Indianapolis Recorder, Indianapolis, Marion County, 15 November 2002 — Page 8

THE INDIANAPOLIS RECORDER

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15,2002

PAGE AS

EDITORIAL Some people just give of themselves unselfishly Don’t you just love nice people? Well maybe I shouldn’t just say “nice” people, I’m talking about people who do things that they really don’t have to do, just to help another individual out. Last week I was speaking with a woman who, along with her husband just recently opened up a church, in an under-served neighborhood. As I was talking with this woman, she began to tell me about different situations that have taken place at this church, which has only been open for a little over a month. She spoke of how rival gangs packed the church during a funeral. The gang members dressed in their respective colors and did the whole hand thing, 1 don’t even know what to call it — throwing up their signs I guess. Anyway, this lady said how lots of people who were in the church were scared, but she wasn’t. She wasn’t afraid because she said she felt an “inner peace.” I don’t know how I would have reacted in a situation like that. I’d probably join the masses and be afraid too. But the thing about my telling you this is that this woman and her husband used their savings and sold all their household furniture, to open this church. They took all they had to open up a church that others could use and enjoy. I don’t know where this couple lives but if I were to guess. I’d assume they resided in a fairly nice neighborhood. But they put on airs so that one would assume they had to rest, and started this church in what many would call the ghetto. When I asked her why they decided on that location, she simply stated, “that’s where the work needs to be done.” And that was that. When she spoke about this church, she had a sparkle in her eyes. I know that sounds kinda cbrny, but she really did. Her eyes literally lit up. When I left her, I felt really good inside knowing that people like her and her husband still exist in this insane world that seems to judge people on their material possessions and financial gains. While writing this, another individual crossed my mind as being one of those people who do things to help other people out. This person is well recognized throughout the city. I’m speaking of Father Boniface Hardin, founder and president of Martin University. Father Hardin founded Martin University to fulfill his goal of educating the poor, minorities, the elderly and the imprisoned. For his unselfishness and dedication to serving others. Father Hardin will be honored with the 2002 International Citizen of the Year Award next week. Individuals like the couple who started the church and Father Hardin are certainly OK in my book. It’s important to recognize that they did something that they really didn’t have to do. Now while they may get recognized or honored for doing such deeds, it’s still something that was done to uplift other people — and that's what matters. If more people genuinely did good things, not necessarily for themselves, but just to maybe make it easier or more pleasant for another individual — this world would definitely be a better place. To all the people that do things unselfishly, I encourage you to continue on. Don’t get caught up in the “hype,” just continue to do what’s in your heart because you never know how the slightest thing can have an everlasting effect on someone.

OMep P. Stomrt 1 MS-ISM

Mrcm C. SMwwt 8r. Eunice Trotlar EdNor#uMMMr EdNor-in-ChM 1KK-1M3 PuMMwr IMS-1990

ill

What the elections results mean and how Democrats must improve

In the end, Tom Schneider couldn’t carry his own city of Lawrence. The voters of Indianapolis/ Marion County and Lawrence punished Schneider’s inept, racist, bigoted, mean-spirited campaign by electing Frank Anderson in a massive landslide. Sheriff-elect Anderson won by 72,322 votes; one of the largest election landslides in Indianapolis history. In many places, African Americans didn’t “Come Alive November Five” and vote. That’s not the case in Indianapolis. AfricanAmerican voters here “Came Alive” and voted. Our Black community’s votes helped Democrats achieve some critical victories in the city, county and townships. African-American voter anger and overall voter revulsion at the vicious negative political ads and tactics directly contributed to Schneider’s and Brose McVey’s defeats. Looking back. Congresswoman Julia Carson’s Oct. 30 walkout of that Kiwanis debate generated negative media coverage and threatened her already shaky white support. However, the walkout crystallized Carson’s Black support. Street talk, community buzz and comments on Black radio all pointed to Blacks coming out in force for Julia. Anderson was going to win, but the revelation two days before the election, of the Schneider campaign’s racist flier depicting Congresswoman Julia Carson in a vile, despicable way unleashed unprecedented anger among African Americans and revulsion among whites. Schneider’s lastminute racist tactics and Mayor Bart Peterson’s strong denunciation of them swung momentum away from McVey and back to Carson. In the end, the backlash over the Schneider flier was so great it

