Retaliation? Yes, Then What?
The terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have brought home in stark detail the need for America to rethink its position in the world in general, and its policy toward the Middle East in particular. Let’s be clear: we cannot continue the status quo policy measures that have engendered such hatred of the United States around the world. After accurate, comprehensive, decisive, and sustained retaliation against the acts in New York, and Washington, D.C. is complete, we must– as a nation–take the hard step of asking ourselves a number of questions we probably have ignored for too long--
- Why do so many people around the world hate the U.S.? Is it petty jealously at our success? Or, is it a function of our international policy in much of the world? What is it about the U.S. that has women and children throughout the Middle East–who have suffered through their own experiences with death and destruction–celebrating the atrocious attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Are we as arrogant and exploitative a nation as we are perceived to be?
We are hated around the world. The enmity many hold for the U.S. ranges from the benign we-don’t-like-you-but-love-your-tourist-dollar-and-we’d-rather-have-you-as-a-friend-than-enemy variety in France, Germany and other parts of Europe; to more serious versions within the U.S., and in Latin America, Asia, and Africa; to the deadly variety to permeates the Middle East. Even in Israel, there is a feeling that America can stop being judgmental of the Jewish state now that historic terror has befallen the world’s only superpower.
Much of the hard feelings stem from U.S. policy support for Israel. While that support is justified, we must recognize that it is viewed as taking sides against the Arab world, particularly the Palestinians. While the solution to that part of the problem has been resisted, no one can seriously argue against what appears to be clear: until an independent Palestine is created, the status quo hatred of the U.S. in the Middle East will remain, leaving us a target for future attacks. It’s time to draw the boundaries of a new Palestinian state.
What is obvious from the reaction in the streets of the Middle East is that many believe we have reaped what we sowed. If that is true, then what should we do beyond military action? As we have seen time and again, those that mean us harm have no problem sacrificing their lives for their cause, whatever that may be. Consequently, bombing Afghanistan to hell–as some have suggested–may only strengthen the resolve of those that hate America. Think about it, if they are willing to hijack planes, fly them into buildings, and kill thousands of innocent people, then what is the likelihood that they will be deterred, in the long term, from their mission by short term bombing?
Many commentators and analysts are calling for considerable retaliation. While retaliation against these acts is justified, necessary, and should commence forthwith, we must be mindful that blowing up countries won’t solve the problem. If we continue doing the same things, we will continue getting the same results. It’s time for change in American international policy.
© Michael K. Fauntroy
September 12, 2001
Posted by Michael Fauntroy on Sunday, June 05, 2005
Race and American Culture •
West to Princeton. Why Not West to Howard?
Much of the recent eruption of opinion and reporting on Cornel West and his decision to leave Harvard for Princeton left me wondering: What if one of the most high profile African American scholars in the world chose to leave an Ivy League school for an Historically Black Institution (HBI)? What if West would have left Harvard for Howard? Or, what if Howard, or a school like it, had even been mentioned in the where-will-West-end-up stories? The sad fact is, at no time during this period was an HBI discussed in any way as a potential stop for the West Express.
I suspect that there are numerous reasons why HBI's were not in the mix, some legitimate, some less so. The bottom line is probably money, which is fine by me. Unfortunately, the money issue does not portend well for HBI's in the marketplace for African American scholars. Rarely do African American scholars at White institutions consider moves to HBI's. Moreover, some of the most talented African American scholars are leaving HBI's at a rapid pace for administrative positions or faculty posts at majority institutions that will pay more, with more reasonable work loads. Many of those who haven't left yet are open to offers while newly minted African American Ph.D.'s are hesitant to enter the academy at an HBI. As a result, African American students are losing the opportunity to learn from some of the most talented minds in academia.
