[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 8 (Thursday, February 3, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: February 3, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
 THE QUESTION OF A COVENANT BETWEEN THE CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS AND 
                          THE NATION OF ISLAM

                                 ______


                          HON. MAJOR R. OWENS

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, February 3, 1994

  Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, over the last 2 weeks, much has been said 
about a so-called covenant between the Congressional Black Caucus and 
the Nation of Islam. This controversy has arisen as a direct result of 
hateful remarks made by Khallid Abdual Muhammad, the national assistant 
to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. This week, I issued a public 
statement about the controversy, which I ask to be included in the 
Congressional Record.

 Statement of Congressman Major Owens on the Question of the Covenant 
Between the Congressional Black Caucus and the Nation of Islam: A Call 
   to Aggressively Reaffirm and Rebuild the Coalition of the Caring 
    Majority With African-Americans and Jews as the Nucleus of the 
                               Coalition

       There is a dangerous poison in the political atmosphere of 
     America which must be confronted aggressively. A Coalition 
     which could contribute greatly to the salvation of our nation 
     is being bombarded and must be defended not with mere 
     denunciations, but by a comprehensive and overwhelming 
     counterattack.
       A recent, unprecedented vile, anti-semitic, anti-human and 
     obscene speech by a Nation of Islam spokesman, Khalid 
     Mohammed, has triggered a chain reaction which if not halted, 
     will sabotage our vital Coalition beyond reconstruction. No 
     rational, decent human being can defend Mr. Mohammed's 
     speech; however, since his immediate superior, Minister Louis 
     Farrakhan has refused to denounce the New Jersey speech of 
     his follower, the spotlight is appropriately focused on 
     Minister Farrakhan. And in the chain reaction of political 
     logic all of those who appear to be presently allied with 
     Farrakhan have become the object of scrutiny. As a result of 
     an announcement by its Chairman that there now existed a 
     ``Covenant'' between the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) and 
     the Nation of Islam, the CBC's position is now under 
     scrutiny. Since it is a highly visible and very powerful 
     national entity, the CBC's ``Covenant'' with Farrakhan 
     understandably arouses widespread concern.
       As a member of the CBC with a ninety-five per cent meeting 
     attendance record I can state factually that the CBC has 
     never adopted a position establishing a relationship with the 
     Nation of Islam.
       In the eleven years that I have been a member of Congress, 
     at his request, the CBC has met with Minister Farrakhan three 
     times. On each occasion the majority of the CBC members have 
     insisted that the meetings be unpublicized and closed to 
     outsiders. Great concern about the possibility of distorted 
     statements and misguided messages have been expressed by the 
     members. Prior to meeting with Mr. Farrakhan there were 
     lengthy discussions. Always the argument that ``it does not 
     hurt for reasonable persons to participate in a dialogue'' 
     prevailed.
       The CBC last met with Farrakhan in the Summer of 1993. He 
     came with a message emphasizing his desire to be accepted in 
     the mainstream world as a legitimate agent for positive 
     social change. He cited impressive examples to make his case. 
     His followers had driven out drug dealers and transformed the 
     environments of certain neighborhoods and public housing 
     projects. He claimed that no one had a better record of 
     rehabilitating addicts and criminals than the Nation of 
     Islam. He asked the CBC to help him advance a proposal to 
     have his group take responsibility for a large percentage of 
     the African Americans now in prisons. Not only did he want 
     help in reaching officials responsible for the prison 
     systems; he also wanted assistance in meeting representatives 
     of African countries who might make land available for the 
     establishment of rehabilitation settlements where alcohol and 
     drug addicts could be totally removed from the corrupting 
     home environments.
       Mr. Farrakhan also proposed that the CBC serve as an 
     intermediary between himself and the Jewish community. He did 
     not indicate what he wanted to tell the Jewish community, but 
     he did insist that he wanted peace, that he had been seeking 
     a dialogue, that the CBC might be able to facilitate what had 
     not been possible up to that time.
       Farrakhan's proposals and Farrakhan the man were both 
     impressive at that meeting. Most of the time was consumed 
