I am Thea Lee, president of EPI, and I am delighted you all could join us this evening, and I am especially appreciative of our amazing panelists for being here and giving us their time. And I want to thank Kirsten Flood also, who is going to be our moderator, who came up with the idea of tonight's event and executed it, along with help from some of her colleagues. But we hope to make this an annual event to celebrate Black History Month, but also to start thinking about some of the issues that we need to think about both in Black History Month and every month of the year, because there's a lot of important debates going on, and we have four awesome people to help us talk and think about those tonight. So without further ado, welcome to the event and introduce your moderator, Kirsten Flood. Hello, everyone. Well, before I start, I just want to say that this turnout has exceeded my wildest dreams, so I'm very happy you all could make it. So give yourself a pat on the back for that. My name is Kirsten Flood, and I'm the communications coordinator here at EPI. And if you're not familiar with EPI, what we do is we use our research to inform policies that will expand shared prosperity and opportunity for working people, not just the wealthy few, and particularly low and middle income people. So I'm very happy that we could use this event to bring that, to carry on that message. And I thought of this event because I really wanted to do something that we could do annually, and that would bring the issues surrounding Black workers to the forefront and highlight the expertise of Black researchers and advocates. And with that being said, I'm super excited to introduce our panel. But first I want to say that, you know, nothing really happens unless you put it on social media. So please, please share your insights and this experience on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, using our hashtag, hashtag Black Workers 2020. In Snapchat, if you use Snapchat stuff. So with no further ado, we have Benga Agilore, who is a senior economist at the Center for American Progress. Jessica Fulton, who is the vice president at the Joint Center for Political and Economic I'm sorry, the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. Janelle Jones, who is the managing director of policy and research at the Groundwork Collaborative. And we have, I'm sorry. And we have Algernon Austin, who is a senior researcher at the Thurgood Marshall Institute within the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Incorporated. So give them a round of applause. My apologies for messing up anybody's names. So in planning this event, one thing that was really fascinating to me are some results that were recently published by the Joint Center survey, which gave Black people the opportunity to share their feelings about their identities, their race, their financial situation, and also their feelings about the 2020 presidential election. And this is important because they began, they had the opportunity to share their own story versus their story being created by organizations that look like us and politicians that look like, you know, what we see on TV. So Jessica, I would love for you to share some of the findings from those surveys. The mic is on. Okay. So thank you for the question and thank you for inviting me to come here. The Joint Center focuses on research and analysis that advances the socio-economic status of African Americans in this country. And we have recently partnered on a few different surveys specifically to help us think through what priorities Black folks have in 2020 and moving forward, right? And in a few of these surveys, we had the opportunity to do focus groups first and then do some quantitative polling work. And that was specifically to get at, you know, to understand more about how Black people talk about their experiences so that we're not putting questions on folks that were not initially created in the language that people used to talk about their own experiences, right? And so there were a few things that came out of this. Some of them were like kind of surprising. A lot of them were just kind of things that I maybe would understand just from talking to my friends and family. But I think they were things that mainstream DC folks don't think about often. So first, it was like Black people aren't monolithic, right? Like, Black people live in all different kinds of places, less than half of the Black folks that we survey live in urban places, right? Black people are also in rural areas and suburban areas. Black folks, there are lots of immigrants in our community, right? So about 14%, I think in the most recent survey that we did, were people who had at least one parent who wasn't from the U.S. That's not something that's often part of the narrative that you hear from a lot of politicians. And you know, we're concentrated all over the country. We're like in the South, but we're also like on the West Coast, on the East Coast, people have all different kinds of jobs. People live and are working all different kinds of industries. And I think that one thing that people miss often, policymakers miss or politicians miss when they talk about when they try to talk to Black people, is they think that they are only talking to someone who is urban and low income, and maybe they don't go to a great school. You know, we're across the spectrum. And so that's something that I think that people aren't thinking about enough. I think the other thing that we saw that wasn't really surprising, but I think is important is that the way that people are talking about the economy being booming, and you know, Black folks have the lowest unemployment rate. I think we'll get into that a little bit later, but Black folks having, you know, pretty historically low unemployment rates, that does that is not translating into people feeling like they're thriving, right? So about like around I think 27% of the people that we surveyed in this most recent survey said that their financial situation has improved in the last two years. Most of the people are like doing the same or they're doing worse. And I think that's something we really need to grapple with. And it's clear that it's not through any fault of their own. People are, you know, working like almost a fifth of the people who were employed in our survey said that they were working more than one job. People are concerned about making ends meet. People don't have jobs that can keep up with the cost of living. And so I think those are things that we really need to think about when like at the same time that we're hearing those things, that was that last survey was in November. That was the same time when there were policymakers putting out statements about, you know, record low unemployment in the Black community. And so I think we need to really take a step back in evaluating those things. And then finally, and I think we'll get into this a little bit more, policy priorities were all across the board. And one of the things that we've really paid a lot of attention to, and that was really important to us, is that the way that Black people talk about the things that they care about are not necessarily the way that politicians would propose them, right? So like people are thinking, talking about climate change. Well, like in a lot of our focus groups, people talked about, you know, the air and water quality in their neighborhoods, that those are the same issue. And they're not things that are getting the kind of attention that maybe mainstream politicians are putting out. Thank you. So circling back to this survey, as I said, one of the most compelling things about it was that it gave Black people to tell their own story as Americans and as workers, which is something that we need to be getting out there ourselves more often. I feel like I feel like too often organizations speak on our behalf. So Janelle, what is your vision for how the results of the 2020 presidential election will shape