Just Tellinlt By AMOS BROWN

claimed McVey as a victim, too. McYey’s defeat was a bitter pill for Republicans to swallow. They honestly believed they could finally beat the invincible Carson. But because 40 percent of Blacks live in white majority precincts, thousands of Blacks received McVey’s and GOP literature and anti-Carson phone calls which paradoxically increased Carson’s Black support. McVey strategists, GOP “experts” and white media adhere to the myth that Julia’s votes come from the “inner city.” An article in last Sunday ’ s Indianapolis Star perpetuated that myth. In truth the “inner city” stretches from Eagle Creek to the Hancock County line, 21st to 56th. The majority of Carson’s Black votes came from Pike, Wayne, Warren, Washington and Lawrence townships where most Black voters now live. Carson’s victory trashed the reputation of pollsters with only WISH/Channel 8 and lUPUI’s Dr. Brian Vargus’ poll getting it right. The biggest humiliation went to Nick Panagakis, pollster for the Star/Channel 13 who flatly said McVey would win. His Panagakis’ Market Shares Inc. totally failed to detect and track Black voter sentiment, a fatal flaw for someone polling Indianapolis. The flier flap was indicative of the viciousness of this year’s elections. TV and radio ads were nasty and snide. Campaign signs were repeatedly defaced or stolen. Dirty tricks from “killer” phone banks to buttons with pejorative candidate photos were the norm. Most voters were revulsed by

the negativity and stayed home. And those that came out, heavily voted for positive campaigners. And because Black voters were angry and energized, they came out and helped make history as Democrats captured all four township offices, trustee, assessor, constable and small claims judge in Pike Township and all but trustee in that bastion of Republicanism - Washington Township. Now, for the first time. Democrats control three of Marion County’s nine township governments and are poised to capture control of two others. Though Prosecutor-elect Carl Brizzi won with 52.2 percent of the vote over Jim Osborn, (with some notable Black support) Republicans did much more poorly countywide. Getting just a smidgen above 50 percent was Circuit Judge-elect Ted Sosin (50.4 percent) and County Clerk-elect Doris Ann Sadler (50.3 percent). Winning, with less than a majority of voters, were “taxbusters” Auditor Martha Womacks (49.2 percent). Recorder Wanda Martin (49.5 percent) and Assessor Joan Romeril (49.6 percent). Rep.-elect David Orentlicher’s 37-vote victory and Rep.-elect Carolene Mays’ two-to-one landslide win now give Democrats control of Indianapolis’ 16-seat state House delegation; another first. Controversy and negative publicity, including a John Strauss Star column the week before the election, helped sink the distinguished career of Judge Z. Mae Jimison. But, two other African-American judges won big as Tanya WaltonPratt and Cynthia Ayres were re-

elected.

Just as Indianapolis rejected racism and bigotry with their votes for Carson and Anderson, Indy rejected religious bigotry with the election of Judge-elect David Shaheed, who placed eighth with 104,205 votes, besting seven incumbent Republi-

can judges. But while Democrats made great gains in Tuesday’s elections here, they made plenty of mistakes they can’t afford to repeat in 2003 and

2004.

A big mistake was Indiana’s Democratic Party utterly failing to energize Indy’s Black voters for Secretary of State candidate John Fernandez and the rest of the state

ticket.

Fernandez lost Marion County by less than 1,000 votes. Fernandez, at the top of ticket, received 47.9 percent of the vote, a smaller percentage of the countywide vote than the Democratic candidates for county cleric, auditor and recorder. Indiana Democratic Party Chair Peter Manous and his minions refused to spend money on Black radio or TV promoting Fernandez or giving reasons why African Americans should vote Democratic. Black voters were energized for Julia and Frank, excited about township and legislative candidates they met or heard about, but didn’t give a hoot about other Democratic candidates because nothing was done to excite and energize them. The inaction provided an opening for Jim Kittle’s Indiana Republican Party which spent thousands on creative radio and TV ads targeting African-American voters between 25 and 40. The OOP’s campaign took advantage of recent polling by the Joint Center for Political Studies which says Blacks 25 to 40 consider themselves more independent and less wedded to Democratic ideals, policies or candidates. However, anti-Carson ads by the national GOP and Schneider’s racist campaign undercut Kittle and MB ARI’s efforts at making inroads into the African-American community. But at least Kittle and Indiana Republican leaders tried. The state’s Democratic leaders’ failure to have a viable, fully funded marketing strategy to reach the largest group of African-American voters is one of the examples of inept campaign leadership. Unless Lt. Gov. Joe Keman wants to lose as badly as Tom Schneider, he must make changes at the state Democratic-Party and bring Robin Winston, Joe Andrew, Tom New and Rachel Gorlin back to get the Democrats' message and campaign together. Or else what happened to Democrats nationally will happen in Indiana in 2004. See ‘ya next week. Amos Brown’s opinions are not necessarily those ofThe Indianapolis Recorder. He can be reached at (317) 221-0915 or by e-mail at [email protected].

