OPINION
CH RON IC LE
Ernest H. Pitt Pubiisher/Co-Foumier
Elaine Pitt Business Manager
Michael A. Pitt Marketing
T. Kevin Walker Managing Editor
*?tloatJ N?wBp?oei
Puou?rwe AmocMOoti
Horm Carolina
Press Association
w.fri.p.w.14
|?H;r:CAr,0f< ?
aaaaaf
Hijacked
Communications?
Editor's note: Two weeks ago, The Chronicle ran an I A story
about the upcoming nationwide conversion to digital television.
BeloM ? is one local woman's take on the 2009 conversion.
An illusionist entertains with the slight of the hand. While you
are concentrating on the left hand the right hand is performing the
trick and voile la, a card disappears, it seems, into thin air, but is
redlly up the sleeve.
On Feb. 17, 2009, digital broadcasters with the aid of the FCC
and the Congressional Committee on Energy and Commerce, will
have performed a disappearing act with our right to free information
and free choice on how we receive telecommunications, with its
national digfital law.
We have been told that this digital Law will help Homeland
Security, and Ifave better clearer television. The illusion being, this
is a normal progression of technology. The trick is, choice will not
exist. Because of this law. all United States consumers will be com
pelled to purchase a new television, cable and or digital boxes if you
still receive free telecommunications through the air waves, with
tried and true rabbit ears or UHF.
In the beginning, televisions that were 13 inches and smaller
were exempt from this law. but the FCC went back to Congress to
revise this and now my $30 seven-inch screen black and white
portable, primarily used for weather emergencies, will now require
a $40 digital box
This hijacking of our free choice of communication began when
9/11 occurred and fear gripped the minds of our representatives, ren
dering them impotent of reason and critical thinking. The digital
industrial- however, filled their mental voids with getting rid of
analogue broadcasting and have digital access across the board in
the market Be market growth must come from consumer need or
demand and not from fear Evidently consumers were not choosing
digital technoi<>?> fa-' enough for the industry so the next best thing
would be to fob*r. jr. ?tmment friends to take away the choice com
pletely
Fear is no rez&x, ?/; take a** ay freedom of choice; after all , fear,
is no reason
Digital comrn unit -atiorn forced upon the American consumer
will do nothing more th ar .rtaie a ready and consistent market of
consumers for digital companxrt While consumer preference may
have been one reav>n for xt*. -. v. acceptance of digital television,
the FCC never asked what the cor -Aimer needed, the FCC has told
you what you want and bo* they a ill proceed
Many would consider this an intrusion of the government in
their homes, and a monopoly of the digital industrials. Yet. others
would say, no. because of the diverse digital companies in the mar
ket. But choice is having an option, and no matter how you slice
this, there is no other choice hut digital
It is not the same as when television came onto the American
market. There was choice at that time for T V,, radio or print; then
cable, non cable, or print There was always a choice for the con
sumer. There is no choice with this law You must use this system or
be completely left out of broadcast communications. Even local
news and community emergencies will be unattainable.
I am not against digital technology; I do however, think that
there should be a choice with any product. If I want water, I can have
bottled water, or I can go to the tap. This is choice. If I want to heat
my home, I can use oil, gas of electric. This is choice. If I do not
watch much television but still want access to emergency info, or if
I want or do not want cable or digital cable, I should have that
choice.
There needs to be a revision of this law to allow American con
sumers a choice. The FCC revised this law before, to add more tel
evisions to aid business and they must revise it again to help the con
sumer.
China has state run (national) television. Russia and Myanmar
(Burma) have state television State run television does not fit the
American consumer. ^
American consumers should not be compelled to accept any life
changing event without public discussion. Is our freedom of choice
and right to information worth caller ID on the screen? Is our choice
for sale?
We must contact our congressional representatives and the FCC
today, to compel them to have what they did not have in the begin
ning; a dialog with the American consumer concerning this pro
business law.
