Source: ESPN.com

Well it’s clear to see where UCLA’s antennas are directed. The university appears to be tired of going after old money, they want to tap into that hip-hop cash cow because after awarding Diddy’s son Justin an unnecessarily controversial full football scholarship, word is they’ve also offered Snoop’s son one.

According to USA Today:

Cordell Broadus, son of rapper Snoop Dogg, received a scholarship offer from UCLA. Broadus will be entering his sophomore year at Diamond Bar High School this fall.

Listed at 6-2 and 185 pounds, he played wide receiver and defensive back for the freshman team last season.

Cordell transferred to Diamond Bar from Long Beach Poly last fall and like UCLA, his coach Ryan Maine told ESPN he likes what he sees so far.

“We’re expecting him to really lead us the next three years. Hopefully get bigger, stronger and keep leading this team.”

Cordell no doubt gets pointers from big snoopy d-o-double-gizzle who coaches how own youth football league. When ESPN asked him how he feels about the paths his older sons are taking—his oldest, Corde, just graduated from Diamond Bar and is headed into the music biz—Snoop said this:

“Both my boys had normal existences. No real drama in the house. No real drama outside. They are all good.”

UCLA is trying to be all good with their hip-hop support too, Cordell still has a few years to make a decision though.

Brande Victorian is the news and operations editor for madamenoire.com. Follow her on twitter @Be_Vic.

More on Madame Noire!

• Bet You Didn’t Know: Secrets Behind The Making of School Daze
• They’ve Got a Story To Tell: Celebs Who Went From Top Ramen to Top Dollar
• If I Wanted to Deal With Kids, I’d Have My Own: A Letter to Parents Who Think Everyone Loves Their Kid as Much as They Do
• Let’s Talk, Ladies: Are You Afraid Of The “S” Word?
• My Story: For Colored Girls Who’ve Considered Suicide When the Law Couldn’t Protect Them From Incest
• Evening Eye Candy: NFL Baller Ray Edwards
• HALF ON A BABY: The Top 7 Ways You’ll Know He’s Ready For Kids

Source: Extratv.com

Diddy’s son Justin is feeling a lot of pressure these days and dealing with backlash that’s totally wrapped up in his race and his wealth, i.e., rich black people problems.

Everyone has an opinion on what the 18-year-old should do with the four-year, $54,000 merit-based (keyword) scholarship he accepted to attend UCLA which has people asking, should he have accepted it in the first place? Should he give it up? Should he donate it? Not to mention, who’s paying for it? But at the end of the day it comes down to one simple fact. Justin Combs, him, himself, and he, earned it all by hard work.

I admit, I was in the donation camp when I first heard the news about his scholarship. I’m pretty sure the ghost of Sallie Mae was haunting my thoughts and all I could think was that he doesn’t really need that money and how cool would it be for another student who will likely have to take out outrageous loans to pay for an education to now have a chance to go to school. Thankfully, looking at comments on the subject from a number of different sites opened my eyes enormously and now I can see I was full-blown trippin.’

The piece I totally missed in this entire discussion and celebration of this young man’s achievement, which has been overshadowed by this scholarship foolishness, is the awesome example Justin is setting for black males, rich and poor alike. If Diddy was our daddy how many of us would be thinking about college? Let along how many of us would have been focused enough to earn a 3.75 GPA while being a star on the football team? That’s not a common story that’s told, especially about black men and no one should try to take away his shine by making him appear to be at fault for working toward academic and athletic excellence and being rewarded for it accordingly. Sure Justin would have likely gone to school for free anyway on his father’s dime, but Diddy didn’t get Justin into school, Justin got himself into school—for free—and I think he’s an amazing example of self-determination and a young man who, as his mother said, “is his own man,” and who will “earn his way through life.” How many rich kids out there can say the same? Certainly not the ones we always talk about in media headlines.

Perhaps it’s the fact that the university had used more than $2 million from student fees to cover an athletic department funding gap the year before that has everyone in a tizzy, but what does that have to do with Justin? Why is this boy in some ways being punished for excelling simply because of who his father is? As many people have pointed out, is this type of fuss ever made over the children of white CEOs and businessmen who could easily afford to pay for their kid’s education but don’t because their children excelled in the classroom and earned free rides. Why is Justin any different?

With the taxpayer nonsense killed thanks to a statement from UCLA that reinforced the fact that this scholarship is merit- and not needs-based, people really need to let this go. I feel like this discussion has grown to the level of Obama’s birther debate and people won’t be satisfied until they find some sort of way to take away from the success of a black man and it’s just not fair. Justin needs to be allowed to have his moment and to say when all was said and done that he put himself through college. If he wants to donate his scholarship to someone else, I think that’s amazing. And if he doesn’t that’s amazing as well. We should demand nothing more from him then we do other men from wealthy backgrounds who earn scholarships the same as he did. And when we see a man exceed expectations like this, we should celebrate it without reservation.

What do you think about the Justin Combs scholarship debate? Is there any merit to it?

Brande Victorian is a blogger and culture writer in New York City. Follower her on Twitter at @be_vic.

More on Madame Noire!

• Allow Me To Vent: Why I Can’t Take The Black Salon Culture
• Where Are They Now? 10 Black Actresses Who Should Have Blown Up Big…
• How Important Is Sex? My Journey Through Celibacy and Dating
• Cute Kid Alert: Roc and Roe Continue Jet-setting, Solange and Daniel, DWade’s Fam and More
• True Life: The Revenge Was Sweet…or Sour
• Kanye I Want You To Take Your Own Advice: Drive Slow Homie
• Uh, Somebody Lied to You: 8 Misconceptions About Single Black Women

Although the racial gaps in many areas of life are closing slightly in the U.S., research says that there is still a significant gap in black life expectancy compared to that of our white counterparts. In a newly released Health Services Research study conducted by UCLA, blacks continue to live shorter lives than whites in every state in the U.S. on average, as white females live five years longer than black females and white men live seven years longer than black males.

As a part of the university’s study, the disparities are broken down by state and the average life expectancy years in between the two races. New Mexico, with the smallest disparity, has a gap of 3.76 years for men and 2.45 years for women as the average life span difference. The nation’s capital, Washington D.C., has the largest life expectancy gap, with white females living 8.55 years longer than black females and a shocking 13.77 years between the lives of the average black and white males living in the District.

The discouraging study concludes that eliminating disparities in states with the largest African-American population would impact these numbers drastically, a positive solution for the following 10 U.S. states where over 58 percent of the country’s blacks reside: New York, California, Texas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, North Carolina, Maryland, Missouri and Louisiana. In contrast, states like Kentucky, West Virginia, Nevada, Oklahoma and Washington reported smaller year gaps in life expectancy, but coincidentally, these smaller numbers were not the result of blacks with longer life span, but due to whites with shorter life spans than the national average.

With the national average life expectancy being 74.79 years for white men and 67.66 years for black men and 79.84 years for white women in comparison to 74.64 years for black women, it is clear that the statistical odds of living longer than whites in many states seems bleak.

Various factors have led to these figures that work against our community as a whole, as well as the quality of life. Experts note that key factors impact the life span of the average American, which include accessibility to health care, HIV/AIDS, homicide, obesity, diabetes and other health and life risks that are statistically proven to be disproportionately more present in the black community.

According to the study, the accessibility to health care plays a major role, stating:

“Federal and state health policies that simply concentrate on the black–white difference in a geographic region may miss important opportunities to improve overall population health or significantly reduce disparity at the national level… Blacks make up a disproportionate percentage of the low-income, Medicaid-eligible population, and we found that Massachusetts and New York, two states where black populations have longer-than-expected life expectancy, are also the states that have expanded Medicaid coverage.”

Knowing that these factors play a key role in our life span more so than they do for others in America, we must be conscious of our health and well-being in order to live more healthy and longer. That includes everything from evaluating our eating habits and our lifestyle choices, being aware of our bodies inside and out, having access to healthcare, helping slow violent crimes in our communities and a lot more.

Are we doing enough as a community to live longer? How can we combat this issue with our lifestyles to close the gap?

More on Madame Noire!

• Dating While Separated? You Were Asking For Trouble Adrian Wilson
• He Had That Masculine Thing DOWN: 8 Mannish R&B Singers
• Should Non-African Blacks Be Cast in African Roles?
• The Black Snob Sounds Off: The 7 Kinds of Men Who Make Life Miserable For Everyone
• 6 Times You’ll Have To Accept No Sex For A While
• That’s My Cousin! Famous Black Celebrities Who Are Related
• MN Exclusive: Tashera Simmons on Why Therapy Was “Life Changing” For Her and DMX
• 4 DIY Home-Made Facial Masks To Rejuvenate Your Skin

By J. Smith

UCLA’s Anderson Graduate School of Management is willing to forsake the funding provided by the state in exchange for the right to act as an independent institution. If the deal is approved, the school would be allowed to function as though it was a private university, and it would save exponentially in the process. A victory for the Anderson Graduate School of Management could mean a potential victory for other prestigious professional schools hoping to cut the costs incurred by operating publicly and go private.

If Judy Olian, dean of the business school, is able to see her proposal to fruition, she will forfeit all state funding for her academic programs in exchange for “self-sufficiency.” That would grant her increased power to arbitrarily raise tuition and to pay prized professors competitive wages instead of the ones sanctioned by its larger governing body. “The rise in tuition and earnings from a presumed growth in the endowment would make up the shortfall,” CNN Money reports. “The business school would also be able to plan better without having to worry about appropriations catfights in the California legislature.”

Although the graduate school has the support of UCLA’s central administration, opponents argue that the change would be economically unfair. “The Anderson proposal, according to a faculty senate report, ‘does not account for the asset value of the school and the investment value to California taxpayers…from 75+ years of state support’,” CNN reports. “But the larger complaint is philosophical. They say ‘self-sufficiency’ is ‘privatization’ by any other name – which ought to be anathema to a school claiming a continuing ‘commitment to the public mission of the university.’”

Mission statements aside, it essentially boils down to a matter of profit. While the tax-paying community’s investment in the public university is threatened, the opportunity to double tuition dollars trumps that longstanding bond. Other schools – like the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business – went into self-sufficiency nearly 10 years ago and has since increased the size of the student body by one-third, raised tuition and fees to $52,000 and taken the reigns over its own budget, CNN Money reports.

With more schools looking to save money and escape federal regulations, universities across the country are looking to self-sufficiency as an out.

by R. Asmerom

Everyone knows that California has been experiencing a colossal financial crisis but are things so bad that the public university system needs to go hierarchal?

Amid budget cuts and staff layoffs, some are advocating that each of the 10 University of California schools determine its tuition rate. This would most certainly result in schools like UC Berkeley and UCLA charging more tuition than less competitive counterparts like Santa Cruz. This plan would align with the supply and demand principles, advocates say, but how does supply and demand enter the equation when it comes to public education?

Critics of the proposal worry that it could create disunity within the UC system and create an elitist environment, as obviously the more pricey, and more competitive, schools would become less accessible to students needing financial aid.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the idea of price differentials in public universities is nothing new.  University of Texas at Austin and University of Wisconsin at Madison are allowed to charge higher tuition than the other state schools in their respective networks.

At a recent Regents meeting, UC Santa Cruz Chancellor George R. Blumenthal expressed grave concern over the idea.

If different rates were allowed, he predicted that UC Berkeley would raise tuition the full 25% in “a micro second” and others would quickly follow, not wanting to be left behind in money or reputation. “I think once we go down that road, it could mean that some campuses may not be accessible to large segments of California students,” he said. (Source: LA Times)