiled because of charges of inept government and skilled corruption -- she with all her taint -- represented something more powerful - The longing of hope.

It is that same longing for hope that has overtaken this country heading into the 2008 Presidential Primary Season.  In the movie "Shawshank Repemption," a movie all about hope, the protagonist Andy tells his friend Red, "Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things and no good thing ever dies."

It is that eternal life that Republican Presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee is hoping to cling to in his quest for the Oval Office.  Like President Bill Clinton, he is from a small southern town called Hope, Arkansas.  It seems so appropriate for a presidential storyline:  A young man no one held any stock in, dreamed of becoming a Christian leader, overcomes odds and becomes governor and now about 100 lbs lighter is looking to overcome the odds once more and become President of the United States. In the composite polls former Mike Huckabee has all but surged past more experiences and savvy candidates to the point where he is leading in the key state of Iowa and is second in national polls.  What does Huckabee say is the answer to his resurgence? "It's not just about making political decisions, but making good decisions for the people it affects."

Attaching himself to the impact politics has on people is a good bet.  The country is clamoring for change and longing for a chance to grasp on to hope.  According to a Summer CBS poll only a third of average income Americans are satisfied with their lives; Only 15 percent of those in the lower income brackets are satisfied and nearly half, 48 percent of Americans believe the future will be worst off for their kids. Yet, 8 out of 10 Americans believe there is still hope one can better their lives.  Hope births oxymorons.

If Huckabee is riding the hope wave, Barack Obama is the one who's earthquake has created it.  He has ridden the Hope-Train long before he declared for President.  "The Audacity of Hope" [note: a recommended K.H. Book] and has become the cornerstone of his closing argument in Iowa:

"I know that hope has been the guiding force behind the most improbable changes this country has ever made.  In the face of tyranny, it’s what led a band of colonists to rise up against an Empire.  In the face of slavery, it’s what fueled the resistance of the slave and the abolitionist, and what allowed a President to chart a treacherous course to ensure that the nation would not continue half slave and half free.  In the face of war and Depression, it’s what led the greatest of generations to free a continent and heal a nation.  In the face of oppression, it’s what led young men and women to sit at lunch counters and brave fire hoses and march through the streets of Selma and Montgomery for freedom’s cause.  That’s the power of hope – to imagine, and then work for, what had seemed impossible before."

For Mr. Obama, who is aligned to have as equal an opportunity to win the Iowa Caucus -- with a minority population less than 5 percent-- than any mainstream white candidate, hope is not just a desire but a powerful tool.  In Obama's hope-world, it is what creates and demands and inspires change.  Change the American people are desperately longing for these days.

It may be that place called hope that is now swinging black voters -- voters who once shied away from him -- back to his fold.  It may be that place called hope that is now giving him wind beneath his campaign's wings to be on the verge of winning the tri-fecta of early primaries: Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

And what will happen then?

For those majority of voters who long for hope,  the chance to elect Barack Obama President may be just as foolish as hoping the beans one trades his cow for actually is a better investment.   It may be true that good things never die, but the Obama Hopefuls may have to instead pray that the place called hope does not become a mere ghost town.

Kapitol Hill provides unique commentary on significant issues and events.  Please feel free to leave a comment and return for the next installment.

A King's Ransom

Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, "the true measure of a man is not the decisions he makes in time of comfort but the choices he makes in difficult times."  The weight of that quote could not have been more felt than on his own children these past few days. The choice they decided to make -- to auction of some of his most personal memos and documents -- has been debated and debased in many circles of  the Civil Rights Community because the collection could have ended up in the hands of any institution that shoveled the asking price in front of the King family.  Not to mention the echos of gasp the family was asking for the originally written speeches and letters -- an estimated $15 to $30 million dollars.

To place that in context, the Nixon family was awarded about $30 million dollars for the collection of secret tapes and written documents the former disgraced President held in his position after he was forced to leave office.

Having placed that context into the equation, I believe it is unfair to criticize the King family for pushing such a high bid.  Why shouldn't the most intimate documents of Martin Luther King carry such a high asking price?  Are some subconsciously saying that the letters of an African-American don't deserve to be placed in the highest of auction prices?  We certainly hope not.

But luckily the sign of the Apocalypse has been adverted with the news that Morehouse College -- King's Undergraduate alma mater -- has formed a coalition with other Atlanta Universities to purchase the collection and keep it where many -- including former King aide Andrew Young -- said it should remain.

But while that solution has smothered some of the uproar over King's legacy supervision, it has not quieted the  criticism overall.  And honestly, legitimately so.

The King legacy is being threatened by mismanagement of the King Center and poor decisions by administrators who have been trusted to keep the legacy and memory strong.  The King Center in Atlanta is in some $5 million dollars in debt and the family has placed a strangle-hold on the public history -- so much so that one of the best Civil Rights Era documentaries, Eyes on the Prize, has stopped broadcast because of the seemingly high fees it was asked to repay to the King Estate.

The choices being made are clearly not being made in the best interest of the legacy.  But the real question that most people avoid is why shouldn't the King family use their father's legacy to better themselves?

It is well known that King himself, through social pressures, did all he could to deflect those criticisms of himself.  He gave away his speaking fees, and two-thirds of his Nobel Peace Prize funds to keep the movement alive more than he did to keep food on the table of his family.  The sad reality is his family suffered while society gained -- and while we are better off because of it, why should the family not be.

No one is second-guessing Jesse Jackson for "cashing"in on his association to King... that association has given Jackson credibility -- but what has it given the family?

I for one won't stand with the troves of critics who say the King family is selling out.  I say, it's about time they sold something.  I'd rather the money go into the pockets of those who had to live most of their lives without a father -- than those who wish to claim illegitimately the father of the Civil Rights Movement.

Kapitol Hill welcomes you to leave a comment and don't forget to check back for the next installment

An Allusion of Assimilation

The residue of the heated immigration debate that swept the country over the past few months has left a culture changing stain on American Society.  No, I am not talking about the guest-worker program or the complicated road to citizenship the Senate bill called for.  Those items actually make sense.  Nor am I talking about the House Bill which makes giving aide to an illegal immigrant -- including food, shelter or health care -- a crime.  That is too absurd an idea to even discuss. 

The one thing that will have a lasting impact on the country's culture, which passed on Capitol Hill was the amendment making English the official language of the United States.  While at first glance one would think this would be an example of why one would use the term "duh!" it echos a must hazardous tone.

The Senate first voted 63-34 to make English the national language after lawmakers who led the effort said it would promote national unity.

But opponents of that specific term argued the move would prevent limited English speakers from getting language assistance required by an executive order enacted under President Clinton. So in a second vote, the Senate voted 58-39 to make English the nation's "common and unifying language."  I suppose this terminology makes the bitter pill easier to swallow.

I say bitter because the motivation behind such a vote strikes at the heart of the negative feelings so many supporters of so-called border security measures harbor.  It seems to me, if one is to really have an honest debate over the fallacy of America's borders, we cannot leave out the poor --in fact poorer border conditions to our north.

While we do not know everything that the Intelligence Community has done to protect and defend Americans, we do know that at least three cases of terrorists with ties to Al Qaeda have been found plotting in Canada.  Perhaps it's easier for them to assimilate into the Muslim mosques of Toronto and Montreal than the Catholic Cathedrals of Mexico City?

Yet is is that term, assimilation, that some proponents of English cite for their vote.

South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham said of why he voted, "We are trying to make an assimilation statement."

If  the vote was about assimilation and not aimed at targeting the fastest growing minority sect in America, then why was there no outrage during the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections when Bush, Gore and Kerry alike were going around the country peppering their speeches with Spanish terms?  I don't recall anyone saying what is the President of the United States doing by speaking another language to Americans other than English.  No, when it's time to vote its catering -- when its time to rev up the base of a party -- its casting off.

It seems assimilation is in the eye of the beholder.  If this were not true we would see more effort to assimilate more disadvantage Americans into our society.

Take for example a new study from a team of Princeton University sociology professors , which revealed that race and criminal history continue to play a role in gaining employment.

The study described how participants of the study went on 3500 entry level job interviews.  The researchers found men  who were given the same qualifications and experience, while criminal history was randomly assigned.
The most alarming conclusions  were that white males with criminal records were just as likely as blacks with no criminal history to find employment.  And, the study also found that a criminal record reduced
the number of positive responses from employers by 57% for black applicants but only by 35% for their white counterparts. Latinos also fared better than blacks.

Thus, making it harder for black men with criminal backgrounds to find jobs, urge a decent wage and yes, assimilate back into society.

One could take these numbers if no racial breakdown was given to mean its harder for ex-convicts to get jobs.  That would probably be a truism.  However, the mere fact that whites with criminal backgrounds fared better in gaining jobs than blacks with no criminal records smacks of the inherent injustice that continues to plague our society and makes it harder for anyone  who is disadvantaged and not able to benefit from white privilege to assimilate.

Before we start telling people they must speak English in order to make it in America, how about showing people of color they can succeed in this country if they are Americans. 

Without question English -- speaking English -- is a symptom of success.  It is, after all the language of commerce in this country.  But should ones color be a symptom of failure?

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each week.  Feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

Si Se Puede!

On Monday President Bush will move the national debate over immigration reform into "Prime Time."  Mister Bush is expected to address the nation in a network carried live Oval Office speech.  Most political observers believe he will reiterate his passion for a so-called Guest Worker program and applaud the Senate for breaking the stalemate over its more consensus minded immigration bill, which includes a "path way to citizenship" for the approximately 12 million undocumented immigrants working and living here in the United States.

What one can find surprising about this speech is, it's not like we need one to generate a fiery debate or to invade the national conscience.  It would seem the hundreds of thousands of immigrant advocates and undocumented workers who have taken over city and small town streets every few weeks have done that all by themselves.

The most recent demonstrations, on May 1st were the biggest so far.  It is estimated a million people or more marched and chanted leading to standing traffic and ogling eyes wondering what the heck is going on.

What is going on is the invisible worker -- the restaurant busboys, the hotel housekeepers, the home construction worker, the farmland field hand, the nanny and the home health aides are coming out of the shadows to protest what they see as the disrespect they've received in the face of  their hard work.  They carry signs saying "humans are not illegal" and "it's not a crime to want the American Dream."  While these high moral cliches may ring faintly of truth, the fact of the matter is, for albeit legitimate reasons, millions have broken the law and by-passed hundreds of thousands of others, who are standing in line seeking their piece of the American Pie.

Does the fact that these undocumented workers are vital to American industry and the fragile economy give them right to cross our borders illegally?  Does the fact that they contribute to the tax system, hold higher moral and work ethical standards than many who were born here give them the right to by-pass America's laws?
Does the fact that until politicians saw immigration reform as a winning political issue they turned a blind eye to companies hiring and often abusing workers  give undocumented workers the courage to stand up and say give me the rights I illegally obtained?

If you listen to the chants in the streets the answer is a resounding, "Si Se Puede" -- Yes I can.

But what about those who don't have the marching support?  Those who are stigmatized by the very event that has sparked the House of Representatives to feel emboldened to criminalize organizations like churches, which assist illegal immigrants.  If we are going to be outraged at the fact millions cross our border illegally and cry for citizenship then we should be even more enraged at the fact thousands who are obeying the law are being denied merely because they happen to be Muslim.

At least ten men have said they have had enough.   The men are  considered permanent legal residents who claim they should have been sworn in as citizens within three months of meeting all the requirements. Instead,  they've been kept waiting for more than a year.

To make their case they have filed a class action lawsuit against the Department of Justice, the FBI and other government agencies.   The plaintiffs allege the delays discriminate against them on the basis of their gender and religious beliefs. They are seeking a court order that they be sworn in as citizens, along with unspecified money damages and attorney fees.

One Muslim advocacy group says there are possibly thousands of Muslim men in the same boat and say if they were not Muslim they would've been sworn in long time ago.

Could our embedded prejudices against Arabs and Muslims because of September 11th be the reason? 

Perhaps.  But what are we to make of that?  Are we truly living up to the high American standard if we are going to selectively decide who  meets the muster of being  an American citizen?   And how can we  spend months and network airtime discussing the possibility of  rewarding millions  who actually broke the law, and ignore those who crossed their t's and dotted their i's?

If we can see the value in allowing undocumented workers to pledge their allegiance to America, can't we also see the value of  ensuring those who actually are documented and dedicated to America's cause get their slice, as well?

The answer has to be a thunderous, Si Se Puede -- Yes I Can!

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for the next column

Nothing Like Saying I'm Sorry

Nothing seems to make those who commit atrocities feel better than saying I'm sorry well after the fact.  Due to a number of local ordinances, companies here in the United States have to research their financial backgrounds to conclude whether they benefited from Slavery.  Not surprisingly many of them find that they have and in an act of  empathy often set up scholarship funds at Histocially Black Colleges or pledge to assist an entire class of elementary school students pay for their higher educations.  It is their feeble attempt to make up for 400 years of oppression which directly attributed to them being successful companies today.  In otherwords, I'm sorry for making money off a people's back and often the people's lives.

Now it's France's turn to apologize for slavery.  On May 10th the European country will mark the event.  To announce the ocassion, Junior Minister for Cooperation Brigitte Girardin said, "Together we must reflect, with courage and clarity, on the past -- yes, France, as well as other European countries, definitely profited from the trade in humans."

The Minister made those remarks while standing on the shores of the Goree Island, Senegal.  Those who know their history will note Goree Island is the symbol of the African Slave Trade.  Over the course of three centuries until 1848, thousands of African slaves passed through Goree Island's "Gate of No Return", just off the former French colony's capital, Dakar, to board slaving ships, mostly headed to the Americas.  In all, estimates suggest between 11 million and 12 million slaves were shipped from Africa by European slavers.

Should those who are now the decendants of those kidnapped people now feel good about this public omission of guilt and sympathy?  Hardly, especially when saying I'm Sorry does little to devoid society of the institutional flaws, which continue to hinder those people from the full invitation to live free and equal.

Secondly, it seems far too easy to apologize when what is needed is evidence of lessons learned and an active attempt to not allow those same mistakes to occur again.  While we can be assured the institution of slavery on that grand scale will never exist again, what about other events the world has apologized for.

It was less than 10 years ago that the world stood on their moral high ground and apologized for allowing nearly a million Rwandans to be killed and millions of others to be displaced, raped, tortured and dehumanized.  Yes, the world leaders said they were sorry and pledged to never allow such a thing to happen again.

So what do we now say about the crisis -- America has called it similar to genocide -- in Darfur?

Tens of thousands of Sudanese have been killed and nearly a million more have been displaced, raped, tortured and dehumanized.  The problem at the heart of the matter is simply an unsympatheic Arab Muslim government allowing weapon carrying, government funded militias to ravage the countryside in an organized plan to rid the country of its native African Muslims.

A glimpse of lessons being learned was seen at the United Nations recently where a resolution to send peacekeeping troops into the region to keep the peace is being debated and supported.  A fragile cease-fire agreement between the government and rebel African Muslim forces has sparked the action at the U.N. and most of us who have shaken our heads at previous inaction can only say, "well, it's about time."

Whether the world action will solve the problem and re-stabilize the nation of Sudan and Chad (now being negatively impacted by the thousands of refugees) is still in question.  But without hesitation, what isn't in doubt somewhere down the line the World will find the courage to apologize for the slow moving action on this crisis as well.

It's not enough to say I'm sorry, what we need is results.  While its true one's words speaks volumes, but one's
deeds saves lives.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for the next column.

The (Blue) Devil Is In the Details

Surprise, surprise a group of elite, privileged, major university students are accused of participating in a sexual assault.  If anyone thinks that what is playing out at Duke University is out of the ordinary then I would advise you to think again.  What is a-typical about this situation however is that it, like most cases involving a clash of class and race, has revealed a tense under-coating of racial tension and economic inequality in a town simply overshadowed by the acre or so of land, which envelopes part of Durham.

In a more surprising twist of an already twisted story, there now seems to be more to the scenario than what has been described initially.  First the latest news is that some of the high-powered lawyers for some of the 46 lacrosse players is that they believe an indictment in the case could be coming soon -- as early as next week.

It seems the Durham District Attorney is moving forward despite the highly anticipated DNA test returned inconclusive and if you believe the spin of the defense attorneys proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that no DNA was quote "in the woman, on the woman, on the clothes of the woman" and therefore reveals no assault occurred.

Whoa! that's quite a statement in light there still is a rape kit which shows evidence of a sexual assault, injuries on her body, which show evidence of physical assault and items such as money and broken glue-on fingernails in the bathroom in question.

While it's uncertain a rape actually happened, it is beyond reason to not think something happened.

And something is happening in and around Durham, as well.  Durham is 40 percent African-American, double the percentage in all of North Carolina.  So the fact that the alleged victim is black who attends a Historically black college down the street from Duke has added a bit of racial overtone.

But the economics -- or the inequality of the economics in Durham is placing a strain on the scandal, as well.
Durham over the past few years; however, this economic boom is not affecting all residents of Durham County, especially minorities and those who do not have professional or technical skills. The number of persons living in poverty is especially high for African Americans - 20,126 African Americans live in poverty -- that is about 10 percent  of the entire population and nearly 25 percent of the Black population. 

If we couple that with the fact most of these students pay in tuition more than most of the Black community
makes in a year and the accusation that racial slurs were spewed that night of the alleged assault race clearly is center stage or at the very least a major player.

And because of that, the details of the case may be clouded.  Some people seem too quick to label the young men guilty while others are just as fast to claim their innocence when any new fact comes to light that seems to swing in their favor.

Whether this case actually ends up with someone on trial --whether its a player or the victim for making a false claim, Durham and Duke would be missing a huge opportunity if the community did not use this opening to break down barriers and build a bridge that brings all of them together in unity.

Kapitol Hill publishes a commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

The New Field Slave

For the past two weeks the country has seemingly been overwhelmed with the topic of immigration -- illegal immigration to be more precise.  You see, the Senate is currently debating various proposals, which would as they see it, solve the problem of thousands of illegal immigrants annually crossing the southern border of the United States.

