Connect with us

Black Press

Trump Lost. Vote Suppression Won. Here are the numbers…

Published

on

by Greg Palast

Trump lost. That is, if all legal voters were allowed to vote, if all legal ballots were counted, Trump would have lost the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. Vice-President Kamala Harris would have won the Presidency with 286 electoral votes.

And, if not for the mass purge of voters of color, if not for the mass disqualification of provisional and mail-in ballots, if not for the new mass “vigilante” challenges in swing states, Harris would have gained at least another 3,565,000 votes, topping Trump’s official popular vote tally by 1.2 million.

Stay with me and I’ll give you the means, methods and, most important, the key calculations.

But if you’re expecting a sexy story about Elon Musk messing with vote-counting software from outer space, sorry, you won’t get that here.

As in Bush v. Gore in 2000, and in too many other miscarriages of Democracy, this election was determined by good old “vote suppression,” the polite term we use for shafting people of color out of their ballot. We used to call it Jim Crow.

Here are key numbers:

  • 4,776,706 voters were wrongly purged from voter rolls according to US Elections Assistance Commission data.
  • By August of 2024, for the first time since 1946, self-proclaimed “vigilante” voter-fraud hunters challenged the rights of 317,886 voters. The NAACP of Georgia estimates that by Election Day, the challenges exceeded 200,000 in Georgia alone.
  • No less than 2,121,000 mail-in ballots were disqualified for minor clerical errors (e.g. postage due).
  • At least 585,000 ballots cast in-precinct were also disqualified.
  • 1,216,000 “provisional” ballots were rejected, not counted.
  • 3.24 million new registrations were rejected or not entered on the rolls in time to vote.

If the purges, challenges and ballot rejections were random, it wouldn’t matter. It’s anything but random. For example, an audit by the State of Washington found that a Black voter was 400% more likely than a white voter to have their mail-in ballot rejected. Rejection of Black in-person votes, according to a US Civil Rights Commission study in Florida, ran 14.3% or one in seven ballots cast.

There are also the uncountable effects of the explosive growth of voter intimidation tactics including the bomb threats that closed 31 polling stations in Atlanta on Election Day.

America’s Nasty Little Secret

The nasty little secret of American democracy is that we don’t count all the votes. Nor let every citizen vote.

In 2024, especially, after an avalanche of new not-going-to-let-you-vote laws passed in almost every red state, the number of citizens Jim Crow’d out of their vote soared into the millions. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, since the 2020 election, “At least 30 states enacted 78 restrictive laws” to blockade voting. The race-targeted laws ran the gamut from shuttering drop boxes in Black-majority cities to, for the first time, allowing non-government self-appointed “vote fraud vigilantes” to challenge voters by the hundreds of thousands.

Throughout election seasons, The New York Times and NPR and establishment media write stories and editorials decrying vote suppression tactics, from new ID requirements to new restrictions on mail-in voting. But, notably, the mainstream press never, ever, not once, will say that these ugly racist attacks on voters changed the outcome of an election.

Question: If these vote suppression laws — notorious example: Georgia’s SB 202 — had no effect on election outcomes, then why did GOP legislators fight so hard to pass these laws? The answer is clear on the Brennan Center’s map of states that passed restrictive laws. It’s pretty much Trump’s victory map.

America Goes Postal

Let’s look at just one vote suppression operation in action.

In 2020, during the pandemic, America went postal. More than 43% of us voted by mail.

But it wasn’t easy. Harris County, Texas, home of Houston, tried to mail out ballots during the COVID epidemic on the grounds that voters shouldn’t die waiting in lines at polling stations. But then, the state’s Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton stopped this life-saving measure.

Why wouldn’t this GOP official let Houstonians vote safely? Maybe it’s because Houston has the largest number of Black voters of any city in America. Indeed, on Steve Bannon’s podcast, Paxton proudly stated, “Had we not done that [stopped Houston from sending out ballots], Donald Trump would’ve lost the election” in Texas. Texas!

Before the 2024 election, prompted by Trump’s evidence-free attack on mail-in ballots as inherently fraudulent, 22 states, according to the Brennan Center, imposed “38 new restrictions on the ability to vote absentee that were not in place in 2020…likely to most affect or already have disproportionately affected voters of color.” You’re shocked, right?

Texas’ requirement to add ID numbers to an absentee ballot caused the rejection rate to jump from 1% to 12%.

So, here’s the question we need to ask. If restrictions on mail-in balloting swung Texas to Trump, how did all these new restrictions affect the outcome of the vote in other states?

In 2020, an NPR study found the mail-in ballot rejection rate hit 13.8% during the Democratic primaries—a loss of one in seven ballots.

Take Georgia, where the Palast Investigative Fund spent months in on-the-ground investigations.

Here are photos of a Georgia voter, career military officer and Pentagon advisor Major Gamaliel Turner (Ret), demonstrating for young voters how to fill out an absentee ballot, emphasizing that it must be mailed in promptly. He did, seven days before the deadline. But we only recently learned that Georgia officials disqualified his ballot as received too late.

In 2008, even before the majority of Democrats began voting by mail, when absentee balloting was much rarer, the federal government reported 488,136 mail-in ballots were rejected, almost all on picayune grounds (i.e. middle initial on signature missing etc.). An MIT study put the number of rejected mail-in ballots at 2.9%.

