hunter of justice

Sotomayor: "The facts that judges choose to see"

The following excerpt is from the infamous speech that Judge Sotomayor gave at Boalt in October 2001, later published in the La Raza journal, and which now has been demagogued endlessly by rightwingers desperate for a way to stop her appointment. In my view the speech offers not just a solid defense against charges of racism (it makes me choke even to write that), but a set of perceptive insights into the process of judging. Judge Sotomayor obviously has thought deeply about the tensions with which she must live and work as a Latina judge. I will be thrilled if she becomes a Justice of the Supreme Court.

... Professor Judith Resnik says that there is not a single voice of feminism, not a feminist approach but many who are exploring the possible ways of being that are distinct from those structured in a world dominated by the power and words of men. Thus, feminist theories of judging are in the midst of creation and are not and perhaps will never aspire to be as solidified as the established legal doctrines of judging can sometimes appear to be.

That same point can be made with respect to people of color. No one person, judge or nominee will speak in a female or people of color voice. I need not remind you that Justice Clarence Thomas represents a part but not the whole of African-American thought on many subjects. Yet, because I accept the proposition that, as Judith Resnik describes it, "to judge is an exercise of power" and because as, another former law school classmate, Professor Martha Minow of Harvard Law School, states "there is no objective stance but only a series of perspectives - no neutrality, no escape from choice in judging," I further accept that our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions. The aspiration to impartiality is just that--it's an aspiration because it denies the fact that we are by our experiences making different choices than others. Not all women or people of color, in all or some circumstances or indeed in any particular case or circumstance but enough people of color in enough cases, will make a difference in the process of judging. ... As recognized by legal scholars, whatever the reason, not one woman or person of color in any one position but as a group we will have an effect on the development of the law and on judging. ...

Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, ... our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O'Connor is the author of that line, since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Minow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.

... I, like Professor [Stephen] Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. ...[N]ine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown [v. Board of Education].

However, to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept ... [that] the presence of women and people of color on the bench [will make a difference]. Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage....

Each day on the bench I learn something new about the judicial process and about being a professional Latina woman in a world that sometimes looks at me with suspicion. I am reminded each day that I render decisions that affect people concretely, and that I owe them constant and complete vigilance in checking my assumptions, presumptions and perspectives and ensuring that to the extent that my limited abilities and capabilities permit me, that I reevaluate them and change as circumstances and cases before me require. I can and do aspire to be greater than the sum total of my experiences, but I accept my limitations. I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate....

[Full text of speech here]

Historically black colleges add protections against anti-gay discrimination

The Winston-Salem (NC) Journal reports that four historically black colleges in North Carolina have added sexual orientation as a protected characteristic to their anti-discrimination policies. On politics generally, North Carolina is a particularly interesting state to watch: it's the 10th largest in population and the one to vote blue in November by the slimmest margin.  OK, and it's also my home state.  I suspect that I have very few Tar Heel readers (Hi Lee), but it's a fascinating political bellwether, so stay tuned.

Three years ago, Winston-Salem State University's nondiscrimination policy didn't include sexual orientation. Neither did those at most of the historically black colleges and universities (HBCU) in the UNC system. But today, four of the five public HBCUs have policies that include sexual orientation.

"Clearly, society has changed," said Edward Hanes Jr., the equal employment opportunity officer at Winston-Salem State University (WSSU). "More information in the community has brought the change around, more acknowledgement that our campuses are diverse in many ways, beyond the color of skin," Hanes said.

That change hasn't come easily, however. Nationally, HBCUs have been resistant, and sometimes hostile, to protecting the rights of gay students and faculty. Many HBCUs were founded by religious organizations, said Joey Gaskins, the diversity student coordinator for Human Rights Campaign, one of the nation's leading gay-rights organizations. "A lot of our students find the administration and faculty tend to be very conservative and not agreeing with who they are as a people and not allowing the space to educate the community," Gaskins said.

