Copyright Time Bomb Set to Disrupt Music, Publishing Industries

Share/Bookmark//

This is one of the reasons the music industry has become more ruthless in its approach toward things.. I can only imagine what they are doing to the artists.. From my take one of the reasons they rushed to change contracts and put what we now know as 360% Deals is to ensure that they will forever have access to artist’s income streams.. So as these copyrights expire, the record labels will be angeling to get a piece of future revenues, because 360 Deals mean the labels gets a part of ALL income no matter if its music related or not..One of the things people need top pay close attention to is increased enforcement of ‘copyright infringement, this will set up the justification for a new more strident copy right bill.. It’s at that point you will see something buried in the details that will flip these laws around who gets to own copyrights and for how long.. Pay close attention to how they are rewording and approaching the digital game cause thats where the hoodwinking is on full tilt..  -Davey D- 

Copyright Time Bomb Set to Disrupt Music, Publishing Industries

By Eliot Van Buskirk

Wired – November 13, 2009

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/11/copyright-time-bomb-set-to-disrupt-music-publishing-industries/

The late ’70s, when punk exploded and disco imploded,
were tumultuous years for the music industry. A time
bomb embedded in legislation from that era, the U.S.
Copyright Act of 1976, could bring another round of
tumult to the business, due to provisions that allow
authors or their heirs to terminate copyright grants –
or at the very least renegotiate much sweeter deals by
threatening to do so.

At a time when record labels and, to a lesser extent,
music publishers, find themselves in the midst of an
unprecedented contraction, the last thing they need is
to start losing valuable copyrights to ’50s, ’60s, ’70s
and ’80s music, much of which still sells as well or
better than more recently released fare. Nonetheless,
the wheels are already in motion.

“The termination that’s going to be coming up is going
to be a big problem for the record companies and
publishers,” said attorney Greg Eveline of Eveline
Davis & Phillips Entertainment Law.

“It’s written into the statute,” said entertainment
lawyer Robert Bernstein. “It’s just a matter of time.”

The Copyright Act includes two sets of rules for how
this works. If an artist or author sold a copyright
before 1978 (Section 304), they or their heirs can take
it back 56 years later. If the artist or author sold
the copyright during or after 1978 (Section 203), they
can terminate that grant after 35 years. Assuming all
the proper paperwork gets done in time, record labels
could lose sound recording copyrights they bought in
1978 starting in 2013, 1979 in 2014, and so on. For
1953-and-earlier music, grants can already be
terminated.

The Eagles plan to file grant termination notices by
the end of the year, according to Law.com. “It’s going
to happen,” said Eveline. “Just think of what the
Eagles are doing when they get back their whole
catalog. They don’t need a record company now.. You’ll
be able to go to Eaglesband.com (updated) and get all
their songs. They’re going to do it; it’s coming up.”

Other artists are also filing notices (there’s a five-
year window), according to Bernstein. But in some
cases, they’re choosing to leave the copyright grant
where it is – albeit with much more favorable terms.

“There are all different kinds of ways people approach
it,” said Bernstein. “If they have a publishing company
that’s making money for them, and collecting it and
paying them well, they may just want a higher royalty.
Or if they’re unhappy, they get it back.”

This isn’t just about music. “It’s every type of
copyright,” said Bernstein. “It doesn’t distinguish
between the types of copyright.”

The only exceptions, he said, are derivative works such
as movies based on novels that include certain music in
their soundtracks, because Congress decided it was
unfair to ask publishers to give those licenses back to
artists and authors.

The record labels tried to defuse this bomb in 1999 by
sneaking an amendment to the Copyright Act through the
House of Representatives that would add sound
recordings to the Act’s list of copyrights that were
considered “works for hire,” which would make them
exceptions to the grant termination clause. According
to one source close to the situation, the labels told
Congress that the Copyright Act already covered sound
recordings as exceptions because albums of music are
“compilations” – but that “just to be absolutely clear,
[the labels] wanted to put it in so nobody can debate
it.”

After musicians, including Carly Simon, reacted
negatively, the amendment was withdrawn amid public
outcry leaving record labels with precisely two options
for fending off notices of termination, neither of
which looks promising. The first is to continue to
claim that albums are compilations, which doesn’t pass
the common-sense test (compilations include songs from
different artists), and probably won’t pass legal
muster either.

“Everybody kind of snickers at that [strategy],” said
Eveline.

The second option is to re-record sound recordings in
order to create new sound recording copyrights, which
would reset the countdown clock at 35 years for
copyright grant termination. Eveline characterized the
labels’ conversations with creators going something
like, “Okay, you have the old mono masters if you want
– but these digital remasters are ours.”

Labels already file new copyrights for remasters. For
example, Sony Music filed a new copyright for the
remastered version of Ben Folds Five’s Whatever and
Ever Amen album, and when Omega Record Group remastered
a 1991 Christmas recording, the basis of its new
copyright claim was “New Matter: sound recording
remixed and remastered to fully utilize the sonic
potential of the compact disc medium.”

This might sound familiar, because BlueBeat.com
employed similar logic in creating new copyrights to
Beatles songs – right before it was sued by EMI and a
judge barred them from continuing to sell the songs.

If the labels’ best strategy to avoid losing copyright
grants or renegotiating them at an extreme disadvantage
is the same one they’re suing other companies for
using, they’re in for quite a bumpy – or, rather, an
even bumpier – ride.

[Eliot Van Buskirk has covered digital music since
1998, after seeing the world’s first MP3 player sitting
on a colleague’s desk. He plays the bass and rides a
bicycle.]

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner

Naomi Klein Throws Down in Copenhagen..COP15 President Says Failure is Not An Option

Share/Bookmark//

This is Naomi Klein speaking at Klimaforum 2009… Note you will have to turn up the volume to hear her…

Last chance to save the world says Naomi Klein

Klimaforum is not about giving charity to the developing world its about taking responsibility and the industrialized countries cleaning up our own mess, Naomi Klein said speaking at the opening of Klimaforum09.

Photo: Mark Knudsen/Klimaforum09.

Speaking at Klimaforum’s opening ceremony in Copenhagen Naomi Klein expressed her doubt whether an ambitious deal would be made at the Bella Centre. “The Bella Center is the biggest case of disaster capitalism. The deal we really need is not even on the table,” she said.

The Canadian author emphasized the importance of civil society to come together to take action on the climate crisis. “There is a difference between a deal and success and Klimaforum09 needs to be the lie detector when the politicians come out with a deal,” she added.

Naomi also had critical words to say about Hopenhagen and its branding extravaganza. “The globe has Siemens logo on the bottom and the whole event is sponsored by Coke. That is a capitalization of hope but Klimaforum09 is where the real hope lies,” she said.

“Klimaforum is not about giving charity to the developing world its about taking responsibility and the industrialized countries cleaning up our own mess,” she concluded.

Klimaforum09 the peoples conference is open from Tuesday 8th till Friday 18th December. The programme features close to 200 workshops, 70 exhibitions and a comprehensive film, theatre and musical events.

The Danish organizers expect up to 10,000 daily visitors and guest speakers include Vandana Shiva, George Monbiot, Bill McKibben, Tim Jackson and Wangari Maathai.

“We would like to tell you that climate change is already seriously impacting us. It brings floods, droughts and the outbreak of pests that are all causing harvest failures,” said Henry Saragih, general coordinator of the global peseants movement Via Campesina, also speaking at the opening cermony.

Nnimmo Bassy, Head of Friends of Earth International, stressed the importance of people getting together to take action.

“At Klimaforum09 we find the real people taking real action. Poluters must be hold accountable and policy makers must start listening to the people,” he said.

