#NNPA BlackPress
COMMENTARY: The Pernicious Power of Patriarchy
NNPA NEWSWIRE — If we women were honest, we would say that we have all cosigned patriarchy in the interest of keeping it moving. We have deflected the sexist comments that come our way, even as we cringe from them. We smile at men that we abhor because they may have decision making power in their hands. We dress up or dress down depending on the occasion and the way we have to play the game. We know the system is slanted against us, we know we still have to play, and we decide when we choose to blow the whistle, a whistle we could blow every single day.
By Julianne Malveaux, NNPA Newswire Contributor
Our nation, these United States, is founded on the principles of racism and patriarchy. They are reflected in our very constitution, where enslaved persons were counted as a fraction of a person, and only men of property were allowed the right to vote. The filthy inequality at the foundation of this nation has now bubbled up and boiled over, now polluting every aspect of our lives.
Patriarchy places men at the center of life, and women at the periphery. It suggests that women do not matter. It allows for the subjugation of women when they attempt to enter public spaces that have previously been earmarked as “male” spaces. Thus, there were no restrooms for women legislators in the US House or Senate, even as women entered those spaces. They were only created when women demanded them. Of course, restrooms are just a minor manifestation of the hegemonic patriarchy that rules our nation.
A great picture of our nation’s racist patriarchy was the visual of doughy and dissipated white men interrogating the amazingly composed Anita Hill as she reviewed her experiences with now-Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Though Hill was persuasive, she was attacked in the vilest of terms, accused of nonsense like “erotomania,” and even recently harassed by Thomas’ unhinged spouse who was still seeking apology after two decades. Note to Thomas, take the phone from your wife when her meds are not working. In any case, Thomas is on the Supreme Court because white men chose to disregard the word of a Black woman, a decision that then-Senator Joe Biden says he now regrets. Thomas was confirmed by the narrowest margin in history 52-48.
Here we go again. By the time this is published the matter of 45’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is resolved, but the issue of pernicious patriarchy will not be. Regarding Kavanaugh, he has been accused by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford of sexual assault more than 35 years ago, when both were teens. She disclosed her accusations in a letter that California Senator Dianne Feinstein received in July, but did not share with the FBI until later, mainly because Ford asked for confidentiality. Ford has requested that the FBI investigate her assertions, and the Senate judiciary committee is still fast-tracking the Kavanaugh vote. The outcome, while necessary, is not the bottom line. The issue is the way that racist patriarchy makes some offensive and illegal behavior acceptable.
Privileged white male culture allows and encourages excessive drinking and obnoxious behavior toward women. It is excused because “boys will be boys.” But what boys? Black boys, even accused of “reckless eyeballing,” are fair game for lynching! White boys on rampages are excused for assault, rape, and attempted rape. Can I call the name of Recy Taylor, the young Black woman who was walking home from church and raped by a gaggle of white men who thought her body their right? Can I remind us of the Texas gubernatorial candidate, Clayton Williams, who said that if rape was inevitable, a woman should “lay back and enjoy it”? Ann Richards beat him, but that wasn’t quite the point. The point was that some man thought that rape was inevitable enough to “enjoy.”
Privileged white male culture allows a man who should not have been elected President to denigrate women regularly. We are “fat,” “dogs” and “liars.” He bragged about grabbing women’s genitals, and our society is so poached in pernicious patriarchy that 52 percent of all women still voted for him. They thought he was joking because, for too many women, patriarchy has so seeped into our consciousness that the abuse of women is a joke.
If we women were honest, we would say that we have all cosigned patriarchy in the interest of keeping it moving. We have deflected the sexist comments that come our way, even as we cringe from them. We smile at men that we abhor because they may have decision making power in their hands. We dress up or dress down depending on the occasion and the way we have to play the game. We know the system is slanted against us, we know we still have to play, and we decide when we choose to blow the whistle, a whistle we could blow every single day. #MeToo is the tip of the iceberg because it fails to deal with race systematically, but also because it manages the evident and personal, not the institutional.