The pay issue is particularly important. As high profile African American scholars leave HBI's for White institutions, the "losing" school tends to sing the "we have no money to compete" blues. But how real is that? Well, if alumni giving rates (AGR) are the standard, then the answer is: very real. HBI's are in serious trouble in the competition for talented young African American scholars in particular. But what do alumni giving rates have to do with it? Alumni giving rates are a direct gauge of what graduates think of the institution from which they emerged. Consequently, the better a graduate feels, the more likely he, or she, is to give regularly. That provides more money to the institution, and puts it in a better position to recruit and retain talented African American faculty and better educate its students.
According to 2001 data from U.S. News and World Report, graduates of some of the largest and best known HBI's are poor givers compared to alumni of White institutions. According to data compiled by the Report, the rate of alumni giving at the top ten White institutions far outpace that of HBI's.
The top ten majority White institutions, in terms of its AGR are: Amherst (68%); Centre College (68%); Princeton University (66%); Williams College (60%); Carleton College (58%); Swarthmore College (56%); Bowdoin College (55%); Washington and Lee University (54%); Davidson College (53%), and Haverford (52%). Other notable majority institutions include: Yale (49%); Harvard (47%); Duke (45%); Brown (43%); University of Pennsylvania (40%); Wake Forest (38%); Stanford (37%); Brandeis (35%); Columbia (32%); Northwestern (29%); and University of Virginia (29%).
Conversely, the top ten HBI alumni giving rates are: Morris College (59%); Alabama A&M (43%); Clafflin College (37%); Morehouse College (26%); Fisk University (24%); Bethune-Cookman College (23%); Johnson C. Smith University (23%); Benedict College (19%); Philander Smith College (19%); and Livingstone College (16%). Notable HBI's include: Spelman (15%); Dillard (14%); Hampton (11%); Howard (9%); Lincoln of Pennsylvania (12%); Xavier (12%); St. Augustine's (12%); St. Paul's (12%); Barber-Scotia (10%); Albany State (11%); Coppin State (10%); and Delaware State (9%).
I can hear you from here: "But, White's have more money that Blacks." True. But, I'm not talking about the total amount of giving, but the rate of giving. And almost every graduate can give something. It's time for more African American graduates of HBI's to dig into their wallets and give something to the schools from which they graduated. I'm not asking for people to mortgage their homes, or put off buying the car of their dreams. I am asking them to consider the following: if you want high quality African American scholars on the faculty of your alma mater when your child gets there, then understand that it will cost. When you consider the alumni giving rates of majority institutions and HBI's, it's no wonder the Howard's of the world aren't keeping up. Increased alumni giving can help change that, and put some HBI's in the conversation when the Cornel West's of the world consider their next moves.
I must go now. As a graduate of Hampton and Howard–and one who, admittedly, hasn't always given like he should–I have checks to write.
© Michael K. Fauntroy, Ph.D.
May 30, 2002
Posted by Michael Fauntroy on Thursday, June 02, 2005
Race and American Culture •
Why Bother With Party Platforms?
The time has come for the quintessential quadrennial tradition that shifts from great city to great city and provides the country with new injections of patriotism. No, it’s not the Olympics, but the increasingly irrelevant Democratic and Republican party conventions (if you need proof of the increasing irrelevance of these events, then look no further than the decreasing airtime given them by the major broadcast networks). The party platforms may be the most irrelevant outgrowth of the conventions. They purport to be documents that reflect the policy positions of the majority of the party supporters. While that may be true, what’s also true is that party platforms have little or no influence on voter choice. How many voters do you think actually read the platforms when deciding for whom to vote for as the next president?
Political platforms were born in an era when the presidential nominees was yet to be chosen. Consequently, the party wrote the document as a reflection of its policy aspirations regardless of the nominee. Indeed, an argument can be made that the parties were more important than the nominees in that era, thus the need for strong policy statements.
Now, with the nominee known months in advance of the convention, party platforms reflect more of the presidential candidate than the party. The nominee names the bulk of the drafting committee thereby ensuring the document best supports his or her candidacy. At most, platforms are documents intended to interest the party activist class into more faithful support of the nominee. They certainly don’t make or break a candidacy in the eyes of voters.
The draft 2004 Democratic national platform, "Strong at Home, Respected in the World" hits all the right notes on making the homeland secure, strengthening the economy, health care, education, and the environment. The document calls for stronger coordination between U.S. intelligence and security agencies, expanding health care coverage for children and adults, and making college more affordable, among other initiatives. These are hardly the kinds of positions that can be easily quibbled with; who doesn’t support such positions. However, as has been said in many other venues, the devil is in the details and the platform doesn’t do detail very well. It is largely silent on how to pay for these new initiatives and leaves much unsaid for those concerned with the structural problems in American society that create many of the needs the platform seeks to address.
The Republican platform, due in late August and yet to be released in draft form, is unlikely to be more inspirational or specific, which leaves us with two documents with input from a few hundred party activists that say very little to arouse voters.
I say let’s do away with the hyperbole that surrounds party platforms. They just aren’t that important. I’ll bet that very few voters go to the polls on election day having had their minds changed or confirmed one iota by a party platform. Moreover, the president isn’t held to what the platforms say and won’t hesitate to move away from a platform plank once in office. Platforms are a waste of time and resources, a relic of a bygone era, and should be dispensed with.
© Michael K. Fauntroy
July 17, 2004
Posted by Michael Fauntroy on Wednesday, June 01, 2005
U.S. Electoral Politics •
Who Is Michael Fauntroy?
Michael Fauntroy is an associate professor of public policy at George Mason University, where he teaches courses in American government and civil rights policy. Prior to joining the faculty at GMU, he was an analyst in American national government at the Congressional Research Service (CRS). At CRS, he provided research and consultations for members and committees of Congress. From 1993 to 1996, he was a civil rights analyst at the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, where he conducted research on civil rights issues such as voting rights and fair housing.
Fauntroy is also the host of "The Forum with Michael Fauntroy," a 30-minute one-on-one interview show with local, national, and international policy makers, public intellectuals, and others who shape our world. The show is produced by GMU-TV and is available, for free, to any noncommercial television station interested in airing it.
Fauntroy's second book, Republicans and the Black Vote, analyzes the historical relationship between African Americans and the GOP. He is also the author of Home Rule or House Rule? Congress and the Erosion of Local Governance in the District of Columbia. A third book, Mission Accomplished? Reflections on a "Post-Racial" America will be published in 2013. A regular contributor to The Huffington Post, he has been published in The Root, The Washington Times, TomPaine.com, and The Black Commentator. He has been quoted widely in print publications such as The New York Times Magazine, The Washington Post, USA Today, Politico, Newsday, Black Enterprise, The Washington Times, the New York Daily News, BET.com, and the Boston Globe.
Fauntroy is a continuing media presence commenting and analyzing national issues. He has been heard or seen on national radio and television networks such as ABC (World News Tonight), CBS (Evening News and The Early Show), CNN (American Morning), MSNBC (Hardball), Fox News (Hannity and Colmes), NBC (Nightly News and Today), PBS (The NewsHour and Tavis Smiley), CTV-Toronto, Comcast (Your Morning), National Public Radio (Tell Me More, Talk of the Nation, and News and Notes), Public Radio International (The Tavis Smiley Show), Radio One, the British Broadcasting Corporation, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Pacifica Radio, and XM Satellite Radio.
Fauntroy is a graduate of Hampton University, where he earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science. He earned a Master's degree in Public Affairs, specializing in public administration and public policy analysis and a Doctor of Philosophy degree in Political Science from Howard University. He resides in Washington, D.C.with his wife Lisa and their twins Sunshine and Brett. Fauntroy is a member of Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Inc., Washington (D.C.) Alumni Chapter.
Posted by Michael Fauntroy on Saturday, January 01, 2005
Contact Me
Feel free to send a message to let me know what you think of a particular column. Let me know if you'd like to be notified of site changes and my upcoming media appearances, or add yourself to my email list using the box in the sidebar.
Posted by Michael Fauntroy on Saturday, January 01, 2005
Audio and Video Links
Mike can be heard every Monday at 3:00 P.M. Central (4:00 P.M. Eastern) on "The Cliff Kelley Show" on WVON-AM (1690) Chicago; the show is also available on the Internet at www.wvon.com. Mike usually begins at about 3:15 P.M. (4:15 P.M Eastern) and is on for about an hour. He provides analysis and commentary on the most important political and cultural issues of the day.
==================================
Talk of the Nation, NPR, January 31, 2008
Mike, Michel Martin, Keli Goff, and Raymond Winbush discuss race and Barack Obama's presidential campaign.
Hannity and Colmes, Fox, January 24, 2008
Mike educates Sean Hannity, Armstrong Williams, and Michael Reagan on race and politics.
The Diane Rehm Show, National Public Radio, January 14, 2008
Mike, along with Todd Shaw, Charles Ogletree, Deborah Simmons, and Andrew Kohut look at race and gender in the Democratic presidential nominating fight.
American Weekend, American Public Media, January 12, 2008
Mike discusses "the Bradley Effect" and whether it played a role in the New Hampshire Democratic primary.
NPR "News and Notes with Farai Chideya," January 11, 2008
Mike, along with Angela McGlowan, analyze the GOP candidates forum in South Carolina.
NPR "News and Notes with Farai Chideya," January 1, 2008
Mike participates in a 2008 political preview.
NPR "News and Notes with Farai Chideya," December 5, 2007
Mike discusses Jena 6 and two college students convicted of bank robbery that claimed they did it to pay their tuition.
NPR "News and Notes with Farai Chideya," September 12, 2007
Mike discusses the week's events, including Cornel West and Mos Def on Real Time with Bill Maher.
NPR "Tell Me More" 17 August 2007
Mike and Princeton professor Melissa Harris Lacewell discuss the week in politics
NPR, "Tell Me More"
27 July 2007
Mike and Princeton professor Melissa Harris Lacewell discuss the week in politics
NPR, "News and Notes"
26 April 2007
Mike, Donna Brazile, and Juan Williams discuss the Black vote and the South Carolina Democratic presidential candidate forum at South Carolina State University.
NPR, "News and Notes"
12 April 2007
Mike, Donna Brazile, and Juan Williams discuss a recent voter fraud study and why Democratic presidential candidates are declining invitations to participated in a forum sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus and Fox News.
NPR, "News and Notes"
22 March 2007
Mike, Ron Walters, and Juan Williams discuss the Congressional Black Caucus and the recent supplemental war-appropriations bill.
NPR, "News and Notes"
1 March 2007
Mike, Donna Brazile, and Juan Williams discuss Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's plans to attend talks on Iraq with representatives from Syria and Iran.
PBS The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer December 28, 2006
Mike, Andrew Sullivan, Tom Edsall, Peter Beinart, and David Frum discuss what lies ahead for presidential candidates in 2007.
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
9 October 2006
Mike discusses presidential polls, cost of Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and November elections.
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
October 2, 2006
Mike discusses House page scandal and November elections
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
September 25, 2006
Mike discusses National Intelligence Estimate report on war on terrorism
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
September 18, 2006
Mike discusses Massachusetts governors race and Representative Ney’s guilty plea
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
September 11, 2006
Mike discusses 2006 elections and President’s favorability ratings among southern women
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
28 August 2006
Mike discusses political impact of Hurricane Katrina on mid-term elections; Democratic strategy for mid-term elections; Lynn Swann’s campaign to become Pennsylvania’s Governor; Massachusetts gubernatorial election; and Connecticut Rep. Chris Shays’ plan to call for a timeline for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
21 August 2006
Mike discusses ratified changes to the Democratic Party presidential nominating schedule; efforts to recruit women candidates for political office; Rep. Katherine Harris’ Republican Senate nomination campaign; and changes to voter registration rules in Ohio.