That’s the low-end of MIT’s estimate of mail-in ballots tossed out. Charles Stewart, Distinguished Professor of Political Science, author of the report, notes mail-in ballots requested and never received nor returned could raise the total mail-in ballot loss rate to 21%.

For 2024, that would total 14.1 million ballots that, effectively, vanished from the count.

The “failure to return” ballot was exacerbated in this election by the steep cut in ballot drop boxes, a method favored by urban (read, “Democratic”) voters. Black voters in Atlanta used ballot drop boxes extensively because they feared, with good reason, relying on the Post Office [see Major Turner’s story above].

In response, the Republican Governor of Georgia, Brian Kemp, signed SB 202 which slashed the number of drop boxes by 75% only in Black-majority counties and locked them away at night. These moves slashed mail-in and drop box balloting, used by the majority of Democrats in 2020, by nearly 90% in the 2024 race.

Even if deemed “on time,” ballots still face rejection. Marietta, Georgia, first-time voter Andrian Consonery Jr. told me his mail-in ballot was rejected because his signature supposedly didn’t match that on his registration. (I needn’t add, Consonery is Black.) In effect, Consonery was accused of forgery — a federal crime — not by the FBI but by self-appointed amateur sleuths. This challenge to mail-in ballots, part of a right-wing campaign, has gone viral.

In 2020, the federal government reported that 157,477 ballots were rejected for supposedly “mis-matched” signatures. That’s quite a crime wave — but without criminals.

And that’s before we get to the dozens of other attacks on voting that were freshly minted for the 2024 election, attacks aimed at voters of color.

The crucial statistic is that not everyone’s ballot gets disqualified. One study done for the United States Civil Rights Commission found that a Black person, such as Maj. Turner, will be 900% more likely to have their mail-in or in-person ballot disqualified than a white voter.

Now, let’s do some arithmetic. If we take the lowest end of the MIT ballot rejection rate, and only a tenth of the “lost” ballot rate, and then apply it to the number of mail-in and drop-box ballots, we can conservatively estimate that 2,121,000 mail-in votes went into the electoral dumpster.

Whose ballots? Democrats are 51% more likely than Republicans to vote by mail; and, given the racial disparity in ballot rejections, Trump’s swing-state margins begin to look shaky.

The KKK Plan and the New Vigilantes

In 2020, the Palast Investigative Fund uncovered a whole new way to bring Jim Crow back to life: challenges to a citizen’s right to vote by a posse of self-proclaimed vote-fraud hunters.

Four years ago, the GOP took this new suppression method out for a test ride in Georgia when 88 Republican operatives — remember, these are not government officials — challenged the rights of over 180,000 Georgians to have their ballots counted. These vigilantes based their scheme on the program originally used by the Ku Klux Klan in 1946.

One challenged voter: Major Turner, the same voter whose mail-in ballot was disqualified in a later election.

In 2020, the Major’s ballot was challenged by the county Chairman of the Republican Party in Southern Georgia, Alton Russell. (Russell likes to dress up as infamous vigilante Doc Holliday, with a loaded six-gun in a holster.) In a (polite) confrontation we filmed between the Major and Russell, the GOP honcho admitted he had no evidence that Maj. Turner, nor any of the 4,000 others he challenged, should be denied the right to have their ballots counted.

Note: The Palast Fund contacted a sample of 800 of these challenged voters and found that, overwhelmingly, they were Americans of color.

In 2020, this KKK plan, adopted by the Trump organization, proved its value. In that election, Trump almost won Georgia, falling short by just 11,779 votes — only because local elections officials rejected most of the challenges. But for 2024, the Georgia’s Republican-controlled legislature changed the law to make it very difficult for officials to deny the challenges.

That emboldened the Trump-supported organization True the Vote to roll out the challenge to every swing state. In 2024, True the Vote signed up over 40,000 volunteer vigilantes. The organization crowed proudly that, by August of 2024, they’d already challenged a mind-blowing 317,886 voters in dozens of states. By Election Day this November, True the Vote projected it would have challenged over two million voters. In addition, Trump’s lawyer, Cleta Mitchell, founded Eagle AI to challenge hundreds of thousands more including in swing state Pennsylvania.

How many voters ultimately lost their ballots? Almost all voting officials we’ve contacted have refused to answer.

Placebo Ballots

Those voters who’d been challenged but mailed in their ballot would be unlikely to know their vote had been lost. Others who showed up in person at a poll would be told they could not vote on a regular ballot. These voters were sent away or forced to vote on a “provisional” ballot.

If you’ve been challenged or find you’ve been purged off the registration rolls, you’ll be offered one of these provisional ballots, paper ballots you place in a special envelope. Typically, you’ll be promised your registration will be checked and then your ballot will be counted. Bullshit. If you’re challenged, unless you personally contact or go into your county clerk’s office with ID and proof of address, your ballot goes into the electoral dumpster.

A better name for a “provisional” ballot would be “placebo” ballot. You think you’ve voted, but chances are, you did not, that is, your ballot wasn’t counted.

Here’s an ugly number: According to the US Elections Assistance Commission (EAC), in 2016, when 2.5 million provisional ballots were cast, a breathtaking 42.3% were never counted. Think about that. Over a million Americans lost their vote — though, notably, not one was charged attempting to vote illegally. And that was in 2016, before the vigilante challenges and before millions more had been purged from the rolls leading up to the 2024 election.

And here’s the statistic that matters most. Black, Hispanic or Asian-American voters are 300% more likely than white voters to be shunted to a “placebo” provisional ballot.

