Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The Calculated Dismantling of Minority Business Opportunity in America

Three diverse professionals  in business attire smiling and posing in an office
‘Black jobs’ slur and anti-DEI mindset are bad for business
LaylaBird/Getty Images

A recent executive order to dismantle the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) is another policy change in America's long history of systematically suppressing minority economic advancement. This decision, which threatens to unravel decades of progress in fostering minority entrepreneurship, demands immediate attention and action.

Since its inception, the MBDA has been a lifeline for America's 12 million minority-owned businesses, facilitating access to over $1.5 billion in capital in 2024 alone. Its dissolution represents the loss of a government agency and the destruction of a crucial bridge to economic opportunity for countless entrepreneurs from marginalized communities.


The timing of this decision is particularly troubling, as it echoes historical patterns of dismantling Black and minority economic progress just as communities begin to gain meaningful footing. Perhaps the most infamous example of such systematic destruction occurred in 1921 in Tulsa, Oklahoma's Greenwood District—known as "Black Wall Street."

Before its destruction, Greenwood represented the epitome of Black economic self-determination. The district housed hundreds of Black-owned businesses, including hotels, restaurants, grocery stores, and a movie theater. But this beacon of prosperity became a target. In less than 24 hours, white mobs destroyed 35 city blocks, burned more than 1,200 homes, and obliterated years of accumulated wealth. The economic impact, estimated in today's dollars, exceeded $200 million in direct property damage alone. But the cost—lost generational wealth, stunted economic development, and shattered dreams—is incalculable.

Tulsa wasn't an isolated incident. Similar attacks on minority economic progress occurred in Rosewood, Florida; Wilmington, North Carolina; and countless other communities across America. Each instance represented not just physical destruction but the systematic dismantling of economic infrastructure that supported minority advancement. The current dismantling of the MBDA is being conducted in a suit instead of a hood and executed with executive orders rather than torches. Still, the effect is similar: it threatens to destroy infrastructure crucial to minority economic advancement. Resulting in consequences that are far-reaching. Elimination of MBDA's support, minority entrepreneurs lose access to:

  • Specialized business consulting services
  • Critical networking opportunities
  • Vital capital access programs
  • Federal contracting pathways
  • Export market guidance

Oddly, I submit, this moment also presents opportunities for innovation and resistance. Just as the Greenwood community began rebuilding almost immediately after the massacre—eventually hosting double the number of businesses by 1942—today's minority business community must forge new paths forward.

However, there are some strategic steps we can take to ensure continued support for minority enterprises:

One is that state and local governments must step up. States like New York, California, and Illinois already have robust minority business development programs. Other states must follow suit, establishing dedicated offices and funding streams for minority business support. These programs should include technical assistance, access to capital, and procurement opportunities.

Two, private sector institutions must expand their commitment. Major banks and corporations should establish dedicated minority business funding programs, not as charity but as smart business investments. The buying power of minority communities exceeds $4.7 trillion annually—ignoring this market is financially irresponsible.

Third, community foundations, community development financial institutions (CDFIs), and minority depository institutions (MDIs) must be strengthened. These institutions have historically been crucial in supporting minority businesses when traditional banks wouldn't. They need increased capitalization and help to fill the gap left by the MBDA's dissolution.

Fourth, professional organizations and chambers of commerce focused on minority businesses must expand their services. Organizations like the National Minority Supplier Development Council and the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce should broaden their programming to include services previously provided by the MBDA.

Fifth, technology platforms and fintech companies should develop specialized tools and products for minority-owned businesses, helping to democratize access to capital and business services.

Yes, dismantling the MBDA represents a significant challenge, but it need not be a death knell for minority business development. History has shown that attempts to suppress minority economic advancement often spark innovation and resilience within these communities. The future of American economic prosperity depends on our ability to ensure that all entrepreneurs, regardless of their background, can succeed. Moreover, supporting minority business development isn't just a moral imperative but a necessity. A step in a direction toward the promise of a more pluralist economy.

Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson is a spiritual entrepreneur, author, scholar-practioner whose leadership and strategies around social and racial justice issues are nationally recognized and applied.

Read More

Blank Checks and Empty Promises: The Collapse of Congressional Fiscal Power

A politician counting money in front of the US Capitol Building.

Getty Images, fStop Images - Antenna

Blank Checks and Empty Promises: The Collapse of Congressional Fiscal Power

From Governing to Grandstanding

There was a time—believe it or not—when Congress actually passed budgets the old-fashioned way: through debate, compromise, and the occasional all-night session, not theatrics designed to appeal to cable news and social media. The process, while messy, followed a structure: hearings, markups, votes, and compromises. That structure—known as regular order—wasn’t just congressional tradition. It was the scaffolding of democratic accountability. It has also been steadily torn down.

Deadlines and dysfunction better define today’s Congress. Instead of the back-and-forth of healthy deliberation, Congress relies on continuing resolutions and last-minute omnibus bills. Budget gimmicks that were once used only during fiscal emergencies—backloaded cuts, timing shifts, reconciliation sleight-of-hand—are now the rule, not the exception. Congress has shifted from prioritizing policy to prioritizing the message and crafting political narratives.

Keep ReadingShow less
Outside Money, Inside Influence: How National Donors Shaped the 2024 Congressional Elections

An individual voting with money.

Getty Images, Orbon Alija

Outside Money, Inside Influence: How National Donors Shaped the 2024 Congressional Elections

In 2024, campaign fundraising in federal elections was more nationalized than ever. Candidates for both the House and Senate continued a decades-long trend of relying less on donations from the voters they represent and more on contributions from donors across the country. The nationalization of campaign contributions, once a concern among elections experts, is now a defining feature of congressional campaigns.

An analysis of 2024 House and Senate campaign data reveals just how deeply this transformation has taken hold. From candidates in small states with limited donor bases to top congressional leaders with national profiles — and especially in competitive races in battleground states — non-local campaign contributions were ubiquitous.

Keep ReadingShow less
Who Really Pays for Congress? Local Donors All but Disappear in 2024

Hundred dollar bills.

Giorgio Trovato on Unsplash

Who Really Pays for Congress? Local Donors All but Disappear in 2024

WASHINGTON, D.C. - There is an old saying: All politics is local. However, many voters may get the impression this is becoming less and less a reality -- particularly in US House and Senate elections where candidates are elected to represent specific districts or states, but campaign to a national audience.

This is because local influence in the most contested races is dying out -- a statement not contrived from opinion, but fact.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money in politics
Super PACs tied to major parties misled voters, complaint alleges
erhui1979/Getty Images

Is It Possible To Reverse Course on the Corruptive Influence of Money in American Politics?

A $288 Billion Dollar Proto-Presidency?

The 2024 presidential election saw Elon Musk spend over a quarter of a billion to elect President Trump, which is exactly $288 million according to The  Washington Post report of the final tally of campaign spending on January 31, 2025. Did that staggering campaign contribution buy the billionaire the right to attend cabinet meetings and stand beside the President in the Oval Office and at other events? Did those millions buy a Proto-Presidency, complete with the opportunity to run a department aggressively dismantling government and radically changing what government does for ordinary Americans while personally benefiting from government contracts? Professor Lawrence Lessig argues that ‘Musk is the clearest example of the corrupting influence of money in politics.’ According to a recent PEW study, 72% of Americans agree that money is the number one corrupting influence in politics. So, what can be done? Are we too far down this road to make meaningful change, or are there options?

Keep ReadingShow less