"Somewhere they Belong" - An interview with CPO Sandra Gasca about Foster Care and Child Placements

For those of you who have been longtime readers of this blog you may remember that the Wichita Branch NAACP agreed to work with Youthville in an effort to increase the number of available African American Foster homes and parents.

This is in light of the data that shows that of the African American children from Sedgwick County awaiting foster placement, about 47% are sent outside of the county to foster homes in more rural areas of Kansas, most often not of the same cultural background. And of the approximately 147 Bi-Racial children from Sedgwick County, 31% are sent outside of the county to foster homes in more rural areas of Kansas, most often not of the same cultural background.

In this effort, we've had the pleasure and opportunity to meet and work with a truly tireless advocate for Children; Ms. Sandra Gasca from Youthville Child services. I asked Ms. Gasca if she would consent to a short interview so that we could share her insights with you, our readers. Our discussion follows:

~~~~~~

KM: Sandra, what is your official title?
SG: Chief Program Officer

~~~~~~

KM: Is Youthville a State agency like SRS?
SG: Youthville is a private, nonprofit agency that serves as a contractor to SRS for services that include foster care, case management, and residential (group homes) to the State. Children are referred to Youthville by SRS when they are removed due to abuse and/or neglect for foster care services. Any child removed from their home and placed into foster care comes to Youthville.

~~~~~~

KM: How many children are served by Youthville?
SG: Youthville serves over 1200 children who were removed from their home in Sedgwick County and brought into the foster care system.

~~~~~~

KM: What are the racial demographics of the children you serve?
SG: The racial demographics are as follows:

51% - Caucasian
27% - African American
11% - Hispanic
9% - Bi-racial
2% - Other (Native American, Asian American)

~~~~~~

KM: Are children actually placed in Youthville's custody? and how long do children typically remain in the foster care system?
SG: The children remain in SRS’s custody and our role is to work towards reunifying the family from which they were removed from or finding another permanent living situation. This could be in the form of living with a relative, preparing the children for a new adoptive family, or with older youth helping them establish their own living situation as they move into adulthood. The average length of stay for a child in foster care from Sedgwick County is 18 months.

~~~~~~

KM: You've spoken in the past about the need for more minority (particularly African American and Latino) families to volunteer to become foster care families. Why do you think this is important?
SG: National research shows that children of color are less likely to be reunified with their birth families.

Hill, R. (2001). The role of race in parental reunification. Paper presented at
the Race Matters Forum meeting, Jan. 9-10, Chicago, IL. Available online on May
15, 2006, from Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Department of
Human and Health Services, as Chapter 6 in Assessing the Context of Permanency
and Reunification in the Foster Care System at http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/fostercare-reunif01/.

The single most important need that a child has upon entering the foster care system is to be with a family as opposed to a shelter or group home. If you think back to the support all of us have had in one way or another, we have always had a family in some form or fashion. The focus that Youthville has is on placing children with families who are a good match—emotionally, culturally, physically, spiritually, and socially.

The concern that I have is that there is a huge disparity between the number of children of color coming into the foster care system in relation to the number of homes of color that we have to serve these kids. As I said earlier, unfortunately many of these children will likely not return to their birth families, so finding them a home that they feel comfortable in, and can identify with, is a top priority for their personal and emotional growth. I am particularly concerned about Hispanic children who may be monolingual and the fact that we only have 3 bilingual homes in the county to serve these children. Often times, we rely on the support of a non-Spanish speaking family with good intentions and a translator to serve these children, but the language barrier is so significant that these children end up being labeled as “difficult” or “oppositional” when in reality, they are not understood linguistically.

~~~~~~

KM: Could you comment on the role of culture in child placements and why that is so important?
SG: Culture is the foundation of identity that provides a blueprint for everyday living. Identity is essential in developing a positive self-image, self-concept and effective life skills. Foster family dynamics and structure are influenced by culture which impacts parenting style, norms, and traditions. When children enter the foster care system, the foster family becomes the voice for the child and is their primary advocate. This family must be able to understand the child within their life experience and cultural context in order to serve them best and help them to grow personally and emotionally. Much has been written about the hazards of ignoring cultural factors in diagnosing and treating children of color in the foster care system, along with basic needs of skin and hair care issues not being adequately addressed. Children in foster care are entitled to a home that is culturally sensitive, responsive, and can comprehensively meet their needs.

~~~~~~

KM: How does a family become a foster care family?
SG: Foster parents must be 21 or older, single or married, in good general physical and mental health, financially able to provide for their own families, own or rent a house or an apartment that can meet licensing requirements, and be able to pass background checks. There is training required for prospective foster parents to become licensed foster parents. This free training, called Partnering for Safety and Permanence- Model Approach to Partnerships in Parenting (or PS-MAPP), is 10 weeks long. Youthville offers PS-MAPP classes on a regular basis in a variety of locations. The goal of the training is to help you decide if being a foster parent (fostering or adopting) is for them. It also helps prepare families for their role if they decide it's right for their family. Once a family has completed PS-MAPP, or in some cases during the training, Youthville staff will assist with the process to become licensed as a foster parent.

For families who only want to adopt, they are required to do all of the above mentioned but do not have to go through the licensing process.

~~~~~~

KM: Can you serve as a foster parent if you are single or divorced?
SG: Yes.

~~~~~~

KM: What else would you like people to know about the foster care system and the need for volunteers?
SG: The number one thing people should know about the foster care system is that these children are just like you and I. The misperception that these kids are bad kids drives people away from them, and they turn their backs. We need our communities to realize that these are just kids. Kids that haven’t been fortunate enough to grow up in the perfect family environment, and have suffered various levels of trauma in their short life, but with the help of a caring individual or family, these kids can get their lives handed back to them. It is a precious gift that lasts a lifetime. The one thing these kids need is someone that will be there for them. In the good times and the bad, it is someone they can depend on to keep them safe, show them what a family is all about. Many of the kids haven’t had this, or have been let down in the past, and have no one there to guide them, look after them, love them, ensure their education, help build their future, or help them navigate their way through this world.

There are over 400 children in Youthville’s care that are awaiting adoption. These kids have had their parental rights severed, and are looking to be a part of someone’s family permanently. That is exactly what they need, somewhere they belong, and somewhere they can come home to at night and be loved. For some of them, it will be the first time they can tell someone they are going home to their family.

