A+ R A-

More Commentary

Blacks Make the Cell Phone Business

E-mail Print PDF

(NNPA) Major wireless (cell phone) corporations should be conscious of the fact that much of their business and future depends heavily on the African American community. Fortunately, Verizon and AT&T understand this and are heavily involved in our community. T-Mobile will become much better, if the merger with AT&T takes place (AT&T guarantees this). The others should take serious notice with the latest studies now being released.

Wireless communication is an invaluable and increasingly necessary way to do business and stay connected with friends, family, and our local communities. While it seems just about everyone has a cell phone or smart phone these days, wireless use is especially prevalent within the Black community. According to Nielsen, African Americans talk and text on our cell phones more than any other race or ethnicity in the country – on average using 1,300 voice minutes and sending about 780 SMS (text) messages each month.

We’re also increasingly leading the way in how the technology is used. The Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project was released this past August, and it shows African Americans use wireless more than any other ethnic group – to access the Internet, send or receive email, play games, access social networking sites, post photos or videos online, and to bank online. We are also among the most likely to use our cell phones to download an app, play music and participate in video calls and chats with our wireless device.

African Americans of all ages are clearly relying on wireless technology to improve their professional and personal lives, which leads me to an extremely perplexing question: If Black communities are using wireless as a lifeline to connect themselves and to improve our daily lives, then why is such a vital service taxed at such incredibly high (and still growing) rates in this country?

The average American now pays more than 16 percent in combined monthly local, state and federal wireless taxes and fees; and in this age of budget-strapped governments thirsty for revenue, there is a very real threat of that taxpayer burden going ever higher. Often, tax levies are being heaped on us, per device – which certainly adds up for families with children and seniors relying on them, as well as small business owners providing them for their employees. These regressive state and local wireless taxes across the board hit those on fixed incomes, such as seniors, small businesses and our minority community families the hardest. It makes no sense to me how we are discouraging the use of such an important tool by imposing a tax and fee burden that’s at this point more than double that which we pay, on average, in general sales tax (7 percent on average).

Luckily, the U.S. Congress is trying to help taxpayers and consumers alike. It is considering the bipartisan and strongly-supported Lofgren-Franks ‘Wireless Tax Fairness Act of 2011,’ or H.R. 1002, and S. 543 (Wyden-Snowe), which would place a five-year ban on all unfair, new state and local wireless taxes and fees. If enacted, this legislation would be a substantial step in the right direction for establishing a fair and rational tax structure on wireless. The bill was ‘scored’ by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) at zero additional cost to government, and after being approved by the House Judiciary Committee, it stands ready for a vote on the floor of the full House.

Congress is also considering the bipartisan Smith-Cohen ‘Digital Goods and Services Tax Fairness Act of 2011,’ or H.R. 1860, and S. 971 (Wyden-Thune), which would create a fair, responsible 'national framework' for the state and local taxation of digital purchases – such as songs, apps, E-books, ring tones, video games, movies or TV shows. The legislation would bring tax uniformity to how we purchase such items with wireless/Internet, as right now, multiple jurisdictions can claim tax rights over the items you buy, and you can wind up paying them all taxes for the very same purchase.

Wireless is clearly the leading communication choice of African Americans of all ages to stay connected, and to move our communities forward. For education, employment, healthcare, research and simply navigating our day-to-day lives, accessing the Internet via wireless is something that Black Americans have embraced and then some. We MUST insist that an invaluable resource such as wireless remains affordable and accessible to ALL Americans, regardless of location, race or ethnicity, nor income. Please stand up and let them know you’re watching – let your elected officials at every level of government know that when it comes to wireless taxes, enough is enough. Take a moment to contact your Mayor and City/County Council, your Representative and your Senators, and better yet, contact all the Members of the Congressional Black Caucus in Washington, D.C. today – and tell them these proposed pieces of pro-consumer legislation are important to you and for our country’s future.

Harry C. Alford is the Co-Founder, President & CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce®. Website: www.nationalbcc.org. Email: halford@nationalbcc.org.

Sending Troops to Uganda?

E-mail Print PDF

By Bill Fletcher, Jr., NNPA Columnist –

(NNPA) Reports that the Obama administration is planning on sending U.S. troops to Uganda to hunt down the so-called Lord's Resistance Army sent chills up my spine. The Lord's Resistance Army, a group of maniacal terrorists running around Uganda for years, has been a major thorn in the side of the people of Uganda. Their atrocities are countless and it is in every one's interests that they are destroyed. That said, I ask myself, why is the U.S.A. sending troops there?

If the Obama administration wants to help Uganda defeat the LRA, they should limit themselves to advising and training Ugandans to fight their own war. Better yet, they should support the African Union in carrying out a coordinated, multi-country assault on the LRA (since the LRA crosses borders, including back and forth to what is now the South Sudan). They could also supply Uganda other forms of assistance to help the areas that are blighted by the LRA. But sending U.S. troops to Uganda starts to feel like an old film we have all seen, i.e., Vietnam.

