Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Dr Boyce joins AOL Black Voices

Syracuse, NY – Dr. Boyce Watkins of Syracuse University has recently joined America Online as a financial writer and expert commentator.  He will be the resident Financial Expert for AOL Black Voices, the premier Black news website in America, with over 100,000 readers per day.  Dr. Watkins has been on the faculty at Syracuse University for 8 years and has worked with many major media outlets, including CNN, BET, ESPN and CBS Sports.  He is also the author of “Financial Lovemaking 101: Merging Assets with Your Partner in Ways that Feel Good”.

In his role with AOL Black Voices, Dr. Watkins will provide analysis on the economy, employment issues, celebrity finances, and money management. He will use his unique style of informative, compelling, yet down to earth financial analysis to promote financial literacy within the Black community.  The site will syndicate his popular financial series' "Financial Lovemaking", co-hosted with S. Tia Brown (formerly a Senior Editor with "In Touch Weekly" Magazine) and "Get Your Paper Straight", a radio segment hosted with George Kilpatrick of Power 106.5 and WSYR radio.

Click to read.

Sunday, April 26, 2009

SI Writer Andy Staples Points to Racial Overtones of Prep Player Criticism

p1.tyler.jpg

The reaction to the news of California high schooler Jeremy Tyler's plan was as predictable as it was tired. The New York Times reported Thursday that Tyler, a 6-foot-11 junior at San Diego High, plans to skip his senior year in high school to play professionally in Europe. In two years, when his high school class is one year past graduation, he'll return to the U.S. and enter the NBA draft.

The tongue-clucking was deafening. You'd think the Book of Revelation had been revised to include skipping a year of high school to play pro basketball right between the sun turning black and the moon turning red. This will kill college basketball, some said. This kid is throwing away his future, others said.

Since no European newspaper sports editor offered me a six-figure salary to skip my senior year of high school, I don't feel qualified to rip Tyler's choice. I've never walked in his high-tops. But I do have a few questions for the folks who consider Tyler's move an abomination.

If he played golf, would you feel differently?

If he played tennis, would you feel differently?

If he had gotten his own show on the Disney Channel, would you feel differently?

Set aside the obvious racial overtones for a moment and consider only the sport-specific double standards. We celebrate individual athletes when they turn pro at a young age. Maria Sharapova was the darling of the tennis world at 17. Joey Logano is tearing up tracks and getting paid at 18. We celebrate entertainers when they turn pro at a young age. Nick Jonas, 16, is an actor, a musician and a paparazzi magnet. Miley Cyrus, 16, just might control the universe.

Click to read.

Georgia Professor Sought in Wife’s Murder

A University of Georgia professor apparently shot and killed his wife and two other people at a community theater group's reunion Saturday, then dropped the couple's two children off at a neighbor's and fled.

An alert on the UGA Web site says professor George Zinkhan  is a suspect in an off-campus shooting.

An alert on the UGA Web site says professor George Zinkhan is a suspect in an off-campus shooting.

Athens-Clarke County police said they have local, regional and national alerts out for George Zinkhan, 57, an endowed marketing professor at the school's Terry College of Business.

"It appeared he and his wife were having problems," police Capt. Clarence Holeman said.

Holeman identified the dead as Marie Bruce, 47, Zinkhan's wife and a prominent Athens attorney; Tom Tanner, 40; and Ben Teague, 63.

Friends identified Bruce as the president of the board of the Town and Gown Players, the theater group holding a reunion picnic on the theater's deck when the shooting took place. Tanner and Teague were identified as set designers for the theater.

 

Click to read.

Technorati Tags:

Saturday, April 25, 2009

Dr. Christopher Metzler Breaks Down Important Legal Battle

by Dr. Christopher Metzler, Georgetown University

As we worried about whether Michelle Obama should have touched the Queen, whether Bo (the White House dog) will be as famous as Barney and whether Levi Johnson of Sara Plain fame practiced safe sex all of the time, the Supreme Court of the United States was wading into the racial water with an American public that is now ensconced into "post-racial" cocoon because of the election of Barack Obama.

This week the Roberts court heard the case of Ricci, ET Al. In this case, several white and one Latino firefighter in New Haven Connecticut asked the Court to decide whether the city violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the United States Constitution by throwing out a promotion test in which the plaintiffs but no blacks scored high enough to be promoted. The rather clinical legal questions are:

  • Whether the city's failure to certify the results of promotional exams violated the disparate (or different) treatment provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
  • Whether the city's failure to certify the results of the promotional exams also violated Title VII since Title VII makes it unlawful for employers to "adjust the scores of, use different cutoff scores for, or otherwise alter the results, of employment tests on the basis of race."
  • Whether the city's failure to certify the results of the promotional examinations violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

As clinical as these legal question are, they have significant real life political ramifications. Although the plaintiffs in this case are firefighters, the decision will affect employment law, affirmative action, diversity and they way in which employers and others seek to remedy the lingering effects of discrimination. The reality is that not everyone believes that discrimination still occurs in America since slavery has been outlawed, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has been implemented and President Obama occupies the White House. Regardless of the position one takes on these issues, the significance of the Court's decision cannot be underestimated for many reasons, a few of which I have outlined below.

First, the Roberts court has not spoken on race in any significant way and is eager to do so. Of course, it is Justice Kennedy who will ultimately decide this case and both the liberal and conservative blocs of the Court will work to craft a decision which he can sign onto. The difficulty for the liberal wing of the Court is that this case is as much an ideological case as it is a legal one. Good old fashioned liberal ideology will require a decision which reaffirms the need for government to be zealous in forming race-conscious decisions. In order to uphold the city's decision, the liberal wing will have to convince Kennedy that the city's decision to refuse to certify the test results was based on the fact that the test impacted Black fire fighters negatively and worse because it ensured that none of them would be promoted.

Click to read from Dr. Metzler and other Black Scholars by clicking here.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

What about our Daughters? – The Gina McCauley Story

www.BoyceWatkins.com

I saw a recent blog post about me on WhataboutOurDaughters.com, a blog that focuses on issues that relate to Black women. Someone forwarded me some things that the blogger (I think her name is Gina) said about me on the blog, and wanted to know my reaction. I’ve always liked Gina’s Blog due to the fact that she stands up for Black women. As a man with a daughter and 4 God daughters, I am sickened by the fact that we live in a society that shows such consistent disrespect for Black women. I consider sexism and racism to be diseases, and I myself have shown signs of infection. When I confront my own sexism, I am then challenged to see the parts of myself that need to be corrected.

Gina doesn’t seem to like me very much, but I wasn’t surprised. I am not sure if she likes anyone, as most of her blog entries tend to be a little bit negative. But then again, sexism and racism can cause people to be damaged and angry on the inside – I’d love to hear some of her personal stories or know what her relationships with men have been like, I’m sure it would be intriguing. Even I have had to confront the internal damage and anger racism has created within me. It’s an on-going journey. I asked a friend about Gina, another blogger who seems to know her pretty well, and she says that she was the only one standing outside a Dallas comedy club protesting DL Hughley’s pathetic statements about Black women, and I respect her for that. In fact, I wish I’d known, since I would have gone out there with her. I just hope that Gina realizes that you can fight for others without feeling the need to carry a chip on your shoulder. Love can be more powerful than anger when it comes to achieving equality – I say this while realizing that I myself get angry on a regular basis.

The bottom line is that I forgive Gina for what she's saying about me. I respect her right to say it. I also appreciate anyone who stands up for Black women, because we don't make it easy for them. While I would not be surprised if Gina has something harsh to say in response to my entry (everyone’s gotta save face I guess), it is my hope that she can always remember the difference between her friends and her enemies in the battle for fairness in America. But then again, I have inadvertently stepped on some toes myself.

Black Prof Sues Columbia for $200M

A professor who gained national attention when a noose was found on her office door and was later fired for alleged plagiarism has filed a defamation lawsuit against her former school.

A former professor is suing Columbia University's Teachers College for defamation.

A former professor is suing Columbia University's Teachers College for defamation.

Madonna Constantine, formerly of the Teachers College of Columbia University, is seeking $200 million in the lawsuit filed Tuesday in New York State Supreme Court.

Constantine contends her scholarly reputation was ruined when the school in February 2008 released the results of what it said was an 18-month investigation into the plagiarism allegations. The school at the time said it found "numerous instances in which she used others' work without attribution in papers she published in academic journals over the past five years."

She was immediately suspended and later fired in June 2008.

"This was a scheme cooked up between the head of the department and former faculty," said Paul J. Giacomo Jr., the lawyer representing Constantine. "We had evidence of her original writing that dates back to the 1990s, but it was altered or dismissed."

A spokeswoman for the Teachers College said, "This case is totally without merit and (the college) intends to defend against it vigorously."

Giacomo said the "baseless" charges of plagiarism, coming on the heels of the October 2007 noose incident, made some members of the media question that incident.

 

Click to read.

Dr. Ronald Walters Speaks on Obama’s Boycott of UN Racism Conference

by Dr. Ronald Walters, University of Maryland

I am missing something here.  President Barack Obama just went to Europe and Iraq and made speeches saying that he would be deferential to Communist China,  that he would meet without conditions with the leadership of Iran and that he wanted to open up a new relationship with the Islamic world.  Then he went to the Conference of the Americas in Trinidad and shook the hand of Hugo Chavez of Venezuela who has said some devilish things about America and the Bush administration.  But the key issue that took the conference over was the American overture to Cuba to talk, in response to Raul Castro’s statement that he would talk with the U. S. and that everything would be on the table.  Moreover, the Obama administration has said that it wanted to open up a new chapter in its relationship with the United Nations.  To that end, it has appointed an African American  Ambassador and put in its application for a seat on the Human Rights Commission.  Against this background, the decision of the Obama administration not to go to the United Nations Conference On Racism in Geneva, Switzerland April 20-24 would appear to be a powerful refutation of this relatively liberal approach to the international community it has established.

Click to read.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Dr Boyce and S. Tia Brown Talk Financial Lovemaking

In this episode of Financial Lovemaking, Finance Professor Dr. Boyce Watkins and S. Tia Brown discuss Mel Gibson’s Half billion dollar divorce.  They also discuss various issues that relate to how couples should merge their love and money together.

What does it mean when the man doesn’t make more money than the woman?  Should Gibson’s wife get half of his dough after the divorce?

Click the image to watch!

Pastor Brad Braxton: Praising the “Lawud” Apparently Pays Pretty Good

Reverend Brad Braxton.

I read today about the financial compensation package of pastor Brad Braxton of the New Riverside Church in Manhattan.  Here is the breakdown of Braxton’s compensation:

  • $250,000 in salary.
  • $11,500 monthly housing allowance.
  • Private school tuition for his child.
  • A full-time maid.
  • Entertainment, travel and "professional development" allowances.
  • Pension and life insurance benefits.
  • An equity allowance for Braxton to save up to buy a home.
  • On top of that, Braxton immediately hired a new second in command at more than $300,000 a year.
  • The total value of the package is estimated to be $600,000 per year. 

    All I can say is “wow”.  No disrespect to this man or his congregation, but he would NOT be preaching at my church.  What was most problematic about the church’s decision to give Braxton such a ridiculous compensation package was that they didn’t seem to clear it with the membership, many of whom are filing suit over Braxton’s pay. As a Finance Professor, I must admit that I personally become uncomfortable hearing men and women of God talking about money more than I do.  I must disagree with Rev. TD Jakes, who said that “Jesus is a product”.  Sorry brother, Nikes are a product.  Cheeseburgers are a product.  Jesus is a spirit that should lead us to pursue a good that is greater than our bank accounts.  I am not sure if many pastors agree with that assessment. 

    Tuesday, April 21, 2009

    Christopher Metzler Analyzes Obama’s Selective Racial Boycotts

    by Dr. Christopher Metzler, Georgetown University

    As President Obama shook hands with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, he was willing to take the political heat. He said that he was not concerned about the politics of the hand shake and more concerned about extending an open hand to nations hostile to the U.S. The open hand, it seems, is not so open after all. The President announced that, like the Bush Administration, the United States will boycott the world anti-racism conference (Durban II), which opens in Geneva today. According to the President, "I would love to be involved in a useful conference that addressed continuing issues of racism and discrimination around the globe. We expressed in the run-up to this conference our concerns that if you adopted all of the language from 2001, that's not something we can sign up for. "Hopefully some concrete steps come out of the conference that we can partner with other countries on to actually reduce discrimination around the globe, but this wasn't an opportunity to do it."

    obama-rice.jpgHe is not willing to take the political heat in this case because there is language criticizing Israel and the West in the final document. As the world celebrates the election of the first Black President, the United States boycotts the world conference against racism. Symbolism, it seems has met political reality.

    On this issue, it is difficult to reconcile the President's rhetoric with his actions. The President has repeatedly said that his policy is to talk with those with whom he disagrees. He is talking to Chavez, to Ahmadinejad, to Medvedev and Kim but cannot talk to human rights defenders about the best way to address the continuing significance of racism world wide? Surely the message cannot be that the United States does not believe that the right to be free from racism is not a basic human right.

    Click to read more from our Black Scholar’s Blog.

    Monday, April 20, 2009

    Russell Simmons Responds to Dr. Boyce’s Critique on the Rushcard

     

    To the YourBlackWorld family:  Some of you saw my recent critique of the RushCard, the new prepaid debit card issued by Russell Simmons.  Some took my article about the RushCard and interview about the Rushcard on BBC World news and The New York Times to imply that I have serious problems with the way Russell Simmons does business.  While I do not feel that Russell, nor anyone else, is above being critiqued by the Black community, it should be made clear that I respect much of Simmons’ work, especially what he has done to reduce the severity of the drug laws that incarcerate so many Black men across America. 

    I must admit that I’ve been disturbed by the recent trend of African American urban role models lending themselves out to companies such as Rent-a-Center to encourage people of color to participate in arguably one-sided financial transactions.  But I must be clear when I say that the RushCard is not necessarily a bad deal for those who need it.  My greatest challenge to President Obama is to find ways to ensure that all Americans have access to basic services, such as bank accounts, so they are not forced to pay high fees in order to access their own money.  I cannot endorse an argument which states that Russell is necessarily a philanthropist (as his ads claim) because his company provides an option that improves upon the horrific options already in place.  So, while I agree 100% that the RushCard is better than check cashing venues in the Black community, my greatest concern is that many members of the urban poor are still paying the high cost of poverty in America.  It is my hope that Russell sincerely fulfills his role as philanthropist, leader and financial enabler by genuinely working to solve critical liquidity and financial literacy problems in urban America.  I have complete faith that he can accomplish whatever he puts his mind to.

    So, out of fairness to Russell, I want all of you to see his response to the New York Times piece, which is written below.  My goal is not to think for you, it’s to encourage you to think for yourself.

     

    From Russell Simmons, CEO- Rush Communications:

    Since April is financial literacy month I feel this is a perfect time to set the record straight concerning comments I have been reading online about the RushCard.

    Although a recent NY Times article was not judgemental about the RushCard, I'm disappointed that they did not do any research when quoting critics who say the RushCard pushes people into debt.  The RushCard is a prepaid card, NOT a credit card.  It gives people the convenience of a credit card without the debt.  Financial literacy month is when people should know the truth about options to manage their money, not when misinformation should be spread to keep the underserved communities suppressed.

    I have watched with pride the way it has changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people giving them respect and dignity.  It gives underserved communities the tools to get their money right.

    The RushCard helps struggling Americans who find themselves without access to bank accounts or credit.  They have to tackle difficult and expensive obstacles every day when they need to pay their bills. When they go to a check cashing place they are forced to pay a huge fee just to get their money.  10% of their paycheck goes to these fees and they spend 8 to 10 hours a week to go pay bills in person. They cannot pay bills without standing in line, rent a car or shop online.  This separates them from part of the American Dream that other Americans are free to enjoy.

    Some people pay a lot to have a bank account.  The average US household pays over $340 a year in bank insufficient fund fees.  In fact, most of these are paid by members of underserved communities totaling over $1,300 per year per household.  I have read that we are somehow trying to take advantage of people by charging high fees.  It's a very competitive space and even Walmart, the largest retailer in the world, has followed us with their own prepaid card.

    We've built many innovative tools to help people save money.  Over half of the RushCard members who use these tools say they save more than $300 a year. 30% say they're saving $600/year.  And we're constantly adding new features to help people.

    I needed to do something to help the underserved.  It had to be an entrepreneurial venture to make it grow fast enough.  In five years we have over 1.5 million members and the biggest source of new members is from current members talking about the card.  The people who need the card and use it really understand its value.  Our biggest advertiser are the users themselves, spreading its value by word of mouth to their friends and family members.

    In short, I have no interest in building companies that don't have empowerment components for communities in need.  The focus of all my businesses will always be to serve.  Scripture says, "do not forget the poor" so I will always make it my job to help relieve the suffering of others whenever possible.  I am thrilled to see the RushCard is doing just that.

    I invite critics to come and compete with RushCard and Walmart in this space. This will help us all find better solutions for the underserved communities.

    -Russell Simmons

    Saturday, April 18, 2009

    Dr Boyce speaks on the Rushcard, Predatory Lending in the New York Times

    In a speech today, the Federal Reserve chairman Ben S. Bernanke talked about the need to “strike the right balance: to strive for the highest standards of consumer protection without eliminating the beneficial effects of responsible innovation on consumer choice and access to credit.”

    Where exactly regulators think that “balance” lies has varied greatly over time. Throughout American history, politicians and their constituents have viewed access to credit as alternatively empowering and exploitative. We can’t seem to decide: Is making credit available to “subprime” borrowers helping them, or taking advantage of their ignorance?

    In the 1970s, efforts to deregulate the financial industry began in earnest. Regulators began repealing or amending laws that restricted banks’ activities (such as the rates of interest they could charge on a loan or pay on a bank deposit). With more freedom to tailor their financial products to the risks potential borrowers presented, banks experimented with new credit terms for different types of customers. This led to much greater access to credit across the board.

    Click to read.

    Thursday, April 16, 2009

    Dr. Henrie M. Treadwell: Dear Mr. President


    Dr. Henrie M. Treadwell

    I applaud your recent creation of the White House Council on Women and Girls to help ensure we are treated equally in public policies, by employers and in every other aspect of American society. I must also urge, however, that you place a similar emphasis on men and boys, particularly young men of color, who face some of the steepest hurdles in American society.

    The reasons cited in forming the new council are just -- throughout our nation's history women have often been treated as second-class citizens when it comes to earning a livelihood, climbing the corporate ladder and even exercising the delayed right to vote. Let us not forget that the Equal Rights Amendment was first drafted in 1923--and has yet to be ratified.

    To be sure, the new council will focus attention on continuing the progress that has been made through the decades as women have crashed through the glass ceiling.

    But I would argue that young men of color face even more daunting circumstances. Young men of color face challenges ranging from a justice system that disproportionately incarcerates them to media and entertainment industries quick to portray them as worthless, violent and criminal. Even before the recession, our young men of color faced a bleak job market where discrimination, globalization and structural change made it difficult for them to find good jobs and succeed in life. With the nation's economy in a tailspin, the unemployment of young men of color has been spiraling out of control.

    Consider this sampling of data:

    * High school graduation rates for males of color--African Americans (42.8 percent), Native American/Alaska Natives (47 percent) and Hispanics (48 percent)--are far lower than for whites (70.8 percent).
    * Minority youths are disproportionately in the juvenile justice system: African Americans (1,004 per 100,000), American Indians (632 per 100,000) and Latinos (485 per 100,000) compared with whites (212 per 100,000).
    * More than 29 percent of African-American boys who are 15-years-old today are likely to go to prison at some point in their lives, compared with 4.4 percent of white boys the same age.
    * The mortality rate from homicide for African-American boys ages 15-17 is 34.4 per 100,000, compared with 2.4 per 100,000 for non-Hispanic white boys.