the economic narrative in the future? And how do you think the current narrative will shape the results of the election? Thank you, Kirsten. It is on. Yep, it's on. Nope, it's on. It's working. Thank you for the question and thanks to EPI for bringing me here for this important conversation. You know, I hope the national debate around the economy really leads to something that is progressive, incoherent, and that centers race. I know, that's quite wild, probably not. But I think, you know, I think for a lot of us, the economic and political system has really been dominated by neoliberalism over the past generation. I think it has perpetuated some powerful myths about taxes, about government, about regulation, about an individual's ability to create their own economic circumstances. And I think a lot of people buy into that, maybe not the audience that came here at 6 p.m. on a Wednesday to hear about it, but other folks. And I think that that system is something that, you know, that narrative is something that really perpetuates across a lot of different folks. And that is trash. So what I'd like to see is a progressive, coherent economic narrative that does a couple of things. I'd like to see something that uses public power in a way that empowers individuals. I'd like to see something that is a check on private, concentrated power, and something that also encourages affirmative inclusion. And I think the inclusion piece is super important because we know that unless we are particularly paying attention to the way that black folks experience the economy, we know based on the history of this country that that will be ignored. So I think that there are some real points that are important to how I would like the economic narrative to be shaped. And I think this piece about public power, which I think is important, you know, I think that's a complicated story for black folks. There is a history of institutionalized racism that has come across local, state, and federal laws and across this government. And I think that, you know, when we tell a story about an economic narrative, we really have to use public power, but also think a little bit about how that is complicated for black folks. That said, I do think there is a role for public power in being a check on concentrated private power. I think some individuals, I won't say who, maybe some last night in South Carolina have a good way of talking about this narrative that makes sense, that resonates with a lot of different audiences. I didn't say who, it's a C3 event, I didn't say anything. But yeah, so I think that, you know, what I'm looking for in 2020 and beyond is an economic narrative that really centers race in a more coherent way. And I think that that leads to better public policies for black folks. And I think the way that this economy is set up right now is that when black folks are doing better, by definition, everyone else will also be doing a lot better. So I think the, oh, Algenon, did you? Yeah, so the Joint Center also did a great survey with the groundwork and Project Mosaic. And I just wanted to recommend people look at both of those surveys and one of the takeaways that I had, and it gets back to what Jessica was saying about people thinking of their circumstances in terms of the cost of living in terms of trying to get by and what people are struggling with. And what I, one of the things, or some of the things that I took away from the survey was, was, you know, starting to think very specifically about what are people mean when they're talking about cost of living. And when you think of it, you know, what costs have been exceeding workers' wages? Housing costs have been growing dramatically, cost of college, cost of health care. And we see in both of those surveys that those issues are really, are among the top priorities for black people generally. So when we're thinking, we're here to talk about policy priorities. So policy priorities for black workers, including some of the more specific labor market issues that we're going to talk about, are, you know, affordable housing, affordable college, affordable health care. So those are really very important for black people, for the country as a whole. And once, if we can get those things in line, we really put ourselves in a position to talk about building black wealth and trying to close the racial wealth gap. So again, those, those surveys are really informative to help, I think, to help people think concretely about what, what black America needs. I think the key here is really talking about inclusive policies that address the generational harm caused by institutional racism in everything like that. So as we move about this year, watching and attending debates in town halls and eventually heading to the polls, Benga, what sort of targeted policies and strategies should we have in mind that strengthen black workers and foster equity? So thank you for that question. Thank you for the invitation. I kind of want to piggyback on what Jessica and Janelle had mentioned. I recently wrote a report looking at the black-white unemployment gap. One of the things that, because you had mentioned, we talked about the low unemployment rate and everyone touts it, including the administration, and they always talk about how that's the lowest in history, and it's true. But as of last month, the black unemployment rate was 6%. The white unemployment rate was 6% in December of 2013. In December 2013, no one was talking about full employment or tight labor markets. So the question is, why is it okay for African Americans to have a 6% unemployment rate but not for anyone else? And so, and then you talk about, institutionalized racism and this individual pathology, when we talk about, well, why do blacks have a lower unemployment rate? It's like, well, maybe we do upskilling, right? Or there's a skills gap, right? But in my report, what I show is that the gap in terms of employment to population ratio, the racial gap in the labor force participation rate, they're closing. So if they're closing, but the unemployment rate still stays double. And the thing is, if you go back to January 1972, when they started looking at African American unemployment rate alone, the ratio has always been double for 50 years. You just, it's all, there's a figure that I posted that it's always been double. So when we had good economies, we had bad economies, no matter what, it was always double. So what does that tell us that there are structural issues in this economy? And so any sort of policies that we want, policies that we have to promote, have to tackle the systemic barriers. And like Janelle, I won't name it names, but some, I didn't name any names. No, no, no, I said, we're not going to name names, but there's people who talk about tackling these structural issues that, you know, race conscious laws created these economic gaps. So race conscious laws have to close these gaps. We can't be raised, I mean, we can't be raised neutral because our economy is not. And so any sort of policies, we have to target that. So some of the things that are inclusive policies. One, we have discrimination. And it's like higher discrimination, discrimination, all these places. And we have an agency with their sole goal is to tackle these issues. So the employment, equal employment opportunity commission. But I was talking to a colleague of mine, Carter Maxwell, who's at CAP. He said that the staff for the EOC is half of what it was during the 80s. The budget for the EOC has been cut for the last 40 years. So we have these agencies that, it's not like discrimination has gone away, or that it's less. In fact, the number of complaints, you could actually measure the number of complaints to the EOC over the last 40 years, or actually the last five years, it's been going down. Now the thing is population is going up. So just by sheer numbers, we should have more complaints. So what does that tell us that people don't trust our institutions? And so again, it