Other than foster homes or adoptive homes, we are always looking for mentors. These are people that agree to be there for a child that is aging out of the system without a family, that can help them avoid some of the struggles life can throw at you. Someone that they can call when they are down, and someone that they can count on to help them pick up the pieces of their life and move forward.

I really want people to know there are always ways for them get involved and help these kids. One of the biggest needs for those that can not physically have a child in their home, or can’t volunteer, or mentor, is simply spreading the word to others that helps change the perception of “foster” kids. If you hear someone talking negatively about what they heard about foster kids, step in have something positive to say. Just help be a voice for all of these children that don’t have one.

~~~~~~

KM: Thank you again Sandra for all you do...

~~~~~~

If you or someone you know in the Sedgwick County area may be interested in becoming a foster parent, please contact Libby Smith at 800.593.1950, ext 8319

or if you'd simply like more information about Youthville or child placements, you can call 800.593.1950, ext 194

Tech Tags: NAACP Foster+Care Youth SRS Child+Placement Wichita

Read more...

Bush reappoints Peter Kirsanow to civil rights post - "What happened to the Civil Rights Commission?"

Yesterday, President Bush reappointed attorney Peter Kirsanow to the US Commission on Civil Rights.



This is tragic... But before I "go there", first some background...




The US Commission on Civil Rights was created in 1957 under President Eisenhower. It is a Federal investigative agency whose stated mission is:

• To investigate complaints alleging that citizens are being deprived of their right to vote by reason of their race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin, or by reason of fraudulent practices.
• To study and collect information relating to discrimination or a denial of equal protection of the laws under the Constitution because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin, or in the administration of justice.
• To appraise federal laws and policies with respect to discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin, or in the administration of justice.
• To serve as a national clearinghouse for information in respect to discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin. To submit reports, findings, and recommendations to the President and Congress.
• To issue public service announcements to discourage discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws.

The US Civil Rights Commission was once a powerful agency that significantly influenced groundbreaking legislation. Its 1961 report was considered by the Congress and the Supreme Court as the intellectual and factual grounding for the provisions of the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act. Its hearings on the disenfranchisement of African Americans in southern precincts and parishes formed the basis of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In 1978 a Commission report challenging law enforcement agencies to recognize domestic violence as a crime put the issue on the national agenda. By the late 1980s Congress mandated the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration to focus on the “role of the criminal justice system in preventing and controlling violence and abusive behavior in the home.” Moreover, Congress relied on a 1983 Civil Rights Commission report on the challenges disabled persons faced in their daily lives in enacting the Americans with Disabilities Act.

However, despite its history and noble goals, the Commission has since been transformed into an extension of conservative policy making. In its current composition, it serves as little more than a rubber stamp, one which provides the necessary illusion of validation for conservative efforts to eliminate Civil Rights era and racially progressive policies and laws.

While it is intended to serve as a "fact-finding" agency, according to the data listed on their website, they investigated only two (2) complaints of racial employment discrimination between 2002 and 2005, both investigations took nearly a year, and neither was found for the complainants nor resulted in any action on the part of the commission. In fact, the data shows that there were actually 5 pending cases at the start of 2002 and additional cases that were filed with each succeeding year, yet by the end of the report only 3 had been processed (1 age related and 2 race related)

So given the extremely low levels of activity in the area of investigating discrimination, you may be wondering 'what exactly has the Commission on Civil Rights been doing these past few years?..'

• They've investigated whether or not HBCU's are effective
• They've presented a position paper urging the Legislature to vote against SB310 the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007 which would have extended the rights of of self-governance and self-determination to Native Hawaiians in a manner parallel to that of American Indians and Alaska Natives.
• They've issued a position paper stating that voting rights issues "have virtually disappeared" (tell that to the residents of Florida, Ohio, or New Orleans)
• They've issued a report on school desegregation that lists as one of it recommendations that The Department of Justice should continue to provide guidance to assist small or moderately-sized school districts to qualify for and obtain unitary status (thereby releasing them from any court ordered deseg programs and dismantling Brown vs Board) Interestingly enough, their next recommendation was that "Social scientists, academics, and relevant government agencies should pursue underlying explanations for differences in measured desegregation among the states. By way of example, researchers might explore whether state differences arise from district autonomy; state law, policy, and guidance or federal processing of unitary status matters". (So the DOJ should help districts achieve unitary status, then afterwards, Social Scientists should study whether the levels of segregation in public education were the result of having done so)
• and they've issued a position paper stating that Affirmative Action programs may be hurting minority law students by "setting them up for failure".

It is a tragic irony that the 8 member "civil rights commission" is now populated by 6 members who are ideological opposed to virtually all of the programs and policies that came out of the Civil Rights movement. While they each espouse the 'ideals' of the movement, ideals without action or implementation amount to nothing more than thoughts and words. These 'thoughts and words' are then liberally sprinkled throughout reports and recommendations that are in fact designed to eliminate the very policies and programs intended to bring about their realization.

Commissioners Melendez and Yaki jointly dissented the approval of the commission's position on affirmative action in Law programs and described the functioning of the commission as follows:

We respectfully, but vehemently, disagree with the findings, recommendations, and focus of this report issued by the Commission’s conservative majority and (misleadingly) entitled Affirmative Action in American Law Schools.

In a misguided attempt to regain influence in civil rights policy, the Commission majority, for the past two years, has ceased holding formal investigative hearings in favor of informal briefings. Their apparent goal is to influence decision making, free of the pesky quality control procedures and thorough background research that hearing reports require. Agency reports have focused on affirmative action programs and education, reactively advocating an end to all race-conscious policies.

Briefing reports like this one are typical, containing predetermined findings and recommendations that target a particular policy while turning a blind eye to scientific and legal evidence that contradict that policy. This report is a sterling example of the lack of serious scholarship that marks these new briefing reports.

No attempt was made by the Commission to assess the consensus positions of the scientific or legal community on these issues. No independent research was done by the Commission on these issues, nor did they perform a comprehensive review of others’ research. This report does not even fairly reflect the testimony of the informal briefing that is the only basis of this report—the statements of two of the four speakers appear to have been ignored in developing these findings and recommendations.