The Great Purge and the Poison Postcard

The polite term in government agencies is, “List Maintenance.” It’s best known as The Purge — when voters’ registrations are wiped off the rolls. The EAC keeps track of The Purge. It’s a big business. For example, before the 2022 election, when the data was last available, swing state North Carolina wiped 392,851 voters off the rolls.

The majority of removals were based on questionable, indeed, shockingly faulty information that a voter had moved their residence. I’m not talking about the 4.9 million voters purged because they’re dead, or eight million others whose residential move could be verified, nor those serving time in prison nor those ruled too crazy to vote.

I’m talking about a trick that has been perfected by politicians of both parties to eliminate voters of the wrong persuasion: the Poison Postcard. Here’s how it works: Targeted voters are mailed postcards by state elections officials. (Let’s remember, state voting chiefs, “Secretaries of State,” are almost to a one partisan hacks.) Voters who don’t sign and return the cards, which look like junk mail, will be purged.

The Poison Postcard response rate is close to nothing. In Arizona, according to the EAC, just one in ten postcards are returned. And in Georgia, the vote-saving response is barely above 1%. And that’s the way our partisan voting officials like it.

Were the millions of Americans purged before the 2024 election all fraudsters who should lose their right to vote? Direct marketing expert Mark Swedlund told us, “This only means that most people, especially young people, the poor and voters of color, simply ignore junk mail.”

With the help of Swedlund and the same experts used by Amazon — and believe me, Amazon knows exactly where you live — we took a deep dive into two states’ purge operations for the ACLU.

The state of Georgia had purged hundreds of thousands from the voter rolls on grounds they’d moved from their voting addresses. Our experts, going name by name through Georgia’s purge list, working from special data provided us by the US Postal Service, identified 198,351 Georgians who had been purged for moving had, in fact, not moved an inch from their legal voting address. The state’s only evidence these 198,351 voters had moved? They failed to return the Poison Postcard.

In 2020, I testified in federal court for the NAACP and RainbowPUSH, presenting our expert findings to get those voters, overweighted with minorities and young Georgians, back on the rolls. Unfortunately, the Trump’d-up court system now gives huge deference to a state’s voting operations, a trend which first took off in 2013 when the US Supreme Court defenestrated the Voting Rights Act.

The results have been devastating. According to the EAC data, before the 2024 election, 4,776,706 registrants were removed nationwide simply because they failed to return the postcard.

Also in 2020, the Palast Investigative Fund produced a technical report for Black Voters Matter Fund on a proposed purge of 153,779 voters in Wisconsin, a plan pushed by Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, a group financed by right-wing billionaires. For Black Voters Matter, we brought back our team of location experts who proved, name by name, that the proposed purge was wildly riddled with errors.

Notably, we found that the purged was aimed almost exclusively at African-Americans in Milwaukee and at students in Madison. The non-partisan Elections Board agreed with us, allowing those voters to cast ballots, with the result that Biden squeaked by Trump in Wisconsin by 20,682 votes. (Note: It was not our intention to elect Biden, but to allow the voters, not some Purge’n General, to pick our President.)

Unfortunately, before the 2024 election, the Poison Postcard Purge accelerated. This time, a new Elections Board in Wisconsin (10 electoral votes) decided to use the same discredited purge list to knock off 166,433 voters which, this time, we could not stop. Kamala Harris lost that state by just 29,397 votes. In Pennsylvania (19 electoral votes), the Poison Postcards wiped out 360,132 voters, three times Trump’s victory margin.

And before the vote this year, Georgia ramped up the purge, targeting an astonishing 875,000 voters, earning it the #1 ranking for “election integrity” by the ultra-right-wing Heritage Foundation.

I saw the purge in action in Savannah, Georgia, this October, where 900 Savannah voters, most of them Black, were challenged by one single “vigilante,” according to voting expert Carry Smith. Smith, who wrote her doctoral thesis on wrongful purges in Georgia, was herself on the hit list.

And more

We haven’t even touched on other ways that voters of color, college students and urban voters have come under attack. These include the rejection of new registrations and rejection of in-person votes as “spoiled” (i.e. rejected as unreadable), costing, according to the EAC, more than a million votes — rejections which our 25 years of investigations have found are way overweighted against the Democratic demographic.

After the 2012 election, I was able to calculate, with cold certainty, that 2,383,587 new voters had their registrations rejected; 488,136 legitimate absentee ballots were disqualified, and so on. In that election, a total of 5,901,814 citizens were blocked from voting or had their ballots disqualified. These stats were based on the hard data from the EAC which gathers detailed reports from the states.

Today, with new, sophisticated, and well-financed vote suppression operations, the number of voters purged and ballots disqualified are clearly far higher than the suppression count of 2012. Unfortunately, the EAC won’t release data, if it does at all, for at least a year. We’ve put in Open Records requests to the states, but today’s officials are stonewalling and slow-walking our requests for the data. In no other democracy are the vote totals — or, to be clear, the uncounted ballot totals — a state secret.

America deserves an answer to this question: Excluding a boost from Jim Crow vote suppression games, did Donald Trump win?

From the shockingly huge numbers we’ve discussed here of provisional and mail-in ballots disqualified, the postcard purge operation, the vigilante challenges and so on, we can say, with reasonable certainty, Trump lost — that is, would have lost both the Electoral College and popular vote totals absent suppression.

By how much?

For those who can’t sleep without my best estimate, let me apply the most conservative methodology possible, as I would do in a government investigation.