Let the illusionists know we have seen up their sleeve, peeped
their hole card and we are not tricked or amused.
Chenita Johnson is chair of the Hanes-Lowrance Precinct
Bush gas remedies are short-sighted
Donna
Edwards
Guest
Columnist
When Federal Reserve
Chairman Ben Bernanke
appeared before the Economic
Club pf Chicago in 2006, he
foreshadowed "the days of per
sistently cheap oil and natural
gas prices are likely behind us."
Two years later as the price
of oil surpasses $140 a barrel,
the chairman's prediction
appears to be increasingly accu
rate: Unfortunately, the Bush
Administration's efforts to
address the crisis included sim
ply a series of short-sighted
remedies such as attempting to
persuade Middle East oil pro
ducers to increase supply, sub
sidizing big oil companies
through tax breaks, and pushing
for leasing millions of addition
al acres of federal and protected
lands to oil companies for
exploration and drilling for fos
sil fuels.
These efforts have achieved
no significant effect, with gas
prices rising 250 percent since
the day President Bush took
office. leading to $'4.09/gallon
and costing the average
American over $1,250 dollars
more per year for gasoline since
2001. .
And while the Democrats in
Congress take this country in a
new direction when it comes to
our energy future, they are
blocked at every turn by the oil
barons and their friends in the
White House and on Capitol
Hill.
But now more than ever,
there is no doubt that much of
our nation's future prosperity
depends on a sound, multi
faceted energy policy that
weans our nation off of oil, pro
motes research and develop
ment of renewable energy, and
eventually eliminates the harm
ful emissions that contribute to
global warming.
Recently, Congress took
important steps in leading our
country in a new direction by
passing two important bills.
The first. Saving Energy
through Public Transportation
Act of 2008 (SEPTA), will help
fight rising energy costs by pro
viding grants to mass transit
authorities to reduce public
transit fares, expand transit
services and assist with escalat
ing operating costs.
In the Washington DC.
metropolitan region alone,
SEPTA will provide $57.3 mil
lion dollars in federal funding
for public transportation. The
second bill, the Energy Markets
Emergency Act, directs the
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission to use all its
authonty and emergency pow
ers to limit excessive specula
tion in energy futures markets
which many believe is con
tributing to a rise in cost that
has little to do with the tradi
tional relationship of supply
and demand and a lot to do with
greed.
Still, more needs to be done
to signify a fundamental change
in our approach when it comes
to dealing with energy costs in
America. This will require
strong market signals to show
that innovation will create jobs
and stimulate the economy.
We must tie our 21st
Century energy policy to eco
nomic development by promot
ing deeper investments in mass
transit and utility infrastructure,
especially for vulnerable com
munities. We can also no longer
delay long-term investments in
clean energy research, develop
ment and production of wind,
solar, and other renewable ener
gy sources. Thfs type of for
ward thinking will provide real
solutions to global warming
and be the catalyst of our
nation's next economic boom.
That catalyst in the short
term can begin by transitioning
from fossil fuels and last centu
ry energy production to green
and renewable energy develop
ment. Congress should provide
funding for remodeling older
homes and businesses, while
developing tax policy that
encourages green development
and conservation.
We must cap carbon emis
sions by actually proposing
mandatory limits of 20 percent
reductions by 2020 and 80 per
cent reductions by the middle
of the century. To achieve this
goal, we must provide indus
tries with incentives to end car
bon production through clean
technologies.
Once we are able to com
bine clean energy production
with industry investments, we
will be close to solving the
energy crisis. Recent events
have made it clear that energy
costs are one of the few com
modities that can affect a wide
range of markets in our econo
my. Internationally, domestical
ly, and individually, our
dependence on fossil fuels has ap
tremendous ripple effect, mak
ing a revolutionary energy poli
cy all the more paramount. The
time has come to look forward.
U. S. Rep. Donna Edwards,
a Democrat, represents
Maryland's 4th Congressional
District.
