National

An Open Letter to Faith and Politics Institute Concerning Bloody Sunday, from Alabama State Senator Hank Sanders

Published

10 years ago

February 11, 2015

February 8, 2015,

I appreciate your bringing a group of congresspersons and other dignitaries each year to Selma and other places in Alabama for Bloody Sunday and related events. Every person in a leadership position ought to have this experience so that they may better understand how the right to vote was forged with blood and lost lives and suffering and sacrifice and struggle. Thank you for exposing these dignitaries to this historic and sacred struggle. We welcome you and all. We are especially glad that President Barack Obama is coming for we also invited him and the First Family.

Faith and Politics, I am extremely concerned. I considered writing you on several occasions but held back. However, after Representative John Lewis talked to a reporter, who then contacted me, I had to write. Other leaders of the Bridge Crossing Jubilee have written you in years past, but you never answered a single letter. I do not expect an answer to this letter, so I am making it an open letter.

The Commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of Bloody Sunday is a once-in-a-lifetime event. It should be a time of great unity, but you have shattered that possibility. The great challenges to the right to vote also demand unity. These challenges include the gutting of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act; the wave of voter photo ID laws, which are modern-day poll taxes; the proof of citizenship laws, which are modern-day literacy tests; and the many and varied other schemes that suppress and deny the right to vote. We should be united, but your actions divide us.

This Commemoration must be more than a celebration. Many workshops and other activities were scheduled for Saturday, March 7th, to forge a more effective effort to restore the Voting Rights Act and expand voting rights generally. Your actions disrupted these critical work sessions.
The reporter I mentioned, Mary Orndorff Troyan, said one of the reasons you wanted a march on Saturday was to ensure that it was a “dignified” march. Faith and Politics, the Bloody Sunday March has been reenacted each year since the seventies. No one has ever said that it was not dignified. Was the Bloody Sunday March not dignified when President Bill Clinton came to Selma in 2000, as a sitting president, for the 35th Anniversary of Bloody Sunday? Was the March not dignified when President Barack Obama came as Senator Obama to Selma on Bloody Sunday in 2007? Was the March not dignified when Vice President Joe Biden came in 2013?

A Competing March

Over the years, many leaders have come to Selma on their own to participate in this sacred pilgrimage – not seeking glory or status. These include members of the Kennedy family, other prominent political and social leaders, and many more. Were the Marches not dignified when these leaders made the pilgrimage to participate in the Bloody Sunday March? Your actions cannot be about the dignity of Bloody Sunday, for if they were, you would not be having another march on a day other than Bloody Sunday.

I recall that some years ago Faith and Politics asked representatives of the Bridge Crossing Jubilee to come to Washington, D.C. to meet. You paid for their tickets, hotel rooms and other expenses, and they came. You proposed taking over the Bridge Crossing Jubilee. In response, we proposed that Faith and Politics co-sponsor the Bridge Crossing Jubilee along with the National Voting Rights Museum, SCLC (Southern Christian Leadership Conference) and other organizations. You said that you would only be a sponsor if you could be the sole sponsor. You conveyed the impression that we were not competent, and that is why you had to do it by yourself. This was not about faith or service or competence. It was about power and politics – and control.

Even though we are volunteers, those of us who have led the Commemoration of Bloody Sunday for 40-plus years have been competent enough not only to accomplish the event each year, but to grow it into the largest Civil Rights Event in the country and, according to a national publication, one of the 100 greatest national tourist events. Your actions do not seem to be about competence but about control, power and politics.

The reporter told me that Congressman John Lewis said that certain unnamed national leaders tried to get into the front lines last year. One of those leaders was SCLC National President Charles Steele. I want to remind you that SCLC was the sole sponsor of the original Bloody Sunday March in 1965 and has been a co-sponsor of the Bloody Sunday March Reenactments since the seventies. The President of this organization certainly has a right to be among those on the front lines. SCLC President Steele told me that last year Faith and Politics tried to stop him and his wife Annette from getting on the front lines. When they entered the lines anyway, Congressman Lewis pointed his finger and said, “This will not happen again. I will get another venue next year.” Now we see what that venue is.

I am sorry to say that the issue of who will be among those on the front lines has recently become a bone of contention. Faith and Politics has insisted that only members of the Faith and Politics delegation be on the front lines. We have insisted that some of the nearly 600 other individuals who were also on the Bridge on Bloody Sunday in 1965 be included. In 2013 when Vice President Biden was here, Faith and Politics wanted to allot only 30 places for survivors of Bloody Sunday with 270 places for members of their delegation, including congressional staff members. When an agreement was worked out that it would be half and half, Faith and Politics then had the Secret Service give virtually every place to members of the Faith and Politics delegation. It seems that you value status, power and money far more than you value blood, sacrifice, struggle and history.

Commemoration of Bloody Sunday is big enough for everyone. It has grown from a few of us crossing the Edmund Pettus Bridge on the afternoon of Bloody Sunday in the seventies to about fifty events over five days each year. Your actions do not seem to be about dignity or competence but about power and politics and control.

In the 17 or so years that Faith and Politics has been coming to the Bridge Crossing Jubilee, not once have you organized a March or contributed in any way. You raise millions of dollars by claiming to sponsor the Bloody Sunday March but never paid for even a chair, a porto-toilet, water or anything else. You never organized other people to come if they were not in your delegation. You just show up and insist on privilege even though you refused to be a co-sponsor because you could not be the sole sponsor. This is about your privilege and power. Bloody Sunday is about sacredness, sacrifice and struggle.

Setting out to Destroy Bloody Sunday

It appears to me that Faith and Politics has set out to not only diminish but to destroy Bloody Sunday. You not only scheduled another march on Saturday in Selma but you scheduled a march and rally in Montgomery on Sunday during the afternoon when the sacred Bloody Sunday March takes place in Selma. It would have been so simple to hold your events in Montgomery on Saturday and join the events in Selma on Sunday. However, the arrogance of power has caused you to try to diminish the sacred Bloody Sunday March and Commemoration and change history.

Faith and Politics, you are not even representative of the struggle. From viewing your web page earlier this year, the makeup of your Board appears to be 14 Whites and two African Americans, including the Chief of Staff of Congressman John Lewis, who is a member emeritus. This is the organization that insisted on being the sole sponsor of the Bridge Crossing Jubilee and the Bloody Sunday events. This is the organization that is insisting on moving Bloody Sunday to Saturday after 40-plus years of commemoration on Sunday. This is the organization that has not contributed anything to organizing these events over the years. Sadly, I do not see the exercise of faith in your actions but only the force of power and politics.

I hope that you will reflect on the facts I have shared in this open letter and on the history of Bloody Sunday from 1965 to the present. It took great faith and courage for all of those nearly 600 people to face the great dangers that awaited them at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in order to fight for the right to vote. It will require great faith and courage today to restore these same rights that were won in 1965 only to be lost in 2013 [Supreme Court decision].
Sincerely,
Hank Sanders
Alabama State Senator

Reporter II

Posts by Reporter II

Up Next

How Cases Involving 2 NYC Cops and 2 Unarmed Men Measure Up

Don't Miss

The New Racists on Campus: Meet the Youth Wing of the White Nationalism Movement

Reporter II

Click to comment

#NNPA BlackPress

Recently Approved Budget Plan Favors Wealthy, Slashes Aid to Low-Income Americans

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts

Published

11 hours ago

March 21, 2025

Stacy M. Brown

By Stacy M. Brown

BlackPressUSA.com Senior National Correspondent

The new budget framework approved by Congress may result in sweeping changes to the federal safety net and tax code. The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts. A new analysis from Yale University’s Budget Lab shows the proposals in the House’s Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Resolution would lead to a drop in after-tax-and-transfer income for the poorest households while significantly boosting revenue for the wealthiest Americans. Last month, Congress passed its Concurrent Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2025 (H. Con. Res. 14), setting revenue and spending targets for the next decade. The resolution outlines $1.5 trillion in gross spending cuts and $4.5 trillion in tax reductions between FY2025 and FY2034, along with $500 billion in unspecified deficit reduction.

Congressional Committees have now been instructed to identify policy changes that align with these goals. Three of the most impactful committees—Agriculture, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means—have been tasked with proposing major changes. The Agriculture Committee is charged with finding $230 billion in savings, likely through changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps. Energy and Commerce must deliver $880 billion in savings, likely through Medicaid reductions. Meanwhile, the Ways and Means Committee must craft tax changes totaling no more than $4.5 trillion in new deficits, most likely through extending provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Although the resolution does not specify precise changes, reports suggest lawmakers are eyeing steep cuts to SNAP and Medicaid benefits while seeking to make permanent tax provisions that primarily benefit high-income individuals and corporations.

To examine the potential real-world impact, Yale’s Budget Lab modeled four policy changes that align with the resolution’s goals:

A 30 percent across-the-board cut in SNAP funding.
A 15 percent cut in Medicaid funding.
Permanent extension of the individual and estate tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
Permanent extension of business tax provisions including 100% bonus depreciation, expense of R&D, and relaxed limits on interest deductions.

Yale researchers determined that the combined effect of these policies would reduce the after-tax-and-transfer income of the bottom 20 percent of earners by 5 percent in the calendar year 2026. Households in the middle would see a modest 0.6 percent gain. However, the top five percent of earners would experience a 3 percent increase in their after-tax-and-transfer income.