In addition to being #MeToo women, we are mothers, sisters, daughters, and wives (hello Julie Chen Moonves), so some of us want to justify patriarchy for “our” men. Our son, husband, cousin, brother “didn’t mean it” and could not be that bad. Wake-up call — if they violated a woman, they were that bad. If they raped a Black woman and you turned away from the accusation, you are wrong, you are horribly and complicity wrong.
Tearing down the walls of pernicious patriarchy means attacking the very foundation of our nation. When we attack patriarchy, we also attack the racism that is also part of our foundation. Many have lined up to support Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. How many are equally willing to attack the pernicious racist patriarchal roots of our nation?
Dr. Julianne Malveaux is an economist, author, media contributor and educator. Her latest project MALVEAUX! On UDCTV is available on youtube.com. For booking, wholesale inquiries or for more info visit www.juliannemalveaux.com
#NNPA BlackPress
Recently Approved Budget Plan Favors Wealthy, Slashes Aid to Low-Income Americans
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts

By Stacy M. Brown
BlackPressUSA.com Senior National Correspondent
The new budget framework approved by Congress may result in sweeping changes to the federal safety net and tax code. The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts. A new analysis from Yale University’s Budget Lab shows the proposals in the House’s Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Resolution would lead to a drop in after-tax-and-transfer income for the poorest households while significantly boosting revenue for the wealthiest Americans. Last month, Congress passed its Concurrent Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2025 (H. Con. Res. 14), setting revenue and spending targets for the next decade. The resolution outlines $1.5 trillion in gross spending cuts and $4.5 trillion in tax reductions between FY2025 and FY2034, along with $500 billion in unspecified deficit reduction.
Congressional Committees have now been instructed to identify policy changes that align with these goals. Three of the most impactful committees—Agriculture, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means—have been tasked with proposing major changes. The Agriculture Committee is charged with finding $230 billion in savings, likely through changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps. Energy and Commerce must deliver $880 billion in savings, likely through Medicaid reductions. Meanwhile, the Ways and Means Committee must craft tax changes totaling no more than $4.5 trillion in new deficits, most likely through extending provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Although the resolution does not specify precise changes, reports suggest lawmakers are eyeing steep cuts to SNAP and Medicaid benefits while seeking to make permanent tax provisions that primarily benefit high-income individuals and corporations.
To examine the potential real-world impact, Yale’s Budget Lab modeled four policy changes that align with the resolution’s goals:
- A 30 percent across-the-board cut in SNAP funding.
- A 15 percent cut in Medicaid funding.
- Permanent extension of the individual and estate tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
- Permanent extension of business tax provisions including 100% bonus depreciation, expense of R&D, and relaxed limits on interest deductions.
Yale researchers determined that the combined effect of these policies would reduce the after-tax-and-transfer income of the bottom 20 percent of earners by 5 percent in the calendar year 2026. Households in the middle would see a modest 0.6 percent gain. However, the top five percent of earners would experience a 3 percent increase in their after-tax-and-transfer income.
Moreover, the analysis concluded that more than 100 percent of the net fiscal benefit from these changes would go to households in the top 20 percent of the income distribution. This happens because lower-income groups would lose more in government benefits than they would gain from any tax cuts. At the same time, high-income households would enjoy significant tax reductions with little or no loss in benefits.
“These results indicate a shift in resources away from low-income tax units toward those with higher incomes,” the Budget Lab report states. “In particular, making the TCJA provisions permanent for high earners while reducing spending on SNAP and Medicaid leads to a regressive overall effect.” The report notes that policymakers have floated a range of options to reduce SNAP and Medicaid outlays, such as lowering per-beneficiary benefits or tightening eligibility rules. While the Budget Lab did not assess each proposal individually, the modeling assumes legislation consistent with the resolution’s instructions. “The burden of deficit reduction would fall largely on those least able to bear it,” the report concluded.
#NNPA BlackPress
A Threat to Pre-emptive Pardons
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process.