For more information and coverage of Klimaforum go here:  http://www.klimaforum09.org/

———————————————————————

Below is a story from the UN Conference COP15.. This is where all the delegates and big time honchos from all the developed countries will be meeting. here a lot of politics will come into play and alot of deals will be cut.. We will try and drop news from both places… here’s the link to their official website http://en.cop15.dk/

Here’s where u can find live webcast of  COP 15

http://www2.cop15.meta-fusion.com/kongresse/cop15/templ/ovw.php?id_kongressmain=1&theme=cop15

Failure in Copenhagen is not an option

http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2257

Connie Hedegaard

If the world fails to deliver a political agreement at the UN climate conference in December, it will be “the whole global democratic system not being able to deliver results in one of the defining challenges of our century”, says incoming COP15 president, Connie Hedegaard.

Will there be a global climate deal at the UN climate conference COP15 in Copenhagen in December? With the clock ticking and a host of major political issues yet to be solved, some people have voiced their doubt.

One hand that is not shaking, however, is the one belonging to Connie Hedegaard, Danish Minister for Climate and Energy. As incoming COP15 president, she faces the daunting task of swinging the baton in front of delegates from all over the globe, thereby making them play the same tune and hopefully, after a concerted effort, end with an accord.

And while thousands of negotiators are still struggling to narrow the score down to something playable, Hedegaard is adamant that Copenhagen will “seal the deal”.

“If the whole world comes to Copenhagen and leaves without making the needed political agreement, then I think it’s a failure that is not just about climate. Then it’s the whole global democratic system not being able to deliver results in one of the defining challenges of our century. And that is and should not be a possibility. It’s not an option,” Connie Hedegaard tells cop15.dk in an interview.

She calls Copenhagen a “window of opportunity” which should not be missed, arguing that it may take years to rebuild the momentum.

“If we don’t deliver in Copenhagen, then I cannot see when again you can build up a similar pressure on all the governments of this world to deliver. So I think we should be very, very cautious not to miss the opportunity,” says Hedegaard, adding that “it would be irresponsible not to use the momentum now”.

Connie Hedegaard is basing her optimism on the fact that nations, after months of political stalemate, began to come forward in September and show their positions. Japan, China, India and Indonesia are some of these “key players” who, according to Hedegaard, have brought new momentum to the climate negotiation process.

“In that sense,” she says, “Copenhagen has already delivered results. If we hadn’t had that deadline, these governments would not have come forward with their targets. They are doing so because they know the deadline is coming closer, and they must start to deliver.”

To effectively break the deadlock, however, two more requirements must be fulfilled. Politicians, including heads of state, need to become more actively involved. And developed countries need to come forward with specifics on finance.

“They cannot just continue to talk about finance. They must show – prove – to the developing world, we know that we are going to pay, or there will be no agreement. And the sooner the developed countries deliver on finance, the better.”

Hedegaard admits that the technicalities of the negotiation process are extremely complex, but that shouldn’t be an excuse for not striking a political, binding deal.

“We know what we ought to do on mitigation, on reductions, on adaptation, on technology and on finance. Well, yes, it’s difficult. But my bet is, it’s not going to get any easier by postponing decisions.”

In order to reach an agreement in December, “as little as possible” should remain to be solved when negotiators arrive in Copenhagen. The high-level section of COP15 is only three days, four at the most. Therefore the negotiation text must be rid of “square brackets” – at this point there are still 2,500 remaining  – and the political options must be made very clear before the politicians arrive on the stage, says Connie Hedegaard.

Her personal success criteria for Copenhagen?

“I think what matters is that we, when we depart from Copenhagen, with credibility can say we brought the world on the right track, on a track that makes it credible that we can stay below the two degrees average increase in temperature worldwide. That is basically the success criteria we must try to deliver on.”

During the actual conference, Connie Hedegaard sees her own role as that of one who will be trying to mediate, find solutions and look for possible compromises. And provide a push or a nudge where it’s needed.

“It’s not so that the COP president, the host country, can just tell China or the United States or India what they are going to do. They will decide for themselves. But of course we will argue as strong as we can, push as strong as we can and try to seek solutions as much as we can.”

All through the year, Connie Hedegaard has been working to grease the climate wheels by participating in bilateral talks and informal meetings, thereby making herself acquainted with the positions of as many players worldwide as possible. Her own Greenland Dialogue is one of several series of climate discussions running parallel to the main UN track.

It’s a round-the-clock job and the fervent dedication Hedegaard demonstrates as a minister and one of the world’s chief climate whips carries into her personal life as well.

“You can’t separate that. When you have a job like this, it’s a hundred percent. If you didn’t think that this is really, really important, then you couldn’t work as much, and I also think that your family wouldn’t let you work as much. I’m not only talking on my own behalf, but on behalf of the whole team behind me. People are doing this because they think it’s the most important issue in the world.”

José Manuel Barroso, re-elected President of the European Commission, has announced that he would appoint a climate commissioner under his new presidency. Connie Hedegaard, a 49-year-old conservative politician, mother of two and former journalist, has been mentioned as a possible candidate. Would she be interested, once COP15 is wrapped up?

“I’m really not thinking about what is going to happen after this. A lot of things will still have to be done, and Denmark will actually be president of the COP throughout 2010. These weeks and months are not suited for concentrating on anything else but how to land a deal in Copenhagen.”
 

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner

Singer Jennifer Hudosn Sparks Controversy in South Africa-SA Actors Don’t Want her Playing Winnie Mandela

Share/Bookmark//

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091207/wl_africa_afp/entertainmentsafricausfilmmandelahudson

JOHANNESBURG (AFP) – South African actors want to stop Oscar-winner Jennifer Hudson from playing Winnie Madikizela-Mandela in a new film on the ex-wife of the nation’s first black president, reports said Monday.

The Creative Workers Union of South Africa said using foreign actors to tell the country’s stories undermined efforts to develop the national film industry.

“It can’t happen that we want to develop our own Hollywood and yet bring in imports,” the union’s president Mabutho Sithole said in The Citizen newspaper.

“This decision must be reversed, it must be stopped now,” union secretary general Oupa Lebogo said in The Times. “If the matter doesn’t come up for discussion, we will push for a moratorium to be placed on the film.”

Hudson, who scooped a best supporting actress Oscar in 2007 for the musical “Dreamgirls”, landed the role of Madikizela-Mandela last month.

The film will be directed by South African film-maker Darrell J. Roodt, whose films include “Cry, The Beloved Country” and “Sarafina.”

The criticism comes just days before the opening of the Clint Eastwood film “Invictus”, a drama about Nelson Mandela and South Africa’s 1995 rugby World Cup victory which united the nation.

Morgan Freeman plays the president and Matt Damon is the rugby team captain.

Madikizela-Mandela campaigned tirelessly for her husband’s release during his 27-year imprisonment in the apartheid era.

However, her image was tarnished by a series of scandals including her links to the kidnap and murder of a young activist and a 2003 conviction for fraud.

She separated from Nelson Mandela in 1992, two years after his release.

————————————————————————————–

Here’s a couple of articles I found in South African newspapers.. I wanted to see what they were saying. First, I didn’t see a whole lot of info on this controversy via the papers on line..but here’s a couple of columns that give this story more context..-davey D-

http://blogs.timeslive.co.za/music/2009/12/07/actors-gun-for-jennifer-hudson/

Right, so the Creative Workers’ Union of SA is having a go at Jennifer Hudson because she’s been cast to play Winnie Mandela in an upcoming film about the “mother of the nation”. In an article by Sipho Masondo in today’s The Times, he writes “The union said foreign actors should not play leading roles in South African movies because it undermined the growth of the local creative industry.” Read the rest of the story here.

 Now I’m waiting to find out more about the casting process of this role and how Ms Hudson got it, but you know what I’m pretty sure it’s because of her talent. As an actor, one is expected to transform into any given character, be it speaking with a different dialect or a change in one’s physique in order to pull off the role. Charlize has done it in America, so why can Hudson not do it in South Africa? Why was this not an issue when Morgan Freeman was cast as Nelson Mandela in Invictus? Come on, the double standards here are priceless.