Obama distances himself from blacks
Ron
Walters
Guest
Columnist
Just back from the
RainbowPush convention in
Chicago sponsored by Rev.
Jesse Jackson, Sr., I was struck
by the fact that neither Barack
nor Michelle Obama showed
up and they live virtually right
down the street.
Th? symbol of Obama's
absence was made even more
vivid to me because he was out
making nice with Hillary
Clinton to knit together a uni
fied campaign in the fall.
I understand that, but I also
understand that he could have
showed up, when Governor
Bill Richardson, who lives in
New Mexico not only showed
up. but gave a rousing speech
crediting the civil rights move
ment for much of the political
success of the Hispanic com
munity and his own.
I know, I know, it is com
mon knowledge now that
Barack Obama has to distance
himself from Black radicals,
from his church, and much of
his community in order to
make White voters comfort
able enough with him to trust
him and then give him their
votes. And he will probably
show at the NAACP
Convention. But the troubling
trend which finds him absent
from other venues that are the
substance of Black life looks
like he is taking the Black
community for granted
because of thpr thirst for his
victory.
I was not too put out when
Obama did not show up at the
State of Black America,
because Michelle Obama was
offered to Tavis Smiley and
Obama was campaigning to
win a touch primary in
rue moio
Sen. Barack Obama is coming under fire.
Indiana.
Jackson, however, not only
was material in Barack
Obama's rise to the State
Senate and the U. S. senate, he
represents to most people the
living legacy of Dr. Martin
Luther King. Jr.
That is important because
the Civil Rights movement is
implicated in Obama's victo
ries. since he won 99 pledged
Delegates in nine Southern
states during the primary elec
tion's. This performance was in
states where Blacks constitut
ed one-third or more of the
Democratic party base, states
where the Voting Rights Act
worked to empower Black vot
ers to make a difference.
Without those 99 delegates.
Hillary Clinton would have
won the pledged delegate race
and the popular vote and most
surely would have won the
nomination.
The question this raises is
whether the sophistication of
Black voters in this case will
eventually cost them. Blacks
have a long history of voting
for Whites when the potential
returns were based on hope.
If we support a Black can
didate for president of the
United States, I think that it is
fair to ask whether we will
have more or less access - at
least as much access as we did
to Bill Clinton - and whether
he will deliver the goods for
our community.
My concern here rs that
theory of Black politics should
be to move our community
from just hoping their political
participation will lead to
resources, to exercising tough
leverage over politicians to
negotiate potential returns to
our community in exchange
for our vote.
In fact, one of the lessons
C*
of Rev. Jackson's two previous
presidential campaigns is that
"Hope and Trust politics" is
not as effective as the ability to
trade votes for future support.
The irony is however, that
when a Black person runs for
high profile office our leverage
often disappears because we
are asked to trust that the per
son will deliver based on their
ties to the Black community.
The Black community did
n't have to play the politics of
leverage with Rev. Jackson
because he had proved his
fidelity to their needs through
his history arid in his presiden
tial campaigns he spoke force
fully to their issues. I know, I
know, he didn't win.
But I am driven to ask what
the traditional notion of "win
ning" is worth under circum
stances where the level of trust
is not as high, because the
message is absent and the can
didate is absent. In other
words, how much can the
Black community count on the
delivery of goods and services
by a Black president who pres
ence and message does not
privilege his own community.
What concerns me is that
we are involved in a great cel
ebration without checking the
guidepost that determine
whether or not there will be
sufficient returns to our com
munity from a Black president
in the White House. The irony
is that Obama is likely to win,
we wfl! have to accept him, but
under circumstances where he
is essentially a White candi
date, so we should "bottom
line" our public policy require
ments now as every other com
munity is doing.
Dr. Ron Wallers is the
Distinguished Leadership
Scholar, Director of the
African American Leadership
Center and Professor of
Government and Politics at the
University of Maryland
College Park.