The agency’s process for drafting reports is fundamentally broken. In place of scholarship, the Commission has gamesmanship. In an unprecedented act, after having voted to publish this report with all dissenting and concurring opinions submitted by May 29, 2007, the Commission majority reopened the record on this report at its May 1, 2007 meeting. Upon motions by Commissioners Taylor and Heriot, the Commission majority postponed publishing this report for two months and allowed all Commissioners to resubmit new opinions. Why?

Commissioner Heriot, after first stating she had an unspecified ethics issue that she wanted a chance to look into and change her comments, tacitly admitted that she wanted a chance to add to her comments in response to our dissent. As with so many votes on our nominally bipartisan Commission, procedures were set aside on a 6-2 vote to allow the six Republican-appointed Commissioners an opportunity to write or rewrite their concurrences to attack our dissent. Such is the integrity and respect for basic procedures at work in generating the agency’s reports.

Now to the reappointment of Commissioner Kirsanow. I find the reappointment of Commissioner Kirsanow particularly troubling and revealing considering that he outwardly opposes affirmative action programs, supports voucher programs for public and private schools and believes that Ronald Reagan should be on Mount Rushmore. He also testified in support of the nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. In short, he is far from an advocate; he is a political ideologue.

Commissioner Kirsanow was chosen to serve as a federal Civil Rights watchdog, not because of his Civil Rights background or work in the field, in fact, quite the opposite is true. Kirsanow was a partner with the Cleveland, Ohio law firm of Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan, and Aronoff LLP which focused on representing Management in employment-related litigation. Placing Kirsanow on the Civil rights Commission is analogous to placing a tobacco lobbyist in the Office of the Surgeon General.

Put simply, Kirsanow was chosen, and now reappointed, specifically because he is a black face willing to give voice to anti-black/neo-negro policy. Not merit, not experience, and not opportunity; this is promotion based on ideology, and that's the only kind of affirmative action that gets a pass...

Read more...

NAACP Interim president says, "It's time to turn up the heat on Target"

For the third year in a row, Target has refused to participate in the NAACP's annual survey on the state of diversity in corporate America, making them the largest retailer to refuse to answer questions about their company's diversity practices.

Last week, thousands of NAACP supporters like you helped send a clear message to Target that economic opportunity for African Americans must be a priority.

Now, as we enter the holiday shopping season, we need you to help us turn up the heat on Target. We need 100,000 people to sign the petition telling Target to Answer the Question.

.

If you haven't yet done so, you can click here to sign the petition.

If you've already signed the petition, please help us reach our goal by telling some friends about it .

African Americans contribute over $700 billion a year to the US economy, and deserve fairness and transparency from the companies that benefit from our hard-earned dollars. Tell Target to clarify its position on economic opportunity for African Americans by answering the NAACP's survey and supporting the Economic Reciprocity Initiative.

Economic empowerment isn't just a financial issue, it's a civil rights issue.

Sincerely,

Dennis Courtland Hayes
NAACP Interim President & CEO

Read more...

NAACP college chapter forming at WSU

BY CHRISTINA M. WOODS
Reposted from The Wichita Eagle
.
An NAACP chapter is forming at Wichita State University. "It's another chapter to bring socially conscious people together to really advocate for equality and justice, higher education, proactive leadership and scholarships," said Aonya Kendrick, a WSU senior who is laying the groundwork for the chapter.
.
The regional branch of the NAACP chartered the WSU college chapter in late October, according to the Rev. Gil Ford, an NAACP Regional Director.
.
The campus NAACP chapter still must be recognized by the university before it can formally operate. Kendrick said that process could conclude by January.
.
The NAACP has more than 30,000 young people representing 600 youth councils, high school chapters and college chapters nationwide. Membership in college chapters is open to students under age 25.
.
The WSU chapter would not replace the university's existing African American Student Association, which works to promote diversity and multiculturalism, Kendrick said.
The two organizations, she said, would remain separate but work toward common goals.
Washburn University in Topeka has the only other active NAACP college chapter in Kansas, Ford said.
.
.
Reach Christina M. Woods at 316-269-6791 or cwoods@wichitaeagle.com.
© 2007 Wichita Eagle and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. http://www.kansas.com

Read more...

Weak Predatory Lending Bill Passes the US House. Immediate action needed!!!

ISSUE UPDATE / ACTION ALERT

.

DATE: November 16, 2007
TO: Concerned Parties
FROM: Hilary O. Shelton, Director, Washington Bureau

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PASSES FLAWED, INADEQUATE BILL TO ADDRESS PREDATORY LENDING CRISIS SENATE MUST NOW ACT TO STRENGTHEN LEGISLATION TO PROTECT HOME BUYERS & HOMEOWNERS

THE ISSUE: "Predatory Lending" occurs when a financial institution charges home-buyers or homeowners more for loans than is the norm for someone with their credit rating. Predatory lending increases the cost of home-buying or home repair for individual families; as a result, homeowners almost always lose much of the financial benefits and security they had hoped to gain by buying a home, and sometimes the home is foreclosed and all is lost. Predatory lending almost always occurs in the "subprime market." "Subprime loans" are those that are intended to serve people who do not qualify for traditional loans, including those with blemished credit histories or without a traditional credit history. While not all subprime loans are predatory, most predatory loans are subprime. Predatory lending is especially prevalent in the refinancing market.

.

Predatory lending is clearly a civil rights issue: predatory lenders target African Americans, Latinos, and Asians or Pacific Islanders as well as the elderly and households headed by females. According to several reports, subprime loans are 5 times more likely in black neighborhoods than in white neighborhoods. Furthermore, disparities in lending between minority and white families actually increase as income increases, refuting arguments that subprime lending and predatory features are introduced solely to mitigate risk. High concentrations of subprime lending in racial and ethnic minority neighborhoods and racial disparities in subprime lending exist in all regions of the nation.

.

To address the recent crisis across our Nation of homes being lost to foreclosure as a result of various types of predatory lending, Congressman Barney Frank (MA), the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, along with Congressmen Brad Miller (NC) and Mel Watt (NC) introduced legislation (H.R. 3915) intended to stop predatory lending and ensure that borrowers could afford the loans they received and were not charged rates higher than those for which they qualified. While the legislation, when combined with a series of strengthening amendments, would have been sufficient the bill was unfortunately weakened substantially during the legislative process to the point where the final version of the bill, which passed the House on Thursday, November 15 2007, is inadequate and does not address the scope of the predatory lending problem. Thus, we must now convince Senators to not only move on this issue, but to also do more than the House has done. Specifically, the Senate needs to pass a bill that establishes higher standards for loan originators, provides tougher penalties for lenders who break the law as well as stronger remedies for victims. We also need to ensure that steering, yield spread premiums and prepayment penalties are eliminated from the subprime market. Finally, we need to demand that there be no federal preemption of state laws, among other provisions that will provide protections to home owners and homebuyers across the Nation.

