Why is only 1 of 100 Senators black when blacks comprise 13% of the U.S. population?

otherwise there would be about 3 black females and 3 black male Senators

Could it be that senators are chosen by states and not by races?

there are variables. I couldn't vote either

that if there really is only one black senator, the people of whatever states, didn't elect one, or they didn't have one running. There could be a lot of reasons. But, I wonder how that will pan out when considering a black man for president? I mean, if they didn't vote for one for senator, would they vote for one for president?

The Senate has 2 seats for every state, and Montana has 2 seats, same as California. The house represents districts, and therefore should be closer to the population.

"In the 435-member House of Representatives, 123 elected officials earned at least one million dollars last year, according to recently released financial records made public each year. Next door in the ornate Senate, whose blue-blooded pedigree includes a Kennedy and a Rockefeller, one in three people are millionaires. By comparison, less than one percent of Americans make seven-figure incomes."

http://www.hostdiva.com/liberalchristians/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=116&Itemid=29&limit=1&limitstart=1

Isn't it only 16?

We've got a long way to go still before we put racism and sexism behind us in this country. :(

but there also is the over representation of white rural areas in the Senate. It is hard to imagine the 30 or so Senators in the great plains and mountain region ever being African American due to the paucity of African Americans in those states. That greatly narrows the possibilities. Add in another dozen or so in places such as upper New England and Alaska and Hawaii and it gets even narrower.

For some reason, people seem to think it would be strange for blacks to be elected in numbers that exceed their proportion of the population, yet don't seem to have a problem when whites - especially white men - being overrepresented.

it makes matters even worse. States like Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana all of which have large African American populations just won't vote for African Americans statewide. I don't know what the solution here is, sadly. Take out Illinois and no state has elected a Demcoratic African American Senator ever. Take out Massachusets and no state has elected any African Americans since Reconstruction.

FUCK PC. I have been a poll worker for over 15 years in a precinct that is over 40% black. I also have spent more time than I should admit to drinking with my black buddies. I have spent a lot of breath trying to convince several of them to vote, to no avail. The weak ass excuse they use is "I don't want the government to know my shit".

I am adamant about people voting. I don't care how they vote, but FOR GOD'S SAKE VOTE. I am a voting advocate. My friends attitudes have befuddled me for decades. These are lifelong friends I am talking about. HELL, I have gotten my former boss to get citizenship and vote and I can't get these Americans to vote.

I am not saying this is everyones case, but it certainly is not an isolated instance. I have heard the same in several progressive and voter forums that I visit.

Are you saying that white people would not vote for a black person for Senate?

Mormon, atheist, woman, latino or whatever sub-group gets by virtue of being of that sub-group.

who's to say. You'd have to go back and look at any black person that ran, see who their opponent was, and what the demographic of the area is...before you could get the big picture...

I think voting is one of our most important rights.

I never replied to anything you said....seriousstan..

Not enough people vote period.
A small town near me just elected
a new mayor, he won with a total
of 17 votes.
The next town, the County Seat,
elected its mayor with just 342
votes.

than meets the eye.

The disenfranchised often understand the system quite clearly.

Baseless assertions can be answered by baseless assertions.

And as usual, there will be attempts to bury them. Copycat threads included!
:thumbsup:

I'm finding these discussions very enlightening - and very disconcerting. If the folks who are supposed to be on our side are having this much difficulty with this topic, we're in trouble

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Man's_Burden
The White Man's Burden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

since there are many factors that come into play long before someone actually becaomes a candidate.

I once worked for a company that had very few black employees. Whenever I asked why there weren't more blacks there, I got the same answer: "Hardly any black people ever apply." Upon investigation, I discovered an interesting thing - the company's employment agency never sent black applicants. When I inquired why, I found out it was because they screened out all of the black applicants, regardless how qualified they were because they knew the company didn't hire blacks. When I pointed this out to the top guy, he said, "Oh, that used to be true, but not any more." I asked him how in the hell were people supposed to know that they no longer discriminated if they continued to be virtually all white?

