Guest Columnist
(0 comments, 7 posts)
This user hasn't shared any profile information
Home page: http://www.racewire.org/
Posts by Guest Columnist
BREAKING: La. Sheriff Ordered ‘Illegal Alien’ Probe of Oil Spill Workers
0By Brentin Mock
St. Bernard Parish Sheriff Jack Stephens acknowledged today that his office requested federal immigration officials search for undocumented workers among those cleaning up BP’s oil spill. After a spokesperson for the sheriff’s department initially denied involvement*–and federal officials insisted they had conducted a “training,” not a raid–Stephens released a statement in response to ColorLines’ questions about who ordered the probe. The statement declared Stephens is concerned about “illegal aliens” and “criminals” coming into the area “under the guise of doing legitimate work.”
The journalism project Feet in Two Worlds and El Diario/La Prensa broke the story Friday, reporting that ICE had visited two oil spill command centers, rounded up workers and checked their documents. ICE has since insisted that the visits were at the request of local officials and that they were “trainings” rather than raids.
Here’s Stephens’ full statement:
St. Bernard Parish Sheriff Jack A. Stephens confirmed Tuesday, June 8, his department asked ICE officials weeks ago to look into reports of illegal aliens among those working in the oil spill clean-up effort as part of an overall effort to prevent criminals from entering under the guise of doing legitimate work.
“We’re not worried about people who want to earn an honest buck,’’ Sheriff Stephens said. “But from the beginning (of the oil spill) we have been concerned about criminal elements coming into this area with the intention of establishing criminal enterprises,’’ the sheriff said.
“We make a distinction between those working here and those who have crime in mind when they come here,’’ Stephens said. “That happened after Hurricane Katrina and we don’t want it to happen again. We’re concerned illegal aliens with criminal records represent a danger to our parish.’’
He said the Sheriff’s Office has set up checkpoints throughout the areas affected by the oil spill and has been working with law enforcement agencies from throughout he coastal Louisiana area on a credentialing system for employees of BP subcontractors being sent in for clean-up efforts.
“We have a good working relationship with ICE’’ and the Sheriff’s Office asked them weeks ago to check on reports of illegal aliens coming in as part of clean-up efforts because the agency has the resources to find out whether such people might have gang affiliations or have criminal records in other countries” Sheriff Stephens said.
We’ll have more on the story tomorrow.
*An earlier version of this post incorrectly reported that Sheriff Stephens denied his office’s involvement “for days.” Stephens released his statement the same day ColorLines asked about the ICE visits.
Lincoln Vows to Finally Pay Black Farmers for Bias
0
By Jessica Strong
Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln stepped into a 10-year-old debacle last week to help Black farmers finally get restitution for years of discrimination by the federal government. Lincoln, who chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee, called on Friday for a long-delayed settlement of the $1.25 billion “Pigford II” case, an historic lawsuit in which thousands of Black farmers charged the U.S. Department of Agriculture with lending bias. Lincoln said in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that she hopes to finally resolve the case with funding from the supplemental appropriations bill for fiscal year 2011. “Every farmer in America should receive equal access and treatment in the delivery of USDA’s programs and services,” Lincoln said. “Congress should move swiftly to provide the funding necessary to fulfill the settlement agreement and close this chapter on discrimination within USDA.”
This isn’t the first settlement in the drawn-out civil rights battle of Black farmers. It is a continuation of the 1999 class-action lawsuit known as “Pigford I,” in which the Clinton administration agreed to pay a North Carolina farmer named Timothy Pigford and 16,000 other farmers $1 billion because of USDA lending discrimination. However, tens of thousands of farmers missed the deadline to file their claims, and were subsequently denied compensation. The current settlement, known as Pigford II, gives those farmers a second chance to file their claims.
The Obama administration announced in February that it would finally settle Pigford II and agreed to a March 31 deadline. But as the saying goes, a promise made is a debt unpaid.