I’ve updated the 2012 suppression numbers with the newest available data. Not surprisingly, the suppression number has soared, in part because the number of voters has increased by 41.3 million since 2012. But principally, the votes “lost” also zoomed upward because of the massive increase in mail-in balloting by Democrats since 2012, and crucially, the effect of new Jim Crow voting restrictions. Given a minimum two-to-one racial and partisan disparity in voters purged and ballots disqualified, the 2024 “suppression factor” is no less than 4.596% of the total vote.

Those familiar with data mining will note that there is some double-counting in the 9 million voters and their ballots disqualified that I cited at the top of the article. In addition, we must recognize that many voters caught up in the purges and challenges would have cast their ballot for Trump. Therefore, I’ve conservatively cut in half the low end of the range of the calculation of votes suppressed to 2.3% to isolate the effect on Trump’s official victory margin.

In other words, vote suppression cost Kamala Harris no less than 3,565,000 votes. Harris would have topped Trump’s official total by 1.2 million. Most important, this 2.3% suppression factor undoubtedly cost Harris the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. If not for the wholesale attack on votes and voters, Harris would have won the election with 286 Electoral votes.

Tech note from a numbers guy — and Martin Luther King

Until the Elections Assistance Commission gets updated figures from the states next year (and, under Trump, I doubt we will ever get those numbers), 3,565,000 votes lost to Harris is the estimate I would present in my role as a forensic expert in a courtroom as the lowest conceivable suppression factor.

I rarely make a big deal about my own credentials but, since the election, the Web has been flooded by amateur, arithmetic-defying speculation about computer hacking and other unsupported twaddle. Best to stick to hard, verifiable data. And that’s what I do.

For two decades, I was a forensic economist for government agencies including the US Justice Department; taught statistics at Indiana University; provided expert calculations of vote suppression for the ACLU, NAACP, and RainbowPUSH and won the Global Editors Award for my data journalism on vote suppression measurements for reports done for Al Jazeera, BBC, Rolling Stone and The Guardian. The numbers you get here are exactly what I’d present to a Federal court. In other words, kids, don’t do this at home…calculating the “un-count” requires expertise.

I make this point for another reason: The theory that “Elon Musk messed with the voting machines” is, unconsciously, unintentionally racist. With few exceptions, these silly speculations come from those who simply ignore not just the millions of votes officially reported as suppressed, their theories also ignore the horrifically painful experience of Black people turned away from the polls.

Here is a photo of Jessica Lawrence in tears, moments after her 92-year-old grandmother was tossed out of an Atlanta polling station, into a storm, because she’d been wrongfully purged. Any speculation about the nefarious cause of Trump’s must not leave out Jessica’s grandma nor the millions of other citizens of color who were wrongly barred from their ballot.

Jessica Lawrence at an Atlanta polling station just after her 92-year-old grandmother was denied a ballot. (Photo: David Ambrose for the Palast Investigative Fund, 2018.) See Ms. Jordan and Maj. Turner in the film, Vigilantes Inc: America’s New Vote Suppression Hitmen, available without charge on YouTube.

Now here’s the good news

We saw that in 2020 when, despite extreme, even felonious actions by Trump supporters to block, challenge and disqualify voters and ballots, the theft by suppression was defeated.

That was the work of voting rights groups challenging these attacks. The work was done in the courts and, more important, in the precincts, re-registering the purged, challenging the challenges, “curing” disqualified ballots.

The road is long but victory is certain. After the 2016 election, the Palast team uncovered a cruel, racist purge program called, “Interstate Crosscheck” that cost nearly a million voters, overwhelmingly minorities, their rights. This motivated the Rev. Jesse Jackson to launch a campaign that successfully shut down Crosscheck. Unquestionably, Joe Biden could not have won in 2020 without the Reverend saving literally hundreds of thousands of votes. The point is, they can’t suppress all the votes all the time.

In other words, Democracy can win, despite the 2.3% suppression headwind.

And that’s our job as Americans: to end the purges, the vigilante challenges, the ballot rejections and the attitude that this is all somehow OK.

Martin Luther King gave us our marching orders in 1965, in words just as important today.

“Let us march on ballot boxes, march on ballot boxes until race-baiters disappear from the political arena. I want to say to the people of America and the nations of the world, that we are not about to turn around. We are on the move now.”

Greg Palast is a forensic economist and data journalist Palast covered vote suppression for The Guardian, BBC Television and Rolling Stone. He is the author of New York Times bestsellers on the topic including The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Comments

Black Press

Asm. Corey Jackson Announces Launch of 24-Hour Childcare in His District

Assemblymember Corey Jackson has secured $2 million in state funding for a proposed childcare special district in Moreno Valley and Perris. This funding aims to establish a system providing 24-hour, seven-day-a-week childcare, which would be California’s first special district focused solely on childcare. The initiative seeks to address the area’s designation as a “childcare desert” and high costs for working families. The funding will cover startup, planning, and formation costs for the district. Read more about the specifics of this groundbreaking initiative.

Published

on

Assemblymember Corey Jackson (D-Moreno Valley). File photo.
Assemblymember Corey Jackson (D-Moreno Valley). File photo.

Assemblymember Corey Jackson (D-Moreno Valley) has secured $2 million in state funding to launch a proposed childcare special district serving families in Moreno Valley and Perris, paving the way for a system designed to provide childcare 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

The Moreno Valley-Perris Childcare Special District would be the first special district in California focused specifically on childcare, according to Jackson’s office. The state funding will cover startup, planning, and formation costs and help the district meet requirements set by the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission, or LAFCO.

The proposed district would coordinate a mixed-delivery childcare system that could include home-based and center-based care. The goal is to provide universal childcare for families who work overnight, early morning, or other nontraditional shifts.

Jackson’s office says Moreno Valley is a certified “childcare desert,” with licensed childcare spaces available for only 15% of children with working parents. Infant care in Moreno Valley averages $2,776 a month, or about 35.7% of median household income. In Perris, licensed infant care can cost more than 60% of an individual worker’s gross median earnings, according to the assemblymember’s office.

“Securing this $2 million in startup funding is a monumental victory for the working-class families of Moreno Valley and Perris who have been trapped in a childcare desert for far too long,” Jackson said.

The proposal follows Jackson’s unsuccessful effort to establish the district through Assembly Bill 2083. The legislation would have created the district as a dependent special district covering Moreno Valley, Perris and their spheres of influence, with Riverside LAFCO responsible for reviewing its formation and boundaries.

The new funding allows the district’s formation to move forward without requiring mandatory contributions from local school districts and other stakeholders, according to Jackson’s office. His spokesperson, Daniel Peeden, said Jackson hopes the district can be operating by 2028.

The proposal has faced questions from some local officials. Moreno Valley City Councilmember Ed Delgado, who is running against Jackson for the 60th Assembly District seat, said he supports affordable childcare but questioned how the proposed district would operate and how much it would ultimately cost.

“Basically, he didn’t have a plan. We didn’t see a plan,” Delgado said, adding that officials had questions about operating costs, insurance and eligibility.

“It’s going to take a lot more than $2 million to create a special district to provide affordable childcare,” Delgado said.

Delgado has suggested working with existing childcare centers to subsidize costs for local families rather than creating a new agency.

Jackson’s office says the program will lower barriers to “workforce participation” and reduce “affordability anxiety” for young families. This landmark District is poised to trigger a virtuous cycle of economic upward mobility and long-term regional prosperity in the 60th Assembly District, his office added.

Continue Reading

Black History

IN MEMORIAM: The Rev. Leon “Sonny” Clark, Longtime Orange County Pastor and Community Leader, Dies at 72

Rev. Leon William “Sonny” Clark, the longtime pastor of New Spirit Baptist Church in Santa Ana and a prominent faith and community leader in Orange County, passed away on September 9 at the age of 72. Born in Bennettsville, South Carolina, Clark was a U.S. Navy veteran who dedicated his life to service. He served various Southern California churches before leading New Spirit Baptist Church for over 22 years, extending his work into counseling, mentoring, and civic engagement, and supporting the African American community. To learn more about his life and contributions, read more.

Published

on

The Rev. Leon “Sonny” Clark. File photo.
The Rev. Leon “Sonny” Clark. File photo.

Rev. Leon William “Sonny” Clark, longtime pastor of New Spirit Baptist Church in Santa Ana and a respected faith and community leader in Orange County, died Sept. 9. He was 72.

Born Oct. 2, 1953, in Bennettsville, South Carolina, Clark was a U.S. Navy veteran who later built a life of service centered on family, faith, ministry, and community.

Clark began his formal ministry at Metropolitan Baptist Church in Altadena in 1978. After acknowledging his call to ministry in 1980, he preached his first sermon and went on to serve churches throughout Southern California, including Second Baptist Church in Riverside, Mount Vernon Baptist Church in Rubidoux, Antioch Missionary Baptist Church in Pomona, and Friendship Baptist Church in Yorba Linda.

In November 2003, Clark was called to lead New Spirit Baptist Church in Santa Ana, where he served as pastor for more than 22 years. His work extended beyond the pulpit through counseling, mentoring, civic engagement, and efforts to strengthen Orange County’s African American community.

Clark served on the Orange County Heritage Council and supported efforts to preserve and celebrate African American history and culture. He helped organize the Orange County Black History Parade and Unity Festival, served on the Interfaith Committee and the Orange County Transit Authority, and served as president of the Orange County Ministers Conference.

In 2024, the City of Santa Ana recognized Clark for his contributions to the community. He also received the Orange County Southern Baptist Association Hall of Faith Award and was previously honored as Pastor of the Year by the Orange County Heritage Council.

Clark is survived by his wife, Andrea Joyles Clark; six children, Shawn Williams, Le Ondra Clark Harvey, Kyla Coward, Joshua Clark, Marissa Clark and Ashley Clark; grandchildren and great-grandchildren; siblings; extended family; and the New Spirit Baptist Church congregation.

A wake will be held Thursday, Oct. 1, from 4 to 8 p.m. at New Spirit Baptist Church, 701 S. Sullivan St. in Santa Ana, with a remembrance service from 5 to 6:30 p.m.

A Celebration of Life will be held Friday, Oct. 2, at Friendship Baptist Church, 17145 Bastanchury Road in Yorba Linda. Viewing begins at noon, followed by the service at 1 p.m.

Burial will take place Monday, Oct. 5, at 10:15 a.m. at Riverside National Cemetery.

Clark often shared a guiding principle that shaped his ministry: “Start where you are. Use what you have. Do what you can.”

