What Does Unemployment Look Like for People Like You? Well, That Depends.

They say that crisis often makes strange bedfellows, and tends to bring people together regardless of age-old factors that really don’t, and shouldn’t, matter at all. But, that adage isn’t proving true in the current job market. The lopsided disparity in those most likely to land work today — and those who won’t — can’t be ignored.

The lack of racial and ethnic diversity in many job sectors, particularly corporate America, was apparent well before the recession. But now, it’s pretty much across the board. In November 2009, the New York Times (NYT) published an article entitled, “Unemployment for People Like You,” which included an interactive indicator of unemployment by various criteria, including gender and race. For those of us who took the time to fill in criteria and view the results, the numbers are stunning especially for  black men.

The current study from the Center for American Progress (CAP) helps to provide insight into the current recession’s desparate affect on minorities.  More importantly, it renews the call for changes in social policy to help to restore some degree of equality and keep everyone ‘honest’ particularly in hiring practices. Another recent article in the NYT highlighted the exceptional difficulties faced by even well-educated blacks in finding work in today’s market. Even higher education, generally a key differentiator, does not seem to significantly help minorities in landing jobs. More to the point, the NYT article states, “Education, it seems, does not level the playing field — in fact, it appears to have made it more uneven.” CAP’s current study reiterates these points and others in greater depth. Unfortunately, not even the White House can do anything to change this pattern in a meaningful way. Change must come through revised public policy, and that will be an uphill battle in the rhetorical ‘post-racial America.’

Last Fall, the CAP also published a report about the inequality many minorities face in mortgage lending practices by key banks in the US.  Subprime lending negatively impacted – and continues to impact – thousands of Americans of all races across the board. But in reading CAP’s study, it’s clearly a matter of the ‘fox in the hen house’ when it comes to Blacks and Latinos:

Overall, 17.8 percent of white borrowers were given higher-priced mortgages when borrowing from large banks in 2006, yet 30.9 percent of Hispanics and a staggering 41.5 percent of African Americans got higher-priced mortgages. Only 11.5 percent of Asians got higher-priced mortgages.

Why do these things matter? Because in the big picture, it highlights the negative impact of institutionalized inequality and racism. I can’t help but wonder if the minorities who supported the decimation of Affirmative Action (AA) programs over the past twenty years feel the same today. One of the main slogans from the United Negro College Fund in the 1980′s used to be, “I’m not asking for a handout, just a hand,” and that’s the way most minorities view AA.  My ego won’t allow me to consider anything that is offered because the standards are lowered for me. However, I do want to at least compete on a level playing field. With the dismantling of AA policies, there’s very little incentive for many companies to maintain a commitment to racial and ethnic diversity in a meaningful manner. In fact, some have gone so far as to bastardize how ‘diversity’ in the workplace is even defined (e.g. ‘where you’ve lived’).

Needless, to say, everyone in America — regardless of race — has been impacted by the current recession, and this blog note is not meant to marginalize anyone’s pain in these challenging times. But for some – many of whom were already experiencing an economic recession long before it was labeled as such — things are much worse than for the general population.

The Day After Mid-term Elections 2010

For those voters who wanted to take back their government: I hope you take it – and us – back to the ’70s, because I was young and cute then. Barring that, I hope you consider taking it forward, instead, to a place where children in Hartford get fed, the homeless in Stamford get housed and we stop this useless bashing of one another long enough to make our government take its responsibilities just a little more seriously. – Susan Campbell, Columnist, Hartford Courant

Ms. Campbell’s column, “Connecticut’s Election Is Over: Thank God. Did We Learn Anything?” nicely sums up what many of us are thinking today, the ‘Day After’ one of the most colorful election seasons in recent history. This morning, I find myself suffering from a terrible headache of TMI on candidates’ personal lives coupled with the pains of serious, unanswered questions about their political views on key issues that matter to me.

Though many hate to admit it, the diversity of political views combined with the strength in national leadership from the Nutmeg state make it a certain kind of bellwether for the rest of the country. As I followed national coverage of the 2010 mid-term election results last night, I kept a close eye on things in my adopted home state of Connecticut as well.  True to form, Connecticut maintained its moderate stance, punctuated by the election of the State’s former – and very effective – Attorney General Dick Blumenthal to the United States Senate.