Once U.S. troops are on the ground in Uganda, it almost automatically changes the dynamics of a struggle. The LRA, as terrorist as they are, can claim, much as the Al Shabab terrorists in Somalia, that they are fighting not just the Ugandan government (in this case) but the U.S. government and its intervention. As we witnessed in Somalia, when Ethiopia invaded with the active support of the U.S.A. in 2006 in order to crush the Union of Islamic Courts (a conservative Islamist force that had stabilized the situation in part of Somalia), this inflamed the situation even more. Instead of crushing Islamists, the Ethiopian/U.S. invasion provoked the growth of dangerous terrorists and warlords, a fact that author Jeremy Scahill has recently documented in The Nation. A similar danger could await the U.S.A. through the deployment of troops to Uganda. While it is only alleged to be 100 troops, as we know from previous U.S. interventions, there is no reason to believe that the intervention will stop there, particularly if there are U.S. casualties. Therefore, as the intervention grows, the battle cry against the U.S.A. will grow and with it the very real possibility of a prolonged engagement in Uganda.

The Obama administration needs to rescind it proposed deployment. It should support the African Union and other forces who wish to crush the LRA. But U.S. troops on the ground needs to be out of the question. Given the disasters in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq, enough is enough.

Bill Fletcher, Jr. is a Senior Scholar with the Institute for Policy Studies, the immediate past president of TransAfrica Forum, and the co-author of Solidarity Divided. He can be reached at papaq54@hotmail.com.

President Obama's Solution for Minority Business – Kill it: Part II

E-mail Print PDF

(NNPA) It all looked so good in the beginning. There was going to be a change. There has been a change but it is not what we expected. Unemployment is higher than ever for African Americans. While there are many reasons there is one direct correlation. The amount of contracting by Black owned firms at the federal government level has drastically been reduced. It is to the point of less than one percent. That is an all time low.

Instead of exhausting all avenues to improve the amount of Black contracting, this administration is now taking formal action to end all minority goaling from the agencies. There was a time a few years ago that HUD was enjoying a 40% level for minority contracting and most of that was with Black firms. Even the Congressional Black Caucus awarded Secretary Alphonso Jackson for that accomplishment. Today that level is below four percent and it fell with lightning speed. The following is an open letter that I received last week:

“The following is a statement by the American Small Business League: As one of the most influential minority leaders in America, I am asking for your help in stopping a policy that could cost minority communities millions of jobs. On Friday, September 9, the Obama administration proposed a policy to end one of the most successful federal programs to create jobs and stimulate growth among minority-owned small businesses. The policy, announced in the Federal Register, aims to end a program that established a five percent minority-owned small business federal contracting goal for the Department of Defense, NASA and the U.S. Coast Guard. I estimate that this change will have a significant, negative economic impact on a substantial number of minority-owned small businesses, costing millions of jobs.

It is difficult to understand why, in the middle of one of the worst economic downturns in U.S. history, and when unemployment has hit minority communities especially hard, the Obama administration would end one of the most successful programs to create jobs for minorities. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the jobless figure for African Americans is 16 percent and 11.3 percent among Hispanics. Close to 35 percent of the U.S. population is made up of ethnic minorities and 5.8 million businesses are minority-owned. According to U.S. Census Bureau data, small businesses create 90 percent of all net new jobs in America. I estimate that this change will divert billions of dollars in federal contracts away from minority-owned small businesses, thwarting the power of those businesses to expand and hire.

I have been a small business advocate for two decades and have rarely seen policies as detrimental as this latest proposal from the Obama administration. I have launched a national campaign to block its implementation. Minority-owned small businesses have until November 8, 2011 to comment on the proposed change in the Federal Register. The administration will tell you that the impact of this policy will be minimal and that you have been misinformed. Nothing could be further from the truth. I need you to help tell President Obama, Congress, the U.S. Justice Department and the media that there is indeed discrimination in federal contracting, and this program needs to be saved. “ SOURCE: American Small Business League

We certainly agree with this association. We are calling out to all groups, associations and individuals to actively protest the above. We all should write letters to our senators, congresspersons and the Congressional Black Caucus. This is a call for action to all of us who want to see our businesses grow and increase the amount of jobs they produce. There is no time to wait. The end of the comment period for the Federal Register’s Request for Comment is November 9, 2011. Please comment in the name of the African Diaspora. If you need details on how to formally comment please go to the NBCC website at www.nationalbcc.org and look under latest news. There is no time to wait.

Mr. Alford is co-founder, President/CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce(r). Website: www.nationalbcc.org. Email: halford@nationalbcc.org.

Letter to the Editor: Lessons of Our Founding Fathers

E-mail Print PDF

When American democracy was formed, many of its Founding Fathers, including Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, supported term limits, "to prevent every danger which might arise to American freedom by continuing too long in office…." as Jefferson wrote. The recommendations weren't, ultimately, included in the Constitution because the Founding Fathers saw a tradition of rotation forming.