    Click to read more from Dr. Treadwell and other Black scholars.

    How Bill O’Reilly Got me….Sort of

    The New York Times wrote an interesting article about how Bill O’Reilly does his ambush interviews. I am not a fan of O’Reilly and many of you saw the times he chose to come after me last year in response to our protests against his racist tactics.  I personally don’t mind the existence of journalists like O’Reilly and never let him bother me too much.  But I thought that some of you might want to know a bit more of the background behind how he attacks people he has personal beefs with.  I actually find his existence to be a bit enjoyable….like watching a drunken frat boy urinating in the front seat of his car.  O’Reilly is paying the bills in the best way he knows how, and I actually give him credit for his ability to take advantage of the racism that exists within our nation.  In most countries around the world, O’Reilly wouldn’t have any viewers.  But in America, he has the #1 cable news show in the country.  I can’t even hate on that. America built O’Reilly and for the amount of money he’s making, he will probably continuing playing this role forever.

    The article is below:

     

    When Bill O’Reilly’s camera crew ambushed Mike Hoyt at a bus stop in Teaneck, N.J., a few months ago, the on-camera confrontation and the microphone in his face reminded him, oddly enough, of the “60 Minutes” interviewer Mike Wallace.

    Fox News

    Michael Hoyt, left, of The Columbia Journalism Review is interviewed by Dan Bank of “The O’Reilly Factor.”

    Mr. Hoyt, executive editor of The Columbia Journalism Review, was well-versed in the venerable art of the on-camera, on-the-street confrontation, perfected by Mr. Wallace and other hard-charging television journalists in decades past. Now, in an appropriation of Mr. Wallace’s techniques, ambush interviews have become a distinguishing feature of Mr. O’Reilly’s program on the Fox News Channel.

    Mr. Hoyt, one of more than 50 people that Mr. O’Reilly’s young producers have confronted in the past three years, said the interviews were “really just an attempt to make you look bad.” In almost every case Mr. O’Reilly uses the aggressive interviews to campaign for his point of view.

    Mr. O’Reilly, the right-leaning commentator who has had the highest-rated cable show for about eight years, has called the interviews a way to hold people accountable for their actions. “When the bad guys won’t comment, when they run and hide, we will find them,” he said on “The O’Reilly Factor” recently.

    Click to read.

    Black News: Fewer Blacks in Prison for Drugs

    For the first time since the war on drugs became a national law enforcement obsession in the mid-1980s, the number of African-Americans in state prisons for drug offenses has declined, a criminal justice reform organization said.

    The number of whites in state prison for drugs rose 42.6 percent since 1999, while  blacks dropped 21.6 percent.

    The number of whites in state prison for drugs rose 42.6 percent since 1999, while blacks dropped 21.6 percent.

    A study released Tuesday by the Sentencing Project found a 21.6 percent drop in the number of blacks incarcerated for drug offenses, a decline of 31,000 people, from 1999 to 2005.

    The corresponding number of whites in state prisons for drug offenses rose 42.6 percent, or by more than 21,000 people, while the number of Hispanics was virtually unchanged, according to "The Changing Racial Dynamics of the War on Drugs."

    The study, authored by Executive Director Marc Mauer, found that the differences between black and white imprisonments for drug crimes are partly because of how police target suspects and court sentencing guidelines, which vary by state.

    Also, there has been a decrease in the use of crack cocaine in predominantly minority urban neighborhoods and an increase in methamphetamine abuse in many primarily white rural areas, Mauer said Wednesday.

    Click to read.

    Dr Boyce Watkins on the BBC to Discuss Predatory Lending, the Rushcard and More

    After writing his commentary on the Rushcard issued by Russell Simmons, Dr. Boyce appears on BBC World News again to discuss the card, predatory lending and whether Simmons is doing a good or bad thing for the Black community.

    Dr Boyce on BBC World News discussing the RushCard, a prepaid credit card issued by Russell Simmons.  Click the image to listen!

    Tuesday, April 14, 2009

    Black Money: Predatory Lending in the Black Community

     

    Why Financial Predators Usually Have Black Prey

    By Dr. Boyce Watkins

    www.DrBoyceMoney.com

    I talked to my good friend Ryan Mack, CEO of Optimum Capital Management, the other day. Ryan wrote an interesting piece about The Rushcard, a new prepaid debit card offered in a partnership between Russell Simmons and Unifund, a company that typically makes its money from bad debt collection. I read the piece curiously, as I have been learning how the Rushcard works, why it exists and who might benefit from the service. On the flip side, there is the larger concern that someone might be taking advantage of those who have the least access to capital, largely African Americans in poor communities.

    The Rushcard is a prepaid banking card with no credit check that allows consumers to deposit their paychecks onto the card, as well as make purchases and withdrawals as if the card were a regular Visa. Russell (a self-proclaimed “philanthropist”, a title likely used to pre-empt any accusations of fraud or exploitation) also argues that the card helps marginalized Americans to seek out the American dream.

    I didn’t know that the American dream was to hold a piece of plastic. Credit cards have created an infinite number of American nightmares as they tend to breed excessive consumption. But one can certainly argue that this card deals with one serious problem in the Black community: a lack of access to capital and banking services. Many people in urban America can’t get bank accounts. Many more have bad credit, can’t get rental cars or find themselves leaning toward check cashing services to liquidate their paychecks. Russell, “the philanthropist” has apparently taken it upon himself to solve this problem.

    I can say, as a Finance Professor, that the Rushcard would likely not make money if it were not filling a critical need. The problem, however, is that those who “help” individuals in need may end up abusing their power. One can argue that a pimp is “helping” a young homeless girl by giving her a place to live. A loan shark can say that he is “helping” a family get the money they need by lending the funds at exorbitant interest rates. A man who sells water for $10 a sip is “helping” a man in the desert get what he needs to survive. So, there is a thin line between “helping” someone vs. exploiting a given need or weakness.

