Carol M. Swain

See Huffington Post for Swain Blogs

2009-06-08T13:44:00.000-07:00

Dear Friend:

Thanks for visiting my blog page. I am now a contributor to the Huffington Post. You can read my latest blog by clicking on the link and scrolling down.

Thanks,

Carol

The Case Against Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants: A Response to Joseph Carens

2009-05-06T15:38:00.000-07:00

http://bostonreview.net/BR34.3/swain.php

‘Apply compassion offered illegal immigrants to the most vulnerable citizens’
Carol M. Swain

This article is a response to Joseph H. Carens’s Case for Amnesty, and part of a New Democracy Forum on immigration.

Joseph Carens argues that states should exchange large-scale amnesties, case-by-case adjudications, and mass deportations for an immigration policy that rewards length of residence by granting special status to those illegal immigrants who have lived in the county the longest without detection. Long-term violators, he argues, have gained special membership rights and ought to be allowed to stay because it would be cruel and immoral to ask them to leave. Although Carens readily concedes that allowing long-term lawbreakers to remain could be considered unfair to other immigrants, he contends that their years of residence make them members of our community worthy of amnesty.

As an intellectual exercise, Carens’s analysis is compelling and worth pondering, especially when he introduces us to Miguel Sanchez and his quest for a better life that includes illegal entry via a smuggler, illegal employment in construction, eventual marriage to an American citizen, and the birth of a son on U.S. soil. Sanchez lives in constant fear of detection because he knows that any brush with the law might result in his deportation. Carens notes that U.S. law provides Sanchez and his family “no feasible path to regularize his status.”

While Sanchez’s decision to enter the country illegally and remain seems perfectly rational, Carens’s use of his story as part of a defense of amnesty loses some of its moral force because of his failure to take into consideration the impact of illegal immigration on the most vulnerable members of American society: native-born Americans and legal immigrants with low skills and low levels of education.

Who are the people harmed? Obviously, it is not university professors, members of Congress, journalists, lawyers, or doctors. The most vulnerable people are U.S.-born blacks and Hispanics with high school educations or less. Unlike Carens, who ignores these groups, I would argue that their moral claim to justice trumps the moral case of Miguel Sanchez and the unknown millions who are in the country illegally and have taken jobs and opportunities to which they were not entitled.

Let me tell you about Joe Johnson, an African-American descendant of slaves, who graduated from high school and eventually landed a dream job at a factory in Virginia. After overcoming initial racism, he worked himself up to a supervisory role earning twelve dollars an hour. Joe married, had three children, and owned a home. After years of having worked dead-end minimum wage jobs, he was living the American dream, albeit briefly. As so often happens for middle-class blacks, Joe was among a group of laid-off workers who learned about immigration first-hand. According to reports, the day after Joe lost his job, a truckload of Mexicans were bused to the plant and hired at a considerably lower wage to do the work that Joe and scores of other American workers had been doing. Because of Joe’s educational deficiencies, he was unable to get other employment at comparable wages. Financial tensions quickly caused his marriage to deteriorate, and he eventually lost his wife, their home, and his sense of dignity. Unfortunately, Joe’s story is repeated all over the South, as illegal immigrants are hired and used to displace low-skill, low-wage native workers. Many of them are African-American men like Joe, legal Hispanics, and working-class whites.

Currently, there are an estimated six to seven million illegal immigrants working in low-wage, low-skill positions that could be filled by U.S.-born workers with high school educations or less. A detailed breakdown of U.S. Census unemployment data released by the Center for Immigration Studies in February 2009 reveals startling levels of unemployment for U.S.-born blacks and Hispanics without a high school education. Blacks had a 24.7 percent unemployment rate and Hispanics were at 16.2 percent. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate for legal and illegal immigrants without a high school education was 10.6 percent.

