. . . but First, Let’s End the Preference Paradigm

Now that George W. Bush finally is our president-elect, he can begin thinking about his presidential agenda. At the top of the list should be the issue of race.

According to the exit polls, 90% of black voters favored Vice President Al Gore, while only 9% favored Bush. Obviously, this voting pattern is a topic of concern to Bush and the Republican Party. But its implications should be a matter of national concern as well. How do we explain the fact that a voting bloc representing about 12% of Americans believed Gore would be better for them when the rest of the nation viewed Bush and Gore, as my grandmother would say, as “six of one and half a dozen of another”?

This voting disparity could more readily be dismissed as mere politics if it did not manifest itself in other facets of American life. But black people often see events--the O.J. Simpson trial, the impeachment of President Clinton, affirmative action, political parties--through different lenses.

For me, the important question is: How do we build a unified America when a significant segment of our population is seemingly detached from the rest of our society? What are the causes of this detachment? How do we integrate black Americans into the mainstream of American life so that their attitudes about politics, culture and public policy are not shaped by their race?

To begin, the American people must genuinely have that “national dialogue about race” that Clinton promised but never quite delivered. And the dialogue needs to have some structure and needs to result in closure. Let me highlight a few items that I believe merit attention.

We must never forget that the centerpiece of the relationship between the races is the principle of equality. That principle is violated when our government treats us differently, whether it does so in the name of affirmative action, diversity or inclusion. We cannot morally live out the creed of equality when we fudge by countenancing race preferences. Bush should lead us away from this preference paradigm to one of true affirmative action for those who need it, without regard to race.

In virtually every major city in America, we still have large concentrations of poor people who are unemployed, uneducated, unskilled and highly vulnerable to crime and drugs. And no one seems to care about their condition. We don’t need another 1960s-type response of throwing federal money at the problem, but we should bring the residents of these zones of depression into the mainstream of American life. We can begin by reexamining the prevailing philosophy that every young person who graduates from high school should go to college.

This philosophy has contributed to the virtual end of vocational training programs and high school courses that prepare students to go to work. Think of the number of young black men who are in prison who could benefit from careers as plumbers, carpenters, mechanics and any number of other occupations that do not require college degrees. But our nation is so preoccupied with how much “diversity” we have at UC Berkeley and the University of Michigan that we don’t give a hoot about those who will never aspire or become qualified to attend college.

Although we have made amazing progress in eliminating race prejudice in America, the practice of stereotyping black people, commonly known as “racial profiling,” is real and needs to be eliminated. In my opinion, however, such practices will not effectively be ended by government fiat alone. Taxi drivers are not going to stop passing by black people just because the mayor says it is illegal. “Diversity” is hollow if we do not educate people about stereotypes and seek to prove their falsity.

A proposal that is gaining currency in our public discourse is reparations for the descendants of slaves. I consider this a bad idea that ought to be rejected. Nonetheless, I believe our nation would benefit from a structured debate about the question of what, if anything, America owes the descendants of slavery. Such a debate might serve as the vehicle to resolve other public policy questions about race that have as their starting point the premise that black Americans are entitled to special consideration owing to slavery.

The issue of “hate crimes” became the No. 1 “civil rights” issue during the 2000 presidential campaign. Supporting hate crimes legislation became the litmus test for determining whether a candidate was racist. This is unfortunate. I oppose having different levels of punishment based on the skin color or sexual orientation of the victims or the motives of criminals with respect to such matters. Doing so can lead to some very perverse consequences.

The exploitation of the hate crimes issue during the campaign reveals how vulnerable black people are to bogus characterizations of “civil rights” matters. Even more frightening is the level of paranoia among a significant segment of black America about the continued existence of “white racism.” There are racists in our nation--and they come in all types--but “white racism” is not the biggest problem facing black people.

Finally, the endgame for America ought to be the elimination of the despicable practice of classifying citizens by race. President Kennedy once said, “Race has no place in American life or law.” President-elect Bush needs to provide the leadership to make that a reality.