     with Farrakhan's presentation. There were few questions and 
     very little dialogue. He did not expect an immediate response 
     from the CBC.
       The fact is that the CBC to this date has never met to 
     discuss a response to proposals made by Minister Farrakhan at 
     that dinner meeting. There has certainly never been a 
     discussion of any ``Covenant'' with the Nation of Islam. 
     While one can understand Chairman Mfume's personal response 
     to the Farrakhan overtures requesting dialogue and 
     cooperation which seemed to be reasonable and sincere, it 
     must be emphasized that the Chairman's response was an 
     individual one.
       For the record it is important to clarify the procedure for 
     inviting guests to appear on panels and forums during the CBC 
     Legislative Weekend. Guests who speak at public forums other 
     than those directly under the jurisdiction of a particular 
     CBC member are invited by either the Chairman of the CBC 
     Foundation, the Chairman of the Legislative Weekend or the 
     Chairman of the CBC. These are individual and personal 
     decisions made without consultation with the CBC members. To 
     date, these are not even decisions made by a Committee 
     because there have been no committees charged with this 
     responsibility. Certainly no votes are taken by the 
     membership to decide these matters.
       The decision to invite Minister Farrakhan was an individual 
     decision made by Chairman Mfume who certainly had the right 
     to make such a decision. But CBC members have a right to 
     question the judgment involved in such an action. In view of 
     the fact that the CBC had always insisted on holding 
     unpublicized meetings with Minister Farrakhan, everyone was 
     aware of the high degree of sensitivity within the CBC with 
     respect to public identification with Minister Farrakhan. His 
     appearance at the most highly visible and widely publicized 
     forum of the 1993 Legislative Weekend did raise serious 
     questions in the minds of many CBC members.
       This CBC member must confess, however, that he was not in 
     attendance at the Forum and did not learn until more than a 
     month later that Chairman Mfume had announced a ``Covenant.'' 
     Uneasiness about the guest appearance of Minister Farrakhan 
     is a matter at a different level from the involuntary 
     inclusion in a ``Covenant.'' But even after concern had 
     become bewilderment and indignation it was difficult to 
     arrange a discussion of the matter within a CBC meeting. From 
     mid-October to the November 22nd adjournment of Congress the 
     CBC weekly meeting agendas were cluttered. At no meetings 
     were the agendas completed and there were no opportunities to 
     add new business and expect a full and civil discussion.
       Because of my very intense feelings about the dangerous 
     poison presently choking the political atmosphere, I feel it 
     is important to provide this explanation of my delayed 
     reaction. The mad ravings of Khalid Mohammed have served to 
     illuminate a crisis that has been escalating for some time. 
     Presently there is an urgent need to move far beyond the 
     denunciation of Mr. Mohammed's speech. We must openly and 
     honestly discuss ways to combat the poison which is 
     destroying a fragile but vitally necessary Coalition. The 
     question must be asked: Why is the CBC constantly being 
     baited? The answer is that the CBC is a victim of its 
     legitimate quest for unity. A strong desire within the Black 
     community for total unity is being exploited by a frustrated, 
     misguided and unproductive fringe crowd. Usually strong and 
     loud in its lunacy, this unrepresentative small percentage of 
     the Black population commands media attention far out of 
     proportion to its numbers and/or its capacity to deliver 
     results.
       Responsible African American leadership should cease the 
     pursuit of total unity within the Black community. We must 
     leave the ten percent who advocate hatred and violence and 
     let them march off to their own destruction. These are 
     copycats mouthing imitations of ancient European biases 
     against Jews. We must also leave the five percent of Blacks 
     who are educated, manipulative, self-serving opportunists 
     openly toadying to racist benefactors on the right. Eighty-
     five percent of African Americans is enough to maintain the 
     core of a Coalition of the Caring Majority.
       This dangerous poison in the political atmosphere threatens 
     to destroy our Coalition of the Caring Majority which could 
     greatly expand the parameters of opportunity and justice in 
     America. This Coalition which is presently an unorganized one 
     is made up of people whose solidifying philosophy is the 
     belief that while they are not their brother's keeper, they 
     will support public policies which guarantee survival and 
     promote opportunity for all people. Members of this Coalition 