It can be argued that illegal immigration is a form of theft in which the longest law-breakers should be given the harshest penalties—not membership rights. Instead of being rewarded with amnesty, perhaps they should be fined, sent home, and placed at the end of the line. Immigration law should favor those immigrants who have shown respect for the rule of law and those who have made good-faith efforts to comply with its rules and regulations. I would place into this category those immigrants who have fallen into illegal status due to no fault of their own.

We have the technology, but not the will, to address the problem of illegal immigration. We could identify illegal workers by using the Department of Homeland Security’s E-Verify system. E-Verify is a highly effective voluntary program, which allows employers to check Social Security numbers against a national database. It has a 99.6 percent accuracy rate and can yield results in a few seconds. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration has not supported the expansion of the program, which is scheduled to expire in a few months. E-Verify should be extended indefinitely and made mandatory for all employers. This would protect workers like Joe Johnson from unfair competition from an unauthorized resident such as Miguel Sanchez, who has used fake documents to claim a job that would otherwise be held by a person authorized to work in this county. Without surplus laborers, U.S. employers would be forced to raise wages in many industries and offer employees better working conditions.

Carens and other amnesty advocates should apply their considerable intellectual prowess and compassionate hearts to the plight of millions of American citizens and legal immigrants who struggle at the margins of society and who have few advocates other than some mostly Republican members of Congress and media figures such as CNN’s Lou Dobbs and Fox’s Glenn Beck. Indeed, I have a dream of one day living in a society where elites apply the compassion offered illegal immigrants to their fellow citizens, especially citizens who continue to suffer racial discrimination, wanton neglect, and outright rejection, even while America celebrates the election of its first black president.

This article is a response to Joseph H. Carens’s Case for Amnesty, and part of a New Democracy Forum on immigration.

Unreliable Allies: Arlen Specter and his New Democratic Friends

2009-05-06T07:28:00.000-07:00

"The Senate last night stripped Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) of his seniority on committees, a week after the 29-year veteran of the chamber quit the Republican Party to join the Democrats." https://email.vanderbilt.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/05/AR2009050504344.html?hpid=topnews

Is anyone really surprised by the Senate Democrats's decision to place Arlen Specter at the end of the line? Specter has no place to go and is considered an unreliable ally by both political parties. Specter should brace himself for more surprises. I will be quite surprised if President Obama actually keeps his promise to campaign for Specter's reelection bid against long-term Democrats. Punishing Specter should be expected. We should not expect political parties to reward defectors, especially one who has rightly earned the name of "Specter the Defector."

Michael Steele and the Battle over RNC Proposed Spending Restraints

2009-05-02T13:07:00.000-07:00

RNC Chairman Michael S. Steele should quietly embrace the proposed financial system of checks and balances being considered for the Republican National Committee chairman’s spending authority.

"The Pullen resolution would make it a written rule that contracts of $100,000 or more be open to competitive bidding; that all checks be signed by two RNC officers; that party staff be prohibited from signing on behalf of an officer; and that all contracts be reviewed and approved by the members of the RNC executive committee."

Fighting over such commonsense recommendations creates a no-win situation for the Republican Party as it seeks to rebrand itself, and for Steele it invites a revisitation of past accusations of financial impropriety. Moreover, it creates a counter-productive sideshow for the Republican Party, as it seeks to attract minorities and overcome past accusations of racism.

Chairman Steele should swallow his pride and welcome the proposed system of checks and balances. Frequent financial scandals involving major corporations have created an environment where there is a greater need for monetary oversight to help increase the confidence of potential donors. The proposed new restraints could make it much easier for the RNC to raise the funds it desperately needs for electing candidates and for getting across its oppositional message. It is a mystery as to why such commonsense measures were not already established RNC policy.

Jumping Ship: Understanding Senator Arlen Specter's Party Switch

2009-04-28T11:32:00.000-07:00

As his political party faces turmoil, Senator Arlen Specter has responded by jumping ship. Is his defection because of his principles or his political survival instincts? On this matter, I must side with Republican National Chairman, Michael Steele, who stated:

"Let's be honest: Senator Specter didn't leave the GOP based on principles of any kind. He left to further his personal political interests because he knew that he was going to lose a Republican primary due to his left-wing voting record. Republicans look forward to beating Senator Specter in 2010, assuming the Democrats don't do it first."