In March, WSSU's board of trustees voted to include sexual orientation in its nondiscrimination policy. Hanes said that the school started taking a close look at including sexual orientation in the policy about three years ago. He said that often school administrators at HBCUs have larger worries than sexual orientation, and that was one of the reasons why it took so long for the school to take action. But once trustee members were able to look at the policy change, they approved it unanimously, Hanes said. "To be perfectly honest, we face a lot of issues at historically black colleges and universities that frankly, majority schools don't have to face," he said. "Sexual orientation is not the most pressing issue. We're working at schools that had to do more with less."

"I think black homophobia is rooted in the fact that our traditional masculine and feminine roles have been under attack for 300 years," said the Rev. Carlton Eversley, who is the pastor of Dellabrook Presbyterian Church and the president of the Minister's Conference of Winston-Salem and Vicinity. Black men have historically been denied the opportunity to make enough money to provide for their families, and the idea that black women can raise a family has also been under attack, Eversley said. "When there are people whose orientation is different or nontraditional, we have a visceral anti-gay, anti-lesbian feeling," he said. "Having said all that, I don't think that condones it."

The issue of gay rights at HBCUs came to a head after a 2002 incident in which a gay student at all-male Morehouse College was beaten by another student with a bat. The gay student's skull was fractured during the beating. After the incident, the Human Rights Campaign started an initiative focusing on HBCUs, Gaskins said. A gay campus organization was soon established at Morehouse College called Safe Space.

Students at Winston-Salem State University established the Gay-Straight Student Alliance last year. Brandon Hughes, the president of the organization and a senior from Charlotte, said he didn't run into much opposition to the group, which recently held a panel discussion on same-sex marriage. "The younger generation is a lot more open-minded," he said. "A lot of gays and lesbians are organizing to let people know what we are. This is how we love. You can either accept it or ignore it."

Race, sex and lobbying in a purple state

From the Durham News, Pam Spaulding recounts lobbying for equality in North Carolina:

I recently attended the Equality NC Day of Action at the state legislature, where average citizens met with lawmakers to discuss pro-equality bills and urge them to oppose a constitutional amendment bill banning same-sex marriage.

The real story, however, is what happened when a group of us -- black lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender North Carolinians -- met with members of the Legislative Black Caucus. It was a shocking experience.

It's hard for some people to acknowledge that LGBT rights issues are social justice issues, but to see this play out in person was disturbing. We stopped in to see Rep. Alma Adams (D-Guilford). She supports the anti-bullying bill and opposes the marriage amendment. However, there was a very strange dynamic going on during the meeting.

We let actual constituents of the lawmaker take the lead. In this meeting, it was a young gay white man from Adams' district. Longtime social justice advocate and fellow Bull City resident Mandy Carter and I, and at least four other black LGBTs were present when the constituent asked if Adams, as chair of the black caucus, would speak with her colleagues who support the marriage amendment.

The answer she gave was pretty astonishing.

1. The amendment "isn't going anywhere," therefore there isn't any point to discuss it with those caucus members. (It is buried in four committees in the House; on the Senate side it was assigned to a committee that hasn't met since 2001);

2. It's not her job to try to educate those black members who support the amendment about why it's an affront to our state constitution;

3. Adams actually said, "your issues are not the black caucus's issues" -- social justice for black LGBTs is not a matter of their concern, even as several black LGBTs stood right there before her. We were all stunned into silence. The lawmaker was apparently unaware of the recent letter released by NAACP national board chair Julian Bond and President Ben Jealous that fully supports LGBT rights, including the right to marry.

Ironically, the Legislative Black Caucus's own Web site says: "Justice - Assure equal protection under the law for African-Americans, other racial/ethnic minorities, the mentally ill and the poor."

I guess that means "except if you're black and LGBT."

We also met with a member of the black caucus who supports the marriage amendment, Rep. Earline W. Parmon (D-Guilford; my rep on the caucus, Larry Hall, was unavailable). She is in favor of the Healthy Youth Act and the anti-bullying bill. But on marriage, she parts ways, citing these reasons:

1. It's a "personal issue" for her. (as opposed to representing her voters' interests)

2. "I'm a minister." (church-state separation, anyone?)

3. "I'm not against anyone, one to one."

That last statement suggests she only wants to "protect marriage," but is sympathetic to same-sex couples' legal concerns. Yet the amendment would eliminate any legal recognition. No civil unions, no domestic partnerships, nada:

"Marriage between a man and a woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state."

If either lawmaker stepped into a time machine that took them just a few generations back in time, they couldn't vote, never mind hold office, or even marry a person of the same race, let alone another race -- all justified by the Bible.

The day taught me that spending face time with our lawmakers is essential, and for black LGBTs it's critical. We left committed to return because lawmakers need to see us and hear our stories.

You can read my full report, with video and photos, here: http://tinyurl.com/c5ynol

Delta days on Capitol Hill

From Politico

If a woman in red demands to be noticed, a thousand women in red are impossible to ignore. At least that’s what the members of Delta Sigma Theta are counting on when they head to the Hill next week, clad in crimson and cream, to lobby their senators and representatives on the African-American sorority’s national agenda. Don’t let the word “sorority” fool you: The Deltas won’t be pushing to lower the drinking age or fighting for their right to party. Most of the women who will attend the 20th annual four-day legislative seminar known as Delta Days at the Nation’s Capital are long out of school, and they’re coming to learn how to be effective advocates on issues like poverty, affordable housing and education.

“It’s an awesome sight to see so many black women here on the Hill,” says Nicole Williams, communications director for Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.). “There’s a powerful message, I think, that black women have a place at the political table.” From Hill staffers like Williams to elected officials like Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio), members of the sorority formed in 1913 by African-American women at Howard University have followed trailblazing sorors — as Delta sisters call one another — including former Reps. Shirley Chisholm (D-N.Y.) and Barbara Jordan (D-Texas) and former Sen. Carol Moseley Braun (D-Ill.) to become a quiet force in the nation’s capital.

Delta and the other “Divine Nine” African-American fraternities and sororities serve as built-in career networks, support systems and social clubs for many of their members in the capital, but Delta has a particular history of political action that its sorors are committed to paying forward. Its founders broke away from Alpha Kappa Alpha, the nation’s first black sorority, at Howard in part because they wanted to be more civically engaged. Their first public action was to take part in the Women’s Suffrage March in Washington — although, because they were black, they had to march at the end of the line.

Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Ohio), who died last year, was an outspoken Delta who made red her signature color and was buried wearing her DST pin.  Fudge, who served as Tubbs Jones’ chief of staff, recalls that when she and Tubbs Jones first arrived in Washington, former secretary of labor and soror Alexis Herman held their first fundraiser. Fudge and Tubbs Jones shared an apartment but didn’t have any furniture. The Deltas brought them some. When Fudge ran for mayor back in Ohio, it was the Deltas who raised the money for her campaign. And after the loss of her friend and mentor, Fudge says, it was the Deltas who persuaded her to run for Tubbs Jones’ seat.

More on race and Prop 8

Charles Blow, the African-American columnist for the NY Times who both writes and produces compelling graphics for the op-ed page, has a column this morning in which he argues that lgbt rights advocates should concentrate on persuading African-American women, who vote in much great numbers than black men, that marriage for s/s couples is a health issue. He points out that within the black community, more women than men voted for Prop 8, tying that to their traditionally greater religiosity. He also speculates that African-American women have much to gain from greater social honesty about homosexuality, invoking the risk of bisexual men infecting women with HIV.  Hence the health angle.

It's a cogent and provocative column, and it will get a lot of attention simply because it's in the Times. Most dramatically, Blow has produced a graphic (follow the column link above) which maps opinion poll data from Democrats, Republicans and African-Americans on a series of sexual "morality" issues, and shows that average black opinion is much closer to the Republican than to the Democratic average. Why? Again, the role of religion, and the disjuncture between how progressive black churches have been on discrimination issues and how conservative many have been on sexuality issues.

These numbers are powerful, and Blow's answer - a new "pitch," stressing health - may be ok for an ad campaign. But a complicated stew of concerns are playing out in these data. At just a gut level, it strikes me that the instinct to circle the wagons and close down to what are tagged as foreign ideas comes from a fundamentally different place for black Americans than for those who cling to race and gender privilege.

Another interesting commentary triggered by Prop 8, focusing on the Latino vote, comes in an interview with Richard Rodriguez (HT Lisa Duggan):

I have not been to a Mexican family without some suspicion of homosexuality in children or grandchildren. But people deal with it within the larger context of family. That's why I suspect the revolution will come not from the male church but from how women treat their children, and whether or not women are willing to reject their children. ...

The desert religions -- Judaism, Christianity and Islam -- are male religions. Their perception is that God is a male god and Allah is a male god. If the male is allowed to hold onto the power of God, then I think we are in terrible shape. I think what's coming out of Colorado Springs right now, with people like Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, is either the last or continuing gasp of a male hierarchy in religion. That's what's at stake. And women have a determining role to play. Are they going to go along with this, or are they going to challenge the order?

Hmm, sounds like women are the key. I hope someone is doing focus groups with African-American and Latina women. And I hope that the progressive and lgbt response to these issues digs deeper than anyone can go in one short column.

Michelle Obama's minefield

By Chrystia Freeland in Financial Times

... The First Lady occupies an odd position in American life, at once on a pedestal and under a microscope. Her husband is the nation’s foremost politician and her main job is to help him do his. But she must always remember that she holds no elected office and wields no independent political power. She is the chief ceremonial female – literally the First Lady – in a country still unsure about the proper role of women in public and private life. If she happens to be African-American, she is a symbol of her race. Oh, and she must be able to choose precisely the right dress for every occasion.

Curtis Sittenfeld - author of Prep and American Wife - speculates that Mrs Obama’s formative years spent as a member of a racial minority at elite institutions – from the “magnet” high school she attended in Chicago to Princeton and Harvard Law School – may be one reason she seems so sure-footed in her new, hypervisible role: “That phenomenon of being overanalysed and having people see all your behaviour as symbolic is probably something that she has experienced for most of her life, certainly more than most white first ladies.”

One of Mrs Obama’s most thoughtful public analysts is her husband. In The Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama introduces her as “smart, funny and thoroughly charming”. When he first met the 44-year-old two decades ago – she was his summer adviser at Sidley Austin, a corporate law firm – what immediately struck him was her height. “She is also very beautiful, although not in a way that men find intimidating or women find off-putting; it is the lived-in beauty of the mother and busy professional.”...

Bringing together work, family and politics has not always been easy for the Obamas. In his autobiography, Mr Obama writes that, by the time Sasha was born, “my wife’s anger toward me seemed barely contained”. He recalls: “I found myself subjected to endless negotiations about every detail of managing the house, long lists of things that I needed to do or had forgotten to do, and a generally sour attitude.”...

Simply by inhabiting the White House, Mrs Obama will be making political history and delivering a powerful political message. “We are still in a time where an image of a tall, really brown-skinned woman as a model of beauty and achievement is striking,” said Lynnette Clemetson, editor of The Root. “I am still stopped cold in a very emotional way every time I see a picture of her, especially if it includes her daughters. I am struck by the fact that those three black women will be living in the White House and they won’t be cooking there, and they won’t be cleaning there. They will be living there.”

New blog with "Obama Posse" list

On Being a Black Lawyer, a new blog by Yolanda Young, focuses on the interests and experiences of African-American lawyers. Feminist Law Professors reports that OBABL grew out of a post by Young last March on Huffington, describing racial stratification at top law firms.

