484 Lake Park Avenue, #332 Oakland, CA 94610 info@Michaellangefoundation.org (510) 455-4040

The Michael F. Lange Foundation mission and purpose

Mission Statement
To support and promote global social change, social justice, and peace.
Purpose Statement
To generate financial and other forms of support for individuals and organizations globally who are meeting the expressed purposes of the foundation as defined by The Michael F. Lange Foundation mission statement, and articulated in its vision statement, projected initiatives, and framed by its goals as established by the Board of Directors. When deemed necessary by the Board of Directors, The Michael F. Lange Foundation will offer direct programs and services to selected constituent groups.

For more information about the foundation, click on the “About” page in the menu above.

Are Constant Prayer and Conscious Action Enough?

by Harriet Tubman Wright

Although I’m generally positive, looking for the good in situations that are challenging, difficult or just crazy; I’m troubled by the intensified global warming disasters and aghast by the series of regressive executive orders coupled with raucous pontifications, social media antics and immoral activities, instigated by White House operatives who are shored up by private and corporate billionaires. Perhaps you’ve also been shaken up or shaken “woke!”

All year, I’ve signed countless on-line petitions, some of which have halted attempts to reverse or repeal progress that we thought we had made. I’ve become better informed about local and national “civics.”  In addition, I’ve convened with other artist-activists to develop resistance strategies, dialogue with “the other” formats, seeking ways to contribute creative solutions to potent issues affecting our generation and those that follow.

  • How are you handling the internal and external challenges that you’re encountering?
  • What experiences or events have caused you to change your thinking or re-consider your actions (or inaction?)

Beneath the agitation, my heart and soul hurt. This quote says it well:

“I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore!” (Actor Peter Finch as television anchorman Howard Beale in the film Network) 

Thinking about the final months of 2017…

Justice and Peace have always been values for me. Given blatant, blasphemous, bigoted activities within the year thus far, as well as my experiences and those of other people of color in this country, I fervently stand for social, economic and environmental justice; take a knee for racial justice and raise two hands for global peace. It’s time for all people of moral consciousness, spiritual maturity and emotional resilience to take back our power!

  • Who are you choosing to be? 
  • What are you willing to do?  
  • What are you ready to create

Community legal assistance concept with a group of hands representing diverse groups of people cooperating together to provide law and justice support and advice holding a justice scale.

I choose to keep my faith strong, hope alive and commitment deep, as well as continue to cultivate and share my vision of a world that values:

  • balance between the divine feminine and the sacred masculine that leads to harmony and wholeness.
  • conscious, spiritual and planetary evolution
  • gifts of diversity & indigenous wisdom
  • reverence for Mother Earth and harmony with nature
  • equitable distribution & responsible use of resources
  • community, connection and contributions of children and elders
  • freedom of expression & creative genius
  • people over profits, education over incarceration, cooperation over exploitation
  • just governance for the good of the whole & peace 

Consistent Prayer and Conscious Action are necessary, and more?

  • In what ways can you still make a positive difference? 
  • By years end, what do you want to celebrate? 

“Take conscious, heart-felt action now, as if your life depends on it, because in fact, your life and the life of the planet depend on it.”

-Harriet Tubman Wright 

“Nothing will work unless you do.” – Maya Angelou 

I’d love to hear from you. Please share your comments below.

Festival of Knowledge

The African American Museum and Library in Oakland is hosting a Festival of Knowledge on July 29, 2017 from 12pm-7:30pm. AAMLO is located at 659 14th Street Oakland, CA 94612. You can RSVP: 510-637-0200. We encourage you to support this important event.

FofK Poster 2017

The Life and Legacy of Michael F. Lange


Join us in our celebration of the life and legacy of Michael F. Lange on May 20, 2017 from 2pm-5pm at the African American Museum and  Library of Oakland (AAMLO) 659 14th Street, Oakland, CA 94612MFLF Presents The Life and Legacy of Michael Lange at AAMLO-May-20-17

To be a fly on the wall: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Meets Malcolm X in Omega Chapter

by Pettis Perry

For those of us in The Michael F. Lange Foundation, as we think about and celebrate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., we are reminded of his accomplishments and his impact on global human rights. But, we also celebrate his life as a member of Alpha Phi Alpha, Fraternity, Inc. We cannot separate this connection because our namesake, Michael F. Lange, and four of our founders as well as other Board members are also members of Alpha Phi Alpha.