It is pretty clear that Arlen Specter's weak polling numbers and his frequent disagreements with other Republican leaders led to his apostasy. This reminds me of David Mayhew's study, Congress: The Electoral Connection, where he described members of Congress as "single-minded seekers of reelection." Arlen Specter did what was expedient for Arlen Specter.

Carol M. Swain: Foreign Relations and President Obama's First 100 Days--The Swain Assessment

2009-04-27T10:24:00.000-07:00

Carol M. Swain: Foreign Relations and President Obama's First 100 Days

"Foreign Relations and President Obama's First 100 Days--The Swain Assessment
Below is my quote for the foreign relations section of The Tennessean.

'President Obama's inexperience and naivete about foreign policy matters could not be more glaring. His frequent denigration of our great country, his embrace of Third World tyrants, and his shameless campaign to become President of the World is starting to make Jimmy Carter's presidency look even better.'--Tennessean, Sunday, April 26, 2009, p. 15 A.

Prof. Carol M. Swain

E-mail: carol.swain@law.vanderbilt.edu
Website: http://www.carolmswain.com/
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/cmswain

Foreign Relations and President Obama's First 100 Days--The Swain Assessment

2009-04-27T10:07:00.000-07:00

Below is my quote for the foreign relations section of The Tennessean.

"President Obama's inexperience and naivete about foreign policy matters could not be more glaring. His frequent denigration of our great country, his embrace of Third World tyrants, and his shameless campaign to become President of the World is starting to make Jimmy Carter's presidency look even better."--Tennessean, Sunday, April 26, 2009, p. 15 A.

Prof. Carol M. Swain

E-mail: carol.swain@law.vanderbilt.edu
Website: http://www.carolmswain.com/
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/cmswain

Debating Planned Parenthood's Version of the Public Good

2008-04-28T11:31:00.000-07:00

In March, Roanoke College professor Gerry McDermott and I published an Op-Ed in the Washington Times, and had a back and forth with Cecile Richards, national president of Planned Parenthood, and the research director of the Alan Guttmacher Institute who responded by writing letters to the editor.

Then on Friday, April 18, we republished our Op-Ed on Planned Parenthood in the Roanoke Times. On April 26, David Nova President of a 4-state Planned Parenthood complex, responded. Below is a copy of our response to Nova sent to the Roanoke Times.

Letter to the editor

David Nova’s commentary (“Working for the good of the public,”April 25) charges we “grossly exaggerated” data regarding the percentage of abortions provided to black women. Yet we used data from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the research arm of Planned Parenthood. According to Roanoke College professor of statistics William Ergle, our calculation of 683,000 black abortions (56% of the total) was “not grossly exaggerated but absolutely correct, based on the information provided.” Interestingly, Nova presents no other statistics.

Nova says the explanation for these shocking statistics is that black women are three times as likely to have unintended pregnancies. Then why are they 4.8 times as likely to have abortions? The rate of unintended pregnancies falls short—significantly—of the rate of abortion.

Nova complains we don’t offer solutions. Planned Parenthood has been in the driver’s seat on reproductive health for thirty-five years, offering its services far and wide. Yet things have only gotten worse—sexually transmitted diseases are way up, abortions in the black community have skyrocketed, and even Nova talks about the “public health crisis.” The Planned Parenthood “solution” has failed, yet we are supposed to be grateful for our $8000 taxpayer support for its Roanoke clinic.

Nova claims Planned Parenthood focuses on prevention—of unintended pregnancies and abortions. Notice the implication—Roanoke Times readers who were not “intended” by their parents would be better off never to have been born. And if Planned Parenthood really wants fewer abortions, why does it fight so hard against parental notification bills? They would surely reduce the number of abortions.

