Over the weekend we 
Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest was a traitor, a racist, and some say, a murderer--basically the trifecta of despicability.
In the early 1960s America was shocked by images of Birmingham, Alabama's notorious and bigoted Police Commissioner 
It seems that Iowa's newly elected Republican Governor, 
The epicenter of crime in the black community, at least according to the
If you're black or Latino and you're planning on traveling in New York City, I suggest you fill your pockets with lots of subway and bus tokens because you're going to find hailing a cab next to impossible.
The owners of a Connecticut roller skating rink aren't apologizing for equating the traditional headscarf worn by many Muslim women to a Do-rag.
Why all the furor and consternation about the government sanctioned group grope playing out in our nation's airports this Thanksgiving season?
If I lived in New York, I know who would get my vote for governor. That's right, I'd put a big fat check mark next to the name of 
As is usually the case when it comes to talking about racism, folks have the tendency to quickly change the subject, and I find that infuriating.- by Carl Chancellor · October 12, 2010 · ECONOMIC JUSTICERead More »
The truth that you can't ignore when you bike across America, as Father Matthew Ruhl has just done, is this: poverty impacts every community.
"There is no place in the country devoid of poverty," says Father Matt, who was one of 12 cyclists to complete a 100-day, 5,052-mile ride last month from Cape Flattery, Washington to Key West, Florida. The pastor of St. Francis Xavier Church in Kansas City, Missouri says he undertook his nationwide pedaling spree to raise awareness about poverty and poverty-related issues.
We previously wrote about Father Matt when the Jesuit priest was in the midst of his epic bike ride, which he completed on Sept. 5. I gave him a couple of weeks to recover before speaking to him recently by phone.
"[Fighting poverty] is my personal calling. As a Catholic priest I have an obligation to uphold the standards of the Gospel," says Ruhl. He says it is his sacred duty, and the duty of all Christians, to "love our neighbors" and do all we can to bring them "out of poverty" and need.
It was clear during our conversation that Ruhl is upset that "people aren't paying enough attention to the issue of poverty" even though it is a constant that surrounds us. He says Americans are too easily "diverted" and are failing to "open their eyes" to focus on an issue that is steadily growing.
"When we started planning for this ride [last year] the poverty rate stood at around 38 million. When we embarked on the ride [on Memorial Day] it was about 40 million. When we finished there were 43.6 million people living in poverty ... We are definitely going the wrong way," he observed, referring to the once solidly middle- and working-class families who have fallen into poverty thanks to the stubbornly enduring Great Recession.
- by Carl Chancellor · September 19, 2010 · HUMAN RIGHTSRead More »
Why are we still throwing black kids out of school like there’s no tomorrow?
A recent study conducted by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) of more than 9,000 middle schools found that African-American boys are three times more likely to be suspended than their white male classmates, while African-American girls are suspended at four times the rate of white girls.
Further, the study -- Suspended Education: Urban Middle School Crisis -- revealed that in 175 middle schools an unbelievable one-third -- that's right, 1 in 3 -- of black male students were suspended at least once during a school year.
The study noted that there is "no evidence that racial disparities in school discipline are the results of higher rates of disruption among black students."
It's obvious that there is significant racial bias going into school suspension decisions.
Of course the disproportionate suspension rate among African-American students is nothing new. There is a long documented history of disparate punishment of black students in our schools. However this latest study points to a dramatic rise in the suspension of black children. According to the study, the gap between suspension rates for blacks and whites has tripled, from about three percentage points in 1970 to over 10 percentage points today.
Being physically removed from school carries with it many risks for both students and society. When students are suspended from school and are at home unsupervised, they are more likely to become involved in harmful "high risk behaviors." It should come as no surprise that left to their own devices, kids are more prone to use drugs and alcohol, engage in sexual intercourse and get caught up in an array of potentially self-destructive behaviors, including criminal activity. Critics blame suspensions for pushing students into what they term the "school-to-prison pipeline."
The SPLC suspension study specifically focused on middle schools because of the demonstrated link between middle school success and future success in and outside of school. The study suggests that "suspension at the middle school level may have long-term repercussions," which I take to mean, middle school is where a student's trajectory is set for good or bad.
Unfortunately, suspension rates aren't often addressed in discussions about improving our schools and the education of our children. That's a glaring oversight.
Why are suspension rates for black students skyrocketing?
One reason is the move by nearly all school districts to a "zero tolerance" discipline policy in the wake of the Columbine school shootings. Often the most minor of infractions can lead to a suspension -- more than 3.3 million annually, which are disproportionally meted out to black students. Unruly acts like using profanity, being disruptive in class, talking back, pushing and shoving -- behavior that used to warrant a trip to the principal's office or detention, now result in automatic suspension. It's ironic that the tragedy at Columbine, a predominantly all-white school, has had such a negative impact on African-American kids.
Another major factor to consider, as highlighted by the SPLC study, is that on average 20 percent of the teachers represent nearly 80 percent of a school's suspension rate.
What is going on with this handful of teachers? That's obviously the question school administrators should be asking. It needs to be determined if these teachers are unduly stressed by large class sizes; have trouble relating to African-American students; or are dealing with some personal demons that's causing them to possible act out inappropriately toward their students. Clearly, when a small population of teachers is generating such a large number of suspensions, the fault isn't exclusively with the student.
It's time for schools to scrap outdated and unproven "zero tolerance policies" that have shown no evidence of making schools safer. It's time for school administrators to follow in the steps of school districts like Baltimore, which have revamped the discipline code and instituted peer mediation, in-school monitoring and intervention programs that have seen suspension rates drop by 39 percent.
The plain fact is, kids can’t learn if they aren’t in school. If the main goal of schools is to educate kids, punishing them by excluding them from school is counterproductive.
Photo credit: Steelight
- by Carl Chancellor · September 18, 2010 · HUMAN RIGHTSRead More »
Way down south in the land of cotton it's clear that "old times there ain't forgotten," particularly if you're State Sen. Glenn McConnell, leader of the South Carolina GOP.
A picture of McConnell in a Confederate general's uniform with two blacks in historically accurate antebellum attire, taken at a party hosted by the South Carolina Federation of Republican Women, has ignited rumblings across the blogosphere louder than the cannon barrage on Fort Sumpter that sparked the Civil War.
According to Fitsnews, which first broke the story and shared the "gotcha" photos, neither McConnell nor the GOP ladies feel remorse or embarrassment over the incident. As a matter of fact the GOP women who put on the "Southern Experience" shindig proudly said the event allowed party goers to "get a taste" of the beauty, heritage and culture of South Carolina.
- by Carl Chancellor · September 03, 2010 · HUMAN RIGHTSRead More »
I still haven't quite figured out what to make of Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally, which is why it has taken me so long to post my thoughts about the event.
Initially, my plan was to immediately vent my outrage over Beckfest, since I was sure I would have plenty of easy and very nasty targets to pillory.
However, from the television snippets of the rally I watched on the day of the event and the news reports I read subsequently, Beckstock wasn't the over the top, in your face, race-baiting, Obama-hating, don't tread on me, right-wing political orgy I and many others had expected.
Still, I'm at a loss to accurately describe the Beck rally, or explain exactly what it was attempting to accomplish. The nearest I can come is to call it a Holy Ghost tent revival meeting on steroids, spreading a "take our country back" gospel bankrolled by the ultra-right wing, billionaire Koch brothers.
While I don't know exactly what Beck's mass gathering was, I do know what it wasn't, which is to say -- it fell far short of being the second coming of the 1963 March on Washington as touted by Beck and others.
Sure Beck, he of the uber-ego and the nutty socialism, communism, Kenyan revenge theories, would have you believe his rally in Washington at the end of August mirrored in intent and purpose that iconic march of 47 years earlier. He even went so far as to suggest that he and his supporters were taking up where Martin Luther King Jr. left off and were laying claim to the mantle of the civil rights movement. But I'm here to tell you people: Don't drink the Kool-Aid.
Glenn Beck has a dream alright and it has nothing to do with brotherhood, equality or compassion for your fellow man.
- by Carl Chancellor · August 31, 2010 · ECONOMIC JUSTICERead More »
Putting a new and sobering twist on baby mama drama, a recently-released study indicates that more than half of poor babies have mothers who are suffering from depression.
While that's disturbing news for babies, since having a depressed mom can interfere with parenting and negatively impact a child's development, it's not necessarily surprising.
It doesn't take a Ph.D to understand that child-rearing is tough under any circumstances and therefore raising a kid, particularly a totally dependent infant, on an extremely limited income has to be stressful. When you are a mother living in poverty and have no idea how you are going to feed, clothe and shelter yourself, let alone your baby, the stress you're under can quickly slip over into serious depression.
Still, I doesn't hurt to quantify anecdotal observations.
According to the study, conducted by the Urban Institute, 55 percent of infants living at or below the poverty level are being raised by moms showing signs of mild to severe depression. "A mom who is too sad to get up in the morning won't be able to take care of all of her child's practical needs," said the Institute's Olivia Golden in the Washington Post.
In addition, the study, which followed 14,000 infants and their mothers, finds that at least one in nine infants born in poverty are being raised by mothers suffering from symptoms of severe depression.
Golden and her research team note that a severely depressed mother who is "not able to take joy in her child" is unlikely to talk to or play with her child. That sort of mother and infant interaction is key to a baby's successful development.
- by Carl Chancellor · August 17, 2010 · HUMAN RIGHTSRead More »
Don’t let those chubby cheeks or that toothless angelic grin fool you. While you're naively cooing goo goo ga ga, that cuddly, cherubic infant before you could be plotting America’s demise.
After all, do you really know what that baby is hiding in his or her Pamper?
Hey, I’m just saying. I mean, we already had the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber. So why not a diaper of mass destruction?
I see that you’re still skeptical. That's because your thinking is stuck in the past. You see, we’re not talking about the babies you and I grew up with — the angelic Gerber Baby, or the wholesome Ivory Snow Baby. No, what we are dealing with today, in 2000 freaking 10 — is an entirely new breed of baby, a sinister and nefarious type of newborn beyond comprehension. I’m talking about a crawling assassin, a demon in diapers, a pacifier-sucking saboteur. I’m talking about..."anchor babies" (shrieks, screams, scary music).
Don’t take my word for it. Some of the most influential, but not necessarily rational, voices in the country, folks like U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) and his fellow Texas Republican, State Rep. Debbie Riddle, are sounding the "anchor baby" alarm as well.
Here's the gist of their argument, what I like to refer to as the Binnie (Laden) Babies Conspiracy. According to Gohmert, at this very moment, pregnant (Muslim) women are traveling to the U.S. on tourist visas for the sole purpose of giving birth on American soil. The Congressman claims these foreign mothers are using the Constitution — specifically, the 14th Amendment, which makes all persons born in this country U.S. citizens — to build a diabolical plot.
Gohmert, who is a member of the Tea Party Caucus in Congress, says these visiting Muslim moms, with newly minted American babies in tow, are returning to their homes in the Middle East where these "anchor babies" are being instructed in radical Islam. After training these babies for 20 years or more to become terrorists, they'll return to the U.S. to carry out acts of violence and dastardly deeds against America and Americans. Simple, right?
- by Carl Chancellor · August 10, 2010 · ECONOMIC JUSTICERead More »
The makeshift shelter — a hurriedly constructed A-frame of 2x4s covered by a heavy plastic tarp — is a far cry from the glistening glass and brick eight-story apartment and retail complex that was supposed to be sitting on this Washington D.C. corner. Ron Harris couldn't be happier.
"They weren't giving us what was promised," says Harris of the proposed apartment complex that was to be an answer to the city's affordable housing problem. In July, Harris, a community activist joined with a dozen others to occupy a rock-strewn patch of dirt at the corner of 7th and Rhode Island Avenue N.W. known as Parcel 42. Harris and a handful of other protesters, who are now living in a tent city erected on the parcel, are determined to compel the city to make good on its commitment to build affordable housing in the Shaw neighborhood of Washington, D.C. (End Homelessness blogger Eric Sheptock is one of the tent city's founders. Also be sure to check out his posts from inside the tent city.)
As angry clouds threatening a downpour periodically spit heavy drops of rain that thud loudly on the tarp above our heads, Harris tells me that ground was to have been broken last year on a 100-unit subsidized apartment complex that would offer housing for families making between $25,000 and $50,000 a year. However, since the Parcel 42 plan was first announced in 2007, the scope and direction of the project has gone through a number of changes, none of them acceptable to Harris or to community groups like ONE DC (Organizing Neighborhood Equity), Take Back the Land or the People's Property Campaign of Empower DC.