Members of Alpha Phi Alpha believe in education as a foundation for personal improvement and social activism. We believe in making a difference through positive social change, no matter where we find ourselves. Like Brother Martin Luther King, Jr., Brother Michael F. Lange exemplified these characteristics in everything he did throughout his life. He worked in the prisons to change the lives of young people by diverting them from the penal system. He worked in inner city junior and senior high schools to encourage students to enter college, linking many of them with traditionally Black colleges as places where they would be supported throughout their education. His counseling program became Project Alpha and is now a nationally recognized program of Alpha Phi Alpha. He worked with inner city children and families by providing camping experiences that changed their lives through what is called experiential learning. His social activism was seen and heard through his roles as Malcolm X in the play, The Meeting a play about a fictitious meeting between Malcom X and Dr. Martin Luther King in more than 1,000 showings. He touched the lives of many thousands of people through his songs, lyrics, and work as an educator at San Jose State University which meant so very much to him. He bridged the ocean with his work in Africa, worked with organizations in the United States to improve interpersonal relationships, and made a difference in the lives of everyone he met.

So, on this Martin Luther King, Jr. Day of celebration I will be thinking about the meeting of Martin and Malcolm in Omega Chapter of Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Inc. where all Alpha men meet once they pass on from this world. Oh, to be a fly on the wall: What conversations you must be having!

Thank you, Martin, and Michael for your many contributions through lives well-lived. You have both certainly had an impact on my life and those you touched by your presence. Our foundation is dedicated to following your examples to bring about social change, social justice, and peace.

To you Brother King, we honor you on your day by sharing your two-part story publicly with permission given by Watch the Yard.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Line Brother Opens Up About Pledging Alpha Phi Alpha With King

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Line Brother Opens Up About Pledging Alpha Phi Alpha With King

The Election Vote in 2016

by Matthew J. Sutherland

There will be many different looks at what happened and the many pundits will spend weeks analyzing the data, but the biggest story of this election will be the failure of Democrats to turn out votes in key demographics.

The Vote

The votes in favor of the Democrat’s Presidential candidate during the elections in 2008, 2012, and 2016 were 69.5 million, 65.9 million, and 65.2 million votes respectively. By comparison, the Republican Presidential candidates during the same elections were 59.9 million, 60.9 million, and 62.6 million votes. There were an estimated 7 million voters who rejected both major party nominees by voting for third party candidates, or no one at all. (Note: These numbers were as of December 1st, and the vote tracker is in the Further Reading section.)
There were lots of indications that there was going to be a loss of enthusiasm in this election. Vote increases were expected with the increase in population, but so did the share of voters rejecting both parties. 7 million was a large jump from 2012’s 2.2 million.

While we expected a high vote count from places with high population that swing blue (such as New York, or California) to go to Clinton, Democrats failed to get that same enthusiasm in swing states. The Democratic share of the vote fell in key counties among these states. Hillary Clinton lost Michigan by 12,000 votes. The vote in favor of Democrats in Wayne County, MI fell by 78,000 from 2012 levels. In Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, the Democrat vote was down 40,000 in a state that was lost to Republicans by 27,000 votes. These are just a few examples of some big and consequential changes reflecting a lowering of enthusiasm by Democrat voters.


Hillary Clinton was expected to dominate the women demographic, especially with Donald Trump tanking in opinion polls with some of his campaign scandals, most notably of which was The Tape, in which 70% of respondents agreed that, to varying degrees, Trump’s treatment of women bothered them as voters. Clinton still won this group, by a considerable margin (54%-42%), but this was actually less than the share of women voters that Obama got in 2008 (56%-43%) or 2012 (55-44). This hurt the campaign overall, as it could have been an area of strength. However, it was marginally worse than Obama’s performance in 2008 and 2012. Broken down demographically, Clinton underperformed with white women 43%-53% when compared to Trump, and since they make up 37% of the electorate, this was a large swing. She dominated the Black Women vote by capturing 94%, compared to Trumps 4% of the vote. Even with what was widely viewed as disparaging remarks about Latinos, Latina women went for Clinton (68% to 26%). Latina women represent 6% of the electorate, so a swing in those numbers can tip closer races.


There are certainly some intersections, between gender and race, but looking at the racial demographics themselves The overall, support for the Democrat nominee fell among minority groups.  President Obama won the African-American vote by 93% to 6% for Romney in 2012 and 96% to 3% for McCain in 2008. Clinton lost significant margins in this group compared to Obama’s performance, who won the Black vote 88%-8%. That is a 5% loss which can mean a lot in close state elections especially when African-Americans are about 12% of the electorate. Additionally, there is evidence that voter suppression took place further reducing the numbers of Blacks who were able to cast their votes.

Another expectation was that Clinton would do better with the Hispanic vote, but what actually happened was that she lost 6% of the Hispanic vote when compared to Obama’s 2012 performance against Romney. At the same time, Trump increased the Republican share of that demographic by 2% points when compared to Romney’s performance. Clinton did win this demographic 65%-29% with Hispanics making up 10% of the electorate, but it is a bad group to be losing shares of, considering they are the fastest growing voter group.