The House of Representatives already came up with their resolution last December -- tighter border security, turning undocumented immigrants into Class-A felons and criminalizing the act of knowingly assisting the law-breakers.  Some say that last part goes way too far because assistance is defined to broadly and would turn non-profits, church organizations and other charity groups into criminals for giving them housing assistance,  work training, food and seeing to their health.  Hillary Clinton had the best line  of the week when she said, "this would probably make Jesus a criminal."

Undoubtedly, there is a problem.  the growth of illegal immigrants coming into the U.S. has expanded nearly four-fold since 1980.  More than 20 years ago there were just over 3 million undocumented immigrants in the country and now the rate is generally seen at close to 12 million (although some say it may be closer to 20 million -- but that is hard stretch).

One can ask, so what's the problem, If they broke the law and bypassed pre-existing policies and jumped in front of thousands of other immigrants who are trying to enter this country legally, then why shouldn't they all be rounded up, taken to jail and shipped back to whatever country they came from?

That's a fair question -- and a complicated one, too.  Senator John McCain, a Republican from Arizona has been begging for months for someone to explain to him how that can be done?  What  makes this a more complicated question though is the fact that illegal immigrants represent nearly 6 percent of the American workforce.

We see them every day in restaurants, in hotels,  on construction sites,  on America's farms and in textile factories.  Because of low wages, less than satisfactory work conditions, no health benefits or job security Americans -- for good reason --  have said no way Jose! to these non-career building positions.

This dilemma leaves us with thousands of essential and vital jobs, which would go undone and cause a complete stall and perhaps derailment of the United States economy if  these industries depended on Americans to do these jobs.  To solve the quandary, the Senate has come up with a so-called "Guest Worker Program."  This initiative would offer immigrants the opportunity to come to this country to do these jobs on a temporary basis -- as long as they went back across the border when the job was done.  The Senate is also considering policies which would allow the 12 million illegal immigrants already hear a "path to so earned citizenship." 

Many hard core conservatives are calling that last point amnesty  -- a free ride.  Hmm, hiding in the shadows of society, afraid to seek health care in an emergency, working for less than minimum wage just to save and send the money back to their home country and living in unkempt conditions without a voice if an employer stiffs them on a hard days work is a ride I'm sure most of us don't think even belongs at a Six Flags amusement park.

This bitter debate has born two cliches which have come to be quite annoying.  First, "these are jobs Americans have refused to do?'  the second,"we are a nation of immigrants."

Let's deal with the latter cliche first.  Those who say we are a nation of immigrants seemingly have forgotten oh, about 400 years of American history.  13% of the American population is no where near in the category of "immigrant"  -- its more like kidnapped victim.

Which brings me to the other phrase,  Up until about the early 1950s the jobs Americans refused to do were being done by those kidnapped victims.  The maids in the hotels and homes, the workers in the fields,the nannies, the farm hands were all  positions met at the front door with the familiar phrase, "Colored Only."  In fact the entire institution of  slavery was born out of the fact tending to the tobacco and cotton fields of the South were jobs the majority population didn't want to do.

While it's important to recognize there needs to be some change in policy to control the borders (did someone say Al Qaeda?) and offset the increasing influx of illegal immigrants, this debate shouldn't be held in a vacuum.  We've certainly identified the jobs American won't do but we have turned a blind eye to the most important W -- the why.

This is important not just for the immigrant worker -- but the unemployed and disenfranchised born here in the inner cities, the Mississippi Delta or the hills of West Virginia.

Perhaps if Congress dealt with the stagnant pay, work conditions and lack of modern protections affording almost every other worker, the jobs illegal immigrants are flocking to would be limited because the poor, disenfranchised citizen would already have it.  Why should major industries get away with reducing their workers to mere indentured servants -- afraid to speak of any injustice due to the fear of deportation?

No wonder major businesses are backing the guest worker plan.  It gets the government off their backs while maintaining their modern day slave labor force.  Is the low-wage, low-skilled, limited education worker not worthy enough to be protected by OSHA, EEOC and any other alphabet-souped protection agency?

Unemployment in the African-American community is more than 8 percent and in some cities the rate of black males with no jobs is nearly 20%.  Yet, they are left to wallow on street corners with nothing  -- but the hopelessness their often less than high school education provides.  Wouldn't it serve the greater society to have these so-called less than desirable  jobs in the hands of some of these potential workers?

If American businesses want to keep a permanent underclass, which is forced to make pennies a day with little hope for tomorrow, at least be honest about it. Let's not  cloud the issue by ignoring the basic problems facing low wage workers and masquerading the solution in a veil of human and social interest   It's disingenuous to the entire conversation to believe the only interest at hand is ensuring Big Business keeps churning.

Yet, it's hard to fault these industries for pushing such proposals without having to give up anything in return... after all, servitude definitely served most of them pretty well for a few centuries -- but if we recall  history, those labor policies ended in a Civil War.  And you know what they say about those who don't learn from history.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't for get to check back next week for a new installment.

NOTE: Special Edition Coming - African-Americans & Marriage

Stop The Madness

For the past three weeks -- with one more weekend to go, American college basketball fans and those who just happen to fill out one of those pesky brackets for the office pool have been transfixed on the television watching teams like UCLA and the Cinderella team of the season, George Mason who pulled off a remarkable feat by advancing to the tournament's final four teams.

But while the fans of these games seem to be the winner in it all and eventually one of the final teams will be crowned the champion of the 2006 National College Athletic Association basketball season, the players in the end -- particularly the African-American student-athletes-- may end up the real losers.

Overall the graduation rate for the 250 Division I schools which are eligible for "March Madness" is 40 percent.  Individual schools have made significant improvement since the NCAA started keeping this data ten years ago and that should be applauded; but, for the most part the overall rate has stayed consistent and low.

This is  worrisome when you look at the overall rate in non-athletes is  at 65 percent but becomes even more troubling and even disturbing when you break it down racially.  In a University of Utah study it was shown that African-American athletes at these elite sport schools graduate at below 30 percent.

So while these students may make millions for their universities, so many of these young men leave without a safety net yet alone a degree even though they may cut down the nets in Indianapolis.  If this is the fate of those who get the opportunity to go to college, spend a few semesters in a classroom and talk to professors and peers with aspirations for more, it should come as no surprise that those who don't even step foot on a campus fare even worse.

New studies, by experts at Ivy League Institutions like  Columbia, Princeton, Harvard, show a huge pool of poorly educated black men are becoming  more disconnected from the mainstream society, and to a far greater degree than white or Hispanic men.

To be more precise the major study concluded:

* The share of young black men without jobs has climbed relentlessly, with only a slight pause during the economic peak of the late 1990's. In 2000, 65 percent of black male high school dropouts in their 20's were jobless - that is, unable to find work, not seeking it or incarcerated. By 2004, the share had grown to 72 percent, compared with 34 percent of white and 19 percent of Hispanic dropouts. Even when high school graduates were included, half of black men in their 20's were jobless in 2004, up from 46 percent in 2000.

* Incarceration rates climbed in the 1990's and reached historic highs in the past few years. In 1995, 16 percent of black men in their 20's who did not attend college were in jail or prison; by 2004, 21 percent were incarcerated. By their mid-30's, 6 in 10 black men who had dropped out of school had spent time in prison.

* In the inner cities, more than half of all black men do not finish high school.

All of these probably come as no surprise to those in the African-American community who see these statistics in real-life as young men huddle on the corners or begging on subway trains.  To many, the reaction to such alarming facts is, "now tell me something I don't know."

To be honest, academics and social advocates have been preaching the demise of the black male for decades.  But it's not the extinction that should worry us, it's the marginalization.

We cannot allow an entire section of American society to be, as Ralph Ellison described, "Invisible."  Nor can we treat the problem that way, as well -- Sweeping it under the rug doesn't make it disappear, it only creates a lump in the carpet.

Eventually, someone will trip over it and when we do,it will be a thud heard  and felt throughout society.  A victory on the basketball court takes a team effort.  And in light of the obstacles facing the African-American community,  to win the victory of  society's survival, it's going to take a full court press.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

Tipping the Scale

When looking over the list of those who have died unjustly by the hands of racists during the height of the Civil Rights movement names such as Emmett Till and Medgar Evers definitely come to mind.  Both crimes were senseless and without reason or a residue of logic.  Till's murder was even more horrific because unlike Evers, he had no clue as a young teen from Chicago what dangerous might overshadow him in Jim Crow territory.  He was the purest symbol of an innocent victim.  In hindsight while we will never understand the why he had to die at the hands of ill-meaning adults -- we can certainly comprehend the culture which created their hatred -- after all it was 1954.

In 2005 a family living outside of Tampa, Florida is equating the death of their 14 year old son to the murder of Till.  While that may simply be hyperbole -- the angst of their frustration and sorrow is no less.  Martin Anderson, who by all accounts and all statistical probabilities was heading toward a troubled period, died while in the custody of juvenile guards at a boot camp for boys.  He had already been before a judge twice and one final violation sentenced him to 14 months doing hard disciplinary work and exercise.

Anderson died less than 24 hours after arriving to the camp.  A video tape released by the authorities in Florida showed him being kneed, punched and dragged to the ground by no more than four officers.  The official statement suggested he was becoming unruly and did not respond to command to continue the mandatory laps around the facility.  The medical examiner reported the official cause of death as complications from sickle cell  trait.  However, after an exhumation and review of the body has concluded that initial report was flawed and a different medical examiner now says Anderson could not have died from anything close to a blood disorder but for now has refused to suggest the manhandling by the officers had anything to do with the death.  It's safe to say Anderson's mother believes otherwise.

It is unclear whether anyone will be charged with Anderson's death but obviously a ward of the state dying in the hands of the state deserves some justice.  But, from the latest disturbing news on the fairness of justice in Florida it is hard to say if that is what will happen in this case.

A coalition of lawyers' groups representing minorities and women are calling for Broward County judges to undergo sensitivity training after it was concluded they lack the empathy desired to be fair and impartial with black and Hispanic defendants.

At a meeting with  Broward Chief Judge Dale Ross representatives cited  one case in which Circuit Judge Lawrence Korda insisted that a battered wife seeking a restraining order speak in English instead of her native Spanish and even denied her the right to have a translator present.

This was just a host of incidents in which judges clearly showed if not bias, illustrated they have no patience for defendant who cannot speak the language.

Chief Judge Ross has indicated he will take the groups concerns under consideration and will even ask Florida's legislature to fund the classes.

It seems odd that those who are placed in positions to judge people on the content of the evidence and not the color of their skin or ethnicity would need to undergo special classes for them to recognize everyone is equal under tha law.

Well just have to wait and see if the training makes a difference and probably have even more patience to find out if elected politicians even believe funding such an endeavor is worth the tax payers dollars.

But while that debate rages on the Anderson family waits, as well.  They're less concerned with whether black and brown defendants get justice in Florida's courts .  They just hope someone ends up before a judge for the black and blue bruises left on their son's body.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

We Wear The Mask -- Literally

Many students of African-American literature base the premise  of influence ofnthe genre on the first  written forum utilized by newly freed and soon to be freed slaves, which somehow learned not only how to read but write.  The slave narrative was much more than a detailed transcription of the peculiar experience of the slave institution.  It was in essence a method by which slaves wanted to tell -- or better yet, scream to the world they were living creatures who lived and breathed and grieved and had sorrow.  It was their experiment in humanity.

It was this need to express humanity, which lead to the further development of African-American literature.  Most important of these was the vehicle of poetry.  One of the most profound poets of this new age forum was Paul Lawrence Dunbar.  In many of his poems, Dunbar tried to capture the struggle of newly freed slaves and the growing tension of being African and American at the same time.

His most provocative poem was "We Wear the Mask."  In it's verses, Dunbar illustrated the conflict of integrating into a society, which by all accounts didn't wish Blacks to be apart.  He ends by saying:

We smile, but, O great Christ, our cries
    To thee from tortured souls arise.
    We sing, but oh the clay is vile
    Beneath our feet, and long the mile;
    But let the world dream otherwise,
            We wear the mask!

The torture of wearing the mask continues to resonate today.  The mask gives African-Americans the ability to travel the roads of mainstream America, while holding tight to their roots.

In a strange new twist of that sorrowful fate, a new reality show, "Black.White" has tried to turn that philosophy on its head by allowing not only a family of African-Americans but a White family as well to literally put on a mask.

Simply, for a few hours the Black family puts on Hollywood make-up to become white and the White family transforms into a black . 

It is the producers' of reality televisions way of hitting the issues of race full on with a semi truck.  However, what this show does is reduce race relations into entertainment and to those who deal with the struggles of equality every day -- race relations is no laughing matter.

The major problem with "Black.White" is it seems to suggest a walk in someone else's shoes -- albeit for a couple of hours -- will make someone understand the woes of another.  It misleads the public in its misnomer that race is something purely based upon skin color.

The injustices of race -- and the perspectives one has because of their race are built not through the commonality of pigmentation -- it is about life experiences and institutional pigeon-holds that date back long before most of us were born.

It is humorous to watch the black father, Brian, get so peeved at the fact no one seems to recognize the racism of a vanilla coke.  On the other-hand we seem to get annoyed that the White father, Bruno has reduced racism to the least common denominator of being called a "nigger."

Being an African-American, I know racial issues are much more complicated than racist slurs and not always as easily indicated as a white woman refusing to look me in the eye.

The bottom line is "Black.White" does an injustice to those who truly wish society can move beyond race and see each individual for the content of their character.

Richard Wright, once wrote of his book, "Black Boy" that he was totally disappointed in its effect.  It was, as he put it, a novel a banker's daughter could feel comfortable reading.  In other-words, to truly have a sincere, honest, advancing conversation about race-- it should not be a discussion of comfort.  We should squirm in our seats and feel a lump in our chests because race and racism are not sugar coated pills to be taken with a glass of water.

Unfortunately, the only thing about "Black.White" that makes us squirm, is the fact it is on for an entire hour.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back for a new installment.

Still Separate... But Unequal?

In the list of deaths we'll mark this week... Dana Reeve, Kirby Puckett, Gordon Parks we will probably skim past the passing of Anne Braden.  Braden was a white woman who in the 1950s recognized the importance of home ownership and particularly the goal of African-Americans to own a home -- and did something about it.

In 1954, Braden and her husband, Carl, bought a home in southwestern Jefferson County for a black World War II veteran and his family. The black family was spurned when attempting to purchase the home. The Bradens used the family's money to purchase the house, then deeded it over to them.   A few weeks later, the house was bombed, but no one was injured.

The efforts of Anne Braden probably won't be recorded in the greater good of the civil rights movement.  It seems to fall short of the great feats of the March on Selma, the March on Washington or the Montgomery Bus Boycott.  Yet, her belief in the idea of once disenfranchised minorities having a piece of the "American Dream"  cannot be questioned and should be commended.  In her mind, living separately was in no means living equally.

Which is why later this Spring, some will mark the weeks the Freedom Riders spent traveling the South to desegregate restaurants, lunch counters and all other public venues such as bathrooms.

It was on the night of May 4, 1961 that a group of young college students decided enough inequality was enough.  The first Freedom Riders were members of the Nashville Student Group, a local group of students who had successfully desegregated the lunch counters and movie theaters in that city. Emboldened by their victory, the Freedom Riders decided to introduce their strategies of non-violence throughout the South in order to directly challenge the region’s Jim Crow laws.

Forty-five years later, we eat, sleep and drink in the same space and most of us don't give a second or even first thought about the integrated culture we now socialize in.

So how do we explain a small diner in Georgia.  These days, blacks are welcome to sit wherever they want at the Carterville, Georgia 4 Way Lunch. But  many older African Americans  still shy away the front section -- a section four decades ago was reserved only for "Whites Only."

In an Associated Press article about the diner, The older blacks at the 4 Way were described as  admirers of the civil rights movement, but most still prefer eating in the former Jim Crow section.

The article said, quote "They don't go up front, they say, because they simply feel more comfortable in the back. They mention that blacks have been sitting on those three stools as long as anyone can remember, trading gossip and cutting up."

Cutting up is exactly what some said of the new members of the Oscar Fraternity.  Three 6 Mafia took home the  Academy Award for "Best Original Song" and has been the tradition they performed -- in pure Southern flava -- gold teeth and all.

Some suggested it was an embarrassment -- but I have to disagree.  On Sunday they became not just insider hip-hop-crunk artists -- they became an aspiration and inspiration to those who dream.  Jon Stewart who hosted the Oscars quipped, "Why is Three 6 Mafia the most excited to be here?"

While he was probably expecting his comment to be taken humorously -- it would be foolish to not see the seriousness of the truth behind the smirk -- those artists were truly amazed at their feat -- just as Hattie McDaniels probably was when she won Best Supporting Actress in the 1930s for her role as Mammie in "Gone With the Wind."

The one thing Three 6 Mafia and those Blacks who sit in the back of the Georgia diner have in common is they aren't trying to be anything but true to themselves --  that is what we all should try and do -- and how can anyone be mad at that? 

NOTE: Coming this week: SPECIAL EDITION: Black. White: The Reality Show

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each week.  Feel free to leave a comment and check back next week for a new installment.

The Cost of the Covenant

It has been more than 40 years since the March on Washington and what could be described as the "height" of the Civil Rights movement.  Soon after Martin L. King, Jr. described his "dream," Congress passed the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 and  the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  After some 400 years of slavery and nearly 100 years under Jim Crow, America was finally on its way to practicing the true democracy its founding fathers described -- particularly as illuminated in Thomas Jefferson's words, which said, "all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. Chief among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

African-Americans, who were discarded when those word were first written, suddenly were now legally able to reclaim the rights the Emancipation Proclamation and the era of Reconstruction could not provide.  When Manny Marable, the prominent African-American Historian professor at Columbia University was asked to describe the state of Black America 40 years since that march on Washington he said, "it is the best of times and the worst of times, at the same time."