Continue Reading

Black Press

Poll: Becerra Widens His Lead Over Hilton; Californians Split on Wealth Tax

A new Public Policy Institute of California poll shows Democrat Xavier Becerra leads Republican Steve Hilton by 22 points in California’s governor’s race, with 60% of likely voters supporting Becerra compared to 38% for Hilton. The September survey also reveals Californians are closely divided on a proposed one-time tax on billionaires, with 52% of likely voters in favor of Proposition 40. Affordability issues are a major factor for voters. Read more to learn about the poll’s additional findings on voter sentiment.

Published

on

Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton.
Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton.

Democrat Xavier Becerra holds a 22-point lead over Republican Steve Hilton in California’s governor’s race, while voters remain closely divided over a proposed one-time tax on billionaires, according to a new Public Policy Institute of California poll.

The September PPIC survey found that 60% of likely voters support Becerra, compared with 38% for Hilton. His lead is actually narrower than it was in July, when he led Hilton 61% to 36%.

Becerra leads among independent voters, with 57% supporting him compared with 38% for Hilton. Party loyalty remains strong, with 93% of Democratic likely voters backing Becerra and 92% of Republicans supporting Hilton. 

Hilton leads in the Central Valley, where 52% of likely voters support him compared with 46% for Becerra.

Affordability remains a major factor: 65% of likely voters say candidates’ plans to address cost-of-living issues are “very important” to their vote.

“Affordability continues to be top of mind for Californians when considering their choice for governor,” said Mark Baldassare, PPIC Statewide Survey director and Miller Chair in Public Policy.

The poll also found a narrow split over Proposition 40, a proposed one-time tax of up to 5% on taxpayers with assets exceeding $1 billion. Fifty-two percent of likely voters said they would vote yes, while 46% said they would vote no.

Support for the wealth tax varies sharply by party. Seventy-two percent of Democrats favor Proposition 40, compared with 46% of independents and 21% of Republicans.

Two competing measures also drew majority support. Fifty-one percent back Proposition 41, while 54% support Proposition 42, both of which could affect the wealth-tax proposal.

The findings come as Californians express broader frustration with the state’s political direction. Seventy-one percent of likely voters expect bad economic times in California over the next year.

“Californians are clearly grumpy and aren’t enamored with any particular political party or movement,” Baldassare said.

The survey interviewed 1,745 California adults, including 1,103 likely voters, from Sept. 4-10. The margin of error for likely voters is plus or minus 3.8 percentage points.

Continue Reading

Black Press

From Historic Memories to New Possibilities: Oakland Celebrates Coliseum 60

More than 75 people gathered at Youth UpRising in East Oakland on Friday, September 18, for Coliseum 60, an event marking six decades of sports, entertainment, employment, and community memories at the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Complex. Held 60 years to the day after the Coliseum first opened, the celebration featured cultural performances and a mini-documentary highlighting its history. Speakers reflected on the venue’s significant role in the community and its future possibilities. Read more to learn about the individuals and stories honored during this special event.

Published

on

Quixote Atkins of VillageGIVE moderates a panel discussion at the Coliseum 60 celebration at Youth UpRising featuring Keith Brown, a member of IATSE Local 107; author, historian and former Black Panther Party member Tareka Lewis; and African American Sports and Entertainment Group President Ray Bobbitt.
Quixote Atkins of VillageGIVE moderates a panel discussion at the Coliseum 60 celebration at Youth UpRising featuring Keith Brown, a member of IATSE Local 107; author, historian and former Black Panther Party member Tareka Lewis; and African American Sports and Entertainment Group President Ray Bobbitt.

More than 75 people gathered at Youth UpRising in East Oakland on Friday, Sept. 18, for Coliseum 60, a celebration honoring six decades of sports, entertainment, employment and community memories connected to the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Complex.

Held 60 years to the day after the Coliseum opened, the event carried the theme, “One Community. One Legacy. One Future. Forward Together.”

The celebration opened with the national anthem performed by sisters Anese Jade, Amina Benjamin and Zaza Benjamin. Diamano Coura West African Dance Company contributed African dance and drumming, bringing movement, rhythm and cultural expression to the program.

A mini documentary highlighted the Coliseum’s sports history and its broader role as an entertainment destination. Archival material recalled performances by Prince and Tina Turner, along with memorable games featuring the Warriors, Oakland A’s and Raiders.

“The Coliseum 60 is about much more than celebrating a building or looking back at 60 years of history,” said event organizer Quixote Atkins of VillageGIVE.

“It’s about the people who made that history possible: the families, workers, athletes, artists, community leaders, fans and generations who gathered there and created memories together.”

A panel exploring that history featured author, historian and former Black Panther Party member Tareka Lewis; stagehand and union representative Keith Brown; and Ray Bobbitt, president of the African American Sports and Entertainment Group AASEG. Lewis described her family as fourth-generation Bay Area pioneers.

“My family and Black families who arrived even earlier helped build the Bay Area, grew businesses and established culture here,” Lewis said. “This should be taught in the public schools.”

Lewis recalled Oakland’s influence on sports, music and literature, from the Raiders’ beginnings at Laney College to stars such as The Pointer Sisters and Rickey Henderson who attended Oakland public schools. She also advocated for school museums, historical timelines, entrepreneurship training and investments benefiting corridors such as Bancroft Avenue and High Street.

Keith Brown, a member of Local 107 of the International Alliance of Theater and Stage Employees (IATSE) who began working at the Coliseum in 2011, remembered the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, the Ice Capades, baseball bat giveaways and Nelson Mandela’s 1990 appearance.

“The special events are amazing, but it’s the workers that make the memories real for everyone,” Brown said. “They make the magic happen at the Coliseum.”

The program recognized longtime workers, including beer-stand manager Robert Preston, who served for 40 years, and Kenyatta Gentry, who worked as a vendor for 24 years and used her earnings to purchase her first apartment. Union workers Jose Gonzales and Carmen Sandoval were also honored. Speakers emphasized that Coliseum employment provided generations of residents with union wages and benefits.

Dr. Denise Saddler, the superintendent of the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) was also honored. Saddler shared her family’s history of working at the Coliseum. 

District 7 Oakland City Councilmember Ken Houston discussed the complex ownership arrangements involving the city, county and private interests.

“This was the most complex deal of its kind in the country,” Houston said.

Prior to moving from the East Coast, Alameda County Supervisor and Coliseum Joint Powers Authority Chair Nate Miley recalled learning about Oakland through its three professional sports teams. As an elected official and public servant, Miley fought hard to keep the Golden State Warriors, Oakland As, and the Raiders, but he is hopeful for the future.

“The story is not over for the Coliseum,” Miley said. “We’re entering a new chapter.”

Bobbitt said the departure of three teams had once seemed unimaginable, but he maintained that Oakland’s future remains bright.

“Oakland is a cultural superpower worldwide,” Bobbitt said. “We’re going to write the future where we participate and drive the redevelopment.”

Bobbitt highlighted AASEG’s four-year partnership with Castlemont High School’s architecture program, which engages students in reimagining and creating redevelopment concepts for the Coliseum property. “The youth will always move us forward. They are the future.”

In closing, Atkins said, “September 18 is the celebration, but what we build together afterward is the legacy.”

Continue Reading

Black Press

County Office of Education Says OUSD Finances Are Getting Healthier, Materially Stronger

The Oakland Unified School District’s recent budget submission has been deemed “materially stronger” by the Alameda County Office of Education, reflecting deliberate work by the new board and superintendent. Despite needing further cuts in the coming years, the district is progressing toward financial health, according to ACOE Superintendent Alysse Castro. This assessment counters critics who suggest a dire financial outlook for Oakland schools, acknowledging the district has made significant reductions and adopted a plan to address structural challenges. The ACOE commended the district’s efforts to get its financial house in order. Read more to learn about the details of these financial improvements.

Published

on

ACOE Supt. Alysse Castro; OUSD Supt. Dr. Denise Saddler. File photos.
ACOE Supt. Alysse Castro; OUSD Supt. Dr. Denise Saddler. File photos.

County’s letter counters critics who offer Doomsday scenarios for Oakland schools

The Oakland Unified School District, under the leadership of a new board majority and new superintendent, recently submitted a budget to the county “that is a materially stronger submission than the district has filed in recent years, (which) reflects difficult and deliberate work,” according to a letter to the district from Supt. Alysse Castro of the Alameda County Office of Education.

While OUSD still must make more budget cuts in the next two years, the district is on the road to financial health, according to a Sept. 15 letter from Castro to the district.

Under the California Education Code, Alameda County and other county offices of education (COEs) have the legal responsibility to review, approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove local school district annual budgets and interim financial reports.

“The Alameda County Office of Education wants to acknowledge that the district has submitted a budget that shows a positive fund balance, meets the state minimum reserve for economic uncertainty in each year of the multiyear project and is accompanied by a board-adopted commitment to close the remaining structural challenges,” the letter said.

“After two decades of state receivership and significant changes in OUSD’s budgeting practices,” it is understandable that there may be “considerable confusion” in the public about the district’s current financial condition, according to the letter.

However, the district’s current fiscal position and practices are “materially” better than prior years, though they “do not yet eliminate underlying structural challenges,” the letter continued.

Castro also commended the board and staff for working to get their financial house in order.

“There are three essential parts to addressing a structural deficit: staff must identify and bring

forward hard choices; the governing board must make those choices; and staff must follow

through and implement them,” she wrote.

“All three appear to be happening in OUSD, and that represents meaningful progress,” she wrote. “The district has made significant reductions to ongoing expenditures, increased its use of available restricted resources, and adopted a plan to address the remaining gap.”

According to the County, the district already has approved budget cuts of about $30 million in the current year. Additional reductions of about $30 million will be necessary next year, and another $11 million the following year.

These cuts are necessary, the county says, because “the district is still operating at a structural

deficit, meaning spending more every year than it brings in.” 

In a statement released earlier this month, the district announced it had “finished the year with $170.1 million in its General Fund and an unrestricted reserve of $32.3 million, finishing $16.4 million ahead of what the district projected in March.”

The budget reflects progress toward putting the district in a stronger financial position to better serve students and families, said district leaders, while also acknowledging the need for significant reductions across the board.

“This turnaround happened because our board was willing to make difficult decisions rather than pass them along, and because our staff did the work,” said Supt. Dr. Denise Saddler. “None of this came easily, and there is more ahead of us. What these closed books show is that the direction is right.”

In October 2025, the board directed staff to prepare budget scenarios totaling $100 million in adjustments. In December, presented with a choice between borrowing to bridge the gap and making the reductions directly, the board chose the latter, the district statement said. As part of the reduction plan, the board approved cuts to more than 400 certificated and classified positions, along with a retirement incentive that converted some layoffs into voluntary departures.

“Closing our books is not the same as finishing the work, and we are not stopping here,” said Tara Gard,deputy superintendent of Business and Operations. “We will continue with the actions in our Financial Stabilization Plan because of where they lead.”