OBABL currently features an "Obama Posse List" of African-American lawyers being named to posts in the  new administration.

Welcome to the blogosphere!

 

Post Prop 8: learning the lessons

I write this as demonstrations against Prop 8 occur around the country. (Right - NYC Wednesday night; HT for photo to Barbara Kerr) That's great (although I distance myself from anything framed as anti-Mormon per se). While it's been tough to have been too busy to be blogging in the last couple of weeks, I'm not unhappy to have missed all the heartburn in lgbt world about why we lost Prop 8, as the gay blogosphere has been flaming with finger pointing in various directions and with interpretations and counter-interpretations of election data. 

Instead -->

First, let's suspend the instant analysis until we have fuller information.  There are at least three studies - that I know of - being done now about what went wrong, including more detailed empirical analysis than is possible from reviewing media web sites with exit poll data. The studies also include post-election focus groups on why people voted as they did.

Maybe these studies will confirm X analysis or Y analysis, or maybe, as is often the case in life, reality will turn out to be at least a little bit more complicated than all of our philosophically-driven explanations would paint it (and I acknowledge that my instant analysis is as much a reflection of my own beliefs as anyone else's). In other words, express the anger, but chill on the analysis until we have a fuller set of data.

Second, specifically with regard to the impact of black and Latino voters, let's not blink at either white gay race stupidity (and worse) or where a marriage equality message failed.  There's undoubtedly a degree of lgbt pain from being rejected by members of another minority whose own struggle for equality has been so prolonged and so important. I feel that, and I can only imagine what it must feel like for an lgbt person of color. I also recall that, as others have said, on every issue except marriage, the support for lgbt equality is stronger in communities of color than anywhere else.  Just compare the pro-gay voting record of the Congressional Black Caucus with any other group in Congress - nothing comes close. And I am quite suspicious of analyses that focus on people of color as somehow the location from which the missing 400,000 votes were supposed to have come. Other groups - unmarried women, from what I've heard - voted by a majority against Prop 8, but by a significantly smaller majority than was projected.  Are single women to blame for the defeat?

That said, after we've dropped the blaming - sometimes racist - language that has emerged since election day, let's not pretend that all is well on this front. There are reasons why communities of color did not vote against Prop 8 in the ways we wanted and needed, and those reasons need to be addressed head on. Maybe the No on 8 campaign should have spent more/different resources directed toward black and Latino voters, but that's way too easy a response.  Maybe just throwing more money into certain ads or get out the vote efforts would have turned the tide.  Even if that's true, however, there are deeper reasons operating here. Hopefully, some of those dynamics will become more clear when focus group analyses come in.  Whatever they are, our duty is to deal with them, in all their complex realities.

Tea and history: new oral history of black gay men in the South

In African-American communities in the South, "tea" can be a code word for "gay." It's also a slang term for gossip; "pouring tea" or "spilling tea," can mean telling tales or dishing up the dirt. With a title playing on those meanings, Sweet Tea, E. Patrick Johnson's oral history of African-American gay men in the South, has just arrived in bookstores.

Johnson, a North Carolina native who is now professor of performance studies at Northwestern University,  argues that southern black gay men draw upon the performance of "southernness"--politeness, coded speech, and religiosity, for example--to legitimate themselves as members of both southern and black cultures. At the same time, according to Professor Johnson, they deploy those same codes to establish and build friendship networks and to find sexual partners and life partners. In addition to filling a gap in the sexual history of the South, Sweet Tea offers a window into the ways that black gay men negotiate their sexual and racial identities with their southern cultural and religious identities.

Traveling to every southern state, Professor Johnson interviewed more than seventy black gay men between the ages of 19 and 93. In Sweet Tea, he presents them in the style of Studs Terkel's long oral histories, with relatively few questions and minimal interruptions - essentially, allowing them to tell their stories their own way.

