MichaelFauntroy.com

Race and Representing Memphis

U.S. Representative Harold Ford's campaign for an open seat in the Senate has received an increasing amount of attention now that Republican fortunes have turned for the worst. However, the far more interesting race is the one to succeed him in representing the ninth congressional district of Tennessee. The election presents a curious choice for some Black Memphians who seek more political power in the hands of African Americans.

On the one hand, they could elect Harold's brother Jake Ford, a patently unqualified African American high school dropout with a G.E.D. so that they can continue a 30-year string of Black representatives for the Memphis-based district. On the other, they could vote for Steve Cohen, the far better qualified candidate who happens to be White. Electing Jake Ford would be a travesty to the political process.

Jake Ford is not the first candidate to try to cash in on his family name; indeed, George Bush is President of the United States in large part, because of his name - names like Kennedy, Kean, Casey, Daley, Landrieu, and Hutchinson are synonymous with politics in many parts of the country. But in this case, Jake Ford is out of bounds and running for a seat for which no one else with his lack of credentials would ever have the audacity to seek. It is hard to argue against local critics who contend that this is nothing more than an attempt to extend the Ford political dynasty at the expense of qualified congressional representation.

Steve Cohen, winner of the Democratic primary, is Ford's biggest obstacle. Cohen is White, Jewish, and reliably progressive with political positions in line with a majority of the district. A Tennessee state senator with nearly 30 years of legislative experience, he is clearly the best candidate for the seat. Indeed, his state senate seat represents many of the same voters as the ninth congressional district. Ford's name recognition, however, cannot be ignored and he must be taken seriously as some wonder if his candidacy could syphon enough votes from Cohen that the Republican candidate may have an outside shot at winning. Wouldn't that be ironic for Black nationalists in the district? By supporting an unqualified candidate because he's Black, they may open the door for someone who will support Bush policies.

A Black ministers group is supporting Ford by trading in racism and narrow-minded political ignorance to oppose a qualified candidate in favor of someone who shouldn't even be in the race. They and others who support Ford on the notion that the district must be represented by an African American are taking racial solidarity in an unfortunate direction and miss an important point: double-standards almost always come back to haunt. Don't they understand that if Whites took the same position around the country that they take, then the Barack Obama's of the world never win?

While I understand and support increasing the number of African American elected officials around the country, I can't help but wonder what damage to cross-racial political alliances would be done if Ford were to win. Hopefully, voters will do the right thing and reward someone worthy of the honor of representing them in Congress.

© Michael K. Fauntroy, Ph.D.
September 30, 2006

The GOP's Black History

Black History month is upon us and the Republicans will likely use this as an opportunity to ramp up their efforts to win more Black votes.  Demographic changes and increasingly tight presidential elections have put the GOP in a position where it needs more Black votes to maintain its electoral dominance.  Consequently, the party has begun to invest more resources–both real and rhetorical–to support this mission.  It won’t be easy and it will require more than platitudes about important Blacks in the GOP.  Indeed, acknowledging the contributions of Blacks in American history is pretty easy for the party.  The hard part for the GOP will be acknowledging its own role in the political history of African Americans. 

While the Republican Party is rightfully acknowledged as the leading advocate of Black equality during the Abolition movement and Reconstruction-era, it is its own history with Black America that will make it difficult for it to overcome its current problems in the Black community.  From the Hayes-Tilden Compromise of 1877, to the Lily-White Movement, to the GOP’s 1960s embrace of racial conservatives who opposed Black civil rights, to the “Southern Strategy,” to Reagan-era dismantling of federal civil rights enforcement mechanisms, to opposition of affirmative action, to Jesse Helms’ “quota” ad versus Harvey Gantt, the GOP has established a long and distinguished record of turning away from its historic role in advocating Black equality.

The relationship between African Americans and the Republican Party garners attention every national election cycle and raises a number of concerns.  Many analysts wonder why the GOP has been unable to gain a significant foothold in the Black community.  Still others want to know how the GOP found itself in its current predicament with African Americans.  Some even implicitly criticize Black voters for not being more open to supporting the GOP.  Some suggest that, given current political trends, the GOP should simply throw up its collective hands and spend no additional time or resources seeking Black votes. 