That description best illustrates the tale of two classes of one race.  Since the march on Washington there are more Black millionaires and white collar executives -- minorities and women now are CEOs of 15-percent of the Fortune 100 companies -- chief among these are Ken Chenault at American Express and Dick Parsons at Time Warner.  More blacks are attending college and going on to enter fields once seen as "white only."  The Black Middle Class is the post-success story of the Civil Rights era.

Yet, those signs of progress cannot overshadow the 10% unemployment in the black community, the economic divide in salary, home ownership and wealth, as well as the deteriorating environment of urban schools where in places like New York City inner city students receive about $2000 less than their suburban counterparts.

The best of times and the worst of times indeed.

For those who dwell in the best of times for the black community, it is incumbent upon them to ensure the rising tide lifts all boats.  For the seventh time,  Tavis Smiley, a PBS talk-show host, tried to spotlight the growing gap, which hinders so many African-Americans at his annual "State of Black America" seminar.

This year the all-day discussion was held in Houston, Texas and was -- as all of them have been -- a sold out affair.  While some see this as a sign of positive effort on the side of the African-American community -- it seems to be an exercise in preaching to the choir.

This year's seminar focused on a newly created "Covenant with Black America" in which the detailed 10 issues  for a better Black community.  However, those who probably needed to hear the insight of people like Cornell West the most were the victims of the very economic divide those who attended the event talked about for eight hours.

It is hard for me to contemplate why it costs $20 per person to attend this event.  Especially when it was hosted by at least one person and attended by others who could without a doubt afford to rent any facility they wanted or use their network of contacts to persuade the venue to be organized through philanthropy.  Thereby opening the venue to those who probably need a covenant the most.

According the the U.S. Census Bureau ten percent of the nations poor live in Texas.  In Houston some 15 percent of people live in poverty and the median income is just over $35,000.  Surely there could've been space for some cheap or charity seats for these disenfranchised residents.

For the poor single mother who works 60 hours a week to place food on the table for her child to eat, the choice between buying a few groceries or purchasing a ticket to an event becomes no choice at all.  Even more disturbing to this author is the fact that the "Covenant with Black America" has actually been published into a 270-plus page book and made available via amazon.com for $12.00 --plus shipping and handling.

While the increasingly expanding black middle class can afford this book and pay with a simple credit card, the availability for those disenfranchised members of the black community the access is increasingly limited.  Not only do those who are living in the worst of times have difficulty finding the $12 to spare but where do they find a computer or even a credit card to purchase the book if they had the money?

Some may see this argument as being too cynical, but it clearly illustrates the bottom-line question:  who is the covenant for?  Surely it can't be for all of Black America because all of Black America don't have access to it or even heard of its existence.

When you're fighting for survival -- luxuries such as caring about the greater society becomes a burden of those  with the free time and income to ponder such solutions.

Even the Covenant itself seems a bit classist.  For those who aren't familiar with the ten covenants ,there are a few which seem to have been created in a vacuum.  For example, the first covenant suggest the right to "secure the right to health care and well-being."  Certainly everyone has the right to health care -- the problem is some 30 million Americans -- not just blacks-- go through the day without it because they can't afford it nor does the low-wage job they work provide it for them.   

The second covenant focuses on "establishing a public education system in which all our children achieve at a high level."  This should be the goal of all Americans, but yet we cannot look to the federal government to improve our schools with more funding when we fail to hold our local districts to the fire by hiring inadequate administrators and protecting unqualified and worse uncertified teachers.

The sixth covenant says Black America must claim our democracy -- but how can Black America re-claim something it fails to participate in.  Black voter turnout in the last two presidential elections was still disproportionately low and the rate of black registration lags behind the national average.  Black America must participate in the process if it is going to demand something from its politicians.

The greater problem with each of these is they seem to broad to wrap any size arms around.  Everyone want to have health care, good schools and an active electorate -- these are black people's issues these are American ones. 

But the devil is in the details and perhaps somewhere in those valuable pages of the "Covenant" there are clear solutions to these issues.  It is a commendable act for Smiley and his host of panelist to take time out of their lives to organize such a program.  Without question, there are tremendous issues, which Black America must face and face soon.  But while we use energy to fight for former felons voting rights, we ignore the fact the next generation of black voters are sitting on the sidelines -- clueless to the impact their pull of the lever might provide.

The covenant Tavis moderated through this week may be a useful tool for the continued progress of Black America; however, I'm just not sure if the progress being focused on will make those living the best of times better  at the expense of the worst-- just try to  live.

If the covenant doesn't assist in making all of Black America better -- the cost in the long term may be too great for any of us to pay.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check

Leadership Roulette

Quick can you name the leader of the African-American community?  This week the Associated Press tried to get a group of African-Americans to do just that and the list may surprise you -- or maybe not.

Jesse Jackson with 15 percent of the vote and Condoleezza Rice  with 11 percent got the most support in the AP- AOL Black Voices survey.  The poll asked people to name the nation's "most important black leader,"   Following Jackson and Rice on the list were former Secretary of State  Colin Powell and Illinois freshman Senator Barack Obama with eight and six percent respectively.

These answers might not be as surprising simply because those four black faces were the most identifiable to the majority of the American people. 

The survey went further by asking whether it was even appropriate to even ask the question.  Many African Americans  sided by questioning whether any one person can wear the leadership mantle for such a large and diverse group of people.

Nearly a one-third of those surveyed declined to volunteer a name.

Rounding out the list were Nation of Islam minister Louis Farrakhan who got 4 percent and talk show host Oprah Winfrey who received 3 percent.

A follow-up question on the survey asked whether those polled thought the present black leadership was actually effective.  Less than one in five of those polled, 18 percent, said the current black leadership is doing a "very effective" job  while half described African American leadership as "somewhat effective."

And it seems to be that 50-percent which may have non-traditional leaders and the Republican party grinning from ear to ear.  Recently, one political season was titled the year of the woman.  This year may end up being the year of the black politician and particularly the black Republican politician.

The Washington Post's George Will made this point in his column this past week.    Will accurately identified this year's  political season cold produce two additional black U.S. Senators and two black governors.

On the senate front  Maryland's Michael Steel -- the current lieutenant governor is a serious contender and in Michigan, Keith Butler is making headway, as well.

Kapitol Hill pointed out last Summer the football legend Lynn Swann would run for governor of Pennsylvania and the other black Republican looking to live in his state's governor's mansion is  Ohio's Ken Blackwell, the Buckeye State's current secretary of state.

During the 2004 elections President Bush's political machine made a point to slice into the overwhelming support blacks have given to the Democratic Party.  He ended up with 11-percent of the black vote a significant jump from the just below eight percent he won in 2000.

This increase in black politicians and the increase in Bush's vote tally doesn't necessarily mean blacks are becoming more politically conservative; however, it could mean the GOP has been able to culture a message of social conservatism -- which most African-American seem to sway -- especially with topics like gay marriage and other hot button issues.

But the fact a majority of African-Americans have lost confidence or focus in who speaks for them also is playing a role.  The Black community has never been a monolithic group -- it is still divided over issues like school vouchers and welfare reform.  Nevertheless,  it was clear in the 1960s Martin L.King, Jr carried overwhelming support.  In a similar poll take then more than 60-percent of African-American's identified him as the most significant black leader.

It is safe to say that just because a politician happens to be black doesn't necessarily mean they will look out for the interest of black people and that will be the challenge the neo-black conservative candidates will have to overcome.

If they come off as too conservative on issues like the War in Iraq and how to assist the disenfranchised there could be a backlash.  If they seemingly side with the black community on more liberal platforms such as affirmative action they're declaration of being Republicans could seem disingenuous and black voters may see them as trying to cater to them just for a votes sake.

The solution for not only these potential black leaders but those who still are worthy to make the list is to be honest and care about people and their problems.  If they can do this the gamble won't seem as risky and the reward might be more beneficial.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.   Please feel free to leave a comment and don't for get to check back next week for a new installment.

Drum Major for Freedom of Speech

If anyone thought the protests over cartoons depicting the Muslim Prophet Muhammad as a terrorists would dwindle after a few days, the continued often violent demonstrations this week should put an end to that hopeful optimism.

Thousands of Muslim protesters have continued to march in the streets shouting violent threats to Western nations, which have either supported the printing or gone as far as printing them themselves.  The initial published cartoons were distributed in a Danish newspaper to provoke at the very least debate over the extremism, which has spread throughout the Arab world.  It's doubtful the editors of the paper believed the furor would grow or would to date, 11 people lose their lives because of their decision.  In fact the publisher of the Danish newspaper has since apologized for his editors' actions.

But that apology seems to be a bit too late.  In fact, many newspapers across Europe and at least one in the United States has republished them in what those editors have called a pillar to the rights of  freedom of speech.  Those who have continued to fuel these hostile flames say they are doing so to show support for their Danish counterparts, taking a stand for civilized society to disagree and debate nonviolently and more importantly for people to have the right to say whatever they want despite the fact it might offend someone else.

Yet, it is hard to take these arguments without a grain of salt.  We should not forget this is an age when the media is as influenced by market demand as any other business.  The higher the number of papers publishers sell the higher their advertising prices.  It seems odd that these newspapers in the name of social justice are making their readers pay to participate in such a noble goal.

While most of the American networks and cable outlets have decided not to broadcast the cartoons (the most offensive one shows the Prophet's turban in the shape of a bomb with a fuse), that fact hasn't prevented the 24-hour monsters from discussing the issue hour after hour after hour.

Often, most critics of the demonstrations dismiss any thought of offensiveness and suggest civilized people are intelligent enough to understand freedom of speech dictates one must take being offended as a symptom of free societies.  One writer, Andrew Sullivan of Time magazine, this week wrote a commentary this week outlining that fact in "Your Taboo, Not Mine."

However, it is unfortunate this logic doesn't extend to the critics own taboos.  The other story, which cable news outlets can't seem to let go is the three minutes of the six hour funeral of Coretta Scott King.  At her funeral Reverend Joseph Lowery and President Jimmy Carter made comments some observers thought were political and inappropriate because President Bush happened to have been there.

Both Lowery and Carter superficially spoke to current issues such as the War in Iraq, NSA eavesdropping and the failure of the government during Katrina.  Many conservative pundits found such remarks inappropriate at the least and offensive at the most and have used any occasion and any two minutes on the topic to say so.

Does anyone else smell  hypocrisy in these two incidents.  On one hand it is okay to offend nearly a third of the world's population, but it is taboo and offensive to discuss civil rights issues at the funeral of a civil rights icon merely because the President of the United States decides to attend?

If President Bush didn't believe those types of topics would come up all he had to do was get a tape of the Rosa  Parks funeral and just listen to the first twenty minutes.  It took four hours before any hint of politics stood at the podium last week.

It should be noted that there were four U.S. Presidents at Coretta Scott King's funeral and not one attended the funeral of her husband whose mantle of racial injustice she picked up following Martin's assassination.

On one famous occasion, Martin Luther King,Jr. gave a sermon in which he detailed what he would want them to say at his funeral. He told the crowd he didn't want them to shower his legacy with accolades and fond memories of how great he was and the prizes and fame he had won. 

In fact, his request was far from that.  He said,

"Tell them not to mention that I have a Nobel Peace Prize—that isn’t important. Tell them not to mention that I have three or four hundred other awards—that’s not important. Tell them not to mention where I went to school. (Yes)

I'd like somebody to mention that day that Martin Luther King, Jr., tried to give his life serving others. (Yes)

I'd like for somebody to say that day that Martin Luther King, Jr., tried to love somebody.

I want you to say that day that I tried to be right on the war question. (Amen)

I want you to be able to say that day that I did try to feed the hungry. (Yes)

And I want you to be able to say that day that I did try in my life to clothe those who were naked. (Yes)

I want you to say on that day that I did try in my life to visit those who were in prison. (Lord)

I want you to say that I tried to love and serve humanity. (Yes)

Yes, if you want to say that I was a drum major, say that I was a drum major for justice. (Amen) Say that I was a drum major for peace. (Yes) I was a drum major for righteousness."

Why shouldn't the funeral of his wife be any different?  President Clinton suggested Coretta Scott King was more than a symbol.  She was a woman who grieved, laughed, had pain and sorrow and joy.  But she was also a woman who fought against injustice and inequality and against oppression and like her husband became a drum major for justice and peace and righteousness.

If America is as free as those who defend the right to publish offensive cartoons believe it to be, surely there is room enough for one to be free to speak out against what they see as wrongs and ills no matter who's in the audience and they not be offended by such remarks. 

It seems what we need now is a drum major for the freedom of  all speech -- not just the words and images we agree we happened to agree with or believe would only offend those we could careless about in the first place.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

NOTE: Visit our new partner Kappas Against AIDS: www.kapitolhill.typepad.com/kappasagainstaids

SPECIAL EDITION: Signs & Symbols

Tensions throughout the Muslim world and beyond are growing to a feverish pitch.  Dozens of people have been hurt and at least five -- including a teenager in Somalia has been killed during protests across the Middle-East and countries with high levels of Muslim populations.   Thousands of protesters in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Thailand,  Australia,  Turkey, India, New Zealand and a number of countries in Europe are marching in the streets in anger of cartoons printed in a number of newspapers depicting the Prophet Muhammad wearing a bomb and other offensive ways.

The cartoons were first printed in a Danish newspaper months ago; however, the furor grew like wildfire when newspapers across the world reprinted them in some form of protest of freedom of speech.  Some are criticizing the protesters because they have increased their vocal protests to violence -- burning flags, storming embassies and fighting those who stand in their way.

These demonstrators are being called hypocritical because in their critics opinion, they are showing more angst at a cartoon than the real life image of kidnapped journalists weeping in front of cameras for their lives.

On the surface this argument has merit.  Why are Muslims more upset over an editorial image than real life terrorism?  To answer that question, one has to assume Muslims aren't.  Immediately after the terrorists attacks in Jordan last year, thousands of Muslims took to the streets shouting, "death to the terrorists!"  I suppose images like these don't stick in our minds as easily and saying Muslims are a symbol of anger is more believable.

Sometimes it seems the symbol means more than the substance.

This is probably why the news of nine southern churches being burned to the ground in Alabama is causing a stir and getting media attention.  Those who are students of the civil rights movement will recall the burning of  black churches as a common tool of intimidation used by the Klu Klux Klan to prevent African-Americans from voting and exercising other constitutional rights.

It is way too early to suggest this latest spat of burnings are racially motivated; however, it should not be ruled out.  The majority of the churches burned are African-American houses of worship.  Yet, a religious professor  was quoted in the Christian Science Monitor saying, " when you burn a church with no people in it, it's not murder its a message." 

A message and a symbol.

But it was up to President Clinton to remind 10,000 mourners  and millions other who hopefully watched some of it at the the funeral of Coretta Scott King, to not diminish this great woman to something less than what she was.  Clinton, one of four U.S. Presidents to attend the funeral, told the audience late in the day, "Let's not forget there is a woman in there.  Not a symbol. She was a person who lived, breathed, grieved, cried and laughed."

Coretta Scott King also was a woman who, despite the ever large shadow of her husband, created her own legacy.  President Bush said during his remarks, " she continued to live the legacy of her husband and in turn built her own."

The legacy she built was founded upon the right to equal justice for women, for gays, for the disenfranchised and the poor.  She was a heroin in the tale of the war on poverty.  Immediately after the death of her husband, she stepped into the spotlight and decided to continue Martin Luther King Jr.'s "Poor People's Campaign."  She returned to the sanitation workers in Memphis before she buried the civil rights leader because she not only supported her husband's fight -- she believed in it.

During the 1980s she marched alongside demonstrators protesting Apartheid in South Africa and used her fame to pressure Ronald Reagan to implement sanctions while moving public opinion to get her husband's birthday recognized as a national holiday.

Coretta Scott King was more than a symbol -- she was a sign of a hope to come and a dream to be realized -- if not now -- then one day.  She was a sign like a rainbow is a sign -- a promise of a brighter day ahead.  We only need to remember the image of a strong widow dressed in black with her faint veil at the funeral of her slain husband comforted her young daughter but more broadly comforting each mourning American during that time of pain to understand that fact.

With the current symbols of offensive caricatures and charred churches making headlines,  we should  pray for for more signs of substance rather than  these symbols of  discontent.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

NOTE: Please visit our new partner, Kappas Against AIDS at www.kapitolhill.typepad.com/kaaids

Deemed Unnecessary?

President Bush is trying to shift the debate on education to a higher plain.  During his State of the Union Address last week, the President highlighted the issue of competitiveness -- or the lack thereof -- between American students and their counterparts in China and India.  In his speech, President Bush argued, American students are falling behind in key subjects are because of that he said, America is falling behind in its fight to stay on top of the job productivity ladder.

In his State of the Union Mister Bush said, "Our greatest advantage in the world has always been our educated, hardworking, ambitious people, and we are going to keep that edge."  To keep that edge, the President announced a new initiative, which would focus on a re-energized math and science course structure.

The President's initiative would place some well needed funding into those courses and create a new program to provide incentives to teachers who wish to teach college-level course in America's high schools.    This  was one of the rare points during the speech that received a bipartisan response of applause and cheers. But as the saying goes, "the devil is in the details."

Today, Congress and the American people got their chance to see those details in the form of the President's 2007 Budget.  The White House delivered the four-volume packet to Capitol Hill today with much fanfare and a few mentions on the network evening news programs.

The overall budget totals $2.77 trillion -- yes, trillion dollars with most of the money going toward "War on Terrorism" in the shape of increases for homeland security and the Department of Defense.

But if the President truly wants to improve America's competitiveness through education, many of the cuts he has suggested for the Department of Education are -- well, indefensible.

This is the second year in a row the President's budget has called for cuts in education.  The 2005 budget cuts sliced up the student loan program and cut some 80,000 students completely from eligibility for Pell Grants for college.