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
14 August 2006
Mike discusses British liquid terrorist arrests; Rep. Cynthia McKinney’s runoff loss; Sen. Lieberman’s decision to continue his Senate re-election campaign as an Independent; delay in delivering Congressional Gold Medals to Tuskegee Airmen; and low approval ratings for 18-24 age group for President Bush.
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
7 August 2006
Mike discusses Rep. Cynthia McKinney’s runoff election; Connecticut Senate primary; Theft conviction of former Bush domestic advisor; party switch for Republican State Senator Nancy Riley to the Democrats; and free medical school tuition in Cuba.
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
24 July 2006
Mike discusses Israel-Hezbollah war; President Bush’s speech to the NAACP; proposed changes to the Democratic Party presidential nominating schedule; and President Bush’s favorability ratings among Hispanic voters.
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
17 July 2006
Mike discusses Voting Rights Act renewal and its political implications; Massachusetts Democratic gubernatorial election; Ralph Reed’s campaign to become Georgia’s Lt. Governor; Lynn Swann’s campaign to become Pennsylvania’s Governor; and battle for control of U.S. House of Representatives.
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
10 July 2006
Mike discusses Maryland Senate primary; obstacles to Voting Rights Act renewal; Connecticut Senate primary; and hate groups infiltrating U.S. military
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
5 June 2006
Mike discusses Federal Marriage Amendment; Supreme Court ruling on whistle blowing; President Bush’s plan to end the Hope VI housing assistance service; and Maryland Senate hopeful skipping a fundraiser featuring President Bush; and Congress moving slowly on ethics reform legislation
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
22 May 2006
Mike discusses New Orleans mayoral election and corruption investigations of Reps. William Jefferson and Alan Mollohan
WVON-AM, Chicago, IL, “The Cliff Kelley Show”
15 May 2006
Mike discusses President Bush’s immigration speech and legislation and mental health problems of servicemen and servicewomen in the Middle East.
WAMU-FM, Washington, D.C. "The Kojo Nnamdi Show"
January 18, 2006
D.C. Shadow Congressional Representation--Discusses the role of shadow congressional representation and the prospects of full congressional representation.
British Broadcasting Corporation, "World Today Select"
October 13, 2005 (at 3:30)
Millions More Movement--Discusses the Million Man March and the Millions More Movement.
British Broadcasting Corporation, "Today"
September 21, 2005 (at 0647)
Republicans and the Black Vote--Commenting on Republican efforts to reach out to the Black community in the wake of the federal response to Hurricane Katrina.
British Broadcasting Corporation, "Analysis"
September 13, 2005
Poverty in the United States--Commented on the reality of poverty in the U.S. in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina
Institute for Policy Studies, "Defining the Issues"
August 10, 2005
The Voting Rights Act -- A Discussion on the continuing significance of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, "The Current" Part 2
June 17, 2005
"Lynching - Compensation" -- A discussion on the legacy of lynching in the American South.
WUSA-TV, Washington, D.C. (CBS), "9 News This Morning"
July 5, 2004
"Bill Cosby's Controversial Comments" -- A discussion of the controversy surrounding comments made by entertainer Bill Cosby regarding African American children.
WAMU-FM, Washington, D.C. "The Kojo Nnamdi Show"
January 7, 2004
"The History of DC" -- A look at the political history of DC.
Posted by Michael Fauntroy on Saturday, January 01, 2005
Booking and Contact
Radio and Television Producers: Michael Fauntroy can be contacted at michaelfauntroy@crimsonmedia.net. Inquiries requiring immediate attention should be directed to 202.577.8048.
Speaking Inquiries: Michael Fauntroy is represented by High Quality Speakers Bureau. Fee information can be obtained from Kimberly McFarland at 323.290.2311.
Posted by Michael Fauntroy on Saturday, January 01, 2005