As is often true in the South, Johnson argues that things are more complicated than they initially may appear. Gay men have found places of honor in countless black church choirs. Drag queens sometimes figure in the sideline antics at athletic events on many historically black campuses. And of course, the Lady Chablis of Savannah - made famous in John Berendt's Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil - is hardly the only diva to make a fabulous living on a local stage.

Along the way, the reader meets Harold and Harold, a mixed-race gay couple who have lived together for more than four decades; "Countess Vivian," a World War II veteran who reigns as a Mardi Gras diva on the gay end of Bourbon Street in New Orleans; or "Chaz," a young trans person who lives as a woman six days a week but dons a suit and tie to attend church on Sundays, to placate his mother.

You can see video clips of Professor Johnson's dramatic readings from the interviews. On November 3, he will be speaking about the book at Indiana University in Bloomington.

HT - Star News

James Baldwin and Barack Obama

The New York Review of Books
By Colm Toibin

...Just as Obama, in his increasing urge to inspire, a necessary aspect of his calling perhaps, often seeks a rhetoric free of bitterness and high on healing, Baldwin, in his urge to speak difficult truths, to tell white people what they least wished to hear, sometimes moved toward a tone which was almost shrill. In his great good humor, however, he would perhaps enjoy more than anyone else reading this passage from an essay written by him in 1965:

I remember when the ex-Attorney General, Mr. Robert Kennedy, said it was conceivable that in 40 years in America we might have a Negro President. That sounded like a very emancipated statement to white people. They were not in Harlem when this statement was first heard. They did not hear the laughter and bitterness and scorn with which this statement was greeted.... We were here for 400 years and now he tells us that maybe in 40 years, if you are good, we may let you become President.

Obama, running for President forty-three years later, just three years too late to fulfill what Robert Kennedy saw as conceivable, what Baldwin saw as far too late, ends Dreams from My Father with the phrase, "I felt like the luckiest man alive." Later, when he won his first election to the US Senate, he wrote:

Still, there was no point in denying my almost spooky good fortune. I was an outlier, a freak; to political insiders, my victory proved nothing.

Similarly, Baldwin in 1985 wrote about his own unique position and attitude in the formative years in Greenwich Village: "there were very few black people in the Village in those years, and of that handful, I was decidedly the most improbable." More than twenty years earlier he had written:

To become a Negro man, let alone a Negro artist, one had to make oneself up as one went along....

Both men set about establishing their authority by exploring themselves and how they came to make it up as they went along, as much as by exploring the world around them. In Obama's own mixed background and complex heritage he saw America; out of his own success, he saw hope and a new set of values. Out of his own childhood Baldwin produced a number of enduring literary masterpieces and out of his efforts to make sense of his own complex, playful personality and his own unique place in history he produced some of the best essays written in the twentieth century. Reading these essays and Obama's speeches, especially the ones that are high on inspiration and short on policy, one is struck by the connection between them, two men remaking the world against all the odds in their own likeness, not afraid to ask, when faced with the future of America as represented by its children, using Baldwin's wonderful phrase, questions that are alien to most politicians: "What will happen to all that beauty?"

Why no talk of "welfare kings"?

Darren Hutchinson (AU) has just published a zinger on blackprof.com,  on "Bringing back welfare as we knew it."  And I would nominate his earlier column, excerpted below, for a prescience award:

blackprof.com

March 17th, 2008 by Darren Hutchinson

Conservatives and liberals alike have maligned governmental subsidies to poor people. One of the most pejorative terms to come out of those debates is the “Welfare Queen.” She defies statistical data (most welfare beneficiaries are white), but she is the icon of waste and laziness. She is a black woman with countless children who have just as many fathers. She is robbing and bankrupting the government and “breeding” a generation of mess. And, certainly, the government should not reward her bad behavior. ...