    I became quite concerned when I saw the long list of complaints from those using the Rushcard. Those who wrote the comments I saw on a blog about the Rushcard seemed to have serious problems with the customer care behind the card. In his article, Ryan does an interesting comparison between the fees of the Rushcard vs. those of a typical Bank card:

    Rushcard vs. Typical Bank Card
    Activation Fee: Rushcard = $19.95 Typical Bank Card = Free
    Convenience Fee: Rushcard = $1.00 Typical Bank Card = Free
    ATM Cash Withdrawal: Rushcard = $1.95 Typical Bank Card = Free (At Branch)
    ATM Balance Inquiry: Rushcard = $.50 Typical Bank Card = Free
    Bill Payment: Rushcard = $1.00 Typical Bank Card = Free
    Inactivity: Rushcard = $2.95 Typical Bank Card = Free
    Refund of Rushcard/Bank Card via Check: Rushcard = $5.00 Typical Bank Card = Free

    So, if these numbers are any indication, it appears that the Rushcard is not a very good investment. Most reviews that I’ve seen recommend against using the card, since it appears that users are paying a premium for the Baby Phat design on the front. What’s more disturbing about the Rushcard is that Russell does not seem to be nearly as determined to fulfill his role as a “philanthropist” when it comes to helping African Americans overcome the underlying cause of the very problems he claims to be fixing. As Ryan explained it, “It’s like telling someone with a cavity that they should chew with the other side of their mouth.” The Rushcard offers few options to help people repair their credit, and I have personally found most of Russell’s financial literacy initiatives to be quite limited in impact.

    While we cannot blame Russell Simmons and others for profiting from the lack of financial literacy and access to capital in the Black community, there are things we can do to encourage Russell to do the right thing. First, the Obama administration can and should implement programs to help those with poor credit obtain bank accounts. Every American should have access to a bank account, and services such as direct deposit should not be a luxury. Secondly, the Banking industry should stop passing over profitable investment opportunities in the Black community. Perhaps if Russell had more competition, his fees might go down. Third, there is no greater cure for money problems than good old fashioned financial literacy. Most victims of financial exploitation are not even aware that the exploitation is taking place. Financial literacy should be taught in every public high school in America, since it might actually be the one class that students actually use.

    Russell Simmons is not necessarily a philanthropist, but he is not the devil. He is merely a symbol of a larger problem. The problem requires long-term solutions, and a high cost piece of plastic is certainly not one of them.

    Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University. He makes regular appearances in national media, including CNN, BET, ESPN, and CBS. For more information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com.

    Sunday, April 12, 2009

    Marc Lamont Hill: Lawrence Summers, Obama’s Advisor – is he on the Take?

    mr-moneybags

    Dr. Marc Lamont Hill, Columbia University

    Matt Tabibi wrote an interesting piece on Larry Summers, President Obama’s chief economic adviser. One of the main critiques is that he accepted major payoffs speaking fees from corporations that would soon demand billions of taxpayer dollars. He writes:

    So I guess that $45,000 speaking fee from Merrill Lynch wasn’t technically a bribe because Summers wasn’t named to Obama’s economic transition team until Nov. 24 — a full 12 days later. I’m sure Larry Summers had absolutely no inkling whatsoever that he was going to be one of the key advisers to the new administration on Nov. 12.

    It likewise makes perfect sense that Merrill Lynch, a company just months removed from having to be rescued from bankruptcy by an 11th-hour, pseudo-state-subsidized buyout by Bank of America, would decide to spend $45,000 on a speaking appearance by Summers because, well, they really valued his economic expertise and his proven ability to rally the troops with his stirring rhetoric.

    It certainly had nothing to do with the fact that a) it was eight days after a Democrat was elected to the presidency; b) Summers had a long history of being one of the key policymakers in Democratic Party politics; and c) Merrill was absolutely not going to survive more than a few more months unless taxpayers forked over another 20 billion or so to cover the giant hole in Merrill’s balance sheet that was, at that time, still being hidden from Bank of America and its shareholders.

    And how about that $135,000 appearance for Goldman Sachs in April, when Summers was already involved with Democratic Party politics again? That wasn’t a surreptitious campaign contribution at all!

    For the rest of the story, click here.

    Saturday, April 11, 2009

    Dr Boyce Explains to NPR How Madoff Got Rich

    Dr. Boyce Watkins explains to Farai Chideyah how Madoff got away with stealing $50 Billion dollars in the largest Ponzi Scheme in American history. Click the image to listen!

    Dr Boyce’s Top 10 Black Public Scholars



    I wake up with strange thoughts on my brain. This morning, I woke up thinking about which Black scholars I feel have given the most to the Black community. My respect and appreciation for all Black scholars (even those who do not have PhDs) is without limit. But there are some that I feel have gone out of their way to be progressive enough to think outside the box and to have a true and real impact on the Black community.

    I do not believe that scholarly contributions to the Black community are defined by writing a bunch of research papers that no one ever reads (although I’ve done plenty of that in my own career as part of my job description). I don’t think your contribution is captured by whether or not you have a chair at Harvard University (interacting with 4 or 5 privileged Black students a year) – although it’s okay to have a chaired position at Harvard. Much of the elitism of academia has always been a turnoff to me, since I believe the proof is in the potato salad. If your work is affecting real Black people and changing real Black lives, then you have my respect. If you are sitting in the ivory tower, claiming the masters house and hiding behind artificially constructed, racially-biased historical privilege which allows you to presume that you are better than everyone else, then you will have to be on someone else’s list. My belief is that a scholar should have SCHOLARLY IMPACT – which can be measured by the breadth and depth of impact your work has had on your target audience, as well as the size and scope of that audience. A journal with 50 readers per year does not possess sufficient breadth, depth or quality of impact to merit a meaningful career, in my opinion. Sure, it’s fun to publish in those journals, but after that, you may want to get out here and make a difference in that scary place called “the real world”.

    Of course my opinion is not the only one out there. But I must confess that I was shocked at how many of our intellectual leaders aren’t leading anyone: many of us are quick to follow and promote the questionable norms created by our academic predecessors. We in academia are not much different from politicians who forget to serve their constituents, or pastors who, in their own quest for personal power, neglect to serve their Lord. Such small thinking is incredibly dangerous in Black America, since we really need our scholars to solve vital problems in our communities. We must accompany our capacity with sufficient courage to speak openly and honestly about the issues that affect those we love. In physics, force equals mass times acceleration, which means that we must connect our scholarly mass with social acceleration to create the necessary force to solve real and meaningful problems.

    My dissertation chair (Rene Stulz at Ohio State University), is one of the leading 3 non-Black Financial scholars in the world (as measured by the number of publications in our so-called premier academic journals). He thought I was insane for choosing the career path that I picked, especially since he seemed to believe that he'd laid out the golden path for me as a Financial scholar (you know, all that Ivy League professor, top journal stuff that makes a small group of people think you’re special). But what I had to explain to Rene was that God has given me a different path: one in which I had to disengage from the pettiness of academia and pursue a more powerful purpose. The challenges of Black America call for active, interdisciplinary thought that is not afraid to challenge ideas created on an undeniably skewed racial foundation….we can’t afford be like everybody else – the waste is just too great. Rene still looks at me like I’m crazy when we see one another, but I respect his choices and I think he respects mine.

    Now, onto the list of my favorite Black scholars – the list is in no particular order and if a certain scholar is not in the top 10, that doesn’t mean I don’t respect that individual. But there are some prominent names missing from the list, and I’ll let you guess why they aren’t there:

    1) Dr. Marc Lamont Hill (Columbia University) – Marc impresses me as the brightest young mind of the 21st century. Marc is not just as sharp as a butcher knife, he is also a true brother who really understands the problems of the Black community. I cannot tell you how much Marc struggled to build his career, it was tough to watch. But Marc is not just brilliant, he represents the essence of that concept called “Survival of the fittest”. The best is yet to come.

    2) Peniel Joseph (Harvard University/Brandeis University) – Peniel, who wrote a book on Barack Obama recently, is not just a brilliant scholar, but a great person. His work is second to none and his analysis on PBS is right on point.

    3) Cornel West (Princeton) – Who can forget Cornel? Our great academic father deserves respect for opening the door to the possibility of pursuing true Black scholarship that is relevant to the world around us. Cornel’s battles at Harvard prepared me for the challenges I would encounter here at Syracuse. This man will be in the history books and he deserves to be there.

    4) Michael Eric Dyson (Georgetown University) – Michael (we call him “Mike”) was the reason I became a publicly engaged scholar in the first place. I remember watching him on BET in the 90s with my jaws dropped, saying, “Damn, I wanna be like that guy!” While I eventually developed my own style (Mike and I differ in many ways), I can say that Michael’s commitment to hip hop culture and his amazing swagger simply cannot be stolen or emulated.

    5) Dr. Fritz Polite (U. Tennessee) – Fritz is one of the leading advocates for Black male athletes in America. He also carries the kind of strong and assertive style that should embody all progressive Black male intellectuals. Many of us have the ability to be strong, but we choose to walk in fear and silence. Fritz does no such thing.

    6) Dr. Billy Hawkins (U. Georgia) – Billy’s recent commentary about Black male athletes was one of the most powerful and poignant statements I’ve seen in a while. I love it when Black men attack an issue head-on, instead of skirting around it for fear of losing our jobs. In order for there to be progress, men must be willing to take the lead. The fight is not with our muscles, it is with our minds. Intellectual athletes like Billy Hawkins are far more impactful than Black male professional athletes, who have unfortunately relegated themselves to psychological and financial slavery.

    7) Dr. Juan Gilbert (U. Auburn/Clemson University) – President of the Brothers of the Academy (the largest group of Black male PhDs in America), Juan is an amazing visionary and a powerful guide to young Black students. He is also one of the premier computer scientists in the world and a highly impactful scholar.

    8) Dr. Julianne Malveaux (President – Bennett College) – The only thing you can say about Julianne is “deeyamm”. She, along with Michael Eric Dyson, were the two greatest reasons for my becoming a publicly engaged scholar. Also, as the only other publicly engaged scholar who deals with Financial issues, I have learned a lot from Julianne as a mentor, colleague and friend.

    9) Dr. Wilmer Leon (Howard University) – Wilmer is the host of “On with Leon”, an XM satellite radio show. As an expert in Black Political History, Wilmer has been highly impactful when it comes to educating the Black community on critical socio-political issues. His meticulous, educational style of information sharing should be given a larger platform.

    10) Dr. Christopher Metzler (Georgetown University) – Chris wrote an article about Academic Imperialism that simply knocked my socks off. I called Chris on the phone to talk with him, and found him to be the kind of Black scholar we need in America today. Educated at Oxford, Chris has exactly the type of global perspective that we need from African American intellectuals.

    Honorable mention:  I hate the fact that these individuals are not on the top 10 list, but I will mention their work regardless.  Not being on the list does not imply, for one second, that their work is any less worthy than anyone else I've mentioned: 

    Dr. Jeremiah Wright  - This man has given a great deal to our nation, namely by serving in the military while his critics hid in shame when it was time to stand up and fight.  At no time was his service to our nation greater than during the Obama campaign, in which he became its single greatest casualty.  Dr. Wright was fighting against apartheid before it became fashionable to do so and was putting his life on the line when President Obama was in diapers.  He should be right there at the top of the list and I will respect him until I am dead. 

    Dr. Bell Hooks - one of the most prolific scholars and amazing educators in the history of the world.  She is reclusive and a bit mysterious, but I love her like a relative.  In fact, she is actually the aunt of my cousin, which pretty much makes us related huh?  (Our last names are actually the same, since she is a Watkins too.  But I think that's just a coincidence). 

    Dr. Derrick Bell   - This Harvard Law Professor wrote a book about his fight to get professors hired at The Harvard Law School during the 1980s.  It was one of the most inspirational books I've ever read. 

    Dr. Na'im Akbar - (Florida State University) - An absolute monster.  He gave a speech at The University of Kentucky in 1995 that knocked me out.  I can only imagine how much hell they've given him in the south and the fact that he has stood up to this scrutiny has been a source of inspiration. 


    Ok, that’s “Boyce’s Top Ten”. I created this list based on the scholarly impact of my colleagues, rather than how many publications they have in specific journals or the university with which they are affiliated. This is the kind of list that is built on courage. In my opinion, if you’re not out there doing YOUR thing, then you’re not out there doing ANY thing. We’ve spent all of our time doing THEIR thing, and now it’s time to start doing OUR thing.

    Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University and author of “What if George Bush were a Black Man?” For more information, please visit http://www.boycewatkins.com/.

    George Kilpatrick’s In-Depth interview with Dr. Boyce

    Dr Boyce Watkins and George Kilpatrick discuss money, scholarship and Dr. Boyce’s bureaucratic battle to make history at Syracuse University.

    Click the image to listen!

    Friday, April 10, 2009

    Finally: Roland Martin Gets His Own CNN Gig

    by Dr. Boyce Watkins

    www.BoyceWatkins.com

    People have asked me what I think about Roland Martin getting his new gig on CNN.  I can only say that IT’S ABOUT TIME!  I’ve been waiting and hoping that CNN would choose a Black personality to brand that matches all the other personalities they’ve chosen to back financially.  Their original choice of DL Hughley as the first African American personality to grace their airwaves was incredibly disrespectful, as he turned the historic election of President Obama into a modern day minstrel show.

