EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Pregnant Anti-War Soldier Sent to Prison
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Time for Big Green to Go Fossil Free
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
Popular content
Today's Top News
Houston, We Still Have a Problem
The election of lesbian Annise Parker as mayor of Houston, similar to the election last year of African-American Barack Obama as president, was another mature moment of Americans judging individual people of color and homosexuals by the content of their politics. Not yet answered is whether America is ready to let such figures use their office to remediate the economic and education disparities and the civil rights gaps that still bedevil people of color and gay and lesbian people in general.
America is getting better at the individual level. The question is when will that translate into critical progress for the groups Parker and Obama come from.
Start with Parker. Houston became the largest yet in the United States to elect an openly gay mayor. Her sexual orientation meant less than her six prior citywide election victories for either city council or controller. The Houston Chronicle called her a grassroots "policy wonk'' who "happened to be gay.''
Houston narrowly rejected in 2001 benefits for same-sex partners of municipal workers, and 76 percent of voters in the state banned gay marriage in 2005. Parker takes office as the nation remains in a conundrum on gay rights. Americans now accept equal opportunity for homosexuals in the workplace and Obama signed a new hate crimes law that finally protects gays. But Obama's pledged repeal of the ban on gays in the military remains a slow political slog and same-sex marriage remains a heated issue, receiving various voter and legislative setbacks over the last year in Maine, New York, New Jersey, and California.
Because of the conundrum, Parker crafted her message to deep-six strong passions on issues that could be construed as identity politics. Asked in one debate if she would use her clout in City Hall to overturn the city ban on benefits for same-sex partners, Parker said, "I am not running to be a role model. I am running to be mayor of Houston . . . I believe, at some point, the city of Houston will offer domestic partner benefits, but it will require a vote of the citizens. I have no plans to initiate that vote.''
In another debate, she said of domestic partner benefits, "Personally, it's very important, but, as mayor of Houston, do I want to engage resources in fighting that battle or do I want to tackle the budget?''
That is similar to what Obama told me as a candidate in 2007 when I asked him how hard would he push Congress to repeal the vast disparities in federal sentencing for crack vs. powdered cocaine. Those disparities have unfairly imprisoned tens of thousands of nonviolent African-American offenders. Since Obama took office, Attorney General Eric Holder has voiced support for eliminating the disparity and the Democrats have bills working their way through Congress to get rid of it. But the real tests loom ahead against Republicans and conservative Democrats.
"Do we want to spend all our political capital on a very difficult issue?'' Obama asked, wondering whether instead we should "spend more of that political capital'' on school programs.
It is a political prison in which white and straight privilege is taken for granted while equality for others is still derided as special pleading. Recently, Obama has been under pressure from African-American and Latino groups for not targeting more stimulus money to low-income neighborhoods.
Even though Obama is president of "all the people,'' he knows that the black male unemployment rate of 16.9 percent needs disproportionate remedies, compared to the 9.8 percent unemployment rate of white men. Yet he remains wedded to the trickle-down rhetoric of, "The most important thing I can do for the African-American community is the same thing I can do for the American community, period, and that is get the economy going again.''
Since then, the Obama administration, through the Department of Transportation, is reportedly asking governors to make sure that more stimulus-funded contracts go to companies owned by people of color and women.
Trickle-down rhetoric did not result in a flash-flood of equity under Ronald Reagan and it will not under Obama. The next step for America is to let figures like Obama and Parker take office without them feeling that they must water down the fight for equality.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
30 Comments so far
Show AllHas Jackson ever been to Houston? I have lived there, have family members there, and often visit there (I live in the Austin area). I would bet my last dollar that Parker did not win because of her sexual orientation or because people in Houston wanted to prove they did not care what her sexual orientation was. She won because her opponent in the mayoral run-off was Gene Locke, an African-American man, and racism is alive and well in Houston.
It's kind of amazing that the author of the article neglected to mention that important detail, kivals.
I have lived there, run a business there and vist there occasionally. I would bet my last dollar that they elected her because she was the best person for the job.
