Commentary
COMMENTARY: Two years until the 2020 elections — time to get to work
MINNESOTA SPOKESMAN-RECORDER — Why are we consistently faced with only being able to choose between the lesser of two evils each election cycle?
By Oscar H. Blayton
Most readers will be familiar with this scenario. A White politician that you have not heard from in two years starts to show up at Black churches, glad-handing the pastors, reciting his or her accomplishments for the congregation that you’ve never heard of, and reminding you to vote for him or her in the upcoming elections.
It’s a scenario that is played out in most political districts where Blacks make up a significant portion — but not the majority — of the electorate. We know very little about these absentee politicians except that they are “the lesser of two evils” — the choice offered to those Black folk allowed to vote since the end of the Reconstruction era.
Why are we consistently faced with only being able to choose between the lesser of two evils each election cycle? Or to put it another way, why can’t we have more options when selecting who will represent us?
The answer is that we do have more options. We must constantly stay politically “woke” and not wait until the last minute to pay attention to who the potential candidates are. Politicians interested in running in 2020 already are lining up at the starting gate.
People aspiring to become the next president of the United States already have advance people in Iowa and other key states preparing for the primary elections. Those eyeing congressional seats, state and local offices are organizing their political teams in order to hold on to those offices or to unseat an incumbent.
2016 has shown us that if we do not get engaged, we are in danger of being saddled with a lying racist, bent on erasing all of the gains people of color have made during the last five decades.
2018 has shown us that when people organize, they can overcome many of the obstacles that are strewn in our paths to equal justice and the freedoms promised to us by the U.S. Constitution. 2018 also has shown us that there are those who would deny people of color justice and freedom by blocking us from our guaranteed right to vote.
The Georgia governor’s race shined a light on how bigots and racists will go to any lengths to tilt the vote in their favor by removing voters from the rolls and by making it more difficult for voters to get to the polls to cast their ballots. Republican Brian Kemp ran for governor of that state while refusing to step down as its secretary of state, the office that oversees elections in Georgia. Over the years, Kemp systematically removed Black voters from the rolls through various questionable means, giving himself a clear advantage by increasing the percentage of would-be voters who were White.
There are those who will try to cheat us out of our rights, including our right to vote. There are those who will try to steal elections in the way that Trump did in 2016 with the help of Russian interference.
These people can be stopped, however. They can be stopped by you and by me. The way we stop them is by looking for people qualified to run for office in federal, state and local elections and helping them to win. These people can be found among your parents and your voting age children — and your aunts and uncles and cousins and friends. They must be identified and then encouraged to run for office.
And when they run, we must support them. We must support them with our time, our labor and with our money. There may not be many of us that can give much of any of these things, but we can each give something.
If we make more of an effort, we can get more elected officials of the type we want and deserve. The proof is in the pudding. 2018 saw a record number of women of color elected and it is expected that these women will work to steer America back on the correct course to fulfilling the promises of our Constitution.
According to the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University, women of color will occupy:
● 38 seats in Congress
● 9 statewide elective offices
● 456 state legislative seats and
● 10 mayoral offices in some of the nation’s 100 largest cities.
We, as people of color, are in a pitched battle for our rightful place in this nation. And it is a battle that we will not win if we do not enlist as many people as possible in the fight. If we do not identify, enlist and support candidates who champion our best interests, then we deserve the callous and unjust treatment that we receive from elected officials who do not respect us.
The clock is running and so are the same tired old politicians. It is time we bring some serious champions into the fight.
Oscar H. Blayton is a former Marine Corps combat pilot and human rights activist who practices law in Virginia.
This article originally appeared in the Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder.
Activism
Oakland Post: Week of May 21 – 27, 2025
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of May 21 – 27, 2025

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.
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
OPINION: Supreme Court Case Highlights Clash Between Parental Rights and Progressive Indoctrination
At the center of this controversy are some parents from Montgomery County in Maryland, who assert a fundamental principle: the right to shield their children from exposure to sexual content that is inappropriate for their age, while also steering their moral and ethical upbringing in alignment with their faith. The local school board decided to introduce a curriculum that includes LGBTQ+ themes — often embracing controversial discussions of human sexuality and gender identity.

