Telling the Story of Slavery and the White House

By: Tynesia Boyea-Robinson

History is complicated because it reflects the thoughts, beliefs and perspectives of the storyteller.  American History is particularly fraught because it has far too often erased the narratives of the people most central to the country’s founding; indigenous Native American people and enslaved Africans and their descendants.  Black History month is a peculiar and important answer to this profound historical erasure, a catch-all time of the year when we lift up and celebrate the stories that often aren’t told, and sometimes forgotten.

This type of erasure is something experienced by most people of color at some point in their lives.  I have grappled with erasure many times in my life, but none as stark as my experience while touring the Decatur House, the first private home in the White House neighborhood, built in 1818.  The White House Historical Association hosted our guided tour as part of the kickoff week of the Presidential Leadership Scholars program.  I was excited to join the fourth cohort of 59 leaders from across the country, chosen for their commitment to community service and bipartisanship.

My classmates and I meandered through the impeccably preserved home, learning about the storied lives of the Decaturs, and the myriad of foreign and American dignitaries including Henry Clay, Martin Van Buren and Edward Livingston who inhabited the residence over the generations since our country’s founding.  Our tour guide was deeply  well versed in the history of the property owners, the art hanging on the walls, and even the furniture and fixtures. But as we followed her down a narrow staircase and walked gingerly into a seemingly forgotten room towards the back of the home, I tensed up, sensing where we were.  I asked with some trepidation, “What was this room used for,” and braced myself for the answer. 

“This was the slave quarters, “but we now use it for our ongoing educational program for surrounding schools.” My throat tightened and my senses heightened, as often happens when you experience the effects of erasure.  Several of us were sitting uncomfortably in diminutive backless stools, akin to preschool chairs, in tight rows in the narrow space.  Several of my classmates peppered the unassuming tour guide with questions ranging from surprise that slavery existed in the North in an  urban setting to curiosity about  the number of  “slaves” who lived  in a room this size. Shortly into the conversation, the tour guide was both fatigued with the line of questioning and had exhausted her knowledge of the subject matter.  Looking around the room, one of my colleagues  joked that the space was about the same size as a row house for staffers in DC.  

I shuddered. People say it is difficult to hate up close, and I would argue that it is equally difficult to love in secret.  How can you love ancestors when their contributions are at best joked about and at worst denied?  How do you believe that their stories matter—that your stories matter—when those histories are not respected?  I glanced at my fellow black scholars whose pained faces mirrored my own.  Instead of speaking up, we sunk lower in our seats, conditioned to accept the erasure,  and whispered only to one another of our pain in the shadows.

Yet then something happened.  As our tour guide rounded up our class to move to the next section of the house, Alanah Odoms, a New Orleans  civil rights lawyer  who champions  justice in her personal and professional life, pulled the person who made the joke aside. The pair trailed behind the group as Alanah shared gently but firmly why the comment was offensive. I hovered within earshot as I witnessed two things that would change me forever. The first is that Alanah was not shackled by silence.  She unapologetically imparted  our shared truth of outrage from a place of confidence and care.  The second was that our colleague was receptive to the feedback and listened with a spirit of learning and humility.

How was it possible that these two strangers could openly engage with each other on a topic that I so often avoided in unfamiliar and unstructured environments?  I  learned the hard way that when you raise issues of race without support or infrastructure, the end result is too often dismissal and exclusion—or, I am quickly labeled an angry black woman. 

Yet I took inspiration both from Alanah and the untold stories of my ancestors and made a decision. At  our large group conversation about the tour, I asked my fellow scholars to join together and ask the White House Historical Association (WHHA) to document and memorialize the history of enslaved people at the Decatur House.  

Once I spoke my truth, I was shocked at how quickly our class sprung to action.  Alanah spearheaded an effort to engage board members armed with research provided by Isabel Gonzalez, an influential author and editor.  Mary Reding, a tenacious attorney dedicated to gold star families, and Brian Wolff, a prolific energy advocate and philanthropist, led fundraising.  Dr Loren Robinson and Dr Christina Grant, who at the time were both transforming Philadelphia through health and education respectively, devised a curation and education strategy.  Together we made the case for WHHA to establish a dedicated exhibit and resources to support the restoration of the neglected “slave” quarters at the Decatur House coupled with interactive educational materials for the public.

Eight months after our visit to Decatur House, the WHHA completely transformed the slave quarters to capture the stories of enslaved Americans and their role in the White House neighborhood.  And almost two years to the day, WHHA announced their new initiative, Slavery in the President’s Neighborhood. 

We often want to tie stories like these up in a bow by congratulating ourselves for what we achieved and glossing over the challenges along the way.  I would argue that succumbing to the instinct to distill and oversimplify creates the enabling conditions for perpetuating our culture of erasure.  In my professional life, I provide organizations with tools to rewire this instinct.

My day job is helping institutions rebuild their approach to capitalism to achieve social impact and racial equity.  As you may imagine, this type of work often results in tense interactions.  Our work with WHHA was no different.  I’ve learned that instead of litigating the past, it is often more helpful to highlight the patterns across similar work to enable behavior change.  Most organizations confronting inequity and their role in perpetuating it experience a range of emotions that result in unproductive interactions.  The diagram below captures the four typical reactions.

It is the rare organization that produces quality results once they reach step four.  And even when they do, the gravitational force of erasure is unrelenting even in very supportive and progressive environments.  What this looks like in practice is lauding the White House as the symbol of freedom and power while suffocating the stories of Americans who have neither.  The difference, as is the case with so many things, is leadership.

These barriers can be overcome when leaders like WHHA President Steward McLaurin take risks on a new project; when visionaries like Secretary of Smithsonian Dr Lonnie Bunch create historical monuments that are beautiful because of their balance of pain and possibility; and when 59 strangers can unite in service of lifting every voice.  I wept when I entered the slave quarters in Decatur House and as I read the names of my ancestors who contributed to building this country.  Together we had broken the shackles of silence.  And in one small pocket of our nation’s celebrated and paradoxical journey, black history was finally synonymous with American history.

I asked two former presidents how they accomplished big things. Their answers surprised me.

What makes a great leader? I used to think I knew.

And then I met Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

On the face of it, the former presidents appear quite dissimilar: they’re from different parties and their administrations often espoused contradictory policies. Yet, both were able to institute bold initiatives to help those less fortunate. And they did it, they say, by putting aside their differences with others in order to achieve common goals.

I met the two former presidents through the Presidential Leadership Scholars (PLS) program, a bipartisan initiative sponsored by the presidential centers of Lyndon Johnson, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush.

At a panel discussion I was involved in at this year’s graduation, the two men discussed leadership and critical issues facing our nation. President Clinton told the graduating class a story about attending a dinner when he was the governor of Arkansas with then-President George H.W. Bush. During the dinner, Hillary Clinton brought up the nation’s high infant mortality rate and her desire to reduce it. The elder President Bush didn’t believe the numbers, says President Clinton. Mrs. Clinton offered to send him the data, but he said he’d get it himself.

True to his word, the next day President Bush handed Hillary Clinton a note. “Hillary,” it read, “I checked the figures. You were right. I was wrong. What can we do about this?”

Bush would go on to create the interagency White House Task Force to Reduce Infant Mortality and the Healthy Start program, with a goal to reduce infant mortality by 50% in five years.

Subsequently, President and Mrs. Clinton picked up the work begun by President Bush. Collaborating with such unlikely allies as Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy and Republican Senator Orrin Hatch, they created the State Children’s Health Insurance Program — the largest expansion of publicly-funded health insurance coverage for children since the establishment of Medicaid in 1965.

Similarly, after he took office, George W. Bush surprised many of his critics when he committed funds to the Mother and Child HIV Prevention Initiative in an effort to save the lives of 150,000 babies in Africa. And then, breaking with the orthodoxy of many in his own party, Bush worked with congressional leaders of all stripes to pass the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR — a multi-billion dollar program that one analysis found reduced HIV/AIDS by 28 percent, saving 1.1 million lives in its first three years.

The examples set by these men have inspired many of us to champion initiatives based on shared values. Recently, the Clinton Foundation, working with the George W. Bush Institute, convened a panel of PLS alumni to explore opportunities to address America’s opioid crisis. Needless to say, my fellow panelists and I come from diverse backgrounds, represent a host of political views and have very strong opinions about the best way to address the crisis.

Which is precisely the point. The only way we’ll make progress toward ending the opioid epidemic is by pushing one another to dance through the edge of discomfort so that we can find the common ground that will allow us to overcome our differences, challenge the status quo, and work toward a common goal.

“While men inhabiting different parts of this vast continent cannot be expected to hold the same opinions, they can unite in a common objective and sustain common principles,” said Franklin Pierce, our nation’s fourteenth president. I hope this Presidents week, you’ll join me in celebrating the presidents who dreamt big and achieved big things by uniting in common objectives and sustaining common principles. Because that’s when the most productive partnerships emerge – even among the most unlikely of partners.

PLS Spotlight: Hunter Taylor

Class of 2018’s Hunter Taylor tells us about his experience with PLS, life after the program, and shares advice for the Class of 2020.

Q: Please tell us a little bit about yourself and your personal leadership project (PLP).

A: I am a professor in the School of Education at the University of Mississippi where I also help lead its alternate-route graduate teaching program, The Mississippi Teacher Corps (MTC). My PLP had to do with adding an additional cohort to MTC (at the time, we just had one consisting of 25-35 each year spread throughout the state), and placing all of the participants exclusively in the Jackson area. Jackson Public Schools (JPS) is the only urban school district in the state, and it had one of the largest teacher shortages across the South. My PLP sought to utilize all of the great things about our program (MTC) and focus its efforts on one school district. 

Q: How did PLS help you develop your PLP?

A: It helped dramatically. The original idea was for the University of Mississippi (UM) to be the main player in the equation. After hearing several talks about strategic partnerships and being advised by my colleagues in our breakout sessions, my project eventually morphed into a joint-partnership between UM and JPS. Leaders from both sides have an equal say in how the program will be implemented, and leaders from both sides will teach the graduate courses that the new program’s alternate-route teachers take. It now truly feels like a real partnership between university and school district, which is incredibly rare.

Q: Since PLS, how has your PLP evolved? What are you working on now?

A: I referenced in the previous question the biggest changes made to the PLP. Another thing to note though is how my original timeline got altered. I think everyone who participates in PLS feels to a certain degree this desire to want to prove you belong. I badly wanted my PLP to be launched by the end of my time in the program. It didn’t happen. Now, I’m grateful that it didn’t, because we have a better project ready to launch this summer. However, that was something I had to get over. The spirit of PLS is service to others. The project was never to be about me, but I needed to be gently reminded by my loving wife of this important truth when things weren’t going as planned.

In the meantime, I’ve gotten to focus on one of my favorite research areas: coaching education. Prior to joining academia, I was a basketball coach for 10 years. I’m also the son of a 45-year Texas High School football coach. I want to make the profession better and be able to share more “best practices” with coaches across the state of Mississippi. Over the past three years, I’ve advised the football coaching staff at Oxford High School, and this past year my father even joined the staff as an assistant. Each year, the head coach and I injected improvement science methods into his program that focused on improving the team’s culture, developing future player-leaders, and maximizing the team’s on-field potential. I’m very proud to say that this past season we won the school’s first state championship in school history and were named the No. 1 team in the state of Mississippi by Max Preps. It was even sweeter, because I got to do this with my father. 

The head coach and I recently launched a digital platform where we share some of our best practices that we uncovered over the past three years. Through this platform, we offer a leadership workshop that schools, businesses, and organizations can take; we launched a podcast where we seek out other expert coaches to ask them about their journeys and best practices; and we are hosting the region’s first ever coaching clinic

Q: Which lessons learned during PLS have stayed with you the most?

A: The strategic partnerships piece that was emphasized so much during our time in College Station at the Bush Library. This session further confirmed my belief that teams accomplish greatness, not individuals. It doesn’t matter if it’s an idea, a policy, or a business plan, they all advance farther by having other people involved. It’s more enjoyable too. How lonely would it be to achieve things by yourself???

Q: How do you put those lessons into action?

A: In regards to MTC, I think I do such a better job of getting students involved in helping our organization create ideas where we can have a larger impact. I still remember one lesson from the Little Rock session where a speaker said, “You need to try to invite people to the table who normally aren’t invited.” Some of the best ideas we’ve generated in the past year have come from our students. 

Also, when it came time to think through launching a platform to reach more coaches in the state, I partnered with a practitioner. There are insights he adds when we create new content that only he sees, because he is still actively coaching. It’s also made this new venture so much fun, because I’m sharing the journey with a great friend.

Q: What advice do you have for the 2020 Scholars?

A:Be present. So many people would love to have your seat. You owe it to them, yourself, and your organization to be fully engaged during every module. This is the type of experience that could SIGNIFICANTLY impact your life (personal & professional) if you approach it the right way.  I wish you the absolute best!

2020 Module One Recap

In January, the 2020 Class of Presidential Leadership Scholars (PLS) kicked off the sixth year of the program in Washington, D.C.

The latest class joins an active network of 298 Scholars who are applying lessons learned through the program to make a difference in the U.S. and around the world. Examples of these Scholar-led efforts include providing employment and mentorship to veteranshelping developing nations access safe anesthesia services for effective surgical careempowering women with economic opportunity through clean energy in Africa, and deploying much needed resources in the wake of natural disasters.

In D.C., Scholars had the opportunity to hear from:

  • Anita McBride, former Assistant to President George W. Bush and Chief of Staff to Mrs. Laura Bush, and current Executive-in-Residence at the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies in the School of Public Affairs at American University;
  • Sylvia Burwell, former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services and President of American University;
  • Dr. Lonnie Bunch, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institute;
  • David Rubenstein, Co-founder and Co-CEO of the Carlyle Group;
  • Richard Norton Smith, American historian and author specializing in US presidents;
  • Holly Kuzmich, Executive Vice President of the George W. Bush Institute and Senior Vice President of the George W. Bush Presidential Center;
  • Stephanie S. Streett, former Assistant to the President and Director of Scheduling and Executive Director of the Clinton Foundation;
  • Dr. Mike Hemphill, Director of Leadership Development, Clinton Foundation and Co-Director, Presidential Leadership Scholars;
  • Michael O’Leary, Professor at the McDonough School of Business at Georgetown University;
  • Keith Hennessey, former Assistant to the President for Economic Policy and Director of the U.S. National Economic Council, and Lecturer of Economics at Stanford Graduate School of Business;
  • Todd Connor, Presidential Leadership Scholar and CEO of Bunker Labs

Notable tweets from the module included:

Check out some photos from the week:

Scholars took a break from the classroom to partake in Iron Chef style team building at Culinaerie.
“History was initially a way for me to understand who I was and what I was doing. And then it became the love of my life.” – Dr. Lonnie Bunch
David Rubenstein speaks to the Scholars with Bush Center CEO Ken Hersh.
Mike Hemphill poses for a selfie with PLS alumni.
Keith Hennessey provides a session on values and tones in leadership.

Over the next six months, the 2020 Class of Presidential Leadership Scholars will visit each of the four partnering presidential centers with unprecedented access to former presidents, their administrations officials, and the unique resources of the libraries to enhance their own leadership abilities in order to make a positive difference in the world. Stay tuned for our next update from the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum in College Station, Texas.

To learn more about the Presidential Leadership Scholars program, visit www.presidentialleadershipscholars.org. For updates about the Presidential Leadership Scholars, use #PLScholars or follow @PLSprogram on Twitter and Instagram.