@ Oupa Lebogo. This is a legitimate question… besides Florence Masebe, who else would play the role better? Also if you look at the caliber of actresses she beat out at the 2007 Oscars, who are we to judge how good she is an actress if she won an Oscar
(Fellow nominees included Adriana Barraza (Babel), Cate Blanchett (Notes on a Scandal), Abigail Breslin (Little Miss Sunshine) and Rinko Kikuchi (Babel)

Yes I agree that the arts aren’t given nearly enough credit that they’re owed, but perhaps instead of pouncing on J Hud, the union should pounce on the president, the arts and culture minister. Tell them to put more money into the arts. Tell them to provide more funding to filmmakers who want to compete (technically) with the rest of the world. In that way film producers won’t have to go out and abroad to look for funding. Film director Anant Singh and actress Florence Masebe make good points, “From a creative point of view we have a great wealth of talent locally. However, it’s very difficult to prescribe how a movie should be made. There are commercial imperatives and if you want a movie to be made you have to do it a certain way. It’s all about balance.
“The integrity of the South African film industry can be maintained. Look at Sarafina. I had [American actress] Whoopi Goldberg, but I also had Leleti Khumalo playing a leading role.” (Singh)

—————————————————————————

http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-12-07-hollywood-se-voet

Have you heard? American star Jennifer Hudson will be playing Winnie Madikizela-Mandela in an upcoming biopic. I’m not sure what your first reaction to that is, but mine was: Winnie can sing?? Not the Creative Workers’ Union of SA, however. In true trade-union style they immediately decried this Western imperial domination of a local industry and demanded national auditions and free hats for everyone. Or something like that.

Union general secretary Oupa Lebogo said: “This decision must be reversed, it must be stopped now. If the matter doesn’t come up for discussion, we will push for a moratorium to be placed on the film being cast in South Africa. We are being undermined, there is no respect at all,” TimesLive reported.

And of course, middle-class South Africans everywhere were disgusted. They probably stopped listening at the word moratorium.

“Im sick and tired of all this B@#LS&^T that’s going on in SA,” said one commenter ferociously. “These people keep on complaining of all the wrongs, yet they are so tired to lift their ass up and do anything. Why didn’t they think of it and do something before the foreigners did?”

Hear hear! I’m sure you’re saying right about now. Followed immediately by that favourite argument: Oscar-winning and bankable Hollywood stars will draw in the audiences! This is good for us. The same commenter thought so. “Name just one actor/actress that will generate money and lure people to the movie house in South Africa … NOT ONE and that is a fact.”

I’m almost sad for the Creative Workers’ Union. I wished they could’ve been a little more, well, creative. Demanding people take you seriously is so nineties revolutionary. Because all they had to do was consult a list of South African films starring big Hollywood stars and take a look at their box-office results. Wham bam — argument won.

Remember Goodbye Bafana? It’s OK if you don’t — no one else does. The story of Nelson Mandela’s friendship with a prison warder was brought to us by the acclaimed director of The House of the Spirits and starred Hollywood star Joseph Fiennes. The numbers say it all. It cost a whopping $30-million to make and brought in under $3-million and received virtually no release in the US.

You think Winnie director Darrell Roodt would have learned from Cry the Beloved Country. It made even less in the US with $676 525, despite starring heavyweight James Earl Jones.

Taye Diggs

And then there’s Drum which, though it featured the fabulous Taye Diggs, failed to make much of an impression at the box office here or abroad.

The logic has not worked for them and it certainly didn’t work when incorporated into Hansie, as anyone who had to sit through the accent of the American actress playing his wife in that flop can attest to.

So urgent is our desire to be vindicated by Hollywood that we forget the massive irony at work here. The movies that have been massive successes — District 9, Tsotsi and Jerusalema — for example, featured South Africans in all the lead roles. District 9 was most notable for its disregard of American expectations and unashamedly South African accents, actors and themes. If you haven’t heard that movie’s success story I can’t help you out from under that rock but I can tell you that as of November it made a worldwide total of $200-million, more than six times its estimated production budget of $30-million.

Is it because there were South Africans in the lead? No, it was because it was a damn good film. But the presence of Hollywood actors in important movies about our past have historically been failures, and ones that are stupid to repeat.

“I don’t think [anyone but a South African] can even begin to understand what we mean when we say Winnie is the mother of the nation,” actress Florence Masebe sniffed. Winnie is no mother of mine, but if I were to see a movie about her I’d like to spend my time immersed in a good plot. Not cringing at the accent.

————————————————————————

http://www.weekendpost.co.za/article.aspx?id=507086

SOUTH African actors have criticised a decision to have American R&B singer Jennifer Hudson play the role of Winnie Madikizela-Mandela in an upcoming film.

The Creative Workers’ Union of SA (CWUSA) at the weekend called on local movie maker Darrell Roodt to rethink Hudson’s role as lead actress in the film about Madikizela-Mandela’s life, reported The Times.

“The decision must be reversed, it must be stopped now,” said union general secretary Oupa Lebogo.

“If the matter doesn’t come up for discussion, we will push for a moratorium to be placed on the film being cast in South Africa.

“We are being undermined – there is no respect at all.”

Production of the film is set begin on May 30 next year.

Lebogo said South Africa had “people who can the play the role far better than Jennifer”.

Actors John Kani, Florence Masebe and Mpho Molepo said CWUSA was heeding a call by President Jacob Zuma to take action and unite on issues affecting the entertainment business.

“Every time there is a movie that tells a South African story, it is done by someone who must be taught the right way of pronouncing Sawubona. Enough is enough,” said Kani, according to The Citizen newspaper.

The CWUSA called for the reinstatement of working permits for international producers who want to make films in South Africa.

Film director Anant Singh said he agreed South Africa had a wealth of talent.

“However, it is very difficult to prescribe how a movie should be made. There are commercial imperatives and if you want a movie to be made, you have to do it a certain way. It’s all about balance,” said Singh. – Sapa

Actress Florence Masebe said the issue was far bigger than “Winnie and Jennifer. Why do Americans and foreigners play the roles we hold so dear? The roles of people we respect. I don’t think [anyone but a South African] can even begin to understand what we mean when we say Winnie is the mother of the nation.” Again I go back to my point on Morgan Freeman playing Madiba….

This is a tricky and rather sensitive subject, I get that. We all know this movie is going to happen, no matter what. So here’s a possible solution I have in mind. Why not have Hudson share some of her skills, secrets into being an A-list actress with local talent when she’s here. Set up a workshop, funded by government one day during shooting, empower the artists by knowledge-sharing? I think instead of lambasting this talented woman, we should look at suggestions and possible solutions rather…

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner

25 Joints to Get U Thru the Day #18: Beats Till The Break of Dawn

Share/Bookmark//

25 Joints to Get U Thru the Day #18:  Beats Till The Break of Dawn

http://odeo.com/episodes/25495187-25-Joints-18-Beats-to-the-Break-of-Dawn

01-Speech ‘When It feels Right’ (Atlanta)

02-Mia X ‘1 Life 1 Love’ (New Orleans)

03-KRS-One w/ Buckshot ‘Robot’ (New York)

04-Rico Pabon ‘It Ain’t Real’ (Bay Area)

05-Aceyalone & the Lonely One ‘The Lonely Ones’ (Los Angeles)

06-Breakastra ‘Low Down Stank’ (Los Angeles)

07-Menahan Street Band ‘The Traitor’ (MalcolmX -Davey D rmx (Brooklyn)

08-Orgone ‘Said and Done’ (Los Angeles)

