Newspapers / The Charlotte post. / Dec. 4, 1997, edition 1 / Page 4
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
4A EDITORIALS/ The Charlotte Post Thursday, December 4, 1997' cijariotte Clinton prefers quota systems The Voice of the Black Community A subsidiary of Consolidated Media Group 1531 Camden Road Charlotte. N.C. 28203 By Ward Connerly SPECIAL TO THE POST Gerald O. Johnson CEO/PUBLISHER Robert L. Johnson CO-PUBLISHER/ GENERAL MANAGER Herbert L. White EDITOR IN CHIEF Shifting lanes of fairness Congressional redistricting is a threat to black representation By George Wilson NATIONAL NEWSPAPER PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION Just when we thought that the issue was settled of how con gressional boundary lines are drawn, yet another challenge is being raised. This time the battleground is Virginia and the target is Congressman Bobby Scott (D-Va.). Unfortunately, this has become an all-too familiar theme. An African American wins elec tion in an area that previously lacked representation, then others claim that the boundary lines discriminate against them. In Rep. Scott’s case, someone doesn’t like the way the district is shaped. “People have complained that my district is too long. 1 can drive from one end to the other in an hour and a half. The two adjoining districts from end to end - one is four and a half hours and the other is two and a half They surround my district. They aren’t too long, but of course, mine is,” Scott observed. The forces that challenge the constitutionality of districts that were drawn to assure minority representation will not rest until African American congresspersons become as scarce as talking horses. What we are seeing is a multi-pronged attack from adver saries of justice and equality. The first prong is the unprecedent ed attack on affirmative action. Its proponents say that America is colorblind and the playing field is level. The notion is easily debunked by people of color, women in general and those who have disabilities. 'The second prong is so-called welfare reform. ’Those who happen to be on welfare are being told that in order to receive a govern ment stipend that really isn’t enough to live on, one must get a job or. sign up for training. Last, but not least, there are the challenges to the constitution ality of some congressional districts. Congressman Scott agrees that challenges to districts and the redrawing of lines can only have a detrimental effect. “The origi nal Voting Rights Act and the amendments in 1982 led everyone to believe that a special effort should be made to draw minority districts where you can. The court has put that in question and frankly it will make redistricting much more difficult in the year 2000 after the 2000 census. People will be confused as to what can and cannot be done,” Scott somberly observed. ’There are truly some rather difficult days ahead for specific cat egories of American voters and Rep. Scott has some advice for oth ers who will undoubtedly find themselves living in a district that is the object of challenge. “'The important thing is to draw the dis tricts according to the law and get expert advice as you draw the districts. Frankly I would expect not only the congressional dis tricts to be challenged again after the 2000 census but also the state legislatures. State House, Senate and city councils.” I know that many thought that the battle for voting rights wasover. However, recent events indicate that fighting about the value of votes looms in the near future. Perhaps, these fights over affirmative action, real employment and voting rights will lead to an inevitable conclusion. Ida B. Wells said it best in 1882 when she wrote, “let the Afro-American depend on no party, but on him self for salvation.” Wells’ statement seems to be as applicable in 1997 as it was more than 100 years ago. GEORGE WILSON is Capitol Hill correspondent of the American Urban Radio Network. In his quest for a legacy. President Clinton recently staked a claim to the race rela tions debate. During his June 12 commence ment speech at the University of California San Diego, Clinton spoke of the “sting of discrimina tion” and the excellence of affir mative action. Lost in the pomp and circumstance stood a contra diction of word and deed many fail to recognize. Affirmative action, as originally intended, was a set of outreach policies and programs designed to ensure equal opportunity specifically to black Americans to redress centuries of racial dis crimination. Over the years, affirmative action evolved into preferences, quotas and set- asides. These new programs opened the door wider for women and “minorities,” residting in dis crimination of another