This time his budget calls for a more than 6% cut in educational funding, which amounts to nearly $4 billion dollars.  To be fair, many of the cuts are being called reductions in funding.  However, those who depend on those services will see services reduced or halted because of lack of funding.  The President is calling the programs slated for cuts " inefficient" and are classified as "deemed unnecessary."

The Bush administration has placed 42 educational programs in the deemed unnecessary box and is requesting more money for school vouchers, which no matter what one's position is on their effectiveness, takes money out of the public treasury to fund private educational programs.

One of major targets is the federal vocational program's annual $1.2 billion dollars.  It seems strange that just a year ago, the President was touting vocational programs in high schools and community colleges as a vital source of skilled blue collar workers for Corporate America.

If the Administration was clearly interested in improving the health of America's educational system, there seems to be more pork-pointed programs and initiatives, which could be cut long before education get hit.
Particularly, when new studies show college graduates lack basic skills this country should be funding education program not cutting them.

Besides the vocational cuts, the President also has an eye on the arts, programs to keep schools drug-free
and parent-support resource centers.  It seems expanding students education foundation, keeping drugs out of schools and providing support for parents seeking help with their child's and sometimes their own education are all "deemed unnecessary."

What probably is more disturbing is that at the same time as the budget calls for cuts to educational programs,  there is still a tremendously low level of funding for the 2001 "No Child Left Behind," that nearly every school district in the country has criticized for lack of funding since its inception as well as an outline to make tax-cuts permanent.

If Congress agrees to these cuts in education (as well more than 100 other service programs like Medicare), the country may be feeling the ill effects long after the war in Iraq is over and Osama Bin Laden is dead.  America will be a more militarized, less economically stable and continue to rank near the bottom in cognitive educational skills -- more so for those who can't afford the charter and private educations now considered the safe haven for America's children.

Decades later -- far after these essential education programs are forgotten and the America lags behind  China and India, but also many countries in Europe it may be the American worker that is deemed unnecessary.

COMING UP TOMORROW: SPECIAL EDITION - DEATH OF CORETTA SCOTT KING

Kapitol Hill publishes a commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

Please visit our new partner: Kappas Against AIDS at www.kapitolhill.typepad.com/kaaids

Branches of History

In case you didn't know, President George W. Bush has declared February Black History Month. It might be strange to think the President of the United States has to issue a national proclamation for an event, which has taken place for 80 years.

However, it has become a political tradition for the President no matter who he is to recognize the month and in a pre-arranged speech or distributed text talk about the significance of  African-Americans and their contribution to American society.

Last week, President Bush issued his annual text saying, " the accomplishments of African Americans in every aspect of our society continue to encourage people to reach as far as their vision and dreams may take them."

It is quite true the American experience through the eyes of African-Americans has come to symbolize the fall and rise of a people under dire circumstances.  Since the days of "Negro History Week" created in 1926 by Dr. Carter G. Woodson, the humanity and accomplishments of African-Americans have grown and increasingly become a part of the greater society's history.  Thanks to the efforts of the pioneers who researched and published the deeds of great African-Americans, school children across cultural and racial lines now can learn about the significant contributions people of color have made to the advancement of this country.

Unfortuantely, the history of African-Americans seems to stop at the water's edge quite often and a few can only faintly extend their reach to a generic region called West Africa.  The direct ancestory links to the homeland has been severed by the institution of slavery and most of the 35 million or so blacks living in America are a race without a long enough history.  It is as if 450 years ago they magically appeared.

But that may no longer be the case. Science -- particularly genetic research -- has advanced tremendously and the use of DNA samples is making it easier for  many people to trace their ancestry,

This very topic will be explored during Black History Month in a new PBS special "African-American Lives."
In this documentary,  produced by Harvard's Henry Louis Gates,  scientists trace the history of famous African-Americans such as Oprah Winfrey and Quincy Jones and many others.

What they found out is quite shocking.  For example, Winfrey's genetic roots extend back to an ancient rain forest tribe in Liberia.  While Quincy Jones' family tree began in Cameroon with a tribe known for its tribal music -- who would've guess that one?

One of the most intriguing findings comes from the cross genetic conclusions discussed in the series.  Gates' genes -- or at least 50 percent of them can be found in Europe.  Another explored lineage stretches into East Asia.

Some have criticized the program as an exercise in futility -- particularly for the majority of African-Americans. Most blacks have neither the time nor the resources to be able to afford such a unique search of their biological history.  Most African-Americans, some cynics suggest, are barely surviving in the present.

Despite that,  the process does shed light on the fact the more than the 3 billion people who live on the earth are more similar than different.

Perhaps that is what we should really focus on this Black History Month.  It is great to highlight the inventions  blacks created and the accomplishments many black intellectuals have contributed.  It is especially important to spotlight those things which continue to add to the evidence of the humanity African-Americans hold  -- particularly when that humanity has been stripped through centuries of miseducation.

Yet, it might be a better exercise  to prove through discovery and discussion  that through science, arts and religion and all else African-American history is just not for black folk but for everyone... because we are all the same -- genetically speaking.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

A Once Bitter Chocolate City

In a few months the Congressional Mid-Term election campaign season will be in full bloom.   U.S.  Representatives will go back to their home districts to listen to their constituents and defend their  legislative records against ambitious  opponents.  The sad fact of the matter is  most of those contenders don't have any shot at defeating the incumbents.  The deck has been stacked against them through rewriting district boundaries, and creating massive fund raising war chests to flood the radio and television waves with political ads.  Many candidates will campaign on a more individual basis by holding town hall meetings and setting political issue platforms developed for citizens, who will cast the ultimate vote, positive intake.

Republican candidates will tout the fact they are for smaller government and concerned about the federal deficit, which will increase by some $400 billion dollars this year.  Never-mind,  the government has grown nearly three times as much during the Bush administration and who should care that special earmarks for fiscal pet projects have grown from about 1300 in 1994 to nearly 14,000  -- costing about  $27 billion dollars last year.

Democratic candidates will shout to the rafters about the need for more oversight of  the president's policies and  they will call for troops to withdraw from Iraq -- immediate or gradual -- but withdrawal none the less.  I suppose they will be mute on why they continue to support the funding of a war they seem to no longer have faith in.

There is an old saying that  a political promise is always given with the ability to forget it was even given.  Remember the "no new taxes" promise by George H.W. Bush?  Political observers dismiss these high-energy speeches and promises as simply pandering.  They are, in a sense expected to be made by politicians.  A politician's platform always comes with a trap door.

This pandering goes beyond promises -- politicians use code words and queues all the time to re-energize their base and motivate their campaign volunteers to get the vote out.  Words like "constitutionally protected privacy" and "quotas" and "activist judges" are scattered throughout political campaigns and no one blinks an eye or very rarely does this pandering to an audience cause a national outcry.  One of the most subtle pandering schemes occurred in the 1980s when Ronald Reagan talked about "state's rights" in Money, Mississippi.

So, it seemed quite odd when there was immediate outcry when a politician pandered to his audience recently.  The mayor of New Orleans, Ray Nagin, during a Martin L. King Day rally turned into a prophet and proclaimed that God had ordained a rebuilt New Orleans  will "be a Chocolate City."  The criticism flooded the streets.  Many of the whites who had evacuated New Orleans proper long before Katrina were outraged and suggested the mayor was making them and those who wanted to return feel unwelcome.  Blacks took his words with a grain of salt -- especially since it seemed the mayor revitalization plan didn't include them and his pre-hurricane allegiance seemed out in the suburbs.

The one thing those who were outraged by the comment failed to remember was New Orleans has been a "Chocolate City" since the late 1970s.  In fact, since the early 1970s the city has become increasingly black.  It has grown from nearly half  in the late 60s to 70 percent in the last thirty years.

While some who believe the new New Orleans will be less black welcomed the comment.   But while we debate whether the comment was proper or not it should not be lost that the pre-Katrina "Chocolate City"  had a bitter taste -- particularly for African-Americans.

According to the Census Bureau, the poverty rate was 23%  -- more than double the national average. More alarming, 35 percent of the city's black population is considered poor -- compared to just over 11-percent for whites.  That means more than a third of New Orleans black households have an income of less than $20,000.

Unemployment in New Orleans is no better Black unemployment rates are more than double the national average and if you break it down by gender New Orleans' black males are unemployed at over three times the rate of white males.

The future for New Orleans' children seemed even bleaker -- students in the city's public schools rank near the bottom on the national scale.

Crime -- particularly violent crimes threatened the city's citizens with gangs and drug dealers spreading further out of their corners.  The FBI reported New Orleans had some 4,000 more violent crimes reported than cities such as Forth Worth, with  equal or more residents in 2004.

The next day, Nagin apologized for his "Chocolate City" comment and suggested he was merely trying to calm fears about a so called "whitewash" of a rebuilt city and wanted only to create unity among the residents. 

For such an intelligent and savvy politician to make a comment so polarizing seems beyond logic.  If he wanted to truly calm concerns and  create unity there were definitely multiple other ways he could have made his point more clear.

However, to suggest it was as absurd as any other comment made by a vote-hounding politician is even equally absurd.  What isn't though,  is the fact that a new New Orleans must be better than the old one -- whether it's Chocolate or Vanilla is not the real issue -- building a city that can sustain its population with good jobs and makes it's residents more secure with lower crime incidents  should be the true concern -- and  that my readers, is not pandering, is it?

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary on Sundays.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for the next installment.

King For A Day

On Monday, many communities around the country will pause for a few hours and honor the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  The life of the good Doctor was cut down on April 4th, 1968 far too soon.  If Dr. King had lived he would be 77 years old.

Many race observers will use the day to discuss and debate the state of Black America.  They will question whether  Black America would be better off if Dr. King was able to carry out his mission.  His primary motivation before he was slain was a focus on economic injustice and particularly the poor.  His Poor People's Campaign was not fully supported by his staff and many of them saw a detour to Memphis and the sanitation workers strike as even more of a distraction.  If King had listened to them, he might have lived.  But he saw things quite differently.  He saw the fight for an equal wage as a direct connection to poverty.

That notion is even more apparent today.  The working class in America struggles with no health-care and 33 million working Americans still wallow below the poverty line.  To King, the circumstances of those who tried to live out the American Dream through work but could not pull themselves up was deplorable.

The question of are Black Americans better off is clearly a resounding yes.  But as Columbia University Professor Manny Marable once said, "The state of Black America is the tale of two cities.  It is the best of times and the worst of times, at the same time."

It is interesting to note as President Bush continues to voice concern for Katrina's victims and tout his support for the rebuilding of New Orleans that he supports Congressional policies to cut vital funding from key programs that have been useful in pulling millions out of poverty.

To be sure, President Bush will mark the King Holiday in his own way and more than likely give a speech on unity and racial relations.  A topic, the President has not held near the top of his list -- even at the height of the Katrina tragedy.  But we can be certain, it was a topic when he recently met with a group of  Black officials at The White House.

Surprisingly,  the NAACP's new CEO Bruce Gordon was on the invitee list.  It has been well reported Mister Bush and the nation's oldest civil rights group have had a frosty at best relationship.  The President has not spoken at the organization's national convention in five years and has publicly rebuked their criticism of him.

The President and the Republican Party have made it known they would love to slice off a significant percentage of the black vote from the Democratic Party.  The GOP is aggressively supporting the Lt. Governor in Maryland and pushing the black Secretary of State in Ohio to run for office and may be counting their blessings with the introduction of football legend Lynn Swann to the Governor's race in Pennsylvania.  Whether these high profile campaigns will convince Black Americans that there is a spot for them in the overall Republican agenda is an open question and full of cynicism.

Many leaders who attended the meeting at the White House share that same skepticism about their pow wow, as well. Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, Mel Watts summed up the sincerity of the meeting by saying, "I don't know if it's real or not. I do think it's desirable. I don't know if it's sincere. I haven't seen anything in their policies that suggest that it is anything but a public relations move. "

But Black America -- particularly its black political officials -- shouldn't think they're not in need of some positive p.r. themselves.

Former D.C. Mayor, Marion Barry continues to prove to the world Blacks aren't immune from bad press, either.
Barry has tested positive for cocaine use and may be heading back to jail for parole violations.  He is on parole for the infamous crack video that became all to familiar to everyone.  The drug test was ordered after he plead guilty to a minor tax violation.

He is set to be sentenced on February 8th and could get nearly two years behind bars.

But what may be more embarrassing isn't the fact Barry continues to make the wrong decisions and get in trouble for it.  The amazing thing seems to be there is actually a contingency of  black voters in the District of Columbia who support him no matter what.

Barry currently serves as a city councilman for DC's 8th ward, which is predominately Black and disproportionately lower-middle class.  Ironically though, maybe the love this community has for Barry may be waning.

Last week he was robbed by a group of young boys who he drafted to help him carry some groceries to his home.  After the robbery, Barry said he was disappointed in the incident because he assumed people there in the 8th Ward saw him as a hero.

Whether that assumption is true has yet to be determined -- but obviously at least four or five young men don't agree his assessment.

I don't know what Barry will be doing to commemorate the life of Dr. King.  But, it maybe a sure bet he'll find an audience for his speech.  I'm just not sure if that is a good thing or a bad one.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

No Place Like Home

One of my favorite movies is about the Tuskegee Airmen.  At one point in the movie the U.S. military was considering shutting the program down for what it believed was a failure of the airmen to realize their ability.  The problem with that assessment was the military did not give them a chance to even have the opportunity to try.  At the deciding hearing the colonel in charge of the airmen said there are two universal questions each African-American soldier has to ask his or herself is this: "How do I feel about my country? and How does my country feel about me?"

That question was relevant in the 1940s and I suppose it is still important today.  Racial issues continue to haunt American society despite the great advances we've made. It is important, particularly as black and white soldiers now are paying the ultimate sacrifice  every single day in Iraq to bring democracy to that country, to  remember America's experiment in democracy only truly began sometime around 1970 and if we wish to expand the injustices to gender it didn't evolve until much later.

During the height of the struggle for civil rights those who would rather walk barefoot on hot coals than sit next to a black person used to scream, "Go Back To Africa!'   

Well, now it seems some 50 years later that opportunity has presented itself.  Admittedly not in the manner that so many ignorant white segregationist would imagine.

The country of Ghana has created a new initiative to increase it's innovation and economic sustainability by actually granting citizenship to any people of African origin.  The program will initially begin with loosened visa rules, which enable any person within the African Diaspora to travel to Ghana and freely come and go as they please.  The government believes the campaign will assist it in re-energizing its economy and help rebuild the country.

The problem with the idea is that most Ghanaians don't see African-Americans as their distant relative but actually foreigners and probably ironically Americans.  In fact most Ghanaians refer to Black Americans as "obruni" which means White People.

To challenge that thinking Ghana has also started an internal campaign to educate its citizens about African-Americans and their connection to Africa.  Ghana's tourism minister explained the marketing campaign
by saying, "We're using mass media to teach people about the Africans when they left here and ... went to the Diaspora. And then in teaching them, we're making them realize... the blood ties. "

Those  ties he speaks of stretches from the sands of Ghana's beaches to the rocky shores of America's coastal ports with a blood trail on the ocean floor.  It is believed more than 10 million Africans died en-route to America's slave plantations during the trip within the Middle Passage.

The thought of having dual citizenship -- especially in an ancient homeland is a nice thought and the fact of being a citizen of Ghana would actually help rebuild a nation forefathers once called home is warming.  I suppose it's like the old saying goes, you can go home, again.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment.  Don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

Uncle Sam Wants More

Our nation's political leaders are set to begin their trek back to Washington this week, after spending a few days in their home districts and states.  Many Congressmen and women spent the recess talking to voters about major issues. and undoubtedly, the debate over troop reductions in Iraq was a major topic.  The issue over whether to reduce the level of troops -- at about 150,000 right now -- or submit an official timetable has been raging in the halls of Capitol Hill and along Pennsylvania Avenue for weeks now.

The President has remained steadfast in his position that announcing a timetable to withdraw U.S. forces would embolden the terrorists and they would simply wait us out before trying to take over the country.  His critics however think that's illogical because the insurgency is a political uprising and not a military one and therefore cannot be overturned through the use of M16 rifles.

But the debate over when to pull out of Iraq probably won't be decided by any political motives.  It will eventually be deemed militarily irresponsible to continue to keep a large portion of soldiers in that country.

With tensions with Iran steadily rising and North Korea and other things -- like natural disasters, which require the assistance of state National Guards on the front burner, officials in The Pentagon are starting to argue about our current troop strengths and whether America can continue to maintain its top military position in the world if  the country is bogged down in one conflict.

America boasts an Army of one-million strong.  However, a deeper look at the numbers shows a staggering problem.  Of the million listed only about 400,000 of them are combat troops -- the rest are support and administrative personnel -- plus only about 150,000 are actually active duty -- the remainder are reservists.

With 150,000 -- mostly reservists on active duty in Iraq -- a glaring problem presents itself. 

Some senior officials at The Pentagon believe the solution is expanding the size of our military force. However, military officials are having a tough go of even meeting current recruitment levels -- the Army is seeing its lowest level of new recruits since 1973 -- does anyone hear the echo of a draft returning?

Don't laugh, especially when the numbers of African-Americans joining up have reached new lows, as well.  The percentage of Blacks joining the Army fell from 24-percent in 2000 to only 14-percent in 2004.  The African-American soldier has been a secure notion for military recruiters.  Black enlistment has always been more than their total U.S. population -- five years ago it was almost double.

Army officials say they are not alarmed by the downward trend because they say their attention has shifted slightly to targeting Hispanic and Asian-American communities.  The rate of Hispanic enlistment has increased some three percent in the last three years.

One other frightening fact military officials cite is the belief Black youths are less likely to be supportive of the war in Iraq than other ethnic groups.  The Army actually commissioned a report in 2004 which surveyed how various racial groups viewed the armed forces.  The survey concluded that Blacks' positive views declined from 22 percent in 2001 to just 11 percent last November.