Congress missed the payment deadline when it went on spring recess without approving the settlement’s funding. The parties have now agreed to a new May 31 deadline for resolving the case. Back in February, when the administration first announced the settlement, Congressional Black Caucus Chair Rep. Barbara Lee pointed out the consequences of the years of lending bias. “Over the past 20 years, the number of farms operated by Black farmers has declined by nearly 50 percent,” Lee said. “In part, this decrease was caused by a lack of access to loans and other assistance which were provided to other farmers.”
John Boyd Jr., founder and president of the National Black Farmer’s Association, has been vocal in criticizing President Obama and the Democrats for having dropped the ball on one of the largest civil rights settlements in history. Obama promised to settle Pigford II during his campaign and, as a senator, co-sponsored a farm bill that would have allocated $100 million to Black farmers. The administration continues to publicly express its commitment to closing the case.
Meanwhile, Native American farmers, who also filed a discrimination lawsuit in 1999, are currently involved in a similar case known as Keepseagle. The settlement deadline was scheduled for April 21, but was extended an extra 30 days for extended negotiations—leaving them in same uncertain situation as Black farmers. Discrimination suits have also been filed by women and Latino farmers.
Jessica Strong is a communications intern at the Applied Research Center.
Accountability for the Return of Abstinence-Only Funding
0By Jessica Strong
Health care reform’s off the front pages, but the new problems it introduced haven’t gone away. Outraged at the (unanticipated) inclusion of renewed abstinence-only sex education funding in the bill, the group Advocates for Youth has plans to fight back against Capitol Hill and fight for the sexual and reproductive rights of youth.
“How bitterly ironic that a measure that threatens the health and lives of young people should be included in healthcare reform,” said James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth.
Despite the efforts of long-time abstinence-only opponent California Rep. Henry Waxman as well as other legislators to keep abstinence-only funding out of the bill, Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch is believed to have crammed it into the bill. Sexual health advocates had previously won an end to years of federal funding for the programs. “Hatch is a Republican who opposes health care reform so there was no political need to placate the author of the measure,” Wagoner complained in a recent blog post.
Advocates for Youth has launched an accountability campaign for Democratic leadership in Congress. “I think the campaign will target House and Senate leadership for a clear and transparent explanation as to who insisted this be included and what was their rationale,” Wagoner said. “There remains no excuse to resurrect these failed programs and that needs to be a focus in our efforts.”
Teenage birth rates showed a national decline of 2 percent in 2008, a statistic that many abstinence-only programs and advocates are taking credit for. But should they? As Newsweek blogger Sarah Kliff points out, “2008 was the year when 25 states opted out of Title V abstinence-only funding.” Moreover, reams of studies have shown abstinence-only programs don’t work.
“Legislators have a habit of doing bad things when nobody’s watching,” Wagoner said. “We cannot allow lawmakers to use the cloak of complex processes to screen themselves from public accountability. We have a right to know who did this.”
Jessica Strong is a communications intern for the Applied Research Center.
ColorLines Finds Dozens of Fresno Cops in Repeated Brutality Cases
0In a joint investigation, ColorLines and the Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute have discovered dozens of officers in the Fresno Police Department who have been involved in repeated inappropriate shootings of civilians. Our investigation will continue looking at police departments throughout California in the coming months, identifying those where repeat offenders of police violence remain on the force and hidden from the public.
By Ali Winston
A thwarted attempt by the San Diego Tribune seven years ago to obtain disciplinary records for a deputy sheriff has rewritten police accountability across California. That case wound up at the California Supreme Court, which issued a sweeping ruling, Copley Press v. Superior Court, in August 2006. Though the ruling attracted some attention at the time it was issued, in August 2006, and a short-lived effort at repeal, there has been no comprehensive attempt to assess its impact. An investigation by ColorLines and the Investigative Fund at The Nation Institute has found that the decision, combined with state laws that protect police privacy, has blocked the public from knowing whether local police officers have engaged in misconduct, or a pattern of misconduct, even when such misconduct involves officers inappropriately shooting civilians.
A California Public Records Act Request uncovered a previously withheld list of 27 Fresno police officers involved in repeat shootings of civilians from 2002 through 2009, 25 of whom, according to an official with the Fresno Police Department, are still on active duty today. Of these 27 officers, four were involved in at least three separate shooting incidents over the same period. One officer, Michael Palomino, was involved in four shooting incidents. In the context of a statewide investigation focusing in on four major police departments, the Fresno Police Department stands out in scale. During the same period, the similarly sized Oakland Police Department had only five officers involved in repeat shootings, although Fresno enjoys a much lower crime rate.