Gerald McDermott, professor of religion, Roanoke College
Carol Swain, professor of political science and law, Vanderbilt University

Why I Support Former Governor Mike Huckabee for President

2008-02-12T07:55:00.000-08:00

Dear Friends:

I have always marched to the tune of a different drummer. Therefore, it should come as no great surprise that I have not lined up in a predictable manner in the presidential races. Although I wish Senators Obama and Clinton well in their efforts to make history, I am compelled to give my strongest endorsement to Governor Mike Huckabee. I urge others to do the same.

Governor Huckabee is the only one of the remaining presidential candidates who has real executive experience and a proven track record of getting things done. I like the fact that he is not the darling of establishment elites, and that he has demonstrated his compassion and concern for Americans of all races and social classes.

The other presidential candidates are members of Congress. They are fine people with no experience running anything meaningful. We have too many problems in America to allow on-the-job training for the highest office in the land.

Governor Huckabee is best able to reform immigration. Moreover, he is for fiscal responsibility, gun rights, tax reform, and a more racially integrated Republican Party. Most of all, I like the fact that he is not ashamed of his faith and the values that it causes him to champion. For him, this has meant that he is a strong advocate for the sanctity of human life. How could he not be? Jeremiah 1:5, boldly states: "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee, and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee; I have appointed thee a prophet unto the nations." He respects life and marriage, but he is not mean spirited with his beliefs.

Governor Huckabee is battling establishment elites in his own party who claim to be Christians, but who are staunchly opposed to spending tax dollars to improve America's infrastructure and human capital. He is clearly the underdog in the presidential contests, the David against Goliath.

Governor Huckabee is the candidate with America's interest at heart and her people. He is an incredibly talented and gifted man. I believe that he will appoint the best qualified people that he can find to public office and that he will be open to radical reforms in public education as well as tax reform. He is a man with humility. He is not afraid of criticism. Best of all, he doesn't always have to be right.

Related Blogs and Articles

See Swain's blog of December 4, 2007--"Fishes and Loaves: The Rise of Mike Huckabee. "
http://carolmswain.blogspot.com/2007/12/fishes-and-loaves-rise-of-mike-huckabee.html

Swain's Blog, December 19 Gender, Race, and Reality: The Inadequacies of the 2008 Presidential Debates"
http://carolmswain.blogspot.com/2008/01/race-gender-and-reality-inadequacies-of.html

Swain Editorial, May 20, 2007 "It's not a Question of Clinton or Obama, Not in 2008"
http://www.carolmswain.net/articles/Tennessean%20May%2020%2007.pdf

http://carolmswain.net/

Al Sharpton Scores a Touchdown: The Indictment of Jeremiah Munsen and the Politics of Hate

2008-01-26T06:23:00.001-08:00

A couple of days ago I received an e-mail asking me what I thought of the indictment of an 18-year-old Louisiana teenager, Jeremiah Munsen, on federal hate crime charges for adorning his pickup truck with two nooses and slowly driving the truck so that it would be seen by a group of pro-Jena Six marchers. My e-mail correspondent wanted to get my response before Mr. Sharpton had an opportunity to turn the whole affair into a “smoke & mirrors, dog and pony show.” If convicted, Munsen faces “a maximum penalty of 11 years in prison and a $350,000 fine.” http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080125/NEWS01/801250314

The indictment of the 18-year-old comes as part of what many of us hope is the culmination of a series of unfortunate events that have included marches led by Mr. Sharpton and counter-demonstrations by white nationalists and members of the New Black Panther Party. Mr. Sharpton has issued a statement calling Munsen’s indictment “appropriate and a step in the right direction.” But is it really? http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/5484386.html

Sharpton was in the forefront of demanding that federal authorities file hate crime charges against anyone found dangling nooses. Mr. Sharpton and other black leaders organized national and local marches on behalf of a group of black teenagers known as the Jena Six. The Jena Six were black teens arrested and originally charged with attempted second degree murder and conspiracy charges for their brutal beating of Justin Barker, a white classmate who required hospital treatment for his injuries. Under the glare of a national spotlight, charges against the black teens were reduced before Rev. Al Sharpton and 20,000 activists descended on the small Louisiana town of Jena, in an effort to free Mychal Bell. Bell was one of the six teens who remained in jail because his involvement in the beating constituted a probation violation for prior offenses hidden in a sealed juvenile record. (It should be noted that accounts differ about what actually happened in Jena, see http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1024/p09s01-coop.html and

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080302098.html).

