The Atlantic - Latest Comments in The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

rikyrah — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:00:04 -0000

Juba and Ms. Perez,

It doesn't make sense to me. If you want Black folk to have representation, then shutting out the Representatives of majority Black districts doesn't make any sense. Those Blacks deserve the right to have their voices heard. They probably said, ' well Cohen isn't legitimate'. Well, the man was RE-ELECTED in a majority Black district. You don't think those Black folks knew what they were doing? And, I don't care if the gentleman from Louisiana is a Republican, for these two years those folks deserve representation in the CBC.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Juba — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 18:14:47 -0000

Correction

"Im SUPER disappointed in the stance of the CBC against non-BLACKS representing majority black districts."

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Juba — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 18:13:56 -0000

Charles, Rikyrah, Ms. Perez...

Im SUPER disappointed in the stance of the CBC against non-members representing majority black districts.

Its that old school mentality of promoting visible symbols instead of dealing with on the ground realities, I think.

Me, I'd rather have a Vietnamese Rep. in the CBC working to improve the lives of his mostly black constituency than a Wesley Snipes complected Rep. whose constituency are white West Virginia conservatives...if I had to choose of course.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

anna perez — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:54:02 -0000

Ditto Rik, both should be members of the CBC. Perhaps the CBC and the CRIC (civil rights industrial complex) have forgotten that "its not the man (or the woman), its the plan." I've seen, up close and personal, many examples of the fecklessness of the CBC, the considerable abilities of many of its members notwithstanding. Obama will be a Black man who is president of all of America, so he cannot carry water for one group of us. So let's have some "change we can believe in" over at the CBC.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

rikyrah — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:34:57 -0000

Half of them need to be replaced. They are beginning to be called on things, hence the Congressional Black Caucus Report Card, which was used by new Rep. Donna Edwards to hound Albert Wynn and call him on the carpet.

The guy from Louisiana and Cohen from TN BOTH need to become members of the CBC of some sort. The CBC needs to reach out to them, because their constituents should be represented in the CBC.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

anna perez — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:11:41 -0000

Agree with you MasterPlan on the reasons for the continuing need for the CBC except can we call those reasons by their real name--racism and its residual effects. Race has never been a problem in this country, racism has been and still is a flat iron on our country. There is no "race card," but folks play the racism card all the time. Obama never had to (and of course never could) transcend his own race, he did however help many Americans transcend their own racism.

This is not just semantics. Racism has been used to advance the economic, political and social agendas of the dominate group for centuries but being Black, Asian, Native American or Hispanic has never been the "problem." (Neither for that matter is being White.) Problems, of course, require solutions, but what pray tell is the "solution" to being born non-White? How we have treated each other, however, ostensibly because of our respective race has been the problem, ( we are still dealing with the residual effects) and in many cases, still is. We can't change the former, we can change the later.

Try this exercise: every time you read or hear the terms "race problem," "race card," "racial insensitivity," "history of race" or any of the other politically correct terms used by the media to describe what Condoleezza Rice calls "our nation's birth defect"

substitute what we are really talking about, racism. I think you may fine it a bit easier to come up with solutions to our real problem.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

MasterPlan — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:58:05 -0000

If the Civil Rights Industrial Complex fails to adapt it will become increasingly irrelevant to and distanced from the constituency it purports to aid. Look at the poor NAACP.

While the CBC report card leaves alot to be desired, contrary to what the MSM would have us believe the election of Obama DID NOT rectify disparities in health, wealth, education, income, and incarceration. There is plenty work to be done in that regard and as much as I support the election of Obama, he is no progressive.

While Americans have an astounding proclivity for "See No Evil, Hear No Evil" I still think there is no way that Americans can be this ignorant. Do we remember Katrina?

Of course, everything is not about race but race sho' nuf' still matters. Emotionally, aspiring for racial transcendence is an admirable and appropriate aim. In terms of house cleaning, self-reflection and correction within the community is necessary, we much appreciate that "The Man" is not to blame for all that ails us. However, these incessant assertions that we are in some post-racial time is WAY premature. And the notion that in some way the CBC is going to be a preferred constituency of Obama remains to be demonstrated. I am not convinced that CBC has more muscle now because Obama is in office. In Obama, I think the CBC will get a better hearing from a more enlightened ear. The real question is, who is Obama beholden to?

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Kristen — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:24:23 -0000

Sorry guys, i meant "I don't WANT to divert" in that last paragraph....my proofreading skills are lacking today.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Kristen — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:21:55 -0000

@Diane:

"The Civil Rights Industrial Complex (great term) reminds me of what we saw play out amongst different generations of women with Hillary, with some older feminists trying 18 variations on "isn't it enough that she is a woman?" and younger feminists responding "uh, no" and both sides shaking their heads at how those people just didn't get it."

