Saturday

ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER on BLACK FATHERS

Found at: http://www.bvblackspin.com/2009/12/15/attorney-general-eric-holder/

Attorney General Eric Holder Gets on Black Fathers: Why He is Wrong
By Boyce Watkins, PhD on Dec 15th 2009 7:59PM

In his recent blog post, Elliot Millner brought it to my attention that Attorney General Eric Holder is acting as if he's been spending time with Bill Cosby. During a speech at a black church in Queens, N.Y., Holder took a page out of the Barack Obama campaign catalog and chose to win favors with the black middle class by recklessly bashing absentee fathers and returning to the "y'all just need to grow up and be more responsible" argument that allows any politician to explain away a blatant disregard for meaningful public policy. Rather than talking about things that we can do as a society to take our collective foot off the necks of black men, he chose to point out that black men are largely responsible for their own disenfranchisement.

Millner, who is also in the legal profession, says things in a way that Eric Holder is unable, because, unlike Holder, Millner is not constrained by the political shackles that come with being an appointed leader in a country that makes a habit of oppressing, destroying and marginalizing black men.

In his speech, Holder said, "It should simply be unacceptable for a man to have a child and then not play an integral part in the raising and nurturing of the child."

That quote is a nice way of reflecting on the obvious. It's sort of like saying, "It should be unacceptable for a black man to become the attorney general of the United States and not play an integral part in helping other black men overcome the blatantly racist and destructive justice system over which you preside."

If I were in that church in Queens, that is the speech I would have given to Holder. As Millner correctly states in his article, "Beyond the lip service, both President Obama and A.G. Holder are in positions to exert influence in areas that play a significant role in why many black fathers are absent."

This is not to say that Eric Holder isn't working to help with the long list of reasons that the justice system has been one of the most destructive forces facing black men today. It's easy to attack African American men for their lack of presence in the households of their children. It makes no sense, however, to make these attacks without spending a second holding yourself accountable for addressing the systemic causes of their absence. That is like telling a starving child that he needs to stop losing weight but keeping a lock on the refrigerator.

Holder does not need an education, so I am not going to give him one. As Millner states very clearly, the list of thoughts that immediately run through the mind of any black man with a working brain cell are going to be the following:

1) One in three black men in their twenties is under some form of supervision by the justice system. It's tough to be a dad when you live in a nation that has adopted mass incarceration of black men as the way to get cheap labor. Then, for those men who try to reintegrate in to society, there are hurdles to employment and education that Holder and others have yet to remedy. A man can't take care of his family if he is in prison, and it's difficult for him to feed his family if no one will hire him. If you want to solve many of the parenting problems, you can start by not putting so many fathers in the penitentiary, especially those guilty of non-violent offenses or who've been convicted because they could not get adequate legal counsel. By the way, it may help to give them rehabilitation options while they are incarcerated, rather than simply punishing them.

2) Attorney Holder, did you also know that black male unemployment is as high as 40 percent to 50 percent in many urban areas? What do you think whites would do to you if they were facing 40 percent unemployment and had to hear you give them a speech about personal responsibility? If whites are screaming about 10 percent unemployment, how would they respond to the unemployment rates experienced by our community?

3) Mr. Holder, can you please take a visit to your buddy Barack Obama and let him know that the inner-city educational systems put black boys in special education at a rate that is five times higher than white kids? Please also explain to the president that many of these young men are not being taught to read and are being pushed out in to an economic system with few opportunities, leading them right to the penitentiaries. I am not sure how much time Columbia University (where Holder attended law school, like the rest of his Ivy League chums) spends teaching about the school-to-prison pipeline, but he might want to read up on it.

4) Oh yeah, Mr. Holder, with all due respect, there are quite a few white absentee fathers also. The divorce rate in white America is more than 50 percent, which means that, technically, half of all white dads are not in the homes with their kids. The next time you go speak to a group of white Americans, I dare you to give the same speech you're giving in African American churches. White folks aren't so quick to allow a black man to come in to their churches to tell them that they are screwed up and that the government (for which they pay taxes) has no responsibility in helping with their plight. For some reason, black people are very good at beating up on themselves.

5) Mr. Holder, just in case you and President Obama are unaware, there's usually a woman involved in most heterosexual relationships. Do you think it might be possible that some men are excluded from the lives of their children by the child's mother, or have we decided to simply follow the trend and blame the black male for every single one of society's ills? When specifically addressing the break down of the black family, we may want to move past the "black man musta done it" model of analysis. There are thousands of black men across America who've been estranged from their children by mothers who've become overbearing in the management of their children's lives. This is not to say that all mothers are in the wrong, but we all know that both women and men are not perfect.

I respect Attorney General Holder, but it is my hope that the black faces hanging out in the Oval Office can be a bit more creative when it comes to solving problems in our nation. When white America moans about 10 percent unemployment, they get stimulus packages. When black men speak up about 40 percent to 50 percent unemployment, we get speeches on personal responsibility. The double standard is as glaring as the shine on Rush Limbaugh's forehead. Eric Holder, I expect you to show a bit more personal responsibility. Do something productive with the power you've got. Don't just sit around and preserve it.