And then there are the cynics who wonder, GOP pronouncements notwithstanding, if Republicans really want Black votes or just want to appear to want Black votes to show racial moderation to their center and center-left supporters.  Taking the steps necessary to get large numbers of African American votes, after all, would alienate white conservatives.  Such cynicism is heightened by the fact that GOP pronouncements wanting African American votes are not aimed at Black America, but rather at middle-class suburban voters who agree with Republican economics but don't feel comfortable voting for a party that has a reputation for apathy–or worse–toward African Americans and other minorities.  The argument could be that the Republicans prefer to have issues on which to abuse Democrats as opposed to actually overturning controversial policies like affirmative action, gay marriage, abortion, and school prayer in order to get more Black votes.

GOP Chairman Ken Mehlman has made it a point to publicize the Republican party’s efforts to win more than their traditionally minuscule support from Black voters.  He has made high profile speeches to Black audiences in which he has said: “give us a chance and we’ll give you a choice.”  Well, if he wants the chance, he’ll have to overcome a long and negative history in the Black community to give African Americans a choice.

© Michael K. Fauntroy, Ph.D.
January 24, 2006

. . . And You Wonder Why Blacks Don't Vote Republican?

The Republicans’ handling of the renewal of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) represents a unique ineptness that has resulted in their adding yet another brick in the wall that separates it from African Americans.  Even though the House ultimately voted to renew the Act, Republicans damaged their ability to build a serious relationship with African Americans by flirting with the possibility of killing the most important piece of civil rights legislation since Reconstruction.  Politically, Republican handling of the VRA also provides a significant impediment for Black Republicans seeking office this year sends the message to African Americans that their votes are welcomed, as long as they don’t expect much in return. 

Black Republicans running for statewide office such as Michael Steele in Maryland, Ken Blackwell in Ohio, Lynn Swann in Pennsylvania, and Keith Butler in Michigan just saw their campaigns get a little more difficult.  It’s even worse for Black Republicans running for seats in the House, such as Vernon Robinson and Ada Fisher in North Carolina, Sherman Parker in Missouri, and Ron Miller in Maryland.  How can these candidates go to Black voters with a straight face asking to be sent to the same Congress as members of the same party that sought to block or water down renewal of this seminal legislation?  Black Republican candidates, along with White Republicans in need of Black votes, are hurt by the shortsightedness of House Republicans.  If this is what Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman has in mind when he goes to Black communities saying “give us a chance and we’ll give you a choice,” then heaven help us all.

House Republicans slapped African Americans in the face again and, given the history of this country that required the implementation of the Voting Rights Act in the first place, poured political salt in wounds that haven’t healed.  Along with the controversial 2000 and 2004 presidential elections that clearly disenfranchised Black voters and the GOPs standing among African Americans, the GOP proves, yet again, that it just doesn’t get it with regard to Black voters.

House Republicans revolted over provisions that require bilingual ballots and continued federal oversight of voting practices in Southern states, despite the Act’s renewal passing through the Republican-controlled House Judiciary committee by a 33-1 vote.  Scrapping a floor vote despite a near-unanimous committee vote reveals an unbecoming cowardice among House leaders.  The Republican leadership melted in the face of a small, but vocal gang dedicated to returning America to a previous era of electoral administration in which it was easier to discount the votes of certain citizens.  Disgraceful.

The conservative uprising was led by a group of Texas Republicans who objected to the continuance of Section 5 Preclearance requirements, among other concerns.  These requirements, which have protected minorities from onerous and unfair electoral administration decisions, require states to win Federal approval of any electoral change before it is instituted.  The Texans, arguing that the requirement is no longer necessary, want the requirement dropped.  Their fallback position is that if their state should be subject to this rule, then the entire nation should as well.  Calling for national coverage seems reasonable on its face but, upon further scrutiny, can only be seen as an effort to dilute Federal protections for disenfranchised voters who live in jurisdictions with continuing histories of shaky electoral administration.  This is an end-run around the Voting Rights Act and appears to reveal a Republican strategy of crippling what it cannot kill.

Some of the Representatives who participated in the uprising are clearly delusional about the reality of voting inequities.  One lawmaker, Rep. John Carter, was quoted in The Houston Chronicle saying, “I don't think we have racial bias in Texas anymore.”  Representative Henry Bonilla said, “It would be dumb to discriminate, that is the last thing anyone is trying to do.”  This kind of reasoning flies in the face of America’s recent electoral history and shows either an arrogance or ignorance about how elections are administered.

If the Republican Party wants to overcome its low favorability ratings in the Black community, then responsible party members in Congress will have to step up and do the right thing – wrest control of the party from those who want to move the country backward, not forward.

© Michael K. Fauntroy, Ph.D.
July 11, 2006

Hacking Democracy

If you want to find out how easy it is to corrupt our electoral system is, then you must see the documentary “Hacking Democracy” now airing on HBO.  It is a depressing and angering account of how the computers used to tabulate elections in America can be rigged.  If you think it’s not a big deal, then consider this:  Computers count about 80 percent of all votes cast in American elections.  If that doesn’t shake you, then consider this: You can’t see a computer tabulates votes, so how do you know it’s done right?

The documentary centers around Bev Harris, a Seattle writer who became a voting rights activist after being alarmed by the decision made by King County, Washington officials to acquire electronic touch screen systems for their elections.  Their argument in favor of the machines by county officials led her to learn more about electronic voting machines.  The more she learned, the more convinced she became that there are fundamental problems in the way our elections conducted.  She then began investigating Diebold, the Ohio-based election machine company led by a man who, in 2004, promised to deliver the state of Ohio to President George Bush.  Her group, Blackboxvoting.org, has traveled around the country investigating voting irregularities and alerted officials to the various ways in which elections can be stolen.  Her dumpster diving revealed illegitimately certified elections in Florida and left me with the sinking feeling that all of our election results are worthy of greater scrutiny.  We just can’t be sure that the candidate with the most votes actually wins.  Blackboxvoting.org should be commended for their efforts and encouraged to continue their work.

“Hacking Democracy” demonstrates that the private companies that develop the technology used to administer our elections are the real arbiters over what happens and that the people and those public officials that oversee the elections can be rendered mere spectators in a grand charade that actually shows ours to be an incredibly flawed democracy.  From vote tabulation cards with encrypted programs that can be used to change the result of elections, to machines that can be hacked to change vote totals, to crooked election officials who aid and abet the scandal, our way of counting votes cannot be proven to be above reproach.  If our system is not corrected, then the core tenet of our democracy – fair elections – is heading for extinction.

After watching the documentary, you are likely to conclude that there is no reason to vote because it will be stolen.  I couldn’t disagree more.  I believe that an overwhelming turnout of voters can overcome the shenanigans that are likely to occur on Election Day.  So, your task is to overcome whatever cynicism you may have about the system and vote.  Decisions about war and peace, student loans, criminal justice, affordable housing, jobs and the economy, and so many other important issues that face everyday people on a daily basis are at stake in every election.  If you want change, then vote for it.  If you like things the way they are, then support the status quo.  Either way, show up.  If you don’t, then you are giving others the right to make decisions about your life.

A Black Mirage for the GOP?

George Will and other Republican opinion makers have begun to beat the drums in support of four African American Republicans who are running for major statewide offices in 2006.  They are touting Michael Steele of Maryland, Lynn Swann of Pennsylvania, Ken Blackwell of Ohio, and Keith Butler of Michigan as potentially historic winners this November in hopes that they will undermine the relationship between African Americans and the Democratic Party.  I would encourage those who believe that these four will win to restrain themselves to the greatest extent possible or run the risk of looking like fools this November.  The candidacies of these  men represents more of a mirage than a harbinger for the Republican Party.

