/ Bumped up /

Well, this came as a bit of a surprise, a pleasant one at that. You will recall that Rep. Maxine Waters had inserted a provision into the Financial Reform Bill creating quotas for women and minorities for financial institutions.

But not so fast says the US Commission on Civil Rights, as this article by Caroline May makes clear, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Demands Changes to Democrats’ Financial Reform Bill. That pretty much says it all, but wait until you see what some of the members actually said about this issue:

[snip] Commissioners Peter Kirsanow, Ashley Taylor, Gail Heriot, and Todd Gaziano affixed their names to the letter, which charges the Senate with either “consciously or unconsciously” promoting discrimination.

“All too often, when bureaucrats are charged with the worthy task of preventing race or gender discrimination, they in fact do precisely the opposite,” the letter reads. “They require discrimination by setting overly optimistic goals that can only be fulfilled by discriminating in favor of the groups the goals are supposed to benefit.”

The letter continues, “In this case, the bureaucrats are not even being asked to prevent discrimination, but to ensure ‘fair inclusion.’ The likelihood that it will in fact promote discrimination is overwhelming.”

Holy moley – they are not mincing any words here. And good for them for that. But they did not stop there:

[snip] “Some legislators have evidently come to think of women and minorities as just another constituency whose leaders must be brought on board with incentives when major legislation is being considered,” the letter says. “The notion that legislation should include ‘a little something’ for everyone is troubling in any context, but it is especially troubling in the context of race and gender, given the requirements of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.”

Commissioner Todd Gaziano told The Daily Caller that Section 342, whether it intends to or not, could have dire implications for the financial markets.

“The likely end of creating offices that require these types of racial and gender goals is that it will result in quotas and discrimination,” he said. “There are many existing laws and enforcement mechanisms that already prohibit discrimination. This provision, by contrast, takes affirmative steps to guarantee discrimination.”

That sounds like a fairly damning assessment to me. Clearly, there are so many problems with inserting these quotas on so many different levels. That the Civil Rights Commission is coming out against it, and so strongly, is telling. Previously, the former chief economist at the US Department of Labor, Diana Furchtgott-Roth, also came out strongly against this provision:

“This is a radical shift in employment legislation,” she said. “The law effectively changes the standard by which institutions are evaluated from anti-discrimination regulations to quotas. In order to be in compliance with the law these businesses will have to show that they have a certain percentage of women and a certain percentage of minorities.”

Furchtgott-Roth worries that this might be a harbinger of things to come.

“So what does this mean? Are we going to get rid of anti-discrimination laws all together and just put in quotas? Could this be what’s to come in other sectors?” she questioned.

And an excellent question it is. Disturbing question, too, I might add.

So what will become of this letter by some of the members of the US Civil Rights Commission on this issue? Well, I wish I could tell you it was going to make all the difference:

Commissioner Peter Kirsanow was more blunt.

“I don’t think it is going to have a substantial effect,” he said. “I think they will ignore it as they have other letters we have sent. Just recently, they ignored our concerns with the health care bill, which contains a number of highly suspect racial provisions embedded deep within the text. They will emerge at some point and we will have to deal with them.” (Emphasis mine.)

Kirsanow added that in addition to the constitutional problems associated with mandating quotas, the political implications are also troubling.

“There is considerable evidence over the years that these types of quota provisions dissolve into a political spoils system—we see it at the federal, state and local level—with certain positions being reserved for certain people,” he said.

Uh, yeah. Again, I urge you to read the full article here. It is well worth your time.

I just have to wonder why this was even put into this bill in the first place, especially if there is evidence showing it is so counter productive. Perhaps the excuse, um, I mean, explanation, will come to light at some point (though I am not holding my breath). At the very least, I hope this provision is removed.

I’m not holding my breath for that, either.

  • Pingback: Crazy Times * Open Thread : NO QUARTER()

  • wodiiej

    I received a mortgage loan 16 years ago after I had established good credit.  Because of first time homebuyer incentives, I had to put little down but did need about $1500 out of pocket to get into the home which I still own.  I worked ALOT of overtime to save the money-didn’t borrow a dime from anyone.  I am a woman but I was approved for the loan because of credit guidelines which should be done for everyone.  When they don’t do that, you have the mortgage mess that we have now.   btw…I have never missed or been late on a payment.  Every year I add new landscaping and do at least one improvement to the house.
    It’s still baffling to me how the government and banks pulled this one off.  I have never heard of before of giving credit to people who were not financially qualified to pay for the loan.  Credit card companies have been doing the same thing.   
    All people have equal rights and freedoms to pursue happiness and success.  But that does not mean they will all do what is necessary to pass the guidelines to do so.  If you want something, work for it and be responsible.  If you don’t want to make the effort, don’t expect the rest of us to do it for you.  Because as we now see, they end up losing the home anyway.

  • kafir

    Martin Luther King legacy was outdated long ago.

    Now Islam wants to dominate the world and if The USA is an Islamic nation practicing Sharia Law, other non-Muslim citizens will be considered as second/third class denizens.

    There wont be any quota system for the non-Muslims… The Muslims and/or Blacks will dominate the USA.

  • Rabble Rouser Wheat Thin Cracker Rev. Amy

    Thanks, Doc – helps to keep things in perspective, doesn’t it?

  • kafir

    In Islam, the non-Muslims are fourth class citizens and the women don’t have equal opportunity as the men.

    The goal is to replace our Constitution with Sharia Law which is the antithesis of democracy.

  • kafir

    Obama is playing  the racial and religious cards- this is  the real Obama- a black and a Muslim 

    Playing with Medicare which benefits mainly these groups hence securing their votes instead of concentrating on the recovery of economy and employment for the benefits of  the average Americans.

    Obama is a corrupt-to-the core Potus!

  • kafir

    America is moving towards a Muslim country and this is the beginning of the Islamisation of America.

    Quota/affirmative action  is being practiced fervently in Muslim countries. The Muslims have to pray five times a day hence can’t compete with non-Muslims on level field.

    But the real intention is to practice cronyism, nepotism, corruption and to rob the nation’s wealth through and through.

    This is what the Medieval Mohammad did during his time and now all the elites of the Muslim world are following his life and works beautifully every time!

  • sybilll

    That was the most captivating hour of television I have seen in a very long time.  I was spellbound.  Thanks for the link so I can rewatch it. 

  • Rabble Rouser Wheat Thin Cracker Rev. Amy

    Yes, I saw that – unbelievable (and actually wrote a post on it).  Good thing Obey was willing to fight!

  • Noogan


    Obama administration Sec/Education, Arne Duncan, was pissed off that he only could get his hands on 85% of the funding promised to him for the RACE TO THE TOP propaganda program for schools! 

    Arne complained to the White House who complained to the Appropriations Committee, chaired by David Obey. 

    Obey ratted the bastards in the Obama administration out. They cared more about spending money to promote themselves [and fill their slush fund troughs] than they did about people getting food to eat. 

    Let Them Eat Cake!

    “The White House Wanted to Cut Food Stamps!”


  • Doc99

    Let’s set the record straight on the Civil Rights Movement.

    Who’s right? Progressive rewriters of history.. or a family member who was actually there?

  • Noogan

    Look over here, ladies and gents! Don’t pay any attention to that man behind the curtain!

    Want to know what we’re lookin’ at here, while you’re trying to smear fiscal conservatives?

    $34 Trillion in Sovereign debt worldwide in 2009

    [it’s really double that, of course, but just for grins and giggles, lets go with what we’ve got in black and white]

    The US and Japan owe the lion’s share of that debt. And, look at the pretty pictures here:


  • Doc99

    “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Martin Luther King

    Indeed …

  • Noogan

    Spoken like a good little authoritarian follower, Ahs. Shame on you. You do, of course, know who is appointing Judges, right? The executive. And, who do you think runs all those “prosecutors” who would have to bring any litigation in front of the “judge” appointed by the executive? Why the Department of Justice, run by the….wait for it…..oh yes, the executive.

    All roads lead to Rome, it would seem. 

  • Noogan

    Mark Steyn in the Orange County Register: Must read the full article!

    Last week, the American Association of Pediatricians noted that certain, ahem, “immigrant communities” were shipping their daughters overseas to undergo “female genital mutilation.” 
    So, in a spirit of multicultural compromise, they decided to amend their previous opposition to the practice: They’re not (for the moment) advocating full-scale clitoridectomies, but they are suggesting federal and state laws be changed to permit them to give a “ritual nick” to young girls.
    A few years back, I thought even fainthearted Western liberals might draw the line at “FGM.” After all, it’s a key pillar of institutional misogyny in Islam: Its entire purpose is to deny women sexual pleasure.
    True, many of us hapless Western men find we deny women sexual pleasure without even trying, but we don’t demand genital mutilation to guarantee it. On such slender distinctions does civilization rest.
    Der Spiegel, an impeccably liberal magazine, summed up the remorseless Islamization of Europe in a recent headline: “How Much Allah Can The Old Continent Bear?” 
    Well, what’s wrong with a little Allah-lite? The AAP thinks you can hop on the Sharia express and only ride a couple of stops. In such ostensibly minor concessions, the “ritual nick” we’re performing is on ourselves. Further cuts will follow.


  • Dave

    Maxine Waters, so stupid, when asked how far she went in school, her reply , TWO BLOCKS.  As long as Calif. wackos are going to keep idiots like this in Congress, these are the types of laws that will be passed.  Waters and Pelosi don’t see a problem with this kind of crap, they are millionaires, what do they have to worry about. 

  • lizzy

    There was no intention to reform the financial system.  O just wanted another star for his crown, bragging rights.  Any meaningful reform is purely miracluous with this bunch of imbeciles making the changes.

  • Daisy Mae Wye Cwisp Cwacker

    She says she is weel tired of the Waaaace Industry, and the Diversity Industry.  Branches of each other.  She says she thanks RRRR Amy and the astute commenters here, but she is overcome with the persistence and political pandering of these industries.  She adds that the Hispanic Industry is merely another branch of these.  I must attend to Daisy Cwacker now.  She needs a p.m. pick-her-up.

  • Rabble Rouser Wheat Thin Cracker Rev. Amy

    Well, yes – that is exactly right.  It is NOT supposed to be a political spoils system.

    Heck, it is supposed to REFORM the financial agencies, but the very men who CRAFTED it are responsible for a great deal of the problems with Fannie and Freddie.  It is just staggering, isn’t it??

  • Justine

    RRRA:  “…quota provisions dissolve into a political spoils system…”

    Precisely!  This bill was supposedly to reform financial institutions, not to create a political spoils system, right?

  • Buzz-water cracker-Latte

    It’s Affirmative Action language.  It didn’t need to be in there and it furthers the notion that minorities still are victims.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention U.S. Commission On Civil Rights Not Amused By The Quotas In The Financial Reform Bill : NO QUARTER -- Topsy.com()

  • EllenD

    If we have specific laws against ANY discrimination, why do we have to include it in every bill?
    Or is there some reason it has to keep being repeated all the time everywhere?
    I mean, should we also be cut and pasting the Constitution and Bill of Rights into every bill too?

  • NW Boiler

    the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

             – Chief Justice John G. Roberts

  • ahs

    “And, who determines what constitutes a “good faith effort” to comply?”

    That would be (in the event of a dispute) a judge.  Judges are pretty good at that sort of thing, seeing how they do it all the freaking time.

  • Noogan

    Thank God There Are Some Conservatives Somewhere to Counteract the Brazen Attack on the Constitution by the Democrats and leftists in the Obama administration.

    Oh, and quoting Julian Bond of the NAACP to tarnish the Civil Rights Commission as “too conservative”? Priceless!  😀

  • Noogan

    Good. I am glad the US Commission on Civil Rights is “conservative.” 

    Thanks for pointing that out, Ahs. 

  • Noogan

    The government will be required to terminate contracts with institutions that don’t make a “good faith effort” to comply with the fair inclusion standard.

    And, who determines what constitutes a “good faith effort” to comply? 

    Oh, yes. Of course. The Justice Department under Eric Holder, who wouldn’t recognize the Constitution if it slapped him upside the head! We’re cowards when it comes to race; but only if we’re white, because blacks should have all the rights in Holder’s wee world. 

    You are naive if you think this isn’t more of G.W. Bush’s own system of political spoils being copied by the very Democrats who were so outraged by it when Bush did it. 

  • Ellis


    Thanks for the background information on the Commission on Civil Rights.  Much like the MMS, it appears that the Commission has changed its purpose from supporting civil rights for everyone, to maintaining the status quo for those who are in control of our country.

  • Rabble Rouser Wheat Thin Cracker Rev. Amy

    You said it, Sassy – that is exactly what they are doing.  This new Financial Reform bill is a case in point – when Chriss Dodd and Barney Frank are the creators of a Financial Reform Bill that does NOT include Fannie and Freddie, you know it is a sham from the get-go.

    But adding in quotas and essentially dismissing anti-discrimination laws is problematic all by itself.

  • ahs

    Okay, here you go.  Ladies and gentlement, your “bipartisan” US Commission on Civil Rights:


  • Sassy

    Amy, I share your frustrations!
    Instead of legislation to address the colossal failures in our financial system, we get another encyclopedia of back-room power plays.
    They gamble with taxpayer dollars, and then we ante up the future bail-outs. UGH!

  • ahs

    This isn’t a quota system.  How is it a quota system?  Go read the law, and tell me where you see a quota in there.

    What it does is create offices to create “standards and procedures to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, the fair inclusion and utilization of minorities, women, and minority-owned and women-owned businesses in all business and activities of the agency at all levels.”  The government will be required to terminate contracts with institutions that don’t make a “good faith effort” to comply with the fair inclusion standard.

    None of that represents any sort of “quota” system.  A quota means there is a specific number required — none of the above specifies any number. 

    You’re just quoting an article that quotes political partisans* who FEAR (yeah, I bet they do) that a quota system will somehow emerge from a law that does not create one.  Nice attempt to create smoke, but there’s no fire underneath.

    *And yes, they’re partisans.  Diana Furchtgott-Roth worked in both Bush Administrations and is now at the conservative Hudson Institute.  As for the Civil Right Commission, there are eight members of the (bipartisan) Commission, not four.  Only four of them signed that letter.  Hmm, I wonder where their political sympathies lie…

  • Rabble Rouser Wheat Thin Cracker Rev. Amy

    Good point, Kenoshamarge – yep, excuses aplenty, I am sure.

    Love the new avatar!

  • kenoshamarge the cracked cracker

    Please don’t hold your breath RRRA not if you are waiting for an explanation.

    A rationale, I’m sure they can come up with. But a bona fide, rational explanation is beyond many/most of those that write the laws that the rest of us must live under and with.