With my urging, they instructed the agency to stop screening based on race. I remember thinking it was a damned shame that *I* had to be the one to dig into this to find out why this was a problem - and wondered why this company never bothered to check why they never saw any black applicants.

I also helped them develop an affirmative action plan - contrary to popular belief, this didn't mean hiring unqualified blacks. Instead, they actively advertised and recruited in places where they knew they'd attract qualified blacks. They also hosted events for black potential employees and created a diversity manager position and developed formal mentorships to help ensure that they not only hired qualified blacks, but retained them by not doing insensitive and sometimes outright bigoted things that tended to make black folks run for the doors (like informally mentoring the white employees, while leaving the black employees to fend for themselves, requiring black employees to attend "golf outings" at private country clubs that excluded blacks from membership, telling racist jokes in the bathroom when they thought no one was listening, etc.)

I see the same thing in the political arena. Senatorial candidates don't just spring to life three months before the election. They are recruited, groomed, brought up through the ranks at a local level. Local and state Democratic parties have tremendous power to determine who eventual candidates will be and to direct the money they need their way. Often you find blacks aren't running for Senate seats, not because they don't want to but because they don't get the support they need from their local and state parties.

Just look at Barack Obama's presidential race. How many times have you heard people say that he can never win because people won't vote for a black president? That kind of naysaying attitude consistently undercuts black candidates, who are told by the powers that be, "we LOVE you and think you'd be great. But people just aren't ready to vote for you, so we're going to have to go with candidate X."

It's an extremely complicated issue, but unless we start facing the reality of the continued existence of racism and sexism in America, we'll never get past it.

standing up for office?

If black people run they might get elected. But it takes a hell of a lot of money and there are few blacks with that kind of money. If the wealth of this country was more equal between blacks and whites, blacks would have a much better chance of running and winning.

Why don't rich white people support blacks running for office, the way they support white candidates?

Could racism have something to do with this?

Isn't Obama getting money from "rich white people" right now? I bet he is...

You're saying that there aren't more black senators because there aren't more rich black people. But implicit in that is the assumption that black people can expect support only from other blacks. Why aren't more white people supporting black candidates?

And the fact that lots of white folks like Obama doesn't answer the question. Barack Obama is one person. Pointing to one person - or two or three - people who are clearly the exception, not the rule, doesn't prove that the problem doesn't exist.

anything of the sort. Someone else said that. Go back and read my post.

____ Certain social forces are at work that teach apathy to black people at a young age. The Kanye West's and Soulja Boy's are not doing the race any favors. Also, some racism still exists:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/south_carolina/election_2008_south_carolina_democratic_primary

And black people are taught apathy at a young age?

Have we ALWAYS been taught apathy at a young age? Is that how to explain why there have been so few black Senators in the country's 240 year history?

let's not do the research, and blame it all on racism. By the way, blacks are the ones who continue beating the racism drum, not the whites. Your post here is a classic example. You don't want to accept that there could possibly be other reasons. It's just easier to blame racism.

By the way, I voted in the poll, and I guess I am the only one that said blacks make bad carreer choices. That, I think is the reason ther aren't more blacks in the senate.

to claim that there aren't more black Senators because black youngsters are taught apathy form a young age and to blame it on Kanye West.

What research have YOU done?

Never mind . . . your comments speak for themselves - and clearly demonstrate the exact point that I'm trying to make.

addressing things to me, that I never said....I think you need to pay attention to who says what. BTW, I don't care to research it, because I don't care if there are a 100 black senators, or 1. You just keep looking for an argument.

You are now on my ignore list.

who teaches them apathy at a young age, and what methods are used.

That's a very small part of the problem, because if opportunities were the same and had been the same, we obviously wouldn't need to have this discussion.

But since it's been raised as an issue, I'd like to point out that we marginalize people of color in our educational system consistently, and I will add that I personally have had coworkers (teachers) who were white supremacists, and I saw that attitude carry over from the way they treated their students to the curriculum they chose. And they justified their curriculum choices by telling me we teach western european history because it's culturally superior to the cultures of other areas. they've had the nerve to print out articles stating why multiculturalism is bad because western Europeans are superior - and put that in my mailbox at school.

