#NNPA BlackPress
OP-ED: Stop Excluding People of Color in Environmental Policies
NNPA NEWSWIRE — Protecting the environment should be about protecting people, regardless of the color of their skin, ethnicity or race, or where they live or how much money they make. The fight to save our planet should be about ensuring a long and successful sustainable future – for everyone.

By Dr. Benjamin F. Chavis, Jr., President and CEO, National Newspaper Publishers Association
The deadly destruction wrought by the coronavirus pandemic has laid bare the harsh inequities in American society, disproportionately ravaging Black America and other communities of color, as well as individuals who were on the social margins long before the crisis.
The inequities have surfaced in obvious ways, including early data released by states showing that the virus is killing African Americans at disproportionately high rates, a disturbing trend that illustrates the substandard availability of health care in Black America.
The inequities have also surfaced in subtle ways, such as policy decisions that fail to reflect the needs and day-to-day realities of low-income communities and communities of color. The irony is that many of these policies are well-meaning. But in some cases, they also have had troubling unintended consequences.
Consider the area of environmental policy. Protecting the environment should be about protecting people, regardless of the color of their skin, ethnicity or race, or where they live or how much money they make. The fight to save our planet should be about ensuring a long and successful sustainable future – for everyone.
Yet, there are many in the mainstream environmental movement who continuously overlook the needs and realities faced by some of our most underserved and vulnerable communities. That includes the mainstream environmental advocacy community’s push to enforce plastic bags bans in favor of reusables, despite the fact that cardboard paper and other reusables pose a clear public health risk – especially for workers on the front lines of the pandemic response.
Why, for example, is it smart public policy to insist that grocery workers be exposed to reusable bags, when research shows these bags can be repositories of the COVID-19 virus? The majority of these essential workers are low-income people of color who are disproportionately bearing the brunt of the COVID-19 crisis, dying from the deadly disease at twice the rate of white people.
Additionally, in New York, it is well-documented that a statewide plastic bag ban also disproportionately hurts Black and Latino-owned businesses and shoppers. Though there is an exemption in this ban for recipients of benefits like WIC and food stamps from paying the five-cent tax on paper bags, working-class people of color and low-income New Yorkers still must pay.
Some stores have been charging for both plastic and paper, and in some cases, more than five cents a bag. Five cents might not seem like much. But five cents (or more) per bag adds up, especially when one is living paycheck-to-paycheck, or, as is more likely at this moment, not working at all due to the financial toll of the COVID-19 crisis.
Some environmentalists have argued that opponents of the bag ban are trying to capitalize on the COVID-19 crisis by recommending a suspension of any bag regulations. Again, it appears that some mainstream environmentalists only use research data to support policies that reflect their privileged vantage point without respect to the impact of those policies on the underprivileged.
I coined the term environmental racism in 1982 while involved in the Warren County, NC protests against the digging of a PCB landfill in the heart of a poor Black agricultural community. At that time there were some who thought that environmental issues were should not be considered as civil rights or as racial justice issues. There was in the past, and it continues in the current public discourse, a kind of arrogance by the privileged who think they know what is best for the underprivileged.
Today as the environmental justice movement has grown into a global campaign for change led by grassroots activists and leaders from people of color communities throughout the world, we all now know much more about the intersection between the issues of racial justice and environmental justice.
I recall vividly back in the late 1980’s when I co-authored and published the landmark study for the United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice: Toxic Waste and Race in the United States, the established environmental movement was unnerved that people of color would dare to do empirical research and define our own reality with respect to exposures to environmental hazards. Our national study proved that there was a deliberate link between race and the placement of toxic waste facilities in America.
In adherence to a blind devotion to a privileged ideology, some who call themselves environmentalists often neglect to take into consideration the day-to-day concerns of millions of low-income and Americans of color living in urban centers that are also communities that house hazardous sanitation sites, incinerators, rail yards, power plants and other environmental threats.
Some mainstream environmental groups consistently insist on pushing for policies that make life harder for people of color and poor communities, arguing that the hardship – if they recognize it at all – is a necessary price to pay in order to achieve their overall goals that those of privilege have exclusively envisioned as the standard for all others to obey.