Supreme Court should strike out 3 strikes

It’s hard to say whether it’s a good or bad thing that the U.S. Supreme Court began hearing arguments on the three strikes law. The court has been granite-like in its opposition to anything that even faintly tilts toward civil liberties in prisoner rights cases. But if there’s a prisoner rights issue that screams for redress it’s three strikes. Twenty-three states now have three strikes laws on their books. The law mandates that repeat offenders be slapped with severely enhanced sentences. California has the toughest and most vigorously enforced three strikes law in the nation. A defendant convicted of a third offense no matter how petty can be slapped with a prison sentence of 25 years to life. The draconian law blatantly violates the 8th Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. In February, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the convictions of two threestrike prisoners in California. These two cases tell much about what’s wrong with the law. The two prisoners, Gary Ewing and Leandro Andrade, were not convicted rapists, murderers, sexual pedophiles, bank robbers, arsonists, or drug kings. They were petty thieves. A judge tossed the book at Ewing for trying to steal three golf clubs from a golf shop, and at Andrade for pilfering video-

The Crisis in Block and Black By EaHOfvi nviQMIlOH

tapes from two K-Mart stores. Despite its revulsion at the atrociousness of the law, the appeals court did not take logical step and void the law completely. This means that hundreds of three-strike offenders continue to be herded into already bulging jail cells. The majority of them are Latinos and African Americans. They are jailed mostly for non-violent crimes such as drug offenses or petty theft, and taxpayers are forced to spend extra millions to feed, house, and provide medical care for them while they wile away decades in prison. Andrade would limp or be wheeled out of prison at 87. There's good reason to fear that even more prisoners will continue to pack prisons under the law. Most District Attorneys in California, and the other states that have three strikes laws, have not given the slightest hint that their enthusiasm for nailing repeat offenders with three-strike convictions have

waned. Every attempt to dump or change the law in California and other states by initiative or legislative action has failed miserably. There are two reasons why. One is that much of the public is scared stiff of crime. They are not reassured by news reports, studies, and government statistics that show that crime has dropped. Crime is crime to much of the public. Few are willing to make any fine distinctions between someone who robs a bank or sells or possesses a small amount of cocaine. The perception is that the cocaine dealer or user today could be the bank robber or murderer tomorrow. Therefore, it’s better to get them off the streets before that happens. The second reason is that politicians obsessively check the opinion polls. They know that there is no detectable swing in public sentiment toward modifying, let alone eliminating, the three strikes law. Few politicians will dare risk being branded as soft on crime by pushing for reform or elimination of the law. They regard this as political suicide for them come election time. Many other politicians reflexively defend the law by claiming that it is a powerful weapon to fight crime and that scrapping it would dump more violent criminals back on the streets. That was the rationale of California’s attorney gen-

eral, an elected official, who practically demanded that the Supreme Court reverse the appeals court decision. Yet, there’s no evidence that three strikes deters, let alone reduces crime. In states such as New York that have no three-strikes law, the crime rate has plunged just as sharply as California’s rate. It dropped because of an aging population, an improved job and business climate, the expansion of community policing programs, and more effective youth and adult drug counseling and treatment programs. Three-strikes laws needlessly imprison thousands of persons who commit petty crimes, and criminalize a generation of young Black and Latino males. For a fraction of the cost of preserving three strikes, most of these desperate souls could be helped by more drug treatment and job and skills training programs. Some states such as California are putting more resources into treatment and prevention programs. They are proving far more effective in helping people turn their lives around than simply warehousing them in prison cells. Given the Supreme Court’s abysmal track record on prisoner rights cases, there’* scant hope that the court will dump the law. But if a miracle happens, it would bring some sanity back into the sentencing laws.