It was during a September 2007 march that Munsen, a drunken teenager from a neighboring town got with another teen and came up with the bright idea of dangling two nooses from his truck and taunting marchers. Munsen has already been booked on state charges of inciting a riot, being drunk in public, and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Does the severity of Munsen’s actions warrant the additional federal charges that could send him to prison and wipe out a healthy chunk of his lifetime earnings?

Let’s consider the purpose of hate crime laws. Hate crime laws are designed to protect individuals from violence caused by intolerance of the person's race, religion or ethnicity. Under current federal law, the victim has to be attending a public school or engaged in a "federally protected activity" to be covered. Therefore, it seems a bit of a stretch to claim that marchers were endangered and intimidated by the mere sight of two nooses dangling from a truck driven by a drunken teenager. If anything, the nooses dangling from Munsen’s truck could have provoked violence against Munsen and his 16-year-old passenger.

Although the indictment of Munsen on hate crime charges may momentarily appease the crowd and satisfy Rev. Sharpton’s appetite for media coverage, it will do absolutely nothing to improve race relations across the nations or make reasonable black people feel any safer. To the contrary, Munsen’s indictment if seen as unfair could incite more such incidents and more counter demonstrations.
http://www.carolmswain.net/articles/WhyBlackAmerica/WhyBlackAmerica.html

I would like to see racial healing in Jena. The Psalmist wrote in Ecclesiastes, “To everything there is a season”. Perhaps, with the right leadership, this can be the season for forgiveness and new beginnings for the young people blinded by the madness of Jena and this includes Jeremiah Munsen.

____________________________________________________________________

See related Swain editorials, "Why Black America shouldn't be focused on hanging nooses," The Baltimore Sun, December 5, 2007 http://www.carolmswain.net/articles/WhyBlackAmerica/WhyBlackAmerica.html and "Jena Six and the Deadly Sneaker, The Tennessean, October 5, 2007.

Personal Website: http://www.carolmswain.net/index.html

Race, Gender, and Reality: The Inadequacies of the 2008 Presidential Debates

2008-01-19T11:55:00.000-08:00

A married mother of five recently sent me an e-mail in which she stated:

"Why is it taboo to talk about race or gender in the upcoming presidential election? Obama is African American and Clinton is female. When people say that they hope the election is not about race or gender that simply infuriates me. I am interested in issues that impact my life and future. I am also concerned about what kind of opportunities will be available for my children. So ignoring race or gender is like saying I'm invisible. African Americans and women are often ignored. If Obama wins the election, headlines will read "First African American or Black President." If Clinton wins, the headlines will read "First Woman President". So why are race and gender issues being ignored?"

Like the little boy in the Emperor’s New Clothes, this woman has voiced an important truth. Americans need to be able to probe each candidate’s beliefs on issues that matter most to them. At the end of the day, the best representative for a given person could be someone outside one’s own racial, ethnic, or gender group. We will never know who is best for us, unless we can raise the right questions at the right time using our media and other surrogates. In some cases, the answers we hear could and should move us beyond our traditional party alliances.

So far, the Democratic presidential candidates have disappointed many of us with their refusal to deal honestly with issues such as immigration reform, urban crime, wage inequities, gender discrimination, and the growing conflict between blacks and Hispanics over neighborhood turf, affirmative action, and other issues perceived to be zero sum for America’s minorities.