By April Ryan
President Trump is working to undo the traditional presidential pardon powers by questioning the Biden administration’s pre-emptive pardons issued just days before January 20, 2025. President Trump is seeking retribution against the January 6th House Select Committee. The Trump Justice Department has been tasked to find loopholes to overturn the pardons that could lead to legal battles for the Republican and Democratic nine-member committee. Legal scholars and those closely familiar with the pardon process worked with the Biden administration to ensure the preemptive pardons would stand against any retaliatory knocks from the incoming Trump administration. A source close to the Biden administration’s pardons said, in January 2025, “I think pardons are all valid. The power is unreviewable by the courts.”
However, today that same source had a different statement on the nuances of the new Trump pardon attack. That attack places questions about Biden’s use of an autopen for the pardons. The Trump argument is that Biden did not know who was pardoned as he did not sign the documents. Instead, the pardons were allegedly signed by an autopen. The same source close to the pardon issue said this week, “unless he [Trump] can prove Biden didn’t know what was being done in his name. All of this is in uncharted territory. “ Meanwhile, an autopen is used to make automatic or remote signatures. It has been used for decades by public figures and celebrities.
Months before the Biden pardon announcement, those in the Biden White House Counsel’s Office, staff, and the Justice Department were conferring tirelessly around the clock on who to pardon and how. The concern for the preemptive pardons was how to make them irrevocable in an unprecedented process. At one point in the lead-up to the preemptive pardon releases, it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process. President Trump began the threat of an investigation for the January 6th Select Committee during the Hill proceedings. Trump has threatened members with investigation or jail.
#NNPA BlackPress
Reaction to The Education EO
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking a higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college.

By April Ryan
There are plenty of negative reactions to President Donald Trump’s latest Executive Order abolishing the Department of Education. As Democrats call yesterday’s action performative, it would take an act of Congress for the Education Department to close permanently. “This blatantly unconstitutional executive order is just another piece of evidence that Trump has absolutely no respect for the Constitution,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) who is the ranking member on the House Financial Services Committee. “By dismantling ED, President Trump is implementing his own philosophy on education, which can be summed up in his own words, ‘I love the poorly educated.’ I am adamantly opposed to this reckless action, said Rep. Bobby Scott who is the most senior Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee.
Morgan State University President Dr. David Wilson chimed in saying “I’m deeply concerned about efforts to shift federal oversight in education back to the states, particularly regarding equity, justice, and fairness. History has shown us what happens when states are left unchecked—Black and poor children are too often denied access to the high-quality education they deserve. In 1979 then President Jimmy Carter signed a law creating the Department of Education. Arne Duncan, former Obama Education Secretary, reminds us that both Democratic and Republican presidents have kept education a non-political issue until now. However, Duncan stressed Republican presidents have contributed greatly to moving education forward in this country.
During a CNN interview this week Duncan said during the Civil War President Abraham “Lincoln created the land grant system” for colleges like Tennessee State University. “President Ford brought in IDEA.” And “Nixon signed Pell Grants into law.” In 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush which increased federal oversight of schools through standardized testing. Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college. Wilson details, “that 40 percent of all college students rely on Pell Grants and student loans.”
Rep. Alma Adams (D-NC) says this Trump action “impacts students pursuing higher education and threatens 26 million students across the country, taking billions away from their educational futures. Meanwhile, During the president’s speech in the East Room of the White House Thursday, Trump criticized Baltimore City, and its math test scores with critical words. Governor West Moore, who is opposed to the EO action, said about dismantling the Department of Education, “Leadership means lifting people up, not punching them down.”
-
#NNPA BlackPress3 weeks ago
Target Takes a Hit: $12.4 Billion Wiped Out as Boycotts Grow
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Undocumented Workers Are Struggling to Feed Themselves. Slashed Budgets and New Immigration Policies Bring Fresh Challenges
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
BREAKING Groundbreaking Singer Angie Stone Dies in Car Accident at 63
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of February 26 – March 4, 2025
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
NAACP Legend and Freedom Fighter Hazel Dukes Passes
-
Arts and Culture3 weeks ago
Beverly Lorraine Greene: A Pioneering Architect and Symbol of Possibility and Progress
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
Trump Kicks the Ukrainian President Out of the White House
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
Apple Shareholders Reject Effort to Dismantle DEI Initiatives, Approve $500 Billion U.S. Investment Plan