goes back to Janelle's point. And so some of the things we have to do is just, while there's policies that we could talk about, we actually have to focus on this narrative that government is wrong or government's bad. Now it's complex, but it's better than the private market. And so what we need to do is strengthen our institutions, our agencies, build that trust back up and actually tackle the structures that create these unequal outcomes. And so we'll get into like more specific policies later on, but more is one of the focus on that systemic issues. I think we have to be really, like there are two sides, right? So people don't trust government institutions for certain things. But a lot of what we saw in our surveys were that people also really are interested in the federal government stepping in to like create good jobs with good wages. People are interested in the federal government stepping in to people are thinking about like how to lower healthcare costs and lower costs of education. So I think there's like two sides and we have to figure out how to talk about both of those sides as their intention with each other so that we can have like productive conversations I think. And I would add that the perception of how government function is a function of who's in charge, right? So that what I focus on when I think about this is really about political power. And really the goal for workers, for black workers and for black people is about getting political power and exercising their political power so that the government addresses the issues that they identified in the survey that they want the government to address. And like I said, affordable housing, healthcare and these other issues, the surveys say that they think government should be doing more on these issues. So it's about black people getting the power to make government do more on those issues. How governments function is a function of who's in charge. That's what I took from this this section the most because what we need to put in black voters minds is that nothing is going to change unless you help choose the person who is able to possibly change something. And I'm particularly interested in the joint centers finding that 57% of democratic black voters are more interested in this election than they were in 2016. So Aljanon, I mean you started expanding on this, but I know that voter turnout is an important topic to you. So what is your take on voter turnout among black voters and how can we improve it? What can we do about it? Yeah, so I should have started by saying all my remarks tonight are my own. This is a personal account. And not my organization in case I get excited and say something I'm not supposed to. So and before I go into the you know I think about what we're talking about today is both political and economic issues. And before I address the more narrowly political I want to talk about an economic and political issue which is the U.S. census. So next month we will get communications from the U.S. Census Bureau about the 2020 census and about filling that out. This is it's imperative that black Americans, African Americans fill out the census. Historically there's been an undercount of black people in the census and an overcount of white people in the census. And this matters a great deal because about $700 billion of government funding is channeled based on the census count. So when black people are undercounted black communities are receiving less than they deserve in terms of federal funding. So that's really important that people fill out the census and address that undercount. The census is also important for political representation. You know we we decide we we divide the representation in the U.S. House of Representatives based on census count.  And on the NAACP legal defense front website there's a handy little guide that you can use to educate yourself more about the census and share with your friends and families to make sure that they fill out the census also. And getting back to the issue of political power it's really important that and it's great that African Americans are excited about this election. It's extremely important. And the way as I was saying before the way that people get to can achieve the government that they want and the government but that can serve their needs is through political power. And the first step the first step in political power is voting. It's not the last step but it is the first step and it is an extremely important step. And there's and I think people Americans generally don't fully understand and appreciate the power that black people have in terms of voting power. So black Barack Obama's election success was not because of what happened with white voters it was completely because of what happened with black voters. In the 2008 election and this is based on an analysis by the U.S. election project that tracks CPS voting data but they correct for over reporting of error in that data. But the election project found that in 2008 Obama's first election the black voting rate was higher than the white voting rate by four percentage points higher than the white voting rates. And we had the first election of Barack Obama. In 2012 the black voting rate was higher than the white voting rate by six percentage points. And again we had the election of Barack Obama.  In contrast in 2016 the black voting rate was lower than the white voting rate by five percentage points. And I can think it's fair to say that black people didn't like the turnout the results of that election quite as much as with Obama being elected. So the message that I want to leave you with today or one message is that black people will decide who the next president is either by who they vote for or by what or by if they decide to stay home and not vote. Now once you understand this you will understand also why some politicians are interested in purging black voters from the voting roles are working to make it more difficult for black people to vote or disenfranchising returning citizens and why the Russians disproportionately channeled their money to social media to suppress the black vote in the 2016 election.   And we should expect a lot of energy and a lot of money spent again trying to suppress the black vote trying to prevent black people from turning out. And again I want to refer you to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund website. We have information about preparing to vote, what you need to do to register key dates and about protecting your voting rights. And there's also information if you see people interfering with people's ability to vote you can contact the NAACP Legal Defense Fund or also other organizations in the sphere who are working to protect people's voting rights. So I encourage you all to vote and to encourage all of your friends to vote and tell them to do the same with their friends. Because again black people should make the decision by voting not by not voting. Absolutely. Banga if you could can you quickly share some of the policy recommendations that you have in mind? So basically to tackle structural racism first we have to enforce and strengthen the EEOC and the civil rights laws. Second there's a lot of stuff in terms of worker power that could make people so first of all it's like you want to be able to do stuff that help people get a job but when they get a job you want to make sure that it's a quality job benefits pay leave things like that. So union representation this actually goes to your point about voting that when unions were stronger there was more basically when you were stronger there were more democracy because you have this institution there that helps channel people worker voice in a way that actually has an impact. If we think about it kind of like as a counterbalance to corporate power we know because it's Citizens United that corporations have a voice because they're people right and so we want we need that counter balancing voice and that's through union so strengthening worker powers. Another way of strengthening worker power is through what are called wage boards where you have these groups that were employers at businesses workers work together to kind of talk about raising labor standards so above minimum so you know higher minimum wages paid leave other things towards job quality and the last one especially and this is very important in terms of structural racism is criminal justice reform. So the rise in mass incarceration has harmed so many people disproportionately African-Americans from the labor market because we have those issues. So part of it is you know there's programs called Clean Slate which remove automatically remove people's records so that gives a better chance in the labor market but the other thing to think about in terms of criminal justice reform is that the best way to prevent people from being harmed by having an incarceration having incarceration on a record is for them to never have been incarcerated before so we have to look at both the front end and the back end so there's some of the things that would help out. I just wanted to underscore a second all of Vanga's points I just wanted to underscore the the union part just to point out that Black workers in unions earn like 10 to 20 percent more than Black workers who are not in unions and I believe Janelle did you do some of that? That sounds super familiar. Janelle and John Schmidt I think have done some work on this issue and Black workers in unions on average have about $20,000 more in terms of wealth and in terms of their net worth than Black workers who are not in unions so really increasing Black unionization is really important to to sort of building economic security for African Americans and like Vanga said also in terms of building political power so again that's an important point and important to look for as we think about who we support electorally you know elected officials who are who strengthen unions are really providing a pathway for for greater Black economic security and the reverse is true. Employee elected officials who are attacking unions are really blocking off a pathway for Black upward mobility. Thank you so we actually have a couple questions from the audience so thank you to those who submitted some questions we're going to start with Jim Robinson from George Washington University he asked what social policy innovations are working and should be expanded? What's working hard? Have you stumped our panelists? I think I'm so I don't think this is what Jim was talking about when he talked about social policy but I will say this because this is something that I think is important I think what we know about the minimum wage in particular is that raising the minimum wage has made a tremendous difference in the lives of most low-income workers generally but a lot of Black workers and I think that's and closing racial income gaps right so I think that's one thing that we really need to be thinking about and I actually have not heard that many of the candidates talk about it maybe I'm not listening that much but I have not heard a lot of talk about raising the minimum wage and that's kind of surprising to me seeing that we know that that's something that works and the minimum wage is seven dollars and 25 cents an hour which is absurd. Yeah and I would I agree I think that's really important and should be easy if we had if we had the the elected officials we deserve but also I mean the problem that we're wrestling with here is like we said before who's in charge because again government can work well if the people in charge want government to work well and if it works poorly if the people in charge don't want it to work well so we can take the Affordable Care Act. I know people have various criticisms of it but we did see a dramatic reduction in the rate of uninsured up till the the new administration there was for children the the black-white gap in health insurance coverage closed it started to it's been in reverse in recent years so there you see that when you have leadership that cares about a well-functioning government you can have progress but if you don't have that leadership then then things fall apart and I think one one thing to think about is when we think about where these kind of social policy innovations are implemented they're never really implemented in the places where black folks are concentrated so like thinking about the Affordable Care Act the states you can like overlay the states that decided not to expand Medicaid and the states where black people are concentrated there's a lot of overlap there for some reason you know places decided that it wasn't a good idea to expand that policy so I think that's something to think about moving forward and that's another reason why the federal government may be playing a really important role in black folks lives and I will say to piggyback off of Jessica's point if you're looking for some really quality research on raising the minimum wage be sure to visit UPI's website we have some great reports from the past year that that really discuss the benefits of raising the minimum wage so our second question is from Catherine Landfield who asks do the policy priorities shift at all if you imagine four more years of Trump versus a new democratic presidential administration I would say no I mean these are these are the concerns that that I think we've raised are concerns are fundamental concerns you know jobs wages health care housing costs uh college costs uh these these are sort of concerns that have been they were around during the Obama administration and the administration before that so we have to to find more effective ways and the political power to address them so you know they're the concerns and we need to figure out how we can get them addressed I think it I think it maybe does a little bit in terms of priorities I think if we are in a situation with four more years of what we had we'll spend a lot more time on defense than than we do dreaming about what a progressive economic economy could look like but yeah those are sort of concerns I think one thing we I would say the progressive side makes a mistake is focusing on federal policy at the expense of state and local so I'll use this I mean I don't work here but I'll use this uh I'll use this to plug the urn network and that a lot of you know what we've played a lot of defense in these last four years we've played a lot of offense in the states and so I think you know New Jersey is the place you know Washington's always been progressive but the biggest story I think is you know Virginia and all the stuff that's been happening in Virginia over the last year because it went all blue so you have gun reform you have wage there's so many things that have happened at the state and then what's what's beneficial about that is you could actually try different things at the state see what works and then use that as a springboard and and we know this works because I know this supposed to be c3 event but but basically that's what the other side has done for the last 40 years that's how they've been able to get to the point where you know this didn't start with Trump this has started you know 80s you think about Reagan and all the stuff and a lot of this stuff happened at local areas state areas and then you know even look at what's happening in the judiciary all that is state level stuff local stuff that has now manifested itself as it is so whether there's another four years of Trump or there's a democrat there's a lot of stuff that we can do and that we should push and that we have the ability to push at the state level okay let me just plug voting again but you know not just presidential elections you know all elections we want people to turn out and vote for because it's it's the other elections and the other elected levels of government where where we actually have even more influence and and more impact and actually an important one is actually the state level