White Supremacists and next week’s visit by Angela Davis
This Wednesday, the Grand Rapids Community College Diversity Lecture Series continues with author and activists Angela Davis. Davis will speak at Fountain Street Church on February 10 at 7pm. The lecture is free and open to the public.
Angela Davis has been a writer, speaker and activists for over four decades now. Angela became involved in the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s, was a member of the Communist Party in the US and later active in the Black Panther Party for Self Defense.
In the early 70s she was on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted list and a target of the agency’s COITELPRO campaign – a counter-intelligence campaign that sought to discredit, harass, imprison or assassinate dissidents in the US. In 1972, Davis became a political prisoner in the State of California.
Since her time in prison Angela Davis has been a professor at several universities in the country, teaching feminist studies and Black history. Davis is the author of several books and has focused her attention and scholarship on the issue of prisons in the US, what she calls the Prison Industrial Complex.
The most recent books by Angela Davis are Abolition Democracy: Beyond Empire, Prisons and Torture, Are Prisons Absolete?, and she wrote an introduction to a new edition of the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglas. Later this month, City Lights Books will publish her newest book, The Meaning of Freedom.
White Supremacists and other opposition
When it was announced last summer what the schedule for the 2009-2010 GRCC Diversity Lecture series, objections to Davis being a presenter were made public. Grand Rapids Community College Trustee Richard Ryskamp publicly condemned the school’s decision to include Davis on the schedule. Ryskamp was quoted in the Grand Rapids Press as saying, “Angela Davis has been a member of the Black Panthers and the Community Party, violent hate groups. She supplied weapons to groups that used them to kill people, and the communists have killed tens of millions of people over the years.”
Ryskamp, who was elected recently as a GRCC trustee, is not shy about his conservative christian worldview, but he was not the only person to object to Davis’s visit. If you read some of the online comments at Mlive.com in response to the article about Ryskamp, you can see that some people have clear issues with Davis speaking in Grand Rapids.
One respondent said, “Funny how when a Black Racist comes to town they are welcomed with open arms and hailed as a champion of free speech. I wonder many of these hypocrites would be defending a KKK member or Neo Nazi if they were speaking. I am willing to bet a lot of money that the same people who idolize this racist would be demanding that the KKK members be barred.”
However, MLive was not the only place that people voiced their objections to Angela Davis. The White Supremacist and white Nationalist website Stormfront also generated a significant amount of coverage at the time of the Press article. Here are a few comments from the site:
“Angela Davis is a communist. Feminist. Former Black Panther. She ran for vice president in 1984 in the Communist Party US. Let’s get involved and stand against filth like this.”
“Is that n**ger still around?!!! Hope you create a major turnout-best of luck to you all!!”
One posting has a quote from John Wilkes Booth – “This country was formed for the White not for the Black man. And looking upon African slavery from the same stand-point, as held by those noble framers of our constitution, I, for one, have ever considered it one of the greatest blessings that God ever bestowed upon a favoured nation.”
It is important for people who attend this lecture to be aware that White Supremacists may be in attendance and might ask questions about “diversity.”
American Casino documents how deregulation stole the American dream
The Foreclosure Response screening of American Casino brought a good size crowd to the Celebration Cinema theatre. The film documented how, beginning with deregulation in 1980, predatory lending practices began defrauding Americans of their homes. The American dream became an American nightmare as crooked mortgage loan
officers learned they could easily falsifying mortgage applications—without the applicant’s knowledge or consent; bring a totally different loan and payment amount to the closing table than previously discussed; and high pressure folks into trusting and signing on the dotted lines.
In a nut shell, deregulation actually made people losing their homes a profitable venture for investors at the top of the chain. When banks realized the guarantees they sold were going to leave them with gigantic losses, they conned insurance firms, like AIG, into insuring the guarantees. Who bails them out? The same American taxpayers that deregulation screwed over in the first place. The film stated that by the time we are done bailing these giants out from their own failed craps shoot, it will cost every American $42,000.
American Casino documents how large financial firms, like Wells Fargo, specifically targeted minority homeowners. The film profiles a young high school social studies teacher, a middle aged social worker and a minister. All are well educated, good hearted, articulate African Americans—and all were victims of predatory lending. Two end up losing their homes, one remains homeless, sleeping in a friend’s car.
The film also discusses the effects of foreclosures on neighborhoods. Lowered property values cause more foreclosures. As homes stand vacant, meth labs, rats and, in California, disease-carrying mosquitos breed illness, crime and high costs for municipalities.
After the film, panelists Darel Ross, Lighthouse Communities, Inc.; John Smith, Legal Aid of West Michigan; and Tracie Coffman, Home Repair Services fielded audience questions. The discussion started out well but would have fared better had more homeowners asked questions rather than professionals. One query that brought concurrence among the crowd was “Why don’t the mortgage companies share in the devaluation of a home along with the homeowner?”
Of course, the panelists had no answer for this one. While these and other agencies are providing homeowners facing foreclosure with excellent guidance with new federal programs designed to keep folks in their homes, the elephant remains in the room.
People who already lost their homes will never get them back. Another wave of foreclosures is eminent. The investors, who made billions by defrauding millions of Americans, go unpunished and are still making their million dollar bonuses. Few new regulations are being put in place. And, while keeping people in their homes, programs to help homeowners don’t give a cent to homeowners stuck with sub-prime mortgages. They only adjust the mortgages so the people can pay a little less interest or take longer paying them off.
Foreclosure Response is tackling the job of working with city and state governments to implement measures that will help Michigan neighborhoods overcome blight and reduced property values. They are also enlisting neighbors to join the Eyes Wide Open Vacant Building Watch. Other opportunities for action will be posted on http://www.ForeclosureResponse.org in the coming months.
News Coverage of the State of the State Address
There is no shortage of local news coverage of last night’s State of the State address by Governor Granholm. News agencies in the Grand Rapids market all provided stories that gave a summary of what the Governor had to say, with most of the emphasis on jobs and state budget cuts.
Most local news agencies also had stories that focused on reactions from politicians and candidates. WXMI 17 ran a story that included comments from two State Representative and one State Senator. There comments tended to follow along parties lines, some with criticism and no concrete solutions to the issues addressed in the Governor’s speech.
The Grand Rapids Press also had a reaction piece, with seven responses from State legislators from West Michigan. Most of these responses were critical of the Governor’s speech, but some of the elected officials did acknowledge their willingness to work on some of the proposals put forth.
A WOOD radio story included reactions to the Governor’s speech from a few State Representatives and three of the Republican candidates for Governor. All three of the GOP gubernatorial candidates had negative responses to Granholm’s speech.
One thing that was missing from all the coverage was that there were no non-partisan perspectives. The WOOD radio story included a comment from the Mackinac Center, but one would be hard pressed to say that this organization did not have a partisan bias in favor of Republicans.
Protestors
In addition to reaction from legislators and candidates there was a fair amount of coverage about the various citizen groups that came to the State Capitol to express their views before the State of the State address. However, there were several different groups represented their, a fact that sometimes got lost in the coverage.
The WOOD radio story said that the protestors gathered outside in what “they had said would be about the State of the Citizen.” The Clear Channel station makes no distinction between the groups that had gathered. The Fox 17 story also at times doesn’t make any clear distinction in their story about protestors, not until their was a conflict between some of the groups present.
The Press ran an AP story that did acknowledge some of the groups protesting outside the capital, such as the Michigan Taxpayers Alliance and the Detroit-based group Moratorium Now Coalition. The article also acknowledges that there was a student group at the capitol protesting education cuts, but it is not clear how this group was organized. The student group was with the MSU Undergraduate Alliance.
The best coverage we found on the groups protesting was from the independent online news site, The Michigan Messenger. Reporter Todd Heywood provided readers with a good balance of comments from several groups on the lawn of the State Capitol. Heywood also did a nice job of verifying some of the claims made by protestors based on their what the Governor actual said in her speech.
Another good indication of the independent journalism provided by The Michigan Messenger was their investigation into some of the material being handed out by those organized by the Michigan Taxpayer Alliance. Heywood said there “was passing out DVDs which he said every American needed to see. Among the five videos were two outlining the Jewish conspiracy to destroy America (Missing Link and Know Your Enemy) and one on the need to be a member of a militia or be tried and hung for treason (Constitutional Militia).”
Courting Disaster: The Weise v Casper Decision
A collapsing economy. A massive earthquake in the long-suffering country of Haiti. The Supreme Court inviting corporations to control our elections. Health care “reform” turned into a gigantic gift to the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries. With all this in the current news cycle, why should we turn our attention to a court case in Colorado that seems to be about—bumper stickers?
On January 27, the United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, ruled on Weise v Casper. This case, which got little mainstream media attention, is actually a significant First Amendment case that was brought into court with the help of the ACLU. It addresses one of the many staggering violations of citizens’ rights to free speech that occurred during the last decade.
In 2005, George W. Bush gave a speech at a museum in Colorado. It was a public event, funded by the government. But as usual, the Bush White House vetted the audience. Even though the tickets were supposedly handed out on a first-come first-served basis, Secret Service agents turned away audience members who might possibly disagree with Bush’s speech. Anyone who ever attempted to attend a George W. Bush event during his presidency is thoroughly familiar with this “perimeter of protection.” It denied not only protesters but any non-conservatives the right to hear their president speak—while all taxpayers footed the bill for the appearances.
At the museum event, Leslie Weise and Alex Young, who’d been given their tickets by their congressional representative, were kicked out before the speech started. Alex Young was physically dragged from the building, and Leslie Weise was “escorted” out after him. Why? Because Secret Service agents noticed that they’d arrived in a car with a ‘No More Blood for Oil” bumper sticker on it. And now a federal appeals court has said that there’s no problem with that treatment.
Never mind that a similar case, involving a protester’s sign during the Vietnam War era, came to a completely different conclusion because, the court said, the sign represented the protester’s own views and therefore “was entitled to the greatest constitutional protection.” This decision also ignores another groundbreaking case, New York Times v Sullivan, in which the court stated, “The right of an American citizen to criticize public officials and policies and to advocate peacefully ideas for change is the central meaning of the First Amendment.” And while we’re at it, let’s shove aside dozens of other rulings in the past 30 years that have consistently protected free speech in this country.
The 10th Circuit Court knows better. It has now decided that the bumper sticker was immaterial; that Weise and Young did not have any “inherent right” to hear their president speak; and that the Secret Service had the right to throw them out of the museum because, even though it was a public event, it was held on private property. Plus (where have you heard this argument before?) the Secret Service agents were just following orders.
One judge on the case, William Holloway, was so appalled by the majority decision that he wrote an unusually blunt dissenting opinion. In it, he pointed out that Weise and Young had gotten their tickets openly, had not done anything to disrupt the event or even indicate that they planned to disrupt it—that their sole “crime” was that they made it plain via a bumper sticker that they disagreed with Bush’s policies.
First Holloway slammed Bush by stating, “It is simply astounding that any member of the executive branch could have believed that our Constitution justified this egregious violation of plaintiffs’ rights.”
Then Holloway turned on his fellow judges and called them “misguided,” adding, “We address here speech that is unquestionably protected, or more accurately, entitled to be protected under the First Amendment. It is severely distressing that such protection is not forthcoming from this court.”
Why is this case important? It sets a precedent that other conservatives can use to attack free speech in the court system. This decision clearly ignores basic First Amendment rights—since the bumper sticker, just like the protester’s sign, is an expression of an individual opinion. As the decisions pile up, they will take on the authority of case law—and be followed routinely in future court rulings.
Just as importantly, the outcome of this case is another example of how the last decade’s far-right-wing appointees to the judicial bench are going to change the way that we are able to express our opinions and exercise our rights as citizens for years to come.
If the ACLU is not successful in finding a way to get this decision overturned, you can bet that Weise v Caspar will haunt future cases for a long time to come. In the meantime, think about what you put on your car bumper, carry in a march, or write to a newspaper. In the not-so-distant future, thanks to the 10th Circuit Court, you may find that speaking your mind is no longer your protected right under the law.
Action Alert on Afghanistan
The Rethink Afghanistan group is asking people to take action today to pressure Washington on the dangers of sending additional US troops to Afghanistan. They write:
“The New York Times recently published the full text of U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry’s memo to President Obama detailing his deep reservations about sending more troops to Afghanistan. The White House ignored his warnings and sent troops anyway.
With the House Armed Services Committee set to begin the 2011 Defense Department budget process on Wednesday, February 3rd, it’s essential that its members read Eikenberry’s warnings about the dangers of deepening U.S. military involvement in the Afghanistan war.”
The anti-war in Afghanistan group is asking people to sign a petition on Twitter and then send the message to friends. There is also a short video they produced which accompanies the action alert.
Rethink Afghanistan screening 2/4 at Aquinas College
This Thursday, February 4, the documentary Rethink Afghanistan will be screened at Aquinas College. The hour long documentary will begin at 7pm at Aquinas College in Albertus Hall – room 119. Albertus Hall is the first building on the right once you enter the Aquinas Campus off of Robinson Rd. Parking is available off of Robinson Rd. by Albertus Hall the the Preforming Arts Center.
The film screening is free and open to the public. The Aquinas College student Social Action Committee (SAC) is hosting the screening. A discussion of US policy in Afghanistan will follow the film.
Media Bites – Bush/Clinton Haiti Ad
In this week’s Media Bites we look at a recent public service announcement with former President’s Bush and Clinton asking for people to donate to their Haiti Relief fund. We take a critical look at the history of US policy towards Haiti, particularly during the Clinton and Bush years, something the mainstream news media has not done during the disaster coverage of Haiti since the earthquake.
Film event reveals causes of foreclosure crisis, provides homeowners help and presents advocacy options
Foreclosure Response presents: American Casino
Celebration Cinema North, Knapps Corners
Thursday Feb. 4
• 6:30 – 7:00 p.m. Browse information from nonprofits, agencies and government officials. Staff will be on hand to answer questions.
• 7 – 8:40 p.m. American Casino.
Reserve free tickets at www.ForeclosureResponse.org.
• 8:30 – 9:30 Q&A/panel discussion about local efforts to stop the foreclosure crisis.
The film, American Casino, lays out how the mortgage industry turned the US into a casino that gambled away millions of American’s homes. Since 2004, 6,773 homes have been lost to foreclosure in the city of Grand Rapids alone. The rate of foreclosure is slowing some. In the past year (September 2008 – September 2009), 1,353 foreclosures went through. The decrease in foreclosures is due to federal and state of Michigan measures that have extended some protections to homeowners.
“Our foreclosure rates were lower than the previous two years,” says Kym Spring, spokesperson for Foreclosure Response. “Part of the reason is attributed to the outstanding job that our housing counselors have been doing. We passed a law in Michigan last July that mandates a 90 day mediation period between the homeowner or the housing counselor representing them. That has really helped as well.”
Spring notes that local housing counselors, such as those at Home Repair Services, have an outstanding success rate; 47% of the homeowners HRS has counseled have managed to hold on to their homes. What many homeowners do not realize, housing counseling is available to anyone in foreclosure, no matter what their income.
“If people are experiencing this financial strain, housing counseling can offer those that can’t stay in their homes a good choice of options,” Spring explains. “It can be very confusing. At least they can make an informed decision about next steps.”
The new Michigan regulations have provided more protections for those renting their homes, as well. A renter in good standing can stay in a foreclosed home. The new owner has to let them sign a new lease, unless the owner occupies the home. In that case, the renter can remain in the home for 90 days.
Screwed or laid off.
As the documentary will show, the majority of people are losing their homes through no fault of their own. They were hoodwinked into signing a mortgage that misled them about costs and payments. Or, they lost their homes as a result of losing their jobs. “ They got screwed or laid off,” Spring says. “The reality is loss of income or escalated mortgage payment. It was not in their control.”
The film also documents how people of color were targeted by subprime mortgages, no matter what their income level. Spring says that local statistics bear this out, showing that mortgage companies did indeed target African American and Hispanic families in the Grand Rapids area.
Spring notes that after targeting people of color, these lenders turned next to senior citizens. She predicts that a second wave of home foreclosures among this population in the coming months.
More citizen action needed.
Spring calls the companies behind the subprime mortgage scandal “Slime.” “They are going to continue to figure out ways to seed their greed unless we put in some serious stop gap measures and regulations. Reagan started the deregulation and Clinton put the nails in the coffin, in terms of talking away consumer protections.”
The State of Michigan passed legislation to help homeowners facing foreclosure only because constituents and groups like Foreclosure Response put pressure on their legislators. The measure passed in spite of intense lobbying by banks and lending institutions. Continuing grass roots citizen action is needed to enact more and better laws to protect not only those facing foreclosure, but also the neighborhoods where they live.
Foreclosures reduce property values, create blight and increase crime. “For all those reasons, it’s important that everyone in the community be exposed to this information and look at what they can do,” Spring says. Foreclosure Response will provide options for taking action on their Website in upcoming weeks. “You can also just help spread the word. If you have missed even one payment, get in to see a housing counselor. Beware of scams. Go to a nonprofit housing counseling service. They don’t charge and they don’t care what your income level is.”
Money in the 2010 Michigan Elections
The Grand Rapids Press has two front-page stories in today’s paper about candidate fundraising in Michigan. One article provides some data on how much money has been raised in the Michigan Governor’s race and a second article looks at the Congressional candidates running to fill Rep. Pete Hoekstra’s seat.
According to the Press article on Gubernatorial candidates, Rick Synder has raised the most money so far ($3.3 million), followed by Mike Cox ($1.8 million), John Cherry ($1.36 million – dropped out), Mike Bouchard ($888,149), Pete Hoekstra ($475,807), Tom George ($199,791), John Freeman ($84,688 – dropped out), and Alma Wheeler ($36,245). This means that all the candidates have raised a combined $8 million thus far.
The Press article on the amount of money raised by candidates for governor provide a brief summary from the candidates on their financial status, with little information on who has donated money to the various candidates at this point. The article also mentions that Rick Snyder plans to air a TV ad during the Super Bowl this Sunday. According to one Lansing-based Republican consultant, “It’ll give him a boost and will get people to look at his campaign when nobody else is on the tube.”
The story on the amount of money raised by those seeking the seat that Rep. Pete Hoekstra will vacate also focuses on the lead fundraiser. To date, Jay Riemersma has raised the most ($352,050), followed by Bill Cooper ($206,722), Bill Huizenga ($151,387), Wayne Kuipers ($57,915), and Fred Johnson ($7,291). Besides monies raised the story focuses on what candidates and other political insiders think about why the “non-traditional candidates” are raising more money.
What are excluded from these stories are two main issues for voters. First, there was no information on the platforms of candidates or the voting record of candidates who have or currently serve in office. Secondly, there is no investigation into why certain individuals, organizations and political action committees have donated to specific candidates and what they expect in return if their candidate is elected. To ignore this is to ignore a great deal of how politics works in this country.
GRIID plans on following the political races for 2010 and will attempt to provide some analysis of the media coverage as well as investigation into candidate platforms and campaign finances. For those wanting to investigate the data on their own you can go to the Michigan Secretary of State’s office for campaign finance updates or check out the monitoring work of the Michigan Campaign Finance Network.
The Press and Michigan’s Economic Future
Starting this past Sunday, the Grand Rapids Press is running a 10-part series on how Michigan can jump-start its economy. The series is called Michigan 10.0 and the first few stories in the series are already indicating what the Press means by improving Michigan’s economy.
The lead story on Sunday, entitled “What Will It Take to Get Our State Back to Work?,” almost exclusively uses business and economic consultants as sources for the story. There is a separate article in the Sunday Press, which focuses on workers, but that article only talk with and about workers from the point of view that workers need to be re-training in the new economy.
The main article in this Press series focuses on what business leaders are advocating, people like Steelcase CEO Jim Hacket, Amway President Doug DeVos and CEO of the Right Place, Birgit Klohs. The strategy that these business leaders propose is a five-point plan:
- Reform State government with an emphasis on downsizing it.
- Reform Labor policy that will be attractive to businesses.
- Focus on education & training – keeping students in school and providing training for new jobs.
- Capitalize on infrastructure, resources and expertise.
- Build policies geared toward helping small businesses.
Interestingly enough, this 5-point plan is very similar to the same 5-point plan that the West Michigan Regional Policy Conference came up with last year. The only major differences in these two 5-point plans is that the West Michigan Regional Policy group was advocating that Michigan become a right to work state….a non-union state.
This idea that organized labor makes the state unattractive to businesses is affirmed in a statement by Steelcase CEO Jim Hacket in Sunday’s Press story, where he says, “Our labor policy is not attractive to business. That gets politically toxic when it starts to drift into the issue of whether you’re union or not. I see it as a long-haul problem. At the same time, the perception of Michigan is negative, the attractiveness of labor rates in other parts of the world are more attractive.”
In today’s Grand Rapids Press there is another front-page piece that is part of this series, but it’s not a story, rather an opinion piece by Press writer Rich Haglund. The preface to the story says that Haglund’s piece is “written as a counterpoint” to the main story in the series that began Sunday.
While it is true that Haglund disagrees with some of the points of view articulated in the original article, he does not offer any real plan other than to say that Michigan can no longer rely on manufacturing, particularly the auto industry. Haglund believes Michigan needs to replace manufacturing jobs with “knowledge” jobs. Haglund still is arguing that Michigan’s economy must improve within a free market framework.
The emphasis on a free-market approach to saving Michigan’s economy is affirmed by an interview in Monday’s Press, which is part of the Michigan 10.0 series. The interview is with Doug Rothwell, CEO of Business Leaders for Michigan. The Business Leaders for Michigan group also has its own 5-point plan for turning Michigan’s economy around, called Michigan Turnaround Plan.
After reading the content of the first several articles in this Press series it seems clear that what the sources cited so far are saying is that in order for Michigan’s economy to thrive it needs to follow a free market plan – downsize government, minimize or eliminate organized labor and invest in education for the purpose of creating knowledge workers.
What the articles in this series so far have ignored is the tremendous role that workers have played in creating wealth in this state over the past century. The series so far has also not acknowledged the role that trade policy has played in impacting Michigan’s economic decline. By 2001 it was well documented by the Economic Policy Institute that Michigan had lost over 46,000 jobs due to NAFTA. It is no coincidence that job loss in Michigan due to NAFTA happens during the same time that Michigan’s economy has taken a downturn.
As the rest of the series unfolds in the Press, we will continue to provide some analysis of Press sources and how the paper is framing the issue of Michigan’s economy.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 