As the pandemic continues, we need to let go of high-minded ideological arguments and do everything possible to protect workers on the front lines – including grocery clerks and those who make deliveries. Some states have temporarily lifted their bans or eradicated them altogether. A number of grocery stores are bringing back plastic bags and telling customers not to bring their own reusable bags.
Due to the crisis, New York has twice extended non-enforcement of its plastic bag ban in the face of a lawsuit that challenges its constitutionality. This is not enough. The state should give essential workers and shoppers alike a sense of protection during the pandemic and bag the plastic ban altogether.
More often than not, these life-changing decisions are being made without the consultation or input from the affected communities of color. Close to 40 years later we still remain on the outside of these conversations, continuously overlooked by many in the mainstream environmental movement as well as in local and state governments.
There is an obvious divide between the members of the mainstream environmentalism movement and the environmental justice community, primarily made up of urban Black and brown people. Until both parties can come together and pay the necessary attention to the pervasive environmental concerns that our communities endure on a daily basis the rift will only deepen, if not completely fracture. Exclusion of people of color will not solve the nation’s or the world’s environmental challenges.
#NNPA BlackPress
Conversation with Al McFarlane and Coach Leah
May 29, 2023 – Welcome back to another episode of The Conversation with Al McFarlane! We bring you inspiring discussions …
The post Conversation with Al McFarlane and Coach Leah first appeared on BlackPressUSA.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=6ydjQ14cOJM&autoplay=0&cc_lang_pref=en&cc_load_policy=0&color=0&controls=1&fs=1&h1=en&loop=0&rel=0
May 29, 2023 – Welcome back to another episode of The Conversation with Al McFarlane! We bring you inspiring discussions …
The post Conversation with Al McFarlane and Coach Leah first appeared on BlackPressUSA.
#NNPA BlackPress
No Labels Endorses Bipartisan Deal to Resolve US Debt Ceiling Debate
NNPA NEWSWIRE — “We have always emphasized that there should be common sense bipartisan solutions to our nation’s problems that are supported overwhelmingly by the majority of the American people,” No Labels National Co-Chairs Joe Lieberman, Larry Hogan, and Dr. Benjamin F. Chavis, Jr., said in a joint statement issued on Sunday, May 28.
The post No Labels Endorses Bipartisan Deal to Resolve US Debt Ceiling Debate first appeared on BlackPressUSA.

By Stacy M. Brown
NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent
@StacyBrownMedia
No Labels, a growing national movement of what the organization calls “common sense Americans pushing leaders together to solve the country’s biggest problems,” announced its support of the bipartisan deal that President Joe Biden, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell have agreed upon in principle to avoid the United States defaulting on its national debt before the June 5 deadline.
“We have always emphasized that there should be common sense bipartisan solutions to our nation’s problems that are supported overwhelmingly by the majority of the American people,” No Labels National Co-Chairs Joe Lieberman, Larry Hogan, and Dr. Benjamin F. Chavis, Jr., said in a joint statement issued on Sunday, May 28.
Chavis also serves as president and CEO of the National Newspaper Publishers Association, the trade association of the more than 230 African American owned newspapers and media companies in the United States.
After months of uncertainty and verbal sparring, an “agreement in principle” has been reached to spare the United States from its first-ever debt default.
But now comes the hard part: convincing both Democrats and Republicans in Congress to agree to pass the measure.
After President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy announced that they’d reached an accord to raise the nation’s debt ceiling and avoid a catastrophic default, Congress has just a few days to approve the deal.
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said a deal needs ratification by June 5, or the United States would breach its $31.4 trillion debt ceiling.
If approved by Congress, the deal would raise the debt ceiling for two years, punting it to the next administration.
The GOP originally proposed a one-year deal but conceded to Democrats’ demand for two.
In the agreement, spending – except for the military – would remain at 2023 levels for next year, with funds being earmarked for other federal programs.
Biden also agreed to a $10 billion cut to the $80 billion he had earmarked for the IRS to crack down on individuals cheating on their taxes.
