Showing posts with label Jamilah Nasheed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jamilah Nasheed. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Are Indiana Democrats Denying Ballot Access to Mmoja Ajabu?

Disciples of Christ minister and founder/leader of the Indianapolis New Black Panther Party (NBPP), Mmoja Ajabu, is having trouble winning ballot access for his independent campaign in Indiana's 7th Congressional District. If he's on the ballot in November, he'll face Democrat Andre Carson and Republican Carlos May. The Democrat party will fight for the right of the New Black Panthers to patrol polling places with batons, but when a New Black Panther wants to be on the ballot, where are they?


Ajabu's Campaign initially turned in about 4,700 signatures of which only 1,300 were certified. Ajabu gathered 4,430 more signatures; however, the Marion County Board of Voters Registration rejected all of them (see document below).


Ajabu's campaign performed their own review of the signatures using the Board's database. That review confirmed that 2,418 of the 4,430 signatures were valid for a 7th congressional district candidate.

Are Democrats working to prevent Ajabu from appearing on the November ballot? Since one of the signatures on the document below is from a Democrat Voters Registration board member, it certainly seems so.

Ajabu AR-M550N_20120717_115936

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Steven Tilley Owes his Friend T.D. El-Amin Another Dinner

Talibdin "T.D." El-Amin (D), a former state representative from St. Louis, left office in 2009 to serve eighteen months in prison for a $2,100 bribe. He completed that sentence this past April.

Earlier this week, the St. Louis Post Dispatch reported on El-Amin's record setting fine for ethics violations: Former State Rep. El-Amin fined a record $527,000 by Ethics Commission:
St. Louis Democrat Talibdin "T.D." El-Amin, who left the state House in 2009 after pleading guilty to soliciting a $2,100 bribe, controlled a web of campaign committees before he went to prison.
From those committees, according to the state Ethics Commission, El-Amin:
  • Issued thousands of dollars in payments to himself
  • Authorized repeated cash withdrawals, which are not allowed under state campaign law
  • Paid thousands of dollars to family members, including his brother, mother and wife
  • Did not report several questionable campaign payments, including expenses at a casino, massage parlor and luxury hotels.
Reached on Tuesday, El-Amin, 40, described the Ethics penalty as an "administrative charge."
"I don't really have a comment," El-Amin said. "Write what you feel like you need to write"
Ouch. Clearly, El-Amin is down on his luck and needs to be cheered up. Speaker of the Missouri House, Steven Tilley, should make good on his friendship with El-Amin by taking him out to dinner again. Heck, get the old gang together--invite Rep. Jamilah Nasheed and Rep. Carter too--enjoy a night on the town. I mean, that's what friends do, right?

Friday, February 18, 2011

Steve Tilley's Dereliction of Duty

Jamilah Nasheed and Steve Tilley's local control bill, HB 71, was "perfected" Thursday and is scheduled to be voted on next Tuesday. The bill would strike the existing state statute that establishes the five member police board in St. Louis. As a result, control of the police department would revert to the structure specified in the St. Louis city charter.

A little history sheds a lot of light on the issue of Local Control of the St. Louis Police Department and why the pending legislation in Jefferson City is a dereliction of duty on the part of the GOP leadership, and Speaker Tilley in particular.

In 1861, the Confederacy sympathizing Governor of Missouri, Claiborne Jackson, seized control of the police in both St. Louis and Kansas City out of fear that they would be used by the Union. St. Louis and Kansas City both sympathized with the Union. Jackson's power grab was a clear abuse of power and violation of the principals of local governmental control. It needs to be undone, but not in the negligent fashion currently being proposed.

Most municipalities in the Show Me state are part of a county. County government provides a check to balance the police powers of their subordinate municipalities. The problem is an ancient one: who watches the watchmen, who polices the police. A few weeks ago I posted video of Gary Fuhr talking about the role of counties in balancing municipal police powersIn 1876, the people of the city of St. Louis voted to leave the county of St. Louis. St. Louis city is not part of a county; therefore, there is no offsetting check to balance the city's police powers. Tilley's support for Local Control and his parliamentary maneuvers to pass it show a disregard for good governance.