09-Chamber Brothers w/ MLK ‘Aint No Mountain High Enuff’ (remix)

10-Plant Life ‘What a World-Baby Girl’ (Los Angeles)

11-Move.Ment ‘Higher’ (Breath) (Los Angeles)

12-Kofy Brown ‘Playing Fields’ (Oakland)

13-J Ross Panelli w/ Kris Ranson ‘No Fairly Tale’ (Reno)

14-Medusa & Kid Named Miles ‘New Definition’ (Los Angeles)

15-Zion I ‘Zion I in Japan Count It Down’ (Oakland)

16-Ras Ceylon ‘War A Gwan’ (Oakland)

17-Mos Def ‘Priority’ (Brooklyn)

18-Invincble w/ Finale ‘Recognize’ (Detroit)

19-GMCaz, Brand Nubian & QMC ‘It Ain’t Hard to Tell’ (New York)

20-Tiye Phoenix ‘Reachin’ (Shemix) (New Jersey)

21-Tiye Phoenix ‘Interview w/ Davey D’

22-Tiye Phoenix ‘Flashing’ (New Jersey)

23-Living Legends ‘She Wants Me’ (Oakland/LA)

24-Jahi w/ADL ‘SOS’ (Cleveland/Denmark)

25-Mic Geronimo w/Sticman ‘Running Out of Time’ (Portland/ Atlanta)

26-Sellaisee ‘Is It Even Meat’ (San Francisco)

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner

Raiders Play the Pittsburgh Squeelers-Here’s the Teams New Official Jersey

Share/Bookmark//

This is the new official Pittsburgh Squeeler jersey.. The pink color is same bright color as a squeeler.. aka pig

 Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner

December 4th 1969: 40 Years Ago the FBI Murdered a Black Panther-We Remember Fred Hampton

Share/Bookmark//

December 4th 1969: 40 Years Ago the FBI Murdered a Black Panther

http://www.sfbayview.com/2009/%e2%80%98i-am-a-revolutionary%e2%80%99/

“I am … a revolutionary” was the rallying cry of Chairman Fred Hampton, a leader so powerful that he could draw tens of thousands on a moment’s notice and therefore such a threat to the system that he was assassinated at the age of only 21, on Dec. 4, 1969. – Photo: Paul Sequeira

On Dec. 4, 1969, 40 years ago, Chicago police led by Cook County prosecutor Edward Hanrahan as part of an FBI Counter Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO) operation stormed into Illinois Black Panther Party Chairman Fred Hampton’s apartment at 4:30 a.m. Armed with shotguns, handguns and a .45 caliber machine gun and guided by a floor plan of the apartment provided by an informant, the police killed Defense Captain Mark Clark and critically injured four other Panthers.

They gunned their way through the apartment into Fred Hampton’s bedroom. There he lay sleeping, having been drugged earlier by an FBI informant. As he lay there, the cops stood over him and put two bullets in his brain, at close range.

Other Panthers, including Fred Hampton’s eight month pregnant wife, Deborah Johnson (aka Akua Njeri), were beaten, dragged into the street and charged with assault and attempted murder. Not one officer ever spent a day in jail.

Fred Hampton was assassinated by the police and dragged by his wrist to the door December 4th 1969

Following this murderous attack – where the police fired 99 rounds in the house and were completely uninjured themselves – Hanrahan brazenly lied that the police were under heavy fire from the Panthers. Among all the many thousands and thousands of actions that show why the Black Panther Party correctly dubbed the police “pigs,” few compare to the viciousness and lies surrounding the assassination of Fred Hampton.

The media took up and spread these lies from the authorities as if they were the whole truth and nothing but the truth. But the Panthers in Chicago – still shocked and grieving from the terrible loss of their key leader and with many of their core members now in jail – refused to give up. Instead, they turned to the people and mounted a defiant political counter-offensive.

The Panthers organized “people’s tours” of the apartment. Thousands came, first from the ghettos and then more broadly. Film crews and reporters were brought in. People saw with their own eyes. And the evidence was clear: All the bullet holes were coming IN. The famous picture supplied by the authorities and run in the Chicago Tribune at the time, showing a door supposedly riddled with bullets coming from the Panthers, was actually a door with nail holes. Even mainstream commentators felt compelled to speak out. Hanrahan had claimed that it was only through the “grace of God” that his men escaped with scratches.

The cops stood over Chairman Fred Hampton as he lay sleeping and put two bullets in his brain at close range. This is Chairman Fred’s bed after his murder. – Photo: Paul Sequeira

Mike Royko, then a columnist at the Chicago Daily News – and no Panther supporter – wrote in response: “Indeed it does appear that miracles occurred. The Panthers’ bullets must have dissolved into the air before they hit anybody or anything. Either that or the Panthers were shooting in the wrong direction – namely, at themselves.” (See “The Assassination of Fred Hampton: How the FBI and the Chicago Police Murdered a Black Panther,” page 102, by Jeffrey Haas, Lawrence Hill Books.)

 Fred Hampton was a 21-year-old leader of the Panthers who inspired all kinds of people to take up revolution. As Bob Avakian says in his memoir, “Many people throughout the country had been moved by Fred Hampton and had made a leap in their revolutionary commitment because of his influence – the whole way in which, before he was killed, he boldly put forward: ‘You can kill a revolutionary, but you can’t kill the revolution.’” (See “From Ike to Mao …  and Beyond: My Journey from Mainstream America to Revolutionary Communist,” Insight Press.)

In one short year from the founding of the Black Panther Party in Illinois to the time of Fred’s murder, there was a transformation in the culture of society in Chicago. Based on the teachings of Mao Tsetung, the leader of the Chinese revolution, there was a “serve the people” ethos and culture the likes of which Chicago had not seen before.

 The Panthers set up free clinics in neighborhoods of the oppressed, where before health care had been virtually unavailable. The Black Panther newspaper was sold everywhere. Posters from the paper were used for political education sessions in the communities and on campuses. Former gangbangers and student intellectuals became revolutionaries. The culture was so widespread in Chicago that conductors on the el and subway trains would announce, “All power to the people!” when calling out the stops where revolutionaries were getting off the train.

When the Panthers conducted “people’s tours” of Chairman Fred Hampton’s apartment after his assassination, thousands of followers lined up in the cold, and film crews and reporters were brought in

Hampton’s assassination was part of a broad campaign to smash the Black Panther Party and the burgeoning revolutionary movement that burst onto the scene in the 1960s. In September 1968, notorious FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover called the Panthers “the greatest threat to the internal security of the country,” and by 1969 the Panthers were the number one target of the FBI’s COINTELPRO operations, which included 233 different documented operations, from assassinations like those of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark to attempts to turn street gangs against the Panthers, efforts to create divisions within the BPP and setting up Panthers on false criminal charges.

Hoover specifically aimed to prevent the rise of what he called “a Black messiah” – that is, he focused on taking out leaders and potential leaders of the masses. Revolutionaries like Malcolm X, George Jackson, Bunchy Carter and John Huggins in LA, and Fred Hampton were either directly murdered by the government or set up. These were counter-revolutionary criminal acts – not only were innocent people murdered by the U.S. government, but the ability of the masses of people to raise their heads and liberate themselves was grievously set back.

Fred Hampton drew out the best from all these sectors of the people, inspiring them with a revolutionary vision and calling on them to rise to being revolutionaries. And many thousands heeded the call. His famous chant, “I am…a revolutionary,” was transformative, as people would take it up, thinking seriously as they did so about what they were committing their lives to when they said it.

Leadership is critical to making revolution. Although revolutionary leaders like Fred Hampton were taken from the people and others capitulated to capitalism and gave up on revolution, the spirit of devoting your life to making revolution and doing all you can to hasten the day when revolution can be made still lives.

This story first appeared on Revolution, the voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA.

