Oakland:Robbery Capital of America?

Recently, two events have occurred that will directly affect Oakland's future. First, Oakland Chief of Police, Howard Jordan, announced his retirement. Only two days later, his replacement, Interim Oakland Police Chief, Anthony Toribio, announced that he too would be leaving the position. Second, came shocking, yet unsurprising news that Oakland was designated as the “Robbery Capital of America”, with a reported 4,338 robberies last year alone. Both events are a jarring reminder of Oakland’s reputation as a dangerous city with an uncertain future. This report shined a spotlight on one of the city's biggest problems: our rising crime rate and an understaffed police force. While Oakland is gaining attention for its bustling restaurant scene, its growing housing market, and its nightlife, our crime rate is also posing a direct threat to our employment rate and opportunities for economic growth and recovery.Our reputation as a dangerous city is a deterrent to corporations and entrepreneurs that would otherwise consider moving and growing their business in Oakland.    Why is Oakland’s crime rate continuing to grow year after year, and what can we as a community do about it? There is a direct link between unemployment and crime in Oakland. Any hope for change relies on our willingness to get to the root of the problem in order to better our reputation as a safe place to do business, thus creating more job opportunities for our community.  It also relies on the fate of our police force and the void left by Jordan’s retirement. The question that many Oakland residents are asking themselves in light of this news is: Does the resignation of Howard Jordan portend a federal receivership, risking a huge financial impact on the city, along with the loss of local control over the police force?While this remains a possibility, we are also faced with the option of implementing a new Chief of Police.  But who does Oakland need that person to be? How do we need them to operate?  What is certain is that we need a world class leader with great communication skills. A leader that can create, implement, and execute a plan. One who will develop metrics by which we can measure success and communicate with both elected officials and the people of Oakland so we may bring an end to the revolving door of police chiefs in our city.  As a city, we need to focus on more than increasing the rank and file; instead, a focus on creating jobs and promoting education programs will create meaningful alternatives for disconnected individuals in our community, breaking the cycle of crime and violence at its roots. Can Oakland get the right Chief of Police who will be an advocate for the community,who will have the confidence of its people? Can this individual create partnerships, connect with the community, and build relationships that will better our faith in what we can achieve as a city and assure us of our safety?As a community, as residents who love the city they live in, we have to ask ourselves: Is there anything the collective community can do to stave off a federal receivership? We must be mindful of the lessons we learned after the State takeover of the Oakland school system, and how long it took our city to recover. While Oakland’s future may be in a fragile limbo state, now is the time for Oakland residents to take a stand and make their voices heard. Now is the time for Oakland residents to get involved in making decisions that will positively affect their community by attending council meetings, writing our legislators and the federal magistrate currently overseeing the police force, and taking back control to ensure the safety of all of Oakland’s citizens. 

The Case for Obama: A Vision to Move America Forward vs. Duplicitous Elitism

The 2012 Presidential election, simply put, is about vision. That is, which vision, President Obama’s, or Mr. Romney’s, will best move this country forward. In my opinion, it is the contrast of hope, optimism, growth and inclusion for all, of President Obama, versus the duplicity, flip flopping (read, lying) and indifference, if not outright hostility to half this country’s populous, of Mr. Romney. As President Obama stated when he closed the second Presidential debate “when he [Mitt] thought nobody was listening he said what he really felt--47% of the American people don't matter because all they want is a government hand out”. For Mr. Romney to now come back and say he cares about all Americans because he wants their vote is just disingenuous. Therefore, when given this choice in vision, I choose, and believe America should choose President Obama for a second term. For me, that President Obama should be the man to lead us forward for another four years was decided long ago. The progress he has made in his first four years is laudable in the absolute sense. Taken in context, and viewed relatively, the progress he has made is remarkable. In inheriting an economy on the brink of another Great Depression, and in four short years returning us to an economy of growth should be applauded. Moreover, despite constant attacks from the radical right, and a Congress that has tried to impede his every move, he has continued to govern as the President for all. The bible tells us that “without a vision the people will perish”. To better determine the right vision for America let us flesh out in a bit more detail, the above referenced visions: Romney: • More tax cuts for the rich • A land with less diversity under more strict immigration and affirmative action laws • Fewer social services for those who most need it including the elderly • A repeal of Universal health care and corresponding denial of access to millions of Americas who desperately need preventative and ongoing healthcare • Less choice for women in what to do with their bodies and laws that tell us who to love and how we can love them • Promises of economic growth and tax reform with no specifics stated • A vision where 47% of the citizens in this country don’t matter This does not sound like a compelling vision to me. How about President Obama? Obama: • Inclusion. 100% of Americans matter • A land where women’s rights are protected; where people are free to love who they want • Healthcare for all Americans as the President demonstrated with the passage of Universal Healthcare • Job growth and a strong economy. The President and his team have (i) saved us from a second Great Depression by putting in place a stimulus package, that among other things, saved the auto and banking industries and (ii) stopped the job losses that where occurring under Bush, and is now adding more than 100k jobs a month • A tax system where the rich pay their fare share and where a healthy middle class can exist; not a system where a millionaire like Romney pays 14% and our teachers, policemen and bus drivers pay 30-40% The contrast between these two visions could not be clearer. In Mr. Romney’s America, the middle class will further dissipate as the “haves” will continue, unchecked, to hold down the “have nots”. The tyranny of the majority will be law of the land. Finally, given how often Mr. Romney’s positions seem to change, there is no telling what further untold dangers await the American people if his vision is the one we follow. On the other hand, President Obama’s vision is about hope, optimism and rebuilding. While we, and he, must acknowledge that more hard work lies ahead, in President Obama’s America, there is an opportunity for us all to prosper. Given the President’s track record, his well defined vision that moves all of America forward, I believe he has stated the case for another four years, and a chance to finish the job he started. I believe we must cast our vote with President Barack Obama in this election.

What the Price of Milk has to do with Jobs in Oakland

Sobering Moment--Problem Deeper Than We Knew

On a recent evening I found myself at a local Oakland theatre watching the movie “Good Deeds”. The movie, beautifully set in San Francisco (could have been Oakland, but that will be a story for another blog), tells the story of a successful CEO cast in the wrong life and a single mother working as a corporate cleaning lady. In one very poignant scene, the cleaning lady asked the CEO if he knew the price of a gallon of milk. Sadly the CEO did not.

This story, for me, has many lessons—the divide between the haves and the have nots, the disconnect between Wall Street and Main Street, and the very real struggle the underemployed and jobless face each day. For millions of Americans, and thousands of Oaklanders, the price of milk represents a quandary. How do I feed my family? What choices do I make if I am very tight on money? What will I do without a job or a job that does not pay enough to maintain a decent standard of living? For these Americans/Oaklanders the rising price of milk and other necessities drives home a larger point of deeper despair. The larger point, we are all connected to this, and so to the solution in some meaningful way

Lengths of Despair

I was struck by a recent article in the New York Times entitled “How Far Would You Go for a Comeback”. The article tells the story of several men who have left their homes in Anywhere, USA, some of them on the brink of bankruptcy or homelessness, for jobs in the oil industry in Williston, ND. For these men, Williston, where the unemployment rate is 1% vs the national average of 8.3% (Oakland is at 16.5%), is a source of salvation allowing them to send money back home to their families thereby keeping their lives afloat. One, a trained cook, who at one time owned his own home, had been reduced to picking up cans, musing in the process “if we’d get $10 to $15, we used it, we did what we had to do”. Part of me admires this indomitable example of the American spirit. The other part of me is filled with profound sadness that able bodied men and women, who want to work, support themselves and their families, increasingly often, don’t have the option to do so. This is not the American dream.

Oakland is filled with people of similar resiliency. We recovered from the big earthquake of 1989, the Oakland Hills fires of 1991 and most recently the sit ins of Occupy Oakland. This resiliency, alone, has not adequately prepared us for the country’s current recession. This recession has proved to be a beast of considerably greater magnitude than the aforementioned tragedies. It has left our city with an unemployment rate of 16.5% or twice the national average. There are many reasons for this fact. David Simon, writer of the Wire, and winner of a MacArthur genius award grant, writes about the ghettoization of America. He asserts that many lower skilled jobs have been pushed to the outskirts or overseas. Additionally, for various other reasons (perception of dangerous city and an out of control crime problem, too much bureaucracy at the city level, lack of a favorable tax climate and perception around level of disposable income of city’s residents available for purchase of company goods and services) we have seen other companies relocate from Oakland or out of California taking precious jobs with them.

This joblessness has pushed up both crime and general feelings of desperation in our city. What are we to do? I remember growing up in the shadows of the Bay Area, the child of a single mother facing similar struggles. My mother dug deep, sometimes working two jobs. She made sure I had access to good schools. These schools provided me access: access to a good college and a law school. Ultimately theses schools led to good jobs. Assuming we make some fundamental changes to our primary education system, I believe we can have similar experiences here in Oakland.

There is Hope (for Oakland)

There must be personal accountability to be sure—secure additional training, ensuring we are involved in our schools and children’s scholastic endeavors, demonstrating a willingness to share costs such as healthcare with businesses and engage in community policing to help make our neighborhoods safer. We, as the residents of Oakland, must be willing to do whatever it takes to get this city back on its feet. Demonstrating such a “cant fail attitude” through actions such as the above in a vacuum are likely not enough. There is also a role for government and business. Oakland has many pluses that should attract business: a largely educated workforce—colleges (Berkeley and Cal State East Bay), community colleges (Peralta), unions that train many workers in trades, a solid transportation system and access to a water front. We also have a Port and sports teams that could also be greater engines of economic growth.