George Washington set the precedent of two terms in the White House and those in Congress so abhorred the idea of political power that a natural changing of the guard occurred until the turn of the 20th century. Representatives couldn't wait to dispose of their duties as it was commonly held that "contact with the affairs of state is one of the most corrupting of the influences to which men are exposed," wrote author James Fenimore Cooper.

I believe the City Attorney has lost sight of an important lesson taught by our Founding Fathers which was ‘term limits’. John Dalberg-Acton stated, “All power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

At the recent candidate forum the City Attorney talked about forming a team with three council members, a council member candidate and a city clerk candidate. Wow! Talk about losing sight on why you were elected. San Bernardino citizens would desire the only team the City Attorney mention forming is a team of lawyers to defend the City in which he was elected to serve as its top attorney.

Alexander Hamilton once stated, “A fondness for power is implanted in most men, and it is natural to abuse it when acquired.” Serving six terms as a city attorney is too long a time to amass power and 24 years is also a long time to practice abusing it as well. James Madison said, “The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted.”

The fundamental truth is, as the elected City Attorney, it’s very easy to pick and choose what lessons of history to follow. It’s convenient to choose the lesson, apply it, and then frame the argument to support the case. Mark Twain stated that, “Politicians are like diapers; they need to be changed often and for the same reason.”

As a self-proclaimed student of history the City Attorney should not ignore one of the greatest lessons passed down by our Founding Fathers - term limits. George Washington said it best and I quote, “The people must remain ever vigilant against tyrants masquerading as public servants.”

Rikke Van Johnson
San Bernardino City Councilman 6th Ward

Letter to the Editor: Response to Moreno Valley's Validation Lawsuit

E-mail Print PDF

I object to the city's financing plan, as do others. Our objections are based on several different things. We intend to present all the arguments we collectively have to the court. We are confident the court will decide which arguments it will entertain not the city's contracted attorney.

If the city isn't suing its citizens, the summons shouldn't have threatened "NOTICE!"YOU HAVE BEEN SUED." The city was hoping for a default judgment that would terminate any future objections. That isn't going to happen.

One of the objections to this Validation Lawsuit is the claim to "low cost". The resolution states this $15 million project was going to cost $38 million in re-payments over a period of 30 years. The court complaint now shows a $20 million principal and forty years of payments, with no stated total for those repayments. The citizens of the City of Moreno Valley shouldn't be expected to write a blank check! No taxpayer should knowingly permit such a travesty.

Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and Caltrans both approved the $17 million for the Menifee HWY 215 project. All Measure A funded projects in Riverside County require RCTC approval. RCTC has not approved the funding for Nason St improvements between Fir and Cactus. Riverside County voters approved a process for expending Measure A funds when they voted for the measure. The City of Moreno Valley cannot unilaterally replace RCTC's authority with their own.

One has only to drive through the streets of Moreno Valley to understand the need for regular street maintenance provided by Measure A funds. This very short street expansion is not in the best interests of the entire community.

The economic development action plan introduced by Moreno Valley's newly hired city manager proposes to spend $23 million to improve the property known as Aquabella. The Aquabella property is only approved and entitled for a senior master planned residential community. This money has been approved even though the development agreement requires the developer of this property (Iddo Benzeevi) to pay for this street improvement.

The $38 million, along with a previously committed sum of $23 million, means the Moreno Valley City Council is committing over $60 million to a project that hasn't been approved or entitled. In fact this $60 million is for a medical campus/corridor that is currently only approved and entitled for a senior master planned community. No signed occupants. There is no way to make sense of spending $60 million for nothing more than an artists rendering without asking some questions that I trust will serve as food for thought. As you read these questions there is one question I really want you to think about. What else don't you know?

Did you know the Moreno Valley City Council kept the city manager vetting committee secret from the public for months in violation of the Brown Act? Did you know that each council member picked one person to be on that committee? Do you know which city council member picked which committee member? Did you know the only reason the public learned about the vetting committee is when Iddo Benzeevi thought his choice wasn't going to be picked so he went to the reporter? Did you know that three of the members of the city manager vetting committee were on the Board of Directors of the Rancho Belago Economic Council (Jamil Dada, Dave Slawson & Iddo Benzeevi)? Did you know it was the Rancho Belago Economic Council Board of Directors that asked the city to change the name of the east end to Rancho Belago? Did you know that vetting committee member Carl Rowe owns Integrated Care Communities which is right in the area of Nason to be improved with the new city managers' economic development plan? Did a very narrow group of hand picked individuals get to pick the new city manager who in turn proposed an economic development plan that boosted that personnel interests? Did you know the city manager is proposing a $100,000. bonus to the bid awarded contractor that can complete the Nason Street project through an empty lot? The businesses at Stoneridge Towne Centre are really suffering, so why isn't there an incentive to complete these improvements early?

Deanna Reeder
Moreno Valley, CA

Page 60 of 99

BVN National News Wire