Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The skanner. (Portland, Or.) 1975-2014 | View Entire Issue (March 28, 2018)
Page 2 The Skanner March 28, 2018 ® Challenging People to Shape a Better Future Now Bernie Foster Founder/Publisher Senate Lawmakers Seek to Gut Fair Housing I Bobbie Dore Foster Executive Editor Jerry Foster Advertising Manager Christen McCurdy News Editor Patricia Irvin Graphic Designer Monica J. Foster Seattle Office Coordinator Susan Fried Photographer 2017 MERIT AWARD WINNER The Skanner Newspaper, es- tablished in October 1975, is a weekly publication, published every Wednesday by IMM Publi- cations Inc. 415 N. Killingsworth St. P.O. Box 5455 Portland, OR 97228 Telephone (503) 285-5555 Fax: (503) 285-2900 info@theskanner.com www.TheSkanner.com The Skanner is a member of the National Newspaper Pub lishers Association 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. ©2018 The Skanner. All rights re served. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission prohibited. Local News Pacific NW News World News Opinions Jobs, Bids Entertainment Community Calendar n F ebo m me • nts TheSkannerNews o k • learn • co in y o u r c o m m u n d ay ! • L i ke u s o ac it SPECIAL ISSUE: FAIR HOUSING April 18 to y • Opinion n just a few weeks, civil rights and housing advo- cates will commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Fair Housing Act. Just six days after the assassination of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., Congress passed the law on April 10, 1968. On the following day, Presi- dent Lyndon Baines Johnson’s signature made it unlawful to discriminate in housing sales, rentals and finance. Although race, color, religion and na- tional origin were the origi- nal protected classes, in later years, the Fair Housing Act was amended to include gen- der, people with disabilities and families with children. With each revision, business- es such as banks, and other lenders, realtors, landlords, insurance companies — even governments that previously used zoning and restrictive covenants to deny housing access — were all obliged to adhere to new standards of inclusion. Fast-forward 50 years, and much of Black America and other communities of color still find that the promise of fair lending remains just that. Our collective experiences as a people provide painful re- minders of how full and equal access to credit — particular- ly in mortgage lending — re- mains an unfulfilled promise. Charlene Crowell NNPA Columnist These long-standing con- cerns have somehow failed to be included in a new draft legislative proposal on Capi- tol Hill. In the name of hous- ing finance reform, a working proposed bill by Senators Bob Corker of Tennessee and Mark Warner of Virginia “ be eliminated and fair lending requirements could be weak- ened. We’re talking trillions of dollars being affected by such a so-called reform with- out any assurance that fair housing promises made half a century ago will remain. At the end of 2016, the GSEs— Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, along with Ginnie Mae, the Government National Mort- gage Association (GNMA), together held $16.7 trillion in mortgages on the nation’s sec- ondary market. It’s the kind of policy de- velopment that usually fails It’s the kind of policy development that usually fails to attract major headlines but affects literally mil- lions of unsuspecting potential homeowners would eliminate the current requirement of a “duty-to- serve” all markets, particu- larly those like communities of color and rural areas. In- stead, the promise of inclu- sion would be replaced with the vague business judgment of a so-called “guarantors’ de- cision.” If the Corker-Warner hous- ing reform plan is signed into law, government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would to attract major headlines but affects literally millions of unsuspecting potential homeowners across the coun- try. Once mortgage appli- cants are approved for loans, the bulk of them are sold to the secondary market, most often to Fannie Mae or Fred- die Mac. Their sale enables the original lender to free up capital to make more loans to consumers. Fortunately, the National Urban League and the Cen- ter for Responsible Lending joined forces to oppose this proposal before it can pick up more lawmaker support. A report co-authored by the Center for Responsible Lend- ing (CRL) and National Urban League critiques this Senate proposal and criticizes re- cently published papers sup- porting it. The report titled “Senate GSE Reform Propos- al: A Blow to Affordable Hous- ing and Harmful to the Over- all Housing Market,” calls for a system that supports opportunity for current and future generations to achieve homeownership. It also crit- icizes the current legislative proposal as reserving home- ownership only for those who are