    When I first met Roland, he rubbed me the wrong way, in large part because I secretly wondered if he would ever stop talking to me (I tend to go to a quiet space when making media appearances, to help me focus on seeking truth in my commentary).  But I eventually learned that Roland is a righteous Black man who believes in what he is saying, and like my other homeboy Marc Lamont Hill, Roland has made tremendous sacrifices in order to get to where he is today (you have no idea how much sacrifice is made behind the scenes).  I’ve appeared on shows with Roland and I find him to be the most intriguing media personality to hit the national airwaves in quite a while. Roland sent me supportive text messages during my feud with Bill O’Reilly and he has always shown me love when I’ve stopped through WVON, his home radio station.

    I respect Roland Martin and I am damn glad to see him finally get his shot.  It is my greatest hope that this temporary filler will turn into a show of his own.  He is a helluva lot better than Glenn Beck!

    Wednesday, April 8, 2009

    Dr. Boyce Talks with BBC World News

    Dr Boyce Watkins, Finance Professor at Syracuse University, tells BBC World News that the NCAA has done a terrible job of seeing to it that African American players graduate.  He also explains the massive multi-billion dollar wealth extraction taking place via college sports.  Finally, Watkins mentions that the NCAA does a poor job of allowing Black coaches the chance to coach the sport to which Black males give so much.  Click the image to listen!

    Monday, April 6, 2009

    The Case Against Cultural Standardization in Tenure Decisions

    Dr. Christopher J. Metzler, Georgetown University

    metzlerThere has been a cacophony of voices calling for the elimination of tenure in higher education. Many of those voices are ultra conservative ideologues who are using the tenure debate to excoriate what they see as a liberal-leaning academy. There is a more vexing question that is conveniently absent from the tenure reform debate. That question is the role that race plays in the decision of tenure committees in denying tenure to Black scholars. I am not suggesting that all decisions to deny tenure to Blacks is racist. I am suggesting that the committees making the decision to deny, the departments that support the decisions, the deans, provosts and presidents who uphold denial must ask themselves whether they have homogenized the tenure process, already structured around amorphous standards of scholarship and service, such that it is more likely than not that Black scholars and our scholarship will forever be relegated to the intellectual margins.

    My concern is that those denying tenure are more concerned about whether their decisions are legally defensible than whether the decisions are just. That is, how many of the people who make the decisions to deny, acknowledge and act upon the structural and racial biases built into the promotion and tenure systems of most universities? Some would argue that there is no need to do so as the issue of denial is about quality and not about race. But, if this is the case are these committees suggesting that Blacks on tenure track were hired as quality scholars and then after years of teaching, researching and providing service magically become mediocre? Perhaps if they were being honest, they would say that in far too many cases, faculties hire Blacks on tenure track because of pressures — real or perceived — stemming from the underrepresentation of Blacks on the faculties of predominantly White universities, including some of the most liberal ones. In some cases, so-called diversity programs, which grant additional funding to departments to hire (not promote) more Blacks, result in an erosion of the faculty sourcing strategy therefore resulting in denial of tenure and thus termination. Do universities that employ this parochial and patronizing approach to diversifying faculties really believe that this is just? To be sure, the deliberately vague terms of “scholarship” and “quality” affects Whites who are denied tenure as well, it simply affects Blacks differently and worse.

    The nature of teaching and learning in colleges and universities continues to change as the student body, and indeed the society, becomes more multicultural and multiracial. The promotion and tenure process at most colleges and universities is a bastion of pettiness, cultural antagonism and ethnocentric backslapping. The ideology and the discourse of tenure approval must become one that praises public intellectuals in all media (including new media), not one that promotes cultural disrespect for the scholarship of Black scholars thus justifying and rewarding the continuation of a community of scholars so stepped in intellectual snobbery and caste warfare that even the mention of new media and scholarship invites public disdain and mocking. To be sure the denial of tenure to any faculty member is as much a failure of the faculty as it is of the individual faculty member. But it is the faculty member denied tenure that must exit the university unceremoniously, while the members of the search committee who selected them selects another group of new faculty often with the same results. Search committees must take a more active and honest role in hiring faculty members who will ultimately succeed, not fail. This requires that the people on these committees understand and can articulate what scholarship is in a way that is specific, measurable, inclusive and achievable.

    Black scholars also bear responsibility for our failure. Some of us see racism where there is none, and others fail to see it until we are denied tenure. Black scholars like all scholars have an obligation to provide quality scholarship. However, given that so much of Black America simply do not participate in the system of education, governance and the academy, we have to use public engagement scholarship to critically analyze and respond to the “Negro problem of 2009 and beyond.” This is not to suggest that all Black scholars become critical race theorists or produce Black scholarship. It is to suggest that whatever our discipline, we apply the framework of that discipline to the engagement of our communities — on campus and off. Further, those of us who accept the diversity scholarships to hire (but not promote) us must ask ourselves whether we are willing participants in our demise and thus intellectual sharecroppers.

    Have we become so content with being window dressing in the halls of academe that we will never own our intellectual mindshare but simply rent it out to the academic overseers? Why do we continue to play the game when we know that the deck is stacked against us? Is it because we see no alternative? Why is it that some of us who are on tenure committees judge the scholarship of our Black colleagues in a much harsher light? Why is it that despite having tenure some of us on these committees refuse to challenge the decisions in the context of cultural standardization? It is doubtful that there is critical mass on tenure and promotion committees at colleges and universities who will adopt my thesis because the tenure process is mostly about cultural standardization, and that standardization does not benefit Black scholars. Mark Bauerlein has it correct when he writes, “The very system that academics invoke to fend off critics has become part of the problem. Ideological bias has seeped into the standards of professionalism. Peer review isn’t just the application of scholarly and scientific norms. It’s a system of incentives and rewards, and success depends entirely on what peers say about you. They examine your teaching and scholarship and deliver an inside opinion, and the process is easily corrupted.”

    Black scholars and all scholars who are truly committed to justice need to insist that the rules for tenure and promotion resists cultural standardization, become specific, particular and transparent or that tenure be abolished in favor of a system that rewards quality, inclusive scholarship and service. Many institutions including so-called liberal institutions are simply not taking the opportunity to expand the definition of scholarship and quality in a way that is substantively equal. Making the case for tenure in 1940, the American Association of University Professors opined, “College and university teachers are citizens, members of a learned profession, and officers of an educational institution. When they speak or write as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but their special position in the community imposes special obligations.” In 2009, the peer review system at so many of our educational institutions has become infected with rank censorship and a fiefdom controlled by ostensibly liberal “royalty” who use a warped allegiance to the ever-illusive quality as a proxy for race-based decisions.

    The oppressed have become the oppressors.

    Dr. Christopher J. Metzler is Associate Dean at Georgetown University’s School of Continuing Studies and the author of the book, The Construction and Rearticulation of Race in a “post-racial” America.

    Sunday, April 5, 2009

    Are HBCUs Hiring Enough Black Professors?