Consider who this election was between. A black man and a gay woman. Sort of takes the wind out of the sails of the racist argumant or the anti-gay argument. If either argument were true a white male would have run and won. There are plenty of them in Houston.
The people of Houston don't need to "prove" anything to anybody.
It was a run-off, and Parker and Locke were the two top vote-getters in the original election in which there were several other candidates. If either of the last two had been a pro-business heterosexual white male, one who was not marked by scandal, he almost certainly would have won. As long as a candidate is generally "pro-business" and scandal-free, Houstonians, like most US voters, never seriously consider the person's record, accomplishments, ability, or policy proposals, but focus on the superficial, and I have found Houstonians to be far more racist than homophobic.
We'll just have to disagree as we sometimes do. I never found Houston particularly different in this respect than most other large cities, better than some in this area. Austin would be more receptive than Houston of course. Or Dallas/Ft. Worth, Waco or Tyler for that matter.
I hope you guys are warmer in Austin than we are! Shirtsleeves and shorts yesterday...Bbbrrrrrrr today.
Racism alive and well in Houston? That city didn't look so bad when my wife and I visited it. There is plenty of genuine diversity not to mention the Hindu Temple that my wife admired and wants to visit again. I assume that Gene Locke was similar in nature to Ron Kirk of Dallas. Had he campaigned as a populist, he would have won. Isn't Dallas more conservative in nature than Houston despite Ron Kirk winning in Dallas? I fail to see how race turned out to be a liability in such a richly diverse city like Houston.
Houston is a strange place. It has the feel of a cosmopolitan city in that there are so many people of different races, with large East Asian, South Asian, Iranian, and Arab communities, as well as large African-American and Hispanic populations. But among the whites I know and have known there (quite a few), it is amazing to me how many are extreme racists. It is as if rubbing elbows with those of other races has exacerbated, rather than ameliorated, their racism. And though the whites are not the majority, they vote in higher proportions and so generally determine the outcomes of the elections in Houston.
As for Houston vs. Dallas, the city of Dallas has a significantly higher percentage of African-Americans than Houston and that helps explain the greater success of black candidates there.
This is where I see progressives messing up the most. Why should you fear race being the factor? So what if whites vote in higher proportions? You do know that Asian Americans even in CA are not solidly Democrats, right? Race needs to be entirely forgotten and this is where I find being color blind to be a huge advantage. What we have here is lose-lose situation where non-whites are not progressively motivated and more whites are conservatively motivated. Progressive populism especially on the economy is needed to reverse both factors.
Ron Kirk could have won the US Senate seat in 2002 but rural Texans were angry not at his being a black but for being a "pro-business friendly" sellout and John Cornyn cruised to victory. I have heard the name Ralph Yarborough being mentioned before and he was a popular Senator. Yarborough stood for civil rights and yet he still won strong because he was an economic populist. Similarly, former governor of VA Douglas Wilder didn't do so bad in rural VA when he ran a populist campaign despite having been mayor of Richmond whereas Deeds did abominable there despite his failed attempts at trying to play the DLC game to win. It is for this reason that I believe that TX can elect African Americans to statewide offices and elect them for US Senate or even the presidency as long as they are progressive populists at large just like Yarborough.
I acknowledge that racism still exists at large but some of it has changed and populism could help diffuse it.
I basically agree with you. My concerns were with regard to Jackson's failure to mention that race still plays a large part in elections in Houston (implying that it does not), which is as racist as any large city in the nation. I think it is a great pity and I wish it were different, but ignoring it is not helpful.
Did Ralph Yarborough put the issue of race to rest as he continued his years in the Senate? Or was that a different Texas in the 1960s? By any chance, did you or Henry live in TX in the 1960s and if so what was the political climate actually like back then?
I was a child growing up in the 1960s in Texas. My father was a lifelong leftist and an avid supporter of Ralph Yarborough. He almost wept when Ralph lost to the millionaire elitist Bentsen in the Democratic primary in 1970. Back then, Texas was a single-party state and many poor whites would vote in the Democratic primaries for FDR Democrats. After the Civil Rights Act passed, many of the poor whites, particularly those who were more racist, began to trickle out of the Democratic Party, as the Republicans consistently made subtle and not-so-subtle appeals to racists. That made it more difficult for FDR Democrats to win in Texas and eventually more difficult for even the conservative Democrats to win, culminating in total control by the Republicans by the end of the century.
I think that some of the FDR Democrats throughout the south became conservative Democrats or went straight to the Republican Party only when they felt like doing it. FDR's home state was New York of all states but the Great Depression must have been too powerful for them to examine FDR politically. Still, I think that the FDR Democrats who later left initially joined out of a sense of belonging. It is a mystery to me as to how racism overtook their sense of belonging. I wonder if some of those FDR Democrats were racists all along but did not want to spoil it until they thought that they had nothing to lose. I was disappointed with FDR's approval of signing a high taxation law against cannabis which included industrial hemp in 1937 which led to banning the crop altogether and I assume that the closet conservatives made it possible.
Wasn't Bentsen one of those who cheered the Vietnam War while Yarborough opposed it?
Yes, Bentsen, who was pretty much a typical Southern conservative Democrat, was a supporter of the Vietnam War while Yarborough opposed it. Yarborough also supported Civil Rights and was progressive on virtually every issue. Back then, FDR and progressive Democrats could win in part because there was some solidarity among the white poor and working class. The racial issues, and then later the other social/cultural issues, used as a wedge by Republicans, really starting with Nixon, broke that solidarity and eviscerated the left in Texas (as Texas is a Southern state, there was always some degree of racism among the poor and working class whites, even those inclined to vote for FDR and for other left-of-center candidates). The left wing of the Democratic Party in Texas has been in shambles ever since, though occasionally someone like Jim Hightower, who was agricultural commissioner, will gain public office. Hightower was defeated in his bid for reelection by Rick Perry, who is now governor and who was then as now the candidate of the chemical and energy industries.
Sounds like a big omission.
I must say, though, the fact that a lesbian woman and an African American man were the runoff finalists in a mayoral election in Houston, Texas strikes me as worthy of remark, though.
Racism may be alive and well in Houston, as it is here in Southern California, but it sure sounds like something has changed as well.
And anti-gay is live and well among the bigoted Southern Baptist Afro-Americans.
Those in power who make the choices on which candidates to put in front of the voting public use whatever distraction (race,gender,sexual orientation) they find useful at the time.
Agree. The calculation, manipulation, PR, strategy, spin, and uber planning behind the scenes in election (and sales) campaigns would surprise most voters.
Annise Parker sounds similar to former Dallas mayor Ron Kirk. Both of them give rhetoric but when all is said and done, the corporate interests win. I may be a straight married while male but I don't care what sex, sexual orientation, color, religion, or nationality an elected leader is as long as the leader does what is true and best for the place to govern. I guess it's now becoming clear that it doesn't matter if it's a gun toter or an open gay as long as they sell out. These culture wars can be such dangerous distractions.
Here in Houston where I have lived since 1966 Ms. Parker is considered a politician in the mold of the current progressive/liberal mayor White. I have never heard Mr. Kirk mentioned in connection with Ms. Parker.
"The question is when will that translate into critical progress for the groups Parker and Obama come from."
So I looked up Ms. Parker and this is from her own bio on the web: "In the private sector, Ms. Parker spent 20 years working in the oil and gas industry, including 18 years with Mosbacher Energy Company."
This is obviously the real group that she comes from and I'm sure that she has made "critical progress" for them.
Follow the money.
I have lived in Houston since 1966 and vote here.
"looking up Ms. Parker on the web" is obviously a very poor substitute for understanding my town and also which paths some women had to take to be treated equally by large firms such as Mosbacher. I do not know whether you consider yourself a progressive/liberal but if you do is there not some contradiction in the complaint that these firms did not hire women and any suspicion that Ms. Parker is "one of them"?