We must aggressively market our positives to attract businesses if we want well paying jobs in our city. We must support our Mayor and her economic development team in this activity. We can do this through the “personal accountability” actions above, participating in the Mayor’s block by block program, and encouraging the companies we work for to come to Oakland. I have done this with my own company. My company is now in the process of building a location in East Oakland that will provide 70-100 healthcare based jobs. Imagine if we all made a concerted effort to do this kind of outreach. As the current Chair of the Oakland Workforce Investment Board I believe we have what it takes to succeed. It will take a material number of jobs to reduce our 16.5% unemployment rate.

We must be bold and audacious in attaching this number. A few examples:
• Appropriate tax breaks for small business so that may create jobs
• A unified effort, including a healthy Oakland effort where we are take better care of our health, that reduces healthcare costs and makes it more attractive for businesses to provide jobs
• Using our unique attributes as a city as real sales tools to attract businesses that can hire thousands of workers at a time
• Doubling or tripling the size of our police force and leveraging technology (like Shotspotter) and advanced data techniques to combat our crime problem and combat the perception that our city is an unsafe place for workers to work
• Organizing a standing business council that the Mayor may rely on for real, tangible ideas; this can be done as a roundtable with our chambers and labor councils as well
• Ensuring that our city government continues to build diversity and attract people, both elected and employees, with deep budget and economic experience
• Work to develop a more efficient government, with a surplus, where hard choices are made to encourage savings and the creation of a surplus, and discourages spending where certain items cannot be readily paid for

I do not claim to have all the ideas, but these are a start. I believe we can achieve our goals through hard work and concerted effort. However, until we take such actions, dare to be bold and audacious in our thinking, for many Oaklanders, like many Americans more generally, the price of milk will continue to matter—a lot!

2011 Heisman—And the Winner Is….

There has been a lot of hype around this year’s Heisman. Many predict a very close race with Baylor’s RGIII or Robert Griffin III appearing to have the most late momentum of any of the candidates. Who is most deserving of the award? Many debate whether the Heisman should go to the “best” or “most valuable” player in college football. Still others suggest it should go to the most well rounded.

To resolve this debate, at least in my own mind, I went to the Heisman website. Here is what it sets forth as the criteria for the Heisman trophy:

The Heisman Memorial Trophy annually recognizes the outstanding college football player whose performance best exhibits the pursuit of excellence with integrity. Winners epitomize great ability combined with diligence, perseverance, and hard work. The Trust, furthermore, has a charitable mission to support amateur athletics and to provide greater opportunities to the youth of our country. Our goal through these charitable endeavors is for the Heisman Trophy to symbolize the fostering of a sense of community responsibility and service to our youth, especially those disadvantaged or afflicted.

Under this definition, it became clear to me that the award should go to the player with the best demonstrated ability who, through hard work, and with integrity, made the most outstanding contributions to college football in 2011. In other words, this definition goes beyond stats and to the player that produces superior stats while acting with integrity and is a role model to the youth of our country.

There are 870 media votes, broken into six geographic voting regions and 55 former Heisman winners that make up the voting for the award. When the results are announced on Saturday night, I believe the winner will be RGIII and here is why.

RGIII
• Eye popping stats. 3,998 passing yards, 36 TDs at a 72% completion rate, and 644 rushing yards for 9 more TDs. I believe he will carry the Southwest, Mid Atlantic and Northeast regions. He graduated in three years and was a member of the honor roll. Demonstrated service in the community. Also a track All American that worked his way back from a knee injury.

Andrew Luck
• Apologies Cardinal Fan. Stanford’s 3rd runner up finish in last three years. Luck, likely the #1 overall pick in next year’s NFL draft has the stats: 3,170 passing yards, 35 TDS at a 70% completion rate, but did not do enough in the big games or down the stretch. Mainly, a poor performance on national TV vs. Oregon will cost him the award. Luck, also an honor roll student, good teammate and well regarded member of the community will carry voting in the West region, but will still settle for second.

Trent Richardson and Tyrann Mathieu
• Will cancel each other out splitting the Southeast region voting.
• Both great stats; IMHO Mathieu is best player in college football.
• Mathieu loses points for drug related suspension. Does not comport with integrity requirement or set good example for our youth. That said, the “Honey Badger”, if he can stay focused is the odds on favorite to win the award in 2012

Montee Ball
• If a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound? Montee likely to carry the Midwest region, and had startlingly good stats: 1,759 rushing yards and 38 TDS, but was the second best player on his own team, had no signature games and played in the Big 10. In other words, outside of the Midwest, and no offense to Montee, but no one watched or cared who has a vote. Good season though.

When Civil Disobedience Becomes Anarchy; : Occupy Oakland’s Misplaced Agenda

Overview

I have been watching what is going on with the Occupy Oakland (“OO”) movement for a few weeks. I have witnessed the Occupy (National) movement grow worldwide, as well as root itself in local communities all across our country. Oakland has become one of those local communities, and in many ways, the poster child for this movement. Ostensibly, the movement started with good intentions: (1) to curb, or at least better regulate, perceived corporate greed on Wall Street; (2) to revise the tax laws such that those richest Americans (the “1%’ers”) would share the fair taxation burden with the rest of the country (the” 99%’ers”); and (3) to stimulate the economy and provide job growth. Oakland, with its high unemployment rate, violent crime problems, health care disparities and foreclosure scandals, would seem then, a convenient and appropriate symbol for what is happening elsewhere in the country, and the world. I get it. People are hurt and angry. They are afraid.


I too live in Oakland. I have lived in this community for more than 15 years. As a graduate of the University of California at Berkeley, with its free speech history, and the son of a mother who participated in the Civil Rights movement of the 60s, I certainly respect free speech, advocacy for change, and even the right to protest. When, however, I see the pursuit of these aims start to tear down my community I become concerned. I am concerned that these protests have become misplaced, and if not done in a more constructive manner going forward, threaten both the safety of our city and the goals OO claims to be pursuing.

Everyone is Upset


A week ago, in an attempt to bring order to an unruly crowd the Mayor’s office ordered the police to remove the protestors from City Hall. One protestor, a war veteran (Scott Olsen), was badly injured. My prayers remain with Scott and his family. The Mayor then announced that the protestors could only protest at City Hall between the hours of 10 and 6. This position was later reversed, again allowing the protestors to establish an encampment at City Hall 24 x7. Now the protestors are angry with the Mayor and police. The Mayor seems to be off sides with her interim police chief. The police are angry with the Mayor (see the open letter from the Oakland police union to the Mayor in the November 1, 2011, Chronicle). Oakland citizens are angry with the Mayor, protestors, and some, the police. There has even been a movement started to recall Mayor Quan. Whew. That is a lot of anger.


I read that OO is calling for a day of protest, on Wednesday, November 2, 2011 when they will “stop commerce”. They are calling for the closure of every bank, corporation and school. I am not sure how closing down business, in a city badly hurting for both new businesses and jobs advances the aims of OO. I for one am against such a closure. As a member of the city’s Workforce Investment Board, I know as much as many, that our city is on the edge of solvency, and as such, the last thing we need to do is stop commerce. To the contrary, we need to show business that Oakland is a place to locate due to our proximity to colleges such as Berkeley, transportation, the Bay and a skilled workforce. Attracting business will stimulate the economy and provide badly needed jobs. What kind of message do we send to our children, by giving them a day off, to protest a city that is broke when they need to be in class, learning and securing a better future?

I think that we need to take a collective step back. The right question at this time is not whether we should recall Mayor Quan, but rather how we as a collective: City Hall, the police, other leaders like Assemblyman Swanson and Congresswoman Lee, OO, business, labor and the residents of Oakland work together to peacefully achieve the goals outlined above.

Civil Disobedience

There are many views on this topic and its use to drive change. Thoreau, Gandhi and MLK are three leaders on the subject of Civil Disobedience. Thoreau's 1848 essay Civil Disobedience, has had a wide influence on many practitioners of civil disobedience. The driving idea behind the essay is that citizens are morally responsible for their support of aggressors, even when such support is required by law. In the essay, Thoreau explained his reasons for having refused to pay taxes as an act of protest against slavery and against the Mexican-American War. He writes, "If I devote myself to other pursuits and contemplations, I must first see, at least, that I do not pursue them sitting upon another man's shoulders. I must get off him first, that he may pursue his contemplations too”.

Gandhi similarly asserted “the fact is that all non-cooperation is not violent and non-violent non-cooperation can never be an act of violence”. MLK also urged a non-violent approach: “Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is force to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored.”


It would seem that OO has part of this right. OO, and the others in the Occupy movement more generally, have put a spotlight on the issues raised above. People are listening. The Economist in its latest issue “Rage Against the Machine” states the Occupy movement has re-focused the debate. The world is paying attention. How then do we achieve: (1) better regulation of Wall Street; (2) more fair taxation and (3) secure new jobs? Well if OO is an example I guess it is throwing items at the police (including feces), refusing to engage in meaningful, productive dialogue and, now, planning to “shut down commerce”. These tactics feel a lot more like anarchy to me given that they are characterized by lawlessness, violence and political disorder. MLK further stated that “the great glory of American democracy is the right to protest for right.” It appears, to me, that OO has taken the concepts of Thoreau, Gandhi and MLK and bastardized them. Protest is one thing, actions when they detract from an orderly society, is another.