Millennials/Young Voters

Katy Perry, Beyoncé, and Jay-Z concerts couldn’t even rally young voters to Clinton, and this one of the more damaging demographics to not show up for her. President Obama invigorated the youth vote. Clinton was given an apathetic meh.

Nationally, Clinton won young voters between 18-29 years old by 55% compared to Trump’s 37%. But when comparing Clinton to Obama this was a 5%-point decrease from Obama’s performance who won with 60% to 37% in 2012 and his share was 66% in 2008. Something else that is important to note is that turnout fell among this group. While this was nationally not the worst (current estimates are around 58.1% which is a fraction of a percentage lower than 2012), The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement estimates that about 23.7 million voters between the ages of 18-29 cast a ballot. Additionally, they estimate (with the caveat votes are still being counted and true numbers won’t come out until the 2020 census) that this is around 50% of the groups population, almost 8 points worse than the national turnout average. So, there is a loss in Democratic share of the young voter electorate as well as that group’s turnout.

What crippled Clinton in this demographic was even worse loss of the young vote in key swing states.

The big states to look at are Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Iowa. These are states where the margin of victory was at around a 20%-point deficit from 2012. As we looked at earlier, some of these swing states were decided by mere thousands of votes.
The Millennial group has the potential to have greater voting power as they become the largest generation in the electorate, when they surpass the Baby Boomers in the near future. There are an estimated 69.2 million Millennials (ages 18-35) and an estimated 69.7 million Baby Boomers (ages 52-70). Both groups are about 31% of the voting-eligible voting population, but Baby Boomer voting habits are much better than current millennial voters. So, while Millennials may be increasing their share of the voting population, their share of the voting electorate is much lower, and as evidenced by this election, their ability to sway elections is entirely based on how many of them decide to vote.

How Did This Happen?

The first thing we can look at is low voter enthusiasm for Democrats when compared to Republicans. When looking at the data we can see the numbers tank from Obama’s two election victories, and we also see something pretty big this year; almost 7 million voters rejected both candidates. Trump had a movement behind him while Clinton was grinding for support.

Additionally, when looking at the Clinton numbers today her margin of victory is approaching past 3 million, but what cost her the victory was that those votes were clustered on the coasts, while Trump used a strategy to win the Electoral College.

Nearly 3.2 million Latino/a voters turned 18 from 2012-2016. Millennials are now 44% of eligible Latino voters. The Pew Research Center, found that two-thirds of Millennial Latino voters who backed Clinton said they cast an anti-Trump vote more than a pro-Clinton vote. With low voter turnout among Millennials, and low enthusiasm for Clinton, provides insights to some of the reasons the Latino vote in general lost Democrats 6% points from previous years.

According to David Cahn, co-author of When Millennials Rule: The Reshaping of America, many surveys of Millennials show their top values are tolerance and diversity, optimism, and authenticity. This may reveal why neither candidate did well in pleading their case to young voters because they did not exhibit any of the traits Millennials found important, especially since the election was riddled with scandals involving both candidates. Where voters were enthusiastic about Obama, they were not enthusiastic about Clinton or Trump.

Additionally, it is important to note Sanders’ impact on young voters and who won their votes in the primaries in a way that was so commanding, that Clinton and Trump combined weren’t even close to Sanders’ ownership of that demographic. With that sort of enthusiasm from young voters, the DNC leaks and the Wiki-Leaks were very damaging to the enthusiasm of young voters and therefore dowsed their enthusiasm for the Democrat Party. When completing the 2016 campaign autopsy it would be unwise to discard those events when we speak about the Millennial voting demographic in the future.

Finally, it is widely believed that this was an anti-establishment election. In exit polling, there was a substantial share of voters who picked someone who would bring change as their most important factor in their voting decision. Those that chose this category overwhelmingly picked Trump. The reasons should be obvious: Clinton ran mostly on an establishment platform, while Trump campaigned against the establishment and against the political elite — and for better or worse, he offered change. We can see, when looking at the data presented by FiveThirtyEight, that places with economic anxiety voted for Trump. Places where there were manufacturing jobs that were lost to bad trade deals rejected the status quo and wanted change and therefore became fervent grounds for Trump to exploit and cinch his election.

Further Reading

Trump Was Stronger Where The Economy Is Weaker


Millennials Just Didn’t Love Hillary Clinton The Way They Loved Barack Obama


An Estimated 24 Million Young People Voted in 2016 Election


CNN Exit Polling


2016 National Popular Vote Tracker


Behind Trump’s victory: Divisions by race, gender, education


Millennials match Baby Boomers as largest generation in U.S. electorate, but will they vote?


Just how does the general election exit poll work, anyway?


Clinton Couldn’t Win Over White Women