Will and the others are overlooking some important factors that make these candidacies uphill climbs, at best.  Steele’s campaign has recently been hurt by staff resignations and stump blunders. He recently tried to ingratiate himself with Jewish voters but ended up causing a mini-firestorm when, trying to explain his opposition to embryonic stem cell research, equated the procedure to Nazi medical experiments.  The gratuitous, and failing, attempt to curry favor with an important voting  bloc and the controversy surrounding it has led an increasing number of political analysts to conclude that he isn’t ready for prime time.  That, added to the fact that Maryland is a 2-1 Democratic state, makes Steele’s climb unlikely to end in victory. 

Swann has never held, or even run for, elective office and is running against a savvy, experienced incumbent who runs well throughout the state.   At this point, his entire campaign appears to be “Democrats take Blacks for granted.”  That kind of sloganeering is fine for pundits and others who want to shake the link between African Americans and the Democrats, but it doesn’t do anything to engender confidence in the voters that a serious plan for education, taxation, the economy, transportation, crime, and the other numerous issues on which people cast ballots is coming soon.  At this stage of the game, he appears to only have his celebrity.  Yes, he is running well in current polls and that is certainly encouraging.  But running for office isn’t the same as running a pass route–particularly when you haven’t done it before.  Look for crucial missteps along the way that will expose his as not ready for the job.

Blackwell is running in a state in which the incumbent governor has, as Will noted, an 18 percent approval rating, among Republican voters.  Republican officeholders throughout the state are in scandal and all this is likely weigh down Blackwell’s campaign.  Plus, he’s running against a strong Democrat when voters appear to be tiring of Republicans.  This and the current controversy over his recent television ads linking his primary opponent to ultra-unpopular Governor Robert Taft may have turned some party activists against him.

Lastly, Keith Butler is a Republican running in a strong “blue” state.  He has poor name recognition outside of Detroit, which is problematic for Republicans, who have to run strong outside of Detroit to overcome the large number of democratic votes to come out of the state’s largest city.  He’s also running against a strong incumbent.

These candidates are also running in the face of a number of national issues that will likely hurt Republicans–Black or otherwise.  The federal response to Hurricane Katrina will be in the news throughout the year and the one year anniversary of the tragedy will be just two months before the election.  Iraq is still a mess and unlikely to change anytime soon.  We haven’t heard the last of Jack Abramoff or Tom DeLay and there is likely to be other prominent Republicans caught up in the lobbyist scandal. 

These problems open a range of opportunities for Democrats.  Every Democratic candidate around the country should force their Republican opponent to defend President Bush and his policies on these and other issues.  Making the race about Bush, given his unpopularity, adds an albatross that will be difficult for every candidate to overcome.

As I see it, these candidates, who are being portrayed as heroes for being Black Republicans, have almost as many odds stacked against them as a gay man on the “700 Club.”  For these and other reasons, it seems to me that the Republican wishful thinkers should try harder to resist the urge to dub 2006 the year of the Black Republican.

© Michael K. Fauntroy, Ph.D.
February 22, 2006

The "Black Jesse Helms" Runs for Congress

Vernon Robinson, the Republican candidate for the 13th congressional district of North Carolina, is brutalizing GOP efforts to win more African American converts.  He is embarrassing national Republicans who want to reach out to Black voters around the country by running a campaign that caters to the fringes of American conservative politics.  Robinson may well be the most conservative person running for Congress this year and his bid to defeat incumbent Brad Miller is based on arguments more likely to inflame  than inform.  He trades in hostility to the poor and immigrants, which is particularly bizarre because Robinson is Black; indeed he caused a stir by stating: “Jesse Helms is back, this time he’s Black.”  You may not know Robinson, but his blame-the-victim brand of politics is very familiar – he is the living embodiment of Jesse Helms and our political discourse is much worse as a result.