Dep. Chief Robert Nevarez, head of the Fresno Police Department’s Professional Standards Division, which oversees the department’s Internal Affairs Bureau, said he had been unaware of the number of officers involved in repeat shootings. However, Nevarez stood by the quality of the department’s Internal Affairs investigations and stressed the need to review each shooting individually: “It’s very important for us to review them [shootings by officers] on their own merits,” Nevarez said. “We’re policing a very dangerous population.”
Citing California government code 6254, which exempts many law enforcement files, including personnel records, investigatory documents, and incident reports, from public records disclosure, Fresno Police Department officials denied a request for the incident reports filed by these officers at the time of each shooting. Likewise, Nevarez said the department would not turn over information on whether any disciplinary action was taken against any of the 27 officers related to the shootings, nor would he supply files on the department’s internal use-of-force investigations into each shooting. Neither family members of the shooting victims nor the public at large are able to access Internal Affairs investigation records or find out why 25 of these officers remain on active duty. Even a victim’s family member who files a formal complaint with the FPD is only entitled to be informed about whether Internal Affairs sustained that complaint, but not whether the department undertook any related disciplinary action.
Nevarez would only speak in general terms, explaining that after shooting incidents, officers undergo range training to make sure they do not repeat any mistakes they may have committed during the incident. He said the department also has instituted a computerized early warning system for potential officer misconduct and a program for supervisors to identify problem behavior early on.
The Fresno Police Department’s use of force record displays a pattern of violence that has drawn the attention of the federal Department of Justice. The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Sacramento office confirmed that it has opened an investigation into the beating of an unarmed homeless man, Glen Beaty, by two Fresno officers in February 2009. Just eight months later, in October 2009, one of the officers involved, Scott Payn, fatally shot John Cooper, an emotionally disturbed man who was waving a toy gun. (Fresno Police only have a handful of officers who are trained to deal with the mentally ill, even though people with suicidal tendencies or “health” issues were the fourth-highest cause of use of force incidents in 2009.) That incident was caught on video and widely broadcast, sparking public outrage and hastening Mayor Ashley Swearingen’s decision to create an independent police auditor to monitor the department. The first of these, Eddie Aubrey, was appointed in November 2009. Until then, Fresno was the only one of California’s five largest cities without some form of independent police oversight. Aubrey was traveling as this article went to press and could not be reached for comment.
On January 14, a federal grand jury subpoena was issued to the Fresno Police Department’s custodian of records by the United States Attorney’s Office for California’s Eastern District. The subject of the subpoena remains under seal, and US Attorney Benjamin Wagner’s office refused to comment on the matter. The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division did not return requests for comment.
On February 16, The ACLU’s Fresno chapter sent a formal request to the Department of Justice for a pattern and practice investigation into FPD’s use of force policies. Such investigations are intended to eliminate behavior by police officers who deprive citizens of their constitutional rights or engage in discrimination. The DOJ recently announced its intent to file a pattern and practice suit against the New Orleans Police Department.
Gloria Hernandez, a Fresno community activist who works with Fresno Copwatch and the Central California Criminal Justice Committee, both police accountability groups, said she had been unaware of the number of officers involved in repeat shootings in Fresno. “I was shocked that they’re allowed to continue,” she said. “The average Jane Doe who wants to find out something about the police department can’t do so.” Hernandez filed two similar public records requests, in 2006 and 2009, both of which were denied — the first just on the heels of the Copley decision.
Last year, the ACLU of Northern California sued the FPD after the city refused a Public Records Act request for the names of the officers involved in the Beaty incident. The names were eventually released three months later, after media inquiries about the lawsuit began to mount.
“The people of this state should not have to go through the trouble and expense of filing a lawsuit to get records that are supposed to be open and available to all,” said Michael Risher, the attorney overseeing the ACLU lawsuit.
