Black History
COMMENTARY: Divisions Set in Concrete and Pavement
The racial divisions that have split our country for centuries don’t just live in people’s hearts and heads. Some of them exist in concrete and pavement running right through certain neighborhoods. They are structural racism in the most tangible sense.

By Ben Jealous
The racial divisions that have split our country for centuries don’t just live in people’s hearts and heads. Some of them exist in concrete and pavement running right through certain neighborhoods. They are structural racism in the most tangible sense.
In Milwaukee last month, local activists told me about their fight against that kind of division. Wisconsin’s transportation department wants to expand a crumbling 3.5-mile stretch of Interstate 94 running through the state’s largest city at a cost of $1.2 billion and about 49 acres of land in the neighborhoods adjoining the roadway.
Like Overton in Miami, East Los Angeles and West Montgomery, Alabama, those neighborhoods, home to poor black and brown residents, were subdivided 60 years ago when I-94 was built. The highway continues to cut them off today.
It’s disingenuous to make plans today that don’t consider the history of these highways in places like Milwaukee. The cost to locate interstates, built as courts were ordering desegregation of public schools and housing, was borne by communities of color whose residents were barred from home loans that would have let them move to suburbs that got disproportionate benefit from faster commutes. Planners used code words like blight, renewal, and efficiency to confuse that reality.
A highway project like this creates an actual intersection between creating more equitable communities and protecting the planet. Public works projects that encourage more traffic increase air pollution that impacts our climate, increase noise pollution, and add to flooding and contaminated run-off that damage swimmable, fishable rivers. Those who live closest breathe the most exhaust and live with the constant drone of traffic, but the environmental impact unquestionably stretches far wider.
The estimated cost of expanding I-94 is about $40 million more than fixing the existing six lanes. That’s the same amount that a 50% cut in the current state budget cost mass transit systems in Madison and Milwaukee. Most Milwaukee mass transit riders are workers riding to a job or the disabled and seniors who no longer drive. While black and brown riders make up a disproportionate share of the total, most riders are white.
When we see these fabricated divisions, the question we should ask is who benefits from creating them? We know from troubling experience that the self-interested find ways to separate us even when our interests are the same. Who benefits from a wider interstate? It’s clearly not its neighbors. Not the Milwaukee City Council who opposed the plan. Not drivers today or in years to come as updating the current highway without adding lanes will improve safety and reduce congestion. And not millennials that Wisconsin has spent millions to retain and attract who say they want to live in places that don’t demand driving.
A local issue like this one in Wisconsin matters even if you live three states away because one like it may be coming to where you live soon. We’re on the cusp of many more in every state. Historic federal funding in 2021 and 2022 to repair infrastructure and invest in a cleaner economy must be spent place by place. We need to follow the example of the folks I met in Milwaukee — stay vigilant, never assume that decisions will be made in the best interest of everyone or the planet, build the biggest coalitions we can, and hold officials accountable when we vote.
Ben Jealous is the incoming executive director of the Sierra Club, the oldest and most influential grassroots environmental organization in the country. He is a professor of practice at the University of Pennsylvania and author of “Never Forget Our People Were Always Free,” published in January
Activism
OPINION: Your Voice and Vote Impact the Quality of Your Health Care
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.

By Rhonda M. Smith, Special to California Black Media Partners
Shortly after last year’s election, I hopped into a Lyft and struck up a conversation with the driver. As we talked, the topic inevitably turned to politics. He confidently told me that he didn’t vote — not because he supported Donald Trump, but because he didn’t like Kamala Harris’ résumé. When I asked what exactly he didn’t like, he couldn’t specifically articulate his dislike or point to anything specific. In his words, he “just didn’t like her résumé.”
That moment really hit hard for me. As a Black woman, I’ve lived through enough election cycles to recognize how often uncertainty, misinformation, or political apathy keep people from voting, especially Black voters whose voices are historically left out of the conversation and whose health, economic security, and opportunities are directly impacted by the individual elected to office, and the legislative branches and political parties that push forth their agenda.
That conversation with the Lyft driver reflects a troubling surge in fear-driven politics across our country. We’ve seen White House executive orders gut federal programs meant to help our most vulnerable populations and policies that systematically exclude or harm Black and underserved communities.
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.
Medicaid, called Medi-Cal in California, doesn’t just cover care. It protects individuals and families from medical debt, keeps rural hospitals open, creates jobs, and helps our communities thrive. Simply put; Medicaid is a lifeline for 1 in 5 Black Americans. For many, it’s the only thing standing between them and a medical emergency they can’t afford, especially with the skyrocketing costs of health care. The proposed cuts mean up to 7.2 million Black Americans could lose their healthcare coverage, making it harder for them to receive timely, life-saving care. Cuts to Medicaid would also result in fewer prenatal visits, delayed cancer screenings, unfilled prescriptions, and closures of community clinics. When healthcare is inaccessible or unaffordable, it doesn’t just harm individuals, it weakens entire communities and widens inequities.
The reality is Black Americans already face disproportionately higher rates of poorer health outcomes. Our life expectancy is nearly five years shorter in comparison to White Americans. Black pregnant people are 3.6 times more likely to die during pregnancy or postpartum than their white counterparts.
These policies don’t happen in a vacuum. They are determined by who holds power and who shows up to vote. Showing up amplifies our voices. Taking action and exercising our right to vote is how we express our power.
I urge you to start today. Call your representatives, on both sides of the aisle, and demand they protect Medicaid (Medi-Cal), the Affordable Care Act (Covered CA), and access to food assistance programs, maternal health resources, mental health services, and protect our basic freedoms and human rights. Stay informed, talk to your neighbors and register to vote.
About the Author
Rhonda M. Smith is the Executive Director of the California Black Health Network, a statewide nonprofit dedicated to advancing health equity for all Black Californians.
Activism
IN MEMORIAM: Nate Holden, State Senator and Longtime Los Angeles Councilmember, Dies at 95
Los Angeles County Supervisor Janice Hahn described Holden as “a lion” in the State Senate and a force to be reckoned with on the Los Angeles City Council.” Hahn added that she learned a lot working with Holden when she was a new councilmember.