.

.
Click Here to see the Steps We Need to Take!!!

.

Tech Tags: Predatory+Lending, civil+rights, subprime, NAACP

Read more...

on Protest and Advocacy...

We recently had a conversation on the AARoundtable (a Yahoo E-discussion group) during which the question was asked: "When will we as a community stop talking and start doing?" Almost rhetorical, it illustrated a degree of frustration with the fact that despite the presence and activity of Black Leaders and Organizations, we still seem to be sliding backwards into more hostile waters. The current resurgence of overt racism and prejudice embodied in the hanging of nooses, miscarriages of justice in the Genarlow Wilson and Jena 6 cases, and heinous acts of violence as with Megan Williams and the Dunbar Village assault made the question all the more poignant.

~~~~~~

Reflecting on that question brought to mind a situation from my own life that I believe to be instructive in this matter. You see, I was once deemed a gifted child. I was blessed with a better than average visual memory thereby allowing me to mentally picture and review text and documents I had previously viewed. Because of this, I was an excellent test-taker despite the fact that I never studied. It was therefore ironic that my strength created my weakness. I did just enough to pass. I never did much homework; I'd just do well on tests and quizzes and hope that I'd average out to a passing grade. But now as a grown man, I'm still saddled with a deficiency in that I never developed any study habits or skills.
~~~~~~
When I look at us as a community, we seem to have a strength related weakness as well. In a society where we had little real 'power', we developed a powerful and persuasive rhetoric which was designed to influence those in power to act on our behalf. We spoke, and change happened. We didn't actually 'author' the change, we didn't 'rewrite' the laws, 'appropriate' the funds, 'build' the facilities, or 'remake' the rules... We spoke; and our speech motivated others to take the practical steps involved in making change. We often mobilized through marches and protests, but even these are forms of 'speech' and 'expression'. We'd gather, march, preach, demand, and chant, and then... go home. We'd then trust that the necessary action steps, (mundane, un-emotional, and tedious) would be faithfully handled by others.
~~~~~~
Our earlier successes in 'speaking truth to power' have left us saddled with a deficiency. We as a community haven't developed the necessary tools or habits for change-making. We continue on in our tradition of 'speaking' the change, then waiting to see it materialize. It seems that we as a community still believe that if we speak to an forcefully to an issue, the 'righteousness' of our position will magically make a change occur. We believe that things will change for the better, simply because we've 'explained' why they should.
~~~~~~
Real change requires real power (The power to decree, to write policy, to create procedure, to allocate funds, to hire and fire, and/or to greenlight projects). If we don't have power than we should make it a priority to acquire power, and in the interim we should use leverage (Leverage to motivate change not because of emotion or sympathy, but because of the prospect of material consequence). If we don't have leverage we should make it a priority to gain some leverage, and in the interim we should use influence (Again this is influence not based on sympathy or emotion, but rather on our ability to 'transfer' our world-view and/or perspective to others and have them internalize those views as their own). If we don't have influence we should make it a priority to build and increase our influence and in the interim we're left with pressure/speech, both of which are dependant upon emotion and sympathy.
~~~~~~
To develop a community of change-agents will require a movement of sorts. This is largely uncharted territory for us and it doesn't look or feel like the activism we've become accustomed to. This will require a new type and method of activism. And it is precisely for that reason, I don't believe the way forward will initially be traveled en mass. I believe that those who are so motivated have to work deliberately to develop the skills and capacity to make change, and we have to demonstrate those skills as we go (kind of like a community OJT). Gradually, I believe, as laws are rewritten, policies amended, and institutions changed, we can and will develop the momentum to truly reinvent the movement. Hopefully then, the question will have answered itself...

KM

Read more...

Ward Connerly's "Civil Rights" Initiative

I first came across this video on a website named the Cultural Health Training Center (http://aunk123.googlepages.com/home)

It is of particular importance to us here in Kansas because Ward Connerly (see: Neo-Negro) and company are currently attempting to push ballot initaitives in all four of our neighboring states.

I've been in contact with some of the NAACP Branch Presidents in Missouri who are currently working to tie Connerly up in court. But in the meanwhile, we are getting our battle plans together for the fire next time...

This video shows a part of a debate on Connerly's iniative in Michigan. It's a little long, but very informative. I hope you enjoy...

Read more...

Important Nov. 20th Racial Profiling City Council Mtg. @ 9AM

The struggle to end racial profiling in Wichita continues. Even with the passage of SB 77 into law in 2005, the WPD still denies that racial profiling is practiced by their officers and department leaders.

However three studies since 2001 show that Blacks are 2xs more likely to be stopped by WPD than any other race. This means 8,000 more stops of Black drivers and pedestrians each year. The disproportionate amount of fines collected from Blacks by the Wichita City Municipal Court is approximately $2 million per year. This does not count the additional amount collected by the County from stops made by Sheriff Deputies.

As part of the new Racial Profiling law, each 1st Class City in Kansas is to have an Independent Citizens Advisory Board to work with the police department on training, policy changes and outreach to stop this egregious practice. However, in two years, Chief Williams has yet to meet with the Racial Profiling Citizens Advisory Board. City Manager Kolb claims that since none of the 100 racial profiling complaints have been sustained by their internal WPD Professional Standards, that there is no problem.

Therefore, our Board has voted to go directly to the Wichita City Council with specific recommendations to change officer behavior and WPD leadership assumptions through training and policy improvements. This important meeting will be held on November 20th at 9am next Tuesday.

Pastors and Church Lay-leaders, we ask that you please announce this very important meeting this coming Sunday so your parishioners will be able to come and support our efforts. Also, please insert copies of the attached editorial entitled “Why We Must Stop Racial Profiling” inside your Church bulletin. It was recently published in the Wichita Eagle and summarizes the many consequences of this discrimination on Black families and the Wichita community.

Thanks to your efforts, the Townhall meeting held in September had over 200 people come to share their deep concerns about how racial profiling and excessive use of force is impacting Black and Hispanic families.