    By Dr. Boyce Watkins

    www.BoyceWatkins.com

    I recently saw a study stating that our Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) are not graduating Black students at the same rate as non-Black institutions. This study was particularly disturbing, since many consider HBCUs to be a place of protection and support for students of color. We shouldn’t jump to immediate conclusions based on the results of the study, since piling all HBCUs into one category would be silly. Some universities have more rigorous admissions standards than others, and many top HBCUs do an excellent job of graduating students.

    I was not able to attend an HBCU for college, since I had both bad grades and an empty wallet. I later hoped to teach at an HBCU, but getting a position with one is not as simple as you might think. During recent visits to a couple of prominent HBCUs on the East Coast, and speaking to many of my colleagues in the profession, I figured out what might be going on. I expected that my visits would be overrun by African American professors, all in support of strong, progressive Black scholarship. I assumed that those nurturing young African American students would be, for the most part, African American as well.

    I was wrong.

    Not only was I wrong, I was DEAD wrong. In fact, for many HBCUs, African American professors are as rare as popsicles in a forest fire. This is especially true in Schools of Business. To say that I was shocked and confused would be an understatement. I was devastated and curious to find out why African American professors have disappeared from HBCUs. How could HBCUs be given so much credit for nurturing young African American minds when there are few African American minds available on campus in the first place? Were Black professors choosing not to apply for positions with these schools? Were our most brilliant Black scholars forgetting about HBCUs and abandoning them?

    It turns out that, in many cases, it is actually the other way around.

    You see, in academia, there are cliques. Many of these cliques are formed around the ethnic background of the scholar. Some scholars protect those in their cliques and ensure that academic cronyism works in their favor. When African American scholars apply to many HBCUs, they are rejected for hire by someone who is not African American. The applicant is arguably at a disadvantage because they are not in the gatekeeper’s clique.

    In other words, many of the primary decision-makers at American HBCUs are not African American, and they are refusing to hire African American faculty. So, rather than sending your African American child to learn from other strong African American professors, your child may go through his/her entire 4 years without having a single Black American professor in class. The nurturing support you expect your child to receive from people who look like him/her may instead be coming from BET or Maya Angelou books. HBCUs have, in some cases, become America’s next great plantation, where, like NCAA sports or our public school system, the product is Black, but African American managerial influence is kept outside the gate.

    Does this mean that HBCUs are not a good investment for your child? Absolutely not, it depends on the institution. I am a huge fan of HBCUs and I feel that some HBCUs, such as Spelman and Morehouse, are better than any university on earth when it comes to creating intelligent and empowered students of color. Am I saying that only African American faculty should teach at HBCUs? Of course not. Some of the greatest minds in the world are non-Black. What I am clearly saying is that if you are sending your child to an HBCU because you assume they will be taught by African American professors, then you may want to do a double take…..the African American professors may not be there.

    So, when I see that HBCUs are not graduating African American students, I am not surprised. It may be the case that they are unable to graduate Black students for the same reasons that the public schools don’t graduate our kids either. The mentors left in charge of our children are, in many cases, not from our own community. So if you want your child to learn from other African Americans, be sure to check the stats – don’t judge the book by its color.

    Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University and author of “What if George Bush were a Black Man?” For more information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com.

    Saturday, April 4, 2009

    University of Kentucky Drags Black Scholar’s Tenure Lawsuit out 31 Years

    By ERIC KELDERMAN

    Joseph M. Hayse's three-decade quest for tenure is littered with bodies. It has outlived the careers of most of the people involved — and several of the people themselves.

    In 1979, Mr. Hayse filed a lawsuit against the University of Kentucky that has turned into a legal Ping-Pong match anecdotally described as the longest-running court battle in the Bluegrass State, and perhaps the lengthiest tenure dispute in the country.

    On paper, at least, Mr. Hayse, 71, has won favorable court rulings from the state's circuit, appeals, and supreme courts. But he has not won tenure, and his suit lingers on. So does his anger at the university.

    "I just hate to let them off the hook," says Mr. Hayse, who retired in 1999 after nearly 21 years in a state-government job.

    His wife is angry, too. "It ruined his career," she says. "It's not that we can't survive, but I always thought ... he couldn't fulfill his whole potential."

    "I think they're going to keep going at it and going at it until he dies," she continues. "I know the university is a big body. It's like fighting a monster; a big dragon."

    Mr. Hayse, so far, is winning the war of attrition. The dean who was found to have improperly denied Mr. Hayse's tenure applications died more than a dozen years ago, two of the university's general counsels have succumbed during the long-running dispute, and the university's president at the time of the original suit is now deceased. Two other presidents have also come and gone: Both are retired.

     

    Click to read.

    Wednesday, April 1, 2009

    John McCain Wants to Pardon Jack Johnson? Why?

    Jack Johnson

    Dr Boyce Watkins

    www.BoyceWatkins.com

    I just saw an article in which Senator John McCain recently wanted to pardon Jack Johnson, the first black heavyweight champ in American history.  His actions confuse me, as McCain was one of the last holdouts on the Martin Luther King holiday a few years ago.  Also, McCain would not like Jack Johnson if he were alive today, for his spirit of defiance of America’s 400 year commitment to racism is similar to the one that scholars such as myself carry today.  In other words, we are his ideological grandchildren, and John McCain doesn’t like people like me.

    I find men like McCain to be even more perplexing because they are the first to get in line to support symbolic gestures, such as pardoning a man who was convicted nearly 100 years ago, but are happy to endorse tougher sentencing laws and more prisons which incarcerate hundreds of thousands of Black men today.  It has been statistically proven that, beyond any doubt, Black males are more likely to be incarcerated for the same crimes, less likely to have adequate counsel and more likely to receive longer sentences for these crimes.  Now, we are in an era in which American corporations own stock in prisons and have a profit motive for excess incarceration, which is incredibly dangerous.  What’s worse, millions of families are destroyed by the justice system endorsed by John McCain, with these men finding insurmountable institutional hurdles to their re-entry into society.

    I grow weary of those who chastise Black men for speaking out against racism, yet show up to sit in the front row of every Martin Luther King Day function.  There are even those in my own university who once hated Jim Brown and love him 30 years later.  All the while, they hate Boyce Watkins without realizing that he and Jim Brown come from the same tradition.   Such reactions show that history only repeats itself and that some Americans are quick to follow the lead created by their forefathers.

    Perhaps dead Black men are the ones McCain is willing to pardon first, since they cause him the least trouble.  But the truth is that rather than hating us while we’re alive and honoring us in death, you’d be better off showing enough vision and open-mindedness to respect our point of view in the first place.   That is supposed to be what America is all about.

    Rest in peace Jack Johnson.  I gave you a pardon long ago.