because 2020s they do redistricting so state legislatures create that so in 2010 when the republicans took over they took over at the state level and they were able to gerrymander a lot of a lot of places so that's actually even more important this year so one more question because I think this is really interesting we touched on black wealth and housing a little bit so Hassan asks black families have historically been unable to buy homes in middle-class neighborhoods talk about the impact that has had on black wealth and black workers i think i just wrote a wealth report yep i actually didn't write a wealth report but um but at center for american progress my colleagues we have a race and ethnicity team that's done a lot of great work on the racial wealth gap talking about systemic inequality in housing in democracy in in terms of economic opportunity they've also simulated policies to see if we can close a racial wealth gap looking at uh you know eliminating student loan debt housing enforcement criminal justice reform and none of that closes the racial wealth gap and so what they're doing is bring board is with reparations but the question was about you know is she can you repeat the question black families have historically been unable to buy homes in middle-class neighborhoods talk about the impact that has had on black wealth and black workers so the problem with not being able to buy homes in middle-class neighborhoods is that you a lot of like the biggest wealth building asset for a lot of families of all races is a house and with that you can do that you can go to school at low debt you could uh entrepreneurship so i always think about there was a picture on twitter a couple years back that was like these different homes and they said like it was like uh steve jobs bill gates is like oh these guys started their businesses in their garage what's your excuse and then someone replied it's like i didn't live with the house of the garage and so that's the kind of thing that wealth allows it just eases your burden but allows you to do a lot more and then and in fact there's a lot more research now about people who don't have a lot of wealth and the stress that it has an impact on um and their health and things like that yeah so i think within the question it's it's it's um the answer is it within the question in that um as you as you mentioned the the value of the home is a big part of people's net worth and if you don't have access to the home uh brookings has also done work pointing out that you know homes in predominantly black communities are devalued right so you can have the same home you move it to a predominantly white community and its value increases so the history of segregation and redlining and snaring all of those things contribute to the the racial wealth gap um so we have to address all of those things to address it um but it gets it also gets back to the affordable housing note that i'm uh pushing and for me it's really important that we build affordable rental housing in a real massive way um and affordable rental housing right now you know you look around dc there's a lot of luxury high-end rental housing being built that that uh many african-americans can't afford um and people wonder well what is that you know renting is not supposed to be a pathway to building wealth but the major right now the majority of african-americans are renters and the majority of african-american renters are cost burden they're paying more than 30 percent of their income on rent um a significant share i think about 30 percent of african-american renters are paying more than 50 percent of their income on rent um and when you're paying that you can't build wealth um so if we can make uh rental housing more affordable then that allows people to save it allows people to repair their credit because they're not being evicted um and then puts them in a position where they can then think well how can i then purchase a home so the fact that our rental housing situation is in such crisis that really prevents people from buying a home and also even i think even bigger than that the fact that so many african-americans are saddled with such high levels of student loan debt that also prevents people from from purchasing a home so so these issues affordable housing uh affordable college and debt forgiveness all these things are are linked to building building african-american wealth and and making some impact on the racial wealth gap for sure now these are issues that we can discuss all all night you know black wealth black voting power the black experience in america overall but if you had to use only three words to describe your vision for black workers beyond 2020 what would they be it's tricky we're gonna go this way you go okay uh combat structural racism that's a good one that's a pretty good one okay yeah my three words uh black woman best that is actually like my twitter thing i'm gonna cheat just a little it's uh what is it uh anyway unions and political power and i'm gonna go with bill black power solid excellent so let those be the resonating messages in your mind as we head to the polls and we watch the debates and we watch the town halls i want to make sure that we're all thinking about these key issues that we've discussed today so thank you very much to our panelists really really really appreciate it this has been a very enlightening discussion and i'm glad that we could you know put your expertise on the platform so thank you again for coming


On the oddily home invasion, former President Jonathan urges federal government to review whistleblower policy. And Vice President Yemi Osibajo urges lawyers to end slow judicial process. This is PlusPolitics, I am Mary-Anna Cohn. Former President Goodlock Jonathan has called for the modification of the whistleblower policy, saying it can damage the economy if not well managed. He made the recommendation while reacting to the invasion of the Abuja resident of a judge of the Supreme Court, Justice Mary Oddily, allegedly on the information given by a whistleblower. While joining us to discuss this is legal practitioner Chris Itaminola and former Special Advisor to the River State Governor, Oppenabu Inko Taira. Thank you very much, Mr. Taira, for joining us. Good evening, everyone, and good evening to you. You and I have spoken about this invasion before. And then we're looking at it from the whistleblower policy angle. Let's revisit this issue of whistleblowers. Now, we know that the whistleblower policy became more known of when the government came up with the idea of people returning funds or people reporting, you know, looters, public office looters. And of course, we all know how that ended. A lot of these whistleblowers ended up not being as protected as they should be. A couple of them complained of the monies because the percentage of these monies was supposed to be given to them. But in terms of the Mary Oddily situation, how does this even play out in the first instance? Well, the whole thing turned out to be messy when the attorney general of the federation denied involvement. Of course, the magistrate agreed that it was issued, but it isn't the advance. We are ridiculous because it said it was, they went to the wrong address and they gave me wrong information. As sad as it is, I don't think we should really bother about a such war and issue against any particular person. Because nobody is insulated from prosecution, nobody is immune from prosecution. And when the issue is such war and it does not necessarily mean what they actually went for could be found in the hope of the persons, property that has done such. Nevertheless, Nigerians are worried because of their views. It is being reprimanded right now to embarrass people. I also want to state this, that I also disagree with the situation where a saturant will be issued and the operatives that are supposed to execute the saturants have been frustrated because that will have a negative effect on our justice