Opinion
Debate Over Endorsements, Race
“Challenging People to Shape
a Better Future Now”
B ERNIE F OSTER
Founder/Publisher
B OBBIE D ORE F OSTER
Executive Editor
J ERRY F OSTER
Advertising Manager
L ISA L OVING
News Editor
P ATRICIA I RVIN
Graphic Designer
A RASHI Y OUNG
D ONOVAN M. S MITH
Reporters
M ONICA J. F OSTER
Seattle Office Coordinator
J ULIE K EEFE
S USAN F RIED
Photographers
The Skanner Newspaper, established
in October 1975, is a weekly publica-
tion, published each Wednesday by
IMM Publications Inc.,
415 N. Killingsworth St.,
P.O. Box 5455, Portland, OR 97228.
Telephone (503) 285-5555.
E-mail: info@theskanner.com
World Wide Web site:
http://www.theskanner.com
Fax: (503) 285-2900
The Skanner is a member of the
National Newspaper Pub lishers Associ-
ation and West Coast Black Pub lishers
Association.
All photos submitted become the
property of The Skanner. We are not re -
spon sible for lost or damaged photos
either solicited or unsolicited.
© 2015 The Skanner. ALL RIGHTS RE SERVED.
REPRODUCTION IN WHOLE OR IN PART
WITHOUT PERMISSION PROHIBITED.
To see The Skanner
News on your smart
phone go to
theskannermobile.com
or scan this QR code
with your app.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Local news
Opinions
Jobs, Bids
Sports
Entertainment
Music reviews
Bulletin board
RSS feeds
T
wo prominent Black Mary-
land
officials
–
Montgomery County Exec-
utive Issiah Leggett and Prince
George’s County Executive Rush-
ern L. Baker III – have endorsed
Congressman Chris Van Hollen, a
White, over Black Congress-
woman Donna F. Edwards in the
race to replace retiring Maryland
Senator Barbara Mikulski.
So far, Edwards is the only
African American in the race and
faces the prospect of joining Cali-
fornia Attorney General Kamala
Harris, an announced candidate
for the California Senate seat that
will be vacated by Senator Bar-
bara Boxer. Another African
American, Rep. Elijah E. Cum-
mings of Baltimore, is considering
running for the seat that will
become vacant in 2017 when
Mikulski retires.
This may seem like a local story,
but it has national implications.
Both Edwards and Van Hollen are
likely to seek contributions from
all over the country. Furthermore,
the possibility of having an
African American woman in the
Senate is an opportunity for
African American women’s issues
to be raised on the Senate floor.
Finally, Edwards’ presence on
committees dealing with work,
health care, and banking will bring
a much-needed perspective to a
Senate that is 96 percent White.
With an African American
female Senator, would Loretta
Lynch’s confirmation for U.S.
Attorney General still be languish-
ing? Or, would Edwards remind
fellow senators that their treatment
of African American women has
hardly been fair? Senator Edwards
B ENNETT
C OLLEGE
Julianne
Malveaux
might also raise issues that impact
all women, but African American
women especially, given the fact
that we have lower incomes, and a
higher rate of single motherhood.
African American women have
also been the targets of disparag-
ing remarks about public
assistance and food stamps, as if
no Caucasian’s participate in these
programs. An African American
Assembly during the 1990s, says
he knows Van Hollen and has
worked well with him. He says
he has made this endorsement “in
the interest of the county.” It has
nothing to do with race, he says,
but everything to do with famil-
iarity.
In his endorsement, Leggett
said, “As we look ahead to build
a strong Maryland, we need a
proven leader like Congressman
Chris Van Hollen, whose reputa-
tion for leadership, deep intellect
and courage is unrivaled. His swift
rise through the ranks in the U.S.
House of Representatives attests
to the respect and esteem he com-
mands from his colleagues, and
from other leaders around this
country.”
The possibility of having an African
American woman in the Senate is an
opportunity for African American
women’s issues to be raised on the
Senate floor
woman senator would likely raise
objections and stop senatorial
trash talk about African American
women it its tracks.
Why, then, have the highest-
ranking elective officers at the
county level in Maryland, both
African American men, chosen the
Caucasian Van Hollen over
Edwards? And if they don’t like
Edwards for the post, why
couldn’t they wait until Cum-
mings decides whether to run?
Baker, who served with Van
Hollen in the Maryland General
Neither Baker nor Leggett has
explained what makes Van Hollen
a better candidate than Edwards. I
won’t speculate about whether
their choice has something more
to do with gender than politics, but
I do think their actions raises
national questions about race and
endorsements.
When all else is equal, I choose
to vote for the African American
candidate instead of the Caucasian
one. The truth is both Edwards and
Van Hollen are likely to vote much
the way that the liberal Barbara
Mikulski did. However, I expect
that Edwards will be far more
aggressive in advocating for the
African American community
than Van Hollen.