Free Speech and its Limitations

OO may counter the arguments above by asserting that their actions are covered by “Free Speech”. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. There are, however, exceptions to this protection based upon: obscenity, defamation, incitement to riot, and fighting words (among other limitations). Government may further limit speech with reasonable time, place and manner restrictions.
Time, place, or manner restrictions must:
1. Be content neutral
2. Be narrowly tailored
3. Serve a significant governmental interest
4. Leave open ample alternative channels for communication
In my opinion limiting the hours that OO may occupy city hall is reasonable. Concerns about riots, public health and sanitation and safety to Oakland residents and its police force are all reasonable justifications. The city has spent well over a $1M on police activities surrounding this protest. These funds are being spent is at the same time when are City is fighting for its financial life and residents are facing yet another parcel tax. I for one, do not want to pay for this kind of activity. I would rather my tax dollars go to fund more police, better schools, public health initiatives and programs that get our residents back to work.

Solutions—How do we Move Forward

I do not claim to have all of the answers, however, below represent a few potential answers:
1. An open forum where the Mayor, City Council, Police Chief, DA, representatives from OO, the business and labor communities and residents of Oakland can engage in a meaningful dialogue around how best to achieve the stated goals.
2. An economic council, made up of business leaders, to help advise the Mayor on creating more jobs in Oakland.
3. A plan to secure additional police officers, as well as support for a strong, autonomous Policy Chief who can drive policy decisions and further develop a plan for a safer Oakland.
4. Reasonable restrictions around time, place and manner of the OO protests.
5. Protection for the businesses of Oakland should this day of protest materialize.
6. Reporting by City Hall, against specific metrics, to show that our City is making the right progress.
7. Voting. Hold our elected officials responsible for reforming the tax laws so that the 1%’ers are paying their fair share and that there exists the proper level of regulation for Wall Street. Put pressure on all members of Congress to achieve these goals and let them know that they are accountable to us.


Thank you for reading. I do not expect full agreement with my views. I welcome meaningful, productive debate. I am deeply committed to this community and its well being, and as such, am happy to be a part of any solution. My hope is that we can filter out the “noise” (recall efforts etc) and put our efforts into those things that can produce tangible results related to those goals set forth above

A Well Reasoned "Blast Back" to the Fab 5

In the midst of all the fun I was having watching March Madness a more serious issue, on the topic, arose. First, the Fab 5 documentary on ESPN and then Grant Hill's response.

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/grant-hills-response-to-jalen-rose/

I wanted to take a brief pause to comment, and to commend Mr. Hill for his response.

I think that is it is unfortunate that Jalen and some of the other members of the Fab 5, brought the attacks on Mr. Hill and other AAs who play at Duke, in that manner that they did in the documentary. I love that the Fab Five, as Grant suggests, represented a new movement, a new attitude in America. A brashness that five talented freshman could compete, and almost win, on the NCAAs biggest stage. That said, some of the comments raised by Jalen and the other Fab 5’ers are even worse that the “crabs in the barrel” mentality that often plagues our community. Even more than being jealous of another’s success, or opportunity, I think the remarks by some of the Fab Five are tantamount to encouraging our youth toward the glory elements of the “hip hop” movement, or path to the fastest buck, at the expense of a good quality education, which is in most cases actually required to achieve such aspirations. I would be ok with the Fab 5 saying “we are tougher than they are”, “play a different brand of ball, etc”, but to put down an AA, or anyone, for that matter for taking advantage of one of the finest educational experiences our county has to offer is just wrong. We as AA leaders, should be bringing glory to such opportunities, and highlighting the fact that only the smallest percentage of us will ever make it to major D1 sports, let along professional sports, and that without a quality education to fall back on we are doomed to a very second class set of opportunities as we pursue our life’s work outside of sports. We need to look no further than certain of the members of the Fab 5, who did not get an education, and their attendant struggles, to see the importance of this point.

As a person of color who attended (and is very proud and blessed to have had the opportunity) a predominately “white” HS, college and grad school, I reject that distinction between “down” or “real” blacks and “fake” or “uncle tom” blacks as false. We are all black. The distinctions, and ensuing judgments, between people generally, or even within a race should spring from actions, not one's stations in life or where they were fortunate or unfortunate, as they case may be, to go to school.

I applaud Grant for responding in the manner in which he did. His response was one of high minded reason, rather than name calling or trash talk. His response was thoughtful, well laid out and unemotional. In this situation it clearly would have been easy to give way to emotion. I hope by “being the change” he hopes to see in the world, Grant will serve as an example to Mr. Rose (who, as a TV analyst, is in position to influence many of our youth), the rest of the Fab 5 and kids more generally. I think he showed real courage in living up to the challenge set forth by Dubois in trying to lead, realizing the implications of the Fab 5 documentary go beyond any mere war of words between Duke and the members of the Fab 5. Clearly, unlike Mr. Rose, Mr. Hill is mindful, that many are watching and taking notes.

New CA AG Harris Makes History

AG Harris Makes History
January 3, 2011. Today Kamala Harris was sworn in as California’s Attorney General. Being a woman, African American and Indian—a ll firsts! It was an honor to be among the many enthusiastic supporters, many of us whom had played a part (no matter how small) in her historic feat, to see her sworn in. When she pledged to “defend the Constitution of the United States and CA against enemies both foreign and domestic” , a collective chill came over the crowd. Kamala “gets it”. That is the law is for all people.
A few highlights:
· She pledged to be tough on crime. Those who commit heinous acts will be removed from society—murders, sex traffickers and pedophiles to name a few.
· She also pledged to be smart on crime. With a 70% recidivism rate and spending at a 2x rate to higher education in our state, the current system is not working. Kamala pledged to promote programs that get people properly prepared to re-enter society—education, job training, etc. Additionally, as she has done in SF, she pledged to continue holding parents accountable for their children attending class. Finally, she promised that her office will use a data driven approach and best of breed practices from around the country to improve CA.
· Mortgage fraud, drugs and gang violence were also among her targets of first order.
· AG Harris also promised a better use of existing laws to combat cyber crime. Cyber criminals will face the same punishment as do those who commit physical crimes.
· In an acknowledgement that the Prop 8 debate will be re-opened, the new AG stated that people “should be free to marry whoever they love”.
With a transition team that features two former US Secretaries of State, it is clear that Kamala Harris is a different kind of AG. Of course, the proof will be in the results, however, if today’s speech is any indication of the possible, I think California may be pleasantly surprised by what this 20 year prosecutor accomplishes. Also unspoken was the future of the death penalty.
It is very clear that our new AG has a bright future. I had previously thought maybe Governor, Senator or even President could be on the horizon for her at some point. However, if one listened closely to her glowing admiration for another former Alameda County DA, Earl Warren, and comprehends the ambitions of her reform plan she starts to more resemble Thurgood Marshall (in the way he reshaped education through the Brown vs Board of Education case). Supreme Court Justice Harris… Another of the many options that are now possible for this amazing woman.

Yes We Can, the Blueprint—How to Finish the Change We Started

The Audacity to Win

We won. I was reminded of the feeling that I and several other friends had the night we knew President Barack Obama had won the election for the President of the United States. Many of us, including me, played small parts in helping this victory happen. An African American had just become the 44th President of the United States. I recalled stepping outside to speak to my mother, a woman who had marched in the Civil Rights movement, and discussing what an historic moment we had just witnessed. We were both proud, but felt, in the final analysis, this victory would be viewed as hallow if we did not use it to make real change (i.e, pass broad laws that impact the majority of America and elect other similarly minded and diverse people at the local, state and federal levels). These feelings had been conjured up by the book I was reading on the way to the annual legislative meeting of the Congressional Black Caucus (“CBC”)—The Audacity to Win. Why exactly, it is, or was, audacious for an African American to have won the Presidency is a story for another time.

My feelings of excitement, happiness and desire to help make change that had been stirred by this powerful book were only re-enforced last night at the CBC Awards Gala when President Obama stepped on stage to speak to the crowd. Even before he spoke, one could feel the electricity in the room exuding from his person. Some, in the community, call it “swag”. Others say he has something special. Regardless, our President clearly has “it”. As he began his speech, everyone in the room could feel the same energy that had popularized what had become the President’s catch phrase during his run—“Yes We Can”. This excitement was bolstered by the President reviewing the many impressive accomplishments by his administration in their first 18 months. The excitement, however, was tempered by what the President called America being at the crossroads.

We are at the crossroads, as stated by the President, because despite having saved the country from another “Great Depression”, passed health care reform and brought an end to the Iraq war, the Republicans, and increasingly the Tea Party, feel the President is not doing a good job. Not only do they want undo many of the aforementioned changes, according to minority leader Boehner, they want to take the country back. This is where the irony gets rich. The last time the Republican minority felt this way, the then minority leader Gingrich, made a contract with America. I am not sure what Newt thought he would deliver under this contract, however, what ensued were eight years of policies that led America right off the cliff. On the day President Obama took office no other incoming President had faced so many challenges on so many different fronts: a crumbling economy, millions of Americans without jobs or healthcare, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and increasingly sour relations with the world’s other super powers. As the President mused last night, it is now pretty funny that “the people who drove the country off the cliff, then watched us while we expended blood, sweat and tears to push the car, that is America, almost back on the road, while they drank slurppies and talked about what a poor job we are doing, now want back the keys to the car”??? No, the President said, resiliently, you can not have the keys to the car back. I suppose this is why the President called our current position a crossroads. To stay with the car analogy, we can hand the keys back to the Republicans, and some of their Tea Party friends (whoever these folks are), put the car in reverse and go backwards, or we can leave the car with the people that have made change, continue in drive and go forward. A precarious position indeed.