If HB 71 passes and Local Control is returned to the city of St. Louis, control of the police will revert to the structure specified in the St. Louis city charter. Ah, the city charter, ancient hallowed document that's almost a hundred years old. The charter was adopted in 1914. The police were under state control in 1914. Nonetheless, the charter provides that the Police Department be directed by a Police Commissioner who serves at the discretion of the Director of Public Safety an existing position effectively putting two additional layers of appointed, patronage bureaucrats between the elected Mayor and the police chief.

A setup like this was tried once before in KC. It empowered the Pendergast machine and was eventually undone when Missouri's Attorney General stepped in to clean out the corruption. This structure is also similar to the setup in the Windy City. Of course, Chicago has a bit of a reputation for corruption. The patronage system there probably helped misplace the recordings of Rahm Emmanuel.

What is lost if HB 71 passes are the four St. Louis civilians on the police board. Local Control will shield the Mayor from accountability with bureaucracy and remove citizen oversight of the police while adding a plum patronage position for the Mayor to appoint. In short, Jefferson City is trying to cut St. Louis city loose to sink or swim on its own; however, one party machine politics in the city combined with a poor governing structure will ensure that the city stews in its own political juices.

Each successively higher level of government, each larger governmental jurisdiction, has a moral obligation of good governance to its smaller jurisdictional subdivisions. The problem with the pending Local Control legislation is that it abdicates this responsibility. That is why Steve Tilley's support of Local Control is a dereliction of duty. As speaker of the Missouri House, he has a duty to "do no harm", a duty to ensure that the governing structure of the police department has minimal political influence, appropriate civilian oversight, and Mayoral accountability while the police themselves are unhindered by politics in their public safety role.

A Path to Local Control

The St. Louis Tea Party has not come to a consensus on local control for the city; however, I do have an idea of how to get there from here. I'm opposed to the pending legislation because, like Governor Claiborne Jackson's seizure of the police department and the city-county split, I think it's ill conceived and poorly thought out legislation that will have significant negative consequences. My first priority in a return of local control is to define a workable system in advance of removing state control. Here's what I would like to see.

St. Louis county's police force is currently overseen by a police board. I would like to see that board granted jurisdiction over St. Louis city's police department. This provides the check on the city's police power that offsets the check currently provided by the state. Obviously, the St. Louis county board would need to be modified to include city representation. Ideally that would include both St. Louis civilian and Mayoral roles on the county board. Because at least three jurisdictions are involved (St. Louis city, county, and the state of Missouri), this will be a politically hard road to take; however, there is interest in the area for a city-county merger. I see this as a down payment on that merger.

In fact, I believe that a city-county merger will be more successful if it is orchestrated in a piecemeal fashion like this. An incremental approach enables the county and the city to consider the pluses and minuses of each step of the integration.

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Why has Missouri House Leadership aligned with the New Black Panthers?


Over the past month, St. Louis Tea Party bloggers have made their case against local control of the city's police department. Bill Hennessy set forth that the US Constitution grants no standing to political divisions smaller than a state. Numerous arguments have been made at 24thState.com ranging from the principled, (Who Polices the Police?) to the pragmatic (St. Louis Police Pension: A Pot of Gold) and everything in between (State Control of the City of St. Louis?).

A vote on the local control bill (HB 71) could come as early as today, 2/17/2011.

The Speaker of the Missouri House, Steve Tilley, has been a leading advocate for local control of the St. Louis Police Department. In his zeal to pass local control, he's gone so far as to appoint an ally of the New Black Panther Party to a House leadership position. As committees were formed, Tilley assigned Jamilah Nasheed (pictured below) to chair Urban Issues. That's the same committee to which he later assigned the Local Control bill. This raises serious questions about Tilley's judgement.

Make no mistake, this is not about Rep. Nasheed who's personal story ranges from tragic to redemptive. If the people of Missouri's 60th house district want her to represent them, so be it. However, that does not mean that a Missouri House dominated by Republicans should place her in a leadership position. Speaker Tilley has demonstrated a lack of judgement and opportunistic leadership in his rush to get the Local Control bill passed.

From left: Jamalah Rogers, Talibdin El Amin, Jamilah Nasheed, and an unidentified member of the New Black Panthers