But this year’s races in Connecticut were a departure of sorts from the normally collegial competition that we’ve seen in prior years (having lived in Texas during elections before, I can call CT downright friendly in comparison to the Lone Star state where during the early 90′s things got so ugly that one national candidate questioned the gender of his competitor’s mother). Unfortunately, this year, Connecticut saw itself drawn into the national low-brow spectator sport of political-bashing instead of the clear issues-hashing that we really need.

Oh well…the next two years will be interesting to say the least. As Bette Davis said so famously in “All About Eve,” “Fasten your seatbelts, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.”

Hate-riotism and “Jim Crow Terrorism” as the Tea Party Movement Plays the Race Card

DW Griffith's "Birth of a Nation"

As word spreads that Sarah Palin is eager to sign up as the newest card-carrying member of the Tea Party movement, many Americans ponder the real purpose and intent of this homegrown, so-called nationalist organization.  With the mainstream media’s help, the Tea Party constantly screams for legitimacy. But actions and words are telling, as clearly evident in Tea Party members’ hurling of homophobic and racist epithets at Democratic lawmakers over the weekend. A few courageous news outlets have posted the truth – that this weekend’s display of intolerance and bigotry over Health Care Reform was not an isolated incident within this ‘movement’. If the Tea Party’s ‘leaders’ really do not condone this rhetoric, then they need to be clear and firm – in and out of the spotlight. The Nation has perfectly summed up what many of us have been thinking about this group whose primary purpose appears not to be in the best interests of the country, but rather in hate and separatism as America tries to heal from near catastrophic ruin:

As I watch the rising tide of racial anxiety and secessionist sentiment I am not so much reminded of the Bloody Sunday protests as I am reminded of D.W. Griffith’s Birth of Nation. This 1915 film depicts the racist imagination currently at work in our nation as a black president first appoints a Latina Supreme Court Justice and then works with a woman Speaker of the House to pass sweeping national legislation. This bigotry assumes no such government could possibly be legitimate and therefore frames resistance against this government as a patriotic responsibility.

Read more at The Nation.

Where is the love? Black Eyed Peas

The fact that there’s so much rancor around something so essential as accessible health care for all Americans has got me questioning…

ABC News’ Checkbook Journalism: The Best Independent News Reporting Money Can Buy?

Caylee

I was listening to National Public Radio today and heard an interesting story, outing ABC News for its checkbook journalism in its coverage of alleged child murderer Casey Anthony. An ABC News spokesperson confirmed this week that  in 2008, ABC News paid Anthony $200,000 in exchange for exclusive rights to pictures and other information during the time of her child Caylee Anthony’s disappearance (Caylee’s body has since been found and Anthony is soon to go to trial for her murder). Ethical violations aside, there’s something very disturbing about a television news network paying an alleged child murderer for information related to her heinous deeds. Because Anthony has not gone to trial, she was able to profit from her alleged crime because US law only prohibits convicted murderers from making a buck off their handiwork.

In the race for ratings, the news, which should be a source of objective, fact-based coverage of important issues, has become just another reality show circus, short on substance, high on gloss. I read and/or listen to several news sources before I analyze them all for myself and determine where the closest ‘truth’ lies (usually somewhere in the middle of them all).

On February 1, 1960, the “Greensboro Four” Led the Greensboro, NC Civil Rights Sit-Ins – And Changed America in the Process

'Greensboro Four' Civil Rights Activists

“Harlem” (more commonly known as “A Dream Deferred”)

What happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
Like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore–
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over–
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?

– Langston Hughes (1951)

“With their very bodies, the Greensboro Four obstructed the Wheels of Injustice” at a Woolworth’s Lunch Counter in Greensboro, North Carolina. The Los Angeles Times has written an excellent article today in recognition of the “Greensboro Four” Black college students who on February 1, 1960, decided to take a dramatic though non-violent stand against bigotry and in doing so, changed the course of American Civil Rights history. Their names are:

• Jibreel Khazan (Ezell Blair Jr.)
• Franklin Eugene McCain
• Joseph Alfred McNeil
• David Leinail Richmond

As noted in the Los Angeles Times, the sit-in led to the formation in Raleigh of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), which became the cutting edge of the student direct-action civil rights movement. The demonstrations between 1960 and 1965 helped pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. I was pleased to see that the Los Angeles Times had not forgotten the fight and struggle of a people – my people – to gain equal status in the country we helped to build and prosper. I’ve liberally excerpted a few passages from the LA Times (below) but I hope you will read their article in its entirety via this link and also visit the Greensboro Sit Ins website via this link to fully understand and appreciate what occurred during this critical segment of the Civil Rights movement.

From February 1, 2010 online edition of the Los Angeles Times:

The “sixties” were born on Feb. 1, 1960, 50 years ago this week, when four African American college students staged the first sit-in at a segregated lunch counter in Greensboro, N.C. Since then, the mythology of the ’60s has dominated the idea of youthful activism.

Of the three big events of the early civil rights movement — the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision, the 1955-56 Montgomery bus boycott and the sit-ins — the sit-ins have always been the least understood and, yet, the most important for today’s young activists.

…In the time before Twitter, the rapid spread of the sit-ins was shocking. The first sit-in was an impulsive act, led by college students. They spread to Nashville, Atlanta, Miami, Durham, N.C., and Little Rock, Ark. — more than 70 cities and towns in eight weeks. By summer, more than 50,000 people had taken part in one.

At the time, this was not just the largest black protest against segregation ever; it was the largest outburst of civil disobedience in American history. The sit-ins rewrote the rules of protest. They were remarkably egalitarian: Everyone participated; everyone was in equal danger. And they went viral because they were easy to copy. All one needed for a sit-in was some friends and a commitment to a few simple principles of nonviolent protest.

Most important, the sit-ins were designed to highlight the immorality of segregation by forcing Southern policemen to arrest polite, well-dressed college students sitting quietly just trying to order a shake or a burger. The students believed deeply in Thoreau’s idea that the only place for a just person in an unjust society is jail.

Contrary to what many think because of the historic 2009 Presidential election, the US, like most of the world, is still a work in progress when it comes to race relations, civil rights and equality, but at least we’re now trying to bring about and sustain necessary changes through peaceful actions supported by clear determination.

I was speaking with a friend last week about Civil Rights, and the lack of smart, dedicated and diplomatic leadership for the current generation of minorities in America. Sure, there are certainly promising points of light like Corey Booker, the current Mayer of Newark, New Jersey, and Adrian Fenty, Mayor of Washington, DC, the nation’s capital, but youths need leadership, full of ethical, knowledgeable and courageous advocates who will work diligently to address the significant challenges minorities face disproportionately virtually across the board, especially in terms of employment, housing, etc. A few weeks ago, I wrote a blog note entitled, “What does unemployment look like for you (via this link),” which highlights deep concerns about the underlying reasons for the troubling disparity in employment numbers especially for Black men with college educations. With gaps this large, it’s not just ‘the poor economy.’

As I close this note, I find myself re-reading Langston Hughes’ “Harlem” (more commonly known as “A Dream Deferred”) and thinking about the generation of youths and young adults we’re losing today through lack of education and lack of opportunities. I may be in my senior years when another, major Civil Rights movement comes along, but I hope that it will occur, once again through peaceful means with dogged determination to help guide future generations of multi-racial Americans into peaceful and productive co-existence and true, lasting integration.

“Why Can’t” I Own a Canadian, Google?

From the files of “ok, guess I missed the humor in THAT joke”: I was reading my February 1, 2010 home edition of New York Magazine (NYM) and saw a curious note in the Highbrow/Brilliant quadrant of the Magazine’s Approval Matrix . The entry was about Google’s auto-fill in ‘assistance’ when you prepare for a search using the words “why can’t“. Just as FYI…self-described by NYM as “our deliberately oversimplified guide to who falls where on our taste hierarchies,” the Approval Matrix is one of those sections that we subscribers love to chew on because it’s usually hilarious and spot-on with it’s ‘rankings’. If you haven’t seen it before, here’s an example of an older Approval Matrix (don’t think it’s updated online anymore).

Anyway, looks like Google‘s may have some explaining to do to our friends up North:

When you type in “why can’t” into Google, one of the auto fill-in options it gives you is “why can’t I own a Canadian.”

- February 1, 2010 home edition of New York Magazine

When I typed in the words “why can’t” and searched Google today, sure enough, “why can’t I own a Canadian” was the very first auto-fill option Google presented to me.

It could have been worse I guess, but not if you’re Canadian.

In the same issue, we Americans didn’t fare much better as NYM pointed out in the “Highbrow/Despicable” quadrant:

The Supreme Court rules against campaign-finance laws because they ‘censor’ the rights of corporations.