Moreover, the analysis concluded that more than 100 percent of the net fiscal benefit from these changes would go to households in the top 20 percent of the income distribution. This happens because lower-income groups would lose more in government benefits than they would gain from any tax cuts. At the same time, high-income households would enjoy significant tax reductions with little or no loss in benefits.

“These results indicate a shift in resources away from low-income tax units toward those with higher incomes,” the Budget Lab report states. “In particular, making the TCJA provisions permanent for high earners while reducing spending on SNAP and Medicaid leads to a regressive overall effect.” The report notes that policymakers have floated a range of options to reduce SNAP and Medicaid outlays, such as lowering per-beneficiary benefits or tightening eligibility rules. While the Budget Lab did not assess each proposal individually, the modeling assumes legislation consistent with the resolution’s instructions. “The burden of deficit reduction would fall largely on those least able to bear it,” the report concluded.

Stacy M. Brown

Posts by Stacy M. Brown

#NNPA BlackPress

A Threat to Pre-emptive Pardons

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process.

Published

12 hours ago

March 21, 2025

Oakland Post

By April Ryan

President Trump is working to undo the traditional presidential pardon powers by questioning the Biden administration’s pre-emptive pardons issued just days before January 20, 2025. President Trump is seeking retribution against the January 6th House Select Committee. The Trump Justice Department has been tasked to find loopholes to overturn the pardons that could lead to legal battles for the Republican and Democratic nine-member committee. Legal scholars and those closely familiar with the pardon process worked with the Biden administration to ensure the preemptive pardons would stand against any retaliatory knocks from the incoming Trump administration. A source close to the Biden administration’s pardons said, in January 2025, “I think pardons are all valid. The power is unreviewable by the courts.”

However, today that same source had a different statement on the nuances of the new Trump pardon attack. That attack places questions about Biden’s use of an autopen for the pardons. The Trump argument is that Biden did not know who was pardoned as he did not sign the documents. Instead, the pardons were allegedly signed by an autopen. The same source close to the pardon issue said this week, “unless he [Trump] can prove Biden didn’t know what was being done in his name. All of this is in uncharted territory. “ Meanwhile, an autopen is used to make automatic or remote signatures. It has been used for decades by public figures and celebrities.

Months before the Biden pardon announcement, those in the Biden White House Counsel’s Office, staff, and the Justice Department were conferring tirelessly around the clock on who to pardon and how. The concern for the preemptive pardons was how to make them irrevocable in an unprecedented process. At one point in the lead-up to the preemptive pardon releases, it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process. President Trump began the threat of an investigation for the January 6th Select Committee during the Hill proceedings. Trump has threatened members with investigation or jail.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

#NNPA BlackPress

Reaction to The Education EO

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking a higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college.

Published

13 hours ago

March 21, 2025

Oakland Post

By April Ryan

There are plenty of negative reactions to President Donald Trump’s latest Executive Order abolishing the Department of Education. As Democrats call yesterday’s action performative, it would take an act of Congress for the Education Department to close permanently. “This blatantly unconstitutional executive order is just another piece of evidence that Trump has absolutely no respect for the Constitution,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) who is the ranking member on the House Financial Services Committee. “By dismantling ED, President Trump is implementing his own philosophy on education, which can be summed up in his own words, ‘I love the poorly educated.’ I am adamantly opposed to this reckless action, said Rep. Bobby Scott who is the most senior Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee.

Morgan State University President Dr. David Wilson chimed in saying “I’m deeply concerned about efforts to shift federal oversight in education back to the states, particularly regarding equity, justice, and fairness. History has shown us what happens when states are left unchecked—Black and poor children are too often denied access to the high-quality education they deserve. In 1979 then President Jimmy Carter signed a law creating the Department of Education. Arne Duncan, former Obama Education Secretary, reminds us that both Democratic and Republican presidents have kept education a non-political issue until now. However, Duncan stressed Republican presidents have contributed greatly to moving education forward in this country.

During a CNN interview this week Duncan said during the Civil War President Abraham “Lincoln created the land grant system” for colleges like Tennessee State University. “President Ford brought in IDEA.” And “Nixon signed Pell Grants into law.” In 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush which increased federal oversight of schools through standardized testing. Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college. Wilson details, “that 40 percent of all college students rely on Pell Grants and student loans.”

Rep. Alma Adams (D-NC) says this Trump action “impacts students pursuing higher education and threatens 26 million students across the country, taking billions away from their educational futures. Meanwhile, During the president’s speech in the East Room of the White House Thursday, Trump criticized Baltimore City, and its math test scores with critical words. Governor West Moore, who is opposed to the EO action, said about dismantling the Department of Education, “Leadership means lifting people up, not punching them down.”