To be clear, while change has been made, we must go further as a country. As the legendary community activist, Harry Belafonte stated “President Obama will drive change, but can not do it alone”. It is clear that true change can not be about one man acting alone, it must be about a Nation working together. Mr. Belafonte further observes that a contributing factor to our being at the crossroads may be that our generation is missing true activists. In other words, the millions of Americans that will work at a grassroots level to help make the change we all claim to want. Viewed against this lens, we must realize that being active every four years, usually during a Presidential election for many of us, is not sufficient. Real change is made on all three levels of government—local, state and federal. I believe we must work on all three levels, and do so continuously. To do otherwise, is to fail to participate in the process that on a daily basis impacts all of our lives. If we fail to participate, we can not then complain that the change we seek did not come.

Real Progress

Recently, I had an opportunity to hear a very senior Senator speak. He told a powerful story on the US economy. On the morning before AIG would be taken over by the US government, a group of the top leadership, from each party, Senators and Congress people were summoned to a meeting with the President and Treasury Secretary, to discuss AIG and the broader economy. It became clear that unless AIG, and as we know now, a few others, were assisted, in other words saved, by the government, not only would they fail, our entire economy would become unhinged. Markets would have plunged, there would have been panicked runs on banks, and unemployment would certainly head toward the 25-35% “Great Depression” levels. The phrase “to big to fail”, for me, now was clearly defined.

Viewed properly against the backdrop of having to make critical decisions concerning institutions that were viewed as “to big to fail”, the only choice for this President and his administration, as they took office was to act decisively, and to make those actions big and bold. What then, have been the results of these actions? Recently I was provided the opportunity to attend a White House briefing on these matters. I admit to being impressed by the breadth of what this administration has been able to accomplish, especially given that it has only been 18 months. A few of these accomplishments:

The Economy
$750+B in TARP Funds. 1/3rd deployed.
Financial industry saved from ruin. Many regulatory changes made to make sure the possibility of a similar collapse in the future is lessened.
US Auto industry back on its feet
Reversal of a jobless trend—moved from losing 700,000 jobs a month to an economy that is currently adding jobs
Tax incentives for businesses to create jobs
Passage of a small business jobs bill and related lending fund

To be fair, the administration must do a better job of providing metrics as to how this $750B has been spent, its exact stimulative effect and the rate at which jobs will grow. This seems more a matter of communication and marketing, than flawed policy, so I think, given their stance as active listeners, they will improve in this area. This point about greater visibility and communication may also be made about many of the other changes being made by the administration. In short, tell us more, and more often.

Healthcare
Passage of healthcare reform that provides basic healthcare to most Americans
Additional money for preventative services
Control of escalating healthcare costs
Elimination of the lifetime benefit exclusion

Foreign Relations
Ending of the Iraq war
Steps toward ending the Afghanistan war
Continued negotiations in the Middle East
Actions, by the EPA and DEO, to reduce our dependence on foreign oils

Education
$4B for educational initiatives
Focus on those poorest performing 2000 US schools
Focus on HBCUs
Funding for more Americans to pursue higher education

As an aside, I think the administration would be smart to pick up Michelle Rhee, if she is not retained by the new Mayor, as DC schools chief. Her brand of innovative and outside of the box thinking may be just what America needs to make systemic change to its educational systems.

Viewed through an objective lens, a great deal of progress has been made by this administration in its first 18 months. I think the President would acknowledge that more work remains. However, even acknowledging more work remains, it does appear that the foundation has been laid for further change. So then what remains? How do we achieve the change we all seek? On a related point, and as Duvall Patrick recently asked “how do we (also) guard the change we have achieved”?

The Path Forward—Being the “We”

During the process of electing President Obama many of us were fond of the quote “we are the we, that we have been waiting for”. To many, it signified that this was a movement, and this movement belonged to all of us. I believe we got off to a great start by getting President Obama elected. I wonder, however, if we have lived up to the “We” part of this change process since. To be fair, many, many Americans have continued to work hard in their communities for advancement. What does it say, however, when in California, for example, there was only a ~20% voter turn out in the June primary. To me it says a great many of us stopped, satisfied with having an African American President. We said to ourselves, “I worked hard, and maybe I will work hard again in 2011 or 2012 when it is time to get the President re-elected, however, until that time I have lots of other areas in my life that require attention”. I do not want to understate the difficulties of every day life. Although our economy has improved, many Americans still struggle with mortgages, joblessness and meeting basic needs. That said, to fully realize the change we seek, we will have to dig deep, work even harder…sacrifice.

John F. Kennedy said “pray not for easy lives, but for the strength to meet life’s challenges”. We must now summon this strength. We must all focus on protecting the advances that have been realized. Additionally, we must achieve a great turn out in the midterm elections, and continue getting America back to work. We have to get back to the same sort of grassroots actions that got President Obama elected: registering voters, getting voters to polls and microfinance initiatives that fund campaigns. To return to the example of California, if we turn out at 20% again in the fall elections, as opposed to the 70%+ rate at which we turned out in 2008, many leaders who would have continued to advance this change will lose: (i) Barbara Boxer will not be Senator; (ii) Jerry Brown will not be Governor; and (iii) Kamala Harris will not be Attorney General. On a related note, if we fail to act decisively and as a collective, there will be no African Americans in the US Senate. Kendrick Meek, Democrat, Florida, will need a Nation to achieve victory. We can not allow any of the aforementioned to become realities.
The change we seek is squarely in our hands. Our actions, or inaction, as the case may be, will determine the future of a generation. Will we act? Will we lead? Will “we” be the “we” that we have been waiting for? Let’s not put the car in reverse and go backwards. Our future can be bright if we strive. Let’s stay in drive and head toward an even brighter tomorrow

(Why do) Things Fall Apart???

What is it all About
Today I write with a troubled soul. Those of you, who have read my blog or just generally know me, know that I am not exactly the sensitive type. I say that to ask you to bear with me as I try to express not just my own views, but also those of many friends and acquaintances, and maybe even a generation who undoubtedly share some of these same views. My subject today is love and relationships, and why are they, especially the later, proving to be so elusive to my generation. I say my generation. At this point, I am not sure if that is Gen X, Y or Z or some combination of all three. If it helps to have context, I am 41, single and never married.

So why is my soul troubled? You may have guessed from the title and first paragraph of this blog that I have recently experienced the ending of a relationship. This ending was surprising to many, including me, who saw great potential in this relationship. Of course I was, and I suppose still am, sad. Why couldn’t we overcome the differences that spelled the end of our relationship? I shall return to this point later in the blog. If this were all that was bothering me I doubt that I would be writing. After all I have my own circle of confidants for such sympathy and support. No, the source of my torment is bigger, far greater than just my own pain.

Recently, I have come across what seems an alarming number of people who have broken up, divorced or are in the process of the same. I was having drinks with some friends recently, when I came across an old friend. I immediately said “how are you, how is your husband”? She replied, sullenly, “Didn’t you know, we are getting divorced”. I was floored. I mean they have been together for more than a decade, have two beautiful kids and generally seemed like that family you hear about in the American dream. I have another set of friends who have been battling for several years, and at this point, appear only held together by a child they have in common. Believe it or not, I was pulled aside by a friend, in the same week as I ran into my divorcing friend with the same circumstances as my “battling” friends, seeking advice on whether to stay or go. Wow.

I think, then, my soul is troubled, not just because of my own relationship struggles, but because so many around me seem to be having the same, or worse trouble. Why? What has happened to our generation? I mean it seems we all want or are seeking love. The evidence is everywhere and has been written about extensively. In the music world for example, Prince sang about “everyone looking for the ladder”, India Arie crooned “I am ready for love” and my personal favorite, Sade, proclaimed herself “A soldier of love”. Death Cab for Cutie provides one of the more poignant examples of true love. In the song “I Will Follow You into the Dark” the group sings “if there is no one beside you when your soul embarks I will follow you into the dark”. It is basically one lover saying to another, who is dying, that I will commit suicide and join you in the “dark” rather than live in this world without you. I realize that this is a dramatic example, and I certainly do not advocate suicide (pro choice/pro life friends, this subject in another blog), but I think it makes a point about how powerful love can be and why many of us pursue it. Why then is love, and relationships, which are supposedly based on love, proving so elusive?

The Story behind the Stats

In the US one in every two marriages ends in divorce. For you statistics geeks that is 50%. In other words, the chances of a modern marriage lasting are no better than a coin flip—a silly game of chance. This rate is the highest it has been since 1970. A generation earlier the divorce rate in the US hovered slightly above 35%. Of course the rate varies based on many factors such as race, income, religion, etc, however, all in all it is a sobering statistic for those of us still “chasing the ladder”. Many more do not make it to marriage at all.

