Category Archives: Economics

Ohio’s Unclaimed Billions Could Empower Central State and Wilberforce Instead of Enriching the NFL

You can’t have political power unless you have economic power. You can’t have economic power unless you own something. — Dr. Claud Anderson

In the quiet towns of Wilberforce, Ohio, two institutions — Central State University and Wilberforce University — have stood for generations as monuments of African American intellectual resilience and historical fortitude. Founded in eras when the very idea of African American higher education was radical, both institutions have graduated engineers, entrepreneurs, theologians, and teachers who seeded entire Black communities with knowledge and leadership. Yet, in 2025, they remain financially fragile — their endowments barely grazing the thresholds needed for robust institutional health.

Meanwhile, Governor Mike DeWine just approved $600 million in state funds — sourced from Ohio’s $4.8 billion in unclaimed assets — to support the Cleveland Browns’ new domed stadium in Brook Park, an NFL franchise owned by billionaires. The Haslam Sports Group, the Browns’ owners, is contributing an additional $1.2 billion to the project, and Cuyahoga County is expected to round out the financing with another $600 million. The stadium, estimated at $2.4 billion, is framed as a jobs and tourism engine — the typical rationale for professional sports subsidies. But beneath the surface lies a deeply racialized economic pattern: Black bodies as capital, Black institutions as afterthoughts.

Let us state this plainly — $200 million in endowment funding (split between Central State and Wilberforce University) would account for just 4.17% of the $4.8 billion in unclaimed assets Ohio plans to repurpose. Yet it would transform the future of two of America’s most storied HBCUs, whose total combined endowments likely do not reach even $20 million today.

The $200 Million That Could Rebuild Black Educational Futures

An endowment is the economic engine of institutional independence. It enables faculty hiring, scholarships, research labs, infrastructure repair, and the kind of multi-generational planning that insulates a university from the unpredictable winds of politics and philanthropy.

  • Central State University, Ohio’s only public HBCU, receives state support — but suffers from persistent underfunding compared to Ohio’s predominantly white public institutions.
  • Wilberforce University, a private HBCU affiliated with the African Methodist Episcopal Church and the first college owned and operated by African Americans, has been in survival mode for decades, enduring accreditation threats and enrollment declines — largely due to chronic financial starvation.

A $100 million endowment per institution, conservatively managed with a 5% annual drawdown, would provide each HBCU with $5 million per year in perpetuity. That’s enough to:

  • Offer full-ride scholarships to dozens, if not hundreds, of students.
  • Endow faculty chairs in business, STEM, and African American studies.
  • Fund campus maintenance and restoration for aging facilities.
  • Launch centers focused on African American policy, agriculture, or entrepreneurship.
  • Reduce reliance on tuition and thus open doors to more low-income students.

In short, it would empower these institutions to build, not just survive.

Meanwhile, the Billionaire NFL Franchise Gets a Taxpayer Bailout

The Cleveland Browns’ new stadium is not just an economic development plan — it’s a public-funded monument to private wealth. Let us remember: The NFL is a tax-exempt cartel whose franchises are operated by billionaires and whose profits — through broadcast rights, luxury boxes, and merchandise — soar year after year.

The public rationale for subsidizing stadiums is that they will generate jobs, tourism, and long-term economic vitality. Yet, study after study from economists across ideological spectrums consistently shows that these promises are overstated or entirely unfounded. Most NFL stadiums create a short-term construction boom, followed by long-term debt and opportunity costs.

But perhaps more galling is this: the economic lifeblood of the NFL is disproportionately Black men. While roughly 13% of the U.S. population is Black, nearly 60% of NFL players are African American. These players, often trained in underfunded high schools, many from single-parent households and first-generation college trajectories, generate billions — yet the communities and institutions from which they originate remain underdeveloped and neglected.

It is a grotesque inversion: Black talent builds white wealth, while Black institutions remain marginal.