Monday

Fatherhood Bill article by Glenn Sack

Article appeared in Huffington Post, June 23. Author: Glenn Sack

With support from President Obama, Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Congressman Danny Davis (D-IL) introduced the Responsible Fatherhood and Healthy Families Act of 2009 for Father's Day, a bill cosponsored by then-Senator Barack Obama in the last Congress. Obviously Bayh and Davis have to contend with DC political realities, which work against fathers and make rational legislation to help them politically difficult. Still, this Responsible Fatherhood bill will help bureaucrats and others far more than it helps dads, and in some ways it will hurt fathers.

According to Bayh's press release, the legislation will:

1) "Ensure that child support payments to families do not count as income and result in loss of food stamps."

That's nice for low-income mothers, who can probably use the help, but it doesn't directly help the noncustodial fathers who are paying this child support.

2) "Restore cuts in federal child support enforcement funding to help state and local governments collect $13 billion in additional payments for single parents"

This hurts low-income men who, unable to make the unrealistic payments demanded of them, are already harassed and jailed by the multi-billion dollar child support apparatus. Obama/Bayh/Davis want to increase funding for child support enforcement, even though the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement’s own data show that two-thirds of “deadbeat dads” earn poverty-level wages, and only 4 percent earn even $40,000 a year. This situation has been made far worse by the recession.

This measure won't help mothers either, because there's little money to collect from most so-called "deadbeats" anyway. What this measure does is help keep and expand employment for child support enforcement bureaucrats. To learn more, see a newspaper column I wrote about child support enforcement funding here.

President Barack Obama's new economic stimulus package already provided $1 billion for fattening up child support enforcement's bloated budget. The standard argument in favor of this is superficially convincing -- "More than $4 was collected in support for every dollar invested in the program."

It is true that federal figures show that over $20 billion in child support is collected nationwide yearly, and that only $5 billion is spent on enforcement. However, the vast majority of the funds collected are not done through enforcement tactics -- they're simply the payments already being made by law-abiding noncustodial parents. These payments will continue to be made regardless of the cuts.

The $4 for $1 myth was created by incorrectly counterposing total collections with expenditures on enforcement. To give child support enforcement credit for all child support collections is like the collections department at Target being credited every time a customer buys something and pays at the register. The mainstream media has largely declined to discuss this Enron-style accounting.


3) "Require states to send 100 percent of all child support payments to the single parent within five years, rather than letting states take a portion of money for administrative costs."

Currently many noncustodial fathers—particularly African-American and Latino fathers, upon whom Obama often focuses—are required to pay their child support to the state to reimburse the cost of public assistance, instead of to the children’s mothers. This new measure helps low-income mothers, and that's a good thing. It's also a modest positive for fathers -- paying "child support" that doesn't go to your children is demoralizing for low-income men struggling to make a difference in their kids’ lives.

4) "Fund programs designed to protect the families who have been affected by domestic violence."

Protecting battered women is important, but domestic violence laws and programs have also made it easy for unscrupulous mothers to drive fathers out of their children's lives by making false accusations of domestic violence. As many prominent family law professionals have noted, this is a major problem, particularly as it applies to domestic violence restraining orders, which are issued almost automatically. To learn more, see my column Restraining Orders Can Be Straitjackets On Justice (Newark Star-Ledger, 7/28/08).

The bill does have a few provisions which actually pertain to fathers:

1) "Fund job training programs and community partnerships to help parents find employment."

Although often these programs' real purpose is to bring fathers into the system so they can pay child support, it can still be a good thing for fathers, if it's run properly.

2) "Fund financial literacy programs and budgeting education, employment services, and mediation and conflict resolution for low-income parents."

This helps mothers at least as much as fathers but is a good idea, if the programs are effective.

3) "Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit to increase the incentive for full-time work and fulfillment of child support obligations."

Fathers pay child support out of after-tax dollars, whereas mothers receive child support tax free. If this program helps ameliorate that, it's a good thing.

While some fathers voluntarily remove themselves from their children’s lives, many seek a greater role. Most child custody arrangements provide fathers only a few days a month to spend with their children, and fighting for shared parenting is expensive and difficult. Custodial mothers frequently fail to honor visitation orders, and there is no system in place to help enforce visitation orders. The Obama/Bayh/Davis "Fatherhood" bill does little to address the real problems separating fathers from the children who love them and need them.
Glenn Sacks is the Executive Director of Fathers & Families, the nation's largest family court reform organization. Fathers and Families, a 501 (c) (3) nonprofit organization, improves the lives of children and strengthens society by protecting the child's right to the love and care of both parents after separation or divorce.

President Obama on Fatherhood

Sunday

NFL MVP and Father of 4 Killed

NFL MVP Steve McNair was found dead, with gunshot wounds to the head, on July 4, 2009. Steve was a father to four sons in Mississippi, one of which is a star high school quarterback. McNair played for the Houston Oilers, Tennessee Titans and Baltimore Ravens, and was selected to the Pro Bowl three times. He was the co-NFL MVP in 2003.

It is a tragedy that four black boys have are now fatherless due to violence in our community. Steve McNair not only was a father, but an athlete that so many black youth saw as a role model. My prayers go out to his family and especially his now fatherless sons.