3 Democrats Confront Richter at Hearing

In many ways, the hearing that Assemblyman Bernie Richter held Wednesday in Burbank was similar to those he chaired last week in Sacramento.

Affirmative action was again the topic, particularly how the state’s public colleges use race and gender in admissions and hiring. And again witnesses were sworn in and asked whether they were on drugs--a query that prompted one educator to confess: “I have Kleenex, a cough drop and I took a Claritan [antihistamine] this morning.”

But there was one big difference when the Chico Republican gaveled his subcommittee on education finance to order: Three Democratic Assembly members were in the room.

Denise Ducheny of San Diego wanted to know whether Richter had created a courtroom-like atmosphere because he was planning to file a lawsuit (Richter said he wasn’t). Marguerite Archie-Hudson of Los Angeles asked why Richter repeatedly sought witnesses’ opinions about data they knew nothing about (Richter said she was out of order). Joe Baca of San Bernardino wanted to know who had authorized the swearing in of witnesses.

“What you’re really doing, Mr. Baca, is trying to delay what we’re doing,” Richter told him.

The Democrats are among 30 lawmakers who have asked Speaker Curt Pringle to censure Richter for what Assembly Minority Leader Richard Katz called “McCarthy-like tactics” in recent hearings.

But by day’s end, Richter and his committee counsel, Robert J. Corry, had managed to elicit some emotional testimony from both those who felt victimized by affirmative action and those who believe it is essential.

The first witness was Janice Camarena Ingraham, a white San Bernardino Valley College student whose suit last year alleged she had been excluded from an English class designed to help black students. Ingraham was a client of Corry, the lawyer from the Pacific Legal Foundation whom Richter hired temporarily to be the chief questioner during these hearings.

Tearfully, Ingraham said she had taught her three children, one of whom is half Mexican American, that they would not be judged by the color of their skin. “I went into this class and realized I had lied to my kids,” she said.

Donald Singer, the college president, disputed Ingraham’s account, saying she was excluded from the class because it was the second semester of a two-semester package and she had not completed the first half. He acknowledged that the college had settled Ingraham’s lawsuit with a written pledge that all classes will be open to all qualified students regardless of race. But he said the settlement was not an admission of wrongdoing.

“We complied with the law prior to the settlement. We comply with the law now,” Singer said.

Late in the day, Richter asked Barry Munitz, chancellor of the California State University system, how Proposition 209--the ballot initiative to end affirmative action--would change Cal State. Munitz said he did not want to speculate about uncertainties, but knew one thing the initiative’s passage would do: “Enrich Mr. Corry’s colleagues in the legal profession.”

Richter frequently described himself Wednesday as a civil rights advocate fighting a “lonely battle.” When his sister and her husband--a Mexican American--arrived in the room, he announced: “We, too, are a multicultural family.”