Thank you for mentioning this. I couldn't agree more. I see similarities between the CBC (and perhaps the NAACP) and NOW and the need or non-need for both. I say this as a (young-ish) former card-carrying member (and former student leader) of NOW, who has been disenchanted with the organization for several years.

I don't divert from the post's original intent; I just see it as an interesting parallel. Is the real question the issue of trying to fight new (or "more evolved") battles with old arguments? A mistake both orgs. make, IMO.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Tyler — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:16:20 -0000

@Scott, If you come out of the bunker, I may end up taking your place.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Scott — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:48:05 -0000

...so I'm NOT crazy. Hmm, might be time to come up out of the bunker :)

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Tyler — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:43:55 -0000

@Scott: As hard as I'm trying - because I really want to believe in the Dems! - I cannot disagree with anything you just said, making this morning all the more depressing.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Scott — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:40:28 -0000

"You're right though; the Democrats shouldn't have gone all out with the bluff and bluster if they're not prepared to back it up. They're clearly not and that's another sign of weakness."

Tyler, I agree, but add this...what else are the Dems in this Congress, historically reviled, but bluff and bluster? How many time-wasting, utterly useless non-binding resolutions did they pass after Pelosi took her position?

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Tyler — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:17:37 -0000

@Deborah: MSNBC (via AP) is reporting this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28507873/

@SG: I see what you're saying, but from what I've read the Dems do, in fact, have some legal ground to stand on here. Slate and a few others (I cannot remember them off the top of my head) have laid this out. Though, to be fair, I'm not a lawyer and cannot say if these arguments have merit.

You're right though; the Democrats shouldn't have gone all out with the bluff and bluster if they're not prepared to back it up. They're clearly not and that's another sign of weakness.

In the end, you're probably right here, but it's no less frustrating.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Charles — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:04:38 -0000

Pretty sure Diane Feinstein is *not* a member of the CBC - they've been getting a lot of flak over the past couple of years for refusing to let in non-blacks representing majority black districts. If this were the 1960s or 70s, I could understand that (since the political context would suggest they were reps put in by the party, etc., instead of by the people), but it just doesn't make sense today. They could probably build a lot more support for the issues the CBC deems important if they brought in a broader coalition. Like, I could easily see how a white representative from parts of NYC with a large black minority would want to join up and fight for progressive urban policies.

As for superdestroyer's argument that the only thing that will matter in the future is Democratic primaries, I cannot fathom that that would be true for more than one cycle. Either the Republican Party would revive, something would take its place, or the Democratic Party would move far enough to the right (to welcome in former Republicans) that the Greens would become a genuine force on the left. Now, maybe we'll enter a period of Democratic dominance, where the Republicans can't ordinarily get more than 49% of the national vote (basically the rut the Democrats were stuck in since '68), but I just don't see the complete collapse of a multi-party system.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Micheline — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:51:12 -0000

sgwhiteinfla,

The Burris matter is distinct from Powell. One is that no one is questioning Burris' qualifications, the dispute has to do with returns. Two is that there parts of the constitution that are conflict with one another. It's a question on priority.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

sgwhiteinfla — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:41:53 -0000

Tyler

In this case the problem isn't the seating. The problem was the bluff and bluster BEFORE the appointment about not seating someone. They weren't on solid legal ground and never should have said such a thing knowing they might have to back down. This is a lose lose situation and politically the right move is to seat him and move on so its out of the news. As spineless as I know the Dems are this was not a case of that.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Deborah — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:40:26 -0000

Tyler, are you just predicting? They do seem to be trying to stick to their guns still; NYT just mentions that you can't bring a stroller to the inauguration, nothing on caving for Burris.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Tyler — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:32:47 -0000

And in other news: The Democrats once again prove they are a spineless group of pussies and are agreeing to seat Burris with out so much as a fight. Weak! Weak! Weak! Weak!

I guess I shouldn't be surprised given the Democrats almost complete and total inability to stand up to Bush and the Republicans these past 8 years.

If it's even slightly controversial, the Democrats run and hide.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Deborah — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:30:59 -0000

Oh yeah, and some sort of conservative party will be back to seriously challenge the Dems by 2016. Even by 2012. '10 is looking a bit less likely as possible RNC leaders flail around in the "we shall embrace the twittering!" and "I have 3000 friends on Facebook" battles they seem to be embracing. And if they don't go ahead and bury Reagan--the person about whom you unite your party shouldn't be out of office for a generation, and dead.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

wallyz — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:29:56 -0000

I think the issue is that "Black" interests have stopped being monolithic on any practical level, the same way that there are no monolithic "white" interests. I think that we will start to see more of the multi-ethnic Urban vs suburban boundary being highlighted and the Black white boundary being de-emphasized.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Deborah — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:25:27 -0000

The Civil Rights Industrial Complex (great term) reminds me of what we saw play out amongst different generations of women with Hillary, with some older feminists trying 18 variations on "isn't it enough that she is a woman?" and younger feminists responding "uh, no" and both sides shaking their heads at how those people just didn't get it.

Burris and Rush's antics certainly throw this into sharper relief; maybe it will be changing. (One of the unflattering bits of Obama's political history was backing a black member of the corrupt Chicago machine over a white reformer friend of his, several years back, failing to make waves. I think he's now more willing to make waves, though working within the existing power structure is definitely a trademark of his style.) This time around, the attempts to claim that the only issue with Burris is that he is black just aren't working--it's not like the Senate would have embraced anyone else that Blago nominated, and pretending that race is the issue here makes the "race card for every occasion" aspect all too evident.

Passing on an observation I saw somewhere yesterday: When this broke last week the general response was "Burris's record shows he is highly qualified and a great choice; who knew Blago could be so sneaky as to pick a qualified person?" With the help of Burris's unfinished tomb and various interviews, in which he is the most qualified person in all of Illinois, including all the people smart enough to turn down a Blago appointment ahead of him, plus Rush's race carding, he has transformed into "just the kind of guy you'd expect Blago to appoint."

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Scott — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:14:37 -0000

-superdestroyer

Oh, and I forgot to add...if the only important elections are going to be democratic primaries, we're all in deep, deep trouble. This past year bore out in stark contrast that the DNC's methods of running elections is both deeply flawed and, from where I was sitting, lacking any real control at all.

First, the "civil rights industrial complex" (love that phrase too) insistence on proportional allocation of delegates, which if memory serves is a hold-over from 1984 almost rendered the Dems in twain. It's one of those policies that sounds good, makes everyone feel good, but in practice works like shit.

Second, the whole superdelegate debacle. I've long wondered how a party that's commonly, right or wrong, suffered from the "elitist" label can even fathom having a system of unelected party insiders having so much sway. It was almost comical on a daily basis to watch the ebbs and flows of Obama's and Hillary's camps trying to woo the, let's face it, aristocracy of the DNC.

Third, add to the fact that the DNC hands-down laid down the rules for their primaries. Michigan and Florida decided not to play nice, but were not held to the established standards. Watching the entire televised meeting where they argued to come to a compromise, I kept thinking...and these people want to run the country???

Granted, we've got little place to go but up, so I'm not shilling for the GOP, but damn...

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

tobby — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:01:31 -0000

I think the fundamental problem here is not the CBC; it is the lack of previous interest of blacks in those districts to hold these clans in check. We will be naive if not outright stupid to think that the CBC members will act differently from their colleagues in the special interest driving Capitol.

Our problem is that we always hold others (white) to fire, while pretend not to see the enemy/enabler from within. Thank God to Obama who makes us see the light of day. In the history of CBC, underperforming member never loss reelection because black folks are just constantly focusing on the last war. Remember CBC embracing FOX news while Fox was literally lynching Barack. The reason: fuck the constituents, they will still vote for us. It is this simple reason why I dearly love the COLOR OF CHANGE. Because they know why our problems are not seriously tackle by congress is because our CBC members don't see the "urgency of now." At the moment, they serve us far better than CBC. I therefore call for the terminal and corrosive death of the CBC forever.

Re: The future of the Congressional Black Caucus

Scott — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 09:58:05 -0000

-superdestroyer

Two things jump out. First, you're assuming that the black electorate will be monolithic in its choice of political affiliation. Second, you're right that they should probably stay organized, but rather for the reason that blacks, last I checked, are the third largest demographic group now. In another generation, that's going to be a huge see-saw tilter.

In a country as politically polarized (ie the squeaky wheels) as we are and the fact that the general population remains center-right, it's a naive to say the only meaningful elections will be democratic primaries. This forgets a couple of key facts. 1) the Republicans have too much money and too many entrenching tools to just go calmly into that good night and 2) the rise of a legitimate third party not run by a folksy midget. As I've always said, if the Libertarians could figure out a solid foreign policy, they would clean house.

As far as TNC's original point, I think we should add the NAACP to the question. Granted, they should stay organized, but I'd say a name change and reorganization of leadership is probably in order.