Instead of raising substantive issues, our valuable time is being wasted by endless debates about real and imagined racial slights. Consider the widely broadcast so-called racially insensitive remarks of Senator Hillary Clinton which occurred when she stated a well-known fact. It took a president to bring about the realization of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream of racial equality. Of course, Clinton was correct. It took President Lyndon B. Johnson to push through and sign the Civil Rights Act of 1964, The Voting Rights Act of 1965, as well as the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. I doubt if any amount of marching or rioting could have achieved the results that came about when white and black leaders joined forces to accomplish the national interest.

Unfortunately, a dangerous racial double standard has emerged that is harmful to all Americans, especially its non-white beneficiaries. What is missing is an overdue conversation about race, gender, class, and culture in American society.

I think that my e-mail correspondent’s question deserves an answer from the powers that be. Our nation needs an honest dialogue about gender discrimination, black youth crime, drug abuse rather than merely incarceration rates, the impact of illegal immigration on low-wage, low-skill Americans’ job prospects, as well as the harmful effects of unassimilated diversity that, in some cases, have led to honor killings and behaviors that offend the sensibilities of most Americans.

Instead of being overly sensitive, we must learn to respect, cherish, and exercise the freedom of speech guaranteed by our Constitution. Indeed, no question should be off-limits for the man or woman seeking to attain the highest office in the land.

Lou Dobbs: Is the Man Nativist, Xenophobic or Truly Heroic?

2007-12-19T12:20:00.000-08:00

Advocacy journalism can get you into trouble with America’s gatekeepers. Just ask CNN anchor Lou Dobbs of Lou Dobbs Tonight. Dobbs who has won numerous prestigious journalism awards has increasingly come under heated attacks over the past few years as he has emerged as a national leader. In recent months, he has been the target of The New York Times, The Washington Post, 60 Minutes, Democracy Now!, and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). Some of these attacks have been editorials and others have come from “friendly” invitations from other network hosts ostensibly giving him an opportunity to promote his new book, Independents Day: Awakening the American Spirit.

What sometimes happens is an attempted mugging, in which Mr. Dobbs is asked to give an account of three serious misdeeds lifted from the scores of shows that he has hosted over the past few years. Usually, the mistakes cited were committed by one of his correspondents or by one of his producers who failed to ask a guest contributor if they were connected either directly or loosely with any politically incorrect groups or positions. What has happened recently has been frontal assault by the SPLC that has accused Mr. Dobbs of giving airtime to people connected with white supremacist groups.

Let’s look closely at some of these “serious” misdeeds and their implications.

Misdeed 1: Dobbs claimed that a “third of the prison population” in America are illegal aliens. In fact, the number is 6 percent.
Twenty-seven percent of federal prisoners are criminal aliens. What makes this statement inaccurate is that Mr. Dobbs rounded off the number and neglected to say “federal” prison population. Mr. Dobbs has apologized for his mistake. A 2005 Government Accounting Office report estimated that the federal government’s cost of incarcerating criminal aliens and their reimbursements to state and local governments “totaled approximately $5.8 billion for calendar years 2001 through 2004.” Moreover, the Bureau of Prisons “cost to incarcerate criminal aliens rose from about $950 million in 2001 to about $1.2 billion in 2004.” whether it is federal, local or state, the number of criminal aliens and their costs to an already overburdened criminal justice system ought to be a cause for some concern.

Misdeed 2: Dobbs has had individuals with white supremacist ties appear on his show without disclosure that they were allegedly white supremacist. Among the cited examples were the guest appearances of Chris Simcox co-founder of the Minutemen Project and Glenn Spencer leader of the American Patrol, groups that the SPLC has labeled as hate groups.

As an expert on white nationalism, I can attest to the fact that many individuals that I consider white nationalists have no formal ties to organizations. And some of the organizations now labeled as hate groups by the SPLC are ones that I would quibble with, such as the Federation for Immigration Reform (FAIR). The SPLC clearly has a political agenda that encourages it to use a broad brush that ensnares many organizations and high profile individuals who disagree with its liberalism.

Many of us believe in free speech and vigorous intellectual dialogue. If Mr. Dobbs were to succumb to his critics and censor his guests, he would lose what makes his show unique. We, the viewers, would be left with the same politically correct talking heads that already dominate mainstream media.