What most troubles community advocates about this lack of transparency is the possibility that brutal or undisciplined officers, prone to the use of excessive violence, might remain on the force. Without access to incident reports, internal investigations, or whether disciplinary action was taken, such a determination is impossible to make. But some of the officers’ actions indicate a pattern of problems.
In 1985 Raul Rangel, Jr., an 18-year-old junior college student, was carrying a gun and threatening suicide in his mother’s home. She called the police for help, and several officers arrived; in the end, Rangel was shot at dozens of times and killed. One of those officers, Jerry Dyer, then a street cop, is now Fresno’s Chief of Police; another, SWAT team member Michael Palomino, went on to be involved in several more shootings over the course of his career, three during the period between 2002 and 2009 covered by the Public Records Act request. Rangel’s mother, Matilda Rangel, believes Fresno police are given too much leeway in cases that might involve the excessive use of force. “In my opinion, there’s no accountability,” Rangel said. “In every case, the police officers’ actions are found to be justified.”
In October 2009, Palomino shot and killed a 32-year-old parolee, Stephen Vargas, following a car accident. Vargas had crashed his SUV into a parked car while driving the wrong way down a one-way street. Palomino, a 29-year veteran who has served as a SWAT officer for all but three of those years, fired on Vargas when he didn’t respond to commands to get out of his car. According to witnesses, another FPD officer incorrectly told Palomino that Vargas was armed. In February 2009, Palomino and three other officers fired shots at an unidentified suspect, who was not hit. No further details were available about the incident, which remains under review by Internal Affairs and the Fresno County District Attorney’s office.
The Fresno Police Department’s most prominent case of excessive force is that of Marcus Tafoya, a police officer who was fired in 2007 shortly before being indicted by the Fresno County DA for assaulting a returning Iraq war veteran at a party two years earlier.
Tafoya was acquitted of criminal charges in February of this year, despite allegations that he had tried to intimidate fellow officers who appeared as witnesses for the prosecution. But prior to his indictment, Tafoya was involved in four shooting incidents, three of which were fatal, all in 2004 and 2005. In a June 2005 incident, Tafoya shot Daniel Mendoza, a 21-year-old suspect in a shooting that had taken place ten days earlier — after Mendoza had begun to lower his hands while surrendering to Fresno Police. The internal investigations into those shootings and records of whether any disciplinary action was taken against Tafoya are not available to the public.
The disclosure of the 27 Fresno police officers involved in repeat shootings is the latest chapter in a decades-long struggle in California over law enforcement transparency. Intensive lobbying by police associations more than 30 years ago resulted in the passage of the Peace Officers’ Bill of Rights in 1978, which prevents law enforcement agencies from releasing officer disciplinary information. Then, in 2006, came the Copley decision, which prevented the release of complaints and findings against specific officers. “Now, you don’t have to worry that your dirty laundry or allegations about your dirty laundry will be on the front page of the newspaper,” the attorney representing the local Deputy Sheriff’s Association, Everett Bobbitt, said at the time. In her dissent, Justice Kathryn Werdegar argued in a dissenting opinion that the ruling “overvalues” police officers’ privacy concerns, and “undervalues the public’s interest in disclosure.”
Combined, Copley and the Bill of Rights mean California has the tightest restrictions on public access to police disciplinary information in the country. “Copley differs greatly from laws in the rest of the country,” said Philip Eure, the head of the District of Columbia’s Office of Police Complaints and a former president of the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement. Copley, Eure said, is “rather extreme” in its public records restrictions and has “caused alarm in the oversight community.”
Fresno Deputy Chief Nevarez said that the integrity and transparency of investigations is key to retaining community trust in the department. “In order to have that trust, there has to be an element of transparency,” said Nevarez. “Whatever we can disclose to the community, we will.” Yet he said the Police Officers’ Bill of Rights prevents him from releasing any information on disciplinary action that may have been taken against the 27 officers.