The reasons behind the statistics are plentiful:

Marriage
Lack of effort. People taking easy way out. If it does not work with minimal effort, the marriage is abandoned.
People set in their ways.
Starter marriages. I can get it right next time.
Failure to really know one another or share common values.
Lack of agreement on whether to have and/or how to raise children.
Money.
Infidelity.
Lack of communication and/or different styles of communication (Mars/Venus phenomenon).

Relationships/Getting to Marriage
Independence. I am good on my own. I do not need a mate to make a good living.
Alternatives. Couples deciding to just live together.
Career. Individuals wanting to “make it” prior to marriage or see marriage holding them back from advancement.
Lack of suitable candidates.
A related point to the preceding—either I will not wait on a suitable mate or do not believe I need one to have a child. Sperm bank and adoption seen as real options.
Global society makes it harder, not easier to connect. Yes, even with Facebook and Twitter.
In African American, and other minority communities, the disparities in education and career options between men and women.

The sad reality is that we now live in a “microwave society”. Often times if a relationship does not work or can not be fixed in an instant, it is over. We seem to want our relationships like we want our popcorn—when we want them and ready, to perfection, in four minutes or less. Unfortunately the real world does not work like that. Relationships are hard. They require lots of work. Nowadays it seems there is no longer any dependence of men and women. They can do without each other. Knowing this makes it easier to break off a relationship, often times over the smallest issue when either or both partners are not satisfied.

Of Consequences and Hope
In a simple sense, the consequences of failed marriages and relationships, more generally, are an increasingly cynical and bitter society—men and woman. A deeper look, however, reveals far more dire consequences: (i) people sad and losing hope; (ii) less true happiness; (iii) economic struggles; and (iv) a nation of children devoid or lacking family values. Of these consequences, the one that most troubles me most is (iv). Clearly there are many adults, who were the product of single parent homes, who are thriving and well adjusted. I was raised by a single mother. I think, all things considered, I am pretty well adjusted and generally happy. That said, there are far more folks negatively impacted by this issue (see education, employment and prison statistics to name a few). Assuming the parents are generally happy, and have decent communication, raising children is a task best shared by two. One, it is easier to divide the workload. Two, children need unique things from each parent as they grow and develop. Finally, with two parents there may be more money to provide for the family needs. As “republican” as it may sound, I would like to see a return to more two parent households, co-parenting, and yes, “family values”.

I do believe there is hope. As smart and as successful as our generation has been generally, I believe we can better figure out relationships and how to make them work. More tenacity is needed. Additionally, we have access to a greater number of resources than did past generations. Counseling, religion and friends and family are all sources of support for troubled times. If we use our intelligence, employ our tenacity and make good use of our resources, I believe we can do better.

Let me close by saying there is nothing wrong with being single. Relationships and marriage are not for everyone. There are plenty of single people who raise great kids, and God knows that there are many, many children who need good homes. For those that do pursue relationships, including marriage, mental readiness (including having dated sufficiently so as to be out of your system), willingness to work and faith in the possible or prerequisites.

Thanks for letting me speak. My soul is far less troubled than when I started writing. I remain hopeful, optimistic, and yes, still looking “for the ladder”. I hope you do too.

If We Must Die, Then Let It Be Like This: One for All and All for One—Random Thoughts on Preventative HealthCare

Unus Pro Omnibus, Omnes Pro Uno

Unus pro omnibus, omnes pro uno is a Latin phrase that means "One for all, all for one" in English. It has come to be the motto traditionally associated with the titular heroes of the novel The Three Musketeers written by Alexandre Dumas, père, first published in 1844. In the novel, it was the motto of a group of French musketeers named Athos, Porthos, Aramis and d’Artagnan who stayed loyal to each other through thick and thin. It is also a motto used by the company where I now work. As many of you know my company is dedicated to fighting the spread of Kidney disease and preventing patients from having to undergo dialysis.

In novel/movie, d’Artagnan when entering the final battle scene and almost certain death gathers the musketeers together and says:

“if we must die, if we must die, then let it be like this….One for All, and All for One”….

The movie inspires me not because it is another example of a hero being heroic in the face of grave danger. After all, that is what heroes do. I am inspired, rather, because d’Artagnan says if we “must” die, then let it be like this. Meaning, there is not necessarily nobility in dying or even in the way we die, rather there is nobility in, when faced with death or other perilous circumstances, we face them together or each for the other. In the example of my company, we don’t wish any patient to have to dialyze, but if they “must” dialyze, then we, as caregivers are in it with them. There is no underestimating the goodwill this generates. Switzerland, in fact, has adopted this phrase as their national motto. Aristotle would have surely embraced this concept for he believed for a society to be successful it had to be organized around a common purpose, and it was in the striving for the “good” in that purpose that created a state that would best serve the citizens.

Why This High Minded Musing

In two days I face my own perilous situation. I will have abdominal surgery for a condition called Chrons. Chrons is a disease, unfortunately with no cure, that causes inflammation, pain and discomfort in an individual’s intestinal region. If the condition does not respond to medication, then surgery is required. I have had the disease since I was 18 and this will be my second surgery. With only two surgeries in 20+ years I am one of the lucky ones. I am also lucky because I have access to a healthy lifestyle, good doctors and insurance. Sadly, even in America, these aforementioned assets are not readily available for all Americans. I suppose it is surgery, and perhaps the fear of one’s own mortality that surgery brings that has made me contemplative and motivated me to write down a few thoughts.

Private, Badge of Honor

For the 20+ years that I have had Chrons, I have kept it quiet, worn it like my own private badge of honor. My loyal supporters: a couple of college fraternity brothers, my best friend from law school, my uncle and my mother (who when we dealt with my first surgery spent more than 4 months by my bedside in the discovery, surgery and recovery phases of my illness). I suppose they, my family more generally, together with the woman in my life, can be viewed as my musketeers. When I found out that I would again require surgery, the words of d’Artagnan sprang to mind. I boldly stated to my mother that “if we must die, if we must die, then let it be like this—One for All and All for One”! She did not care for that and began quoting me numerous bible verses on faith. I had to tell her that I was not being fatalistic or even depressed. My faith, in my opinion, is unshakable. The poem “Invictus”, Latin for “unconquerable” hangs on my wall. I know God is the master of my faith, the captain of my soul. I was saying if I “must” die, and I do not think that is even a remote likelihood in this context, then let’s be in it together. Let you all be strong for me. Luckily, they, my entire family, teammates and friends have been greatly supportive. Why then had I kept this a secret for so long?

A Role Model Emerges

Growing up I played football, I wrestled, and I even fought. As an adult I spent over ten years on Wall Street as a lawyer and later an Investment Banker. None of these endeavors were for the timid. I felt if I showed weakness, I would be written off as weak. This perceived weakness would limit my advancement possibilities. I could not have that. I mean I am a hard charger, the Gordon Gecko of my group, maybe even a future Congressman or Senator. In many ways I have been a walking contradiction. Saying I want to make change in the world, impact the political process and do for those less fortunate. I long could have used my own disease and access to the assets I have to better raise awareness, but I did little. Perhaps I was paralyzed by fear or too selfish from the pursuit of those things I wanted to achieve. Whatever the case, I did not sacrifice or at least in the way that I should have sacrificed. This has changed meaningfully in the past two years. I have always been interested in our healthcare system. Two years ago I received the opportunity to work for a terrific company that specializes in dialysis. Not only do we treat patients, but educate, advocate and raise money for those less fortunate. The company has provided me many opportunities, for which I will be eternally grateful, to put my money, heart, soul and advocacy efforts behind the prevention of this disease that needlessly impacts so many.

My second inspiration also involves my company. Last week I found out that my boss and mentor also has Chrons. He relayed to me that he has been an active member of the Chrons Foundation for years, even traveling to speak on the subject. He is one of the highest ranking and most respected executives at our company. It really made me look at myself and ask “what have I done” to carry out the “One for All” motto in the society at large. After all, perhaps like Switzerland, to truly live this motto I can not just be concerned with my own musketeers, rather almost by definition don’t I have to do my part to impact and support greater society? I know that success, for me, will not be limited by my advocating for others with this disease. If it does, I reject that brand of success. I will be unafraid. I have been blessed with resources that can assist others and prevent suffering. I plan to use them. I thank this mentor, more than he knows, for modeling the way.

An Ounce of Prevention

The cases are well made for prevention. Whether Republican or Democrat I hope that one day our society will see that access to healthcare for all is a good thing. While everyone may not like the healthcare bill that was recently passed, it does have two very important attributes—greater access to healthcare for a greater number of Americans and more dollars for preventative healthcare. Many ask “why should I pay for someone else’s healthcare”? I say we pay either way. If a person, who has a condition that could have been detected early and treated with prevention, and instead of preventative care they are forced to receive treatment for often, then, catastrophic conditions at the ER, society bears a far greater cost in the later circumstance. County hospitals, and their ER rooms, where patients who do not have insurance go as a place of treatment of last resort, are funded by tax dollars. Simple math tells me that I would much rather pay for prevention than catastrophes. The data varies, but for the system, we know that this delta in preventative dollars and dollars spent on emergency treatment can be in the billions.

I do believe everyone should pay their fair share of healthcare costs. I like a formula based approach here. Perhaps a marginal dollar analysis that ranks the priorities in life: shelter, food, etc and says out of your after tax income and after food, clothing and shelter you must pay x% toward healthcare prior to paying for other items that are, as judged by society, of a lesser priority. Even under such a formula, it is likely that many Americans would not have healthcare or would be under-insured. Unless we say as a society that we are willing to let our citizens die in the streets when they are sick and can not pay, which I hope and pray to never be a part of such a society, then we must cover the gap. I, as a tax payer, would rather pay for more prevention and less emergency care, because it is less expensive and would actually save tax dollars.