system. Nevertheless, the only way we can end this unnecessary abuse of the issue out of saturant is to ensure, for example, on the part of the whistleblowers, if an information is given to the security operatives, they should ensure that they ascertain the veracity of that information. They should not just swing into action immediately without carrying out investigation. They should ensure that proper investigation is being carried out before they swing into action because it could become embarrassing to the victim. And just like now, the credibility of the saturant is being questioned. If I see a saturant today, honestly, I will not want to honor that saturant. That's why it has a negative effect on our justice system. Because I will doubt in view of the authenticity of it, a situation where what are the contents of the saturant? One is about the date and time of issue. Two, the confirmation of the probable cause to search. Three, even the period that the operatives were moving to carry out the search, the period is even stated. So it is not of your own being will, of your own volition, that you move it when you want to move it. It is stated. So when all these things are stated, the address of the house to be searched, and that's where I say it is sound laughable when they say it was done in error. Because you, if this at the very least justice, for example, number 10 B B Ravi Street. And on that paper, 10 B B Ravi Street is written on 9 B B Ravi Street. There is no way you can go to number 10 B B Ravi Street. It's not possible. And that is why it is generating the plurality generated. And that is why it is being perceived as witch hunting. Let me come in there. I'm curious. I'm curious. I'm curious. I don't think it has to do with assassination. So I've been saying it has to do with bringing her right into dispute so that you will not emerge as the CDN executive to bring the poverty of logic because she is to retire next year. Why the CDN will retire the year after? So the issue of succession does not even come in, you know? I want to ask about the modus operandi because such warrants, yes, are very important. But then how do they, you talked about how it's been carried out at the time. And there have been several times where security agencies, especially the State Department of State Services, break into houses at odd hours of the night. So I'm wondering that time that is stated on the warrants, why is it not adhered to strictly? And the issue of mistakes, I have... But at that time, I didn't get that. At that time, that was... You said that the time that they need to affect that search is also clearly written on the warrants. But then we see, that's what I'm asking, the adherence is the issue here because I have taken the report of a man whose house was broken into by DSS agents and they were not necessarily looking for him. They were looking for someone else. So this can actually be a mistake, can't it? But then it's the way they carry out the search that should be questioned here.  Because the way they went about it, the man lost money that he kept in his house. He lost jewelry. They destroyed the appliances in his house, et cetera, et cetera. Is that how a search warrant is supposed to be carried out? Is that such a warrant? Is that such a warrant? But like I said, if you have a period on it. So if the operatives move in, not within that period depulated by the magistrate of the drug, then it's an illegal act. Then you sue. It's an illegal act. Just like in other cases. You have the time when to execute. You cannot, the prisoner or the visitor, another guy is going to say, today it has to be two o'clock. That's when I have the time. Everything is stated. If you do it before it's illegal, you do it after it's illegal. Before it's modern, after it's modern. Everything is signed. So if, that's when they say period. Maybe on it you could say 10 p.m., between 10 and 11, or 10 p.m., or 12 p.m. But if they say, so if the court grants it, there was ever security reasons. The court grants it. Then the court has granted it. But if the court doesn't, then the people the operatives acted illegally. Probably that is why people are weaving the interpretation of assassination. That's why they're weaving. And secondly, don't forget that you have the antecedents. We are worried, as always, on that right from when we were the needy to get up to date. As always on that security, they're the residents of just judges and justices. And that's why you do things like that. What do you have against the judiciary? But the presidency has not in any way, has not in any way been incriminated in this issue. The person who's been fingered in this issue was the attorney general. The office of the attorney general was accused. Don't forget that, that is one and number two. But the attorney general is not the president of the federal republic of Nigeria. Sorry? Sorry? The attorney general is the attorney general of the federation, not the president of the federal republic. He acts at the behest of the president. He acts at the behest of the president. There's no way there will be a way on the premises of judges and justices without knowledge. Supreme Court justices will turn the imprimatur of Mr. President. That is not possible. That is not given how highly placed they are. It is definitely not possible. And the attorney general himself being a lawyer, he's a very senior lawyer, senior advocate of Nigeria. It's definitely not possible. He might have gotten the consent because he would have been acquitted by Mr. President. So he might have gotten the consent of Mr. President for him to have done that. He cannot do that on his own condition. He cannot do that on his own condition. It's not possible. That's not possible. Nobody can come up to the police. Let me refer to the statement by former president Goodlock Jonathan. I'd like to quote him directly. He said the concept of whistleblowing helps to give information, but that information should be slightly investigated. And if you need to be sure before you strike, it should be modified so that security appraisals do not go into the voice of discoveries. If things are not done properly, he says, people will exploit it to the advantage. People who give wrong information to security operators should also be punished. As much as whistleblowing is okay, it will help to control it. It must be done in a way that it will not injure the economy. I'm trying to put side by side the whistleblowing issue and the economy and what ties it together. That is exactly what is a little bit confusing to me, because whistleblowing is all about giving information secretly, so officially, to the establishment for them to carry out certain actions, information that will help the economy. For example, you have a criminal, you have an armed robber, or you have a panel secretary or an editor-general, or somebody is committing some sort of fraud in the ministry. You go and disclose to the authorities you should have investigated. That's what it's talking about. You don't just take the information hook, line and sinker, because what information is a function of loud? The informant loves or revives the victim.  