kind. The problem, of course, is not affir mative action, but racial and gender preferences. If you ask the Jesse Jacksons and Patricia Irelands of the world, preferences are the last fine of defense for minorities and women against segregation and unemployment. Logic assails this theory on two fronts: ’The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars discrimination on every level, and the misguided assumption that minorities and women caimot compete equally with white males. Using discrim ination as a fight-fire-with-fire approach doesn’t work; racial Connerly preferences breed resentment, not equality. At the time of Clinton’s com- mencement speech, he introduced the American pub lic to his advi sory board on race relations. Designed to “help educate Americans about the facts surrounding the issue of race,” the entire panel of four men and three women supports racial and gender preferences. ’The panel’s chair. Dr. John Hope Franklin of Duke University, revealed his bias soon after the speech, saying, “the white side has been in control of everything, so they’re the ones who need edu cating on what justice and equal ity mean.” When President Clinton creat ed his race panel, he considered diversify of race and gender, but excluded diversity of thought. 'This is particularly significant in fight of national polls released the week of the President’s race speech showing that over 75 per cent of the public rejected prefer ences. Contradiction, not discussion, defines Clinton’s legacy - from the selection of his seven member advisory board to his interpreta tion of federal court decisions. One case in particular, Piscataway v. Taxman, Clinton’s shifting policy on race. In 1992, the Bush Administration sued the Piscataway, N.J. school board, arguing that it had violat ed the civil rights of one of its teachers. The district had to lay off one teacher in the business department of the Piscataway High School and was forced to choose between two equally qual ified teachers - one black, one white. In the past, the board had drawn names to break a tie. 'This time they simply retained the black. In 1994, the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, Deval Patrick, ordered the Justice Department to withdraw from the case and ask the court for permission to file a friend of the court, brief supporting the school board. 11100, this August, Clinton urged the Court to uphold the award of damages to the white teacher. 'The catch? He wants the Court to interpret the case nar rowly so it won’t “become binding precedent for the entire nation.” Piscataway v. Taxman is just one example of Clinton’s aggres sive legal defense of preferences. 'The administration has promot ed and defended quotas and set- asides - and lost in numerous federal cases, including Proposition 209, Adarand v. Pena, and Hopwood v. University of Texas. The Adarand case resulted in a Supreme Court decision striking down minority- based set-asides. 'The Clinton Administration’s reaction was addressed by Deval Patrick, who said, “It is important for us all not to be intimidated by Adarand. We have to take Adarand on.” Before Proposition 209, Cfintori gave his famous “mend it, don’t end it” speech, in which he defended racial preferences and opposed the CCRI. “Let me be clear about what affirmative action must not mean and what I won’t allow it to be,’ Clinton said. “It does not mean - and I don’t favor - the unjustified preference of the unqualified over the qualified of any race or gen der. It doesn’t mean - and I don’t favor - numerical quotas. It does,- n’t mean - and I don’t favor - rejection or selection of any employee or student solely on the basis of race or gender without regard to merit.” 'The President, at the tune, never suggested one program that could be mended or ended, He may argue that he has abol ished some preference programs, but the facts show that any racial, or gender preference program or policy eliminated during thq Clinton Administration was elim,- inated either by the courts ojr Congress. What Clintonian double-speak will say to future generations,; anyone can guess. Meanwhile, the American voters, the courts and Congress will decide the fate of racial and gender preferences., WARD CONNERLY serves oit the University of Califomid Board of Regents and founded the American Civil Rights Institute. This column was reprinted with permission from Carolina Journal, the bimonthly magazine of the John Locke Foundation, a conservative think tank in' Raleigh. Why didnH multiple birth ehcit immediate response? By Earl Ofari Hutchinson NATIONAL NEWSPAPER PUBUSHERS ASSOCIATION If Jacqueline and Linden Thompson are perplexed over the massive national media attention and public outpour ing of support for Bobbi and Ken McCaughey, the parents of the Iowa septuplets, it is understandable. In May, the Washington D.C. couple set the record for the longest sextuplet pregnancy at 29 weeks and six days in the United States. They also were the first African American cou ple to give birth to sextuplets. Yet unlike the McCaughey’s media-dubbed “miracle birth,” the birth of their children stirred no interest in the media at first. There were no 'TV news features, special reports, or a story on them in any mqjor newspaper. If not for a brief news blurb on the 'Thompson births in the black weekly. Jet magazine, the event would have gone completely unno ticed. It’s not hard to figure out why. Unlike the McCaugheys, the Thompsons are a low- income, working class African American couple. 'They do not five in a small, tight knit, mid- American Iowa community. They did not use a fertility drug. As a result, the 'Thompsons did not get the fol lowing treatment: • Free advertising in major newspapers for their family assistance fund. • The donation of a 12-seat van • 'The offer by Iowa’s gover nor to build a larger home. • A year’s supply of groceries from a national supermarket chain. • A year’s supply of baby care products. • A lifetime supply of dia pers. • A phone call from President Clinton congratulat ing them on their “amazing adventure.” • A special invitation to the White House. • A bid of $250,000 from a tabloid weekly to tell their story and; • Countless offers from their friends, and neighbors to assist with the children. 'The Thompsons’ story only became the subject of mild passing interest when the McCaugheys’ septulets made news and a caller to the nation ally syndicated “Tom Joyner Morning Show,” complained about the lack of help the cou ple had received. A Washington, D.C. commu nity group. Sisters in Touch, has made the Thompsons’ plight an issue. The Washington Post did a back pages story on them. But even then this was not enough to spark the kind of national offers of help that flooded into the McCaugheys. A Procter & Gamble spokesperson hinted that the company would consider a six- to eight-month supply of dia pers but added that this was the standard contribution for families with multiple births. A spokesperson for Johnson & Johnson suggested that the Thompsons contact the compa ny to determine if there are “things we can do.” With the assistance of the D.C. Housing Finance Agency, the 'Thompsons were able to move out of their cramped one- bedroom duplex unit into a three-bedroom apartment. Since then they have managed to find a six-bedroom house but The Thompson sextuplets were they have not been able to move" in. Even with Linden Thompson’s salary from two jobs, they can’t afford the $1,500 rent. However, at press time, the Virginia-based Freddie Mac Foundation, which gives grants to organizations that supports children’s issues and children at risk, has made a commit ment to give the family a house from their inventory. The impe tus for the foundation’s involve ment came from staff members who heard/read reports of the 'Thompsons’ situation and rec ommended involvement, said virtually ignored at first. Shawn Flaherty, spokesperson for Freddie Mac. The founda tion scheduled a Dec. 1 meeting with the family to access their needs. Additionally, as a result of the appeal letters on their behalf by Sisters in Touch and the increased media coverage, the Thompsons are now receiv ing free day care at a local child care center, and they were noti fied that they will be eligible to enroll their children in the Head Start Program. Calls and offers of donations are coming from all over the U.S. and Canada. While the 'Thompsons have been forced to shoulder much of the tremendous physical and. emotional strain and financial burden of caring for five chik dren (one of them died at birth), alone, they have expressed pleasure at the showering of support for the McCaugheys and for the way in which the" African American community’ has now responded to them.' 'Their only regret is, as Mrs. Thompson said, that her com-' munity and the nation did not' support them until the media- hype of the McCaugheys. And; that shamefully underscores the general indifference of| much of America when the chil-, dren in need are not media sen sationalized products of “mira cle births” but children of the, minority poor. Donations and information can be sent to: Sisters in Touch, P.O. Box 4337 Largo, MD 2077& or call (301) 499-8976 or (202) 773-4006. EARL OFARI HUTCHIN SON is author of “The Assassination of the Black Male Image.’’ His email address isi ehutchi344@aol.com.
Dec. 4, 1997, edition 1
4
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75