Archive for June, 2010
This CNN story reveals some of the complications that crop up when the government asks people to state their race on government forms.
According to a new government report, some Census workers “incorrectly communicated” questions about race during face-to-face interviews, and others made assumptions about the race of interviewees based on appearance.
The story frames the problem as miscommunication and incorrect assumptions (one-drop rule redux?) about interviewees. The real problem is the government asking Americans to state their race. Not only should the government not ask about race, the more multiracial America becomes, the more difficult it will be to classify people along rigid racial or ethnic lines.
One of the Census Bureau’s frequently asked questions is why the Census asks about race. The answer (PDF):
“Information on race is required for many federal programs and is critical in making policy decisions, particularly for civil rights. States use these data to meet legislative redistricting principles. Race data also are used to promote equal employment opportunities and to assess racial disparities in health and environmental risks.”
Why is race critical in making policy decisions, and how does checking a box on a form “promote equal employment opportunities”? Government policy is supposed to be colorblind, and the law protects the rights of all individuals, regardless of race. If someone faces racial discrimination, he may seek redress. Checking a box on a government form doesn’t protect his rights.
As to racial disparities, they are not proof of discrimination. The government too often uses the existence of disparities as an excuse to grant preferences to people based on race. As some races are more susceptible to certain diseases, however, collecting race for medical data may be legitimate. But this exception doesn’t require people to check race boxes on forms unrelated to medical data collection.
Why haven’t “we the people” demanded our government stop the race-box practice? If you’re as frustrated about it as I am, sign the Decline to State Race petition, and let’s try to turn the project into a national movement. Government policy should be colorblind, but America won’t accomplish the goal unless we retire the government from the race business.
Filed under: General | |1 Comment
California’s Proposition 209, which amended the state constitution to bar the government from granting preferences to or discriminating against individuals or groups based on race, faces legal challenges after almost 14 years. The Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, and Immigration Rights By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) filed suit earlier this year, and the Pacific Legal Foundation seeks to intervene in the federal lawsuit.
Laurie Morrow, blogging for the Democracy Project, comments on the latest challenge to overturn the voters’ will in California.
“Rather than defend the will of California voters and the Ninth Circuit, defendants Governor Schwarzenegger, President Yudof, and the University of California Board of Regents have moved to be dismissed from the [BAMN] suit.
“Unlike those entrusted with the governance of the state of California and of its state institutions of higher education, other citizens have the moral courage to demand California’s constitution remain in alignment with Dr. King’s dream and with the will of the people. The California Association of Scholars, the Pacific Legal Foundation, and Ward Connerly, himself a former University of California Regent, a member of the California Association of Scholars, and President of the American Civil Rights Institute, have jointly filed a motion to defend Proposition 209. Here is the Pacific Legal Foundation’s case summary; you can also download a copy of the Motion to Intervene from the same page.
…
“Not everyone shares Dr. King’s belief that a colorblind society is a good thing. Some prefer a society that recognizes race as a qualification for a job or for admission to a college.”
This point can’t be stressed enough. Allowing our government to consider race a job or admissions qualification is a dangerous proposition. Among preference proponents, such policies that favor blacks are “good”; policies that favor whites are “bad.” But a government with the power to discriminate in favor of blacks also has the power to discriminate against blacks. The goal is to keep government from granting preferences to or discriminating against individuals based on race for any reason.
Californians who support colorblind government policy should support candidates committed to protecting and defending Proposition 209.
Filed under: Judiciary | |Comments off
Although federal law allows states to bar felons from voting, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that Washington state is violating the Voting Rights Act by barring felons from voting.
Sharon Browne, lead attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation, and Roger Clegg, president and general counsel of the Center for Equal Opportunity, co-wrote an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, in which they argue otherwise. An excerpt of: “Felons have lost their right to vote.”
“If a state were to use its felon disenfranchisement laws deliberately to keep blacks from voting, as was sometimes done in the Jim Crow era, then it is clear it would be in violation of the Constitution, and the Supreme Court has so ruled. But what if there is no such discriminatory intent: Is it enough to show that a disproportionate number of, say, African Americans are in prison?
“The answer is clearly no when it comes to the Constitution. The claim in Farrakhan, however, is that such disproportionate ‘results’ are enough to prove a violation of the federal voting rights law. The intent and history of the law refutes this claim.
…
“What’s more, the Constitution explicitly assumes that felons may be barred from voting. The 14th Amendment — which, like the 15th, was passed during Reconstruction to ensure equal treatment of African Americans — acknowledges that states can disenfranchise people for ‘participation in rebellion, or other crime.’ So an interpretation of the Voting Rights Act to bar felon disenfranchisement would not only be inconsistent with the intent of that statute, it would exceed Congress’ constitutional authority.”
Filed under: Judiciary, Roger Clegg | |Comments off
A non-English-speaking woman living in an English-speaking city in an English-speaking country was robbed. She couldn’t find a cop who spoke Spanish. Someone in the Boston Police Department told her she needed to speak English. (Source)
From this anecdote, which the woman shared at a city council meeting, we get this:
“The executive director of the advocacy group, Oíste, Negretti blamed the experience on a shortage of blacks and Latinos in higher positions and specialized units on the Boston Police Dept. Negretti contends the shortage hurts performance and perception, even hampering the ability to combat youth violence.”
How about hiring Spanish-speaking officers of any color to translate for Spanish speakers? Would that qualify as a diversity effort, or would the police department be coerced to hire based on race?
Police Commissioner Ed Davis seized the opportunity at the city council meeting to complain about the pencil-and-paper civil service exams on which hiring and promoting decisions are based. He said the exams are barriers to minority hiring and aren’t valid for measuring an applicant’s or candidate’s skills in any case. Davis also said, “I will not change my standards. I will not pick people based on race. They have to do the job.”
According to the article, minorities account for 40 percent of the appointed (by Davis) command staff, “above the levels when the department still used race-based hiring,” but for positions in which a civil service exam is required, the numbers are lower.
Draw your own conclusions.
Complaints lodged and lawsuits filed against the use of objective, valid employment exams signify a slow march toward their extinction. It’s ironic. Civil service exams were implemented to prevent race- and politically based decisions. Now, people claim the exams are discriminatory. Whether one considers the exams valid or not, dropping the requirement would mean that police departments lowered standards instead of challenging people to rise up against expectations.
Some people call that progress.
Filed under: General | |Comments off
Earlier this year I blogged about the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, and Immigration Rights By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) filing a lawsuit challenging Proposition 209, approved by 54 percent of California voters in 1996. The law bars the state from granting preferences to or discriminating against individuals or groups based on race in government employment, contracting, and education.
BAMN contends, in so many words, that certain racial minorities have a constitutional right to preferential treatment. Among other things, BAMN said Prop. 209 “promised a ‘color-blind’ Constitution. But this was and is a lie…”
The law’s purpose was to create colorblind government policy, not to guarantee equality of outcome. Defying common sense, BAMN compared Prop. 209 to Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), which held that states were permitted to enact laws that separated the races, as long as segregated facilities were “equal.” Plessy permitted racial discrimination. In contrast, Prop. 209 bars the government from such actions.
But why quibble?
The Pacific Legal Foundation (PLE) has issued a call to defend Prop. 209. PLE seeks to intervene in the federal lawsuit.
“Committed supporters with historical ties to Prop. 209 need to be part of this lawsuit,” said PLF lead attorney Sharon Browne. “They must be allowed to intervene because the voters who passed Prop. 209 deserve to be represented, and Prop. 209’s guarantee of equal rights and equal opportunities must be defended credibly and to the max.”
PLE notes that named defendant Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who signed a government contracting racial quota bill last year, has moved to be dismissed from the suit.
“The governor and the regents are trying to backpedal out of defending Prop. 209,” Browne said. “And Attorney General Jerry Brown has already tried to sabotage Prop. 209 by sending a brief to the state Supreme Court calling it unconstitutional.”
The American Civil Rights Institute’s (ACRI) Ward Connerly added: “Every individual in this country – including every student and every university applicant – deserves a full measure of equal treatment, not categorization by race or sex. This is the mandate of Prop. 209, and 14 years after its enactment it is time to move forward and fully embrace that goal.”
(Photo: ACRI’s Jennifer Gratz of Gratz v. Bollinger hounded by BAMN protesters)
Filed under: Judiciary, Pacific Legal Foundation, Ward Connerly | |Comments off
For those who deny the link between “affirmative action” and lowered standards, look no further than this lead sentence in a USA Today article:
“Colleges and universities should adopt affirmative-action policies based on socioeconomic status, argues a new report that finds the most disadvantaged students on average score 784 points lower on the SAT than those from the wealthiest, most educated families.”
Richard Kahlenberg, author of the report, says schools should lower standards for “disadvantaged students,” whose average SAT score is a whopping 784 points lower than the so-called wealthy. If affirmative action didn’t involve lowered standards, individuals admitted under the policy would have scores similar to those in the general pool, but that’s not the case. Widening the pool of qualified applicants was affirmative action’s original intent, but the policy quickly morphed into rigging the game for members of certain racial groups, to redress past discrimination and racial imbalances.
Preferring lower-income students over higher-income students isn’t illegal (yet) or as unpalatable (to some) as preferring people over others based on race.
Filed under: Socioeconomic AA | |Comments off
On November 7, 2006, 58 percent of Michigan voters chose to bar the state from granting preferences to or discriminating against individuals or groups in government employment, contracting, and education.
Western Michigan University (WMU) has gotten the message. The school’s Incentive Scholarship Program was once Hispanic-only; now it’s open to all students, regardless of race.
Now, that didn’t hurt, did it?
An excerpt:
“The university chose nine Michigan school districts and one intermediate school district, based on their percentages of free and reduced-price lunches, to participate and allowed schools to choose the students based on criteria set by WMU. The schools must also name a representative, who can be a teacher or counselor, to monitor and work with the student.
…
“[T]he use of the free and reduced-lunch standard allows WMU to continue one of the program’s original purposes: to help under-represented populations and those who might be unable to pay for college.”
WMU found a race-neutral way to target certain racial minority students, without explicitly targeting racial minority students, and students of other races may benefit.
Filed under: MCRI | |Comments off
From the Pope Center (emphasis added):
“In November 2006 Jian Li filed a discrimination complaint against Princeton University. He graduated in the top 1 percent of his high-school class and received a perfect score of 2400 on the SAT, as well as perfect or near-perfect scores on the SAT subject-matter tests in math, physics, and chemistry. But those achievements were not good enough for Princeton, which turned down his application, as did Harvard, MIT, Penn, and Stanford.
“Mr. Li was aware that his race worked against him, since most selective universities give preference to African Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans over Asian, Arab, and European Americans. So he filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, arguing that students of Asian ancestry were judged by different criteria than some other groups were.
“Whatever the Obama administration decides to do with Mr. Li’s complaint (it is still ‘investigating’) there is no doubt that Asian Americans are discriminated against in university admissions. The studies published by my organization, the Center for Equal Opportunity, over the past 15 years have analyzed the admissions data obtained from the schools themselves through freedom-of-information requests, and have concluded that African Americans and, frequently, Latinos are given significant preferences over both whites and Asians.
Our study of the University of Michigan, for example, found that in 2005 an in-state male with no parent ties to the school, a 1240 cumulative SAT, and 3.2 high-school grade-point average had a 92 percent chance of admission if black and an 88 percent chance if Latino – but only a 14 percent chance if white and a mere 10 percent chance if Asian. Our study of six North Carolina schools – North Carolina State and the University of North Carolina campuses at Asheville, Chapel Hill, Charlotte, Greensboro, and Wilmington – found the same pattern.
“Students of Asian ancestry appear to face the same kind of treatment that Jewish students did decades ago. They’re held to higher standards than applicants from other groups in order to keep their numbers down and ensure more room for less academically gifted students from ‘underrepresented’ groups.”
Read the full article.
Filed under: Roger Clegg | |Comments off
It shouldn’t surprise anyone to know solicitor general and U.S. Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is a liberal who supports racial discrimination and preferences. From Roger Clegg at National Review Online:
“The Piscataway case involved a school board’s decision to lay off a white schoolteacher because of a desire for more racial diversity on the faculty; the Justice Department, which had opposed the discrimination in the first Bush administration, switched sides under the Clinton administration. The key issue presented in the case was whether Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act allows employment discrimination in the name of nonremedial ‘diversity.’ The Dellinger memorandum was explicitly premised on the belief that Title VII does indeed permit nonremedial discrimination (although it acknowledged that the school board’s firing of this particular schoolteacher was untenable, based on the specific facts of that case), so Kagan’s note means she agrees with that premise.”
Kagan was a domestic policy adviser in the Clinton administration. In the margin of a memo about the case from former Solicitor General Walter Dellinger, Kagan wrote: “I think this is exactly the right position — as a legal matter, as a policy matter, and as a political matter.” As Clegg noted, Kagan agreed with Dellinger that the government may discriminate against whites in favor of blacks.
Filed under: Judiciary | |1 Comment
I’ve argued that one reason racial preferences exist is the academic achievement gaps between the races. The government has been trying for years to close the gap, or at least to narrow it. School choice has been floated as one possible solution to narrowing the gap. In Florida, school choice gets credit for narrowing the reading achievement gap among 4th and 8th graders.
According to the Heritage Foundation, minority students in the Sunshine State made progress, based on the 2009 reading results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Hispanic students exceed or tie the statewide average of all students in 30 states, and black students exceed or tie the statewide average for students in eight states. An excerpt:
In 1998, Florida’s black students fell far behind even the lowest statewide averages. Now these students have pulled even with some states, and they have the momentum.
How did Florida do it? Florida’s success has resulted from the commonsense reforms that were implemented during Jeb Bush’s tenure as governor.
One of the key reforms involved increasing parental control in education. Florida families enjoy more educational options than those in any other state. Florida lawmakers have created one of the nation’s strongest charter-school laws, a voucher program for special-needs students, and the nation’s largest tax-credit program. Florida also leads the nation in online education options.
Do factors like school choice and “rigorous state standards and assessments” hold the key to reducing the achievement gap?
Filed under: Achievement Gap | |Comments off
« Previous Entries||