In a statement released on social media, Oakland Education Association (OEA) President

Kampala Taiz-Rancifer strongly criticized those who allege the district is collapsing and supported members of the school board majority who are working hard to stabilize the district’s finances while minimizing disruption for schools and employees.

Jennifer Brouhard (D2) and Valarie Bachelor (D6), who are running for reelection, “are moving the district toward a ‘materially stronger’ financial position than we’ve seen in recent years—all while investing in school sites and the employees who serve Oakland students,” she wrote.

“For years, we’ve heard billionaire-backed board members say they had to make ‘tough choices’ to balance the budget,” she continued. “Those choices almost always caused disruption and instability for our schools and communities. This is a different approach: financial stability alongside investments in students, schools, and workers. All in the effort to improve student outcomes.”

“The real hard work is tuning out the rage bait, the chaos agents, the attacks on unions and workers, and ignoring the loud corporate profiteers—and staying focused on what matters: improving outcomes for students while creating stable teaching and learning conditions,” said Taiz-Rancifer.

“Let’s not go backward into the days of manufactured panic.”

Continue Reading

Black Press

LIVE FREE Sunday Dinner Brings Faith, Fellowship and Civic Conversation to Oakland

Approximately 50 members and guests gathered at Imani Community Church for a LIVE FREE Sunday Dinner, sharing a meal with Pastor Michael McBride. The event, hosted by Imani Community Church Pastor Jeremy McCants, focused on faith, community preparedness, and civic participation. Participants discussed “sacred resistance” and how communities can collectively respond to challenges, including practical suggestions for emergencies. The conversation also touched upon the importance of civic engagement and voting in the upcoming election. Read more to learn about the specific actions discussed.

Published

on

Imani Social Justice Team (left to right): Angela Noel, Zakiya Jendayi and Diane Doss. Patty Hallm, Susan Burns, Diane Lewis, Pastor Michael McBride, Theresa ???, Jean Moses and Diana Bell. Front: Sloane Johnson and (man whose name I'm getting to complete the identification). Photo by Octavian Kelly.
Imani Social Justice Team (left to right): Angela Noel, Zakiya Jendayi and Diane Doss. Patty Hallm, Susan Burns, Diane Lewis, Pastor Michael McBride, Theresa ???, Jean Moses and Diana Bell. Front: Sloane Johnson and (man whose name I'm getting to complete the identification). Photo by Octavian Kelly.

Pastor Michael McBride joins Imani Community Church Members for Food, Faith and Conversation about Community Action

Approximately 50 members and guests of Imani Community Church gathered Sunday afternoon for a LIVE FREE Sunday Dinner, sharing a meal with Pastor Michael McBride while discussing faith, community preparedness and civic participation.

Hosted by Imani Community Church Pastor Jeremy McCants, the Sept. 20 gathering was part of LIVE FREE’s Sunday Dinner initiative, which draws upon the tradition of families, neighbors and faith communities gathering around the Sunday dinner table to break bread and discuss issues affecting their lives.

McBride is founder of LIVE FREE and lead pastor of The Way Christian Center on University Avenue in Berkeley. His Bay Area ministry has deep roots. The congregation traces its history to a church planted by McBride’s grandmother in 1969. McBride returned to the Bay Area in 2005 and became its fourth pastor.

His ministry later expanded into community organizing and national advocacy. McBride founded LIVE FREE in 2011 following organizing work in Oakland and has been involved in efforts addressing gun violence, mass incarceration and civic engagement.

At Imani, the Sunday dinner concept was simple: sit down together, eat together and talk.

McBride recalled a time when Sunday dinner provided families and neighbors an opportunity to discuss what was happening in their communities. LIVE FREE has adapted that tradition into gatherings where faith communities and neighbors can meet, communicate, and consider how to respond collectively to current challenges.

Much of Sunday’s conversation centered on what McBride described as “sacred resistance,” bringing faith into discussions about how communities respond during difficult and uncertain times.

Participants considered a fundamental question: How do we make sense of what is happening around us, and how do we move forward?

The conversation was grounded in faith and prayer, but participants also discussed action and preparation. Attendees talked about not assuming that institutions and everyday systems will always function as expected.

Practical suggestions included keeping basic food staples such as rice and beans available during emergencies. Participants cited the water crisis in Flint, Michigan, as an example as they discussed communities that have experienced disruptions to essential services.

The broader message was one of preparedness and connection: neighbors should know and support one another before a crisis occurs.

The conversation also turned to civic participation and the upcoming election.

McBride’s message was brief: “Vote. We must vote.”

Participants were encouraged to register to vote, verify that their registration is current, and learn what will appear on their ballots. The discussion included researching candidates and ballot measures, voting early, and making a voting plan.

An Oct. 3 workshop was announced as another opportunity for community members to learn more about candidates, volunteer phone banking, ballot measures, and issues before voters.

For Imani’s Social Justice Team, the gathering provided another opportunity to share information with the congregation and surrounding community regarding Imani member Zakiya Jendayi, fighting for her home, and how the community can support her by attending a vigil at her Oakland home every Tuesday from 6-7 p.m. at 3614 Randolph Ave. 94610.

Continue Reading

SIGN UP TO RECEIVE NEWS UPDATES IN YOUR INBOX

Subscribe

* indicates required

Like BlackPressUSA on Facebook

Advertisement

Advertise on BlackPressUSA

advertise with blackpressusa.com

Latest News