No matter how one takes the conclusions of such a survey or even questions the validity of spending money on the report, the loyalty of the Black soldier is clearly evident on the list of those who have died since going to war in March 2003 and should not be used to dampen Blacks patriotism.

Whether the low enlistment numbers overall  or the decrease in African-American recruitment leads to a serious debate on bringing back the draft is still an open question and as they say, time will ultimately tell. 

And while Uncle Sam may be selling military service more aggressively these days  -- it's clear black AND white potential soldiers  alike have decided for multiple reasons -- they aren't buying.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment and remember to check back next week for another installment.

After the Flood Comes Recess Disappointment

If the efforts in south Asia are any indication, it seems the millions of Katrina survivors along the Gulf Coast have a long road of recovery ahead of them.

This Monday marks the one-year anniversary of the great tsunami disaster.  On December 26th 2004, a massive wall of water wiped out villages and killed some 216-thousand people.  Hundreds are still listed as missing and an exact death toll cannot be calculated.  However, what has been totaled is the amount of money tens of countries, including the United States has pledged.  The United Nations says some $13 billion dollars has been promised and according to their estimates about 75 percent of those funds have been secured.

However, according to the government of Sri Lanka -- where 31-thousand people were killed, it has only collected 50 percent of the funds allocated for that country and only $141 million of that money has been spent.

The slow spending seems to be without reason.  Especially when 80 percent of those left homeless by the storm are still living in tents, half-a-million Indonesians are still living off rations and government officials say it will take another year and a half to build homes for some 60-thousand others crammed into temporary military style barracks.

Those facts don't lean in New Orleans' and other towns like Gulport, Mississippi's favor.  Thousands  celebrated their first Christmas in those hurricane-ravaged cities this weekend.  Hundreds spent the day attending Catholic masses -- some traveling as far away as Houston to participate in the services.

While thousands of residents have returned to the area to try and rebuild their lives, it is uncertain how much assistance they'll have from their government on all three levels -- but particularly from the federal government. It was not too long ago President Bush stood in the New Orleans French Quarter and announced he would do everything he could to assist -- including pressure Congress to spend the necessary funding to rebuild.

But what Congress may give in short-term efforts might be lost in long-term reconstruction.

Right before scrambling out of Washington for the holiday recess,  Congress passed  painful budget cuts in order to find fiscal savings in order to spend some $30 million dollars on the reconstruction of  the gulf coast.

Most of the funding will come as tax-breaks and financial incentives for businesses, while other monies will be allocated for community grants -- sort of like the enterprise zones, which have fueled a revitalization of urban areas like Harlem and the south side of Chicago.

But what these residents and millions of others across the country will soon learn is that those who are poor and economic disadvantaged in this country will have a tougher time.

The budget bills which narrowly passed -- by the vote of Vice President Dick Cheney in the Senate -- take aim at the very programs, which not only will give Katrina survivors a stronger crutch; but, also give the lower class a helping hand out of their dire circumstances.

Key reductions include slicing up student loan subsidizes, cuts in medicare and food stamp programs.  The new budget proposals also cut the Pell Grant program -- which also was altered during the last budget changes, which left 81,000 students with no federal non-loan  assistance for college.

It's not surprising a government, which has asked low and middle class military families to sacrifice their sons and daughters while the upper class benefits from tax breaks, would once again seek to put the burden of this county's recovery on those who can least afford it.

With the President suffering low poll numbers (although they've recovered in these past weeks), and Congress' ratings at an all-time low -- for both parties, it might make sense to rethink these tactics.

Martin Luther King, Jr. once said the "The true measure of a man's character is not the decisions he makes in good times, but the choices he makes when times are bad."  For the millions who will have to find a way to survive with less government support and less sympathy from Washington politicians -- the measure of their character will soon be known.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Feel free to leave a comment.  If you would like to support our efforts please support our advertising sponsors or leave a donation in our "Tip Jar."

"Happy Holidays & Happy New Year To All!"

Reading Is Fundamental

In a time not long ago public schools use to sponsor a program called R.I.F. -- Reading Is Fundamental.   For most inner city children this was their first experience with the concept of leisure reading.  Each class would file into a room filled with tables of books.  For 15 minutes or so each child would race around each table looking at rows of new books meant for their age group and intellectual interest.  For young girls, it was their initial venture into Nancy Drew mysteries and for young boys, novels of  adventure were at their finger tips.

It would seem for at least a little while, there was a concerted effort to introduce young American children to reading and comprehension.  The program still lives on with the thanks of corporate sponsors and philanthropic individuals.

Since 1966, the efforts of one motivated teacher has lead to millions of school children sitting in their bedrooms or living rooms and settling down for a relaxing evening with a good book.

However, it seems these efforts have not impacted enough American students.  According to a new study  sponsored by the National Assessment of Adult Literacy program, the level of illiteracy in America is at a terribly high level.

The new federal study concludes one in 20 Americans does not read at a comprehensible level and cannot understand written English.  Approximately 11 million adults in this country cannot read a simple paragraph or sentence.

What is even sadder is the fact the study suggests the level of illiteracy has not improved in the past 11 years.
The report concludes from 1992 to 2003 American adults made no progress in this area and do not have the ability to read bus schedules and more hazardously prescription bottles.

While the fact that 11 million Americans may be alarming what is even more frightening is that 30 million Americans read below basic levels and just 44 percent of Americans are at an intermediate or just above average reading level.

There was some good news in the report if one breaks it down racially -- at least for African-Americans. Black adults made gains on each type of task tested. White adults made no significant changes except when it came to computing numbers, where they got better.  Hispanics showed sharp declines in their ability to handle prose and documents.

Some point to the changing demographics of the country and the rapid influx of immigrants who have come to the country not knowing how to read as one major reason for the flat line in progress.  The sharp declines in the Hispanic community seems to suggest there's a great level of credibility in that logic.

The low reading level has a direct impact on the economic status of  workers.  The report also connected medium salary with literacy levels.  Americans who have a below basic reading level also have a lower income level -- the average is just above $28,000.  For Americans who read at an above average level they take home on average $51,000 a year.

It is hard to imagine the progress America will make if school age children are not being motivated at home because their parents cannot assist them with homework above the 5th grade.  What is even worse is that our schools are pushing students through the system without giving them the basic skills they need to do basic things like understand a menu.

America has become an entertainment nation -- engrossed in cable, television shows, and video games.  It is too bad such stimulation such as a good book has  lost out to these other outlets.  It would seem instead of trying to create new rating systems for programs and worrying about whether another sports halftime show will be tainted by another wardrobe malfunction on live television. It might serve the government better and our future better if  we encouraged the television to simply be turned off and open our minds with a new book -- after all, reading is not only fundamental -- it is also FUN.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment.  If you would like to support the efforts of this blog feel free to click on the "Tip Jar" and make a donation.

Pryor Notice

It would be terribly narrow of us to dismiss the death of Richard Pryor as simply that-- the passing of a famous black comedian.  Pryor was more than a black humorist.  During the peak of his reign on stage he moved the debate on race relations into people's living rooms subtly through laughter.

All one has to really do is listen to the transformation Pryor personally took each time he got on stage and the ride he tried to take each of us on with him.  Unlike his contemporaries -- such as Bill Cosby -- who tried to move the topic of race by making mainstream audiences comfortable, Pryor did it through uncomfortable means.

Some critics dismiss Pryor as a drug-addicted, foul-mouth idiot -- who contributed very little to the greater cause of Black people.  I have to respectfully disagree.

It is beyond doubt Pryor used the words he learned on the streets of Peoria, Illinois and described things he saw in the whore house he grew up in -- but he was cunning enough to turn his pain into our pleasure.  His use of the word "nigger" and  four letter words made his material R-rated; but the lessons he taught in his comedy
were for all audiences.

Pryor transformation from back-alley talent to mainstream star was said to have occurred  in 1980 after he took a trip to Africa.  That trip impacted him so much he refused to use the n-word ever again.  In one of his routines after the trip he recalls after a couple o weeks of the excursion thinking to himself  "I don't see any Niggers."

However, it would be a mistake to believe it was during that time Pryor became a voice for African-Americans.  Long before then, Pryor used his spotlight to say what so many African-Americans during the late 1970s wished they could say to their white bosses and neighbors.

Anyone who wants to see the activist-humorist Pryor in action should go and find a copy of his fourth album "Bicentennial Nigger."  In that routine, Pryor explores the Vietnam War and race relations.  In fact he takes that every issue full on:

"They'll have some nigger two hundred years old in black face.  Stars and stripes on his forehead. Little eyes and lips just jiving... But he's happy. He's happy cause he's been here two hundred years.  He'll say, I'm just so thrilled to be here (yuck, yuck, yuck) Over here in America. I'm so glad you all took me out of my home. I used to live to be a hundred fifty. Now I die of high blood pressure by the time I'm fifty-two (yuck, yuck, yuck)...

..They brought me over here in a boat.  There was four hundred of us come over here.  Three hundred sixty of us died on the way over here... That just thrills me so. (yuck, yuck, yuck)...

...Took my  mama over that way.  My wife that way.... Y'all probably done forget about it. But I ain't gonna never forget."

In today's world where we have Chris Rock and Dave Chapelle, such comedy seems normal and tame.  But we must see Pryor's courage and remarkable ability to not only turn race relations  on its head but have a profound desire to do so particularly in the 1970s when things like Affirmative Action were just being initiated.

It would be one thing if Pryor was purely a black comedian with a black following -- but his fame and his message reached beyond the color line. 

Richard Wright once wrote of his novel, Native Son, he wanted to write a book that would make a banker's daughter feel uncomfortable.  In other words he wanted to make people uneasy about the treatment of black folks.  He wanted them to finish reading his book with nervousness at his people's plight.

Pryor wanted to bring the plight of black people to the surface as well.  He truly thought if people could laugh together they could live together.

In his later comedy routines he talked fondly of his transforming trip to Africa and he ended them with this:

"What else I found out in Africa is the fact that aside from us being from the original people, we are the white people.  We all family.  That's it Jack.  And F-- all that other sh-- "

As we pause and remember Pryor for his incredible sense of humor, let's also give notice to his remarkable insight into the plight of society.   It will be said Pryor lived a full life.  But it should also be said he wanted each of us to do the same.

Kapitol Hill Publishes a New Commentary each Sunday.  Feel free to leave a comment. And don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

A Thousand & A Tookie

This week California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will meet with a group of prosecutors and defense attorneys to hear arguments on whether to spare the life of  Stanley "Tookie" Williams.  It seems this life or death penalty choice has taken on a movement of its own with a group of celebrities and activist joining in the debate, as well.

Tookie is one of the infamous founders of the notorious Crips gang.  The Crips during the height of the drug turf wars was one of the most violent groups to prey on the innocent streets of Los Angeles.  Their rivalry with the Bloods and other independent drug warlords was the source of thousands of drive-by shootings, robberies, assaults and murders.

Tookie was sentenced to death twenty-five years ago.  He was convicted of the brutal murder of four people.  He killed a 7-Eleven clerk in a robbery for $120 and an Asian family at their motel for $100.  Each of them was gunned down by a shotgun at point-blank range.  To this day, Tookie claims his innocence and says the witnesses against him -- each of them with questionable character issues themselves -- were setting him up.

Yet the evidence against him was overwhelming and his cries of innocence lack credibility. His denial to take responsibility for his crimes and the manner in which the crimes occurred-- to those who fully support the death penalty-- make him an ideal example of who should receive the ultimate punishment.

Yet, Tookie's story is not that simple and since his incarceration has transformed his life.  He has, as his supporters recount, been rehabilitated.  For the past decade, Tookie has used his tragic tale for good.  He has renounced his gangster past and written a number of children's books telling parables of goodness and preaching to them about how to make the right choices -- staying away from gangs and drugs.  In short, his lawyers argue Tookie has become a symbol of hope and compassion and a role model for the millions of disadvantaged inner city youths who at one time would have followed him into a gang war -- but now use his life to stay on the straight and narrow path.

Tookie's clemency case rests not on his contrition but his ten-year redemption.  The question the "Governator" will have to deal with is should a man who was once touted as a Noble Peace Prize nominee be put to death? 

But while California battles that question, the rest of the country grapples with one of their own.  This week also marked another milestone in the death penalty's history.  On December 2nd at 2:15am, Kenneth Lee Boyd
became the  one-thousandth person to be executed in the United States since the policy resumed 28 years ago.

Like Tookie, Boyd was no saint.  He gunned down his ex-wife and her father 17 years earlier.  His last words: "God Bless Everyone Here."

Boyd didn't  wish to be the  one-thousandth executed prisoner, but his fate to go down in history became clear when Virginia's Governor decided to grant clemency to Robin Lovitt.  Lovitt was sentenced to death in 1998 for stabbing a pool hall clerk to death with a pair of scissors.

Governor Warner commuted Lovitt to life in prison primarily because those scissors were illegally destroyed during the appeal process and ended what Lovitt's lawyer says any chance of proving his innocence.  DNA testing, which was not available during the trial would have thrown the case in doubt Lovitt's supports say and the governor obviously agreed.

The introduction of DNA testing has in fact thrown the entire debate over the death penalty into a frenzy.  Illinois has placed a moratorium on the death penalty and a number of other states are aggressively investigating their own cases.  Nearly a dozen people who had been sentenced to death have been freed after new DNA evidence showed without a doubt they did not commit the crimes all other evidence suggested they had done.

The fact that these lucky men were freed after spending years on death row and the unfortunate reality that it's probable some of the 1000 people executed were innocent as well, should give us pause and force us to reflect on whether the death penalty is just or face a fairer  couple of question:  is the sentence given out justly? And if not, should we abolish it all together.

Some people believe that would be throwing the baby out with the bath water and the more simple answer is to create a higher standard rather than beyond a reasonable doubt.  The fact a few states actually impose the death penalty even without a unanimous decision by a jury is also troublesome.

On Thursday, each side of the Tookie Williams case will have 30 minutes to make their argument on why Tookie should continue to live or payback his victims with his life.

An hour to decide the fate of one man.

For the hundreds of others on death row, perhaps the debate over the usefulness and fairness of the death penalty should last a bit longer than that.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment.  If you would like to support the continued efforts of this site make a donation in the "Tip Jar."

5 Million Victims & Counting

Since the early 1980s and the death of flamboyant musician Rock Hudson, Acquired Immune-Deficiency  (AIDS/HIV) has been a staple in the global lexicon. So far, the virus has killed some 25 million people.  The tragedy of many of these deaths is that while only education and enlightenment could prevent the infection, medical advances could very well stall the deaths and stop another tragedy-- the orphanization of hundreds of thousands of African children left often to wallow and surrounded by decomposing death until someone is brave and courageous enough to investigate the stench of their parents death.

Nevertheless, 40 million people across the world are living with the disease each day and the number may be countless in terms of those indirectly impacted by such a pandemic number.

Today the world is bracing for a new epidemic of the bird flu.  Nations are pouring money into prevention and preparation.  Some countries along the Pacific Rim are bypassing normal patent policies and ordering their own pharmaceutical companies to develop alternates or generic versions of Tamiflu.  Ironically, none of the medical experts will even hint that Tamiflu will be the answer to everyone's prayers if the virus leaps from chickens and wild birds into more humans.  Less than 100 people have died from bird flu in the last decade.

Yet, even in this country Congress and the White House are holding conferences and hearings trying to find a solution.

It is unfortunate such government action and media attention is not being given to the pandemic, which already haunts us.  The United Nations and the World Health Organization released a profound status report on the state of AIDS in the world and it got hardly a whisper of news coverage.

The report soberly stated another 5 million people have died from HIV/AIDS this year and another three million more were infected.  The report also signifies what seems like a reversion back in time because it noted many of the new infections are occurring through shared injection needle usage.

Despite the verbal power and multi-national funding being thrown into Africa, Sub-Sahara Africa continues to be ground zero in this epidemic.  The hot zone accounts for two-thirds of all people who have been diagnosed as HIV positive.

But the report does not discount some positive headway.  In a couple of African countries and in the Caribbean, the rate of infections and the mortality rate is decreasing.  The influx of antiviral drugs has averted some 350,000 deaths.  In Uganda, health officials have seen infections decline 20 percent.  A true continuing success story to say the least.

Yet, the success in Uganda and other places could be greater if the United States dropped what seems like the unseemly connection between science and religion.  The U.S. has promised aid to try to reverse the AIDS pandemic in Africa; however, those monies only go to faith-based groups, which do not distribute condoms.

As the world pauses this coming Thursday for World AIDS Day, here in America, there should be special notice given to two very alarming items.

The first, is that a disproportionate number of young people are making up the list of new cases.  Americans under  the age of 25 make up nearly half of all new HIV cases -- even though they represent only one-third of the population, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Just let these two statistics sink in for a minute:

                * Among ages 20-29, it's 35 percent female, 65 percent male.

                * Among ages 13-19, it's 50 percent female, 50 percent male.

The second point is that a disproportionate number of African-Americans make up the bulk of new cases.  African-Americans are more than eight-times more likely to be infected compared to their white counterparts.
Of the more than 100-thousand new cases reported in the last three years, 51 percent of them were African American.

Here are two more statistics to mull:

               * 68-percent of newly infected African Americans were female.

               * 44-percent of newly infected African Americans were male.

However, there is some good news in this scenario as well.  The rate of infections within the African-American community is dropping and has dropped steadily for the last three years.

The HIV surveillance report produced by the Centers for Disease Control, confirmed that the rate of newly diagnosed HIV cases amongst black people has been dropping around 5 percent a year, since monitoring began in 2001.

While that is good news, there is still a lot of work to do.  Each day another person whether they be Black, White, Asian or African is infected by the --  control-able and preventable--  virus is another tragic day.

The world has been counting AIDS deaths since 1981 and it seems nearly a quarter of a century later, the counting unfortunately continues.   Instead of really doing something about  the problem, it just seems so many of us are just counting our blessings we weren't one of them.

