By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Analyst

March 3, 2010 – Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) ,  the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee announced Wednesday he would temporarily step aside as chair until all ethics investigations have been completed.

Rep. Charles Rangel in the House Gallery announces he will step down as chair of the Ways and Means Committee.

This was a quick retreat from his stance on Tuesday, but the tide may have turned when he learned of Republicans plans to bring a resolution t the floor that would have forced his fellow Dems into a politically awkward situation.

Rangel, 79, told reporters at a press conference Wednesday, “In the view of the fact that my chairmanship is bringing so much attention to the press, and in order to avoid my colleagues having to defend me during their elections, I have this morning sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi asking her to grant me a leave of absence until such time as the ethics committee completes its work.”   

 Rangel’s fellow colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) have been loyal to one of the founding members of the group, following the announcement CBC chairwomen Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) issued the following statement; 

“We regret that Chairman Charles Rangel is taking a temporary leave of absence during this very critical time in our efforts to turn the economy around. He has been an effective chairman and has shown tremendous leadership on many issues and dedicated service to his constituents.”

Rangel will be replaced by California Rep. Peter Stark (D) another colorful and often controversial member of the House.  Stark’s role as chairman is also deemed “temporary,” and it’s unlikely his selection will sit well with House Republicans.

From the floor of the House In 2007 Stark accused President Bush of sending troops to Iraq “to get their heads blown off for the president’s amusement.”  He also gave Rep. Scoot McInnis a tongue latching calling the Colorado lawmaker a “fruitcake.”

 “We recognize that Chairman Rangel did not want this matter to be distractions from our efforts to create jobs and revitalize our economy. However, we remain concerned about the precedent this sets for the House of Representatives that the political climate is such that a member would feel the need to step aside, even temporarily, during an ongoing proceeding,” Lee said.

All of this is unfortunate for the seasoned lawmaker, but the move he made has removed the target on his back, given the Dems time to re-group and will allow the Ethics Committee time to finish their work.

Did Rep. Charles Rangel do the right thing?

By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Analyst

Nov. 6, 2009 – The feisty and outspoken New York Rep. Charles Rangel (D) and several other Black lawmakers will most likely be cleared of any wrongdoing by the House ethics committee on Friday.

Rangel has been the subject of an investigation looking into several financial irregularities, including his failure to report more than a half million dollars in assets.  Rangel always maintained it was an accounting error and that he would be cleared. 

Republicans have tried unsuccessfully for months to get him to step down from chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, one of the most powerful committees in Congress, but Rangel declined to do so and for good reasons. 

Roll Call is reporting Rangel along with four other members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) will be cleared of any misconduct for taking a privately financed trip to the Caribbean.  The investigation centered on whether a trip to the Caribbean privately financed broke House travel rules.  I was told by staffers, lawmakers checked with the ethic committee before taking the trip and it was deemed permissible.  It’s not clear why the committee started the probe after the members reported it in their disclosure filings.

The four other Black lawmakers who will reportedly be cleared are: Reps. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D-MI), Donald Payne (D-NJ), and Del. Donna Christensen (D-Virgin Islands).

On Thursday a group of high-profile New York Democrats held a rally on the steps of City Hall to show their support for Rangel.  Former New York Mayor David Dinkins told the crowd, Rangel has had a long record of public service, “Folks seem to have a short memory.”

David Jones, one of the organizers of the rally chided the media for their coverage of Rangel, “Where is the balance? Everything makes him out to look like he’s on the take.”

This will be good news for Rangel and the other four Black lawmakers who can put this all behind them. But for California Reps. Maxine Waters (D) and Laura Richardson (D)  it’s just beginning.  Last week the ethics committee opens two probes looking into Waters role facilitating meeting with minority bankers and government officials and Richardson relationship with the lender who foreclosed on her home.  (See my Blog Oct. 30)

The House ethics committee has launched investigations into seven Black lawmakers; more than 15 percent of the total members in the House, no White members are under any full-scale ethics committee probe.  Politco.com is reporting, an eighth Black member, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-Ill.) would also be under an investigation if the Justice Department hadn’t stepped in and asked the committee to stand down.

The 10 member committee seems to have targeted Black lawmakers and is keeping them on the ropes of defending their names and reputations.  It appears to be a distraction they just have to cope with. 

Several of the 42 members of the CBC are majority ranking members and chair powerful House committees, some of these investigations could be a way to weaken their influence or remove them from power under a cloud of controversy. 

It can’t be ignored that all of the ethics investigations are focused on Black lawmakers; they are being held to higher standard and it looks like the other 393 lawmakers are getting a pass.

By Pamela Gentry, Senior Poltical Producer

Sept. 3, 2009 – President Obama will address a joint session of Congress next week to publicly concede that he will not move forward with his campaign promise to overhaul health care reform.
 
One White House staffer told The New York Times, “It’s so important to get a deal…he’ll almost do anything to get one.”  That’s disappointing to hear. 

What’s surprising is the president is willing to “scale back” his plans for changing a system he’s said is broken and will only get worse. So what is he willing to give up?  

None of his critics have offered alternatives, Republicans have united against it, conservative Democrats have asked for more cost controls, and the American public  just want more details.    

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) said in a statement released Wednesday, “The president is clearly not running away from this battle but rather confronting the challenges we’ve encountered these last few weeks head-on.”

“He’s pulling out all the stops, and this level of involvement from the president could well be a game-changer. There is no better way to turn public opinion around than to have someone as popular as President Obama addressing the American people directly, without intermediaries interpreting — or misinterpreting — his ideas,” he said.

The good news about the presidents planned speech on Sept. 9, is it demonstrates he’s willing to step-up and give more direction and specifics of what he wants to see from Congress.

 The bad news is that it might be too late for him to breathe life back into health care reform and revive his promise to secure affordable health care for all Americans.

By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Analyst

July 14, 2009 – The NAACP got underway this week in New York City and is challenged to answer the nagging question:  Is the organization still relevant and needed?

The question always sparks controversy and could appear to be unwarranted with the election of the first African-American president; the election of the first African-American chairman of the Republican Party; the first Latino women poised to sit on the Supreme Court and a Black women nominated to become the next U.S. surgeon general.

But all of these accomplishments were made possible by the early work done by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People as it paved the way.  That’s why its survival and constant watch is needed to keep opportunities and doors open for those who follow. 

NAACP president Benjamin Jealous acknowledged the organization must continue to work for social and economic justice.   “We dream big of a day all kids go to good schools, when all workers have a good job,” Jealous said. “And when someone says, ‘Mr. Jealous, your dreams are too big,’ I say, ‘Read up on the history of the NAACP.’”

When Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) was asked, “Do we need the NAACP?”  He responded, “You bet your life we do.” 

And Attorney General Eric Holder, the first African-American to lead the Justice Department agrees there is still work to be done. 

“We must resist the temptation to conclude that our nation has fulfilled its promise of equality based on one moment or on one election,” he said, in reference to Barack Obama being elected president.

“The efforts to harmonize our laws with our best ideals is not yet done,” Holder said.

These are the reasons the organizations century-old mission isn’t out-dated.  Now to continue combating old problem, Jealous has launched a new program using modern-day technology.  It’s the “rapid response system” and allows folks to use cell phones to capture photos or video of incidents of alleged police misconduct and send it to the organization through a Web browser.

   “Technology has basically put a video camera in the pocket of every child in this country over the age of 12 and most grown-ups as well,” he said.

Now the battles for racial equality won’t only be waged with marches, protest and boycotts – but with the help of cyber communications, social networking and texting. 

What a difference 100 years can make.

Do you think the NAACP is still relevant?