Tuesday, October 15, 2013, the US Supreme Court heard arguments on Michigan’s Prop 2, which prevents public colleges and universities from using race or gender in admissions decisions. As then-Senator Barack Obama pointed out in his famous race speech in 2008, today’s racial economic inequality, as well as gender economically inequality, is largely inherited from a history of discrimination. As such, the most prevalent consequences of institutionalized racism and sexism are manifested in socioeconomic terms. Because the Michigan ban disallows any racial or gender considerations in the admissions process, it seems this piece of legislation does actually reinforce the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, despite what opponents say.
Given these two considerations, public schools should be able to accomplish their mission of diversity by giving preference to qualified students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds who come from socioeconomically diverse regions. Although opponents of the Michigan ban have pointed to evidence that suggests these practices do not produce the type of racial diversity sought after, this does not mean directly accounting for race and gender in the admissions process is the only or best solution while a failure to achieve racial diversity through indirect means may well be the result of far larger problems, i.e. failings in primary schools, where minorities live, may not be producing qualified candidates. In such cases, forcing students into colleges only sets them up for failure, thus the legacy of racism is best addressed in our failing elementary and high schools. Alternatively, candidates may not be able to afford to attend classes, they might lack faith in the educational system, or colleges may not be recruiting enough students from regions where disenfranchised minorities live. As for the Michigan ban, it is likely Constitutional, but it is important to remember it does not prevent legal action against public schools that engage in racist or sexist practices.
Comments
It seems the Senate is well on its way to producing a bill that would fund the Federal government through January, 15th, 2014 while setting up formal discussions on long-term tax code reforms and budgetary policies to be concluded by December 13th, 2013. It would be great if this effort succeeded as it makes the best of an out of control situation. This shutdown needs to end and the People’s finances must be put back in order. As such, lawmakers need to make this bill as clean as possible then vote on it. Anyone who throws a wrench into the workings of this latest proposal must be politically flogged by the American People and other political figures.
Unfortunately, the Senate has not been the major roadblock on this latest government drama. Accordingly, House members on the far Right are already demonizing the legislative push. That said, it is sometimes easier to begrudgingly support someone else’s efforts then it is to take full responsibility for proposing an unsavory solution. If moderate Republicans are willing to support the Senate’s legislation as, at least, a means to an end, the shutdown could end without much fuss and a near-death experience called a default. If too many Republican and Democratic Congressmen decide others will bite the bullet of compromise and fail to vote on it themselves, there is going to be a big mess come Thursday. Of course, what the House does or does not do will be irrelevant if someone like Senator Ted Cruz or Senator Mike Lee decide to derail, or “delay,” the effort in the Senate. All and all, things might sound a little better at this point, but default continues to be the more likely outcome given the trajectory. Consequently, this is the time for the American People to speak up; if this effort fails, later might too late. Sunday, marks the beginning of the week the US government could default on its debt for the first time. This will likely to do untold damage to the US and global economy. Although the effects may or may not be apparent, at first, such a default will have lasting ripple effects. Given the significance of this upcoming event and the ongoing government shutdown, we should be able to assume the US House of Representative would be working around the clock with political activist groups storming the Capitol Building and home offices of every public official.
Instead, the House took the weekend off. Certainly, there are political groups working to the end the shutdown and avert a shutdown, yet it lacks the energy and volume we might expect considering the urgency of the situation. That said, supposed conservatives, who appear more and more like self-serving Libertarians and anarchists, to preach on and on about talking personal responsibility and fiscal responsibility. When someone is a leader, personal responsibility includes taking responsibility for decisions and actions that affect society. Meanwhile, fiscal responsibility certainly does not mean defaulting on debt, especially when you are using the Budget crises to push policy agendas. Consequently, one would expect the leaders of so-called conservative groups rally the masses in order to support specific solutions that might pass both Chambers of Congress with the approval of the Executive Branch. As it turns out, they decided to protest the closing of the memorials on the National Mall with guest appears from Senator Mike Lee, Senator Ted Cruz, and Former Governor Sarah Palin. It goes without saying that the sacrifices of the member of the armed forces must be remembered and honored, yet these protests were started to distract from what needs to be done. What some would like call the “Million Vet March” is a strategy to use patriot feelings and the military vote to garner support for the Right. In essence, the objective is to shift blame onto Obama for the shutdown and potential default. Quite frankly, no one involved in politics or the media should be focusing on who is to blame at this point, aside from mentioning the polls on the issue and identifying roadblocks in the problem solving problem. What we need to be focused on are potential solutions. That is the responsible thing to do. That is the conservative thing to do. The second week o f the US government shutdown may end with a deal in sight. At the very least, both sides appear to be trying to work with each other. Negotiations should be held to address the National Debt and the Budget; however, the majority of the GOP should be able to accept a temporary increase on the Debt Ceiling as well as a short-term resolution giving our leaders a realistic amount of time to address the complex Budget issues that use be resolved. After all, the goal of the GOP was to take a stand; they certainly have made their point. Now, they must be willing and able to give meaning to their protest by accomplishing something worth the disruption.
That said, nonpolitical Americans and the outside world are watching Washington with great angst. The US Federal government has great influence in the lives of almost everyone in the world, whether it is apparent or not. As such, the People of the world and foreign governments need to understand why this is happening. The fundamental reason is that the US has reached a critical juncture thanks to a series of unresolved conflicts stemming from years of failing to properly balance the competing interest of the American People, business, and foreign governments. The world has been rapidly changing since the 1980’s, yet Washington has remained stagnant in many respects, especially when it comes how America views its power. For those Americans who lived through America’s golden years, there is a sense of loss. These individuals often view a scramble to adopt change as the reason the US is losing its privileged position in the world. On the other hand, there are individuals who feel a lack of justice. The older Americans of this type were unable to enjoy the abundant benefits of America’s golden age while the younger version feel the older privileged enriched themselves then rigged the system to their benefit at the expense of everyone else. For these individuals, a lack of proper or sufficient change has created America’s problems. As a whole, the US government has failed to properly deal with a myriad of issues that the American People needed addressed. At the same time, many of the solutions we were sold on appear to benefit only a select group of individuals while harming everyone else. This unhealthy degenerative dynamic is most apparent when it comes the economy where growing wealth disparity and struggle are driving individuals to take renewed notice of social and political issues. Because there are many groups of individuals with different views on what is wrong and what needs to be done, whether right or wrong, tensions are growing. In fact, this tension allowed the more radical political elements of the American electorate, such as those represented by Tea Party candidates, to win elections. Although most Americans want the political system to solve problems instead of creating them, our population is uncertain as to what can and must be done. Without a strong push toward specific policy objectives from the populous, Washington insiders are relying on old solutions from their bases that will likely have little constructive effect on our current predicament. In other words, the dysfunction in Washington stems from a lack of knowing what to do. There are problems that need solved, but there are far few really good ideas to support while no one has confidence in our ability to solve problems. Like any country facing a myriad of internal crises, the United States needs time to work out our issues. Unlike most countries, we are sufficiently developed to avoid mass violence as we see in Middle Eastern nations today. Unfortunately, the world is looking to America to behave as a stabilizing force. Given our need to reorganize, other world powers need to step up to fill the gaps when America must turn inward and cope with internal struggles. In the long run, the world needs to develop a new dynamic where the world powers forge coequal partnerships with America the superpower instead of relying on the US to act as a monolithic power when things need done or go wrong in the world. The nations of the world need to be more proactive when trying to solve problems with US, i.e. take America’s hand, while avoiding the impulse to act aggressively toward the US when we cannot or will not fulfill to interests of a given partner. Countries should learn from Iran’s recent gestures. Instability equals vulnerability and a vulnerable US will respond to aggression with disengagement or reciprocated aggression. Moreover, America is facing many issues that we have neglected over the years and this is driving internal political conflict. America is not a dying superpower. In dealing with our most pressing issues, we will emerge stronger than ever as properly balancing interests, coping with crises, and dealing with bad habits allows countries, like corporations, to become far more stable. All countries go through these periods. Given the rapid changes in the world, it is no wonder that so many countries have experienced, are experiencing, or soon will experience their own versions of these periodic “mid-life” identify crises. The world just needs a little patience while the People of the world need to proactively seek constructive solutions that balance their and American interests. Despite the US government shutdown, the world goes on. Once again, Bangladesh is in the news adding another garment factory fire to a recent history of major fires, which includes one that killed more than 1100 workers in April of this year and another that killed 112 workers in November of last year. With 20 billon dollars in exports, the Bangladeshi government and People are struggling to balance competing interests of worker safety and job creation. Although the government and major clothing companies have pledged to improve safety standards, the economic mechanisms, which allowed this industry to take root in this poor nation of 150 million people, discourage necessary changes.
Weak regulation can encourage business growth through the displacement of costs. In this case, businesses can keep prices suppressed by taking advantage of greater production space and capacity without paying for well-maintained and properly expanded building space thanks to the unscrupulous practices of subcontractors. The conundrum for Bangladesh stems from the reality that a crackdown on safety regulations and building codes, which will likely need to be improved, will add costs. The reason clothing is being made in Bangladesh for the West rests in its People’s ability to reliably produce products at the near lowest cost. If costs start to rise due to the cost of safety and building upgrades, the clothing industry will eventually shift production to lower cost countries or back to the US and other developed countries where it does not have to deal with the fallout of these safety failures. These fires provide a very clear example of the hazards that our lowest-bidder global economy has created. Without sufficient tariffs, developed countries like the US cannot complete with the labor of poorer countries when it comes to industries that utilize relatively low skilled labor. Not only does this mean Americans’ lose jobs, it also means the US government loses its ability to regulate and tax an industry. As such, the lack of regulation and taxation adds to the cost savings associated with outsourcing productions to countries with lower standards of living. On the flip side, countries like Bangladesh attract businesses to their shores by allowing their people to be paid such low wages and by loosening regulations. Because underdeveloped countries have less economic leverage than developed countries and many big businesses, these governments have little choice when it comes to governing companies that setup in their territories. Basically, the governments of poor countries can choose to accept what businesses want or lose out on economic development. Because underdeveloped and developed countries now compete by trying to lower costs, poor countries lose what little leverage they have, i.e. their ability to demand increased safety standards and the enforcement of building codes. As such, the clothing industry will likely move on from Bangladesh once this PR nightmare is over for them. The Bangladeshi government may try to improve safety regulations and the enforcement of building codes at first while the clothing industry will promise to improve standards, but the economic realities dictate that Bangladesh will soon lose its ability to provide the most cost effective opportunities for the garment industry on a global scale. Just as the clothing industry was driven out of the US, it will abandon Bangladesh. The only way it will stay is if the Bangladeshi People and government absorb the cost of improved safety. The lowest-bidder global economy we live in places the burden of safety on non-business actors. Unless safe infrastructure exists or improvements are funded by governments, businesses will likely move to onto the new lowest-bidder. |
Read old posts
April 2020
|