Black Athletes, White Wealth, and the Poverty of Institutional Ownership

The NFL, and by extension the Cleveland Browns, benefits from a system where the labor is Black, but the ownership is almost entirely white. Out of 32 NFL teams, only one have non-white principal owners: Shahid Khan, a Pakistani-American who owns the Jacksonville Jaguars.

Meanwhile, no HBCU alum holds equity in any major professional sports franchise, despite HBCUs being core contributors to the American athletic pipeline that fuels leagues like the NFL and NBA.

Despite producing generations of elite athletes, coaches, and sports executives, no collective of HBCU alumni has leveraged its wealth or influence to acquire equity in a major professional sports franchise, leaving the economic rewards of Black athletic labor concentrated elsewhere.

Imagine a model where Ohio had used even half of the $600 million to create a Black Education & Sports Endowment, partially controlled by a consortium of HBCUs, Black public schools, and community development organizations. The returns from that endowment could support thousands of students, community health centers, literacy programs, and STEM labs for generations.

Instead, we see yet another example of extractive economics, where African American physical, cultural, and intellectual capital is used to build empires for others, while Black institutions — including HBCUs — remain dependent on begging, philanthropy, and hope.

Why Unclaimed Funds Should Serve The Forgotten

Ohio’s decision to redirect $1.7 billion in unclaimed funds to cover state expenditures is fiscally creative — but morally questionable. These are not “free” funds. They are monies left in dormant bank accounts, uncashed checks, unclaimed insurance payouts — many of which disproportionately belong to low-income individuals who lacked the resources or knowledge to retrieve them.

Data suggests that Black Americans are disproportionately represented among unclaimed property holders — in part due to higher levels of economic displacement, address changes, and financial exclusion. Redirecting these funds to subsidize an NFL franchise, instead of redressing the institutional and educational gaps that created that unclaimed status, is a betrayal.

Ohio could have:

  • Created a permanent Black Higher Education Trust, benefiting Central State and Wilberforce.
  • Used 5% of unclaimed funds — about $240 million — to fund Black-led public health initiatives in underserved areas.
  • Directed even 1% of those funds — roughly $48 million — to finance land acquisition and economic development for Black-owned businesses.

Instead, we’ve chosen to rescue billionaires from spending their own money.

HBCU Endowments Are An Economic Empowerment Issue — And the Gateway to Political Power

Endowments are more than just financial assets. They are strategic tools of power — insulating institutions from political winds, enabling bold experimentation, and giving their stakeholders the leverage to influence policy, not just plead for it.

For African America, the chronic undercapitalization of HBCUs is not merely a funding gap — it is an economic power vacuum that undercuts the entire community’s ability to advocate effectively for systemic redress.

While Williams College and Bowdoin College — small liberal arts schools with fewer than 2,500 students — boast endowments of $3.7 billion and $2.58 billion respectively, many HBCUs operate with endowments under $50 million, and some under $10 million. This discrepancy is not accidental. It is the compounding result of centuries of exclusion from generational wealth accumulation, philanthropic networks, and public investment.

Until African American institutions — especially HBCUs — are armed with independent and sizable capital, they will remain vulnerable to the whims of legislatures, accreditation bodies, and philanthropic trends. Worse, they will lack the institutional might to challenge inequity in courtrooms, boardrooms, and ballot boxes.

The fight for reparations, education equity, health justice, and fair housing requires leverage — and leverage requires capital. Political power without economic power is temporary and transactional. But economic power institutionalized through endowments can translate into permanent seats at the table, not just access to it.

Endowing HBCUs, then, is not a charitable gesture. It is a foundational strategy for African American sovereignty and redress. Without institutions that are capable of outlasting election cycles and media trends, African America will continue fighting uphill with borrowed tools and limited voice.

Ohio had a chance to fund that future. Instead, it chose to subsidize a stadium — once again reminding us: until we build our own institutions, we will always be asked to cheer from the stands while others profit from our play.merican educational infrastructure for the next 100 years. Instead, he invested in a stadium with a 20-year shelf life.