Furthermore, you are just guessing what "real group" she comes from. In my book that is known as the very ugly "guilt by association". And do you know what Ms. Parker's work was at Mosbacher?
it does my heart good to see so many still have faith in the fundamental wisdom, and influence, of the populace, and in the integrity of the voting systems, that they believe them to accurately reflect such...
I am unable to do so...
But we hope you will find that faith in our people again. Thats the good part...you can always find something you've lost again and if you never had it...you can get it.
Pax
Just because 0bama's campaign was fraud from day one does not mean that minority candidates whose elections set precedents do not have to play politics to get things done.
Were 0bama bargaining school for green jobs or less draconian drug laws against reduced military expenses, that would be politics, not betrayal.
The problem is, of course, that none of that is happening. He has burned political capital to escalate wars, threaten Latin America, steal from the poor and middle class to give to the Wall Street Casino, and blow the Appalachians up for the privilege of poisoning its rivers and fields and loading the air with coal dust and greenhouse gases.
It is well to remember that there is no longer a "majority" group in Houston. All groups are "minorities". Every candidate for Houston's mayor was therefore a "minority candidate". The labels "majority" and "minority" have become meaningless here (I have lived in Houston since 1966) hence ought not to be used any longer.
The earlier discussion between Kivals and Henry8 is interesting. Many of my relatives live in the Houston area, or have lived there. It's not that different from big cities in other states. It has many attractions, but clean air and light traffic are not among them.
Ambitious young people who reach the top in local educational institutions in Texas small towns and rural areas move to cities like Houston, San Antonio, Austin, etc. The small towns' loss is Houston, etc.'s gain. That tells you something about the populations in both areas.
The election of Annise Parker has to be interpreted as an indication that most Houston voters and residents accept new ideas and reject bigotry. If Parker, true to her word, focuses on issues of concern to the broader population instead of gay rights or civil rights, that won't bother me. But if she comes out against domestic partner benefits, or legalizing gay marriage, I would definitely question whether she knows who she is.
I hope she agrees that gay people, who constitute one of the greatest resources in our country, should be proud not of being gay, but of what gays have done for the country.
I think articles like this are counter productive to creating a truly just society. Derrick Jackson should know better. When a black writer limits the questions of a black government official to what they are doing for black people, it turns me off.
If he would have asked what the person is doing to make the laws more equitable for all people, including questions on jobs, the environment, health care, school etc, then I would be more prone to listen.
If you protect human rights for all, you will be protecting it for the minority groups as well. That is the way the issue should be framed if it were to work at all.
Furthermore, and I don't know this one way or the other, but how does he feel about Obama selling out the black and white people, and all the colors in between (except for the ones with green)? Had this been Bush carrying out these policies I think he would have been outraged.
As a white person, I don't give a pass to someone just because they are white. I have been sold out more by white people than black, and this includes our last 4 presidents, and most elected officials. Now I have the privilege of being sold out by a black guy named Obama.
Until we define and deliver basic human rights to all people, this fragmentation will continue to be divisive (maybe as it is intented to be).
Caution: Identity politics can cause blindness.
"I think articles like this are counter productive to creating a truly just society. Derrick Jackson should know better. When a black writer limits the questions of a black government official to what they are doing for black people, it turns me off."
Well you can't afford to ignore racism. Racism has disproportionately affected blacks and latinos in those areas. But classism, capitalism specifically, doesn't shield whites from those kinds of things either.
Racism, sexism, homophobia, and classism can all be rectified simultaneously. End the Drug War, enact univeral employment at a living wage, and you'll go a ways towards solving many societal problems.
This one reason why I don't like identity politics. It creates blind spots, causing some people to ignore race and others to ignore class. When you ignore one and focus solely on another, you hold people responsible for their own disenfranchisement.
No one deserves to go to jail because of an addiction.
Very few if any people deserve to be destitute.
As a Houstonian, let me tell you why I voted for Annise Parker.
She was the more qualified candidate.
His (Gene Locke's) race had nothing to do with it.
Her (Annise Parker's) sexual orientation had nothing to do with it.
She is better qualified to run this city, than is Gene Locke.