Further, in light of the recent
killing of Walter Scott in South
Carolina, Eric Gardner in New
York and Michael Brown in Fer-
guson, Mo., among others, it
seems specious to say that race
doesn’t matter. In light of the dou-
ble-digit unemployment rates
African Americans experience
(twice those of Whites), race still
matters and the need to target
employment programs have not
been raised in this Senate, even
when Democrats held it. Edwards
would be forceful in pushing these
programs. Baker especially owes
his county an explanation both
because it is majority African
American (65 percent) and also
because his county was critical in
electing Edwards to Congress four
times.
There has been a blurring of
racial lines in our nation and in
politics. Increasing numbers of
Americans are biracial or multi-
racial, and identify with every
aspect of their background. Many
choose to check the “biracial” on
census forms, an option that was
unavailable two decades ago.
Apparently the “one drop” rule is
obsolete, unless a mixed race per-
son collides with the wrong officer
of the law. Still, I think that race
should matter in endorsements,
especially when history is about to
be made. Rushern Baker and Isiah
Leggett owe their constituents a
more substantive explanation than
the ones they have offered.
Controversy Builds in Videotaping Cops
F
eidin Santana, the young
Dominican immigrant who
videotaped
North
Charleston, S.C. police officer
Michael Slager firing his gun eight
times, killing Walter Scott, an
unarmed Black man who was flee-
ing, was a hero. His quick decision
to videotape the unfolding action
on his telephone led to the arrest
of Slager for murder.
However, in some states, instead
of being hailed as a hero, Santana
would be the one behind bars.
Illinois, Maryland and Massa-
chusetts
have
used
their
wiretapping laws to prevent video-
taping police in public places.
Some states are moving in that
direction.
But, as we can now see, video-
tape can be a game changer.
This was vividly illustrated in
1991 with the brutal beating of
Rodney King in Los Angeles.
More recently, the July 17 choking
death of Eric Garner in New York
City was captured on video as he
pleaded, “I can’t breathe.”
Although no one can creditably
deny the value of citizens being
able to videotape on-duty police
officers operating in public spaces,
courts are sharply divided on
whether that’s protected under the
First Amendment.
In an article titled, “The Legal
Right to Videotape Police Isn’t
Actually All That Clear,” the
Atlantic Citylab noted, “… The
truth is that courts have not uni-
Page 2 The Portland and Seattle Skanner April 15, 2015
ommends that you:
• Tell police you are recording
T HE C URRY them;
• Comply with their requests to
R EPORT
step back or identify yourself;
•
Keep
your camera out of the
George E.
way (low and close to your
Curry
body); and
• If need be, calmly remind them
of your right to film them.
Given recent success, you can
formly recognized that a right to expect police unions around the
record police actually exists. nation to push for legislation that
Though the U.S. Department of would bar citizens from videotap-
Justice
has
expressed ing such incidents involving
its support for the right to record, police.
‘The truth is that courts have not
uniformly recognized that a right to
record police actually exists’
only four federal appeals courts
have ruled that such a right exists;
others have either not ruled at all
or narrowly rules that no right had
been ‘clearly established.’”
I am not a lawyer and I don’t
play one on TV. But the best avail-
able legal advice seems to be that
generally speaking, it’s legal
under the First Amendment to
videotape on-duty police officers
as long as it is on public property
and you are not interfering with
them performing their official
duties. As noted above, some state
laws ban such recordings.
One legal site, findlaw.com, rec-
Even before the recent spree of
police killing African Americans,
there was strong resistance. A
woman in Rochester, N.Y., for
example, was arrested and charged
with obstructing governmental
administration in 2011 after video-
taping three White police officers
interrogating a Black man from
her front yard. Charges were later
dropped against the woman,
Emily Good, 28.
What would have happened to
Officer Slager in South Carolina
had there been no videotape?
In a word –nothing.
In fact, the officer had radioed,
“Shots fired… Subject is down.
He grabbed my Taser,” a charge
not supported by the videotape.
Instead, what we see in the video
is Slager dropping the Taser near
Scott’s motionless body. The
cover-up was underway before
Scott’s body could be moved to
the morgue.
The local newspaper reported
the next day:
“A statement released by North
Charleston police spokesman
Spencer Pryor said a man ran on
foot from the traffic stop and an
officer deployed his department-
issued Taser in an attempt to stop
him.
“The officer then resorted to his
service weapon and shot him,
police alleged.”
Of course, that was a lie.
According to the Washington
Post, Victoria Middleton, execu-
tive director for the ACLU of
South Carolina, said: “…I think
one of the concerns that immedi-
ately comes to mind is the
discrepancy between the initial
story, the kind of rush to judg-
ment, the rush to say that
procedures were followed and this
was justified, and then when the
video surfaced that quickly unrav-
eled.
And that’s why we must resist
all efforts to prevent citizens from
freely videotaping police while
they are supposedly acting in a
lawful manner.