Take me as a case in point. I am blessed to have good insurance. I get regular check ups, healthy living plans and medication that prevent the onset of more serious situations like surgery. If, for example, half of my preventative care had been taken away, and I had, over the last 20 years, two additional surgeries, those surgeries would have amounted to several hundred thousand dollars vs. the few thousand on the aforementioned preventative care measures. If I had not had insurance, that delta of those several hundred thousand dollars would have to be covered by the system when I went to the ER. Multiply that times millions of uninsured Americans and you will arrive at a serious threat to our system.

In the final analysis people die. We face a question of how they die and how we as a society want to express our nobility. Again I say, “if they must die” let’s make it fewer people, let’s make it less painful and more cost effective for us all. We can do this through a system of better preventative care. We can do this through a motto as simple as “One for All, All for One”.

Thank you everyone for your prayers and well wishes with my upcoming surgery. Hopefully by the grace of God and the hands of a very skilled surgeon at UCSF I will be fine. Let us all think about those who are not as fortunate as I. There is great nobility in that pursuit.

Obama’s Military Excellence

Obama’s Military Excellence, by Bryan R. Parker

President Obama’s early military performance has exceeded expectations. The President’s performance in Afghanistan, Iraq and now the Somali coast, shows that he has the judgment to lead our military. During his presidential run, Mr. Obama was routinely questioned regarding his readiness for being Commander in Chief. He responded, as evidenced by his vote against the Iraq war, that he had the requisite judgment to respond reasonably, effectively and with force when necessary. In his first 100 days he has, as promised, started a plan of withdrawal from Afghanistan, made a surprise visit to Iraq during his G20 summit to discuss transfer of power, and acted with great care and judgment in this most recent situation.

In the most recent situation in Somalia, President Obama said that force may be used “only if the captain’s (Richard Phillips) life was in imminent danger, and the opportunity was present for clear shots at each of the captors”. It is this nuanced, well reasoned approach that should earn President Obama his greatest applause. In contrast to the previous President, Mr. Obama did not rush in without regard to human life, instead he exercised appropriate caution, while being clear that in certain situations, force is indeed appropriate. With three shots, and in an instant, three captors were killed. The navy seals team, as directed by their President, restored order.

President Obama’s follow up, of course, will define his military legacy in the end. Now that we have escalated violence in the region, we can surely expect the pirates of the region to retaliate. To be consistent, and so these enemies will know that they will be met with force for these kind of actions, President Obama must remain committed to the region. At the time of this writing, the author has learned that four more ships had been captured. How Mr. Obama responds now will shape his evolving grade in Military 101.

Rome (I Mean Oakland) is Burning!

Rome (I Mean Oakland) is Burning
By Bryan R. Parker

Oakland—A City Adrift

It is with great sadness and a heavy heart that I write this blog. Four Oakland Police Officers lie dead—Mark Dunakin, Ervin Romans, Daniel Sakai and John Hege. These officers, victims of a senseless, violent attack carried out by Lovell Mixon, an ex-convict who was at the time of the killings being sought on violations of his parole. Today, our city, Oakland, honors these officers at a memorial at the Oracle Area. It is right that we celebrate these fallen heroes, these men who bravely defended our city and each of us as citizens.

Despite, what I am sure will be touching tributes, these men can never be brought back. For their families, friends and fellow officers, there can never be true solace. When taken together with Oakland’s rising overall homicide rate, tragedies like the Oscar Grant shooting, and the poor state of our economy we can see Oakland in its true context—a city on fire, seemingly adrift without a clear solution in sight.

The Meaning and Solutions

What then, does all of this mean for our city? Our Mayor would say that it is up to us, the citizens of Oakland, to stem this tide of violence and correct the city’s economy. I saw him speak these words at a recent State of the City Address. The Mayor is partially right. That is, we as citizens must rise to the occasion and assist in forming solutions to these pressing problems. However, the fact that the citizens of Oakland must be held to a higher standard of action, at this time, does not abdicate our Mayor of his responsibilities. Just, as in ancient Rome, there was no excuse for Nero fiddling while his city burned around him, so too is there no excuse for our Mayor not taking more decisive action at this time of crisis. Mr. Dellums must stand tall at this time, and offer concrete solutions and not just rhetoric. Mr. Dellums was a warrior for more than 20+ years as a congressman for our area, bringing tens of millions of dollars to California, and leading countless programs that helped our community. He must recall that spirit now!

I believe that the current situation, if left unchecked, has a high potential for escalating into further violence, thereby further tearing our city apart. Mr. Dellums must start by leading the creation of more jobs in Oakland and attracting a greater number of businesses to our city. As we have witnessed from history, lack of jobs and money are often precursors to crime, and crime in general is often a precursor to more violent crime. Given this trend, Mr. Dellums must issue a zero policy on violent crime—regardless of who carries it out. In addition, he must work with the state and federal governments to enforce stricter gun control. While I am a believer and defender of 2nd Amendment Rights, there is no justifiable reason for an ordinary citizen, as did Mr. Mixon, to possess an AK 47 (military assault rifle). Further, Mr. Dellums must work with those same groups to repair our broken parole and penal systems. Implementing programs like gps tracking of parolees, and having better programs in prison that ready ex-prisoners for re-entry into society are obvious starters.

The citizens and the police force must assist our Mayor in this enormous undertaking. Citizens can work with the Mayor and the Police, like the 100 Black Men of the Bay Area, of which I am a board member, are doing to find peaceful, non-violent solutions. Citizens, who wish to protest, must do so in a non-violent way. In addition, we should not celebrate people like Mr. Mixon as martyrs, rather recognize and appropriately deal with them as criminals. Lastly, even during this time of understandable sadness, our police force must carry out their duties with compassion and dignity. Any thoughts of retribution will ring hollow in the community and only serve to further divide us.

Takeaways
We must be ever mindful of the lessons of the great Ghandi who urged us “to be the change we seek”. We must come together and seek solutions as a community. If we do not, and continue to give in to hatred, anger, mistrust and even retribution, our city will be torn apart. Limb by limb, the very fabric that underpins the fiber of our city, will be torn to shreds. If and when this happens, we risk anarchy, increased violence and further economic despair. If however, we rally together, support our Mayor as he implements concrete solutions, and do our parts to be agents of change, our city can climb out of this tragedy—better, stronger, wiser, and ready to move forward and capitalize on the great potential that is Oakland.

J. Alfred Smith Jr.—the Right Pastor for Our Times

J. Alfred Smith Jr.—the Right Pastor for Our Times
by Bryan R. Parker

After much thought, deliberation and prayer (yes prayer), I am guided to support the Reverend J. Alfred Smith Jr. as the next Senior Pastor of Allen Temple Baptist Church. I am convinced that Reverend Smith Jr. is the right man, at the right time, to lead our church spiritually and otherwise, as we seek to build upon the great legacy of Allen Temple in the community, and move our church to the next level. I understand that my recommendation, this choice and indeed this confirmation, should it take place, has been fraught with controversy. Below, I share of few of my thoughts as to why I believe we should support Pastor Smith, Jr. as our next Senior Pastor.

We just completed a week of town hall style meetings in which the congregation was able to interact with and ask questions of Pastor Smith, Jr. In response to this author’s question of whether Pastor Smith, Jr. would still be the best candidate for Allen Temple even if his name were other than “Smith”, Pastor Smith Jr. provided two telling responses. One, as will be discussed below, he set forth the positive aspects of his association with his father. Two, he said that he was not the right person to answer the question. This question, was a question for God, and for the congregation in their faithfulness to answer. He asked us to pray, as would he, reasoning that God would guide us to the correct choice. Here we are reminded, that despite being in a season of elections, the selection of a Senior Pastor is a bit different. The selection of a Senior Pastor is not a perfectly secular process. The old adage that we “walk by faith” must guide us in instances such as the current one. It is in his answer to this very pointed question that we see Pastor Smith, Jr.’s truth spiritual depth.

Pastor Smith, Jr, makes reference to the “four callings of man” from Reinhold Niebuhr. Niebuhr, the evangelical scholar, I believe in his seminal work “Moral Man and Immoral Society” writes of four callings of man. The calling that is most relevant here is the calling of man to the church. I believe Pastor Smith, Jr. has been called by God to lead our church at this time. As a testament to his faith, I also believe Pastor Smith, Jr. is ready to head this call.

How then do we answer the charge by some of nepotism. Nepotism is defined as patronage bestowed or favoritism shown on the basis of family a relationship, as in business and politics. Some have asserted charges of nepotism in the potential selection of Pastor Smith, Jr., given that is father has been Senior Pastor of Allen Temple for more than 40 years. I do not believe the potential elevation of Pastor Smith, Jr. is a case of nepotism. I believe, rather, as I will set forth more fully below, that Pastor Smith, Jr.’s candidacy stands on his own merits. That said, Pastor Smith, Jr, has benefited from his relationship with his father to be sure. In this instance, this benefit is not a bad thing, and in fact, not only inures to benefit of Pastor Smith, Jr., but also to the church as a whole. To be more specific, Pastor Smith, Jr. by virtue of his relationship, and growing up in Allen Temple, understands, probably more deeply than any candidate under consideration, the traditions, mores and psyche of Allen Temple. He has also learned how to build and use relationships in the broader community for the benefit of the church. Moving forward, clearly his closeness with the Senior Smith will aid in his smooth transition, and in buttressing him on any of the aspects of the position for which he might not be quite ready. There is real merit to Allen Temple having a pastor who understands its history, traditions and relationships, and who can hit the ground running. Certainly such a situation lends itself toward increasing the odds that we reach our goals, both spiritual and secular, with greater speed and more certainty. We must still ask ourselves, what makes Pastor Smith, Jr. the man to shoulder such an awesome responsibility.

The answer to why Pastor Smith, Jr. is the right man, for right now, to lead our church has been shaped over a lifetime of service. Pastor Smith, Jr., as discussed, has grown up in Allen Temple. He has directly had a hand in shaping several of the ministries of our church including: home visits, elderly care, AIDS, credit union/repair, drugs and alcohol and prison. Over the past six years he has served as Senior Pastor of Antioch Baptist Church in San Jose, Ca. As Marvin Sapp sings in the song “Never Would Have Made It”, these six years have made Pastor Smith, Jr. “stronger, wiser, better”. During his time as Senior Pastor of Antioch Baptist, he has added real depth and weight to his preaching. He has also continued his commitment to the ministries. Further, Pastor Smith, Jr. has demonstrated that he has the kind of energy and commitment to empowering the next generation of leadership that will be required to not only keep Allen Temple healthy and thriving, but to also raise it to the next level. His openness to additional forms of communication—blogs, the Internet, Facebook and other forms of digital media, show that Pastor Smith, Jr. is a pastor with the openness to new ideas and approaches. In my opinion, it is this kind of openness that will result in a greater number of new, and younger members, and that will foster a spirit of ownership and participation that our church badly needs.

How then will Pastor Smith, Jr. bring about this vision. To be fair, exactly what Pastor Smith, Jr.’s vision is for the future, remains a bit unclear as he was deliberately vague in the recent series of town meetings on the topic. Comforting, however, was the fact that Pastor Smith, Jr., if appointed, would first call for 40 days for prayer and reflection, where we would both ask God for those things we desire for our church and spend time “listening” to God guide us as to where he wants us to go. It is through such a thoughtful process argues Pastor Smith, Jr. that our vision will become clear, just as it was, at one time, for Moses and his people. He recites that not only did Moses hear the “vision”, but so did the people. I believe this approach shows Pastor Smith, Jr. is intelligent, yet humble. Pastor Smith, Jr. would have us further complement the above approach with engaging in a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis for the church. I applaud the rigor of this approach. I believe before Allen Temple can experience true success, we must fist be honest with ourselves about where and what we are as a church. Then and only then, may we plot a deliberate course toward our future. Where this secular approach falls short, I have faith that Pastor Smith, Jr. will fill in the gaps through his faith, spirituality and leadership.

Despite the foregoing, there will be those who remain miffed at the process by which this selection took place. I would urge anyone with this view to please separate the candidate and the process, after all the candidate followed the process, not created it. Second, we elected a pulpit committee who has spent countless hours judging these candidates against objective criteria to set forth the best one for our consideration. The question of why only one finalist versus three is being presented to the membership of Allen Temple is one for the American Baptist College, Progressive Convention. Allen Temple is a member of this convention. The Progressive Convention clearly sets forth how this process is to be carried out. This process is based on statistical data of several churches. Our Pulpit Committee followed the process set forth faithfully. I urge people who otherwise feel that Pastor Smith, Jr. is the right candidate for our church, to separate him from any views on the process, because to do otherwise is to potentially end up with a new pastor, yet have a divided church. We know from history that a house divided will turn on and potentially destroy itself. I believe if we all line up behind Pastor Smith, Jr., should he be elected, Pastor Smith, Jr., Allen Temple and each of us stands the best chance of success for creating and enjoying a great church. Even should we fall a bit short on this account, I have faith that Pastor Smith, Jr. will unite us. As the Lord told Peter “Pastor my sheep”. The Lord meant all sheep, not just the sheep Peter liked, or those who agreed with Peter. I believe Pastor Smith will embrace and lead us all.

In uncertain times such as these, where among other things, lack of money and loss of housing and jobs are leading people to question their faith, we need a leader who can both feed our souls and help us build our communities back to prosperity. We need a 21st century leader who is energetic, committed and accessible. We must have a leader, a Senior Pastor who has the vision and desire to lead not just some, but all members of Allen Temple. That leader should be J. Alfred Smith, Jr.

To those still struggling with the decision, pray, then allow yourself to walk by faith.

Turn Out the Lights, The Party is Over, by Bryan R. Parker

I woke up this morning full of vigor. I had the unexplainable feeling one sometimes gets that lets you know its going to be a good day. I thought, “was it a big new job”, “would I win the lottery”, “make plans for an exciting vacation”? Turns out it was none of those things, but something much bigger, both for me and the country. Around 3pm pdt today I learned that former Presidential Candidate John Edwards would endorse Barack Obama. I was excited.

I ran to tune into CNN only to find an interview running of Hillary Clinton, while a crowd waited in Michigan for Senators Obama and Edwards to arrive. Despite her largely hallow victory last night in West Virginia, Senator Clinton had vowed to fight on until a nominee was finally determined. This was the sentiment reported in this morning’s papers. Imagine my surprise to see an interview with a largely conciliatory Senator Clinton saying she respected Senator Obama, thought the party would unite, and ultimately vote, for the eventual nominee, and that, should it not be her, she would do everything in her power to help that person win the general election. I was shocked to see this level of honest resignation, especially in a person who had vehemently pledged to continue fighting even as the odds stacked more and more against them. It was not until Wolf Blizter chimed in and said this interview had been taped earlier that I really realized the race had ended, and everyone, including Senator Clinton, knew it. That Edwards would momentarily endorse Baraack was just icing on the cake. For those who have watched Monday Night Football long enough to remember, I was reminded of the song Don Meredith use to sing when the game was out of reach for one team or the other “turn out the lights the party is over…”.

Yes, the party is over for Senator Clinton. It is time for us to unite. That includes, in my opinion, reaching out to Senator Clinton for her support. Senator Clinton has been a warrior in this campaign, and although she fractured some feelings, and wounded some egos, I think we would be remiss, as a party, if the party does not reach out and include her in the fight against Senator McCain.

I am so glad that the feeling I had this morning, the feeling that today would be a good day, turned out to be true. We stand at an historic moment in history. An African American stands on the doorstep of the Democratic nomination for President. An African American, an who is first an American, who is uniquely positioned to bring change to the country, and who has a very good and realistic chance of becoming President of the United States is in and of itself exciting. We can not, however, allow ourselves to settle for this accomplishment. Such a victory would itself be hollow.

The prize here is the Presidency, and bringing the one leader who is capable of bringing true change and uniting our country, must be the goal. Our hardest days are ahead. We will need to continue raising vast sums of money, walking the streets, calling voters and generally working hard. I think, together, we can accomplish this goal.

To me, the luckiest part of this day, is seeing our country at such an historic inflection point, the excitement by people of all races and creeds for the political process, and knowing that, while small, I, and many others like me, get to continue playing a part in this process. For that I am grateful.

Friendly Fire—How a One Time Insider Threatens to Undo an Historic Process, Jeremiah Wright, Simply Wrong, by Bryan R. Parker

Friendly Fire a term originally adopted by the United States military, is fire from allied or friendly forces, as opposed to fire coming from enemy forces or enemy fire. This term may best be seen as an oxymoron. That is “fire” whether coming from allied or enemy forces is still deadly. In this context, there is no real concept of friendly fire. I submit that Senator Obama has been hit by “fire”, and the source of that fire, friendly or allied is starting to be damaging, heading toward being deadly, to the most promising Presidental campaign of my lifetime. I for one, would like to see it stop.

I am very saddened by the recent words and appearances of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. It seems, for some inexplicable reason, that this man simply will not fade from the public consciousness. I am puzzled as to why, especially when he knows full well the impact his words and appearances are having on the campaign of Senator Obama. I share Senator Obama’s outrage and sadness that Reverened Wright would pick now to take center stage in a debate that is not about Reverened Wright. It is not even about Senators Clinton, Obama or McCain, but as Senator Obama states it is about “[P]eople wanting some help in stabilizing their lives and securing a better future for themselves and their children…” This is the fundamental message of change of Senator Obama’s campaign. This message of change should be the central point in our debate. Not the silly comments of an aging pastor who is fighting his own irrelevance.

If it is not about Jeremiah Wright wanting to maintain his relevance, what then? Is he mad that Senator Obama had to distance himself from the reverend? Senator Obama was right to distance himself from Reverend Wright. He was right to distance himself, not for political gain as Reverend Wright asserts, but because the comments of Reverend Wright were and are wrong. These comments are divisive and antithetical to the politics of change and unity. The change that Senator Obama promises will be beneficial to all, to be sure, but especially blacks and other disenfranchised groups. As such, shouldn’t Reverend Wright be embracing this message, and supporting the campaign, even if it means, as it does here, taking a backseat and staying out of the limelight? If Senator Obama made any mistake it was not denouncing Reverend Wright sooner and more strongly. In his previous remarks he said “he could no more denounce Reverend Wright than he could his white grandmother”. I respectfully submit that someone who says “God damn America” and after the September 11 bombings stated that it was a case of “American chickens coming home to roost” can and should be denounced, and in the strongest terms possible. Senator Obama may therefore rightly be accused of being too loyal, however, this still does not excuse the actions of Reverend Wright.

