Thanks to a diverse array of activist leaders at the helm of groups like Black Mesa Water Coalition (BMWC) and the Navajo Green Economy Coalition (NGEC), the Navajo Nation is moving towards a sustainably powered bright future. Women’s leadership has played a central role in bringing forth the shift towards collective support for green economic development that is in alignment with traditional Navajo life ways.

Read more.

Dorothy Height, who in an 80-year campaign for social justice became the grande dame of the civil rights era and its great unsung heroine, died Tuesday morning at the age of 98.

Her death was announced by the National Council of Negro Women, of which she was president emerita, and by

Howard University Hospital in Washington, where she died.

Ms. Height is widely credited as the first person in the modern civil rights era to treat the problems of equality for women and equality for African-Americans as a seamless whole, merging concerns that had historically been largely separate.

Read more via NYTimes.

Wilma Mankiller, 64, the first female chief of the Cherokee Nation in modern times, whose leadership on social and financial issues made her tribe a national role model, died April 6 at her home in Adair County, Okla. She had metastatic pancreatic cancer.

via Washingtonpost.com

“Wilma exemplified a Native woman’s leadership, both in her manner and in her consistent and unfailing devotion to her family, her people, the land, and the ways in which we are connected to past and future generations.”

-Rebecca Tsosie, an Indian law professor at Arizona State University

via Indian Country Today

The Internet has made amazing things possible, like freeing the Jena 6, electing President Obama, even creating ColorOfChange. None of it could have happened without an “open” Internet: one where Internet service providers are not allowed to interfere with what is seen and by whom.

Now, Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon — the most powerful broadband providers — are trying to fundamentally change the way the Internet works. They’re seeking to make even bigger profits by acting as gatekeepers over what you can see and do online. If they succeed, the Internet would be more like radio and television: a few major corporations would control which voices are heard most easily, and it would be much harder for grassroots groups, individuals, and small businesses to compete with large corporations and well-funded special interests.

The FCC wants to do the right thing and keep the Internet open, but the big providers have been attacking their efforts, with help from Black leaders who have financial ties to the industry. And a court ruling yesterday just made the FCC’s job even tougher¹. If the FCC is to preserve an open Internet, they will have to boldly assert their authority and press even harder. It’s why they need to hear directly from everyday people, especially from Black folks, about the importance of an open Internet, now.

Can you join us in sending a message to the Federal Communications Commission supporting their effort to preserve an open Internet? It takes only a moment:

http://www.colorofchange.org/opennet/?id=1829-173305

The FCC is working to create rules that would protect “net neutrality,” the principle that protects an open and free Internet and which has guided the Internet’s operation since it began. It guarantees that information you put online is treated the same as anyone else’s information in terms of its basic ability to travel across the Internet. Your own personal website or blog can compete on equal footing with the biggest companies. It’s the reason the Internet is so diverse — and so powerful. Anyone with a good idea can find their audience online, whether or not there’s money to promote the idea or money to be made from it.

For Black folks, this is crucial. For the first time in history we can communicate with a global audience — for entertainment, education, or political organizing — without prohibitive costs, or mediation by gatekeepers in government or industry. That’s how ColorOfChange became successful: because of the low cost of starting up online, we could start small and grow without spending a lot of money. The strength of our ideas, not the size of our budget, determined our success. In television, radio and print, this can’t happen, because access is determined by big media corporations seeking to turn a profit.

AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon are spending millions of dollars lobbying to create a new system where they can charge large fees to speed up some data while leaving those who can’t afford to pay in the slow lane.² Such a system could end the Internet as we know it — giving wealthier voices on the Internet a much bigger megaphone than poorer voices, and stunting the Internet’s amazing equalizing potential.

Buying the support of Black organizations?

President Obama strongly supports net neutrality, and so do most members of the FCC. With so much at stake for Black communities, you would expect Black leaders and civic organizations to line up in support of an open Internet.

But instead, a group of Black civic organizations is challenging the adoption of net neutrality rules. Some of the groups are nothing more than front groups for the phone and cable companies. Others, however, are major civil rights groups — and all of them have significant financial ties to the nation’s biggest Internet service providers.

For example, AT&T donated half a million dollars last year to the NAACP and led a drive to raise $5 million more,³ and boasts of donating nearly $3 million over the last ten years to a number of Black-led organizations.⁴ Verizon, meanwhile, recently gave The National Urban League and the National Council of La Raza a $2.2 million grant.⁵ Comcast is one of the National Urban League’s “national partners” (Comcast Executive Vice President David Cohen now sits on the NUL’s Board of Trustees),⁶ and the NUL’s 2008 annual report notes that Comcast donated over $1 million that year.⁷ Many of these groups have now filed letters with the FCC opposing or cautioning against net neutrality,^8,9,10,11 and the Internet service providers are using the groups’ support to promote their agenda in Washington.^12,13

The main argument put forth by these groups is that net neutrality rules could limit minority access to the Internet and widen the digital divide. They say that unless we allow Internet service providers to make bigger profits by acting as gatekeepers online, they won’t expand Internet access in under-served communities. In other words, if Comcast — whose broadband Internet business was recently earning 80 percent profit margins ¹⁴ — can increase its profits under a system without net neutrality, then it will all of a sudden invest in expanding Internet access in our communities.

?This argument has been debunked^{15, 16} — it doesn’t make any sense from a business or economic perspective, and it doesn’t reflect history. Expanding access to high speed Internet is an extremely important goal, and we are fully in support of it. But allowing the phone and cable companies to make more money by acting as toll-takers on the Internet has nothing to do with reaching that goal. Businesses invest where they can maximize their profits, period. Internet service providers are already making huge profits,¹⁷ and if they believed that investing in low-income communities made good business sense, they would already be doing it. The idea that making even more money is suddenly going to make them care about our communities is ridiculous.

?When we’ve asked civil rights groups to back up their arguments against net neutrality, not a single one has been able to explain how they make any sense, without appealing to discredited, industry-funded studies.¹⁸ And no one can offer any evidence for the claim that protecting net neutrality will hurt efforts to expand Internet access.

?Some of these civil rights groups are quick to say that they don’t really oppose net neutrality, they only intend to raise questions or concerns they deem important. But the “concerns” raised by these groups sound so similar to talking points from the Internet service providers that both the FCC and the news media¹⁹ have interpreted them as against net neutrality. And these organizations have done little or nothing to clarify the record.

We don’t enjoy being in opposition to organizations like the NAACP, the Urban League, and the National Council of La Raza, organizations that have a history of doing great work that benefits our communities. But in this case, we don’t have a choice. The digital freedoms that are at stake are a 21st century civil rights issue.

We’ve privately contacted each of the above organizations, and we’ve publicly called for them to explain their positions, twice.^20,21 In each case, we’ve gotten nowhere.^*

Now it’s up to you

The FCC wants to do the right thing and implement net neutrality rules. FCC commissioners know, as we do, that the anti-net neutrality arguments coming from civil rights groups are bogus. But they don’t want to appear to be on the wrong side of Black interests.²²

We need to demonstrate that there’s support among Black folks and our allies for protecting an open Internet. Please join us in telling the FCC that we support net neutrality.

You can add your voice here:

http://www.colorofchange.org/opennet/?id=1829-173305

Thanks and Peace,

– James, Dani, William, Gabriel, Milton, Micah and the rest of the ColorOfChange.org team
April 7th, 2010

Help support our work. ColorOfChange.org is powered by YOU — your energy and dollars. We take no money from lobbyists or large corporations that don’t share our values, and our tiny staff ensures your contributions go a long way. You can contribute here:

http://act.colorofchange.org/go/5?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=5

____________________________

* We reached out to National Council of La Raza through a partner twice. We reached out directly and through a partner to the National Urban League. We did not get a response from either group. We had several conversations with senior leadership at the NAACP, who explained that they wanted to be “neutral” on net neutrality. However, the NAACP has signed on to two letters warning the FCC about adopting net neutrality rules, and several NAACP chapters and state conferences have sent letters to the FCC that carry the industry message even more blatantly (see refs 8,10, and 11). The only public statement regarding the NAACP’s “neutral” stance was a “tweet” on February 8th, after they were already under pressure, that stated: “A note to our friends in the blogosphere: The NAACP is NEUTRAL on net neutrality.” The tweet was followed by no formal announcement, and nothing has been put into the public record to counter any of the anti-net neutrality filings or letters. We were in conversation with the NAACP for more than two months. We were told that the NAACP wanted to set the record straight, and were told of the concrete steps they planned to take. None were ever taken and eventually our attempts to follow-up went unanswered.

References:

1. “The Courts Can’t Take Away Our Internet,” Save the Internet, 4-06-2010
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/190?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=7

2. “Threats to an Open Internet,” Save the Internet
www.savetheinternet.com/threats-open-internet

3. “NAACP Near Fund-Raising Goal with AT&T Campaign Leadership,” AT&T, 7-16-2009
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/171?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=9

4.”AT&T Launches 28 Days Campaign During Black History Month to Encourage, Inspire and Empower African Americans,” AT&T, 2-1-2010
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/172?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=11

5. “VERIZON FOUNDATION INVESTS $2.2 MILLION IN PARTNERSHIP WITH NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LA RAZA AND NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE TO CREATE AFTER-SCHOOL EDUCATION PROGRAM USING THINKFINITY.ORG,” National Council of La Raza, 10-7-2008
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/173?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=13

6. “National Urban League and Comcast Announce Comprehensive Partnership Aimed at Improving Communities”, Comcast, 11-15-2007
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/174?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=15

7. “National Urban League 2008 Annual Report,” National Urban League, Retrieved 4-5-2010
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/175?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=17

8. Letter to the FCC signed by 20 Civil Rights Groups, 10-19-2009
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/176?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=19

9. FCC Filing signed by 16 Civil Rights Groups, 1-14-2010
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/177?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=21

10. Letter to the FCC signed by 23 Civil Rights Groups, 1-14-2010
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/191?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=23

11. Letters from NAACP local units to FCC opposing net neutrality
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/192?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=25

12. Email from US Internet Industry which uses the positions of civil rights groups to justify opposition to network neutrality, 12-3-2009
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/178?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=27

13. “AT&T Asks Employees To Oppose Net Neutrality,” Consumerist, 10-20-2009
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/179?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=29

14. “When Is the Cable ‘Buy’ Set to Come?” Wall Street Journal, 4-3-2008
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/180?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=31

15. “Why Consumers Demand Internet Freedom,” Free Press, 5-2006
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/181?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=33

16. “Finding the Bottom Line: The Truth About Network Neutrality & Investment,” Free Press, 10-2009
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/182?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=35

17. “AT&T’s Earnings Rise 26%, Driven by Wireless,” New York Times, 1-29-2010
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/183?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=37

18. “The ‘American Consumer Institute’ Doesn’t actually represent consumers…” Broadband Reports, 8-22-2006
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/184?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=39

19. “Minority and Civil Rights Groups Slam Net Neutrality,” Big Government, 1-25-2010
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/185?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=41

20. “Why Are Some Civil Rights Groups on the Wrong Side of Net Neutrality?” The Huffington Post, 1-28-2010
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/189?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=43

21. “Push-polling net neutrality,” The Huffington Post, 2-10-2010
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/187?akid=1422.789983.kIJ-6B&t=45

22. Ibid.

Saluting the golden pipes of Marvin Gaye

Today would have been the 71st birthday of entertainer Marvin Gaye. The singer was killed on April 1, 1984.

Gaye was known as one of the greatest singers of the Star Spangled Banner and none was better than his version at the 1983 NBA All-Star Game.

We salute Marvin Gaye’s talent.

 USA Today

A month ago, the federal government promised it would pay more than $1 billion by the end of March to thousands of black farmers who complained of discrimination by the Department of Agriculture.

But Congress left on its spring recess without appropriating money to make the payments.

And that leaves the farmers waiting for justice — yet again.

Read more

By LARRY ROHTER

Published: March 30, 2010

“Teza” may be the Ethiopian director and screenwriter Haile Gerima’s most autobiographical movie yet.

Read more

This is why we love Erykah. True artist!

Please help us save and support First Nations University of Canada. Send this video to FOUR Friends and also go to fnuniv.wordpress.com email or print the letter of support and send it to your MP, Indian Affairs or the Prime Minister. WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT TO SAVE OUR SCHOOL

If you believe our arguments for Funding First Nations University Now! are good, please send an e-mail expressing your opinion.

The Sharpeville Massacre is remembered annually on 21 March - Human Rights Day. In order to pay tribute to those who lost their lives on this day, it is essential that we have an understanding of the context in which this event occurred. The year 1960 was a fateful year period for South Africa, and one that was to be inherent steeped in racial conflict, as foreseen in Harold Macmillian’s “winds of change” speech.

Read more via South African History Online.

Every year, thousands of people are put away for long prison terms because of arcane and racist sentencing laws. They punish people caught with crack cocaine — who are often Black and poor — 100 times more harshly than those caught with powder cocaine. These laws have broken up families while doing nothing to make our communities safer, and they’re part of the reason 1 in 15 Black adults is behind bars.¹

Last week, the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee had a chance to advance a bill to eliminate the disparity. Instead, they chose to reduce it²—with no good reason other than to please “moderate” Democrats and Republicans. And President Obama, who for years has championed ending the disparity,³ is supporting the bill — apparently because it’s bipartisan.⁴ It’s shameful.

Can you take a moment to sign our letter to President Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi demanding they show leadership and push for the House version of the bill, which would eliminate the sentencing disparity?⁵ It only takes a moment:

http://colorofchange.org/cpsenate/

Today’s unfair sentencing laws treat five grams of crack cocaine the same as 500 grams of powder cocaine — a disparity of 100-to-1. Under the Senate Judiciary Committee’s plan, the laws would change to make 28 grams of crack trigger the same sentence as 500 grams of powder.⁶ As one journalist put it, the proposal would “make the law one-fifth as racist as it used to be.”⁷

Here’s what New York defense attorney Gary G. Becker told the Sentencing Law and Policy blog:

The Senate Judiciary Committee’s vote to “reduce” the crack cocaine/powder cocaine punishment disparity from 100:1 to 20:1 is a scandalous, racist, and politically motivated act. In view of the near-unanimous consensus that there is no justifiable basis for punishing crack cocaine more harshly than powder cocaine, and that the 100:1 ratio was both arbitrary and irrational — even [the] DOJ called for elimination of the disparity — the Senate Judiciary Committee settles on an equally unsupportable, irrational, and arbitrary punishment scheme, one that will disproportionately affect minorities, destroy families, and promote disrespect for the law.⁸

Attorney General Eric Holder said last week, “There is no law enforcement or sentencing rationale for the current disparity between crack and cocaine powder offenses, and I have strongly supported eliminating it to ensure our sentencing laws are tough, predictable and fair.” Yet he went on to give his stamp of approval to the Senate’s 20:1 bill and urged Congress to approve it so it can be signed into law.⁹

There is no disagreement that the current sentencing approach pulls non-violent drug offenders out of their communities for unreasonable lengths of time. And most of the committee members, who unanimously supported this plan, acknowledge that the disparity disproportionately affects Black communities.¹⁰

This is politics at its worst. It’s legislation that harms communities instead of helping them — a direct result of political horse-trading that throws the most vulnerable among us under the bus.

Thankfully, there’s a bill in the House that would completely eliminate the sentencing disparity. But if some Senators have their way and are able to quickly send their bill to the House, this diluted compromise could override the House’s bill — our only remaining chance at real reform.

Allowing that to happen would be disastrous. It will mean more broken families and more unequal justice. It will mean that instead of seizing an opportunity to help our communities, Congress and President Obama have decided to write a scaled-back form of discrimination into our laws.

Can you take a moment to tell President Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to fight for passage of the House version of the bill? And when you do, please ask your family and friends to do the same:

http://colorofchange.org/cpsenate/

Thanks and Peace,

– James, Gabriel, William, Dani, Milton and the rest of the ColorOfChange.org team
March 17th, 2010

Help support our work. ColorOfChange.org is powered by YOU–your energy and dollars. We take no money from lobbyists or large corporations that don’t share our values, and our tiny staff ensures your contributions go a long way. You can contribute here:

https://secure.colorofchange.org/contribute/

References

1. “1 in 100 U.S. Adults Behind Bars, New Study Says,” New York Times, 02-28-08
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/28cnd-prison.html

2. “Senate bill would reduce sentencing disparities in crack, powder cocaine cases,” Washington Post, 3-13-10
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/12/AR2010031204124_pf.html

3. “Obama Administration Calls for End to Crack-Powder Sentencing Disparity,” 4-29-09
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jasmine-tyler/obama-administration-call_b_193028.html

4. “Missing Element in Obama’s Ties With G.O.P. Leaders: Good Chemistry,” 2-24-10
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/us/politics/25chemistry.html

5. “Bad science and bad policy,” The New York Times, 3-2-10
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/03/opinion/03wed3.html

6. See ref 2

7. “Senate Says No To Ending Crack Disparity,” American Prospect blog, 3-11-10
http://tinyurl.com/ykdtp8j

8. “Varied reactions to the crack/powder reform work of the Senate Judiciary Committee,” Sentencing Law and Policy blog, 03-11-10
http://bit.ly/985ddj

9. “Statement of the Attorney General on Senate Judiciary Committee’s Approval of the Fair Sentencing Act,” 3-11-10
http://www.justice.gov/ag/speeches/2010/ag-speech-100311.html

10. See ref 7

Please give if you haven’t already. And continue to give as you can.

International pressure builds to reinstate Honduran president | csmonitor.com

Posted using ShareThis