I know of so many cases like that, that this man is involved in this, and it's not true, it's not a genocide. And if you have such an informant that dispenses mendacity, then that informant himself, and that's why every whistleblower or parties must ensure that they know the houses, they know them to their houses. If you come and give me any information, you must show me where you reside, your office, or something. I must trace you to something, you'll be like everything. So that if that information is questionable, I will come back for you. And that will be a very larger thing with this college dispensation of falsehood. That is exactly what Jonathan is talking about, and I completely agree. But then, on the issue of having a whistleblower who have a negative effect on the economy, I don't really think so. I don't know why he's saying that. I cannot question his own argument. But the truth about it is that it is rather positive than negative. Because if, for example, now I say Marianne is an armed robber, and they invade Marianne's house, or Marianne's house is a gun runner, she has guns at home, and they invade Marianne's house and there is no gun. The only negative aspect is on the image of Marianne, and if it is who beyond the devil does that, there is no gun in my house. That's the only thing. But how will that affect the economy is what I cannot reconcile. I don't know. I'm not saying what he's saying is not correct, but I cannot perform it. I cannot perform how he's going to affect the economy, negative. Because if I'm sure of my information, if I'm sure of my information, and I give the story that they will disclose that information to you, and you can't carry out if it was right. How does it affect the economy? I can't comprehend that. He might have his reasons. Maybe if he's asked, he's going to sponge it. He's going to tell you what he did, but I cannot, as I sit here now, tell you how negatively, but I can explain how positively, like in the show called as well, but negatively, I don't understand how it will affect the economy. Let's come back to the way or the modus operandi of, you know, such as in different houses, at the behest of a magistrate or somebody being armed with that warrant. We have seen many people whose houses were broken into, like I said earlier on, who sometimes are shot dead because maybe they're resisting or maybe they were not ready for this invasion. You know, sometimes people may be said to be feigning ignorance, but then they have no idea because you're in the wrong house. I think one of the most recent is that the DSS raided the house of one of the ex-big brother African housemates, and she was scantily clad. I think the day after she posted about it and said that she was still facing trauma from what happened the night before. Now, if they had not necessarily recognized that because she was a public figure, she probably would have been shot dead or something bad would have happened. Is it just about reviewing this policy of whistleblowing or should we also be reviewing these searches or breaking into these homes? I'm going to pose that question to Mr. Tamunola. I'm sorry, let me pose that question to Mr. Tamunola because he's a lawyer. Mr. Tamunola, the issue of whistleblowing is not just that of people giving misinformation or wrong information, but how about the searches and how it's done. Many people have fallen prey to maybe a wrong house, a wrong residence or a wrong person, a case of a wrong person. And sometimes these people end up being shot dead or being beaten or maimed. So what about reviewing that process of searching or taking a person into custody? The brutality that follows? Well, let me say good evening to you, Adora. Let me say good evening to you, my friend, my brother in Kotaria that I haven't seen for so many months now. And... Mr. Tamunola, good evening. Good evening. You see, the law, the law is very clear. When it comes to issue of summons, when it comes to the execution of warrants and whatsoever, the law is clear. It's governed by the administration of criminal justice at No. 7 of 2015. There is nothing wrong with the law. There is everything wrong about the implementation. When we are talking about the aspect of whistleblowing, the important thing is who he, who alleges must prove. There is nothing wrong. For the aspect of whistleblowing, let us first of all establish that where there is a right, there is obligation. And because there is a right and obligation, there is also a benefit. And if there is a benefit, there must also be sanctioned in the context that I see. When the whistleblower is found to be culpable, what happens to him? Because based on that information that is abused, the magistrate takes an action. And of course, in order to be able to issue the warrants, the law is section 35, section 36, section 37, section 38 of what you call the Part 3 of the administration of criminal justice act. The magistrate will not just act in the act, will not act in the act. The magistrate is expected to know the facts. The magistrate is expected to be furnished with who you are going to arrest. The magistrate is expected to be furnished with that information regarding the identity, the location and whatsoever. So based on that, you can't be talking about a misnomer. You can't be talking about error. You can't be talking about a misplacement. You can't say you are going to... But these are the claims that were made by the magistrates. We all heard it. No, but so somewhere along the line, once I want to go there, I say breach. Because now you are going to the house of a particular person. That person has a right under the Nigerian constitution, under section 4 of the Nigerian constitution. When you are wrong, that person has the powers to come against you.  The unfortunate challenge I have here is that our institutions are not just working. Let's cast our mind back to what is quite... Black lives must be saved in America. Black lives matter. Up till today, there are people that are still going in. Those particular people that initiated and executed that incident, we know what has happened to them. And the trial was public and whatsoever. For these people that have come, the autonomy general is complicit. If the autonomy general is complicit, the beginning of the journey is that it should be formula not to simply say, I resign, I step aside. And of course, not only that, if he's culpable, he's not above the law. It should definitely be tried. There must be a proper investigation. But the attorney general has said that he doesn't know anybody. He doesn't know this man.  And so what he's telling us is cock-and-boo stories. I don't know the reason why those statements were made. Sorry, Miriam, I beg your pardon. Apologies. Miriam, the simple reason why those statements could be heard is because we have weak institutions. Because on the basis of strong institutions, look, investigations will be made within weeks, within days, within months. Look, Donald Trump was alleged to have done something in his wee days, in his closing days. Up till today, investigations are still going on regarding the invasion of the White House, I mean of the Capitol and so on. So the simple problem is that you get into a party, you get into government based on the party, and then there are breaches, there are infractions, and somebody sees back and say, okay, this is a member of party A, party B, and on the basis of that, rather than to sanction for, to give sanctions, investigations, appropriate sanctions for infractions, what you do is to turn the other way around. For goodness sake, if you could do this to the justice of the highest court of the land, the Supreme Court, then who are you and me? It's unfortunate. Quickly, before we go, because we're running out of time, Mrs. Taminolla, you're saying that the attorney general needs to be put on trial or investigated because of the claims that have been made. The magistrate on one hand is saying it was a misnomer, misinformation, it was a wrong residence, and you have clearly stated that he needs to have the right information. What if he was also misled? Secondly, where is the precedence in this country that a highly placed person like the attorney general of the Federation, who's also a political appointee of the president, is being investigated on that level, especially when it's been watered down to he said, she said, I don't know this person, et cetera? Look, it's still the same challenge we are talking about. It's because of weak institutions. Because at the end of the day, who is the attorney general of the Federation?  