... Bear Sterns did not have a highly diversified portfolio and was blown away by the subprime mess. The same story applies to Countrywide. Subsidizing its misconduct and irresponsible behavior would seem to raise the same issues as the welfare debate — but with greater force, given the impact of national banking decisions on the broader economy. Are bailed-out banks Welfare Kings? What distinguishes their poor behavior from the poor behavior of the poor (yes - 3 times in one sentence)?

Shifting demographics of abortion and the political fall-out

An important new report from the Alan Guttmacher Institute analyzes trends in abortions from 1974 to 2004, a time frame that dramatically highlights generational shifts among American women. The key findings:

* The overall rate of abortions is at its lowest level today since 1974. It peaked in 1980, and the rate today has dropped almost one-third (from 29 per 1,000 women to 20 per 1,000 women) from the 1980 peak.

* BUT - the rates have fallen much less among non-white and low-income women. As a result, the net effect is that abortions are becoming more concentrated among women of color than among white women, and likewise for low-income, rather than middle- and upper-income women.   

About 70 per cent of all pregnancies among African-American women are unintended, compared with 48 per cent of pregnancies across other racial groups.

The social reality for each group is reflected in the fact that 5 per cent of black women had an abortion in 2004, compared to 3 per cent of Hispanic women and 1 per cent of white women.

The remarkable drop in the overall rate is proof that something is working to prevent unwanted pregnancy, since the abortion rate is an artifact of the unwanted pregnancy rate. It's frustrating that the fundies try to claim the credit for abstinence only programs - frustrating because many other studies show that those programs are generally failures. 

My bigger concern is about the potential political fall-out of these demographic changes for a woman's right to have an abortion. Some of the groups litigating abortion rights in the 1970's stressed that the lack of legal abortions had a disproportionate impact on poor women - there was a "poverty" amicus brief in Roe v Wade, built on an equal protection theory. But the face of the abortion issue was that of a white middle-class young woman, a face that - whatever its other problems - also signaled that this was a demand that cut across almost every segment of American society.

I worry that the AGI report data tell us that abortion is becoming more a minoritarian issue. If so, we are at a moment when social policy and law can move in one of two directions. Our society could move to change the life circumstances of the young women who now face unwanted pregnancy, and therefore seek abortion, at much greater rates than other American women, by providing real choices over their futures. Or, we could - silently, without acknowledgment - continue down the path of cutting them loose from whatever remains (not much, it seems in the moment) of the American vision of a decent middle-class life of work, family and aspiration.

NYT analyzes the angles for ballot initiatives

[See my earlier posts here and here for more about substance] 

Social Initiatives on State Ballots Could Draw Attention to Presidential Race - NYTimes.com

By IAN URBINA

Divisive social issues will be on the ballot in several states in November, including constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage in Arizona, California and Florida, and limitations on abortion in California, Colorado and South Dakota.

Although research indicates that ballot measures do not drastically alter voter turnout, they have begun attracting the attention of both presidential campaigns.

Unlike 2004, when same-sex marriage bans were considered in 11 states, no single issue will dominate statewide ballots.

... Jennie Drage Bowser, a policy analyst at the National Conference of State Legislatures.... said that many of the social measures on the ballots are being pushed by evangelical groups that hope to force Senator John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, to pay closer attention to their agenda.

On the ballots are at least 108 measures, down from 204 in 2006. At least 30 measures may be added as signatures are verified....

In Arizona, California and Florida, advocates hope to amend the state constitutions and define marriage as solely between one man and one woman. Similar amendments have been passed by 27 states.

Mr. McCain has endorsed the proposal. Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, the presumptive Democratic nominee, who previously said same-sex marriage should be left up to the states, has said he opposes the ban....

“California’s measure is distinctly important because the movement to legalize gay marriage thus far has been driven by the courts,” said John G. Matsusaka, president of the Initiative and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California. “If California voters reject the amendment banning gay marriage, it will be the first significant popular affirmation of gay marriage.”

Abortion will be a ballot issue in California, Colorado and South Dakota.