Accomplishments of the Illinois Black Panther Party

• Breakfast for Children Program – Chicago

• Breakfast for Children Program – Peoria

• Free People’s Medical Clinic

• Free Sickle Cell Anemia Testing

• Political Education Classes

• Community Control of Police Project

• Unified the street gangs of Chicago

• Multi-racial united front among the Black Panther Party, Students for a Democratic Society, the Blackstone Rangers, the Young Lords and the Young Patriots that was called the “Rainbow Coalition,” a phrase later taken by Rev. Jesse Jackson

40th anniversary events

In Chicago, “40 Years Later, 40 Years Strong! We Will Never Forgive! We Will Never Forget!”

4:30 a.m. – exactly 40 years later at the same address – at 2337 W. Chairman Fred Hampton Way (previously Monroe at Western): candlelight vigil with speakers

12 noon, same place: vigil with speakers

5:30-10 p.m., at Winnie Mandela School, 7847 S. Jeffrey Ave. (enter from parking lot): premier screening of “Chairman Fred Hampton Way,” produced and directed by Ray L. Baker Jr.; keynote speakers Akua Njeri, widow of Chairman Fred Hampton and chairperson of the December 4th Committee; Chairman Fred Hampton Jr. of the Prisoners of Conscience Committee; solidarity statements from Black Panther Party members, POCC Minister of Information JR, POCC New Orleans and other POCC chapters, James Clark of the Mark Clark Foundation and brother of Mark Clark, Pam Africa of the ICFFMAJ, Ramona Africa of MOVE and the Last Poets; panel discussion

For more information, call (773) 256-9451.

In San Francisco, “Fred Hampton Commemorative Film Festival”: Illinois Black Panther Party Deputy Chairman Fred Hampton was killed by Chicago Police and the FBI on Dec. 4, 1969. Commemorate the history and inspiration and the lasting impact of our revolutionary leaders!

7-9:30 p.m. at 522 Valencia St., San Francisco, near 16th Street, one block from BART: a showing of films on Fred Hampton, revolutionary and servant of the people; his enemies: how they murdered him 40 years ago today; and the lessons for today. Chairman Fred Hampton said, “You can kill a revolutionary, but you can’t kill the revolution!” Sponsored by Collision Course Media, It’s About Time BPP, Freedom Archives, ILPS-Bay Area Grassroots Organizing Committee, Committee to Free the SF 8, Haiti Action Committee, Malcolm X Grassroots Movement, BAYAN-USA (NorCal)

Bruce Dixon of Black Agenda Report: ‘Remembering Fred Hampton, 40 years later’

Bruce Dixon, a member of the Illinois Chapter of the Black Panther Party in 1969 and 1970, offers a personal recollection of Fred Hampton, murdered by the Chicago Police Department and the FBI in the pre-dawn hours of Dec. 4, 1969.

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner

Police are Now Confiscating DJ Laptops as “Evidence’ for Illegal Parties-What’s next?

Share/Bookmark//

I wanna make sure that every DJ reading this pays close attention and doesn’t dismiss this. Its all about setting legal precedent so police can take things a step further. This is pointed out in the article.

Every DJ reading this needs to realize that this so-called collection of evidence will eventually start happening when the RIAA and the organizations it backs  (I.e. Music First Coalition, Sound Exchange etc) began tracking down DJs who aren’t paying licensing fees for their music, especially if they are rocking at these ‘underground’ parties. This will really happen if they manage to push John Conyers bill HR 848 and make that into law.

For those who don’t know, HR 848 is a performance tax they want to charge radio. Play a song on the air and the artist (translation really the label using the artists as fronts) should get some money. This talk about playing songs for promotional purposes has fallen on def ears as far as the labels are concerned. Once this bill passes they will then use this argument of  ‘precedent’ and  make the case that since radio is paying a performance license so should deejays and club venues. This argument of ‘precendence‘ is the same scurrilous tactic they are using now to try and pass HR 848, except they are pointing to the highly contested bill that made internet and satellite radio pay similar fees as justification. They are likely to argue that the DJ is making living off the backs of hardworking artists and that there would be no career if it wasn’t for the artist thus an artist should share in a percentage of the revenues.  Keep your eyes open..

Lastly I will remind people if you recall when the RIAA started cracking down on mixtapes being sold in open markets they were able to do something that almost every business I know of has not and can not. They been able to come along with law enforcement on those RAIDS as if they were the police themselves. I also want folks to check to see if some sort of tracking devices or software are not being added to the laptops when they are returned.

-Davey D-

 Controversial tactic of taking laptops even when DJs not charged with crime  reportedly condoned by San Francisco’s new chief of police. EEF attorney steps in to help protect DJs privacy, get computers back.

San Francisco Bay Guardian

Police seize DJs’ laptops
New police chief apparently condones policy that critics call illegal and punitive

By Joshua Emerson Smith

news@sfbg.com

San Francisco Police Department officers have added a controversial tactic to their aggressive raids on house parties (see “Fun under siege,” 4/22/09): they’re seizing laptop computers from DJs at the events.

While SFPD officials deny the laptop seizures is a new policy, they admit it has been condoned by Police Chief George Gascón, who took over in August and last month told the Guardian’s editorial board he wants to make the SFPD more transparent and accountable to the public (see “New coach, new approach,” 10/14/09).

“The police chief is aware that officers are being proactive in gathering evidence,” Sgt. Lyn Tomioka told the Guardian when asked about a string of laptop seizures by undercover cops over the last 10 months, most of them in cases in which the DJs weren’t even charged with a crime.

Many of the raids have occurred in SoMa, and were spearheaded by undercover officers who penetrated the parties and were followed by uniformed officers. San Francisco Entertainment Commission member Terrance Alan called the crackdown a “disappointing and dangerous trend.”

Tomioka said it’s a judgment call for officers to seize laptops as evidence of an illegal party, but Alan said the tactic is a punitive measure that proves nothing: “Taking laptops [is] not necessary to prove the underlying crime, and in many cases damages people’s ability to earn a living.”

One of the most recent raids happened on Halloween. It was about 2:30 a.m. and music was pumping out of a warehouse party on Sixth Street. The people throwing the party had hired a doorman, and attendee Eric Dunn was standing in line waiting to get in.

“We were right at the front of the line,” Dunn told the Guardian, when, he said, two plainclothes officers drove up on the sidewalk, jumped out of an unmarked car, and rushed up to the doorman. “[The officers] pretty much started demanding entry right away. The doorman was really polite. He basically told them that you have to know somebody to get into the party.”

Dunn said the officers waited until an exiting guest opened the door from the inside and then made their move. “One guy barged in, and the other guy followed. They never asked permission or received permission to enter the building,” Dunn said.

SF Chief George Gascon is allowing his officers to confiscate laptops from DJs as 'evidence'

Inside, the two undercover officers immediately shut down the event. Justin Miller, a DJ at the event, said she remembers it very clearly. “The cops at that point were telling everybody to leave the party, telling me to turn the music off. I turned the music off. Everyone was quietly leaving.”

But Miller said it didn’t stop there. One of the undercover officers approached her and asked if she had a laptop. She said she did. “I was a little confused at this point because I didn’t know what my laptop had to do with anything. I was playing CDs.” She said she pulled her computer out from underneath a table and unzipped it from a case. The officer then “grabbed it from me.”

The undercover police officer — later identified by witnesses and the evidence receipt as Larry Bertrand — instructed Miller to follow him down to the street to get a property receipt for her laptop.

At this point there were uniformed officers on the scene as well. Miller started to cry. “I begged him. I said, ‘This is my livelihood. You’re talking my laptop. This is my livelihood. I hope you realize that.’ He said, ‘This is how you’re going to learn then, I guess.’”

Miller said Bertrand (who did not return Guardian calls for comment) then told her he was “going to take it upon himself to shut down every illegal party in San Francisco.”