You know how blacks are more likely to be stopped by police, arrested, and convicted, and given harsher sentences? That happens in our schools as well. In the states where we have corporal punishment in the schools, black kids are 17% of the population, and make up 38% of the kids getting hit. Here's a quote from a teacher I took a class with: "There is nothing more effective than a misbehaved 14 year old getting spanked with a wooden plank by the principal. The students fear this the most and they will do anything to avoid it. It is humiliating and it hurts. I am glad my school takes a firm stand on discipline."

So we humiliate kids (disproportionately the black ones) and we do it happily, and we do it knowing that they will do "anything" to avoid it. "Anything" - that would include dropping out of school to avoid being hit.

So there is a message that kids receive, early on, that this whole school thing isn't for you or your type. And it's white people sending them this message. It's easy to stand back as a white adult and say "well, those 5 year olds shouldn't have let the constant message that "you are inferior" or that "your type doesn't run the world" affect their self esteem or their vision of their future, but I think it's part of the denial of racism to blame the victim of constant racism for being affected by it.

What I'm saying is that if a person believes that black people make bad career choices, and they can't figure out how that is a product of systemic racism, they're deluding themselves. If I were in a substandard school district with inadequate funding, being taught from the time I was 5 to the time I was an adult that the world is about and for white people, and I couldn't afford college because my parents had been kept out of jobs where they were able to save for college, and my teachers were treating me like I was naturally inferior and they took joy in "humiliating" me, well, that would affect my career choices. If I know I can't afford college, and I've been told all my life I'm just not all that smart, I'm not going to decide to be a lawyer, you know?

That's a very curious assertion.

As we can in a concert, some day life could be much fuller for all of us.

of the overall inequity in the country.

Racism hasn't gone away it's just been shuffled into the closet not to be mentioned in the "post-modern" paradigm.

I don't think that bodes well for Omaba in the GE if he was the nominee....it may cost the Dems the White House if you're right....

not by keeping black people hidden on the back of the bus because we will "cost the Dems" something.

Exposing these issues to the light has an amazing cleansing effect. Many people hold biases and prejudices they don't even know they have. When it's shown to them, they often change their way of thinking and do the right thing.

Racism will never be eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.

just look at the attitudes expressed whenever the issue of racism and sexism come up. It's hard to tell some of the folks in here from the bigots on the outside.

Maybe some of them ARE the bigots on the outside.

Why is it that the Democratic Party hasn't nominated more African Americans as Senate candidates?

We need to make a concerted effort to recruit candidates that reflect the diversity of our communities. Certainly, Dem elected leaders tend to be more diverse to begin with, but I'm saying we should have an official policy of affirmative action when it comes to candidates.

Senators are picked for all kinds of reasons - including race and gender. That's why the overwhelming number of senators have been WHITE MEN.

It's pretty funny that the only time I hear people demanding that people be selected "on merit" is when the question of selecting African Americans or women, instead of white men, comes up. Then suddenly folk insist that we morph into a meritocracy - a goal that doesn't seem to be of much concern to people when white men are disproportionately represented.

No one will ever be able to convince me - or any other rational thinking person - that every white man who has served in the Senate has been THE MOST QUALIFIED PERSON for that seat or that there have only been three instances in our history in which a black person has been more qualified than a white person to be a U.S. Senator.

No one was bothered by quotas when we had a 100% white male quota for all the powerful and prestigious positions.

And most folks don't object to quotas now - as long as white men either meet or exceed the white male quota. But the minute the white male quota falls BELOW white men's percentage of the population (i.e., the presence minorities and women exceeds THEIR percentage of the population) all hell breaks loose!

In the past, most people did not think that racial quotas were wrong.

Now, most people do.

That is the reason racial quotas are largely a thing of the past, not the other way round. You're confusing cause and effect, I think.

All I said is all senators and house reps should be elected
based on merit, not gender or race.

Part of the explanation is entrenched racism.

The other part is the math of democracy. People are pretty tribal in politics, so majority white political districts tend to have white representation, as do black political districts, Latino political districts, etc.