Repeat Shooters: Fresno Police Department
Name and number of shootings (2002-2009)
Daniel Astacio — 2
Andre Benson — 2
Tom Canales — 2
Alfred Campos — 2
Alfonso Castillo — 2
Paul Cervantes — 2
Stacie Colby — 2
Christopher Cooper — 4
Christopher Desmond — 2
Rick Harrell — 2
John Herring — 2
Justin Hoagland — 2
Daniel Gonzalez — 3
Carl McKnight — 2
Paige McQuay — 3
Gunter Meiss — 5
Richard Nadeau — 2
Michael Palomino — 3
Kennan Rodems — 2
Louis Sanchez* — 2
David Surabian — 2
Brian Sturgeon — 2
Marcus Tafoya* — 4
Rudolpho Tafoya — 2
Allen Taliaferro — 2
Matthew Vincent — 3
James Young — 2
*No longer employed by the Fresno Police Department
Compiled from Fresno Police Department running logs 2002 – 2009. The names and active duty status were confirmed with the department’s personnel division as well as by documents from other law enforcement agencies.
Ali Winston has reported on law enforcement, surveillance, immigration, education and civil liberties issues for several publications, including ColorLines. He is a second-year student at the University of California, Berkeley, Graduate School of Journalism and a recipient of the school’s Mark Felt Investigative Reporting Fellowship.
Image used via creative commons license by Divine in Daily
Exploring Race in the NYT Tea Party Poll
0Yesterday’s New York Times poll of “tea party” supporters shows that while their most important concern is the economy, they often view this issue through the lens of racially tinted glasses. Not surprisingly, no public figure is more distorted in their perception than President Obama. The racial perceptions are subtle, but nonetheless striking in several ways. For example,
- Fifty-four percent believe that the Obama administration’s policies favor the poor over the middle class. But with unemployment rates in Black and Latino neighborhoods hovering at twice the national average, and in some areas going as high as 25 to 30 percent, it’s hard to see how that belief is based on anything other than vast misperceptions about life in communities of color.
- While 73 percent of the tea party supporters believe that Blacks and whites have equal opportunity in society, 52 percent feel that too much has been made of the problems facing Black people. The roll that race plays in shaping these perceptions is further revealed by the 30 percent who still believe that Obama was born in another country and the 92 percent that think the president is a socialist.
- While a great deal of their anger is focused at Congress, they are overwhelmingly antagonistic toward President Obama. Approximately 88 percent disapprove of the way he is handling his job. That disapproval rating is 93 percent on health care and 91 percent on issues affecting the deficit, even though Obama inherited these massive problems (including $1 trillion in war spending) from the Bush/Cheney administration.
- Meanwhile, President Bush continues to get a 57 percent approval rating despite the fact that he presided over the collapse of Wall Street and the big bank bailout, both issues that the tea party supporters are furious about.
Yet, despite these racially tinted perceptions, there does seem to be a strain of pragmatism that runs through this group. By significant majorities (65 percent) they continue to support abortion rights (45 percent with limits), are close to supporting civil unions (41 percent) and surprisingly 53 percent support either present levels or increased levels of immigration. And despite their very strong anti-big government sentiments, significant majorities of tea partiers support both Medicare and Social Security.
What’s it all mean? It’s the economy stupid! But it’s also that Black guy that they still just can’t seem to connect with.
Victor M. Goode is an associate professor of law at the City University of New York and a board member of the Applied Research Center.
Will the FDA Stub Out Big Tobacco’s Menthol Ploy?
0
By Jessica Strong
Last June, President Obama signed a law authorizing the FDA to regulate tobacco and creating a panel for that task. Now the panel’s taking up the question of whether to ban menthol-flavoring in cigarettes, which critics say is used to cover up the taste of cigarettes and recruit young smokers. Smoking critics have long argued the “menthol marketing ploy” is particularly aimed at Black smokers, who coincidentally suffer from the highest rates of smoking-related diseases.
Some American Lung Association statistics on the marketing:
- The use of menthol cigarettes is disproportionately high among African Americans. Almost 84 percent of African American smokers aged 12 years or older reported smoking a mentholated brand of cigarette compared to 24 and 32 percent of their Caucasian and Hispanic counterparts, respectively.
- As smoking declines among the white non-Hispanic population, tobacco companies have targeted both African-Americans and Hispanics with intensive merchandising, which includes advertising in media oriented to these communities and sponsorship of civic groups and athletic, cultural, and entertainment events.