Sitting at a conference table of sorts, which is an old wooden door with brass knob still place, turned up on four cinder blocks, Harris says the project has been significantly scaled back. Instead of providing 100 units of housing, the new plan is for 94 units, but most egregious is that there will no longer be tiered rents for households making 20 percent and 30 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI).
"Now, the developers only want people making at least 50 percent of the AMI, which is around $53,000 a year. That's not low-income to me," Harris says.
- by Carl Chancellor · July 28, 2010 · HUMAN RIGHTSRead More »
Carl Chancellor, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist who has been writing about social justice issues for decades, is a columnist for Change.org.
It was a Steve Urkel moment of monumental proportions for the President, his administration, the USDA and the NAACP.
I'm speaking, of course, of the ham-fisted apologies offered to Shirley Sherrod — the recently fired USDA director — by the aforementioned after they each took turns throwing her under the bus.
In giving their separate expressions of regret, they each should have been accompanied by a video clip of nerdy, suspender-wearing Urkel uttering his trademark line — "Did I do that?"
The answer, sadly, is: "Yes, they did."
Why was the administration so willing to rush headlong to condemn and punish Sherrod before knowing the entire story? Why was there an unquestioning willingness to believe the worst about Sherrod, particularly given the background of those accusing her of being racist? Knowing the unethical history of right-wing blogger Andrew Breitbart and the unabashed political agenda of Fox News, you'd think even a half-rational person would pause to consider the source.
But as we already know, that didn't happen, and in the process, a good woman was nearly destroyed.
That's because once the word "racist" gets tossed around, reasonably intelligent people lose their minds and go off half-cocked. Calling someone a racist is akin to lobbing a live grenade into a crowded room — it sends everyone in the vicinity scurrying in a panic toward the nearest exit in a frantic attempt to distance themselves from such an accusation, and damn anyone who gets in the way.
- by Carl Chancellor · July 06, 2010 · HUMAN RIGHTSRead More »
Okay, I guess I’m a slow learner, but I finally get it: the GOP ain’t feeling black folk — nor brown, gay, or unemployed people for that matter.
However, for the purposes of this post, let’s limit the conversation to Congressional Republicans’ obvious disregard (bordering on callousness) for people of the African-American persuasion — an attitude that was on full display during Elena Kagan’s confirmation hearings.
The target of the GOP’s ire this time (drum roll) — the esteemed Supreme Court Justice and legal giant Thurgood Marshall, who is just the sort of easy target they would attack, since he’s been dead for 20 years and isn’t around to defend himself.
Clearly, the goal was to tarnish Kagan’s image, a la Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers, by playing up her connection — "guilt by association" — with the late Justice. I have to give to Kagan — she didn’t mumble when she proclaimed that she was proud to have clerked for Marshall in the late 1980s, and considered him one of her "legal heroes."
I also have to give it to the Republicans, because I never saw this one coming.
According to several media accounts, GOP senators invoked the name of Marshall 35 times during the first day of Kagan's hearings. Every chance they had, they painted Marshall as an "activist jurist." Fumed about him being a raving "liberal." And accused him of dissing the Founding Fathers — you know, the guys who took time out from walking on water and multiplying loaves of bread and fish to found the country and pen the Constitution.
- by Carl Chancellor · June 29, 2010 · ECONOMIC JUSTICERead More »
Seeing is believing. That old bromide it at the heart of a plan by a University of Mississippi professor to lift folks out of poverty through college education.
Eric Weber, an assistant professor of public policy at Ole Miss, says students coming from impoverished backgrounds can succeed in college if they see examples of people from similar circumstances who have done well, or are doing well in college.
The problem, says Weber, who is working on a film that focuses on how poverty impedes educational achievement, is that too many poor students are being discouraged from attending college.
It is Weber's contention that students in his state of Mississippi are not attending college in larger numbers in part because they are being told by friends, relatives, and in some cases school officials, that they are not college material.
SEARCH RESULTS
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY
Carl Chancellor Akron, OH
Carl is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist who has a passion for social justice issues. For more than 20 years he was a reporter and columnist for the Knight-Ridder news service and its flagship paper, the Akron Beacon Journal. At the moment he is a freelance writer in the Washington, D.C.-area with the bulk of his writing focused on the health care and financial reform debates on Capitol Hill. He is always working on works of fiction and had a collection of short stories published in 2000.