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media
Former Los Angeles City Councilmember Nathaniel “Nate” Holden, a prominent figure in the city’s politics, passed away at the age of 95, his family confirmed on May 7.
Holden, who represented South Los Angeles for 16 years on the City Council and served one term in the California State Senate, was widely regarded as a forceful advocate for his community.
Los Angeles County Supervisor Janice Hahn described Holden as “a lion” in the State Senate and a force to be reckoned with on the Los Angeles City Council.”
Hahn added that she learned a lot working with Holden when she was a new councilmember.
Holden’s journey to political prominence began in the segregated South, where he was born in Macon, Georgia, in 1929. He often recalled the childhood moment when he first heard the governor of Georgia vowing to continue suppressing Black people.
“Doing the best you can for the people. Law and order. Make sure that people’s communities are safe. I did it all,” said Holden, reflecting on his legacy.
Holden is survived by his sons, including former California Assemblymember Chris Holden, who represented a district in Southern California that includes Pasadena and Altadena in Los Angeles County and cities in San Bernardino County.
Black History
Henry Blair, the Second African American to Obtain a Patent
Being a successful farmer required consistent production. Blair figured out a way to increase his harvest. He did this with two inventions. His first invention was a corn planter. The planter had the same structure as a wheelbarrow, with a box to hold the seed and rakes dragging behind to cover them. This machine allowed farmers to plant their crops more economically.

By Tamara Shiloh
The debate over whether enslaved African Americans could receive U.S. Government-issued patents was still unfolding when the second African American to hold a patent, Henry Blair, received his first patent in 1834.
The first African American to receive a patent was Thomas Jennings in 1821 for his discovery of a process called dry scouring, also known as dry cleaning.
Blair was born in Glen Ross, Maryland, in 1807. He was an African American farmer who received two patents. Each patent was designed to help increase agricultural productivity.
There is very little information about his life prior to the inventions. It is known that he was a farmer who invented machines to help with planting and harvesting crops. There is no written evidence that he was a slave.
However, it is apparent that he was a businessman.
Being a successful farmer required consistent production. Blair figured out a way to increase his harvest. He did this with two inventions. His first invention was a corn planter. The planter had the same structure as a wheelbarrow, with a box to hold the seed and rakes dragging behind to cover them. This machine allowed farmers to plant their crops more economically.
Blair could not write. As a result of his illiteracy, he signed the patent with an “X”. He received his first patent for the corn planter on Oct. 14, 1834.
Two years later, taking advantage of the boost in the cotton industry, he received his second patent. This time for a cotton planter. This machine worked by splitting the ground with two shovel-like blades that were pulled along by a horse. A wheel-driven cylinder behind the blades placed seeds into the freshly plowed ground. Not only was this another economical and efficient machine. It also helped with controlling weeds and put the seeds in the ground quickly Henry Blair received his second patent on Aug. 31, 1836
During this time, the United States government passed a law that allowed patents to be granted to both free and enslaved men. However, in 1857, this law was contested by a slaveowner. He argued that slaveowners had a right to claim credit for a slave’s inventions. His argument was that since an owner’s slaves were his property, anything that a slave owned was the property of the owner also.
In 1858 the law changed, and patents were no longer given to slaves. However, the law changed again in 1871 after the Civil War. The patent law was revised to permit all American men, regardless of race, the right to patent their inventions.
Blair died in 1860.
-
Activism4 weeks ago
AI Is Reshaping Black Healthcare: Promise, Peril, and the Push for Improved Results in California
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Barbara Lee Accepts Victory With “Responsibility, Humility and Love”
-
Activism4 weeks ago
ESSAY: Technology and Medicine, a Primary Care Point of View
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Newsom Fights Back as AmeriCorps Shutdown Threatens Vital Services in Black Communities
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Faces Around the Bay: Author Karen Lewis Took the ‘Detour to Straight Street’
-
Arts and Culture4 weeks ago
BOOK REVIEW: Love, Rita: An American Story of Sisterhood, Joy, Loss, and Legacy
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Teachers’ Union Thanks Supt. Johnson-Trammell for Service to Schools and Community
-
Alameda County4 weeks ago
OUSD Supt. Chief Kyla Johnson-Trammell to Step Down on July 1