By Craig J. DeLuz, Special to California Black Media Partners
In America’s schools, the tension between parental rights and learning curricula has created a contentious battlefield.
In this debate, it is essential to recognize that parents are, first and foremost, their children’s primary educators. When they send their children to school — public or private — they do not surrender their rights or responsibilities. Yet, the education establishment has been increasingly encroaching on this vital paradigm.
A case recently argued before the Supreme Court regarding Maryland parents’ rights to opt out of lessons that infringe upon their religious beliefs epitomizes this growing conflict. This case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, is not simply about retreating from progressive educational mandates. It is fundamentally a defense of First Amendment rights, a defense of parents’ rights to be parents.
At the center of this controversy are some parents from Montgomery County in Maryland, who assert a fundamental principle: the right to shield their children from exposure to sexual content that is inappropriate for their age, while also steering their moral and ethical upbringing in alignment with their faith. The local school board decided to introduce a curriculum that includes LGBTQ+ themes, often embracing controversial discussions of human sexuality and gender identity. The parents argue that the subject matter is age-inappropriate, and the school board does not give parents the option to withdraw their children when those lessons are taught.
This case raises profound questions about the role of public education in a democratic society. In their fervent quest for inclusivity, some educators seem to have overlooked an essential truth: that the promotion of inclusivity should never infringe upon parental rights and the deeply held convictions that guide families of different faith backgrounds.
This matter goes well beyond mere exposure. It veers into indoctrination when children are repeatedly confronted with concepts that clash with their family values.
“I don’t think anybody can read that and say: well, this is just telling children that there are occasions when men marry other men,” noted Justice Samuel Alito. “It has a clear moral message, and it may be a good message. It’s just a message that a lot of religious people disagree with.”
Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised a crucial point, noting that it is one thing to merely expose students to diverse ideas; it is quite another to present certain viewpoints as indisputable truths. By framing an ideology with the certainty of “this is the right view of the world,” educators risk indoctrination rather than enlightenment. This distinction is not merely academic; it speaks to the very essence of cultivating a truly informed citizenry.
Even Justice Elena Kagan expressed concern regarding the exposure of young children to certain materials in Montgomery County.
“I, too, was struck by these young kids’ picture books and, on matters concerning sexuality, I suspect there are a lot of non-religious parents who weren’t all that thrilled about this,” she said.
Justice John Roberts aptly questioned the practicality of expecting young children to compartmentalize their beliefs in the classroom.
“It is unreasonable to expect five-year-olds, still forming their worldviews, to reconcile lessons that conflict fundamentally with the teachings they receive at home,” he said.
As was noted in my previous commentary, “The Hidden Truth In The Battle Over Books In American Schools”, what lies at the heart of these debates is a moral disconnect between the values held by the majority of Americans and those promoted by the educational establishment. While the majority rightly argue that material containing controversial content of a sexual nature should have no place in our children’s classrooms, the education establishment continues to tout the necessity of exposing children to such content under the guise of inclusivity. This disregards the legitimate values held by the wider community.
Highlighted in this case that is before the Supreme Court is a crucial truth: parents must resolutely maintain their right to direct their children’s education, according to their values. This struggle is not simply a skirmish; it reflects a broader movement aimed at reshaping education by privileging a state-sanctioned narrative while marginalizing dissenting voices.
It is imperative that we assert, without hesitation, that parents are — and must remain — the primary educators of their children.
When parents enroll a child in a school, it should in no way be interpreted as a relinquishment of parental authority or the moral guidance essential to their upbringing. We must stand firm in defending parental rights against the encroaching ideologies of the education establishment.
About the Author
Craig J. DeLuz has almost 30 years of experience in public policy and advocacy. He has served as a member of The Robla School District Board of Trustees for over 20 years. He also currently hosts a daily news and commentary show called “The RUNDOWN.” You can follow him on X at @CraigDeLuz.
-
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
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
Newsom Fights Back as AmeriCorps Shutdown Threatens Vital Services in Black Communities
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
The RESISTANCE – FREEDOM NOW
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Teachers’ Union Thanks Supt. Johnson-Trammell for Service to Schools and Community