His oppressions are by law. Look at what happens in South Africa. We are talking about Zuma. We are talking about other officers. Look at Oka that was, I mean, was taken in regarding certain infractions emanating from Nigeria. Where is that man today and whatsoever? The most important thing is, I mean, there is nothing like ignorance of the law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. That's all it was done in error. How do you know who is at fault, except by an investigation? How do you know whether the attorney general, the magistrate, had done something? I mean, a magistrate is expected to act judiciously and judicially. You are expected to take a decision judiciously and judicially. And even the cost of it, it is found that definitely you haven't done exercise at what is your decision. Judiciously and judicially, what will happen? You must be investigated. There are appropriate authorities. The NJC is there to, I mean, to look into the infractions of such a magistrate. And then for the attorney general, for goodness sake, it is because some of us have proved ourselves to be higher than the law. To be higher better and so on. So no matter what we are talking about, just go back. That if this could happen to Mary, how many of you just say Mary, imagine what would happen to the common man on the street. Imagine what would happen to Iqotaria that is there and whatsoever. It is pathetic and we need a foundational restructuring. Definitely. Well, we'll keep our eyes on that story as it develops. But I want to say thank you to Opunabal Incotaria and of course Chrissy Tabunola. We're out of time. We're out of time in one sentence because we need to go. Those authorities that have been arrested, what has happened to them? We want to know. Like the Tabunola like he said, they should be prosecuted. And let the attorney general go to court to prove his innocence. We'll wait and see what happens. We'll wait and see what happens. But thank you very much. Chrissy Tabunola, Opunabal Incotaria. Thank you very much for joining us on this conversation. Thank you. My pleasure. Well, thank you all for staying with us. We'll take a short break. And when we return, we examine the need for judicial reforms in Nigeria.


And this is what we're going to talk about, one of the most important things, one of the main reasons we have kidneys is for glomerular filtration. So we're going to look at how we can measure the GFR or glomerular filtration rate, how it occurs and why it matters. So here we see just in general, remember your cardiac output should be about five liters per minute or 5,000 milliliters per minute in normal healthy person, 20 to 25 percent, usually to say 20, 21 percent of your cardiac output goes to your kidney. So that means in any given minute, if you're moving five liters of blood, then a leader of it, or you see here 1,050 milliliters of it, is going to be flowing through the kidneys. Then you'll see, I don't care about the equations, but you take that leader of blood and from it, a little over half will become renal plasma flow. And then the part that actually will be traveling through the glomerulus is going to be right at about 110 milliliters per minute. So if you have a healthy heart and healthy kidneys, you should be pumping five liters of blood, about a leader of it should reach the kidneys, and that should be turned into a glomerular filtration rate of 110. It's 125 milliliters per minute in a man, 105 in women. So that's where you get this number of 110. The GFR, as I'll show you in a little bit, it's going to be a really great indirect measurement of kidney function. And then the amount of urine, so you take that huge number, 110 milliliters every minute, that's going to lead to that 40 to 50 gallons of filtrate being produced today. And then your body will reabsorb most of that, so you only produce between one and two liters of urine. All right, so how do we get glomerular filtration rate? This is going to be very similar to how I taught you about capillaries. Sorry, my eye itches. About capillaries and how we filter out at the arterial end of a capillary and we reabsorb at the venous end. So we've covered this when we talked about capillaries in general. So you see here, it's a combination of hydrostatic pressure, the fluid pressure of fluid rushing through the glomerulus here versus the osmotic pressure sucking things back in. So the numbers don't matter to me much, but you'll see that hydrostatic pressure should be 55 millimeters of mercury. The osmotic pressure should be 30, and then you do have some capsular osmotic pressure bringing it up. But in the end, the net filtration pressure should be a positive number. It should be 10. If this number was zero or obviously negative, then you wouldn't be producing any urine. This is very important. That's a small number, right? 10 millimeters of mercury is a very small number. If you like whisper into your hand, you're probably looking at maybe 15 millimeters of mercury. So tiny pressure changes here are going to cause huge problems. So the most important thing to understand here is about blood pressure. Your kidneys are exquisitely sensitive to changes in blood pressure because they can't function without good blood pressure. If the average blood pressure in your kidneys would drop by 10 millimeters of mercury, this number would now become zero. So if you're looking at, if you take someone who's blood, the blood pressure in their kidneys is 50 millimeters of mercury, drop it to 40, their GFR would be zero. Their kidneys would not be functioning. So your kidneys are terrified of any drop in blood pressure, which is why, as you've covered in other videos, that would lead to if a drop in blood pressure or blood flow would lead to kicking in the renin, angiotensin, aldosterone system, and then also the increase of erythropoietin.  So your body will, that will go into high alert. It's like we have to get the blood volume and blood pressure back up here at the kidneys. All right, so why does this matter so much? Why do we care? Because the GFR is the best measure of kidney function that we have. So let me give you some numbers. If you look at, if someone is just developing kidney disease, so kidney disease without a drop in GFR, they'd be at stage one. So anyone with a GFR of 90 or higher would have 90 to 100% kidney function. But then as you drop like into stage two kidney disease, the GFR would be between athletes number 60 to 89. And then if they were to say, so if someone ever tells you, my kidney function is at blank percent, what they're basically telling you is the GFR. So it translates really well. So the GFR of 60 would give you a kidney function of 60% and you're gonna drop and drop and get into stage four kidney disease. Your kidneys are failing, but not have not completely failed yet. Stage four would be a GFR of 15 to 29. So if you like, I remember my uncle at one point his kidney function was at 27%. Mainly due to the fibrosis and scarring of the blood vessels here because of chemotherapy. But that would have been a GFR right around 27 milliliters per minute instead of the normal 110. And then stage five kidney failure is going to be a GFR, glomerular filtration rate below 15.  So how do we measure this? There is, it's very important to know what it is, especially if you're a pharmacist or a doctor working with patients, if they have poor kidney function, it's gonna impact dosages of drug, et cetera. But a great way to measure GFR is actually use inulin. So inulin is a soluble fiber, it's a polysaccharide, but it's not reabsorbed or secreted by the kidneys. So you can actually tell what someone's GFR is really, really closely with looking at inulin. But the simplest way to do it is to use creatinine. So creatinine is one of the three key metabolic waste products I told you about, and it's the only one that's not reabsorbed. So your creatinine levels are the best way to get an estimated GFR, an estimated glomerular filtration rate, and it works pretty well. All right, so that would be how you determine the GFR. That's what the GFR is, and that's why it matters and its relationship to kidney disease. I hope this helps. Have a wonderful day. Be blessed.