Please come this Tuesday to the City Council meeting in City Hall and bring your congregation and friends with you. We need a strong showing of support to let the Council know that racial profiling can no longer be tolerated in Wichita, Kansas.

Please join us on November 20th @ 9am @ City Hall in the City Council Chambers. By standing together, our voices will be heard.

Have a GREAT DAY!!

Walt Chappell, Ph.D.

ChairmanWPD-Racial Profiling Citizens Advisory Board
Wichita Branch NAACP Political Action Committee

.

Tech Tags: racial+profiling, Police, WPD, NAACP

Read more...

Candidates Mixer planned for December 1st

What: Candidates Mixer
When: December 1st, from 1 - 3pm
Where: The All Occasions Center
Cost: Free

On December 1st the Wichita Branch NAACP will host a non-partisan Candidates Mixer at the Wichita All Occasions Center. We are inviting all declared and potential candidates for the 2008 School board, City, and Kansas State Elections.

This is an opportunity for community members to address each of the declared and potential candidates in an informal setting, to ask questions, offer suggestions, and to form opinions. All candidates are encouraged to bring literature, cards, and campaign materials.

This event will also provide a forum for community organizations to share, discuss, and align legislative agendas for the upcoming session.

*Refreshments will be provided*

.

Tech Tags: NAACP election Candidate

Read more...

The NAACP releases its 11th annual survey on the state of diversity in corporate America

The NAACP released its 11th annual survey on the state of diversity in corporate America, our Economic Reciprocity Initiative. The 2007 NAACP Consumer Choice and Best Practices Diversity Guides provide consumers with tools that enable them to make informed choices about their spending.
There is some good news in terms of advancements in employer diversity and community reinvestment. But, there is still significant ground to cover to advance economic opportunity for African Americans.

For the third year in a row, one of the nation's largest retailers, Target, has flat-out refused to participate. What are they hiding?

Tell Target to Take the NAACP Survey

African Americans contribute more than $700 billion a year to the economy--and a substantial amount of those hard earned dollars are spent in stores like Target. We are serious about holding companies accountable for respecting the value of African American consumers.

Economic empowerment isn't just a financial issue, it's a civil rights issue. African American consumers want fairness in the marketplace, just as they do in all other aspects of their lives.

We must demand economic diversity and transparency from corporate giants like Target. Tell Target to clarify its position on economic opportunity for African Americans by answering the NAACP's survey and supporting the Economic Reciprocity Initiative.

We won't look away from this issue, or from the companies that take our dollars then turn a blind eye to the needs of the African American community.

Sincerely,

Dennis Courtland Hayes

NAACP Interim President & CEO

Read more...

An Open Letter to our Veteran's

TO THE WICHITA BRANCH NAACP VETERANS

The NAACP would like to thank you for all that you have done
and are doing to protect and defend our country.

The NAACP is the oldest Civil Rights organization in the world
but without the blood, sweat, and tears; without the dedication,
tolerance, loyalty, endurance, and devotion of our veterans, this
country would not have survived.

To the veterans of World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam
War, Desert Storm, Afghanistan and the Iraq War; our hats are
off to you.

The men and women of the NAACP wish to thank you. We salute
you, and we are proud of each and every one of you, from the
very youngest to the oldest veterans who helped to make a
difference in this great nation of ours.

Carolyn E. Wallace
Veterans Affairs Chair
Wichita Branch NAACP

Read more...

TELLABRATIONS coming to the Kansas African American Museum

The Griots Storytelling Institute will be hosting "Tellabrations" at the African American Museum on Saturday November 17th at 6:30pm.

Admission will be $5.00 for Adults and $1.00 for children 12 and under.Tickets can be purchased from any Griots storyteller or at the door.

Tellabrations is a national storytelling celebration that the Wichita Griots celebrate by sharing stories for families of all ages.

Guest Storytellers this year will include; Brian Black, Eric Williams, Gwen Mukes, Charles Coleman, Dr. Gretchen Eick, Wichita NAACP VP and City Councilwoman Lavonta Williams, and Wichita NAACP President Kevin Myles. If you are interested in purchasing a ticket, please call 316-683-4965.

Read more...

The NAACP opposes US Attorney General Nominee Michael Mukasey

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS ON TORTURE AND USE OF WARRENTLESS SEARCHES OF AMERICAN CITIZENS RAISE GRAVE CONCERNS ON KEY CIVIL RIGHTS, CIVIL LIBERTIES AND HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES

.

.

DATE: November 8, 2007

TO: Concerned Parties

FROM: Hilary O. Shelton, Director, Washington Bureau

THE ISSUE: President George W. Bush has nominated Judge Michael B. Mukasey to succeed Alberto Gonzalez as Attorney General for the United State. Due to his refusal to condemn waterboarding as torture, endorsed broad assertions of executive authority, and failure to make firm commitments to the enforcement of civil rights at his Senate confirmation hearing earlier this month hearing and in his responses to written questions, the NAACP opposes his confirmation.

The NAACP is deeply concerned that Judge Mukasey's refusal to state unequivocally that waterboarding is torture, along with his apparent willingness to allow the Administration to engage in warrantless surveillance of persons in the United States in violation of congressional laws does not speak well of his willingness to protect Americans' civil rights or civil liberties. This, combined with Judge Mukasey's ambiguous responses with respect to questions regarding how he would improve civil rights enforcement, is at the heart of the NAACP's opposition.

Civil and voting rights enforcement have been low priorities within the Department of Justice for too long, making it especially important that the next Attorney General be committed to the vigorous and unbiased enforcement of those laws. Unfortunately, during his confirmation hearing Judge Mukasey failed to offer solutions to the extremely low number of cases brought by the Civil Rights Division on behalf of women and racial and ethnic minorities in employment discrimination cases. Furthermore, on an issue as central to the civil rights community as voting rights, Judge Mukasey would not commit to the straightforward proposition that a voter identification requirement that disproportionately impacts minorities could violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. His responses to questions concerning civil and voting rights enforcement evidenced little understanding of the problems that currently plague the Civil Rights Division, and have led the NAACP to be concerned that he will not take the necessary steps to improve this vital, yet faltering, division of the US Department of Justice.

PLEASE CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE ACTION STEPS WE NEED TO TAKE!

Thank you for your attention to this matter...

Read more...

The Rise of the "Neo-Negro"

This post is from a Special guest contributer to the Blog; My Dad! It's a powerful post, hope you enjoy...