Web Quickies: Rielle Hunter Files Restraining Order for Alleged John Edwards Sex Tape

Rielle Hunter

It’s been a busy month for John Edwards’ Baby Mama Rielle Hunter . She’s finally gotten long overdue legal and public recognition of her and Edward’s love child; Edwards and his wife have split; and now comes word that Hunter’s attempting to block a personal video tape made during her and Edwards’ affair. Hunter doesn’t leave much to the imagination in the affidavit for a restraining order her attorneys filed in North Carolina on January 28, 2010. According to news reports, she’s attempting to block publication of an apparently very interesting ‘flick’ she made in 2006 while she and then US Presidential Candidate John Edwards were lovers:

“…In or about September 2006, using my video camera, I authored a personal video recording that depicted matters of a very private and personal nature,” Hunter wrote in an affidavit filed Thursday. “In 2006, I was also having an intimate relationship with Edwards.”

- Washington Post

There’s no mystery to what she wants to keep under covers, but I’ll say this for Ms. Hunter: she sure knows how to tantalize.

Center for American Progress’s Take on Larry Platt’s Pants on the Ground

By now, I think everyone in the world has heard 62 year-old American Idol sensation Larry Platt’s “Pants on the Ground.” Just in case you haven’t… “Pants on the ground” is Platt’s protest rap to what we’ve all been lamenting for years — the legions of young men who for some odd reason refuse to pull up their pants and properly adjust their belts when they leave home. Many folks have parodied the track so it’s only fitting that the Cartoon Group at the Center for American Progress (CAP) have added their two cents with a political slant.

Yes, CAP, we Americans can relate.

Pants Around the Ankles - Courtesy of Center for American Progress

What Does Unemployment Look Like for People Like You? Well, It Depends.

They say that crisis often makes strange bedfellows, and tends to bring people together regardless of age-old factors that really don’t, and shouldn’t, matter at all. But, that adage isn’t proving true in the current job market. The lopsided disparity in those most likely to land work today — and those who won’t — can’t be ignored.

The lack of racial and ethnic diversity in many job sectors, particularly corporate America, was apparent well before the recession. But now, it’s pretty much across the board. In November 2009, the New York Times (NYT) published an article entitled, “Unemployment for People Like You,” which included an interactive indicator of unemployment by various criteria, including gender and race. For those of us who took the time to fill in criteria and view the results, the numbers are stunning especially for  black men.

The current study from the Center for American Progress (CAP) helps to provide insight into the current recession’s desparate affect on minorities.  More importantly, it renews the call for changes in social policy to help to restore some degree of equality and keep everyone ‘honest’ particularly in hiring practices. Another recent article in the NYT highlighted the exceptional difficulties faced by even well-educated blacks in finding work in today’s market. Even higher education, generally a key differentiator, does not seem to significantly help minorities in landing jobs. More to the point, the NYT article states, “Education, it seems, does not level the playing field — in fact, it appears to have made it more uneven.” CAP’s current study reiterates these points and others in greater depth. Unfortunately, not even the White House can do anything to change this pattern in a meaningful way. Change must come through revised public policy, and that will be an uphill battle in the rhetorical ‘post-racial America.’

Last Fall, the CAP also published a report about the inequality many minorities face in mortgage lending practices by key banks in the US.  Subprime lending negatively impacted – and continues to impact – thousands of Americans of all races across the board. But in reading CAP’s study, it’s clearly a matter of the ‘fox in the hen house’ when it comes to Blacks and Latinos:

Overall, 17.8 percent of white borrowers were given higher-priced mortgages when borrowing from large banks in 2006, yet 30.9 percent of Hispanics and a staggering 41.5 percent of African Americans got higher-priced mortgages. Only 11.5 percent of Asians got higher-priced mortgages.

Why do these things matter? Because in the big picture, it highlights the negative impact of institutionalized inequality and racism. I can’t help but wonder if the minorities who supported the decimation of Affirmative Action (AA) programs over the past twenty years feel the same today. One of the main slogans from the United Negro College Fund in the 1980′s used to be, “I’m not asking for a handout, just a hand,” and that’s the way most minorities view AA.  My ego won’t allow me to consider anything that is offered because the standards are lowered for me. However, I do want to at least compete on a level playing field. With the dismantling of AA policies, there’s very little incentive for many companies to maintain a commitment to racial and ethnic diversity in a meaningful manner. In fact, some have gone so far as to bastardize how ‘diversity’ in the workplace is even defined (e.g. ‘where you’ve lived’).

Needless, to say, everyone in America — regardless of race — has been impacted by the current recession, and this blog note is not meant to marginalize anyone’s pain in these challenging times. But for some – many of whom were already experiencing an economic recession long before it was labeled as such — things are much worse than for the general population.