South Dakota voters will consider a ban on abortion except in cases of rape, incest or threats to a woman’s health. The proposal would give the state one of the strictest bans in the country, and it would almost certainly lead to a challenge in the courts.

California will vote for the third time on a parental notification measure.

Colorado voters will be asked whether to define a “person” as “any human being from the moment of fertilization.” The proposal is the first in nation to put the question of when life begins before voters.

Groups including National Right to Life and Focus on the Family are opposed to the Colorado initiative, arguing that the timing and language are not right.

A memorandum circulated among activists and lawmakers last year by the Indiana law firm Bopp, Coleson & Bostrom, which is closely associated with the National Right to Life Committee, argued that now is not the time to promote such “personhood” measures because they will fail in the courts.

“They also run the risk of taking much-needed resources and attention away from other types of laws that could protect women and their unborn children immediately,” said Clarke D. Forsythe, president of Americans United for Life.

Kristina Wilfore, the executive director of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, a liberal-leaning policy group in Washington, said the lack of unity and focus among conservatives this year on measures like Colorado’s may put Mr. McCain in a difficult position, forcing him to choose sides.

Three states are expected to consider banning affirmative action. Colorado has a proposal on the ballot, and Arizona and Nebraska may soon follow suit. Similar measures have been passed in California, Michigan and Washington.

As the first black presidential candidate to lead a major party ticket, Mr. Obama has cast himself as being able to move beyond racial divisions, but those divisions are likely to take on increasing significance as both candidates confront the affirmative action measures.

The debate, in fact, has already begun. Asked about affirmative action last week, Mr. McCain said he supported a ban, even though in 1998 he opposed a similar measure, calling it “divisive.” Mr. Obama opposes the bans....

In Nebraska, a radio advertisement favoring the ban was broadcast this month and featured a clip from an inflammatory speech by the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., Mr. Obama’s former pastor. “Colorblind government,” the advertisement said, is the best way to “reject the politics of race and hate.”...

AIDS = African-American health crisis

U.S. Blacks, if a Nation, Would Rank High on AIDS - NYTimes.com

By LAWRENCE K. ALTMAN

If black America were a country, it would rank 16th in the world in the number of people living with the AIDS virus, [according to the Black AIDS Institute].

The report, financed in part by the Ford Foundation and the Elton John AIDS Foundation, provides a startling new perspective on an epidemic that was first recognized in 1981. [Full report is here.]

Nearly 600,000 African-Americans are living with H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS, and up to 30,000 are becoming infected each year. When adjusted for age, their death rate is two and a half times that of infected whites, the report said. Partly as a result, the hypothetical nation of black America would rank below 104 other countries in life expectancy.

Those and other disparities are “staggering,” said Dr. Kevin A. Fenton, who directs H.I.V. prevention efforts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the federal agency responsible for tracking the epidemic in the United States.

“It is a crisis that needs a new look at prevention,” Dr. Fenton said.

In a separate report on Tuesday, the United Nations painted a somewhat more optimistic picture of the worldwide AIDS epidemic, noting that fewer people are dying of the disease since its peak in the late 1990s and that more people are receiving antiretroviral drugs.

Nevertheless, the report found that progress remained uneven and that the future of the epidemic was uncertain. The report was issued in advance of the 17th International AIDS Conference, which begins this weekend in Mexico City.

The gains are partly from the Bush administration’s program to deliver drugs and preventive measures to people in countries highly affected by H.I.V.

The Black AIDS Institute took note of that program in criticizing the administration’s efforts at home. The group said that more black Americans were living with the AIDS virus than the infected populations in Botswana, Ethiopia, Guyana, Haiti, Namibia, Rwanda or Vietnam — 7 of the 15 countries that receive support from the administration’s anti-AIDS program.

The international effort is guided by a strategic plan, clear benchmarks like the prevention of seven million H.I.V. infections by 2010 and annual progress reports to Congress, the group said. By contrast, it went on, “America itself has no strategic plan to combat its own epidemic.” ...