~~~~~~

When you’re called a nigger you look at your father because you think your father can rule the world—every kid thinks that—and then you discover that your father cannot do anything about it. So you begin to despise your father and you realize, oh, that’s what a nigger is.

-James Baldwin (1924–87), U.S. author. A Dialogue (1973; with Nikki Giovanni), from a conversation, 4 Nov. 1971, in London.

The Neo-Negro

Neo-Negroes are Americans of African or mixed African descent who show a marked preference for far right wing neo-conservative ideologies and are opposed to efforts to continue affirmative legal action against racism and discrimination. This designation is particularly applicable to those who, having benefited from affirmative civil rights legislation in the past, now wish to reverse such legislation and deny those benefits to the generations to come.

Not wishing to be all closely associated with Blacks, they tend to seek out friends and long term relationships with non-African Americans, and while it is not unusual for them, like other closet reactionaries, to hide their true motivations behind the convenient cloak of “libertarianism,” their compulsive preoccupation with race becomes all the more obvious by their obsessive focus on ignoring, changing or eliminating racial classifications and reversing civil rights legislation; matters that are of little urgency to true race neutral libertarians.

Their ultimate goal, if carried to its logical conclusions would, in fact, eliminate the black race as a legal entity. It would actually end racial discrimination as a matter of 'law' while leaving racial discrimination as a matter of 'fact', free to spread like a virus with no cure. That is why they are so coveted by the neocon movement. They would end the problem of racism by fiat; eliminate the crime by simply legalizing the act. (One might wonder if they feel equally as libertarian in their position on illegal drug usage…) In any event, they truly live in a fool’s paradise; which is probably amusing to many of their neocon “friends.”

The Neo-Negro solution to racism is the “Unilateral Fiat” used, most infamously, by GW Bush in his “Mission Accomplished” speech to declare unilateral victory over one problem while blithely ignoring the far greater emerging dangers in the ensuing situation.

In similar fashion, from their high towered house of cards, propped up by neocon puppet masters and paid for by civil rights battles of the past, modern self-congratulating Neo-Negroes, can only secure their own prominent positions by declaring mission accomplished and turning a blind eye to the deteriorating situation outside of their own immediate environment. This is the hallmark of the Neo-Negro, who under no circumstances should be confused with the many hard working successful African Americans who openly acknowledge their debt to the civil rights sacrifices of the past and who are still willing to take positive steps to insure that the fruit of that bloody labor is passed on to succeeding generations.

While genuinely concerned African Americans may rightly assert that affirmative action legislation is neither a substitute for positive action on the part of individuals nor a valid excuse for persistent failure in its absence, Neo-Negroes are those who openly declare the problems of racism solved and deny the need for continued affirmative action while the situational effects of racial discrimination persist and in some cases worsen. Try as they may to rationalize their behavior, actively working to weaken or circumvent affirmative action legislation is the Neo-Negro’s ultimate act of betrayal.

African Americans must be made to recognize, rise up and ostracize this insidious enemy from within and declare to the world that the deep seated and pervasively institutionalized effects of racism cannot be eliminated by declaration of the privileged few but must be whittled away by constant vigilance, exposure, determination and positive action.

In that any form of racial discrimination without the power of enforcement is a paper tiger that cannot influence events to any significant degree, accusations of so-called “reverse discrimination” can easily be seen as just another in a long line of tired old strawman maneuvers, covertly financed and directed by entrenched right wing extremists to impede harmonious racial progress. These wily old-school ultra conservatives, after generations of exploiting racial animosity and profiteering from racial discord, were threatened by new understandings, coalitions, open communication, and above all, the affirmative action legislation of the sixties. So they began financing and developing a new strain of neocons to deal with liberals and Neo-Negroes to deal with Blacks.

Like their “Askari” predecessors from around the globe, the Neo-Negroes are rewarded for their willingness to stifle dissent, belittle civil rights activities, openly oppose affirmative action, and make “Negro problems” appear to disappear while leaving the underlying unrest of African American situations essentially unchanged, unchallenged, and unassisted. Sweeping the problem under the rug, as Neo-Negroes would have us do, provides cosmetic improvement to the surface, while the hidden but ever deteriorating foundation is allowed to fester and grow.

Neo-Negroes would have you to believe that those who stand up and fight to address America's racial problems ARE the problem. Traditional Organizations that work for Social Justice are 'Relics', 'useless' or 'unnecessary' because in the Neo-Negro's brave new world, race problems will cease to exist as soon as you stop discussing them. New foundation-funded organizations are created which borrow heavily from the vocabulary and imagery of the Civil Rights Movement, and with Neo-Negroes at the helm, they operate merely as storefronts for the same status-quo that the movement sought to overturn.

Make no mistake about it, these Neo-Negroes are willing to bargain away the civil rights that their ancestors were willing to suffer and die for. They are the arrogant and ungrateful sons and daughters of those whose blood and sweat are the mortar and pestle of roads built over the rocky terrain of racial terrorism, and to their everlasting shame, they have chosen to take the personally profitable path offered to them by the residue of the very forces that fought most fiercely against emancipation, integration and equal opportunity in the past, and now would engage their services as front men in the battle against affirmation action.

Having passed through the narrow corridors of legally mandated equal opportunities opened up to them only through the trials and tribulations of the civil rights movement, these Neo-Negroes now seek to close the doors behind them and give the keys to those who would see them locked once again. They have declared open warfare in well-funded and orchestrated efforts to betray the very acts of positive civil rights legislation that gave them the opportunity to give voice to their treachery. And for this, as long as they behave, they are very well compensated by right wing reactionaries who might otherwise drive them out of their fool’s paradise for a deed undone or misspoken word.

It is precisely because of the precariousness of their positions, over which they have no autonomous control, that they struggle all the harder to overturn the gains of the past and thus keep other African Americans from rising to levels from which they can see into the sham and the hypocrisy of their false bravado. The Neo-Negro house of cards can ill afford the additional weight of their brothers and sisters.