     do not have to pretend to love everybody but they must 
     subscribe to the principle that every human life is sacred.
       This Coalition of the Caring Majority is open to all; 
     however, it definitely begins with a racial and ethnic mix 
     composed of African Americans, Latinos, Whites and Asians. 
     African Americans are pivotal in this Coalition because, in 
     America, they have suffered the worst abuses over the longest 
     period of time. They have suffered official abuses sanctioned 
     by the government. They have been the victims of crimes 
     perpetrated by local, state and federal officials. We are the 
     only Americans who are the descendants of slaves. Among the 
     exploited groups African Americans presently also have the 
     largest critical mass with an escalating sense of political 
     awareness. African American consciousness is the beneficiary 
     of the still glowing activist heritage of Malcolm X, Martin 
     Luther King and Nelson Mandela. African Americans are at the 
     core of the Coalition but all of the other partners are also 
     crucial components. Among the whites in the Coalition Jews 
     are the overwhelming majority.
       When we jettison the saboteurs and end their opportunities 
     to confuse issues, agendas and possible solutions, we greatly 
     improve the capacity of the African American leadership to 
     serve as the glue, the cohesive center for this Coalition of 
     the Caring Majority. No more time should be wasted on 
     negotiations with hatemongers and rank opportunists. Reject 
     Mohammed and Farrakhan at one extreme. Reject Clarence 
     Thomas, Roy Innis and their more subtle followers who 
     strangle human and economic rights at the other extreme.
       All African American energy, brainpower and 
     organization skills must be focused toward the building of 
     a greater Coalition of the Caring Majority.
       We have a clear criteria for identifying the enemy: 
     Regardless of the race, creed or color whoever preaches 
     hatred, violence, and exploitation--that is the enemy.
       We must denounce the enemy. We must isolate the enemy. We 
     must ignore any future devious overtures from the enemy. All 
     of this and more we must do to draw a line, to build a solid 
     wall between the Coalition of the Caring Majority and the 
     exploiters and hatemongers. And far beyond these defensive 
     actions our Coalition must accentuate the positive. We must 
     aggressively mount a campaign for the respect, loyalty and 
     dedicated energy of our youth. The world can easily dismiss 
     the obscene ravings of Khalid Mohammed at Keane College but 
     we cannot ignore the cheers and applause of the students who 
     listened to him. Only the most disaffected and the most 
     alienated; only students who feel that they have been 
     deserted by all others would cheer such a heinous speech.
       The challenge our Coalition faces is the challenge of 
     offering a more reasonable but inspiring program of 
     alternatives to bitter, frustrated and frightened youth. No 
     student should have to anticipate a graduation followed by 
     unemployment. At the center of a Coalition platform there 
     must be a national program for full employment now. We must 
     demand not only jobs to get people off welfare, but job 
     opportunities for all who want to work. The Coalition of the 
     Caring Majority must demonstrate to the Youth of America that 
     it is willing to confront the present stagnation in 
     Washington and mount an aggressive campaign for full 
     employment.
       At the state and local levels, as alternatives to group 
     hatred and infatuation with violence, Coalitions must mount 
     more aggressive campaigns for jobs, justice, and community 
     rebuilding. In the big cities we have concrete evidence of 
     the workability of our Coalition. In Chicago with Harold 
     Washington; in Philadelphia with Wilson Goode; and in New 
     York (1989) with David Dinkins; in all three showdowns at the 
     ballot box, the Coalition of the Caring Majority prevailed. 
     We won repeatedly with thirty to thirty-five percent of the 
     white vote as part of the Coalition. And among these white 
     voters, the overwhelming majority were Jewish voters. Jews 
     are a vital and steadfast part of the Coalition of the Caring 
     Majority.
       There is a dangerous divisive poison in the political 
     atmosphere currently manifested in the form of anti-semitic 
     attacks on Jews by an African American hatemongering fringe 
     group. The only potent antidote to this poison is to amputate 
     the fringe limb and focus more intensely on the healthy body 
     that remains. We must move to aggressively reaffirm and 
     rebuild our Coalition of the Caring Majority. The nucleus at 
     the core of this Coalition is the long-standing alliance 
     between African and Americans and Jews.

                          ____________________