Choose the Future You Fund

In 2029, a new domed stadium will open in Brook Park. It will gleam with LED lights and imported steel. It will be filled with cheering fans on Sundays and concerts on Saturdays. The Browns may even win a playoff game or two.

But just 50 miles away, on the campuses of Wilberforce and Central State, students will still walk cracked sidewalks. Professors will still work on contracts. Students will still withdraw for financial reasons.

Unless Ohio chooses to invest in the institutions that nurture and protect Black futures, those futures will continue to be harvested but never planted.

This is not just about football. It is about the future of Black Ohio. And whether our institutions will ever be allowed to rise beyond survival — and into sovereignty.

Disclaimer: This article was assisted by ChatGPT.

The American Brain Drain: Could the Next Superpower Rise from U.S. Talent Exodus?

“Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships.” – Michael Jordan

America’s diversity leaving Ellis Island. (AI)

The 20th century bore witness to a dramatic shift in global power as the United States cemented its status as the world’s foremost superpower. A pivotal contributor to this ascent was the influx of foreign intellectual capital—most notably following World War II, when a cadre of German scientists, engineers, and thinkers were transplanted to American soil under Operation Paperclip. Today, history may be rhyming: a quiet but consequential outflow of talented Americans is underway, and it may herald the ascent of a new global power.

Paperclip’s Precedent

America’s victory in the Cold War owed much to borrowed brilliance. Operation Paperclip, a covert government initiative, spirited more than 1,600 German technologists across the Atlantic. Among them was Wernher von Braun, whose pioneering work in rocketry helped put a man on the moon. The absorption of such expertise turbocharged America’s scientific and military prowess, transforming it into an unrivalled innovator on the global stage.

This historical lesson is instructive: when knowledge migrates, power often follows. Should today’s American émigrés find fertile ground elsewhere, the implications could be similarly seismic.

Why the Exodus?

More Americans, particularly the skilled and educated, are eyeing exits. The motivations are myriad:

  1. Living Costs and Economic Pressures – Astronomical housing prices, stagnating real wages, and an eroding middle class are prompting professionals to seek prosperity elsewhere. Countries like Canada, Germany and Portugal combine affordability with opportunity.
  2. Fractured Politics – Deepening partisanship, institutional paralysis, and cultural polarization—exacerbated by the MAGA movement—have left many disillusioned with America’s trajectory.
  3. Healthcare and Wellbeing – The United States remains the only wealthy nation without universal healthcare. By contrast, expatriates praise the peace of mind afforded by European and Asian systems.
  4. Remote Work’s Liberation – The pandemic redefined where work happens. For many, the logic of staying tethered to a high-cost, high-stress American city has evaporated.
  5. Emerging Market Allure – Some are lured by dynamism abroad. Nations once considered periphery are now innovation hubs. The pull is not only economic but aspirational.

Contenders for the Crown

Which nations might inherit America’s intellectual capital—and potentially its mantle? Only a handful, those with welcoming immigration regimes and ambitious national strategies, are poised to benefit.

Canada

Long the polite alternative to its southern neighbour, Canada is quietly absorbing talent at scale. Toronto and Vancouver, buoyed by tech booms and liberal visa policies, have become sanctuaries for America’s disaffected coders, scientists, and entrepreneurs.

Germany

As the EU’s economic engine, Germany combines formidable infrastructure with a commitment to industrial leadership. Berlin’s start-up scene and Bavaria’s engineering prowess offer rich pickings for those with ambition.

Portugal

Once peripheral, Portugal now leads in lifestyle migration. The Golden Visa scheme, coupled with a burgeoning tech ecosystem in Lisbon and Porto, makes it an attractive landing spot for digital nomads and founders alike.

Australia

Far-flung but forward-looking, Australia blends quality of life with economic resilience. Melbourne and Sydney are magnets for talent, helped by pathways to permanent residency.

Singapore

The Lion City is capitalism distilled: efficient, safe, and strategically situated. Its government aggressively courts foreign expertise, and its tech, finance, and logistics sectors are world-class. Few places convert brainpower into GDP as ruthlessly.

Ghana

Perhaps the most surprising contender, Ghana has recast itself as a Pan-African beacon. Through initiatives like the “Year of Return” and incentives for diaspora entrepreneurs, it is reversing the historical brain drain. With growing tech and finance sectors and remarkable political stability, Accra may become a nucleus for Black global talent.

HBCUs Look to Africa

Among the emigrants are graduates of America’s Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). These institutions, long ignored in the mainstream, are now exporting a new vanguard of Black intellectuals and professionals.

In nations like Ghana, Nigeria, and Rwanda, HBCU alumni are finding not only economic opportunity but also cultural affirmation. Business-friendly policies, grants of land, and dual citizenship are part of the welcome mat. Crucially, these professionals are not just seeking refuge—they are shaping the future of African innovation.

Africa’s universities and research institutions are likewise tapping into this talent pipeline. Joint ventures, think tanks, and faculty exchanges hint at a new Pan-African intellectual economy—one rooted in both heritage and ambition.

America’s Loss

What happens when a country loses its best minds?

  1. Innovation Decays – Fewer patent filings, less scientific output, and diminished R&D. The United States risks ceding supremacy in emerging fields like AI, biotech, and clean energy.
  2. Economic Hollowing – Entrepreneurs take jobs and capital with them. Venture funding flows to where start-ups congregate.
  3. Soft Power Slips – America’s influence derives not just from military might but from cultural prestige and intellectual leadership. An exodus of thinkers imperils both.
  4. Strategic Risk – Just as the U.S. turned German rocket science into military advantage, others may now do the same with American AI or biotech expertise.

Can the Tide Be Turned?

Reversing this trend requires boldness:

  • Healthcare Reform – Without universal care, the U.S. will continue to appear brutal and bizarre to its own citizens.
  • Education and Infrastructure Investment – STEM pipelines and next-gen transit systems can rekindle optimism.
  • Immigration Overhaul – Welcoming the world’s best talent, while retaining its own, should be a bipartisan imperative.
  • Depolarisation – A republic in perpetual gridlock cannot inspire confidence.

A New Centre of Gravity?

Brain drain is not new. But in an age where ideas, not armies, shape empires, its impact is profound. If America does not reckon with its internal contradictions, it may soon find that the next superpower was made in America—by Americans—somewhere else.

Disclaimer: This article was assisted by ChatGPT.

African America’s June 2025 Jobs Report – 6.8%

Overall Unemployment: 4.1%

African America: 6.8%

Latino America: 4.8%

European America: 3.6%

Asian America: 3.5%

Analysis: European Americans’ unemployment rate has remained steady for four straight months with virtually no change in unemployment rate. Asian Americans decreased 10 basis points and Latino Americans decreased 30 basis points from May, respectively. African America’s unemployment rate increased by 80 basis points from May.

AFRICAN AMERICAN EMPLOYMENT REVIEW

AFRICAN AMERICAN MEN: 

Unemployment Rate – 6.9%

Participation Rate – 68.8%

Employed – 9,752,000

Unemployed – 721,000

African American Men (AAM) saw a increase in their unemployment rate by 170 basis points in June. The group had a mild rebound in their participation rate in June by 30 basis points. African American Men lost 117,000 jobs in June and saw their number of unemployed increase by 181,000.

AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN: 

Unemployment Rate – 5.8%

Participation Rate – 60.9%

Employed – 10,248,000

Unemployed – 634,000

African American Women saw a decrease in their unemployment rate by 40 basis points in June. The group decreased their participation rate in June by 80 basis points. African American Women lost 84,000 jobs in June and saw their number of unemployed decrease by 50,000.

AFRICAN AMERICAN TEENAGERS:

Unemployment Rate – 19.2%

Participation Rate – 30.0%

Employed – 651,000

Unemployed – 155,000

African American Teenagers unemployment rate increased by 480 basis points. The group saw their participation rate increased by 210 basis points in June. African American Teenagers added 10,000 jobs in May and saw their number of unemployed also decrease 41,000.

African American Men-Women Job Gap: African American Women currently have 496,000 more jobs than African American Men in June. This is an increase from 463,000 in May.

CONCLUSION: The overall economy added 147,000 jobs in June while African America lost 193,000 jobs. From CNN, “It is becoming harder for Americans to find work: The average duration of unemployment rose from 21.8 weeks to 23 weeks, and the share of unemployed workers who have been out of a job for 27 weeks or longer rose to 23.3%, edging closer to a three-year high. Trump’s tariffs — and the dizzying back and forth on implementing them and pausing them — has caused many businesses to stall major decision-making or spending, including hiring.”

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Monetary Illiteracy In The Halls Of Power: When Grandstanding Replaces Governing

“It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” — Aristotle

Each time Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell appears before Congress, particularly the House Financial Services Committee, a rare opportunity presents itself—one that could improve financial literacy at the highest levels of government and foster substantive dialogue on monetary policy’s profound impact on American households, businesses, and institutions. But that opportunity is almost always wasted.

Instead, the public is forced to endure yet another performance of political theater where elected officials, both Democrat and Republican, seem more concerned with going viral than going deep—more focused on five-minute gotchas than on fifty-year policy ramifications.

And for African America, whose economic institutions and family wealth face historic and systemic precarity, this continued dysfunction is not simply frustrating. It is dangerous.

The Purpose of Oversight or a Stage for Soundbites?

The Federal Reserve is arguably the most powerful economic institution in the world. Its chair, currently Jerome Powell, wields incredible influence over interest rates, inflation, labor markets, and the credit system. A hearing before Congress should be a time when policymakers probe deeply, ask sophisticated questions, and help inform the public through their own understanding.

Instead, what unfolds is often little more than ideological posturing. Members of Congress use their time to push personal or party agendas, cherry-pick statistics, or lob loaded questions with no intent of hearing the answer.

This isn’t oversight. It’s political performance art.

The House Financial Services Committee, charged with overseeing financial institutions, capital markets, and economic stability, must rise above this. Its role should be more than ceremonial. It should be educational—to itself and to the American people. But the overwhelming sense watching Powell’s recent testimonies is that most of the committee members lack even a basic understanding of how monetary policy functions, let alone how to interrogate it effectively.

Why It Matters for HBCUs and African American Economic Institutions

African America does not have the luxury of political and financial ignorance.

When inflation creeps higher, it isn’t just a line in a Bloomberg terminal. It is the difference between a Black student being able to afford books for the semester or choosing between groceries and tuition. It is a Black-owned small business having to lay off an employee because a loan’s interest rate jumped from 6% to 11%.

The lack of thoughtful interrogation of Powell’s monetary strategy reflects a more structural problem. There is a scarcity of African American economists in monetary policy circles. The Federal Reserve’s own ranks remain largely devoid of HBCU graduates, and few members of the House Financial Services Committee themselves come from economically marginalized backgrounds or have spent real time examining the consequences of macroeconomic policy on communities of color.

Yet these are the same communities most sensitive to interest rate swings, credit market freezes, or inflationary spikes.

And still, with this knowledge, Black America’s representatives—those on the committee and those adjacent—too often use their time during hearings for moral appeals or political slogans. But where is the policy meat? Where is the specificity? Where is the courage to press Powell on structural inequality in the Federal Reserve’s frameworks?

The Federal Reserve and the Myth of Neutrality

To be fair, the Federal Reserve, under Powell or any other chair, does not operate in a vacuum. But the institution often touts its political independence as a form of virtue. That independence, however, should not be mistaken for neutrality. The Fed’s policies have winners and losers.

From 2020 to 2022, the Fed’s monetary expansion saved financial markets—but also exploded asset prices, exacerbating wealth inequality. Homeowners gained equity. Renters fell behind. Banks consolidated more power while local lenders and community institutions—like Black banks—continued to struggle.

The committee could have questioned Powell on these outcomes. It could have demanded a racial wealth gap impact assessment of every major monetary policy decision. It could have interrogated how interest rate hikes disproportionately hurt historically marginalized borrowers. But those questions are never asked.

Instead, Powell is interrupted mid-sentence. Politicians talk over him. They make proclamations but ask no follow-ups. This behavior isn’t just disrespectful—it’s dangerous. And it’s a gross misuse of public time.

What HBCUs Can Teach Congress About Learning

At an HBCU, you learn that education is both a privilege and a weapon. It is something to be studied, sharpened, and used to build institutions. That approach—one rooted in discipline, humility, and preparation—is entirely missing from the House Financial Services Committee’s handling of monetary policy.

If a professor at Spelman or Howard or North Carolina A&T asked students to prepare a critique on central banking and one of those students responded with vague accusations or irrelevant political banter, they would be challenged to do better. Because rigor matters.

Imagine, instead, what would happen if HBCU economics departments had a seat at the table. Imagine if the committee regularly invited young scholars from Hampton, Morehouse, and FAMU to submit briefs or participate in Q&A sessions. Imagine a committee that used Powell’s visit as a chance to uplift new Black monetary scholars, who are often overlooked despite deep institutional knowledge.

There is no reason why an HBCU-trained economist should not be Chair of the Federal Reserve one day. But for that to happen, both access and expectation must change. We must expect more of Congress—and we must prepare ourselves to be in those seats.

The Price of Ignorance Is Paid in Communities Like Ours

Grandstanding doesn’t stabilize mortgage rates.

Political theater doesn’t ensure access to affordable credit.

Viral clips won’t help a Black farmer secure the funding needed to plant next season.

When the committee wastes its opportunity to genuinely understand and shape monetary policy, it abdicates responsibility for protecting those most vulnerable to economic volatility. Black communities cannot afford that negligence.

For instance, Powell was not questioned about how inflation-targeting might undervalue employment gains in Black communities. Nor was he asked whether the Fed’s models even consider racial employment disparities in real time. These are the kinds of questions that would surface if the committee viewed itself as learners—not performers.

A Call for Financial Statesmanship

What is needed in Congress is not just political courage but intellectual humility. An understanding that financial literacy is not just for constituents but must be a discipline practiced by lawmakers themselves.

The House Financial Services Committee could evolve into a place of high economic inquiry, a model of bipartisan dialogue around shared economic goals. But that will require members who read the footnotes of policy briefs, not just the headlines. Who consult experts across ideology. Who admit what they don’t know and ask better questions in return.

It also means creating a pipeline of informed staffers, many of whom should be HBCU-trained. Imagine a rotating fellowship where top students in finance and economics at Prairie View or Tuskegee serve one-year policy internships with members of Congress. Not only would this improve committee function, but it would democratize who gets to shape monetary discourse in the long run.

A Missed Opportunity That Cannot Keep Being Missed

Chair Powell is not infallible. His policies deserve scrutiny. But if the scrutiny is shallow, the Fed wins by default. Monetary policy deserves robust challenge—but that challenge must come with intellectual integrity, not political antics.

African American families, students, and business owners live with the real-world consequences of interest rate decisions every single day. They deserve elected officials who treat these hearings not as soundbite factories, but as classrooms—where hard questions are asked, where policies are dissected, and where the future is imagined more inclusively.

The Federal Reserve will always operate in the shadows unless Congress holds up a light. But to shine that light effectively, the House Financial Services Committee must first turn its cameras inward and ask whether it is performing or learning.

Because for communities like ours, the cost of their ignorance is far too high.

The Lisa Cook Doctrine: Monetary Policy In A Post-Globalization American

“Uncertainty is not an exception—it’s the economy’s new default. Our job isn’t to eliminate risk, but to build institutions resilient enough to thrive within it.” — Dr. Lisa D. Cook, Federal Reserve Governor & Spelman Alumna ’86

When Dr. Lisa D. Cook took the stage at the Council on Foreign Relations for the C. Peter McColough Series on International Economics, it was less a speech and more a declaration: the global economy is fragmenting, technology is compounding that fragmentation, and the Federal Reserve must remain nimble but principled in navigating this emerging disorder.

What makes Dr. Cook’s presence at the Federal Reserve so consequential is not simply her identity as the first African American woman to serve as a governor—though it is significant—but her lens. A lens forged not just through elite academic corridors, but one that dares to understand the edges of America’s economy—its marginalized labor markets, its precarious innovation system, and its uneven globalization. And if her remarks this week are any signal, Dr. Cook is actively shaping a monetary doctrine for this new epoch.

THE FEDERAL RESERVE AND ITS FRACTURED MANDATE

Dr. Cook reminded the audience that the Federal Reserve’s dual mandate—price stability and maximum employment—is being strained by new dynamics. Inflation, while down from pandemic-era peaks, remains stubbornly above target. Headline inflation is at 2.1 percent, core inflation at 2.5 percent—both still above the Fed’s 2 percent goal. On the employment side, job growth is steady, unemployment hovers at 4.2 percent, and labor force participation is not in freefall. But beneath these metrics lies disquiet.

That disquiet is coming from three fronts: trade protectionism, artificial intelligence, and long-term underinvestment in public innovation infrastructure.

In short, America’s economy is at a precipice—caught between inflation imported through tariffs and supply chain fragility, and deflationary pressures driven by automation and labor displacement.

Dr. Cook’s doctrine, it seems, is to hold the center.

TARIFFS: THE RETURN OF ECONOMIC NATIONALISM

Trade policy has re-entered the monetary discourse with a vengeance. For African American economists—and institutions like HBCUs that sit adjacent to both poor communities and international students from across the African diaspora—the discussion is no longer abstract. Dr. Cook underscored that tariffs, while politically popular, have a “nontrivial” inflationary effect.

Tariffs raise prices on imports, which businesses pass to consumers. But more importantly, they alter inflation expectations. And when inflation expectations become “unanchored,” monetary policy loses its credibility—and its traction.

This is not merely an economic concern, but a philosophical one. If the U.S. economy turns inward and abandons international trade cooperation, the financial consequences will not be equally shared. Institutions and people on the margins—like HBCUs, which rely on price-sensitive budgets and internationally sourced equipment—will be among the first to feel the tightening grip.

AI AND THE PRODUCTIVITY PARADOX

Artificial intelligence was one of the few bright spots in Dr. Cook’s analysis. While it introduces short-term labor displacement, it holds medium- to long-term potential for productivity gains, cost containment, and even inflation moderation.

Dr. Cook estimates productivity boosts from AI could range from 1 to 18 percent over the next decade. But this range, she admits, reflects the economic unknowns of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. For African American institutions, the message is twofold: AI will not wait for us to be ready, and without intentional investment in AI literacy and infrastructure, the economic benefits will bypass our communities entirely.

More than that, Dr. Cook emphasized the importance of how AI gets adopted. “It’s not job loss,” she clarified. “It’s task replacement.” The nuance matters. Black workers and businesses must advocate for job redesign, not job removal. This requires an active policy partnership between labor, government, and educational institutions.

HBCUs, with their historical ability to adapt curricula to new economic paradigms, have a window here. The time to build AI research centers, ethics think tanks, and public-private tech fellowships is not tomorrow—it is now.

UNCERTAINTY IS THE NEW NORMAL

Dr. Cook invoked former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke’s guidance: in times of heightened uncertainty, policymakers must plan for multiple scenarios. In Fed speak, this means optionality. In HBCU speak, this means resilience.

The Federal Reserve is not in a rate-cutting mood. Nor is it eager to hike. It is watching. And waiting. And watching some more. “The current stance is balanced,” Dr. Cook affirmed. “But that balance could shift in either direction.”

For HBCU leadership—especially those managing endowments, student financial aid disbursements, or capital investment strategies—this moment requires uncommon dexterity. Inflation could reaccelerate. Or the economy could cool into a stagflationary trap. The key is planning for a 2 percent interest world and a 6 percent one.

INNOVATION: TWENTY YEARS TO FRUITION

Perhaps the most poignant segment of Dr. Cook’s remarks came not from inflation or tariffs or AI—but from her reflections on innovation and time.

“It can take twenty years or more,” she noted, “from the time a student conceives an idea to the point it becomes a product on the market.”

That is a sobering timeline. And it is why public investment in basic research, early-stage science, and academic freedom matters so much. The ecosystem that birthed Silicon Valley started with small government grants, eccentric professors, and graduate students with uncertain job prospects.

For HBCUs, the lesson is urgent: waiting for federal investment in Black innovation ecosystems is no longer tenable. Institutions must pool their resources, coordinate R&D pipelines, and build their own version of the National Science Foundation if need be.

Tuskegee University had its agricultural labs. Howard had its medical research. North Carolina A&T and Prairie View have their engineering corridors. But the next phase of Black institutional development must consolidate these assets into a coordinated force, backed by investment funds, intellectual property banks, and patent commercialization arms.

THE GLOBAL BACKDROP: COORDINATION WITHOUT UNITY

On the global stage, Dr. Cook walked a careful line. She acknowledged that while central banks maintain regular dialogue—through G-7, G-20, OECD platforms—there is no grand consensus. Different countries have different mandates. The European Central Bank is laser-focused on inflation. The Bank of Japan must navigate currency volatility. The People’s Bank of China has geopolitical motives laced through its monetary calculus.

The Federal Reserve cannot outsource its decisions to global peers. But it can learn from them.

For African American policy circles and HBCU economics departments, this is a call to global literacy. We must teach our students to read the central bank minutes from Frankfurt, London, and Accra as readily as they read those from Washington.


INSTITUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS FOR HBCUs

What, then, should HBCU presidents, CFOs, and policy offices take from Dr. Cook’s remarks?

  1. Protect Purchasing Power
    Inflation—especially if prolonged—can erode real endowment spending. HBCUs must explore inflation-hedged assets, indexed tuition strategies, and energy-efficient infrastructure.
  2. Reimagine Labor Pipelines
    AI and global trade will redefine job descriptions. HBCUs must preemptively build training programs, certification pathways, and innovation hubs aligned with the labor market of 2030—not 2010.
  3. Internalize Innovation
    If innovation takes 20 years, then we must stop relying on outside institutions to fund our intellectual property journey. We must build our own innovation endowments, grant programs, and incubators.
  4. Globalize Strategically
    As America turns inward, HBCUs must look outward—toward African economies, Caribbean partnerships, and Latin American markets. Diversifying donor bases, research collaborations, and student recruitment internationally is no longer luxury. It is imperative.
  5. Endowment Defense Against Rate Risk
    Whether rates rise or fall, HBCU financial managers must adopt more active duration management strategies and review fixed income allocations accordingly.

FINAL THOUGHT: THE JUDGMENT ECONOMY

Dr. Cook’s final words were a reminder that even in an era of algorithms and quantitative models, human judgment remains central.

The economy cannot be automated. And neither can policy. The strength of institutions, including the Federal Reserve, still rests on the character and clarity of its leaders.

For HBCUs and African American institutions broadly, Dr. Cook’s rise—and her vision—should be both inspiration and instruction. It is not enough to be present in the room. One must bring a philosophy. A framework. A doctrine.

The Lisa Cook Doctrine, if there is one, is clear: do not panic, do not stagnate, and never underestimate the power of intentional innovation guided by principled policy.

In an uncertain world, that kind of leadership is the rarest form of capital.