For all of that, the real victim of the Neo-Negro is not the black man or woman who must be better and brighter to be treated as equal. The true victim is the black child, born or yet unborn, coming into this world with no more to guide them than the tools, the system, the laws and legacy we leave behind. Unless we can pass the rights, the liberties, and the opportunities won in the civil rights struggle on to our children and our children’s children then we won nothing; it was all for nothing. That is what the Neo-Negro seems to have forgotten. That’s whose future they would trade for their present self-indulgence.

Claiming that civil rights laws are no longer needed and therefore should be reversed or circumvented makes no more sense than arguing to repeal the Thirteenth Amendment because legal slavery has ended. An important question for us to consider is why are human rights and civil rights laws kept on the books long after the urgent need for them is ended? What is their purpose? The Neo-Negro says we should do away with them. Feeling confident that their problems are apparently solved for their lifetime, they see no need for the continued existence of such laws to protect others. After having received their comfortable foundation funded offices, hand-picked appointments, and fast-tracked promotions on the basis of their special talent they can no longer see the need for such laws not only to undo wrongs of the past and protect us in the present, but even more importantly, to secure our future and the future of our children.

RMyles

The Neo-Negro Show
By light of day he is confident enough to need no big show of confidence
He swaggers just a bit, not too much, just the right amount
In dark of night he prays that no one will see through his false bravado
Not just yet. Not just yet. He is not yet ready for such exposure
-RM

Tech Tags: Neo-Negro Race Discrimination Affirmative+Action Steele Thomas Meyers Connerly Current+Affairs Social+Commentary

Read more...