Misdeed 3: Dobbs agreed with one of his correspondents who stated that 7,000 new cases of leprosy have occurred in the U.S. over the past 3 years, when the National Hansen’s Disease Center in Carville, LA reports 7029 cases since 1976.

Leprosy is not a disease that we expect to see in modern day America, no matter how few the cases. A 2006 report produced by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Reports states that the majority of U.S. cases have appeared since 1980, and it places the number of registered cases at the end of 2005 at 12, 025. In the era before political correctness none other than the venerable New York Times published a December 4, 1983 article titled “Immigration Brings More Leprosy to the United States.”

According to the article, there were 193 new cases of the disease reported in the first nine months of 1982 and it placed the number of U.S. leprosy patients at between 4000-5000. Clearly, the existence of the disease is troubling. The good news is that it is now curable if it is caught early enough. Perhaps the focus on the disease brought about by the attack on Mr. Dobbs might actually save lives if it causes people to become more aware and to seek early treatment.

How should we feel about Mr. Lou Dobbs? Is he a menace to society or is he the truth speaker that America needs to hold her politicians, corporate leaders, and other elites accountable?

I believe that Mr. Dobbs is a man of integrity and courage who genuinely cares about his country. Through the vehicle of Lou Dobbs Tonight, he has awakened many of our eyes to corporate greed, out of control borders, dangerous products from communist China, illegal immigration, unresponsive politicians and racism of all stripes. To fully understand why this man is under attack, one need only watch his show and read his several books.

Clearly, this is a man that has thought long and hard about his country and his Constitution. To me, he is truly an American hero: a man willing to do battle on behalf of millions and millions of ordinary people like the ones we see in our grocery stores. I write these words as a person who has been a contributor to his show. I have met the man. I have seen the man speak in public forums, and I consider the man one of the most compelling voices of our times.

Shall We Celebrate or Cry? : The Looming Release of Thousands of Crack Cocaine Offenders

2007-12-13T10:16:00.000-08:00

December 13, 2007

Shall We Celebrate or Cry?: The Looming Release of Thousands of Crack Cocaine Offenders

By Carol M. Swain

Christians often say to one another, “Be careful what you pray for.” Right now, there is a strong possibility that thousands of mostly black federal prisoners (86 percent) incarcerated for crack cocaine convictions will seek early release. On December 12th, The U.S. Sentencing Commission unanimously decided to retroactively apply their new sentencing guidelines to roughly 19,500 inmates serving time in federal prisons for such violations. http://www.ussc.gov/ . The Commission’s decision came one day after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Kimbrough v. U.S. that federal judges can offer more lenient sentences in cases involving crack cocaine.
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/law/12/10/scotus.crack.cocaine/

What impact will the return of so many ex-convicts have on communities around the country? I’m afraid that unless our leaders do some careful planning and resource allocation, the retroactive application of the changes in sentencing could be a recipe for further neighborhood disintegration. Before considering what could become quite ugly, let’s discuss what I see as the good and bad emanating from this well intentioned decision.

As early as next year, thousands of affected prisoners could be back home, re-entering communities that lack support networks and infrastructures needed to successfully reintegrate them back into society. Their families and loved ones will suffer the consequences of no good deed going unpunished. http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hE81t3ai9bGPOARa64Aaz3jN7tAgD8TG5OQ82

It is good that the both the U.S. Supreme Court and the Sentencing Commission decided that enough is enough. It was time to end the blatant disparity in the criminal justice system that may have made sense in the 1980s, but was no longer defensible in the wake of Jena Six and recent protests. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jena_Six

For more than a decade, civil rights leaders have called the mandatory minimum sentencing laws racist. These laws have forced Federal judges to punish crack cocaine dealers much more harshly than those trafficking in powdered cocaine. What made sense in 1986 and 1988, was an embarrassment in 2007. If someone convicted of having five grams of crack cocaine faced a mandatory sentence of five years in prison and 10 years for 50 grams; whereas, powdered cocaine convictions, mostly associated with white offenders, required 500 and 1000 grams to trigger the same sentences. http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/66738/