Jeremiah Wright said in a recent sermon that “[he] is sick of Negros who do not get it….being a black man in America, controlled by rich white people is hard”. Yes, I agree, being black in America is still hard, but getting better. If the Reverend Wright “got it” he would not be so quick to provide fodder to the Clinton and McCain campaigns. Senator Obama has undertaken a task some thought was impossible—becoming the first African American President of the United States. Senator Obama has done a fine job. Reverend Wright is also correct in that blacks in this country still have to be a step better to achieve acknowledgement and success. Senator Obama has been better. Now, when he can use all the support he can get, especially from the African American community, one should not expect that another African American, especially one who claims to love and care for Senator Obama, would give fodder to the opposition. The opposition, Senators Clinton and McCain, are clearly looking for anything they can to undermine this historic campaign. It is against this back drop that I am reminded of one of my favorite Gospel Songs—“Hide Me”. The song asks God to hide me from the enemy. Near the end, the song says “hide me o Lord, even if the enemy is me”. Reverend Wright should heed the words of this song, exit center stage and allow this historic campaign to get back to the real issues—change for America and its citizens.

Allow me to close with Galatians 5:7 “Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth”. The bible teaches us that the path of the righteous man is beset on all sides be treachery and the tyranny of evil men. Galatians reminds us that even when the path to victory is impeded, we still have an obligation to stay faithful to the right path. Fortunately, we have a candidate, Senator Barack Obama that gets this concept. I praise Senator Obama for continuing to rise above these politics of negativity and staying focused on his message of bringing change for our country. Thank you Senator for not succumbing to this “friendly fire”. We can only hope that those engaging in this “friendly fire” get the message as well.

Spitzer—A Modern Lesson in Hubris, Bryan R. Parker

Upon reading about the events of this week as they relate to now former NY Governor Spitzer, one might be quick to laugh this saga off as another politician fallen from grace. One might ask what is the big deal with one more sex saga. The NY Post playfully coined him the “Luv Gov”. Whether it is the Luv Gov or “Client 9” it is clear that this public fall from grace holds an important lesson.

The Danger of Arrogance and Hubris
Most of us are familiar with the term Hubris from Greek Mythology. In many myths, mortals who display arrogance and hubris end up learning, in quite brutal ways, the folly of this overexertion of ego. Edith Hamilton, writes that “the Greek concept of hubris refers to the overweening pride of humans who hold themselves up as equals to the gods. Hubris is one of the worst traits one can exhibit in the world of ancient Greece and invariably brings the worst kind of destruction.” There is the story of young Phaëthon, who pridefully believes he can drive the chariot of his father, the Sun, loses control and burns everything in sight before Zeus knocks him from the sky with a thunderbolt. For the ancient Greeks, any type of hubris or arrogance, no matter the circumstance, is an attitude that no god will leave unpunished.

Sadly, Mr. Spitzer’s situation in “NY Sex Gate” is analogous. He captured the public trust by campaigning as a crusader against crime and the evil ways of Wall Street. He declared himself a man of family values. Little did the people of NY know that Client #9 would go on to spend more that $80,000 on prostitutes during his time as governor.

Mr. Spitzer in apologizing states that “I acted in a way that violated by own sense of right and wrong…and violated my duty to my family”. I think Mr. Spitzer’s actions have violated more than just his sense of right and wrong, they have violated the objective sense of those concepts. I also believe he had a higher duty to the people of NY. I know the former wizards of Wall Street he “brought to justice” are rolling in the aisles at the falling of this former crusader. One commentator, commenting on the situation states “yes he was wrong, but he is human”. Yes he is human, with all the accompanying frailty. The point, however, is that he sought out and accepted the public trust. In doing so he committed to a higher standard of decency. This is the lesson to be learned. This lesson is particularly relevant in this season. That is, do not accept the public trust unless you are prepared to accept not only the power of the mantle, but also its responsibility.

We have all learned time and time again, that the lessons of Hubris apply to us all and secrets we think are secrets in the dark, become embarrassing lessons and falls from grace when they come to light.

Hillary Clinton and the Kitchen Sink—Desperation Politics that Threaten to Divide a Party

In watching the events of the last two weeks, I am reminded of a scene from one of my favorite movies “Any Given Sunday”. In this scene, the coach, Al Pacino, is addressing his team as they struggle to make the playoffs to face their dreaded rivals. He says “[m]en we are at war, we are in hell right now, if we don’t come together, put aside our differences and play as a team, we will be torn apart….piece by piece, limb by limb”. Even if you are not as much of a sports fan as me, the power of this analogy should be clear. We are at a crossroads in the Democratic Party. After 8 years of a very bad, on many levels, Bush, Republican White House, we, the Democratic Party should be poised to seize the Presidency. However, rather than standing united behind one candidate, the party is on the verge of being thrown into disarray by the desperate politics of Senator Clinton. If we can not find a way to come together, and quickly, I fear we are the ones who may be torn apart, and if so, the Presidency, which is well within our reach, may also be torn from our grasp in the process.

The 3am Call
Hillary’s now famous commercial that aired just days before the contests in Texas and Ohio. Hillary suggests, by showing images of people’s children sleeping, that if a call to action came in the middle of the night, presumably a terrorist based emergency, that she is the best candidate to take that phone call. Setting aside her deplorable scare tactics, I am wondering, hopefully with the rest of the Democratic Party and nation, what makes Hillary so qualified to answer that call. The fact that she was the first lady? The fact that she has been a Senator slightly longer than Senator Obama? When pressed on this question, she struggled to give one tangible example of where she has been the central leader in a crisis, and managed and solved that crisis situation. The question of readiness to answer the 3am call may perplex any current candidate. It may be the case that only someone who has served as President and received such calls, has the experience to authoritatively say they credibly know what to do in such a situation. That being the case, I believe it comes down to judgment. The kind of judgment I think we need is someone who stands in the face of a challenge, and against the great weight of his peers, as Senator Obama did in first opposing the Iraq war, and has the courage to stand up and say when something is wrong. Someone who has not only the desire, but the courage and the judgment to lead.

Legal Challenges Abound
Senator Clinton first challenged the rules about where hotel workers in Nevada could vote. She did this in the wake of the strongest union in Nevada endorsing Senator Obama. She did this after the rules had been agreed to more than a year prior. She threatened to challenge the caucus rules in Texas when it became clear she would not fair as well under that format. She now threatens to sue, or otherwise challenge, agreed upon rules regarding the Michigan and Florida primaries. Sanctions against this states were imposed by the Democratic leadership, agreed to and known by all candidates. Now, Senator Clinton wants to spend time, energy and most importantly money re-opening this issue. As an African American, the last thing I want to do is disenfranchise anyone, however, we do have rules for a reason. If these are not followed there are consequences. These consequences were known to the states of Michigan and Florida, as well as to Senators Clinton and Obama. Now desperate for voters and delegates, Senator Clinton seeks to challenge these previously understood rulings. Other than declaring herself the victor in those states, I don’t remember Senator Clinton raising issues of fairness or voters being dis-enfranchised at the time. This position, at the least, seems disingenuous.

Senator Obama as VP
Senator Clinton suggested that Senator Obama would make a good VP and she might consider such a proposition. I applaud Senator Obama for his response, and frankly for stating the obvious, which is that he is running for President, and second, when does the person in second place in a race offer the VP job to the person in first place. That is audacity, and not the good kind. A last footnote here. If Senator Obama is not ready to answer the 3am call as President, why would he make a good VP, where he stands next to be President should something happen to the then sitting President.

Ferraro and Spitzer
Earlier this week, Ms. Ferraro, a prominent Clinton fundraiser, said "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," she said. "If he was a woman [of any race], he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept." My apologies, but I have seen few instances, and none involving a person seeking the Presidency of the United States, where being African American is an advantage. Quite the contrary, I think Senator Obama’s impressive rise has come almost completely without playing the race card. His credentials, Harvard Law, University of Chicago Law Professor, Illinois State Senator and US Senator, his positions on the issues and the powerful way he can use his rhetoric to inspire millions, I think, is why he is in “this position”. The fact that Senator Clinton has not rebuked, and summarily dismissed Ms Ferraro after such remarks, to me, shows she is willing to stop at nothing to tarnish Senator Obama as she attempts to regain the party lead. By contrast, senior foreign policy aid Samantha Power was dismissed from the Obama campaign for calling Senator Clinton a monster.

On an unrelated note, the conspiracy theorist in me can not help but wonder about the timing of the Spitzer indictment (separate blog on this topic). Very strange to me that this announcement and resignation has dominated the news at a time where Senator Obama won two more states, and captured enough delegates to erase any gains made by Senator Obama on March 4.
Whether or not one agrees with Ms. Power, it is clear that Senator Obama means what he says when he states that he will not promote politics as usual, nor tolerate those that do. Senator Obama is a unifier and seeks to unite the party at time when is badly needs unification. One would hope that Ms. Clinton would realized that her actions are not shifting the election in her favor, and are in fact, dividing a party that should be celebrating and unifying behind the only Democratic candidate that can take the White House in the fall. To do otherwise is to engage in a futile exercise of Hubris, and to further waste valuable capital that can be put to work in the general election.