Instead, the funds will go to other programs that Republicans sought to cut.
Additionally, with billions remaining from pandemic relief funds unspent, both parties agreed to claw back those funds to the federal government.
“Avoiding America’s default in paying our national debt is vital to the future of our nation. We thank President Biden and Speaker McCarthy for their leadership to achieve the debt ceiling deal,” the No Labels leaders continued.
“We encourage Republican, Democratic and Independent members of both chambers of the US Congress to pass this agreement expeditiously because it is so important for every American.”
The post No Labels Endorses Bipartisan Deal to Resolve US Debt Ceiling Debate first appeared on BlackPressUSA.
#NNPA BlackPress
Three Years After #DefundThePolice, Schools Are Bringing Cops Back to Campus
SAN DIEGO VOICE & VIEWPOINT — As of January 2023, there were about 60 SROs remaining in D.C. schools, down from its peak of more than 100, according to the Washington Post. However, the progress made toward reducing law enforcement presence in D.C. schools appears to be in jeopardy. In what seems like a backtrack from the progressive momentum generated during “America’s racial reckoning,” four D.C. council members now support a proposal to retain officers in schools, citing an uptick in violence and crime in school vicinities.
The post Three Years After #DefundThePolice, Schools Are Bringing Cops Back to Campus first appeared on BlackPressUSA.

By
In the wake of George Floyd’s murder, calls to defund the police rang across the nation during the summer of 2020. While few cities took swift action, many school districts — integral community hubs where young minds are nurtured, and where kids spend the bulk of their time — began to reevaluate the presence of armed personnel patrolling the hallways.
In September 2019, eight months before Floyd’s murder, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported nearly 25,000 school resource officers were assigned to primarily K-12 schools.
Those numbers slowly started to change in districts around the country as a response to calls to defund the police.
In Washington, D.C., for example, the D.C. Council unanimously voted in 2021 to reduce the number of SROs in both public and charter schools beginning July 2022, with the plan to end the Metropolitan Police Department’s School Safety Division in 2025.
In September 2019, eight months before Floyd’s murder, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported nearly 25,000 school resource officers were assigned to primarily K-12 schools.
As of January 2023, there were about 60 SROs remaining in D.C. schools, down from its peak of more than 100, according to the Washington Post. However, the progress made toward reducing law enforcement presence in D.C. schools appears to be in jeopardy. In what seems like a backtrack from the progressive momentum generated during “America’s racial reckoning,” four D.C. council members now support a proposal to retain officers in schools, citing an uptick in violence and crime in school vicinities.
On the other side of the country, the Denver Public School District Board of Education unanimously voted to bring SROs back to schools through June 2023. Similar to D.C., the decision followed closely on the heels of a shooting at Denver’s East High School. And 18 SROs were brought back to 17 schools in the district.
Schools around the country are running into roadblocks trying to remove SROs.
The Roadblocks
The roadblocks don’t look the same in every situation.
In D.C., for example, ACLU DC policy associate Ahoefa Ananouko cites Mayor Muriel Bowser as the biggest barrier. Bowser has been vocal about keeping SROs in schools, going as far as to say that removing SROs is “the nuttiest thing.”
And, like in D.C. and Denver, politicians, policymakers, and some educators nationwide cite violence in the area as a reason for keeping SROs, but there is little evidence to support that SROs actually do make schools safer. In fact, in a 2020 report, the Justice Policy Institute said, “rates of youth violence were plummeting independent of law enforcement interventions, and the impact of SROs on school shootings has been dubious at best.”
Plus, it’s been proven that SROs exacerbate the school-to-prison pipeline, especially for Black students.
The Center for Public Integrity analyzed U.S. Department of Education data from all 50 states, D.C., and Puerto Rico in 2021. The investigation found that school policing disproportionately affects students with disabilities and Black students. Nationwide, these two groups were referred to law enforcement at “nearly twice their share of the overall student population.”
What we often have seen is that the teachers or classified staff who feel that it’s not within their ability to handle certain situations automatically defer to the SROs.
ADONAI MACK, SENIOR DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AT CHILDREN NOW
But it doesn’t stop many adults on the school campus from differing discipline to SROs, says Adonai Mack, the senior director of education at Children Now. This happens when there is either a fear around addressing disciplinary problems or concerns, or feeling they aren’t able to handle it.
“What we often have seen is that the teachers or classified staff who feel that it’s not within their ability to handle certain situations automatically defer to the SROs,” Mack says.
This is where the call for additional non-police safety officials comes in, like nurses, counselors, or psychologists, who “certainly do more help than harm,” Mack says.
But, like teachers and other educators, there’s a shortage of these professionals. But Ananouko says this shouldn’t be a barrier if policymakers decided it was more important to have mental health professionals or restorative justice interventionalists — people who are trained to handle trauma, behavior, and underlying issues.
“I believe they could and should shift those resources to incentivize those professionals being hired instead of investing more in police,” Ananouko says, “which have been shown to be harmful to students in a school environment, generally.”
A Detriment to Mental Wellness
Though it’s too early to have concrete data on students’ mental health without SROs, there are, anecdotally, reasons to believe it’s a positive change.
Aside from students leading police-free school groups, there are other historic factors that lend insight. For one, whenever there are fears around deportation, not only Black students, but Latino and AAPI students experience negative mental health impacts, Mack says.
The feelings, like with the Defund the Police movement, are split across racial lines. Black, Latino, and AAPI students don’t always feel safe with police around.
“With kids of color, what you often have is this alienation,” Mack says. “There are decreased feelings of safety. Now, I would say that’s different for white kids and white families. They often will feel that having police on campus makes the campus safer.”
Black and Brown students are more likely to attend a school patrolled by an SRO.
And, Black and Brown students are more likely to attend a school patrolled by an SRO. A 2023 Urban Institute study found that schools where the student population is at least 80% Black and Brown, students are more likely to have an SRO compared to schools with a high population of white students, regardless of income levels. And, 34%-37% of schools with high populations of Black and Brown students have an SRO, compared to 5%-11% of predominantly white schools.
But it’s clear that there’s “a detriment to kids of color” with police on campus, Mack says.
“From that perspective, with any decrease, what we see is that it automatically improves the mental wellness of students from those communities,” Mack says.
‘A Critical Point’
While the roadblocks might be tougher or the headlines have fizzled out, Ananouko says the police-free schools movement “isn’t slowing down at all.”
And now, D.C. is at a critical point. It’s budget oversight season, meaning it’s the time when funding for SROs could be restored. But, every year since the initial 2021 vote, students, school administrators, teachers, and advocates have continued to push for the phase-out, Ananouko says.
“Our messaging has not changed,” Ananouko says. “We’ve stayed consistent in saying that police don’t keep students safe. And none of that has changed in these past three years.”
The bottom line is that all kids deserve to feel safe and nurtured, Ananouko says.
“They should be able to feel like they can go to school with that fear,” she says, whether this fear comes from other students or armed officers in the building who can use their gun “at any point at the discretion of the law is on their side.”
“A lot of the issues that students are dealing with are not going to be addressed by somebody with a gun.”
This article originally appeared in San Diego Voice and Viewpoint.
The post Three Years After #DefundThePolice, Schools Are Bringing Cops Back to Campus first appeared on BlackPressUSA.
-
Activism7 days ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 31 = June 6, 2023
-
Activism2 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 24 – 30, 2023
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 17 – 23, 2023
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 10 – 16, 2023
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Rise in Abductions of Black Girls in Oakland Alarms Sex-Trafficking Survivors
-
Bay Area4 weeks ago
Nordstrom Closing Both San Francisco Stores, Citing ‘Dynamics of Downtown’
-
Activism3 weeks ago
The Case Against SB357: Black, Vulnerable and Trafficked
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Oakland Teachers Strike Continues Over Wages, ‘Common Good’ Demands for Needs of Parents, Students
Pingback: Panafricanmedia Networks
Pingback: OP-ED: Stop Excluding People of Color in Environmental Policies - BomaLink DrumBeat