financially well off. “Although much of the hous- ing market has recovered in recent years, many Ameri- cans have either not benefit- ed or have even lost ground,” said National Urban League President Marc Morial. “Mil- lennials and people of color deserve the opportunity to pursue their own American Dreams. And existing home- owners, especially older Americans need buyers when they are ready to downsize or retire. The financial glue con- necting these generations is affordable mortgage credit.” Read the rest of this commentary at TheSkanner.com Black Women Need Better Access to Reproductive Healthcare I ’ve been a practicing OB/ GYN for nearly 15 years, long enough to see pa- tient after patient struggle through the web of systemic barriers that make access- ing healthcare needlessly difficult. At my practice in Baltimore, in a state that is a national trailblazer in pro- viding comprehensive and af- fordable reproductive health- care, I still hear every day from women who struggle to get the care they need. My patients have told me stories about having to take three buses to get to an appoint- ment, only to be turned away, if they are late. Some patients don’t have the right type of in- surance coverage or have no insurance, pushing needed health services or medication financially out of reach. Oth- ers can’t take time off work or afford transportation or childcare in order to go to their doctor. Reproductive healthcare is not a luxury, and for Black women specifically, being in full control of our repro- ductive decisions can quite literally be a matter of life and death. Data from the CDC show Black women are three to four times more like- ly to die during childbirth than White women. These statistics remain consistent even when adjusting for Dr. Raegan McDonald- Mosley Planned Parenthood of Maryland factors like age, education, and economic status. There is a growing consensus that the stress of prejudice and racism endured by Black women increases the likeli- “ of implicit and explicit racism when interacting with the medical system, lack of quali- ty information about effective family planning methods, and inability to access or afford reproductive healthcare. What I see in these statistics — and what I hear from my patients — is that the current systems for providing birth control are not meeting Black women’s needs. We need to think bigger about how to overcome these barriers and What I hear from my patients is that the current systems for pro- viding birth control are not meet- ing Black women’s needs hood of preterm birth and other health consequences. Racial and ethnic dispari- ties in unintended pregnan- cy also persist. Black women are significantly more likely to have an unintended preg- nancy when compared to all women of reproductive age, and the percentage of people who decide to end an unin- tended pregnancy, instead of give birth, is highest among Black women. Black women at risk of unintended pregnancy are also less likely to use any method of contraception, par- ticularly young Black women. Researchers propose these disparities are a consequence provide convenient contra- ceptive options directly in people’s communities. From birth control delivery apps, to pharmacist prescribing programs, healthcare inno- vators are bringing us clos- er to a world where the tools to prevent pregnancy are at your fingertips. In my view, an over-the-counter birth control pill is the obvious next step and would be a game changer for giving people the option of getting safe birth control when and where they want it. Women’s health providers are working in tandem with researchers to hone best practices for providing birth control pills—for example, no longer are blood pressure checks or pap smears re- quired prior to prescribing the pill for healthy patients. People are already empow- ered to provide self-care with over-the-counter medica- tions, and there is no reason a birth control pill should be different. Studies show that individuals themselves can determine whether birth con- trol pills are right for them and if there are any health conditions that might make taking birth control pills less safe or less effective. While having a yearly genecology exam is import- ant for other health reasons, it is not necessary to start birth control pills. Yet, I’m not con- cerned about my patients dis- appearing. In a recent survey, the vast majority of women interested in taking an over- the-counter birth control pill reported they would continue to visit their healthcare pro- vider to obtain gynecological screenings, like pap smears. We don’t have to hold patients hostage to their prescriptions for birth control pills in order to get them into the office for other services. We need to work to make all reproduc- tive healthcare more acces- sible for people where and when they need it. nt • lo c a l n e w s • eve