Coming Up Next Week:  A Thousand Executions.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every Sunday.  Please feel free to a comment.  Please support those advertisers that support us and if you'd like to leave a donation click on the "Tip Jar."

Blurry-Eyed Ballot

At the beginning stages of the Black Power Movement and the turn to black nationalism, there was a familiar mantra heard throughout the streets.  Particularly on the corners of Lenox Blvd. and 125th the Honorable Minister Malcolm X spoke about the injustices African-Americans faced constantly.

While Martin L. King, Jr. and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference marched through the hostile roads of Mississippi and Alabama, Malcolm took to the streets of Harlem preaching about the unfairness the government burdened the Black community with -- especially the right to vote.  In his mind it was either the "Ballot or the Bullet."

Today, for hundreds of thousands of Black men that choice is not that simple.  It seems their use of the bullet has erased their right to ever use a ballot.

This week, the United States Supreme Court reinforced that idea when it refused to hear the case against Florida.  The argument would have challenged a 160-year-old law, which bans felons from exercising their right to vote.

While it seems just that a person who commits a felonious crime not be able to exercise the freedoms his or her choices limited, what about those who completed the punishment doled out for their crime?

Without comment, the nation's highest court turned away the case Johnson versus Bush.  The case has been
some four-years in the making.  It stems from the controversial 2000 Presidential election.  What makes this case interesting is that it wasn't brought on behalf of those who were currently serving prison terms.  It was taken up for those ex-convicts who has not only served their actual prison terms, but also completed parole or probation.

It's estimated that the ban effects 10 percent of Black adults in Florida -- but the impact could have been far greater. According to a Washington advocacy group the Sentencing Project, some 5 million people might have had their voting rights restored if the Supreme Court ruled in their favor.

Forty-eight states - excluding Maine and Vermont have enacted some restriction on voting by felons.  However, Iowa is the only state, which has universally cleared the path for all ex-felons who have completed their prison terms to become eligible voters.  Florida does have a process but it is complicated, expensive and not a very successful step for the aspiring voters.

Beyond the confusion the Supreme Court has instituted by leaving varied laws on state's books -- one  previous case allowed ex-convicts to sue the state of Washington, while another case left a similar law in place -- is the confusion left for society to grapple with.

It has always been the higher moral responsibility of our penal system to rehabilitate criminals to become productive citizens after they've served their time; however, such get-tough-on-crime legislation seems to slap that ideal in the face.

As reported in an earlier Kapitol Hill commentary, teens are increasingly being tried as adults (see: When Does Life End?).  Does this mean a crime a child commits in Florida at the age of 13 now subjugates the teen to never exercising a basic right?

In seems apparent that the origination of such laws are embedded with politics.  As the travesty of the 1950s & 60s taught us -- politics should have no place near the right to enter the voting booth.

That very notion seems to have others scratching their heads about what is going on within the cubicles at the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.

It seems the highly criticized approval of Georgia's new voter ID law was initially rejected for the very reasons the opposition claimed it should have been in the first place -- it would inadvertently discriminate against African-Americans.  However, immediately following that initial recommendation, the conclusion was dismissed and approved.

In an August 25th memo obtained by the Washington Post, a panel of five lawyers called the law flawed and regressive.  However, the next day, the chief of the department informed the state legislature the program would not be held back from approval.

The Justice Department dismissed the conflict by calling it a "healthy debate" and suggesting there wasn't a conflict at all.  "It is the chief's responsibility to report recommendations to the Attorney General." Eric Holland was quoted as saying.

Leaving one to wonder if it's the Chief's responsibility to ignore the recommendation of his staff?

The controversial law would essentially force people to obtain an additional identification card in order to vote.

A federal district judge has placed a stay on the law and an appeal to the entire district court failed.  The judges agreed that such a law does amount to a Jim Crow era style poll-tax.

It would seem luckily, for poor and disenfranchised African-Americans in Georgia, justice is in this particular case color-blind.

Unfortunately it seems, for ex-felons  who desire to re-enter society and add some contribution through the electoral process, legal sight on this issue is still blurry.

Coming Up Next Week:  HIV & African-Americans

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment. Don't forget to check back next week for a new installment and remember to support our advertisers and if you choose leave a donation in the "Tip Jar."

SPECIAL EDITION: Civil Unrest

It is inevitable that a change in political control in Washington will have an impact on the bureaucracies, which keep the government running.  Political appointments often collide headstrong with the career administrators, advocates, economists and lawyers working at such places as the State Department and the Department of Justice.

As Senator John McCain often says, "elections have consequences."  In a report published this week, it seems the election of 2004 is having unintended consequences for the hundreds of career lawyers toiling away at the Justice Department and particularly and most disturbingly at the civil rights division of the department,

Anytime there is a shift in political power it is expected priorities within administrative entities such as the Justice Department would change.  According to articles citing the Washington Post's reporting, lawyers in the civil rights division are being inundated with immigration cases and issues of deportation and violation of immigration polices circling illegal human trafficking. 

We must be fair by stating these cases were swept under the division's spotlight by the enacting of a law Congress passed prior to Bush taking office in 2001.

But we must also be fair and saying it is a fact that almost a fifth of the lawyers in the division have left the department this year alone.  It is also fair to cite there has been a significant drop -- a 40% drop-- in the racial and gender discrimination cases brought by the civil rights division.

Some might deduce the number of  criminal trials correlates to a drop in incidents -- that unfortunately is not the case.

Perhaps,  as Kapitol Hill discussed earlier this week, it stems from the fact the Department of Justice has turned it's attention from traditional discrimination trials to reverse discrimination lawsuit threats.  Southern Illinois University received such a letter last week regarding its minority and gender scholarship programs.

This revelation of low moral and lawyers running for the front door, when one looks at the latest statistics reported by the FBI this week, should cause African-Americans' eyebrows to raise and cause them to raise questions and seek answers.

According to the latest stats, race-based hate crimes actually rose last year by 5% and overall hate crimes grew 2%.

Data collected from more than 12-thousand law enforcement agencies around the country showed nearly half of the 7400 hate-crimes committed in 2004 were motivated by racial prejudice and the overwhelming majority of them were against black Americans.  Close to 2800 hate crimes were committed against African-Americans in 2004.

Is anyone in Washington using a calculator to add one plus one and coming up with any energy to ask some tough questions of our government and particularly the Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez about whether there is any correlation or concern about a rise in hate crimes and a reduction in hate crime prosecutions?

When Gonzalez was appointed, he made a sincere point to say civil rights violations would be a top priority at his Department of Justice. 

On the one hand we should applaud the Department of Justice for its efforts to reopen America's painful Jim Crow era history by investigating the murder of Emmet Till and getting a conviction in the so-called Mississippi Burning case.

But on the other,  those headline grabbing actions should not equate to a free pass on aggressively fighting and prosecuting hate crimes of less infamy.

As we fight across oceans for the hearts and minds of Arabs and struggle to spread democracy throughout the world -- preaching freedom and personal liberty, it is equally and probably more importantly, that we continue to fight against attacks on personal freedoms here at home.

The civil rights division of the Justice Department has played an instrumental and vital role in assisting African-Americans achieve a level of equality in this country and it is essential that role not be diminished -- protecting the lives and liberties of all Americans must always stand above political appointments and political philosophy.

Coming Up Next Week: Felons & Florida - The battle over voting rights.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment.  If you would like to support our endeavors please click the "Tip Jar."  Remember to visit our advertisers.

Budget Cuts & Affirmative Action

This week the House of Representatives will renew its struggle to find needle in a haystack spending appropriations it can cut in order to help pay for the rebuilding of the gulf coast areas -- particularly Gulport, Mississippi and New Orleans after the tragedy of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

The irony in the proposed cuts is while there may be monies found to help rebuild buildings and infrastructure, they will probably be the same cuts that make it harder  for actual people to rebuild their lives.

The House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi held a press conference with many of her Democratic peers on Friday after the House Republicans - without the hammer of scandal-ridden Congressman Tom Delay -- could not garner enough votes to pass a $50 billion dollar package.

The most controversial element of the House bill is the fact that $1 out of each $5 cut will come from social programs such as food stamps, medicaid and student loans.  It seems many moderates in the House don't want to seem too harsh toward the poor a year out from the 2006 mid-term elections.

The Senate passed their budget cut proposal bill -- a $35 billion dollar package --  last week.  While their debate was full of controversy, as well -- particularly whether to give oil companies the approval to drill in the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge.  That provision was later dropped in order to get the bill passed.

But it is clear the House bill is the one that, at least the critics say, is the hot potato for social service advocates.

The policy and advocacy grooup, Voices for America's Children says 6 million poor and low-income children will be especially hard hit.  The cuts will make it harder for low-income and working poor parents to feed their children and provide them with day care the agency says.  It will also make their futures quite bleak because the cuts will also pull back increases in pell grants for college education. 

This fact makes the other news out of Washington even more disturbing.  The Department of Justice has sent a letter to the University of Southern Illinois threatening to sue the college over its minority and female scholarship programs because they reportedly discriminate against whites, males and non-preferred status minorities.

The program the Justice Department is targeting is a group of financial scholarships given to academically qualified female and minority students to assist them in graduate and undergraduate programs.  A few years ago the Supreme Court gave a split decision on universities and affirmative action saying it is unconstitutional to have quotas for students but it is constitutional to provide programs and incentives which generate diversity within the college walls.

Across the country universities have reshaped their scholarship programs and opened them up to a broader audience.  SIU has requested time to review its program and seek modifications.

What is missing in this back and forth is the simple fact SIU has --at least when it comes to African-Americans achieved the goal the Supreme Court said was constitutional to seek.  The black population at SIU is 12.4% -- essentially equal to the same proportion of the black percentage in the U.S.

It is not all together clear whether the institution's financial scholarship programs have been the epicenter for the demographic -- but it is clear that SIU's affirmative action program has assisted in putting highly intelligent and qualified minority and female students onto that campus -- and everyone that attends Southern Illinois is better for it.

It seems quite disingenuous and cruel for the same government, which wants to cut aid for college education while saying nothing about the  continued payments for  things like the War in Iraq, the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts would also want to shut down a door of opportunity for aspiring students to attend college.

How can we as a society say everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed or fail based upon their own free will and inner strength when we consistently and constantly tear away the crutches that help lift up those who may need a little assistance.

No one would agree that blacks or women automatically should receive special treatment just because of the color of their skin or make up of their x or y chromosomes.  But the answer is not to completely eradicate programs, which -- despite popular belief -- don't give an edge; but an opportunity -- opportunities that historically were not granted to them.  For all the progress we've made in this society we are but two generations removed from the ills of Jim Crow in the South and his subtle cousin James Crow of the North.

Countless numbers of young minority students still are feeling the negative economic and social  impact of them because their grandparents suffered due to the denial of the right to vote, the right to work and the right to live when, where and how they wanted.

Now it seems, if the House budget cut proposals rule the day, many of those same young people will have some suffering to do of their own.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each and every Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment.  If you wish to support Kapitol Hill's endeavors click the "Tip Jar" and leave a donation and don't forget to always support our advertising sponsors.

Parks, Paris & Protests

Burn! Baby! Burn! Those familiar with the civil rights struggle in the United States might recall those three words came to symbolize the images from Watts, an enclave of Los Angles in the late 1960s.  The Watts riots were ignited after the assassination of Martin L. King, Jr.  A group of outraged youth took out their frustrations and hatred of the racist white establishment on their own neighborhoods.  For nights they burned buildings, stores and cars to voice  outrage at what they and in fact most of the greater society saw as injustices against them.

High unemployment, low moral and even lower expectations from the society, which in most cases passively sympathized with their fight, fueled the flames.

Just 40 years later it seems the same high anxiety and low expectations are sweeping another major city.  But this time it's in Paris, France.

For a week, young minorities, filled with equally tense frustrations and anger, have been rioting in Paris' poorer disenfranchised suburbs.  Since the urban violence ignited October 28th, there have been more than 500 arrests.  Police in riot gear have been trying to restore order but right now it seems futile.

In fact, the violence is spreading faster than the fires the young people are setting to cars and buildings.  The events started with the death of two teens of African ethnicity, who were electrecuted hiding from the police who many say were chasing the boys.  The authorities dispute reports they were chasing them.  Nevertheless, whether the urban legend is true or not  it has sparked the underlining tensions thousands of these young men have held close to the chest for decades.

Socio-economic experts don't dismiss the reality in which these young men live.  Joblessness in France is 22.2 percent for men under 25 years old, compared with 7.8 percent for men aged 25 to 49, according to the Labor Ministry. France doesn't include ethnicity in its census nor does it publish poverty or unemployment statistics based on ethnicity or religion.  But no country, no matter how they try and hide or not acknowledge the facts -- doesn't mean they don't exist --particularly in these African-Muslim sects buried in the shadow of the mostly Catholic country.

The most disturbing thing about this week's  long protest seems to be the fact many in the establishment deny there is an underlining problem and suggest it is not the uncovering of  isues of race and poverty, but merely the unmasking of islamic militants and fundamentalist of the same vain as those who bombed subways in London or took down the World Trade Center Towers in New York.

While every uprising has an element of individual opportunism for individual causes that oftern are unjust  and unfair to the greater problems, it would be foolish to not listen to the echos floating out of these suburban ghettos. 

Perhaps, for once, France could actually learn something from their American counterparts. 

Just as the Paris riots were beginning, in America the nation was pausing to celebrate the end of a pioneers life.  For seven hours, mourners listened, sang, clapped and celebrated the accomplishments of Rosa Parks.  Each speaker spoke of her quiet grace and the loud aftershocks of her refusal to stand so a white man could sit.

Parks' protest ignited a civil rights movement, which quite often violently, ended with progress for African-Americans.  But, just as the protest in Paris, Parks' quite "sit-in" uncovered a lot more than just racial social inequality.  Her spark and the movement that followed took the veil off of the racial economic inequality as well.

At her funeral, Bishop Charles Adams energetically told the audience of 4,000 that because she sat, African-Americans now sit in the audience of presidents of countries and CEOs of companies.  It is this opportunity that has lead to the rebuilding of the Black middle class and has lead to the decrease in teen births in the African-American community, a higher ratio of college graduates and more blacks owning homes and businesses  than right after Reconstruction.

No one will admit that race matters in the United States have been solved -- far from it.  Nevertheless, we would be equally ignorant to suggest progess --significant progress is not evident.

In Martin L. King's "Letter From Birmingham Jail." he told the Southern clergy, "for far too long the South has been talking monolithically and there needs to now be a dialouge."  In order to get a seat at the table it took protests.  While negative racial overtones continue to haunt America -- at least in many academic, social and political circles the conversation is being had and had often.

Perhaps that is what needs to occur in Paris.  It better to solve these problems without violence.  But there is no question it are those out of the mainstream actions, which lead to initial positive reaction  and responses to create change those riots  maybe unintentionally mean to ignite.

But when the fires are put out and the tensions calm, unless dialouge replaces denial, the City of Lights may indeed be bright with more torches and molatov cocktails than candlelights sitting on coffee tables meant to shine upon the racial and economic injustice being played out right now.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday. Please feel free to leave a comment.  Don't forget to check back next week for the next installment.  Also please support our advertisers and if you wish make a donation by clicking the "Tip Jar."

The Son Also Rises

The heroine Rosa Parks is lying in Honor at the Rotunda of the Capitol.  The honor was granted after Congress passed a resolution marking the first time a woman was given the right.  The symbolizism behind such a feat highlights the position Parks holds in American history.

In December of 1955,  Parks refused to give up her seat to a White man on a Montgomery, Alabama bus.  The silent secret of this noble defiance is that Parks was actually accommodating to the Jim Crow laws, which segregated the public buses between Blacks and Whites.  Parks was sitting in the first seats of the colored section on her way home from work.  The rush hour soon filled the bus and forced people to stand for their ride home.  A white man who thought the idea of him standing and this black woman sitting was improper  and asked the driver to make her move.

Parks, who saw she was seating in her rightful section then refused.  After a number of request and an equal number of refusals Parks was arrested and the rest of the story -- the year long boycott... the emergence of Dr. Martin L. King, Jr. and the fuel of the Civil Rights Movement -- is as they say history.

Parks says it was not the defiance of an unjust law, which preoccupied her mind -- it was the tragic murder of a young boy in Mississippi four months earlier.

If Parks is, as she is affectionately known the "Mother of the Civil Rights Movement."  Then the young boy she was thinking on would have to be the Son.

Emmett Till was a 14 year old boy who was visiting relatives in Money Mississippi was kidnapped by three white men.  The men beat, shot and drowned Till in the river for what folklore says was a not so innocent flirtation with the wife of one of the men during a routine candy run to the grocery store.

The men were arrested and tried,  but were found not guilty by a jury of all white men.  If not for the courage of Till's mother the world probably would not have cared or known.  The image of Till's bloated, deformed and damaged face was laid for all to see at an open casket funeral.  The image was placed into history by Jet.

In 2004 the U.S. Justice Department re-opened the case and is now investigating the deed.  His body was exhumed and investigators are now re-interviewing and examining every detail of the 50 year old case.

This investigation was ignited by a documentary, "The Untold Story of Emmett Till." which has been the most in depth documentary look at the incident.

The tragic death of Emmett Till clearly illustrated the inhumanity of the post-slavery south and laid out an even more clear view of the detest many whites in the South had for blacks -- particularly any blacks who tried to exercise their inalienable rights as human beings.

If it is true that Park's mind was on the death of Till that day in 1955, then she was not alone -- all of Black America mourned Till's death and the image of his death stuck in each of their minds.

It is best, as we pause and mourn the life of a great American and view her in the most high regard of history, we should not forget the incident, which brought her to sit and refuse to stand.

Many who praise Rosa Parks use the now too often used cliche "she sat down to stand up for the rest of us. "  She did much more than that.  Parks' "sit-in" also gave courage to millions to protest all kinds of injustices and be brave enough to fight back against fire hoses and police dogs. 

