A Wednesday afternoon interview with Philadelphia NAACP President Rodney Muhammad was meant to suffocate rumors and offer clarification. Instead, it birthed a new set of pertinent questions about the activist’s relationship with the Mayor, his campaign and political action committee.
Minister Muhammad, who in addition to being the face of the local chapter of the NAACP leads the Nation of Islam Mosque No. 12, was revealed in early October to have worked for two months doing community outreach on a campaign to promote the soda tax, a marquee policy agenda for Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney.
The minister on Wednesday said he as an individual, not as NAACP President, offered his services to Philadelphians for a Fair Future, and that he has done other consultant work for companies. Though Mr. Muhammad appeared not to have disclosed this relationship publicly, despite him penning at least one Op-Ed in favor of the soda tax, he refutes the notion that he aimed to hide his operation.
“There’s no secret going on,” Mr. Muhammad told WURD Radio’s Mr. Charles Ellison.
The minister said the initial article which ignited this news cycle implied something that wasn’t true, and that since its publishing, people have been conspiring in order to “rev up the story.”
But the story, as of today, has changed. When the minister was asked about the $25,000 paid to him by Mayor Jim Kenney’s political action committee since April 27th of this year, which is separate from the work he did to promote the soda tax, he responded by disclosing that he is working to re-elect Mayor Kenney, who’s term began in January of 2016.
“We’d like to see him re-elected,” the minister said, noting that it would take “another four years” for the Mayor’s vision to materialize.
According to Mr. Muhammad, Mayor Kenney is a Silver Life member of the NAACP. And the minister, who has been a member of the local chapter of the NAACP for years and who’s unpaid as its president, said it’s not uncommon for people there to be on a politician’s payroll.
Critics of the minister say there appears to be blurred lines as to whom he’s accountable to, and when. For example, as the leader of a civil-rights organization, there’s an expectation that he will, when necessary and appropriate, be adversarial against the government, which could include the mayor. But if he’s employed to ensure the Mayor’s brand remains valuable, cheer him on, and likely encourage others to do the same, then how much of an opposition to the current administration can he be?
Thanks for reading! Until next time, I’m Flood the Drummer® and I’m Drumming for Justice!™
Photo courtesy of the author.