She said he then opened the trunk of his car, revealing several other laptops. A person at the party pointed out that one of the laptops belonged to a friend of his, and asked if he could get the property receipt for the laptop. Miller said Bertrand turned to the inquiring person and said, “You will never see this laptop again.”

She continued: “He then looked at me and said, ‘I’m going to make sure your paperwork gets so tied up that maybe you won’t see this laptop until December, January, February, who knows when.’ I felt so violated.”

Miller has been working as a DJ in the Bay Area, under the name DJ Justincredible, for more than 10 years. She says she’s never had any of her equipment confiscated by the police before. But at that party, three DJs had their laptops confiscated, even though none were charged with a crime.

Shortly after the Halloween incident, Miller and the two other DJs who were at the party contacted the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit advocacy group specializing in technology and privacy issues. Jennifer Granick, a civil liberties lawyer with EFF, said most people haven’t heard about this because few of these DJs, if any, ever get convicted of a crime.

“DJs and the police department know that sound equipment and laptops are being unlawfully seized. But the public and the courts haven’t heard much about it because every time a DJ asks for a hearing, the cops just give them their property back rather than show up and defend the practice in open court before a judge,” she said.

Sean Evans has been working as a DJ in San Francisco, under the name DJ 7, for more than 10 years. He said that over the summer he had his laptop seized by police during an after-hours party in SoMa. He was given no property receipt, and his case was dismissed. But it took him three months to get his computer back.

“To lose our sole means of income, it’s a huge setback. It puts us out of work. In this recession, we’re struggling, and we need our laptops to get by,” he said. Evans grew up in the Bay Area and he said has never had anything like this happen to him before.

Granick argued it is illegal for police to seize property without issuing citations or arrests. She also said there are serious privacy issues at stake. “If we were to find out that the police were doing something else with the laptops, like searching through them or copying the data, we would definitely go to court,” she said.

SFPD Sgt. Wilfred Williams said he could not say what was currently being done with the laptops. In general, he said, private events that emit “extraordinary amounts of sound” need permits. And if they don’t have the proper permits, he said, property can be seized as evidence, “be it the speakers, be it the laptops, be it a mixer.”

Both Tomioka and Williams say the seizures aren’t a new policy. “If you look back in time, laptops haven’t been used for music,” Williams said. “There used to be old types of equipment that was taken in the past. But now laptops are being used. So yes, today, laptops [are] being seized.”

Entertainment advocates have called on Mayor Gavin Newsom and Gascón to come forward with an explicit policy concerning these raids and seizures. The Mayor’s Office did not respond to Guardian inquiries. Critics of the policy say it’s having a chilling effect on nightlife in San Francisco.

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner

America’s Obsession with Extramarital Affairs Are Used As Distractions to the War

Share/Bookmark//

Tiger Woods, Tiger Woods, Tiger Woods-What have you done?  Word of his sordid affairs is all anyone can talk about. From coast to coast  on every single local and national newscast, squeaky clean Tiger Woods cheating on his wife is the lead story. Sadly,we’ve seen this film way too many times. Whether it’s South Carolina governor  Mark Sanford, basketball great Kobe Bryant, former president Bill Clinton or Civil Rights leader Jesse Jackson, such sagas more often than not have me asking,  ‘What are ‘they’ trying to hide from us?’

All this Tiger Woods talk has me suspicious. Something is up.  

It was just two days ago, that we had a sobering conversation with Congressman and former Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich about what he anticipated President Obama would say in his speech about increasing troops to Afghanistan. A very impassioned Kucinich noted that the anti-war’s collective upset to Obama’s proposal was a few steps too late. He reminded us that key hurdles were cleared a month ago in early October around the 8th anniversary of the Afghan War. According to Kucinich, on October 8th, the House  approved a bill that authorized the expenditure of $130 billion dollars for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  He noted that the democratic dominated Congress had already taken a pro-War stance and many in the anti-war peace Movement were quiet.

David Letterman's extramaritial affairs were big distractions from war issues

Folks may not recall this particular bill because back in early October while our government was pouring all this money into the war effort, the rest of the nation was besieged with endless news stories and punditry analysis about another sordid extramarital affair and its accompanying baggage including attempted extortion. This of course involved late night TV host David Letterman. 

 Instead of hearing from an enraged Kucinich, Barbara Lee or Texas Republican Ron Paul, we were subjected to all sorts experts taking up valuable airtime debating whether or not Letterman having sex with another consenting adult was appropriate.

 Adding to this distraction was Barack Obama being awarded  the Noble Peace Prize the day after the October 8th date Kucinich referenced.  Ron Paul took some time out and expressed his concerns about the Noble Prize sitaution. he talked about it being a waste of time and distraction and that it awarding Obama such a prestigous award would not move him toward peace. 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbcDk-bNoc8&feature=player_embedded

But getting back to this country’s obsession with cheating spouses. They’ve long served as perfect covers for serious discussions about issues that have far-reaching impact on our lives. Last month it was Letterman, this month its Woods. The Woods story is now eclipsing important news coverage of the dozen or so anti-war protests yesterday from around the country. Instead of seeing or hearing man-on-the-street reports soliciting the opinions of young people about the escalation, we’re hearing them weigh in on Woods. Instead of hearing from celebrities like actor Danny Glover talking about his oppposition to the war, we’re hearing basketball great Charles Barkely‘s take on Tiger.

And don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting a conversation about Tiger Woods is an indication that one is un-intelligent or un-interested in more serious subjects. What I am cautioning us to keep in mind, that all this news coverage may be a distraction  to keep our eyes off some important balls. We have to ask ourselves; ‘What are we not talking about today?  Is it the President’s Job/Economic Summit being held today? Is it the debate to re-appoint Fed Chair Ben Bernacke? Is it the latest developments surrounding the Oscar Grant trial? Is it the controversy surrounding the conclusion of the mayoral election in Atlanta or the upcoming hotly contested run off mayoral election in Houston? As I’m typing this the Today Show is tripping all over itself to report how yet another woman is coming out to hold a press conference with famed lawyer Gloria Allred to possibly admit she had an affair. Her press conference comes at the heels of two other press conferences including one the other day where several law enforcement officials announced that they are not going to be further investigating Woods.

I’m thinking to myself, if such stories are being  done because the American public is hungry for salacious and intriguing reports, why not bring on journalist Jeremy Scahill of RebelReports.com to talk about how the worlds largest and most notorious private army Blackwater has been waging a secret War in Pakistan where they been assassinating and kidnapping people. If you wanna get heads turning and tongues wagging make note that this is happening on the watch of a President who promised rto abandon all those disturbing George Bush-Dick Cheney type tactics  that painted America in a bad light.  Secret war in Pakistan vs Tiger Woods being an undercover player? You decide what’s more important.

Ron Paul Kicked up dust around the escalation of the War in Afghanistan

Another glaring omission I see missing from national news coverage is yesterday’s Senate Armed Services Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee discussion on Afghanistan It was there that Congressional Black Caucus chair Barbara Lee and Progressive Caucus co-chair Lynn Woolsey were not allowed to speak  and express their staunch opposition to the Obama’s escalation. Fortunately Ron Paul got a chance to speak and really went in on the committee hitting them pretty hard, but that was barely covered. You can peep Paul weighing in on the C-Span video. He starts his round of questioning at 88.17 minutes into the hearing.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/id/216172

It’s interesting to note that it was just 3 weeks ago that Pittsburgh rapper Jasiri X hit us off with a song and video that raised similar concerns. He asked the question about whether or not we are staying up on the news. His video is a good note to end on and reflect.

written by Davey D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v2Ju74i2dU

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner

President Obama & Jasiri X Come Together and Make a Dope Song ‘Ballers & Rappers’

Share/Bookmark//

Who said Hip Hop lost its creativity? Who said it was dead? Apparently no one bothered to give Pittsburgh artist Jasiri X with the memo. He’s been on fire, dropping a thematic song each week. Today he raises the stakes with an incredible song featuring Prez Obama.. If you can’t feel this, then unfollow me from Twitter and give us back your Hip Hop pass.. This is what we like to call ‘Pure Butta’..