Forgotten, in the name-calling and suspicions of racial motivations, were how these disparities became law. Tougher laws against crack cocaine dealers were passed in the late 1980s with the full blessings of the Congressional Black Caucus and white Democrats concerned about drug wars and violent crimes that were wreaking havoc in many urban black communities. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/snitch/primer/

It is a bad that it took so long for corrective measures to occur. Meanwhile, the minimum sentences were responsible for the steady, unrelenting removal of thousands of marriageable, young black men from their communities and the families that loved them and had to carry on in their absence.

The ugly is yet to happen. It looms. The ugly could occur if thousands of formerly incarcerated men are released from prison into communities not adequately prepared for their return. Needed will be group homes (preferably faith-based), job training, educational opportunities, drug rehabilitation, anger management programs and more law enforcement personnel and jail space for the recidivist. Without the necessary support networks, the newly released ex-cons will find themselves in the same hopeless situations that lead to their initial downfall.

This time the newly-released prisoners will find themselves in a radically changed environment where thousands of legal and illegal immigrants will hold many of the low-wage, low-skilled dishwashing and landscaping jobs unskilled laborers once banked on. As problems and frustrations mount, some people will hear a faint reminder in the distance, “Be careful what you pray for.”

.

Fishes and Loaves: The Rise of Mike Huckabee

2007-12-04T13:41:00.000-08:00

I welcome you to what I hope is the first of many blogs covering a range of topics. I hope to blog regularly, so please check back often.

A few weeks ago, I wrote an opinion piece about the hypocrisy of Pat Robertson’s endorsement of Rudy Giuliani and I concluded my piece by stating, “If conservative leaders are true to their purported values, their only real choice is between Kansas Senator Sam Brownback, who withdrew from the race, and Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, who trails in the polls because of the failure of Christian leaders like Robertson and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council to embrace him.” Since then, Mike has surged in the polls and gotten the endorsement of many Christian leaders. No doubt Pat Robertson rues the day that he made his endorsement. A wiser and more chastened Robertson has turned over the leadership of CBN’s 700 Club to his son Gordon.

For some people, it is a miracle that Mike Huckabee is leading in the Iowa poll despite being an underdog candidate with only a fraction of the funds of the leading Democratic and Republican contenders. He is truly David up against Goliath and his campaign funds brings to mind the miracle of the 2 fishes and five loaves of bread that Jesus multiplied to feed the 5,000 (Matthew 14:13-21).

Although I am an independent, Mike excites me in a way that I have not been excited since I was a child enamored with Robert F. Kennedy’s campaign for the presidency that ended tragically with his assassination hours after his winning the California primary on June 6, 1968. I like Mike because he strikes me as a man of substance and virtue who is willing to unshakably stand for his deeply held principles. Here is a man who is not ashamed of his Christian roots and beliefs and shows evidence of attempting to practice what he preaches.

Huckabee is pro-life and pro-heterosexual marriage as would be expected of a former Baptist pastor and a conservative Christian. However, he is not mean-spirited or driven by a single issue or desire to transform America into a theocracy. Instead, he strikes me as a populist candidate with genuine compassion and concern for ordinary Americans, a rare breed of Republican with a proven ability to garner the votes of blacks and Hispanics.

A recent column by David Broder makes the case for a McCain/Huckabee ticket. Reverse it, and Huckabee/McCain would be the ideal ticket for me. A few people would reject this ticket solely because of the candidates’ previous stances on immigration. Immigration reform is important for me and for millions of Americans who value and respect the rule of law and would like to see something done about illegal immigration and porous borders. Many of us recognize that, at the end of the day, there will be a compromise on this issue. Whatever we do as a nation must pass muster with a now galvanized public. I believe that the political system itself and the influence of leaders such as CNN’s Lou Dobbs can and will force drastic change upon the political system.