It is unfortunate she did not age as healthy and of sound mind as we would have loved.   In her last years she was unable to strongly remember the post in history she holds.

But we can probably be certain, if she did have all of her abilities and had lived to see the Golden Anniversary of her mark, she would not have praised herself nor would she wanted us to remember her solely.  It is without any doubt that while we sang the praise of Rosa Parks on our lips on hers would've been the memory of that teenage boy who she was thinking on that day.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment.  Also support our  advertisers and  if you desire make a monetary donation in our "Tip Jar."

But When Does Life End?

The debate over abortion rights is being played out in the halls of  Capitol Hill and on the editorial pages of national newspapers like the Washington Post and New York Times. This debate has taken shape due to the vague leanings of Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers.  Recently it was reported Mrs. Miers, when she was running for City Council in Dallas in 1989 filled out a survey created by an anti-abortion right advocacy group called, "Texans For Life."  In this more than 15 year old questionnaire, Miers admitted her support for a Constitutional Amendment banning abortions -- except when the life of the mother was in jeopardy, cutting off public funds to abortion clinics and even using her political position to keep publically announced abortion supporters  out of city jobs like clerks and chairmanships of committees.

Some have suggested these answers clearly indicate Miers distaste for abortions and have gone as far as to say it is beyond a shadow of a doubt evidence she would overturn Roe v. Wade at the first opportunity if she was indeed appointed to the Court.

Mier and even the White House contends her answers don't point to that conclusion at all.  The White House brushed  it off  last week saying the questionnaire merely shows the opinions of someone running for political office and not their judicial philosophy.  It is her judicial philosophy Senators on the Judiciary Committee will have a chance to probe when her confirmation hearings get underway on November 7th.

But for the rest of us the philosophical debate over abortion is being played out today and every day.  The most anti-abortion rights groups go as far as to purchase commercial time and billboards.  The most famous advertisement shows a fetus (at probably around the  late period of the third-trimester)  beside the caption, "Life Begins at Conception."

But that notion leaves one to wonder, -- particularly when one looks at the state of the American family and our treatment of the disenfranchised and impoverished -- when does life end -- or more importantly when do we stop caring whether our young people have a life or not?

Jose Orozco might hold the answer.  At the age of 14 he has become one of the youngest juveniles in California to be charged as an adult. Jose is charged with fatally shooting a man earlier this year.  Prosecutors contend the crime was affiliated with some gang activity.  That places Jose's offense under the new ordinance,
Proposiiton 21, which gives prosecutors the leeway to charge juveniles as adults.

The Assistant District Attorney, Eddie Thomas was quoted as saying the proposition means, "At some point, society has the right to say no, no, no ...We cannot tolerate juveniles killing people,"  Mr. Thomas makes a very good point.  If  young teens are going to commit crimes they should be punished and if the crime is severe the punishment should be severe.  Government's primary junction is to protect its citizens and if teens are endangering society they should be removed from it.

But I doubt the citizens of California would've voted for a tough on juveniles policy if they knew not only would they be charged as adults but they would be sentenced to adult prisons.  It is there these young boys learn what it really means to be a primative man -- or at least die learning.  Our prison systems have long forgotten their function should be to rehabilitate criminals; not allow them to rehearse for future crime and refine their hatred of society and social order.  If the odds are stacked against an adult when he enters prison, what are the odds for a young man -- and what does it say about the greater society that we allow 14 and 13 year-old boys to be shelved into these cells, as well? 

Probably more alarming than the increase in juveniles being charged as adults, is the fact that more of them
are being sentenced to life in prison.  According to Amnesty International there are more than 2200 people serving life sentences for crimes they committed as minors throughout the United States prison system.
Under the age of 18, a child is not allowed to buy a pack of cigarettes or vote and yet society has said essentially their less than 20 years on this Earth has shown they don't belong to live on it freely.

It is amazing to think that some two-thousand American soldiers have died trying to build freedom in Iraq while their country along with Somalia are the only two nations in the world, which have not signed the treaty that disavows incarcerating a juveniles without a chance of parole.

The report also showed the majority of the jueveniles are not, as best one can even phathom the idea "career criminals."  The study reported the convicting crime was the first criminal offense for 60-percent of the minors given life sentences.

But what is more disheartening-- especially for African-Americans -- black youths were  sentenced to life sentences at 10 times the rate of their white counterparts. This should give all of us pause, should it not?

Unfortunately, the  announcement of  the Amnesty International  report has been drowned out  by other news.  People in New Orleans are still recovering while prosecutors are indicting powerful politicians in Washington.
Yet, even if this tragic news had been aggressively reported, it's doubtful the debate over whether it is just to lock up a child for life would ever reach the fevor of  the one on abortion.

It seems easy to suggest a child's life begins at a particular point, but it is much harder to decide when a child's life ends -- or worse -- when we as a society decide a child's life isn't worth trying to save.

KapitolHill publishes a new commentary every Sunday.  Feel free to leave a comment and support the efforts of  Kapitol Hill by making a donation in the "Tip Jar" and supporting our advertisers.  Remember to check back next week for a new installment.

Marching Orders

This weekend thousands of African-Americans gathered in the Nation's Capital to mark the anniversary of the Million Man March ten years earlier.  In 1995, the theme was unity and solidarity of Black men and a pledge to go back home and be more responsible to their families.  This year, the Millions More Movement lacked a focused theme and its objectives seemed more vague than before.  That could've been the reason the crowd was not as large or as energetic as it was a decade ago.

Many people found criticism in the blurry objectives and questioned why a march was even needed.  Afterall, the march ten years ago did not provide any concrete positive changes.  Unemployment in the African-American community is as high as 11 percent.  The majority of African-American children -- 68 percent infact-- are born out of wedlock.  African-American women still make up just about 40 percent of women who have abortions.  The wealth gap between Whites and Black is ever widening.  African-Americans are quickly becoming the face of AIDS in this country with those between 18 - 24 the fastest growing population of infections.    It seems knowning these statistics there would be plenty to march for and speak about; nevertheless,  even the often firey and well spoken orations of Louis Farrakhan seemed without concentration.

The one thing that struck me as I watched the event unfold was when the announcement was made that 8 year old Kiera was lost.  "If you find a lost girl her mother is waiting at the information station" the announcer remarked.  While it is not unsual for a child to get separated from their parent, particularly at an event in the open space of the Mall, it was a symbol of the comedic tragedy the March had become.  At an event where people were suppose to get their marching orders to be more responsible, a seemingly irresponsible incident occurs.

It always seems those with the least ability to help themselves who are left with no help at all.  So it is particularly when we deal with the issue of poverty.

The Brookings Institution has released a study focusing on the country's urban poor.  Not surprisingly cities like New Orleans (made obviously clear after Hurricane Katrina) had high concentrations of poor residents  In fact, New Orleans had the second highest concentration of poor. 

Brookings' study concluded that many of these urban poor neighborhoods are poverty traps.  Often households have incomes  just barely - if at all - above the poverty line.  There is a disproportionate number of people without a college degree and often a high school diploma.  This limits the lack of funds and role models children would need to motivate and aspire for more.

One economics expert summed up the situation by saying, " it's not that poor people don't want to work or want better lives for them and their children it's simply they can't access it."  That access is even more elusive when everyone around you seemingly is in the same  dire situation -- which is the percepton most of these neighborhoods receive.

The 37 million Americans now living in poverty don't seem to need another march.  More than that they need money and the understanding of how to make that money work for them and their families.  Without access to capital there will be no way to access the key to unlock the trap door of poverty.

During the March there were plenty of speeches given about the lack of government responsibility and it's neglect.  There's plenty of government inaction to point to when it comes to the state of Black America.  Nevertheless,  there was hardly a whisper about the sad state of the nation's poor.

Prior to the 1995 march, the last time hundreds of blacks gathered on the Mall was after Martin Luther King's death.  It was the beginning of the poor people's campaign -- the SCLC's economic equality initiative.  Perhaps
if  a million poor people decided to march on Washington these days, they might get some attention from someone. 

That seems unlikely.  The nation's poor are busy trying to survive til the next day to be concerned about how they can galvanize an organized voice to hear their woes.  But what is stopping us?  Maybe we've been given too much access or maybe we just need a different list of  marching orders.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every Sunday.  Feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

Sins of the Father

After the passage of the historic Civil Rights Bill of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Martin L. King, Jr and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference quickly turned their attention to other pressing issues --  the rights to fair and equal opportunity housing and economic equality. 

To highlight the housing issue King decided to spend a few months in Chicago.  During one particular protest in the neighborhood of Cicero, a southern enclave of Chicago's South Side, King met some of the worst protests he had seen in years.  In fact, King once remarked he was more afraid for his life marching the streets of Chicago than he ever felt in the belly of the Jim Crow South of Mississippi and Alabama.

The fever of hatred of the idea of Blacks and Whites living together was so perverted in the city, it is hard to imagine it was located far above the Mason Dixie line in the comforts of what so many naive readers of history have come to know as the promised land North.

However, as a unique exhibit in New York City clearly illustrates, the tension and animosity of intermingled races was not just a Southern institution.  The exhibit, " Slavery In New York" opened this past weekend at the New York Historical Society. 

One of the most disturbing notions one walks away from the exhibit with is how entrenched slavery was in all daily activity in New York.  In fact, New York was a primary epicenter for slave trading and the use of slaves was designed for all manner of work.  It were the slaves of New York who built the wall now land-marked as the center of the financial world -- Wall Street.    Nor was the treatment of slaves in New York any less harsh than other colonies.  In the 1690s slaves could be legally whipped if they made noise on Sunday.

Such revelations can and probably will only add to the weight so many try and place upon the shoulders of  past generations of sons.  The so-called "White Guilt" sociologist discuss when issues of race emerges is founded upon this heavy load.  Yet, others try and dismiss the notion signifying the son can no way be held liable for the sins of the father.  It's hard to argue when one says, "I didn't own slaves."  Nevertheless, it is not impossible -- particularly when the sons now have a level of status built upon their father's sins.  It is the basic concept of "White Privilege."

This privilege may be playing out in the hallowed halls of the city King swore to never return to.  In 2001 the city council of Chicago passed a law which stipulated any company, which wishes to do business with the city must research and disclose any historical links it has had to the peculiar institution.

For the most part the law has primarily affected financial institutions.  The disclosure of connections by Well Fargo lead to the bank establishing scholarships at a couple of Historically Black Colleges in South Carolina.
The latest institution to have to disclose its historical links was Lehman Brothers.

Earlier this month, Lehman was forced to disclose its ugly past.  What made Lehman's acknowledgment worse was it became the first company to suffer from the disclosure.  It was forced to give up a $1.5 billion dollar underwriting contract because it had initially withheld the information.  After the public disclosure Lehman actually profited significantly from the sale of slaves it was further acknowledge Lehman's founding fathers actually owned several slaves themselves.

Now, Lehman must pay a heft $500,000 fine.  The galvanizing force behind the ordinance, Councilwoman Dorothy Tillman said after the fine was announced, " If you tell the truth there is no penalty.  If you lie there is."

It is uncertain whether Lehman Brothers will be able to resubmit its forms or be able to re-apply for the hefty contract.  However, was is certain -- at least in Chicago and other cities which have adopted similar laws -- sometimes the sins of fathers can cost their sons a lot more than embarrassment.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for another installment.

A Sunday In Harlem

If you've ever been fortunate enough to visit New York, one thing your visit cannot do without is a walk in Harlem on a cloudless Sunday.  Nevertheless, walking down Lenox Avenue today is far different than a stroll ten years ago.  Today the pedestrians are more like a rainbow of brown, yellow, pink and white versus the multi-hues of brown they used to be.  When people say Harlem has changed -- it has.  The major difference in Harlem is now those who wouldn't live anywhere above 110th Street are living as far uptown as Washington Heights and Inwood which stretch to the most northern tip of Manhattan.  With this new influx also comes appreciation of property and the increase in rental incomes.  The once called ghettos, with concentrations of poor, disenfranchised black folks, have now become integrated co-op neighborhoods-- filled with fresh vegetable markets and health spas.

Many sensitive people to what is commonly called gentrification claim the pale invasion is destroying the culture and character of indigenous communities with its $1500 one-bedroom rents.

But we also need to see the greater good of such inter-mingling.  If Harlem is too close for perspective -- blinding us to the forest because of the trees then maybe we should cross the Atlantic.

The Chairman of Britain's Commission for Racial Equality -- that government's racial watch group recently
warned Britain is "sleepwalking" into a Ghettoized society with multiple "black holes" emerging in many cities.   One could claim that our European cousins are being oversensitive to this trend.  Outside of Northern Ireland, Britain's ghettos are no match for those in America. In fact Britain's oldest and most mainstreamed minority group -- Afro-Caribbeans -- are the most integrated minority in the Empire.

The concern with concentrated ghettos for the most part is the centralization of poverty and institutionalized segregation.. but it's not the mere racial integration of neighborhoods, which will dissolve that taint.  52% of Britain's Jews live in concentrated areas of London -- but the are solidly Middle Class and therefore the issues of their self-segregation and stigma of ghettoizing is unfounded.  Why? because in London the high costs of living and therefore rental and housing clumps all people's together.

While fair and affordable housing should always be a noble goal it must also be done in a manner that motivates all kinds of people to dwell together -- mixed races and mixed classes.

Unfortunately that hasn't been the case here in America.  In the 1980s the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the right of Oklahoma City to end its busing for the sake of integrated schools.  One of the dissenters was the champion of school integration, Thurgood Marshall.  In his opinion he chided the majority for not recognizing the fact that residential segregation still overwhelmed the society and until that issue is resolved the ideal of aggressive action to integrate our school systems must continue because integration of our classrooms and class status is the only way to achieve equality.

Two decades later our neighborhoods are even more segregated than ever before-- and so are our school systems.  Inner-city schools are predominately black and Latino while our suburban schools maintain a fleshy paleness to them which strikes of bland learning in both areas.

It is evident by a recent study that housing segregation persists in this country.  Between 1980 and 2000 the University of Florida study shows segregation in urban cities declined a mere 13% and since the 90s has held steady if not increased in some areas like the Northeast.

For many economists, it is surprising to see that the poverty rate for African-Americans dropped by 30% in the 1990s, yet the rate of integration within white neighborhoods was basically unaffected.  Simply, the ability of blacks to turn greater income into greater residential opportunity does not seem to be present.

Many of the issues why this problem persists has been written about --especially in this column-- before.  Examples of investment disparity and lack of savings and access to wealth growth opportunities abound.

It's no wonder a brisk walk through Harlem these days has to be at a faster pace on some streets than others.  It is quite evident the boom many people speak about Uptown is not booming for everyone.  And despite the luxury condos being built around the area, there are still pockets of ghettos that seem untouched by the new wealth seeping into the historic area.

It would do America some good if it could learn at least one lesson from the Brits -- that in a country where prosperity seems to be growing for some, in order to ensure everyone's boat is lifted by the rising tide and the fear of continued ghettoizing remains -- the mystery of wealth must be solved and the integration of our neighborhoods must be soothed --at least for Harlem's sake.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for the next installment.

Take That To The Bank(ruptcy)

On October 17th it will be harder for consumers who find themselves drowning in debt to get any kind of financial fresh start.  In three weeks, the Bankruptcy Reform Bill will go into effect and could possibly impact hundreds of thousands of people each year. 

Not surprisingly the biggest pushers of the legislation were banks and credit card companies.  They claimed, and obviously Congress and the President agreed, too many people are using Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 filings to get out of paying debts they could easily afford to repay.  If true, this bill could assist in lowering the interest rates for so called "responsible" consumers because the risks taken on by these financial institutions would be greatly reduced.

However, it's not true.  Only three-percent of consumers filing for bankruptcy protection were shown to actually have the means to pay their bills.

It's easy to paint a picture of irresponsible consumers who have no concept of consequences running out to the malls and charging up credit cards on luxury items only to choose not to pay them and use bankruptcy to avoid payments at any point.  But this would be an optical illusion as well.

The biggest cause of bankruptcy filing is actually medical expenses.  With more than 30 million Americans without health care a mere visit to the emergency room could force a patient living check to check into the courts seeking protection.  In fact some 2 million people in the past 5 years are under bankruptcy protection due to medical expenses.

With the state of the current economy and more Americans seeping into poverty, it seems more people will be adversely affected by this new law.  Bankruptcy filings have increased nearly 200 percent in the past ten years -- jumping from less than 175,000 in 1995 to more than 400,000 right now.

Instead of giving more latitude to bankruptcy judges to give filings more scrutiny and giving incentives to consumers to seek other options, Congress implemented a number of new restrictions.  The primary one is "means testing."  Anyone who makes a specified level of income no matter what their circumstances is basically shut out of the bankruptcy court.

Right now there is a debate getting faint attention over whether to exempt the victims of Hurricane Katrina (and now Rita) from the new enforcement.  The debate is an honest one and so is the problem many of these victims will face.

It's estimated bankruptcies increase 11-percent one year after a hurricane and five years after, the rate of filings jump to 30%.  The impact of a hurricane seems to last long after the storm passes -- as well as the media attention.

Exempting hurricane victims seems to be a fair thing to do -- but hard questions abound.  How would such an exemption be implemented?  By state?  By zip code?  How would victims prove they were actual victims?  By identification which may have been washed away?

It seems the solution isn't looking at exempting specific victims because of specific tragedies  The survivors  or family's of 9/11 victims aren't being given the same choices.  Maybe we should be looking at revising the law or focusing on the root causes of bankruptcy filings in the first place.

Perhaps it would be easier to ensure every American who wants health care can have it.  Or, maybe there should be a mandatory class on consumer credit and financial responsibility taught in our public schools.  Another solution could be to limit the types of solicitations banks and credit card companies can distribute on college campuses.