There are lots of majority black cities, some majority black congressional districts, and no majority black states. (since DC is, unfortunately, not a State) If there were any majority black states there is little doubt that they would elect some black senators.

Unfortunately, everyone tends to vote for their own race when given the opportunity. In today's political landscape, white politicians don't do much better in majority black districts. There is that one white Democrat who won Harold Ford's seat and wasn't allowed to join the black caucus. (He wanted to join because his district is majority black and he thought the black caucus should be about the issues of interest to the constituents, not about the race of the representatives.) He's probably the only white congressman from a majority black district today.

Much of this effect and been exacerbated by both parties through gerrymandering. Democrats have fallen for the trap of isolating/concentrating minority populations in districts. Career politicians are happy to have their seats made safer by concentrating minorities, but the result is that minorities have little influence in all the other districts.

Turning five reddish-purple districts into one blue and four red guarantees one blue seat, but also guarantees that blue can never be a majority.

The Texas redistricting plan is a perfect example. One of Delay's cohorts said the objective was to turn the Texas Democratic Party into the "black party." Concentrating black voters creates a certain number of "safe" black seats while making it all but impossible for Democrats to win outside those districts. Their desired result is that every Democratic elected official from Texas should be black, and that marks the Democratic party as "the black party" and marginalizes the party among white voters throughout Texas.

A sick, clever plan that is the predictable up-shot of the unfortunate facts of racial voting by all races.

It's not soley "black or white". Until we examine it in an holistic manner we will continue to see this type of representation.

You can read the online comments by readers in most of the major newspapers and not only see the racism but see where it is concentrated the most. The reader comments in stories about immigration in the Houston Chronicle are quite revealing. And quite scary.

I posted a comment on the reality of Texas in the DU Texas forum that was deleted. But it didn't delete the reality. The South for the most part is red and purple because of the racism that has empowered the Republican Party and in great part made it impossible for Democrats to win unless they have a conservative platform. Reality of Texas is that Kay Bailey Hutchison's popularity is not just among Republicans. That apparently irritated someone as well as a moderator when I posted that before. But it is the reality. Then we have John Cornyn.

Texas most likely will have a Hispanic Democrat candidate challenging John Cornyn in 2008. Moderate Republicans who support Kay Bailey Hutchison do not necessarily support John Cornyn. But the question of race may influence the race again. Lloyd Bentsen was a conservative Democrat who was very popular among Republicans in Texas although the Tom De Lay followers would deny that. Rick Noriega is very similar in some ways to Lloyd Bentsen and while he himself might deny it, he is a conservative Democrat as well. But the difference is that Lloyd Bentsen was a WASP in every sense of the word. Rick Noriega is Hispanic. It shouldn't matter. Most Democrats in Texas will say it doesn't. But it may. John Cornyn beat an African-American the first time. The question was and still is was it because he was a popular Attorney General or because Ron Kirk was an African-American?

I often wonder about Barbara Jordan and if she would have been able to win a statewide election in Texas. I don't know that she could have even today. And if she couldn't, and she was well-respected in Texas, I don't know that anyone else can. But that is no reason why anyone should not try. And keep trying.

I believe it was Sandra Day O'Connor who said we are still not a color-blind society while still striking down affirmative action. But truer words were never spoken. But of course that is why the Texas race for the US Senate in 2008 should take on some national importance. And hopefully some national funding. Rick Noriega beating John Cornyn will prove that competence is more important than color. It will also rid us of one of the worst of the Republicans in the US Senate.

You only need to browse through any thread dealing with the topic of race to find that racism is alive and well right in our midst!

"Because black people are inferior" and "because people are racist."

Since the poll question and answers have all the subtlety and nuance of a using a sledgehammer to dust the fine china, I abstain.

Not that I actually believe that, but nobody had picked it yet and I felt sorry for it.

If not, why not?

Akaka and Inouye from Hawaii.

Just look at their scholastic averages and their average incomes.
They are higher than whites. But they are a small minority and that
is why no Asian senators except for a lonely Hawaiian from Hawaii.

1/2 of the Supreme Court?

I think it should be mandated (womandated) that women are equal in the Capitol

we ARE half the population (maybe more then half)

:silly: