WINNER: 2020 T YPOGRAPHY & DESIGN, 1ST PLACE, PHOTOGRAPHY (PORTRAIT & PERSONALIT Y), 1ST PLACE, WEBSITE, 3RD PLACE
Insight News
November 16, 2020 - November 22, 2020
Vol. 47 No. 46• The Journal For Community News, Business & The Arts • insightnews.com
National Archives
BLACK SERVICEMEN FROM WWII FACED LIMITED OPTIONS AND DENIAL AS THEY SOUGHT GI BENEFITS AFTER THE WAR.
Veterans Day reflections
GI Bill opened doors to college for many vets, but politicians created a separate one for Blacks Joseph Thompson Assistant Professor of History, Mississippi State University When President Franklin Roosevelt signed the GI Bill into law on June 22, 1944, it laid the foundation for benefits that would help generations of veterans achieve social mobility. Formally known as the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, the bill made unprecedented commitments to the nation’s veterans. For instance, it provided federal assistance to veterans in the form of housing and unemployment benefits. But of all the benefits offered through the GI Bill, funding for higher education and job training emerged as the most popular. More than 2 million veterans flocked to college campuses throughout the country. But even as former service members entered college, not all of them accessed the bill’s benefits in the same way. That’s because white southern politicians designed the distribution of benefits under the GI Bill to uphold their segregationist beliefs. So, while white veterans got into college with
relative ease, Black service members faced limited options and outright denial in their pursuit for educational advancement. This resulted in uneven outcomes of the GI Bill’s impact. As a scholar of race and culture in the U.S. South, I believe this history raises important questions about whether subsequent iterations of the GI Bill are benefiting all vets equally. Tuition waived for service When he signed the bill into law, President Roosevelt assured that it would give “servicemen and women the opportunity of resuming their education or technical training … not only without tuition charge … but with the right to receive a monthly living allowance while pursuing their studies.” So long as they had served 90 consecutive days in the U.S. Armed Forces and had not received a dishonorable discharge, veterans could have their tuition waived for the institution of their choice and cover their living expenses as they pursued a college degree. This unparalleled investment in veteran education led to a boom in college enrollment. Around 8 million of
the nation’s 16 million veterans took advantage of federal funding for higher education or vocational training, 2 million of whom pursued a college degree within the first five years of the bill’s existence. Those exservice members made up nearly half of the nation’s college students by 1947. Colleges scrambled to accommodate all the new veterans. These veterans were often white men who were slightly older than the typical college age. They sometimes arrived with wives and families in tow and brought a martial discipline to their studies that, as scholars have noted, created a cultural clash with traditional civilian students who sometimes were more interested in the life of the party than the life of the mind. Limited opportunities for black servicemen Black service members had a different kind of experience. The GI Bill’s race-neutral language had filled the 1 million African American veterans with hope that they, too, could take advantage of federal assistance. Integrated universities and historically Black colleges and universities – commonly known as HBCUs
– welcomed black veterans and their federal dollars, which led to the growth of a new black middle class in the immediate postwar years. Yet, the underfunding of HBCUs limited opportunities for these large numbers of Black veterans. Schools like the Tuskegee Institute and Alcorn State lacked government investment in their infrastructure and simply could not accommodate an influx of so many students, whereas well-funded white institutions were more equipped to take in students. Research has also revealed that a lack of formal secondary education for Black soldiers prior to their service inhibited their paths to colleges and universities. As historians Kathleen J. Frydl, Ira Katznelson and others have argued, U.S. Representative John Rankin of Mississippi exacerbated these racial disparities. Racism baked in Rankin, a staunch segregationist, chaired the committee that drafted the bill. From this position, he ensured that local Veterans Administrations controlled the distribution of funds. This meant that when black southerners
applied for their assistance, they faced the prejudices of white officials from their communities who often forced them into vocational schools instead of colleges or denied their benefits altogether. Mississippi’s connection to the GI Bill goes beyond Rankin’s racist maneuvering. From 1966 to 1997, G.V. “Sonny” Montgomery represented the state in Congress and dedicated himself to veterans’ issues. In 1984, he pushed through his signature piece of federal legislation, the Montgomery GI Bill, which recommitted the nation to providing for veterans’ education and extended those funds to reserve units and the National Guard. Congress had discontinued the GI Bill after Vietnam. As historian Jennifer Mittelstadt shows, Montgomery’s bill subsidized education as a way to boost enlistment in the all-volunteer force that lagged in recruitment during the final years of the Cold War. Social programs like these have helped maintain enlistment quotas during recent conflicts in the Middle East, but today’s service members have found mixed success in converting the education subsidies from the Post-9/11 GI
Bill into gains in civilian life. This new GI Bill, passed in 2008, has paid around $100 billion to more than 2 million recipients. Although the Student Veterans for America touts the nearly half a million degrees awarded to veterans since 2009, politicians and watchdogs have fought for reforms to the bill to stop predatory, for-profit colleges from targeting veterans. Recent reports show that 20% of GI Bill disbursements go to for-profit schools. These institutions hold reputations for notoriously high dropout rates and disproportionately targeting students of color, a significant point given the growing racial and ethnic diversity of the military. In August 2017, President Trump signed the Forever GI Bill, which committed $3 billion for 10 more years of education funding. As active duty service members and veterans begin to take advantage of these provisions, history provides good reason to be vigilant for the way racism still impacts who receives the most from those benefits. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license.
Page 2 • November 16, 2020 - November 22, 2020 • Insight News
insightnews.com
Now Available at our Broadway and Lake St. locations.
Order online.
We’ll shop for you.
Cub community pickup is our way of bringing the full selection of a Cub store to the convenience of the temporary store at our Broadway and Lake St. locations. Place your order by 9pm and the order will be available the next day afternoon at your scheduled time. You will be able to pay for your order at the time of pickup for your added convenience.
Order online @ cub-community-pickup.com Pay in store at pickup, including cash, credit and EBT.
insightnews.com
Insight News • November 16, 2020 - November 22, 2020 • Page 3 WINNER: 2020 T YPOGRAPHY & DESIGN, 1ST PLACE, PHOTOGRAPHY (PORTRAIT & PERSONALIT Y), 1ST PLACE, WEBSITE, 3RD PLACE
Insight News November 16, 2020 - November 22, 2020
Vol. 47 No. 46• The Journal For Community News, Business & The Arts • insightnews.com
Working the refs, the latest GOP tactic in their attempt to steal the election Guest Commentary By Jeremy Drucker
NNPA NEWSWIRE
“Trump finds out Biden won while he’s playing golf,” Washington Informer Journalist Anthony Tilghman tweeted, as Trump played golf at his National Club in Sterling, Va.
America declares to Trump: ‘You’re Fired’
Black votes push Biden over the top in contentious election By Stacy M. Brown NNPA Newswire Correspondent @StacyBrownMedia After days of post-Election Day counting, Democrat Joe Biden has defeated President Donald Trump to become the nation’s 46th commander in chief. With all eyes on Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, and Arizona, it was the Keystone State’s 20 electoral college votes that put Biden over the top, and helped America send the message Trump had become known for years earlier during his “Apprentice” reality television show: “You’re Fired!” “Trump finds out Biden won while he’s playing golf,” Washington Informer Journalist Anthony Tilghman tweeted, as Trump played golf at his National Club in Sterling,
Va. Reportedly, it’s the 410th day the President spent at one of his namesake properties since taking office. “This election is about so much more than @JoeBiden or me. It’s about the soul of America and our willingness to fight for it,” Sen. Kamala Harris, the Vice President-Elect tweeted alongside a video. “We have a lot of work ahead of us. Let’s get started,” she added. When Biden and Harris are sworn-in on January 20, 2021, the California Senator will become the first Black Vice President in U.S. history. After what’s expected to be the most contentious and violent post-election in American history, inauguration ceremonies will occur. Demonstrators had already gathered outside of vote counting centers around the nation, mainly as the country
waited anxiously for results from Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia, and Nevada. Chants of “Stop the Count! Stop the Count,” turned to “Stop the Steal! Stop the Steal! At state buildings by pro-Trump supporters at state buildings. The President egged on the commotion, tweeting false claims about voter fraud and that the “Democrats are trying to steal the election.” With little question, Black voters pushed Biden over the top. Biden trailed the President in Pennsylvania, but as the count included predominately Black Philadelphia and surrounding counties, Trump’s lead disappeared, and the Democrat prevailed. That scenario repeated itself in Georgia, where Atlanta and Fulton County also came through for the former
vice president. “At this historical moment, the voters have made it clear that they want a country that works for all people. They want a country that is not broken by racism and bigotry,” NAACP President Derrick Johnson wrote in a statement. “They want leadership that can create opportunities for all Americans to succeed in all aspects of society, without fear of over-policing, discrimination, and destructive policies at our expense. “This election transcends party and gives voice to the voters who want affordable health care, economic stability, quality education for their children, and wholesale relief from the pandemic and structural inequality. How we move forward from here and begin to repair our nation is critical.”
Trump’s Pennsylvania lawsuits invoke Bush v. Gore – but the Supreme Court probably won’t decide the 2020 election By Steven Mulroy, Law Professor in Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Election Law, University of Memphis The Trump campaign has filed two lawsuits in federal court over ballot counting and voting deadlines in Pennsylvania, threatening to take the election to the Supreme Court. Both consciously echo the two main legal theories of Bush v. Gore, the infamous Supreme Court case that decided the contested 2000 presidential election. But this race is not likely to be decided by the Supreme Court. There are several reasons, sitting at the intersection of law and politics, why the ghosts of Florida past won’t rise again in Pennsylvania. As a law professor who’s authored a book on election reform, I rate success in Trump’s efforts to wrench back Biden’s lead through litigation as a real long shot, though not out of the question. Equal protection Trump’s latest Pennsylvania lawsuit draws on
the “equal protection” argument cited in Bush v. Gore. In the 2000 case, Democratic candidate Al Gore challenged Florida’s first machine-generated vote count when thousands of voters had problems marking their punch card ballots. The Florida Supreme Court allowed a statewide recount to ensure that all legal votes were counted. But the standards for counting the infamous “hanging chads” – incomplete marks on those punch card ballots – varied from county to county. The U.S. Supreme Court held that this lack of uniformity violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution, which guarantees equal weight for votes. The court shut down the recount and declared Bush, the Republican candidate, the winner in Florida – and therefore of the 2000 election. Republicans are trying a similar play in Pennsylvania with a legal claim filed on Election Day. In some Pennsylvania counties, election officials were contacting voters whose mailin ballots were disqualified for technical reasons to confirm their signature or fill in missing identifying information, validating their ballot so it
photo/Jantanee Phoolmas_Moment via Getty Images
Judges can intervene in elections, but the Supreme Court really prefers not to. will count. Since only some Pennsylvania counties were doing this “ballot curing” process, the Trump camp argues, the state’s lack of uniformity violates the Equal Protection Clause. No matter what the lower courts rule, the plaintiffs will likely take this case, which makes a federal constitutional claim, to the Supreme Court. The court might decline to take it for any number of reasons. One is that in Bush v. Gore, the justices actually cautioned that their decision was unique to Florida’s 2000 vote count and should not be given
News
3 lessons in resilience to help you get through 2020
PAGE 5
much weight as precedent. State legislatures Trump’s other Pennsylvania legal challenge, which was filed in state court back in September, is also rooted in Bush v. Gore. It invokes an often overlooked concurring opinion in that case, which advanced an alternate theory for handing Bush a win. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist as a supplement to the majority decision, is rooted in the
LAWSUITS 4
I’d like to think we all read a print newspaper from the institutions so many of us grew up reading or watching our parents read, but that’s just not the case anymore. Two years ago, for the first time, more Americans revealed they get their news from online social media companies than print newspapers. This has deep implications across our community and state. Most notably, social media platforms have spawned a massive ecosystem of independent publishers, media watchdogs and critics, and partisan institutions masquerading as independent, impartial publishers. No one is going to solve the decline of print newspapers or the lack of well-funded community news organizations, and I am not here to call for that. But what’s increasingly apparent is how congressional Republicans, led by the President, “worked the refs” in Silicon Valley ahead of this election, badgering CEOs of the large platforms purveying “news” of all types to stand down on correcting falsehoods. Now they are trying to parlay
Donald Trump that into an attempt to steal this election from the rightfully elected president. Why did they do this? It wasn’t about anticonservative bias in Silicon Valley, which the President desperately wants you to believe. It’s far more dangerous than that. It was clearly about the election, and Republicans goosing conspiracy theories on mail-in ballots and wrongfully equating the counting of such ballots as fraudulent. Now they’re trying to take this to the next level. On election night when President Trump held an “in-person vote” lead, they tried to make people believe that’s the outcome, and pundits and platforms across the vast conservative online news media perpetuated those myths and falsehoods on mail-in ballots
GOP 5
Dr. Michael Osterholm
Biden-Harris Transition announces COVID-19 advisory board WASHINGTON – Today, the Biden-Harris Transition announced the formation of the Transition COVID-19 Advisory Board, a team of leading public health experts who will advise President-elect Biden, Vice President-elect Harris, and the Transition’s COVID-19 staff. The Transition COVID-19 Advisory Board will be led by co-chairs Dr. David Kessler, Dr. Vivek Murthy, and Dr. Marcella Nunez-Smith. Dr. Beth Cameron and Dr. Rebecca Katz are serving as advisors to the Transition on COVID-19 and will work closely with the Advisory Board. “Dealing with the coronavirus pandemic is one of the most important battles our administration will face, and I will be informed by science and by experts,” said Presidentelect Biden. “The advisory board will help shape my approach to managing the surge in reported infections; ensuring vaccines are safe, effective, and distributed efficiently, equitably, and free; and protecting at-risk populations.” New cases are rising in at least 40 states, with more than 9.3 million total infections and more than 236,000 deaths. Biden has pledged to bring
leadership to the COVID pandemic, which continues to claim thousands of lives each week, by curbing the spread of the disease, providing free treatment to those in need, and elevating the voices of scientists and public health experts. The COVID-19 Advisory Board will help guide the BidenHarris Transition in planning for the President-elect’s robust federal response. These leading scientists and public health experts will consult with state and local officials to determine the public health and economic steps necessary to get the virus under control, to deliver immediate relief to working families, to address ongoing racial and ethnic disparities, and to reopen our schools and businesses safely and effectively. The Transition COVID-19 Advisory Board is made up of a diverse and experienced group of doctors and scientists. Members of the Advisory Board have served in previous administrations and have experience engaging with and leading our country’s response to nationwide and worldwide public health crises.
BIDEN-HARRIS 5
I2H
Saliva testing location at Minneapolis Convention Center
PAGE 6
Page 4 • November 16, 2020 - November 22, 2020 • Insight News
insightnews.com
Financial difficulties during a global pandemic: Why it is important to start saving for retirement, despite your age (NAPSI—The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted Americans in more ways than one. With the ups and downs the market has experienced since the start of the pandemic, it’s important that working Americans understand their various financial and retirement planning options. According to a recent survey from the Center for a Secure Retirement and Bankers Life, more than half (54%) of working adults say their retirement planning has taken a hit amid the COVID-19 pandemic, with more than a third (36%) having lost money in the stock market. Whether you’re 25, 35 or 45, it’s never too early— or late—to start financially
planning for retirement. Additional insight from the Center for Secure Retirement shows that nearly two-thirds (63%) of those age 35 to 44 reported that the pandemic has impacted their future retirement, compared to just one-third (35%) of those 65 and older. A moment of upheaval like that experienced amid COVID-19—which has been particularly felt by those reliant on employer sponsored plans like a 401(K)—represents an opportunity for the next generation of retirees to review their options and ensure their financial security. Here are smart actions to take: •Stay calm. The uncertainty of the market can
Preparing for your future is possible even during a pandemic— and easier and more important than ever. cause panic for some. Financial planning experts advise that the best thing you can do is to refrain
from impulsive decisions. Stay calm and avoid any emotional or risky moves when it comes to
large investments. •Reevaluate. Even for those who may feel confident in their retirement planning, it is important to continually reevaluate as you receive new information during the pandemic. It can be tempting to focus on short term gains at the expense of long-term plans. •Be flexible. It may even be beneficial to schedule reviews of your retirement plans several times over the course of the year, as the state of the world is everchanging. Continuously revisiting and adjusting your plans will ensure that you are prepared for the future no matter what it may bring. •Supplement savings. Consider including life insurance as part of your retirement plan to
supplement your savings and provide peace of mind for you and your loved ones. Although life during a pandemic is uncertain and difficult to navigate, by seeking help to better understand your financial plans and current health care coverage, you’ll be more prepared to anticipate unforeseen situations in the future. •Bankers Life is the marketing brand of Bankers Life and Casualty Company, Medicare Supplement insurance policies sold by Colonial Penn Life Insurance Company and select policies sold in New York by Bankers Conseco Life Insurance Company (BCLIC). BCLIC is authorized to sell insurance in New York.
What to know as ACA heads to Supreme Court — again By Julie Rovner Kaiser Health News jrovner@kff.org, @jrovner The Supreme Court on Tuesday will hear oral arguments in a case that, for the third time in eight years, could result in the justices striking down the Affordable Care Act. The case, California v. Texas, is the result of a change to the health law made by Congress in 2017. As part of a major tax bill, Congress reduced to zero the penalty for not having health insurance. But it was that penalty — a tax — that the high court ruled made the law constitutional in a 2012 decision, argues a group of Republican state attorneys general. Without the tax, they say in their suit, the rest of the law must fall, too. After originally contending that the entire law should not be struck down when the suit was filed in 2018, the Trump administration changed course in 2019 and joined the GOP officials who brought the case. Here are some key questions and answers about the case: What Are the Possibilities for How the Court Could Rule? There is a long list of ways this could play out. The justices could declare the entire law unconstitutional — which is what a federal district judge in
Lawsuit From 3
mandate only, which would have basically no impact. It gets more complicated if the court decides that, as the plaintiffs argue, the individual mandate language without the penalty is unconstitutional and so closely tied to other parts of the law that some of them must fall as well. Even there the court has choices. One option would be, as the Trump administration originally argued, to strike down the mandate and just the pieces of the law most closely related to it — which happen to be the insurance protections for people with preexisting conditions, an extremely popular provision of the law. The two parts are connected because the original purpose of the mandate was to make sure enough healthy people sign up for insurance to offset the added costs to insurers of sicker people. Another option, of course, would be for the court to follow the lead of the Texas judge and strike down the entire law. While that’s not the most likely outcome, said Bagley, if it happens it could be “a hot mess” for the nation’s entire health care system. As just one example, he said, “every hospital is getting paid pursuant to changes made by the ACA. How do you even go about making payments if the thing that you are looking to guide what those payments ought to be is itself invalid?” What Impact Will New Justice Amy Coney Barrett Have?
Could a New President and Congress Make the Case Go Away? Many have suggested that, if Joe Biden assumes the presidency, his Justice Department could simply drop the case. But the administration did not bring the case; the GOP state officials did. And while normally the Justice Department’s job is to defend existing laws in court, in this case the ACA is being defended by a group of Democratic state attorneys general. A new administration could change that position, but that’s not the same as dropping the case. Congress, on the other hand, could easily make the case moot. It could add back even a nominal financial penalty for not having insurance. It
“plenary authority” of state legislatures to allocate Electoral College votes. Under Article II of the Constitution, state
legislatures have total power to decide how their Electoral College votes should be awarded – they don’t even have to hold a presidential election if they don’t want to. Whatever their process, Rehnquist wrote, it should be respected; no court, state or federal, should disturb it. That “plenary authority” is not controversial. But Rehnquist’s concurrence is. In it, he argued that by ordering an emergency recount whose timing and deadlines deviated from the legislatively provided election rules, Florida’s Supreme Court was usurping the Florida legislature’s plenary authority. This “Article II theory” is considered rather fringe – but Republicans are advancing it in Pennsylvania. In September, the Pennsylvania courts agreed with the Democratic Party that due
to COVID-19-related concerns, mail-in ballots received up to three days after the election could still be counted, even if the post office neglected to affix a legible postmark. In October, the state’s Supreme Court then ordered an extension of the receipt deadline for absentee ballots. The GOP challenged this extension in federal court, arguing that Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court was usurping the state legislature’s authority by extending the mail ballot deadline. Upon appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court twice declined to halt the counting of these latearriving ballots in Pennsylvania. But it did order that the ballots in question be segregated for a possible post-election challenge. It is generally accepted that federal judges should defer to a state court’s interpretation of
INSIGHT NEWS www.insightnews.com
Insight News is published weekly, every Monday by McFarlane Media Interests. Editor-In-Chief Al McFarlane Publisher Batala-Ra McFarlane Associate Editor & Associate Publisher B.P. Ford Associate Editor Culture & Education Dr. Irma McClaurin Associate Editor Afrodescendientes Carmen Robles Associate Editor Nigeria & West Africa Chief Folarin Ero-Phillips Columnist Brenda Lyle-Gray Director of Content & Production Patricia Weaver Content & Production Coordinator Sunny Thongthi Yang Distribution/Facilities Manager Jamal Mohamed Receptionist Lue B. Lampley Intern Kelvin Kuria
Perhaps a lot. Before the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, most court observers thought the case was highly unlikely to result in the entire law being struck down. That’s because Chief Justice John Roberts voted to uphold the law in 2012, and again when it was challenged in a less sweeping way in 2015. But with Barrett replacing Ginsburg, even if Roberts joined the court’s remaining three liberals they could still be outvoted by the other five conservatives. Barrett was coy about her views on the Affordable Care Act during her confirmation hearings in October. But she has written that she thinks Roberts was wrong to uphold the law in 2012.
Texas ruled in December 2018. But legal experts say that’s not the most likely outcome of this case. First, the court may avoid deciding the case on its merits entirely, by ruling that the plaintiffs do not have “standing” to sue. The central issue in the case is whether the requirement in the law to have insurance — which remains even though Congress eliminated the penalty or tax — is constitutional. But states are not subject to the so-called individual mandate, so some analysts suggest the Republican officials have no standing. In addition, questions have been raised about the individual plaintiffs in the case, two consultants from Texas who argue that they felt compelled to buy insurance even without a possible penalty. The court could also rule that by eliminating the penalty but not the rest of the mandate (which Congress could not do in that 2017 tax bill for procedural reasons), lawmakers “didn’t mean to coerce anyone to do anything, and so there’s no constitutional problem,” University of Michigan law professor Nicholas Bagley said in a recent webinar for the NIHCM Foundation, the Commonwealth Fund and the University of Southern California’s Center for Health Journalism. Or, said Bagley, the court could rule that, without the tax, the requirement to have health insurance is unconstitutional, but the rest of the law is not. In that case, the justices might strike the
Contributing Writers Maya Beecham Nadvia Davis Fred Easter Abeni Hill Inell Rosario Latisha Townsend Artika Tyner Toki Wright Photography V. Rivera Garcia Uchechukwu Iroegbu Rebecca Rabb Artist Donald Walker Contact Us: Insight News, Inc. Marcus Garvey House 1815 Bryant Ave. N. Minneapolis., MN 55411 Ph.: (612) 588-1313 Fax: (612) 588-2031 Member: Minnesota Multicultural Media Consortium (MMMC), Midwest Black Publishers Coalition, Inc. (MBPCI), National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA) Postmaster: Send address changes to McFarlane Media Interests, Marcus Garvey House 1815 Bryant Avenue North, Minneapolis,
INTERNET ESSENTIALS FROM COMCAST SM
995
$
www.violadavis.net
“There are 30 million Gabriella Wiggins Americans with type 2 diabetes and 84 million with prediabetes. There are 324 million people in this country, so that’s half the population right there,” said Viola Davis who joined forces with the pharmaceutical company Merck to narrate “A Touch of Sugar,” which also depicts how the disease affects all communities.
1
2
2
per month + tax
LEARN MORE. DO MORE. SHARE MORE.
NO CONTRACT NO CREDIT CHECK NO INSTALLATION FEE IN-HOME WiFi INCLUDED ACCESS TO 40 1-HOUR SESSIONS OF XFINITY WIFI HOTSPOTS OUTSIDE THE HOME EVERY 30 A DYS
Internet Essentials gives you access to affordable, high-speed Internet. You may qualify if you have at least one child who is eligible for the National School Lunch Program or receive HUD housing assistance.
A P P LY N OW
InternetEssentials.com 1-855-8-INTERNET
Restrictions apply. Not available in all areas. Limited to Internet Essentials service for new residential customers meeting certain eligibility criteria. Advertised price applies to a single outlet. Actual speeds may vary and are not guaranteed. After initial participation in the Internet Essentialsogram, pr if a customer is determined to be no longer eligible for theogram pr and elects a different XFINITY Internet service, regular rates will apply to the selected Internet service. Subject to Internet Essentialsogram pr terms and conditions. WiFi Hotspots:Available in select locations. Requires compatible WiFi-enabled laptop or mobile device. Limited to forty 60-minute sessions per 30-day period per person/ account. If session is terminated before 60 mins. remainin time expires. Unused time does not carry v oer to subsequent sessions or 30day periods. Not responsible for lost data resulting from terminated Internet session or any other reason. A maximum of up to 10 devices may be registered to a single XFINITY WiFi On Demand account. May not be combined with other offers. Call 1-855-846-83 76 for restrictions and complete details, or visit InternetEssentials. com. © 2018 Comcast. All rightseserved. r
Omar From 3
Commentary by By StatePoint Hazel Josh Cobb Tricethe Edney Special from Ricki Fairley By Pam Kragen By Kevin Punsky Dr. LaVonne Moore Twin Cities Association Minnesota Department The Cincinnati Herald Reprinted courtesy ofon the Originally published Mayo Clinic of Black Journalists/ Health BlacksInTechnology.net San Diego Union-Tribune Insight News Intern March 9, 2017 By Stacy M. Brown NNPA Newswire Correspondent @ StacyBrownMedia
photo/sharrocks_iStock
The Supreme Court on Tuesday will hear oral arguments in a case that, for the third time in eight years, could result in the justices striking down the Affordable Care Act. could eliminate the mandate altogether, although that would require 60 votes in the Senate under current rules. Congress could also pass a “severability” provision, saying that, if any portion of the law is struck down, the rest should remain. “The problem is not technical,” said Bagley. “It’s political.” What Is the Timeline for a Decision? Could the Court Delay Implementation of Its Ruling? The court usually hears oral arguments in a case months before it issues a decision. Unless the decision is unanimous or turns out to be very simple, Bagley said, he would expect to see an opinion “sometime in the spring.” As to whether the court could find some or all of the law unconstitutional but delay when
its own state law. But in separate opinions written on behalf of four conservative justices, Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch used Rhenquist’s opinion on Bush v. Gore to argue that state courts cannot usurp the role of state legislatures. In effect, these four justices believe Pennsylvania’s top court had no grounds to extend the voting deadline. Should the Supreme Court hear this case again, Justice Amy Coney Barrett – the conservative jurist who recently replaced the progressive Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg – could become the crucial fifth vote necessary to overturn the Pennsylvania decision. Court victory unlikely That ruling would invalidate all affected Pennsylvania votes, as well
its decision takes effect, Bagley said that happened from time to time as recently as the 1970s. “That practice has been more or less abandoned,” he said, but in the case of a law so large, “you could imagine the Supreme Court using its discretion to say the decision wouldn’t take effect immediately.” If the court does invalidate the entire ACA, Congress could act to fix things, but it’s unclear if it will be able to, especially if Republicans still control the Senate. If the justices strike the law, Bagley said, “I honestly think the likeliest outcome is that Congress runs around like a chicken with its head cut off, doesn’t come to a deal, and we’re back to where we were before 2010,” when the ACA passed. This article originally appeared on KHN.org.
as votes anywhere else in the country where courts or administrators changed election rules to make them more flexible. That’s thousands upon thousands of votes, potentially enough to change the election’s outcome. That outcome could be catastrophic for public confidence in both the Supreme Court and the American electoral process. These lawsuits could theoretically stop the election from being certified by the Electoral College per the normal procedure. But more likely, if the suits had any traction, they would be resolved quickly to meet the Electoral College’s Dec. 12 deadline. This scenario looks increasingly less likely. After winning Wisconsin and Michigan, Joe Biden has a number of credible paths to the necessary 270 Electoral College votes without Pennsylvania. If that happens, a Supreme Court ruling there wouldn’t change the outcome of the 2020 election – though it could set an important precedent for later elections. If there is a Trump loss that doesn’t hinge on Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court may also decline to hear his case. As a rule, the court is reluctant to decide issues unless it has to. More Trump legal challenges in North Carolina, Georgia and Michigan are involving the courts in this election. But this litigation won’t be able to reverse a decisive, multi-state Electoral College win. Steven Mulroy is a former federal prosecutor, former civil rights attorney for U.S. Department of Justice. He litigated, published, and taught in the areas of constitutional law, civil rights, criminal law and procedure, and election law. He is the author of Rethinking US Election Law. This article was originally published on The Conversation and is republished under a Creative Commons license.
insightnews.com
Insight News • November 16, 2020 - November 22, 2020 • Page 5
3 lessons in resilience to help you get through 2020 Brandpoint (BPT) (BPT) - Billionaire Mark Cuban was fired from his first job in software. Actress Jameela Jamil endured three life-changing medical diagnoses before breaking big in Hollywood. Musician John Legend was receiving unemployment checks while waiting for his big break. Life is rarely linear or straightforward — even for some of the most successful people in the world. From minor speed bumps to cavernous potholes that force an abrupt U-turn, everyone experiences significant disruption to what they had imagined their life might look like. For many of us, 2020 has been one of those years. “From the pandemic to the recession to racial injustice to the election, the big, crazy stories of this year have affected everyone’s lives in very real and often very distressing ways,” says Carlos Watson, a journalist,
GOP From 3
Biden-Harris From 3 Co-Chairs and Advisory Board Members: CO-CHAIRS Dr. David Kessler David A. Kessler, MD, is Professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology and Biostatistics at UCSF. Dr. Kessler served as FDA Commissioner from 1990 to 1997, appointed by President George H.W. Bush and reappointed by President Bill Clinton. Dr. Vivek Murthy Vivek Murthy, MD, MBA, served as the 19th Surgeon General of the United States from 2014-2017. As the Vice Admiral of the US Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, he commanded a uniformed service of 6,600 public health officers globally. The officers focused on helping underserved populations, protecting the nation from Ebola and Zika, responding to the Flint water crisis, and natural disasters such as hurricanes. Dr. Marcella Nunez-Smith Marcella NunezSmith, MD, MHS, is an Associate Professor of Internal Medicine, Public Health, and Management at Yale University and the Associate Dean for Health Equity Research at the Yale School of Medicine. Dr. Nunez-Smith’s research focuses on promoting health and healthcare equity for structurally marginalized populations. MEMBERS Dr. Luciana Borio Luciana Borio, MD, is VP, Technical Staff at In-QTel. She is also a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations. Borio specializes in biodefense, emerging infectious diseases, medical product development, and complex public health emergencies. Dr. Rick Bright Rick Bright, PhD, is an American immunologist, virologist, and former public health official. Bright was the director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) from 2016 to 2020 and the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response at the Department of Health and Human Services. Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel Ezekiel J. Emanuel, MD, PhD, is an oncologist and Vice Provost for Global Initiatives and chair of the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania. From January 2009 to January 2011, he served as special advisor for health policy to the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget. Since 1997, he has served as chair of the Department of Bioethics at The
entrepreneur and CEO of cutting-edge media company OZY, tapped as the next HBO. “It’s a very trying time for people across the country and the globe — and it might well continue for quite some time,” continues Watson, who is also the host of Defining Moments With OZY on Hulu, one of the best interview shows currently available to stream, featuring indepth interviews with culturedefining celebrities who have battled adversity on the road to success. Watson and OZY’s relentless focus on highlighting unique, fresh stories has again paid off, with impactful and candid reflections on failure, loss, struggle and resilience making Defining Moments With OZY perhaps the most important show of 2020. While no two paths are the same, there’s a lot we can learn from figures like Amy Purdy, who was given a 2 percent chance to live before fighting back to win Olympic gold, and Jason Collins, who had to hide his sexuality for
decades for fear of rejection. As everyone across the globe faces their own Defining Moment this year, there are several lessons we can all take away to help us find hope for a way out of difficulty. Here are just a few: 1. The power of being broke The importance of perseverance — the determination to keep trying, keep learning and keep perfecting your craft, even when things aren’t going your way — is something most hugely successful people emphasize.
From selling garbage bags door to door as a teenager to moving to Dallas without a job or a place to live, Mark Cuban has always been hustling, as he reveals on Defining Moments With OZY. “I was always healthily afraid,” says Cuban. And before he became John Legend, John Stephens felt he was on the cusp of breaking through — six years before he was anywhere close.
circumstances can precipitate a positive reevaluation of personal goals — whether that unexpected event comes in the form of a medical emergency, mental health issue, job loss or freak accident. For Jameela Jamil, it was all four. While her life has been shaped by a cancer scare, which caused her to move to the U.S., where she ultimately found fame; a battle with body dysmorphia; and cursing during her first live TV appearance, it was a life-threatening car accident at age 17 that was the biggest turning point in her life. “Getting hit by the car was the best thing that ever happened to me. I’d do it all over again,” says Jamil. Similarly, Olympian Amy Purdy tells Watson how her bacterial meningitis diagnosis, which led to the amputation of both her legs, instilled in her a new sense of drive that has shaped her life for the better.
2. Difficult personal circumstances may have silver linings Sometimes an unplanned change in life
3. The battle to fit in can make you stronger In many cases,
personal struggle comes from external forces such as discrimination, prejudice and exclusion. For Dominique Jackson, the trans star of Pose, and Jason Collins, the first active NBA athlete to come out as gay, the struggle with their identity included being rejected by family. Both Jackson and Collins found external support networks that helped them thrive — and ultimately repair their family relationships. Sophia Chang, an Asian American hiphop mogul, has struggled against being marginalized for her race, gender and immigrant status her entire life. “Fine-tuning that anger and owning it” is the key to turning vulnerability into strength, Chang reveals in her Defining Moments With OZY interview. For more inspiring insights to help you make sense of this challenging year, binge the entire first season of Defining Moments With OZY — now streaming on Hulu.
being counted in the days after the election to delegitimize them. Now, as the Republicans are executing on
their strategy to try and sow doubt on President-elect Biden’s victory, I would suggest we keep an eye on Republicans continuing working the refs –
complaining loudly about tech companies’ efforts to dispel falsehoods – in the hopes of driving skepticism around election results they don’t like.
I urge Senator Klobuchar, who stands close witness to this activity by her Republican colleagues in the U.S. Senate, to stand up to their
demagoguing and intimidating efforts upon the new media gatekeepers who are now the main conduit for people to get news about the election.
Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Services, and previously served in leadership positions at the LIVESTRONG Foundation and the American Cancer Society.
Obama Administration, Goosby was appointed Ambassador-atLarge and implemented the U.S.
President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). After serving as the U.S. Global AIDS
Coordinator, he was appointed by the UN Secretary General as the Special Envoy for TB.
Dr. Atul Gawande Atul Gawande, MD, MPH, is the Cyndy and John Fish Distinguished Professor of Surgery at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Samuel O. Thier Professor of Surgery at Harvard Medical School, and Professor of Health Policy and Management at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Gawande is also the founder and chair of Ariadne Labs, a joint center between Brigham and Women’s Hospital and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health for health systems innovation, and of Lifebox, a nonprofit organization making surgery safer globally. He previously served as a senior advisor in the Department of Health and Human Services in the Clinton Administration. Dr. Celine Gounder Celine Gounder, MD, ScM, FIDSA is a Clinical Assistant Professor at the NYU Grossman School of Medicine and cares for patients at Bellevue Hospital Center. From 1998 to 2012, Gounder studied TB and HIV in South Africa, Lesotho, Malawi, Ethiopia and Brazil. While on faculty at Johns Hopkins, Gounder was the Director for Delivery for the Gates Foundationfunded Consortium to Respond Effectively to the AIDS/TB Epidemic. Dr. Julie Morita Julie Morita, MD, is Executive Vice President of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF). Morita previously served as the Health Commissioner for the City of Chicago for nearly two decades. She is a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics and has served on many state, local, and national health committees, including the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and the National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Community Based Solutions to Promote Health Equity in the United States. Dr. Michael Osterholm Michael Osterholm, PhD, MPH, is Regents Professor, McKnight Presidential Endowed Chair in Public Health and the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota. Osterholm previously served as a Science Envoy for Health Security on behalf of the State Department. For 24 years (1975 to 1999), he worked in the Minnesota Department of Health; the last 15 years as state epidemiologist. Ms. Loyce Pace Loyce Pace, MPH, is the Executive Director and President of Global Health Council. Over the course of her career, Loyce has championed policies for access to essential medicines and health services worldwide. Pace has worked with Physicians for Human Rights and Catholic Relief
Dr. Robert Rodriguez Dr. Robert Rodriguez graduated from Harvard Medical School and currently serves as a Professor of Emergency Medicine at the UCSF School of Medicine, where he works on the frontline in the emergency department and ICU of two major trauma centers. He has authored over 100 scientific publications and has led national research teams examining a range of topics in medicine, including the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of frontline providers. Dr. Eric Goosby Eric Goosby, MD, is an internationally recognized expert on infectious diseases and Professor of Medicine at the UCSF School of Medicine. During the Clinton Administration, Goosby was the founding director of the Ryan White CARE Act, the largest federally funded HIV/ AIDS program. He went on to become the interim Director of the White House’s Office of National AIDS Policy. In the
s8_InsightNews_BW_PrintAd_5.25x5in.indd 1
11/8/20 10:07 AM
Page 6 • November 16, 2020 - November 22, 2020 • Insight News
insightnews.com
Insight 2 Health
Site will offer free saliva tests to anyone who needs it
Saliva testing location at Minneapolis Convention Center The State of Minnesota today announced it will open a saliva testing site at the Minneapolis Convention Center. This will be the eighth in the state, offering free saliva tests to any Minnesotan who believes they need to be tested. “What’s happening in Minnesota right now is alarming,” said Minnesota Commissioner Jan Malcolm. “We are seeing record numbers of new cases every few days. And it’s because we’re falling behind the rapid spread of this virus. This is truly a statewide outbreak, and we encourage anyone who believes they may have been exposed to COVID-19 to visit one of these no-barrier testing sites. Testing is a key part of our strategy, and we’ve made great progress in removing obstacles to testing thanks to strong partnerships across the state. When combined with social distancing, masking, avoiding crowds and staying home when sick, testing helps us slow the spread of COVID-19 and move us closer to the day when we have safe and effective vaccines.” Testing will be located at the Minneapolis Convention Center, at 1301 2nd Ave. South in downtown Minneapolis. Those coming for testing should enter on the west side of the building off 1st Avenue, then continue to exhibit room E. Free parking will be available and marked in nearby surface lots and parking ramps. Due to expected demand, testing will be available seven days a week, noon to 7 p.m. on weekdays and 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on weekends. The State of Minnesota and Vault Health will reevaluate
hours of each site as others open and demand waxes and wanes with disease progression in Minnesota. Appointments can be made through the Vault Health registration site. The state opened the first saliva testing site in Duluth on Sept. 23. Since then, saliva testing locations have opened in Winona, Moorhead, Brooklyn Park, Mankato, St. Cloud, and Saint Paul. State officials plan to open at least two more in the Twin Cities metro area in coming weeks. Those tests will be processed right here in Minnesota, at the new saliva lab in Oakdale. Results will be provided via email within 24-48 hours. “The Minneapolis Convention Center offers access to thousands of people in the heart of the metro,” said Dan Huff, MDH assistant commissioner for health protection. “Our COVID-19 numbers are moving in the wrong direction, but we still have a chance to turn the tide here in Minnesota if everyone does their part; we hope this increased access to testing will help people learn if they are positive for COVID-19 and to isolate when necessary.” Testing is free to all Minnesotans who believe they need a COVID-19 test, including those who are asymptomatic. Participants will be asked for their health insurance information so the state can bill their insurance company on their behalf. If a person is uninsured or for any reason insurance doesn’t cover some or all of the cost, the state will cover the difference so testing remains completely free to everyone. “We’re glad to have
photo/Vault Health
The saliva test is a PCR test, just like the traditional nasal swab, with the same effectiveness rate; however, it is more comfortable to take. Those who come for a test should avoid eating, drinking, chewing, or smoking anything for at least 30 minutes before providing a sample. another COVID-19 testing option in our community,” said Hennepin County Public Health Director Susan Palchick. “This new site will make it easier for people to access testing, to know if they’re positive, and to take steps to protect themselves and others.” “This is a welcome additional source of testing for those who live or work in our community,” said Gretchen Musicant, Minneapolis Health Commissioner. “Because it will be open seven days a
week without barriers it is an important resource as we work to stem the rising number of COVID-19 cases.” The same saliva test was also recently made available to 23 counties and the Red Lake Nation through the COVID-19 Test at Home Program The service will be available soon to all Minnesotans statewide. The saliva test is a PCR test, just like the traditional nasal swab, with the same effectiveness rate; however, it is more comfortable to take. Those who come for a test should avoid
eating, drinking, chewing, or smoking anything for at least 30 minutes before providing a sample. Once they arrive at the site, they will self-administer the test by spitting into a funnel attached to a small tube. Clinic staff will be available on-site to monitor the collection process and ensure there is enough saliva to be tested. “Our strategy to managing the virus continues to be proactive, data-driven, and aggressive,” continued Huff. “A higher testing capacity, combined with masking, social
distancing, and isolation when appropriate, is critical to that strategy. Our work to bring saliva testing to Minnesotans is an important supplement to the COVID testing options already offered across the state. Growing and diversifying our testing options is a tool to keeping Minnesotans safe.” For more information about the saliva testing site in Minneapolis, please visit COVID-19 Saliva Community Testing Sites.
Help stop the spread of COVID-19 – get tested.
Testing is encouraged and available to everyone, regardless of symptoms. Getting tested is critical to stopping the spread of COVID-19 and will help to prevent exposing your loved ones to the virus. Find free testing events at Minneapolismn.gov.
For reasonable accommodations or alternative formats please call 311 at 612-673-3000. People who are deaf or hard of hearing can use a relay service to call 311 at 612-673-3000. TTY users can call 612-263-6850. Para asistencia 612-673-2700, Yog xav tau kev pab, hu 612-673-2800, Hadii aad Caawimaad u baahantahay 612-673-3500.
insightnews.com
Insight News • November 16, 2020 - November 22, 2020 • Page 7
Q&A: Green Light Twin Cities By Al McFarlane Editor Part 2 of 2 Hardeman-Jones: As I said, I was born and raised in South Minneapolis. I would say I grew up in a family of activists, organizers, and politicians. A lot of my days off from school consisted of door knocking for a local campaign or volunteering somewhere. Looking back now, I’m like - “yeah”, that was awesome! But as a high school student, I found I’d rather sleep in. But my political involvement early on did shape my life’s path and my career to date. I attended Minneapolis Public Schools through eighth grade, and then went to a private school for high school. It’s a school you’re probably familiar with because your daughter went there, as well. I went off to Washington D.C. for college, and really began to focus on my interest in public and education policy in particular. I think my interest in education policy was really motivated by my academic experiences. You mentioned that I went to Breck School for high school because my parents really wanted to ensure my sister and I received the best quality education that would prepare us to do well in college and beyond. Frankly, we weren’t certain the public-school system - at the time - would be the place for us to get what we needed. They made some decisions and sacrifices to send us to a private school where I received a phenomenal education. It became clear to me that my family was able to make those decisions when there were many families not having those options. But I think the important issue here is that parents shouldn’t have to make those kind of decisions . . . that every kid should be able to go to any school of their choice and know they’ll receive the best quality education. It was that
experience that made it clear to me that after college I wanted to pursue a career that would shift equity and opportunity, specifically in education policy. And so, that became my motivational vehicle from there on. McFarlane: Tell me about your parents. How did who they are and their commitment to their community pour into you and keep you going? Also, I often ask guests about their grandparents. I want to get a sense of lineage. I think we carry all that has happened before us in us. Hardeman-Jones: Definitely agree with that truth. McFarlane: I think it’s important, for me anyway, and I don’t put this on other people. But I do sometimes because I’m asking the question . . . to acknowledge our ancestors and to walk and talk in way that honors their labor, sacrifices, and wisdom. This is part of a continuum. This moment and every moment is a critical moment. That gives us weight and earnestness and credibility and authenticity in every word we say, and in every interaction because we know there are consequences. We are intentional in striving to create consequences of value that benefit community, and that validate the vision of our parents . . . of the ancestors. So take it from there. Hardeman-Jones: I appreciated that. When I said I come from a family of activists and organizers, it’s my grandmother, Ernestine Belton who lived on the South side of Minneapolis, not too far from Sabathani Community Center. She was a force of nature. She taught my sister and me to identify a problem in the community and figure out how to solve it. She wouldn’t take no for an answer. To say we
Simone Hardeman-Jones really didn’t want to be bothered was not an acceptable answer. It was if you don’t like it, do something about it. I remember there was an empty lot on the corner of 36th and 3rd Avenue South. She convinced the city of Minneapolis they needed to put a rose garden in that space. She planted a rose garden and made the neighborhood beautiful. She taught me how to advocate for what I wanted . . . what I knew was right and just. I was inspired to have a voice and be a committed activist in our society. Whenever I think about my foundation in my work, it comes back to her . . . no doubt. Many other family members have done a lot for the Twin Cities, especially for people of color, as well. McFarlane: Let’s unpack that. You’re being modest. I understand that. Allow me to mention a few names. The people you and I are talking about come from a huge and powerful family tree. Many of the members are influential not in a self-aggrandizing way, but the notable impact they have had on our community . . . on our people. Their historical path will always be shared with present and future generations. I think whenever we can speak their name, we should. Say some of the names in your family and in your circle. Say this because it all comes into influencing your view and the power you have. Hardeman-Jones: Sure. My
uncle,
Steven Belton, currently leads the Urban League. He has spent years in the Twin Cities trying his darnedest to create change and shift the disparity gap that appears to get wider. He continues through the League to do that work today. My father, John Hardeman has worked for the Boys and Girls Club - both in Minneapolis and St. Paul - longer than I’ve been alive. He has dedicated his days and nights to young people who need a place to go after school . . . those who need support and mentorship. Growing up with my twin sister, I can remember when someone came up to us in public and said, “Oh, you’re the Hardeman twins. You’re John Hardeman’s daughters.” Everyone knows John Hardeman. In fact, we can’t even get him to retire because he’s so committed to his work and his kids. In the time of COVID, we keep saying, “You’re in that population that needs to stay home.” But he won’t listen to us. He’s going to work. Another uncle, Michael Belton, has dedicated his career to juvenile justice reform. He’s an advocate for Black boys and Black girls and kids of color who are caught up in the juvenile justice system. And then of course, I should mention my aunt, Sharon Sayles Belton. She was the first Black mayor of Minneapolis and has given so much to the city. McFarlane: I’m so glad you mentioned those names. A lot of times people in the community think those who are movers
and shakers are not bringing up people under them or behind them to fill in and carry the work forward. I know that’s not true, and I also know the people you just mentioned, your dad in particular, and your uncles and your aunt are phenomenal leaders. They’ve been wonderful about giving, sharing proven principles, and simply being fearless people. Fearless is the operating word. They were never afraid to voice community residents’ interests . . . to share, create, and work towards a common good. I think of your grandma, Ernestine Belton. If it’s in her mind, she says, “I can do it.” And then she sets out to do it, and it gets done. That’s the kind of environment that you come out of. Those are the shoulders I see you standing on. These are the lived experiences that have strengthened your ability to identify and serve the needs of our community. Thank you for sharing.
Hardeman-Jones: I should also add that, I neglected mentioning my mother, Sherie BeltonHardeman. Because of her, my interest and commitment in education really came to fruition. She directed the placement office for the Minneapolis Public School District. I observed how she had to navigate the politics. Student families were assigned a certain school or district based on their zip code or a lot of times the color of their skin. I would be remiss to not mention that she also has laid the foundation that I stand on, as well. McFarlane: Simone, talk about your academic journey . . . your first two or three positions on your way to where you are today. Hardeman-Jones: I was one of those young people at the time who wanted to get as far away from Minnesota as possible for college. I attended American University in Washington,
D.C. for undergraduate and graduate school, as well, earning a master’s degree in public policy. For the past 15 or so years, I have been working in education policy for local and national political campaigns. I worked on Senator Amy Klobuchar’s first run for U.S. Senate, and served as director of African American outreach for her campaign. I went back to D.C. as one of a couple staff members to work in her D.C. office. I spent another few years working on Capitol Hill with a wonderful senator from North Carolina named Kay Hagan. After about six or so years working in Congress in the Senate, I was recruited by the Obama administration to join their work at the U.S. Department of Education. I had the honor to spend the last four years of the Obama administration working to advance educational equity on behalf of President Obama and two phenomenal secretaries of education, Arnie Duncan and John King. I stayed in the Obama administration until they kicked me out at the very end. After that, I took a little time off to breathe, and figure out what to do next. I decided to move back home to the Twin Cities. McFarlane: I’m trying to think back to my role as one of the directors of the National Newspaper Publishers Association. I recall we had meetings at the Department of Education with Arnie Duncan, and it might have been you involved in setting that up. Hardeman-Jones: I probably sat in on some of those meetings, for sure. McFarlane: They were great meetings and a great team. Tell me, I’m sort of going with the flow here. As you remember your experiences in the Obama
GREEN LIGHT 8
Page 8 • November 16, 2020 - November 22, 2020 • Insight News
Green Light From 7 administration, reflect on what you think your counterparts must be thinking and feeling now under the current administration? What thoughts come to mind? Hardeman-Jones: Disappointment Working in the Obama administration was like being a part of a family where everyone was deeply committed to equity and high quality education for every child, but especially Black and Brown ones; young people from low income families; and kids with disabilities. We were all rowing in the same direction . . . energized and making things happen. We made shifts that were really changing the trajectory and the conversations in education and education policy. As I continue to be in
touch with former colleagues and friends, it’s just really so disheartening to see so much of our work being undone, bit by bit. And then I really think about what that means for kids, especially kids that look like me. That’s even more devastating. McFarlane: It seems like it’s almost being undone with a certain viciousness . . . with a tenacity that is mean-spirited and can lead to no good any way you cut it. But some people are short-sighted and have an ill-conceived idea of what the world is and whose the world is. They adamantly believe they can continue on a course of control of the world and of our society, even at the expense of all the principles and ideas on which the notion of democracy rests. It is discouraging, but as I was saying at the beginning, the answer really is at our fingertips right now. Everyone must go vote. That’s the most important thing. We can’t emphasize that
insightnews.com to make their lives better. But I still think it’s an important piece of the puzzle in order to have a meaningful impact. And I feel really fortunate to have experienced policy making at a national and federal level where it’s the best of times and the worst of times. There are big victories, but also real low lows where ridiculous, politically charged things can happen. Poorly carried out decisions ultimately have a negative impact on populations of kids or people, and it really shouldn’t. It’s been an interesting ride to say the least, working in the policy arena.
enough! McFarlane: How did you come to study public policy? You sort of described the environment that produced you, but what attracted you to really work, dig in and research, and become an expert in your chosen discipline . . . on policy issues, and moving from policy to action in our communities? Hardeman-Jones: I see policy and saw policy as the vehicle for change. What I didn’t realize at the time, my younger self was saying, “This is going to be great. POLICY! We’re going to change things . . . change the way systems work.” I’ve learned it takes a lot of time, and political shenanigan play a huge part in how or if change is ever going to happen. We’ve seen this change doesn’t always benefit the population of people or the systems that need resources and human support
McFarlane: I think one of the challenges of my generation, whether we said it or not, was a sub-text of competition where one of us felt that if I got it, you shouldn’t get it from me. There seemed to be this undercurrent of competitiveness that was really not mean, but it reduced our ability to genuinely collaborate. Often, we did came together despite ourselves. I think millennials are different in that you approach problem solving and collaboration differently as an asset, as a useful tool, and you’re not hindered by the “I got to be the first” or “I’m the only” or “It’s just my show”. Does that make sense to you at all? Hardeman-Jones: Yeah! It definitely resonates with me. I realize I can’t do this work by myself. I deeply value collaboration and the sharing of support, resources, and work. If we are going to make the changes we all are saying we want to see, we can’t do it in silos. We have to talk to each other. We have to bring folks together to get the work done. Otherwise, we are right back where we’ve been, and perpetuating a cycle that hasn’t fully worked for a lot of people. McFarlane: As a new organization, what have you done both internally and in the community around the threat of the COVID-19 pandemic? I’m looking at your literature on your website, and there’s one thing I see that just
By Titilayo Bediako
makes common sense. You announced to the public that since March, everybody on the staff has worked from home. As a question of your policy and practice, both internal and external meetings (no matter the size), are held virtually, or they get rescheduled. Hardeman-Jones: I think for me personally, leading a new organization where I’m the only staff member right now, it’s certainly easy enough to work from home. But as I’ve said, the major portion of my job right now is to be in the community talking and meeting with people while building important relationships. While certainly that can be done and is being done over Zoom and over a computer, it’s disappointing we can’t be in person. “I’m sorry I can’t get a cup of coffee and talk to you, sharing the work of Green Lights Twin Cities . . . who I am and what I’m about in person.” It does feel like that makes the relationship building piece of my work a little more challenging, but not impossible. As we think about COVID-19 and its impact, I wanted to also share that some of my colleagues in our other Green Light locations have been responding in a couple of different ways through their selection cycle processes in the programs and models their bringing in. For example, our Kansas City site just last week or maybe the week before, announced they’re in partnership with the school district there. They are bringing in two programs. One is called, “Becoming a Man” and the other, “Working on Womanhood.” And these are two really amazing programs for young people who are in desperate need of mental health support; trauma informed support; and social emotional learning we know so many kids are facing now more than ever, especially kids of color and those from low income families who are disproportionately affected by COVID-19. McFarlane: A component of your mission is to support replication of entrepreneurial initiatives with proven measurable results. Measurability, accountability,
and transparency are important to me. I think one of the challenges of previous generations who moved into the space of social change was that we might not have had the tools, the training, or at least the stateof-the-art training in analytics. In your generation, analytics is really like air these days. I think younger people and their businesses depend on data. What the challenge has been and what we responded to is the need to be an expert. To master the art of creating data driven decision making and to use data to prove our case. I think analytics, data, and research are going to be elevating how our community understands in value and employs these tools for our own interest. In the past, the data has been used against us. It has been part of the structure or the process of defining us at the margin, keeping us in that place. I see that differently with you. Hardeman-Jones: I think data is sort of an integral piece of the Green Light method and the way we conduct our work. I think that starts in this beginning discovery phase where I need to understand through data, what the landscape of the Twin Cities really looks like. What’s happening here and who is it happening to and why? And data plays an important role in that end, and will ultimately help me understand what issues we need to be focusing on and diving deeper into. And then I will say beyond that, any model or program selected for the Twin Cities will utilize data to make informed decisions before bringing the model into our community. We want to ensure Green Light’s fit, initial success, and sustainability within the local eco-system. That means knowing they have been successful in other parts of the country in doing their work. That they are financially stable and that they are ready and willing to grow and partner in a new place will allow the impact we are looking for. I see data as a thread throughout all those pieces. To your point, I think data-based decision making is a piece of the puzzle or a piece of the work that will continue to be present and prevalent.