It seems educating Americans on their fate once they dive into the world of credit would be a better use of our energies and a more effective way to spend American tax dollars.  But if  politicians actually acted like they cared about the special needs of citizens rather than special interest of big business who would donate to their campaign funds?

Kapitol Hill publishes a commentary every Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget
to check back next week for a new installment.

The Inner Eye of Invisibility

Prior to Martin Luther King Jr.'s assassination he was planning another significant event on the Mall of the Nation's Capital.  The Poor People's March was to be the beginning of an aggressive push by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference to turn its focus from the injustices under Jim Crow -- most of which was addressed in the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 -- to the unfairness of economic inequality.  The Poor People's March was suppose to be a turn toward the isue of class and the institutionalized soft caste system of America's capitalistic society.

While the march went on despite it's leaders unfortunate absence, it's impact was limited.  It did however re-energize Lyndon B. Johnson's War on Poverty.  However, since his speech in 1964, poverty continues to plague American society.  Today, more than 37 million people are in poverty. Since President Bush has been in office the poverty rate has risen steadily from 10.4% to 12.7%.  Why?  The simple solution can be answered in a quote by President Ronald Reagan 20 years ago: "We fought the War on Poverty and Poverty Won."

The casulaties of America's defeat can be seen daily on the broadcast and cable news in the form of Huricane Katrina's victims.  New Orleans is a segregated, impoverished city.  Despite its reputation for fun and partying -- many of its residents cannot enjoy the good times.

Surprisingly, today's media has rediscovered America's poor and the national conversation has now turned to issues of race and poverty and class.  But why now?  Isn't it logical that the nearly quarter of New Orleans' residents were poor and disenfranchised before Katrina.  Why, in the midst of the stories about jazz and creole foods, didn't those stories make the evening news?

Essentially, it can be summed up in the writings of  Ralph Waldo Emerson Ellison.  In his most profound book he writes: "I am an invisible man...that invisibility to which I refer occurs because of a peculiar disposition of the eyes of those with whom I come in contact.  A matter of the construction of their inner eye."

Throughout his novel, Ellison explores the construction of this inner eye and illustrates how despite all the effort to be seen and more importantly heard, many in this society are looked past and far worse, looked through as if they were invisible.

In short the poor have always been here; always struggling to survive; always finding some way to live -- yet they have gone undetected and uncared for and invisible.

Even today, despite all the coverage -- most who could do something about this ailment only see a silhouette and have yet to discover a real person beyond the shadows.

That fact is seen in the current debate over how to pay for the reconstruction and salvage of  people's lives.  Most estimates place the funding of this enormous effort at $200 billion dollars.  For a country, which is already in $400 billion dollars in debt and seeking to continually pay for the war in Iraq and activities in Afghanistan the problem of how to pay for this renewal becomes a problem.  America's life line is already held by England, Saudi Arabia, Japan, China and South Korea.  Each of them hold huge IOUs due to the United States constant borrowing.

But Congress has yet to decide to make the tough choices.  According to them it is not yet time for America's richest 1% to help pay their part.  When asked recently if  Congress should retract President Bush's $1.35 trillion dollar tax cut package, Senator David Vitter (R) Louisiana said he did not favor such thoughts.

In the face of tremendous debt and the reality of terrible poverty, it's not time for those making more than $200,00 a year to give back to the greater good?

It's not a surprise  the Republican-controlled Congress can't dare ask America's rich to part with its precious tax cuts -- the War in Iraq didn't result in that request either. 

Nor will it be any more suprising that Congress will make its members sacrifice, as well.   The highway bill the President signed last month totalled $286 billion dollars.  While there are many well thought projects -- 6,000 programs are considered fat -- one, a bridge in Alaska that ends at the end of an iceberg.  Certianly there's billions there that can be saved.   Then, there is the faulty prescription drug plan which is so confusing that most states have no idea how to implement it.  A delay in that initiative for a year could save $40 billion dollars.

The bottomline is Congress will refuse to make the hard choices and tighten its belt.  It seems the sad truth of the matter is America's poor will continue to live on the outskirts of society's consciousness and unfortunately continue to be invsible -- but not because of  an inner eye but inner greed.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment.  Don't forget to check back next week for a new installment

High Tide, Low Wages

This week FEMA began the daunting task of trying to help the tens of thousands  of Hurricane Katrina's victims recover some financial resemblance of the lives they knew before the storm hit.  Initially, the federal agency distributed $2000 ATM cards to each household.  However, for some reason the policy changed by the weekend and now families are receiving these emergency funds via a check or through direct deposit.  On first glance this might seem like a logical and sensible change -- it would indeed be one way to combat fraud.  As we saw in the aftermath of 9/11 some people do attempt to take advantage of any situation-- no matter how personal or tragic.

However, once you look deeper into this policy you see how ignorant it is and impractical to the circumstances many victims find themselves in -- particularly the poorest of them.  While it may seem rational for the average American to have a bank account, many of New Orleans' residents have not seen the lobby of a bank,  If they do receive checks from their jobs they use check cashing places where a utility bill is more than enough identification  to get their money (minus a 1% fee).

This ignorance of the working poors' circumstances is not new.  It is also seen in the powerful storm over the fight for a fair living wage.

In February of 2002 New Orleans voters, after a long hard public relations battle passed a referendum to increase the mininimum wage of workers.  The federal minimum wage has been $5.15 for nearly ten years.  The New Orleans law raised that to $6.15 and would implement any level increase to keep the wage $1 more than the federal level. When it was first passed it was applauded by higher wage advocates.  Unlike many others it was extended far beyond city workers but to any business that received any level of fundings from the local government.

Despite the voters making their voices heard, the Louisiana Supreme Court struck down the law eight months later 6 to 1.  The lone dissenter, was Justice Bernette Johnson.  In her lone opinion she wrote: "...the city's effort
to insure that a working family has the ability to live above the poverty line, without relying on government subsidies, such as food stamps, is a legitimate exercise...".  However, the majority saw the action as a violation
of the State's authority to raise wages.

In otherwords, the right to give people the ability to live beyond poverty and independent of government assistance does not supercede the right of a state government to give its citizens that same right when it decides the time it right.

The repercussions of that court decision can be seen quite clearly in the aftermath of Katrina.  The hundreds of people who died because they had no way to leave... the thousands of people who will be forced to now live totally on the bill of government and private citizen's charity point without question to the inability of New Orleans poorest to save money or accumulate wealth.  With 50% of New Orleans' children living in poverty and 26% of its adults struggling below the same line, it made sense voters would want each resident of the city to have the ability to survive on their own. 

ACORN, a New Orleans based nonprofit, has been working to lift the minimum wage and fighting to put living wage laws on the books in every city for two decades.  To date, more than 80 municipalities have passed similar legislation.  Some of them have been limited in their scope and others, such as the one in New Orleans, are being  fought out in courtrooms.  Business groups, like restaurants are against the living wage policies because they say, despite evidence which suggest otherwise, it will not only drive them out of business but have a negative effect on its employees.

After watching the last two weeks of thousands fighting to survive in the wake of massive flooding, it's hard to imagine any worst effect.  Now instead of fighting for a fair and just living wage, thousands of people are struggling just to keep living.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every Sunday.  Feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

The Eye of The Hurricane

  If the aerial views of rooftops isn't enough... if the site of thousands of people trapped on those rooftops, car tops and floating on any debris they could find isn't enough... if the frustration on people's faces and in their conversations isn't enough... if the frantic search for food and water in devastated store shops isn't enough... if the stench and sight of dead bodies left on streets and floating in water to decompose isn't enough to show the government on all three levels failed to keep it's primary  objective of protecting and defending it's citizens, I'm not sure how much more evidence we need.

The latest predictions are that thousands of people will have died in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and nearly $100 billion dollars in damage across the Gulf Coast will be left behind.  New Orleans is essentially evacuated with only a few hundred waiting to be bused out and others so hopeless they refuse to leave the only place they can safely and securely call home.

Many have questioned why so many stayed when the call to leave came.  We all saw the string of cars and SUVs spread out across Interstate 10 packed with all they could carry to safety.  We saw the thousands do what was advised and head to the Superdome for protection as the local government had counseled.  So why did thousands stay behind?

The sad truth of the matter is to claim such is pure ignorance of reality.  The fact of the matter is the thousands of people who were left behind were stranded long before Katrina even became a tropical depression off the coast of Florida.

The unfortunate reality is some 100,000 New Orleanians didn't have the private transportation to sit in traffic on Interstate 10.  The cruel truth is there wasn't adequate information distributed in sections of the city like its 9th Ward -- the poorest in the city.  And that adjective -- poor -- is the crux of the matter; and being black is the rub.

In 1927 the great flood of Mississippi had the same effect on the Gulf Coast's poor and black.  The flood killed some 2000 people and left 300,000 homeless.  The tragedy of that destruction grew ten fold when African-Americans were rounded up, placed in concentration camps, held hostage and some were turned into human sandbags.  This racial animosity was clearly evident of the lack of humanity society placed in their black citizens.

So is the case today.  News of the latest Census Bureau poverty statistics were lost in the news cycle this past week.  The 2004 data shows the number of people living in poverty rose last year.  In fact, now 37 million Americans now live below the poverty line.  The largest concentration of poverty is in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi.  The hurricane of disenfranchisement has flooded the Gulf Coast and the reality of its effects is made clear when physical disaster strikes.

In New Orleans, the eye of  poverty's hurricane is even more evident.  50% of its children live in poverty.  15% of the elderly live in poverty.  Overall, 28% of New Orleans' adults live in poverty--double the national average.  Being poor in America is worse enough -- especially when you have three levels of government, which have not given adequate attention to this problem.  In essense it's hard as hell to be poor in the Big Easy.

It seems in this evacuation this reality was absent.  There was no official transportation given to evacuees who couldn't leave.   There wasn't enough advocacy to leave spread across the city.  Nor was there any real police presence shown to protect those who did tread through water to leave.

And now the situation will become worst --  these people are now without jobs and without the homes they could've used to rebuild their economy strength hopelessness seems to be quite evident.  One question which looms is what will happen to these people in light of the Bush Administrations new bankruptcy law.  Will they be exempt from the narrowed ability for people to file for bankruptcy protections?

Without question it is a hardship to be poor in this country; but when you are poor and in the midst of a natural disaster, poverty becomes a death sentence.

Kapitol Hill publishes a commentary every Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment and check back next week for the next installment.

Georgia On My Mind

The deaths of three civil rights workers were given a drop of justice this Summer when one of the men accused of plotting and participating in their murder was convicted.  The three boys (two were Jewish and the other African-American) were in Philadelphia, Mississippi that fateful day to register  blacks and shine a light on the lack of protection for the basic right to vote.

Under Jim Crow, African-Americans were placed through exams and rigorous tests before they could be allowed to vote.  Many of them were found hanging from trees, while others were burned out of their homes and buisnesses because they fought or even spoke out for the ability to cast a ballot.

This month, hundreds if not thousands held a rally in Atlanta, Georgia to highlight the issue of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  This legislation was seen as one of the most profound initiatives in the Civil Rights Movement.  Under its protection African-Americans were able to go to the polls in droves and sparked a wave of  newly elected African-Americans entering the halls of Congress.

Under  technical reasons, the Voting Rights Act has to be renewed and the latest period ends in January 2007.  Civil and voter rights organizations across the country are galvanizing as much support as they can to put pressure on the Repubican controlled Congress to renew the Act before its protections end.

Despite popular belief, the Voting Rights Act does not give African-Americans the right to vote.  Those rights are granted by the Constitution and the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments firmly give each African-American the authority to exercise their voting power.

The Voting Rights Act does however, protect individuals from being disenfranchised or prohibited from voting or enables individuals to fight against policies, which could harm their voting rights.  One after effect of the Act's passage  was that many southern states were denied the right to change their voting procedures without federal approval.

This weekend the Justice Department did just that in Georgia.  Georgia's legislature passed a law requiring voters to provide a photo ID before they go into a voting booth.  The law eliminates other forms of ID such as a social security card, a birth certificate or utility bill from serving as identification.  Anyone who does not have a photo ID can vote through other means such as absentee ballot.

Critics of the law, which include the NAACP, the entire Black Georgia State Democrat Delegation, say the law will unfairly impact the African-American community.  While supports believe the law is necessary to protect against fraud.  The difference between the two sides seems to be critics have some clear facts and research to back their claim while the supports have only conjecture.  For example, proponents of the bill cite fraud as a major reason, yet Georgia does not have a problem with people stealing someone's identity to vote.

However, Georgia has documented reports of absentee ballots fraud.  Strangely enough, this law relaxes the restrictions on this form of voting.

The NAACP says this law will unfairly affect the poor and the elderly in two ways.  First, they say the primary ID being required under the new law will be a driver's license or state identification -- this poses a negative result because the poor and elderly will not be able to afford the fees or it will place a burden on their already strapped pockets.  Second, they say the number of locations to get one of these forms of ID -- 56 in the entire state are not condusive for the poor or elderly because they are not in major areas-- infact the state recently eliminated the only two locatios in the city of Atlanta.

With those facts known, it does make wonder what is going on here.

In allowing the change, the Justice department said it's approval of the law doesn't preclude any lawsuits against it.  In other words, we'll allow the court system to sort the mess out.  Didn't we get enough of the courts getting involved in state's voting systems in 2000?

No one is suggsting Georgia's Republican party is conspiring to subtly revert back to the 1950s.  But, while the country awaits Congress' action on the Voting Rights Act, it seems reasonable to ask the Justice Department to seriously consider the implications and not brush the issue under  another branch of government's rug.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week.

Aint This A (Georgia) Peach

When history discloses the relationships some White slavemasters had with their African female slaves, all too often they are retold with a sense of romanticism.   Thomas Jefferson's relationship with his female slave Sally Hemmings is described as a love affair -- where the emotion felt between the two was sincere and heartfelt.

When it was revealed Senator Strom Thurmond had an African-American daughter, the relationship between the young Strom and his African-American caretaker was told as a loving story which was kept secret.  It was said Strom loved her -- so much so the daughter, Essie Mae Washington-Williams kept the secret until the Senator's death.

One thing striking about these "loving" relationships is they seem one-sided.  Could Sally Hemmings really rebuff the advances of Jefferson?  Could the then 16 year old Carre Buffer dismiss the advances of  Thurmond?  What would've happened to either of these women had they just said no -- and said no aggressively?

The answer to that question probably can be seen in the tragedy of Lena Baker.  Baker who in 1945 was sent to the electric chair for shooting and killing E.B. Knight.  Knight was a white man who in the 1940's hired Baker to take care of his home.  The relationship soon turned to an all to common scenerio -- he held her captive and essentially kept her to do all his bidding and fulfill his desires.  One night Baker took a gun and shot him when he raised a metal bar to hit her for not obeying his orders.

An all white,all male jury convicted her in a one-day trial.  Baker became the only woman ever executed in Georgia's electric chair.

Now 60 years later Georgia has decided to issue her a pardon.

In a ceremony on August 30th, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles will issue the pardon saying, while she is guilty of the crime she should have been given clemency-- calling that a "grievous error."

Today, the justice system would probably be a bit more fair.  Women who clearly in self-defense of their lives and freedom kill their attacker don't spend  much time in jail -- if at all - yet alone get the death penalty.

This 60 year old case is another example of how insignificant the rights and lives of Blacks - particularly in the deep south -- were at the time.  Her jury took very little time to decide her crime was inexcusable and her actions, I'm sure they thought, might spark a trend of black women standing up to their sex crazed white holders.

The Lena Baker story stands as a clear reminder of a tragic time in America's history and a testament to how far we've come.  But with the fact there is still more work to do to truly make our society truly live up to its promises it is no surprise to see why history would rather rewrite it's tragic past.   

Kapitol Hill publishes a commentary every Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment and check back next week for the next instalment.

Justice Too Blind Too Often Part II

Pennsylvania was founded upon religious freedom. The Society of Friends or Quakers as they are more commonly known, concentrated in the Penn colonly to practice a different view of their relationship with God.  Quakers believed they could have a direct relationship with God without the mediation of a minister or pastor.  In otherwords, they believed each individual person could be spiritual enough to have a direct conversation with God and be assured he would listen.

Where is that sense of spirtuality in 2005 -- especially as it relates to the treatment of Thomas Doswell.

Doswell was recently released from prison after spending 19 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.  Like many of the 160 other prisoners who've been exonerated, Doswell is African-American and  accused of raping a White woman.  The prosecutors did not put up much of a fight after DNA evidence proved Doswell shouldn't have even been arrested.  Even the judge apologized for sentencing him.  But not State Attorney General Tom Corbett.

Pennsylvania is one of  nearly 30 states, which has no law to compensate people who were wrongly convicted of a crime.  In fact, Corbett's attitude is simply there is no need for one and if there is to be recourse let it be done in civil court.  To be fair,  Corbett's seemingly harsh attitude stems from his belief these exonerations are so rare  in the Quaker State they don't rise to the level of needing any legislation and a similar civil suit in Arizona did cost that state $1.4 million dollars -- hardly a pultry sum.

But it seem disingenious for Mr. Corbett to just throw up his hands at the situation.  There are a number of state legislators working to pass compensation bills but there seems to be some things Corbett and indeed all 50 states can do immediately.

For instance, these states can immediately offer exonerated prisoners the same services as paroled felons.  Exonerated prisoners are not eligible for job services, educational programs or other essential tools needed to help them reintroduce themselves to society.  It seems illogical these unfortuante people aren't provided with the assistance to find a job  or obtian a skill they never received because they were busy making license plates for the state.  This doesn't require a Governor's signature -- just a change in correctional facility policy

Fortunately, there are a few nonprofits such as Life After Exoneration Program (LAEP), pronounced "leap" that are working hard to fill the gap government agencies have refused to provide. 

Without the help of those who thank God want to give back to these unfortunate victims, these exonerated prisoners may ultimately end up back in prison.

Kapitol Hill  publishes a new commentary every Sunday.  Please feel free to leave a comment and remember to check back next week for the next installment.