- African American communities have been bombarded with cigarette advertising. Since the signing of the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) in 1998 through 2005, the average youth in the United States is annually exposed to 559 tobacco ads, every adult female 617 advertisements, and every African-American adult 892 ads. Money spent on magazine advertising of mentholated cigarettes, popular with African-Americans, increased from 13 percent of total ad expenditures in 1998 to 49 percent in 2005.
- The former Brown and Williamson Tobacco Company (now part of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company) ran a campaign for Kool cigarettes aimed at black youths in 2006 that featured hip-hop DJ competitions, themed cigarette packs, and was billed as a “celebration” of hip-hop music and culture.
The FDA’s newly-formed Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee has all of this in its crosshairs. Dr. Jonathan Samet, the committee’s chair, told the New York Times that the first step will be to examine the evidence “before recommending what changes could be made to products.” According to the Times, the bill requires the “F.D.A. to issue a report on menthol next year and take action by 2012,” but it’s clear that a lack of evidence on menthol’s harmful effects will be one of several roadblocks to a complete ban.
Another roadblock is that the industry representative who has a non-voting seat on the FDA panel. Who’s that person? The Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org explains:
And in case you’re wondering: That lone representative appointed by the tobacco industry to take part on the government panel is an executive of Lorillard Tobacco of Greensboro, N.C. — the group that owns Newport cigarettes, the nation’s leading menthol cigarette maker. Lorillard Tobacco spent $2.5 million lobbying the federal government in 2009.
What changes are ahead then?
David J. Adelman, an analyst for Morgan Stanley, told the Times that “the panel may eventually recommend added warnings on menthol products, perhaps saying they are no safer than regular cigarettes,” and “additional marketing restrictions and possibly a reduction in menthol levels over time.”
While this meeting and the potential regulations are the first steps toward addressing the depressing statistics attached to African American tobacco use, what’s being done to educate the Black community on tobacco’s harmful effects before they light up? Too many people have died with many more on the way. It’s time to mobilize our communities by educating them on the underhanded marketing tactics used by many tobacco companies.
Jessica Strong is a communications intern for the Applied Research Center.
It’s Back! Abstinence-Only Funding Revived in Health Bill
0
By Jessica Strong
The Obama administration can add this one to its ever-growing list of progressive criticisms: The health insurance reforms the president finalized this morning include a revival of the controversial abstinence-only education initiative known as Title V.
Title V, created by Congress in 1996 under the Welfare Reform Act, offered a funding stream for narrowly tailored programs that teach students exclusively about avoiding sex until marriage, without discussing safer sex tools like condoms. Youth health and sexuality advocates hated it. Many stressed that Black and Latino youth – particularly young women – could least afford a safety-information blackout, given their disproportionately high HIV and STD rates.
After a decade of extravagant funding and virtually no data to demonstrate its effectiveness, Title V’s funding was briefly suspended last year. And President Obama fulfilled his campaign promise to cut funding for abstinence-only education by terminating the program in his projected budget for the Fiscal Year 2010.
Surprise, surprise. Title V is back, with a $250 million outlay over five years.
The bill also includes $75 million for comprehensive sex ed programs, but grassroots organizations such as Advocates for Youth are nonetheless outraged:
There is simply no reason that funding for these ineffective programs should have been included in health care reform. Three things remain shockingly clear:
- These programs still do not work. An eight-year evaluation funded by Congress demonstrated that these programs have “no impact on teen behavior.”
- Abstinence-only programs put the health and lives of young people at risk by censoring critical health information about contraception and condoms and violate the rights of all young people to honest, accurate, and complete information.
- Taxpayers will be forced to foot the bill for $250 million in wasted spending over five years, making a mockery of conservative Democrats’ claims that they want to cut spending or reduce the deficit.
It’s also worth noting that, however we spend the money, allocating $325 million for educating youth about healthy sexuality is an outrage. Check out more information on Title V at Advocates for Youth’s site. And check out ColorLines’ 2008 feature on how students and teachers are creating space for real sexuality education.
Jessica Strong is a communications intern at the Applied Research Center.