Race on the Web

I wish I could take credit for this post, but I can't. This was article was posted in the comments section of a story on Newsvine by someone going by the initials "BT". I found the post very informative and well assembled, so I decided to repost it here. Props to you BT!

~~~~~~

This is a paper on how Hate messages are distributed on the Web. While the discussion is of the more crude, fringe groups (KKK, Aryan, Skinhead) - it pretty much depicts the same themes as brought forth by the petaloonie, conservative racists who often hire black conservatives to advance their more -

http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_10/rajagopal/

In general, these attacks play on 5 themes:

1. Black Dysfunctionality - That black folks are less intelligent, perform worse on tests, have lower educational indicators, commit more crime, etc. Where numbers don’t exist to support the premise, they make them up, and/or selectively parse data to support their points.

2. White Victimhood - A old time favorite is white women being raped by Giant Negroes, but other favorites are “unqualified blacks are stealing white jobs/education/etc.” (AA), “our values are being destroyed by the brown/black wave”, “the welfare queen”, “only white folks are convicted of Hate Crimes”, and the newest venue - “Black Racism”.

3. It’s Not Racism - the cruder groups claim that “white nationalism” or “white pride” aren’t racism. The typical construct of this is “Why are there black organizations when ‘white’ organizations are considered racist?” Variations include “Christian Identity” - “I’m a christian, not a racist!” . There are a number of rationales to provide cover for the underlying racism.

4. A “Negro” said it! - This is a favorite of the conservative right. It boils down to utilizing a small group of “captive negroes” to say things which otherwise would be considered racist - and to provide cover for white conservatives (My best friend is a Negro!). Possibly the most ludicrous example of this is here:

http://www.scvcamp469-nbf.com/theblackconfederatesoldier.htm

In any oppressed community it’s possible to find folks who are so psychologically damaged that they will work against the very community they come from. Whether selling heroin on street corners to neighborhood kids, or pandering the right’s need for Negroes to provide racial cover - the dynamic, and morality are the same.

A good article on how the conservative racist right utilizes these folks:

http://www.alternet.org/story/19294/?page=1

You have to remember, that bashing black folks is a $40 -100 million industry, funded by the very same folks who fund the conservative movement. Like the enticement of “easy money” in the drug industry, black conservatives willing to front for “the Man”, can rake in salaries and book sales in excess of $250,000 a year. Indeed, the bashing black folks industry can provide the black conservative far more media and ego polishing recognition than they are ever going to earn in their field of study through quantitative accomplishments.

5. “Black folks are whiners!” – The crux of this argument goes something like this: “We’ve given black folks equality and welfare, and they are still whining! They need to get a job and learn to take care of themselves and stop being a drain on white’s wallets.” Favorite punching bags are Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who magically become responsible for every word uttered by a black person.

This is a list of Hate Organizations posting on the WWW -

http://www.bcpl.net/~rfrankli/hatedir.htm

An amusing article about Project21, a “black” conservative group of which I believe Michael Meyers, who actually penned the article by pettyloon above was a member:

http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/07/30/blackwashing-what-black-conservative-movement.htm

Principal Funders of Academic racism –

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?sid=370

This is by no means a complete list. Much of the “mainstream” racism is funded by 4 Foundations – variously called the “4 Sisters”.

Who funds the “re-segregation movement”, and lines the pockets of many black conservatives?

• Scaife Family Foundations

The Scaife Family Foundations. Sarah Scaife, Carthage and Allegheny are funded by industrial tycoon Richard Mellon Scaife, who inherited $200 million from his mother in the 1960s. He was a presidential appointment of the U.S. Advisory Commission for Public Diplomacy during the Reagan and first Bush administrations.

Scaife gave former U.S. attorney general Edwin Meese $1.9 million to start PLF. Between 1985 and 2005, Scaife gave more than $4.5 million to PLF. He is the primary supporter of the Heritage Foundation, of which he is a trustee and Meese a former staff member. Many Heritage Foundation staff members held or hold high-ranking federal positions, including current Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao and former U.S. Civil Rights Commission (UCCR) staff director and Manhattan Institute fellow Linda Chavez, founder of the right-wing Center for Equal Opportunity (CEO).

Scaife funds Connerly’s ACRI, Chavez’s CEO, and the Center for Individual Rights, which together comprise the triumvirate leading the campaign to end affirmative action. Other major grant recipients include the National Association of Scholars, co-author of Prop. 209, which banned affirmative action in California, and the Manhattan Institute for Public Policy Research. UCCR Vice Chair Abigail Thernstrom, a Manhattan Institute senior fellow, is on the board of the Equal Opportunity Foundation, which directs funding for CEO.

• Castle Rock Foundation

Coors Brewing Co.’s support for anti-gay groups led to a 10-year boycott led by AFL-CIO in 1977. Pressured to reform, Coors began funding black and Latino groups through the Adolph Coors Foundation and became one of the first companies to offer domestic-partner benefits to employees in 1995. In 1993, the Coors family created Castle Rock to separate the Coors name from its conservative agenda. The Castle Rock and Adolph Coors Foundations have the same board of directors, the same staff and the same address.

Coors co-owner Joseph Coors founded and financed the conservative Heritage Foundation, which later received most of its support from Richard Mellon Scaife. Coors was a Heritage trustee until March 2003. Ambassador Holland Coors, President Reagan’s appointment to the National Year of the Americas, has been on the board since 1998. Major grant recipients include the Heritage Foundation, the National Association of Scholars and the Institute for Justice, which was founded by anti-affirmative-action leader Clint Bolick, a disciple of ultraconservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Castle Rock gave PLF $340,000 between 1985 and 2005. Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), a right-wing legal advocacy group founded in 1973, represents the Seattle parents in the recent Supreme Court case eliminating even voluntary integration. In 2001, PLF represented Ward Connerly’s American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI) and provided pro-bono counsel to then Calif. Gov. Pete Wilson in a successful effort to expand the scope of Prop. 209, which banned affirmative action in public education, employment and contracting.

• Olin Foundation

The New York-based John M. Olin Foundation grew out of a family-owned chemical and munitions manufacturing business. The foundation, which dissolved in 2005, was charged with spending all assets within a generation of Olin’s death, lest its mission be altered. Grant recipients included CEO, the Heritage Foundation, the National Association of Scholars and the Manhattan Institute. Specifically, Olin funded the research of CEO founder Linda Chavez and former Secretary of Education William Bennett.

When former Olin Foundation President Michael Joyce left to run the Bradley Foundation, William Simon, who was secretary of the treasury for Nixon and Ford, took over. Joyce had worked under Simon at a neoconservative think-tank prior to joining Olin, and it was Simon who asked him to take the helm at Bradley. Olin gave PLF $669,000 between 1985 and 2005.

• Bradley Foundation

The Allen-Bradley Company, a manufacturer of electronic and radio equipment, was one of the last major Milwaukee-based companies to racially integrate, which it did only under legal pressure. In 1968, the company had 7,000 employees, only 32 of whom were black and 14 Latino. When the Allen-Bradley company was sold in 1985, the name of the foundation was changed to the Lynne and Harry Bradley Foundation to separate the company name from its conservative cause.

Bradley is the principal supporter of Connerly’s ACRI. ACRI co-chair Thomas Rhodes is on the Bradley board of directors. Bradley Foundation President Michael Joyce, formerly with the Olin Foundation, served on President Reagan’s transition team and other presidential commissions and worked closely with William Bennett prior to his appointment as Secretary of Education.

The foundation gives to the Institute for Justice, where founder Clint Bolick drafted a federal bill to eliminate affirmative action. Other major grant recipients include the Heritage Foundation, the National Association of Scholars and the American Enterprise Institute, a literary outlet for conservative thinkers such as William Bennett and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who will take part in deciding the Seattle case this December. Bradley gave PLF $327,000 between 1985 and 2005.

Tech Tags: Diversity Race Racism Current+Affairs Social+Commentary

Read more...

Welcome to the Wichita State University Branch NAACP

At the October 20th meeting, the NAACP National Board of Directors approved a request to charter the Wichita State University NAACP College Chapter. Please join with us as we welcome and support a new generation of Leadership...

Tech Tags: NAACP Youth College Education Leadership

Read more...

Action Alert: Crack cocaine / powder cocaine sentencing disparity addressed

DATE: November 2, 2007
TO: Concerned Parties
FROM: Hilary O. Shelton, Director, Washington Bureau

NAACP APPLAUDS STEPS TAKEN BY US SENTENCING COMMISSION TO BEGIN TO ADDRESS CRACK COCAINE / POWDER COCAINE SENTENCING DISPARITIES

SENTENCING COMMISSION RESPONSE TO NAACP TESTIMONY BEGINS TO ADDRESS RACIAL DISPARITY CONCERNS; NAACP URGES DECISION TO BE APPLIED RETROACTIVELY

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE ISSUE
Due to actions taken by the U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC) last May, as of November 1, 2007, the mandatory minimum penalties for crack cocaine conviction have been lowered, which may impact as many as 3,500 federal defendants a year. On average, this change will reduce the penalty on defendants' sentences by 15 months. The NAACP has long supported a reduction in crack cocaine penalties, with NAACP Washington Bureau Director Hilary Shelton forcefully testifying before the Sentencing Commission last November in support of a reduction of crack cocaine penalties.

As a result of federal law passed in 1986, there is a huge (100 to 1) disparity between the penalty for possession of crack cocaine and powder cocaine. Specifically, a person has to possess 500 grams of powder cocaine before they are subject to the same mandatory prison sentence (5 years) as an individual who is convicted of possessing just 5 grams of crack cocaine (despite the fact that pharmacologically, these two drugs are identical). One of the effects of the 1986 law is that small-scale crack cocaine users are punished much more severely than powder cocaine users and their suppliers.

Everyone seems to agree that crack cocaine use is higher among Caucasians than any other group: most authorities estimate that more than 66% of those who use crack cocaine are white. Yet in 2006, 82% of those sentenced under federal crack cocaine laws were African American. When you add in Hispanics, the percentage climbs to above 96%. Since 1986 the 100 to 1 ratio has had a devastating and disproportionate impact on the African American and Hispanic communities.

While the USSC decision does not impact the 100-to-1 crack / powder cocaine sentencing disparity, it does ensure that people convicted of crack cocaine possession under federal law are not sentenced even more harshly. The USSC in now in the process of determining if their action should be retroactive; a move that will help approximately 19,500 people currently in prison for a federal crack cocaine conviction. NAACP Washington Bureau Director Shelton is preparing to testify before the Sentencing Commission in mid-November in favor of applying the decision retroactively.

In the meantime, the NAACP will continue to advocate for a change in the underlying 100-1 sentencing disparity.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS IMPORTANT MATTER!!!
If you have any questions, call Hilary Shelton at the Washington Bureau at (202) 463-2940.

Tech Tags: NAACP Sentencing Action+Alerts Judicial Courts Disparity

Read more...