Here’s what Jasiri has to say..;” President Barack Obama looking to boast his sagging approval rating teams up with conscious rapper Jasiri X on a song designed to change the media’s negative portrayal of Black man. Ballers and Rappers-the Season Finale of This Week With Jasiri X, was produced by Black Czer and directed by Paradise the Arkitech of X-Clan”

LYRICS
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
Gun clappers or athlete that run faster
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
trappers or actors a brothers runnin NASA
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
we the masters of anything that u hand us
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
this is a new chapter that’s called the Hearafter

no presidential pardon for the elements that charge us
with just being criminals because the television stars us
and cause you got fame don’t mean your relevant to march us
and since you not a leader than your negligence will harm us
and when we say a leader than our reference is a martyr
like nobody today can take a message from the father
impart it to our sons and give the lessons to our daughters
except Lebron Lil wayne or President Obama
nada we gotta a lot of activist and scholars
organizing the hood for the good and not the dollars
holla every unsung hero I wanna honor
from the Burg to Bahamas consider this good karma
Imma give ya light cause of the fact they want to bury us
CNN don’t know bout being Black in America
and Fox news is like non stop fools
that’s why I drop jewels cause Real Hip-Hop Rules

We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
Gun clappers or athlete that run faster
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
trappers or actors a brothers runnin NASA
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
we the masters of anything that u hand us
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
this is a new chapter that’s called the Hearafter

we so much greater than how they portray us as
with more champions than Kobe and the Lakers have
but they always make us have guns mad faces and
disgraces and show the world our shame like a naked man
I hate it man so I guess I gotta take a stand
cause I rep the X like the flag from Jamaica man
and when I say Jamaica u think Usain Bolt
or a Dred that came by boat with Mary Jane to smoke
Like our brains are broke and we just came to joke
like new millennium slaves with the chains round our throats
but our own laziness it what I blame the most
we can’t achieve if we just believe in change and hope
find our lane and coast and remain the folks
that just slang the dope and only aim the toast
gang bang and boast
we need retrained and reeducated so we don’t get the same results

We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
Gun clappers or athlete that run faster
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
trappers or actors a brothers runnin NASA
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
we the masters of anything that u hand us
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
this is a new chapter that’s called the Hearafter

We not just good at representing the hood
just because they show that life all night like Suge

We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
Gun clappers or athlete that run faster
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
trappers or actors a brothers runnin Nasa
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
we the masters of anything that u hand us
We not-Not just Ballers or Rappers
this is a new chapter that’s called the Hearafter

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner

30 Million Small Businesses: The Army President Obama Has Yet To Deploy

Share/Bookmark//

Update: We interviewed Cedric Muhammad on Hard Knock Radio about the economy and how its looking under what many see as a New World Order of sorts. He expounds up on his article and gives some keen breakdowns..Here’s a link to the archived show

http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/56677

30 Million Small Businesses: The Army President Obama Has Yet To Deploy

by Cedrick Muhammad

President Barrack Obama’s decision to deploy more troops to Afghanistan should be a reminder and not a distraction that the country is involved in a two-front war. Not only one where the battlefields are Iraq and Afghanistan, but also a domestic economic war where saving an ailing banking system, is one front, while the struggle of small businesses to grow and expand is the other.

So far, that second war is only being waged on one battlefield.

It may be a generalization but not an oversimplification to say that when push came to shove, during and after the Financial Panic of 2008, the United States government – both Congress and two Presidential administrations – decided the interests of Wall Street and only a small portion of America’s 10,000 commercial banks, along with a handful of auto companies, were more important than the needs of approximately 30,000,000 small businesses [There were 6.1 million employer and 23.1 million nonemployer firms (a nonemployer firm is defined as one that has no paid employees, has annual business receipts of $1,000 or more and is subject to federal income taxes.) in the U.S. in 2008 according to Statistics of U.S. Businesses (SUSB) data from the U.S. Census Bureau].

The commercial banking sector is important – especially those smaller and community-oriented institutions that have been an after-thought in the plans of both Presidents Obama and George W. Bush. And if money is the lifeblood of a nation, then the financial system is somewhat like a circulatory system moving capital and credit wherever it is needed throughout the economic body.

This crisis was a financial one for sure, and its roots can be found in four areas.

First, a fractional reserve banking system which allows banks to lend out (or extend credit) several times the actual amount of money they actually have on deposit.

Second, a fiat currency (money with no sound backing) created gradually in three stages – initially when the Federal Reserve was born in 1913 giving a private central bank control over the issuance of America’s currency, a responsibility the U.S. constitution reserved for Congress. And then, when the gold standard was ended in two stages – in 1933 under Franklin Delano Roosevelt and 1971under president Richard Nixon.

Third, the out of control growth of a derivatives market initially built upon the legitimate need of farmers and businesses to insure themselves from disasters and unpredictable circumstances (like storms and poor crops) which grew to dwarf the real economy (the physical and digital goods and services that we need to survive and want to enjoy) in size. It should be noted that the first major derivatives market was in foreign currency and it grew out of the instability of a world where the dollar was no longer on the gold standard and investors, entrepreneurs, farmers and corporations had to guess and gamble each day over what the world’s currencies were worth.

Fourth, the birth of the modern securitization market in 1970s, started by the Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) or ‘Ginnie Mae’ which allowed private institutions to gather mortgages extended to different customers and owned by different banks into large bundles to be resold to other institutions – like pension funds and investment banks. With the help of institutions like Salomon Brothers this practice grew to the size of trillions of dollars and saw bundles as large as 5,000 mortgages and up, sold all over the world. By 2009 loans of all kinds – mortgages, bank, student, credit card and business – were being made not because individuals and entities qualified for them but because banks could make more money off of securitizing and re-selling them to Wall Street investors and institutions and governments all over the world. When these loans could not be repaid the whole house of cards tumbled.

For the most part, first under President Bush, and afterward President Obama very little has been done to effectively address these four fundamental aspects of the financial crisis. When you combine this reality with a national debt of $12 trillion (around $60 trillion when you add in the money owed for Social Security and Medicare payments) it is not hard to see the hand-writing on the wall – the American economy is headed for a painful day of reckoning.

But there was an equally important problem to be solved, aside from the financial one. In fact, it was already in effect and looming on the horizon before the Panic of 2007-2008. It was the challenge of how the American economy was going to transition through the era of globalization that was eroding its foundation due to two practices – offshoring and outsourcing. Offshoring is the decision of a company to relocate an entire business process from one country to another and outsourcing is the subcontracting of a service or business process to a third party.

Former Federal Reserve Governor and Princeton University Professor Alan Blinder, before the recession, estimated that 30 million to 40 million American jobs have the potential to be offshored. These include such professions as tax accounting, film and video editors, computer programming, bookkeepers, architects, lawyers specializing in contract law, mathematicians, graphic designers, financial analysts, actuaries, microbiologists, and even economists.

And who was on the front lines of this battle best positioned to win it and create the jobs that will replace those being lost, but also suffering the greatest casualties?

Without question, it is the country’s 30 million small business owners.

According to the Small Business Administration (SBA)’s 2009 “Small Business Economy: A Report To The President,” ‘…since the mid-1990s, small businesses have generally created 60 to 80 percent of the net new employment, but in 2008 there was a net loss of 3.1 million jobs. While it is not yet possible to know how many were lost in smaller businesses, it is likely they were a significant share of the losses. In the first three quarters, the United States lost 1,695,00 jobs, of which 60 percent were in small businesses.’