To be sure, it is not bizarre that he is a Black conservative running for office; that happens regularly.  What is unusual is the fact that Robinson is running the kind of race-baiting, hate-filled campaign one would expect from a White racial conservative.  His inflammatory ads are beyond the pale and spray bigotry over the airwaves like a machine gun.  They play on all the popular bogeymen that resonate with voters these days: illegal immigration, gay marriage, and abortion as well as others we haven’t heard much of recently, like making English the official national language.  His positions aren’t that unusual, either; many candidates have won races across the country on the strength of aggressive positions on these issues.  It is the way in which he treats these issues in his ads tht suggest Robinson should not be taken seriously.  If he were White, he would have been denounced long ago as a racist.

Robinson has also established himself as a clever mudslinger.  He continues to insinuate that Miller, a childless man, is an ultra-liberal gay – a charge he hopes will resonate with conservatives in this district that includes parts of Greensboro and Raleigh.  Robinson has called his opponent “Sugar Daddy Miller” who has given away tax dollars and has “sneaky aliens eating from his hand”.  His most inflammatory ad may be the one that features a Black woman dejectedly balling up a job application as the narrator says:  “You needed that job and you were the best qualified, but they gave it to an illegal alien so they could pay him under the table.”  Sound familiar?  Well, it’s nearly identical to the racist ad Jesse Helms used against Harvey Gantt in their 1990 campaign.  The Helms ad was denounced for its overt implication that affirmative action necessarily required Whites to lose their jobs or not get work for which they were qualified.  Robinson is a Black man who mimics White racists.  Delightful.

Even though Robinson is running in a reliably safe Democratic district, he should be watched because of his ability to court contributions from the fringes of American politics.  He’s from the Tom Tancredo-Ann Coulter-Pat Buchanan wing of the Republican Party and has parlayed his inflammatory positions into more than $3 million in campaign contributions over the last three years for two House campaigns (he lost a 2004 race).  Imagine how much he could raise if he was seen as a possible winner.

Robinson is an unfortunate, albeit interesting, contrast to African American politicians around the country who are trying to reach out to White voters to win races.  Barack Obama and Harold Ford, for example, are viewed as part of the vanguard of new Black elected officials who downplay race and appeal to hope to actively court White voters while maintaining Black support.  Robinson, on the other hand, appears to repel Black votes while courting far-right White voters with anti-Black, anti-Hispanic rhetoric.  Robinson is trying to pull America backward while other African Americans are pushing the country into a new, more enlightened era of political discourse.

© Michael K. Fauntroy
October 17, 2006

Race and the Republicans

Virginia Senator George Allen and Maryland Lt. Governor Michael Steele represent the Republican Party’s racial quandary:  How do you make a party more palatable to African Americans when the party and some of its leaders have histories that show sympathy to racists or have supporters that use race to make positive assertions that are not true?  On the one hand is Allen, whose unfortunate affection for the confederacy and all it represents dates to his teen years.  On the other hand is Steele, seeking to become the first African American elected to the Senate from Maryland.  Their ability to effectively deal with this quandary will determine just how successful the party will be in wooing minority voters going forward. 

Allen is under a deluge of pressure to respond to allegation that he has been too cozy with racism in his earlier days and what, if any, residual prejudice may still exist in him.  Herein lies the problem for his campaign: Every day he spends responding to and defending himself against his distant past is a day that he can’t spend addressing his recent past – his support for the Bush administration and conservatism in a state that is not as “red” as it used to be.  His campaign is stuck in deep water now and his head is above water only because his opponent, nominal Democrat Jim Webb, is weak and has his own problems as he responds to opinions he expressed 20 years ago about women in the military.

While Allen’s problems are somewhat self-inflicted, Steele is being done in by those who purport to be supporters.  The National Black Republican Association (NBRA) ran a radio advertisement in the Baltimore media market that stated Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican and that Democrats were responsible for the creation of the Ku Klux Klan.  Steele should be commended for calling on the NBRA to stop running the ad, but the damage may have been done.

This ad is ridiculous on at least three levels:  First, it states that King was a Republican.  King, according to a biographer and a representative from the King Center, was nonpartisan.  It’s also instructive to note that virtually all of his lieutenants – namely, Walter Fauntroy, Andrew Young, Hosea Williams, and John Lewis – all ran for and won elected office as Democrats.  Second, it suggests that if King were alive today, he’d be a Republican; there is no evidence to support that, particularly given GOP-international policy that acts as if our problems abroad lend themselves to military solutions.  Third, the Klan-Democrat link is misleading.  Yes, many racists and Klan sympathizers of that era were Democrats.  They opposed Republican racial moderation and liberalism.  What’s also true is that those Democrats were also conservatives and it is not a stretch to see that most conservative racist sympathizers of that era would not be Democrats today.  Indeed, segregationists like Strom Thurmond left the Democrats to become Republicans as a protest to Democrats shifting positions on race.  Many of those who left the Democratic Party became Republicans. 

The ultimate problem with the ad, however, is that by going so far overboard in trying to ingratiate Republicans with Black voters, the ad actually reminds people why the party is in such bad shape in Black communities around the nation.  There is a delicious irony in the NBRA running on race as they are: often Black conservatives criticize Democrats who address race-specific issues claiming it gets in the way of the goal for a society that doesn’t deal in race.  So the use of race in an ad smacks of hypocrisy.

Any way you slice it, Republicans like Allen and Steele are now being cut by the double-edged sword that is race in America politics.

GOP Backslides in Bid for Black Votes

There was a tremendous amount of excitement and anticipation in Republican circles that 2006 would be the year in which the party makes serious inroads in Black communities around the country.  Republican strategists have argued for years that such a breakthrough would place a near permanent GOP lock on the American electorate and drive the Democrats the way of the Whigs.  Leading the charge into Black communities was the prospect of electing African American Republicans to substantial statewide offices around the country and building on the historic nominations of Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice to unprecedented positions.  Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, Lynn Swann of Pennsylvania, and Maryland Lt. Governor Michael Steele embody Republican hopes for a more diverse, and dominant, party.

However, less than two months from general elections around the country, it is now clear that the Republican Party may be further away from its goal than it ever expected.  The Iraq War, the federal response to Hurricane Katrina, wasteful spending, and Republicans embroiled in corruption investigations around the country have devastated the party in the eyes of many African Americans. 
J. Kenneth Blackwell is on his way to defeat in his gubernatorial campaign.  Granted, he’s burdened by an overwhelming Republican corruption scandal in the state that has the party polling at all-time lows.  He’s also campaigning with the stench of the 2004 campaign surrounding him.  He oversaw the administration of a presidential election that is as questionable in its legitimacy as Florida was four years earlier.  Ohio Republican Representative Bob Ney’s recent guilty plea to improperly taking gifts from disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff served as yet another reminder of Republican corruption.  All that, coupled with his very conservative positions, leaves Blackwell nearly 19 points behind his Democratic opponent, according to a recent Rasmussen poll.

African American Republican candidates are struggling as they run along with President Bush.  The  promise of early 2006 has been replaced by the grim reality that most of these candidates, who were going to lead the GOP into Black communities around the country, are falling flat with the voters. Lynn Swann’s much publicized bid for the Pennsylvania governorship has collapsed under the weight of unreasonable expectations for a candidate without a portfolio beyond personal celebrity.  Recent polls show he now trails incumbent Ed Rendell by 10 percentage points and it is only a matter of time before his financial support from around the state and nation dries up.

Blow-out losses in November for Swann and Blackwell could adversely impact Republican plans for Black voters going forward.   It’s a bad sign for the party and African Americans if the “best” Black Republicans can’t win important elections.  African American voters are hard pressed to see a reason to support a party that can’t seem to get itself together. 

Conversely, Michael Steele is surprisingly strong in his campaign to win the Senate seat being vacated by Democrat Paul Sarbanes.  A Steele win, or a close finish, could give Republicans hope that all is not lost with Black America.  While GOP success in the Black community is about more than electing Black Republicans to office, it is an important step.  The November elections are shaping up in a way that shows this important step may still be out of reach.

© Michael K. Fauntroy
September 22, 2006