[INDEX |
NATIONAL
|
WORLD
|
PERSPECTIVE
|
COLUMNS
|
MONEY
|
ENTERTAINMENT
|
HEALTH
|
TECH
|
LETTERS
|
SUBSCRIBE]
FinalCall.com News
National News
North Carolina slavery bill defended
By Cash MichaelsThe Wilmington Journal
Updated Jun 20, 2005 - 12:07:00 PM
WILMINGTON, N.C. (NNPA) - To Rep. Larry Womble, if a company or corporation wants to do business with state government, it should open its books first to see if it ever made its money from the slave trade, in the interest of full disclosure.
But to conservatives, all the Black lawmaker really wants are reparations for the enslavement of Africans and their descendants, and they’re determined to stop him.
Rep. Womble denies the charge.
The controversy is about state House Bill 1006, which has the short title “State Contracts/Slavery Profits.” Rep. Womble is the primary sponsor. The measure requires companies “entering into contracts with state departments to examine their records for evidence of participation in or profiting from slavery.”
The bill has already cleared the House Government Committee by unanimous vote. If passed, all vendors seeking to contract with North Carolina state government would be required to submit an affidavit certifying that they have searched their company’s, and any predecessor company, records for evidence of “participation or investment in or profits derived from slavery, including slaveholder insurance policies issued during the slavery era.”
If there is evidence, the vendor would be required to “disclose any and all records of participation in or profits derived from slavery by the vendor, or any predecessor vendor, including issuance of slaveholder insurance policies during the slavery era, and the vendor has identified the names of any enslaved persons or slaveholders described in the records.”
“They can still do business with the state; it is not restrictive, it is not punitive,” Rep. Womble told The Wilmington Journal.
“The value,” he added, “is more information. Without that information, a lot of our decisions will be flawed.”
The state can “terminate a contract entered into with a vendor if the vendor fails to fully and accurately complete the affidavit required,” the bill adds.
In cases of emergencies, the requirements of the measure would not apply. Also, other state, county, city or federal government entities would be exempt from the requirements.
“It’s not anything brand new,” the Forsyth County Democrat said, noting that other states and local governments have implemented similar measures. “We must make sure that history reflects the correct [information] as it involves North Carolina. Let’s make sure that the history we’re telling is the correct history,” he said.
But everyone doesn’t see it that way.
In the May 16 edition of Carolina Journal—the online newsletter of the John Locke Foundation, a Raleigh-based conservative think tank, an article titled “Reparations Bills Could Hurt Dems Most” charged that Rep. Womble is a “known reparations activist.”
The article also quotes Peter Flaherty, president of the National Legal and Policy Center in Falls Church, Va. and co-author of a study, “The Case Against Slave Reparations,” as saying, “the bill in North Carolina is an attempt to legitimize a broader nationwide movement to shake down corporations.
“The ultimate goal of the legislation…is to provide a massive payday for 35 million blacks across the nation.”
“That’s the farthest thing from the truth, if I’ve ever heard one,” Rep. Womble replied. “If I wanted reparations, I would have put it in the bill. I did not want it and I’m not seeking it and I’m not asking for it. That point I want to make abundantly clear. The bill doesn’t even mention it.”