And what has been the official policy response to this recognition?

Virtually none of the over $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) under President Bush went to small businesses (including most of the nation’s 8,000 smaller community banks) and while President Obama signed the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, funding to the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) was increased by only $730 million. An SBA plan designed to generate $10 billion in loans to small businesses has been crawling for months.

When one considers other steps taken by the administration of President Obama including putting $2 trillion on the line in order to jump-start the previously mentioned securitization market (through the Federal Reserve-engineered Troubled Asset Relief Facility or TALF), it can be argued that while the U.S. government has put an estimated $4 trillion on the line to help revive the commercial banking sector and securitization markets, its best efforts to help small business may have not even reached $10 billion.

To make matters worse, the economic pain is not being distributed evenly across racial lines.

While the overall unemployment rate in the country was 10.2% in October it was 15.7% for Black Americans, with Black males 20 and over at an unemployment rate of 17.1% and Black teenagers of both sexes unemployed at the rate of 41.3%. This is all the more troubling when one considers that prior to the recession, it had already been determined that Black male unemployment in cities like New York and Milwaukee was over 50%.

With all of this doom and gloom what should President Obama do?

First, he should be applauded for hosting this week’s Jobs Summit.

But summits, meetings and conferences are only as good as their agenda, the quality of the dialogue and debate, and the follow-through on the best ideas, policies and decisions that emerge.

To that end here is a nine-point platform for consideration at the Jobs Summit that could jumpstart the American economy from the ground up:

1) Cut the Payroll Tax. In his November 18, 2009 Wall Street Journal op-ed, Michael J. Boskin makes the case, “…to evaluate the stimulus properly we should consider not just what we got for the $787 billion cost but the effects of alternative policies that might have been enacted. My Stanford colleague Pete Klenow and Rochester economist Mark Bils estimated that cutting the payroll tax by six percentage points (of the 12.4% Social Security component) would, under standard assumptions, increase employment by three million to four million workers—an amount equal to all the job losses since the stimulus was passed. The payroll tax cut would have reduced firms’ costs by roughly the same amount as from the entire decline in employment. It would have cost less than half as much as the stimulus bill, gotten far more income into paychecks quickly and, most importantly, greatly reduced incentives for firms to lay off workers. In fact, it would have created incentives to hire. Even using the administration’s claims of one million jobs ‘created or saved,’ the stimulus program passed in early February is millions of jobs short of what a cheaper payroll tax suspension would have delivered.”

2) Enact Job creation tax credits (as proposed by the Economic Policy Institute: http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/bp248/).

3) General capital gains tax rate reduction to 10%, indexed for inflation and made permanent.

4) Reduce the holding period to qualify for capital gains tax elimination in distressed rural and urban areas from 5 years to 6 months. This will encourage investors to make investments in struggling inner cities because they know they don’t have to wait 5 years to see a return. Entrepreneurs don’t want patient capital (what makes 5 years a magic number for the government anyway – especially since most small businesses have failed by then?) as much as they want smart capital.

5) Expand of the number of Empowerment Zones and Renewal Communities that receive incentives for economic development in distressed communities. If, since the financial crisis, the rest of the country has been receiving incentives that were previously reserved for these areas, something must be done to maintain their comparative advantage.

6) Increase incentives and worker tax credits for any business which hires a previously incarcerated person. This gets at the core of the unemployment problem (aggravated by state laws that make it illegal for ex-offenders to be employed in certain jobs) in the poorest areas, and in communities where the social fabric is the frailest.

7) Complete capital gains tax elimination for investment clubs which invest in businesses with less than 5 paid employees, and an increase of the limit from 99 persons to 250 on the size of an investment club before it falls under SEC regulations. This may inspire the merger of several successful existing clubs – increasing their scale and reach – and fill the void in areas of the economy where venture capital and private equity are unavailable or unwilling to invest (the government’s SSBIC program to bring venture capital into the Black economy has been a failure, as Senator John Kerry has so duly highlighted, and which I discuss in my book, The Entrepreneurial Secret). If something is not done to move these areas away from debt-dependency and toward equity capital, a mass of small businesses are set to go under as the government fails to re-start lending and unfreeze credit, even in programs it sponsors through the SBA.

8) Reduce combined state (of course with the assistance of Governors and State legislatures here) and federal corporate tax rates. Perhaps the problem with the corporate tax is that only an elite group of corporations has the resources to avoid paying it. The motivation here is not only to produce shareholder earnings, capital investment, higher wages, and lower prices for goods and services but also to increase the attractiveness of the limited liability company to sole proprietorships. Utilizing the corporate legal form of business will allow them to raise capital more efficiently (only 10% of Black businesses utilize the C or S corporate form of business), share and spread risk, and develop a managerial hierarchy (about 90% of these businesses do not have more than a single paid employee).

9) Reduce regulations that hamper entrepreneurship and create a burden on cash strapped and employee-thin small businesses. As John Berlau and William Yeatman wrote recently in a Washington Times op-ed, ‘Solutions: How To Reduce Unemployment’: “Congress also should pare back job-killing mandates like those embedded in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which was rushed through Congress in the wake of the Enron and WorldCom scandals. This law has showered business with massive accounting procedures that may have created jobs for auditors — the law is often called the Accountants Full Employment Act — but discouraged business expansion by making it so costly for a firm to raise money by going public.” Sure enough, according to the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, the Small Business Administration (SBA)’s Office of Advocacy has noted, “Very small firms with fewer than 20 employees annually spend 45 percent more per employee than larger firms to comply with federal regulations. These very small firms spend four and a half times as much per employee to comply with environmental regulations and 67 percent more per employee on tax compliance than their larger counterparts.”

The above proposal is an eclectic mix of policies favored by some on the Left, Right and Center, members of both political parties and Independents. It is a framework that would invite creative compromise and deal-making – always a function of the political processs. What is required to help this economy can only be advanced with this kind of electoral coalition and a wide cross section of support from others, which the skillful and gifted President Obama can uniquely convene, organize and build.

Paul Ryan

If President Obama could enlist the support of a leading pro economic growth Republican like Congressman Paul Ryan (who I know understands the economic challenge from past discussion with him: http://www.blackelectorate.com/articles.asp?ID=591) and a liberal, business conscious Democrat like Senator Charles Schumer (surprisingly the strongest political voice on the crisis of Black male unemployment: http://jec.senate.gov/archive/Hearings/03.08.07BlackMaleUnemploymentHearing.htm) , and have the initiative spearheaded by the rare embodiment of compassion for the poor and understanding of the rich – the brilliant and nimble Jared Bernstein (Vice-President Biden’s Chief Economist and co-author of the penetrating ‘The Benefits Of Full Employment’: http://www.epi.org/page/-/old/books/full_employment-intro.pdf) – the country would find if not these, then other realistic and radical solutions that the time demands.

With these policies – the nation’s army of small businesses will have more of the weaponry, ammunition, and moral support they need to do what they do best – innovate, and create jobs.

It should be noted that there are one and not two wars underway that will determine the future of America. What is more obvious are the war underway in Afghanistan and Iraq. What is less obvious is that the battle to save the American economy has a second front.

An army – 30,000,000 million strong – awaits its orders from the Commander In Chief.

Cedric Muhammad is a business consultant, political strategist, and monetary economist. He is author of the book, The Entrepreneurial Secret: To Starting a Business Without A Bank Loan, Collateral Or Revenue (http://theEsecret.com/). His talk show, ‘The Cedric Muhammad and Black Coffee Program’ can be viewed every Wednesday from 12 to 5 PM EST (USA) at: http://www.cedricmuhammad.com/media/. He can be contacted via e-mail at: cedric(at)cmcap.com

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner