Tag Archives: race issues

New Financial Regulations Create Diversity Czars for All Federal Financial Regulators

The financial regulations package recently passed by the House of Representatives would create a new diversity overseer at each of the major federal financial regulatory agencies, including the new ones created by the legislation itself. This new office, called the Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, would take over from any existing diversity or civil rights office already working at the agencies in question. It would also be responsible for making sure that each of the major federal financial regulators is hiring enough minorities and women, and contracting with enough minority-owned and women-owned businesses. However, each individual diversity czar is responsible for defining exactly how many minorities, women, and minority- and women-owned businesses are satisfactory. “[E]ach agency shall establish an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion that shall be responsible for all matters of the agency relating to diversity in management, employment, and business activities,” the legislation says. (The bill passed in the House on June 30; a Senate vote could occur as early as next week.)     In fact, each new diversity chief will be responsible for developing quota-like guidelines proscribing the ethnic and gender makeup of each regulator’s workforce, including upper management.   “Each Director shall develop standards for- (A) equal employment opportunity and the racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of the work-force and senior management of the agency,” it states.   These diversity offices will also be responsible for “assessing the diversity policies and practices of entities regulated by the agency.”   This means that in addition to monitoring every bank in the country, checking every financial institution in America to make sure they are not doing anything systemically risky, and trying to prevent another financial collapse, every federal financial regulator will also be counting the number of minority and female employees at banks and investment firms, big and small.   The proposed law would also mandate that federal financial regulators hire from certain types of minority- or women-only colleges and universities, advertise in minority- and women-focused publications, and partner with inner-city schools and other minority-focused organizations to hire or mentor more minorities and women.   The diversity offices will also be charged with enforcing the newly written diversity guidelines for each private sector company the regulator contracts with, meaning that they will be checking to ensure that each of the agency’s private contractors is following the agency’s diversity guidelines.   “The Director of each Office shall develop and implement 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, including in procurement, insurance, and all types of contracts,” the bill states.   This provision is significant because some of the same federal regulators who must establish these diversity offices – Treasury and Federal Reserve – make heavy use of the private sector on a regular basis. They have also relied heavily on the private financial sector in their responses to the financial crisis.   For example, the Fed’s Term Asset-Backed Lending Facility (TALF) program, which backstopped the securitization market during the height of the financial crisis, was actually run with the help of Bank of New York Mellon, an institution regulated by the New York Fed.   The TALF program, along with other Fed lending programs, had to maintain a strict level of secrecy to protect the banks using the program from irrational runs on their businesses. Because the securitization market had essentially collapsed, TALF’s customers had to remain anonymous if the government was to avoid setting an arbitrary – rather than market – price for securitized debt.   Had the markets learned which financial institutions were using Fed lending programs like TALF, they would have known which securities the Fed was taking as collateral for a particular loan amount. With such information in the public domain, the government would have essentially been fixing the price of asset-backed securities, rather than letting supply and demand set the price in the normal way.   The new diversity office at the Fed – and other financial regulators – apparently would be empowered to dig into such sensitive relationships under the guise of diversity enforcement, possibly endangering the programs and hamstringing their effectiveness.   If one of the new diversity czars thinks a financial firm is not being diverse enough, he potentially could recommend that the regulator terminate the contract(s) the regulator has with that firm. Crossposted at NB sister site CNS News

Go here to read the rest:
New Financial Regulations Create Diversity Czars for All Federal Financial Regulators

CBS’s Schieffer Interviews Eric Holder, Ignores Black Panther Case

While devoting all of Sunday’s Face the Nation to an interview with Attorney General Eric Holder, CBS host Bob Schieffer failed to ask a single question about the Obama Justice Department dropping a voter intimidation case against the Black Panthers or allegations that the department has adopted a policy of ignoring such cases. Schieffer discussed a range of topics with Holder, from the federal lawsuit against Arizona’s immigration law, to a potential criminal investigation into BP, to the trial of terrorist Khalid Shaik Muhammed and closing Guantanamo Bay. At the end of the interview, Schieffer even asked about Holder’s infamous comment that the United States was a “nation of cowards” when it came to discussing race. However, the Face the Nation host failed to use that comment as a transition to the Black Panthers case, despite the fact that former DOJ attorney Christian Adams recently testified before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, accusing the department of adopting a policy of refusing to pursue voter intimidation cases that involved black defendants and white victims. On Holder’s “nation of cowards” comment, Schieffer asked: “A lot of people criticized you for that. A lot of people applauded you for saying that. Are you sorry now that you said that or what exactly did you mean by that and how do you feel today after some time has passed?” Holder responded: “I was trying to say in that speech is that we should be honest with one another…we ought to have the strength of character to say that which we really feel….To just have an open, honest dialogue about something that I think for too long we have not been willing to discuss.” Schieffer wondered: “Do you see any sign that we are doing better on that?” Holder remarked: “I think the fact that we have an African American as president, perhaps an African American as an attorney general, is a spur in that regard.” Here is transcript of the July 11 exchange between Schieffer and Holder on that topic: 10:51AM BOB SCHIEFFER: You know, early on in the administration, you created quite a stir when you said in a speech that we’ve become a ‘nation of cowards’ because we weren’t talking enough about race. A lot of people criticized you for that. A lot of people applauded you for saying that. Are you sorry now that you said that or what exactly did you mean by that and how do you feel today after some time has passed? ERIC HOLDER: You know, I think that this is – ours is a great nation, but one of the great things that we have always tried to – we’ve always wrestled with, from the inception of this nation, is the question of race. If one looks at the history of this country in the 19th century, race was, I think, the dominant issue. Look at the history of this country in the 20th century, race was one of the dominant issues. It remains an issue that, I think, still divides us. And if you look at the demographic changes this nation is about to undergo, we have to have, I believe, an open and honest discussion about race, ethnicity, the diversity that we are about to see, an unprecedented diversity in this country, can be a great source of strength for this nation, but if not dealt with appropriately, can also be something that is very divisive. And what I was trying to say in that speech is that we should be honest with one another and not feel that we have to retreat into our cocoons and only say that which we consider to be safe, that we ought to have the strength of character to say that which we really feel and people who are receiving it should understand that those things are said in good faith. To just have an open, honest dialogue about something that I think for too long we have not been willing to discuss. SCHIEFFER: Do you see any sign that we are doing better on that? HOLDER: Well, slightly. I think certainly that speech that I gave generated some conversation. I’m not sure I heard all the applause that you were talking about with regard to those remarks. I think perhaps we are getting to a place where – a better place. I think the fact that we have an African American as president, perhaps an African American as an attorney general, is a spur in that regard. But I think there’s still a lack of desire. And understandable, I think, in some ways. People feel uncomfortable talking about racial issues out of fear that if they express things, they will be characterized in a way that’s not fair. I think that there is still a need for a dialogue about things racial that we’ve not engaged in. SCHIEFFER: Mr. Attorney General, thank you for being with us in Aspen. HOLDER: Thank you.

Link:
CBS’s Schieffer Interviews Eric Holder, Ignores Black Panther Case

CNN Again Omits Pro-Illegal Immigration Stance of ‘Public Defender’

On Wednesday’s Newsroom, CNN’s Tony Harris omitted the pro-illegal immigration activism of guest Isabel Garcia, just as his colleague Suzanne Malveaux did more than two months earlier . Harris twice referred to Garcia as merely the “deputy public defender in Pima County, Arizona,” and didn’t mention her involvement in the beating and decapitation of a pinata effigy of Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The anchor brought on the activist, as well as Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce, the author of the state newly-passed anti-illegal immigration law, for two segments starting 10 minutes into the 11 am Eastern hour. After asking Senator Pearce’s position on the federal government’s new lawsuit against the enforcement of his law, Harris turned to the public defender: “Isabel, you’ve been patient. Weigh in here.” Garcia (her pro-illegal immigration organization, Coalición de Derechos Humanos, whose website features a logo incorporating the southwestern states into Mexico, was identified on-screen as the “Human Rights Coalition”) immediately went on the offense against Pearce, playing the race/ethnicity card against the Republican politician: GARCIA: This is not about protecting anybody from Arizona. (Pearce laughs) In fact, if Mr. Pearce were responsible, he would, in fact, want to protect us and protect our values in this country. Clearly, this is a supremacy issue. I mean, it’s preposterous that he argued that the federal government doesn’t have the exclusive jurisdiction on this very complicated area of law. Certainly, Arizona cannot simply regulate immigration- and he is trying to regulate immigration. As much as he tries to hide it over and over, he knows full well that they have created a new offense of not having your documents with you. And the issue of racial profiling, that he can just wipe it away so easy- well, it’s because you’re a white person, Mr. Pearce . PEARCE: Oh, what an idiot. GARCIA: You don’t have any qualms about racial profiling at all . You should be concerned about our liberties in this country. You should be concerned about the facts. The facts are that immigrants are an absolute plus to our economy- always have been. That’s why we have 11 million undocumented people here, not because we’re giving give-outs, like you’re saying. In fact, it’s the exact opposite. Immigrants contribute much more than they ever take out in health care, in educational costs, in anything. You look at any credible study, Mr. Pearce- which you should, because you’re an elected official- you should have a real body of evidence before you start talking and endanger our entire community and endanger our country. The state senator didn’t get a chance to reply to Garcia’s racially-charged accusation because the anchor then broke for commercials. After the break, Harris asked Pearce, “You acknowledge that it, at some point, becomes a federal issue, and we’re here because the government hasn’t done enough in this area. And I’m curious, are you as angry at Congress- all of Congress- for not enacting new immigration legislation- and that is Republicans, Democrats and independents?” Once Pearce answered, Harris asked Garcia a similar question, but one from the left: “We’ve got a list of 11 Republican senators who voted for immigration reform in 2006 who aren’t doing much in the way of leadership on this issue at all right now….But Democratic leadership on this issue isn’t moving it forward as well. Do you have any anger right now for Speaker Pelosi, Senate Leader Reid? This was supposed to be the year for comprehensive immigration reform .” Near the end of her reply, the pro-illegal immigration activist proffered a conspiracy theory on the issue: GARCIA: Well, really, the responsibility lays not only in all the people you have mentioned, but in previous administrations, from Clinton, to the Bush administration, to the present Obama administration- is their inability to articulate the truth to the American public that we have caused the situation . Mr. Pearce talks about people not following the laws. Let me tell you, Mexicans, specifically, and other immigrants, have followed the rules. You know what the rules have been for 100 years? Come into the country in an unauthorized fashion so you can build our country. Do you really think we’ve got 11 million people that are benefitting so profusely from give-outs? Absolutely not. We depend on these 11 million people to feed us, to clothe us, to house us, and Mr. Pearce should be thanking them rather than demonizing them, because Arizona was selected by the federal government. It was no accident. This is not occurring because the federal government has not acted. It’s the opposite . HARRIS: Okay. Got you. GARCIA: It’s because they funneled everybody through Arizona to elect the likes of Mr. Pearce – HARRIS: Oh my. GARCIA: In order to become a laboratory for everything that’s anti-immigrant . One might be inclined to add Garcia’s out-there theory to the likes of 9/11 “trutherism” and “birtherism,” and all Harris had to say in response was “oh my”? Neither Harris, nor Malveaux during the April 23, 2010 interview, brought up the activist’s participation in a 2008 protest where the pinata effigy of Sheriff Arpaio was beaten and decapitated and where she carried the figure’s head down the street. Only CNN anchor Anderson Cooper fairly questioned the “public defender” on the incident during an October 2009 segment where she appeared with Arpaio .

See the article here:
CNN Again Omits Pro-Illegal Immigration Stance of ‘Public Defender’

Cynthia Tucker: ‘Steele Would’ve Been Fired Long Time Ago Were He Not Black’

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Cynthia Tucker on Sunday said that Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele “is a self-aggrandizing, gaffe-prone incompetent who would have been fired a long time ago were he not black.”  Chatting with ABC’s Jake Tapper during the Roundtable segment of today’s “This Week” about Steele’s recent remarks concerning Afghanistan, Tucker went even further with what many would consider overt racism.  “The irony is that he never would have been voted in as Chairman of the Republican Party were he not black” (video follows with transcript and commentary): JAKE TAPPER, HOST: Cynthia, you once called, let me underline “You” once called Michael Steele an affirmative action hire gone bad. What’s your take on this? CYNTHIA TUCKER, ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION: Well, Michael Steele is a self-aggrandizing, gaffe-prone incompetent who would have been fired a long time ago were he not black. Of course, the irony is that he never would have been voted in as Chairman of the Republican Party were he not black. Let’s remember how the Party wound up with Michael Steele. In November 2008, the Party was devastated that the Democrats had elected the nation’s first black president while the Republican Party was stuck with being seen as largely the party of aging white people, with good reason. A party that was hostile to people of color, especially blacks and Latinos. So the Party needed a new face, preferably a face of color, and they didn’t have very many officials to choose from. So, they came up with Michael Steele. And it is very ironic since the Republicans have been so critical of affirmative action, to watch them stuck with their affirmative action hire that they dare not get rid of because that would generate even more controversy. If this were said about a black Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, or any high-ranking black Democrat, the media, the NAACP, and the Reverends Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would be up in arms demanding that person’s resignation. But because Steele is a black Republican, this kind of talk is completely acceptable. In fact, nobody on the panel including the host even batted an eye when Tucker made these disgusting remarks. Yet there’s a potentially even more striking hypocrisy here: didn’t Tucker with her accusation admit that some incompetent black people are hired exclusively because of the color of their skin, and they don’t get fired for exactly the same reason? As such, wasn’t Tucker accidentally making a case AGAINST affirmative action?  Somehow you imagine she missed this while she was eviscerating Steele on national television. 

Continue reading here:
Cynthia Tucker: ‘Steele Would’ve Been Fired Long Time Ago Were He Not Black’

Open Thread: DOJ Attacks Former Employee Over New Black Panthers

The Eric Holder-led Department of Justice is now resorting to attacks against its former employee Christian Adams after he’s come out publicly criticizing its decision to refuse to prosecute the New Black Panther Party under voter intimidation laws. Adams is fighting back , however: I was appalled and disappointed by the DOJ yesterday. They included a blatant lie in their response to my interview.  They told Fox News I had been “unhappy with my position.” Not only would this be a personnel matter they aren’t supposed to discuss, it’s a fairy tale. In fact on April 28 I got a promotion, so maybe they can let me know what position I was unhappy with. The problem with smearing me is that there are many others who know the truth inside the Department. Documents which they refuse to turn over pursuant to subpoenas from the Civil Rights Commission prove it. Testimony from other DOJ employees, which they refuse to allow, would also prove it. Will he get the support he needs from his former colleagues or will the issue get ignored and swept under the rug?

Read the rest here:
Open Thread: DOJ Attacks Former Employee Over New Black Panthers

NAACP Forces Hallmark To Pull ‘Racist’ Graduation Card

The Los Angeles chapter of the NAACP last week forced Hallmark to pull from its shelves a graduation card the civil rights group deemed racist. “Printed on the card, is dialogue such as, ‘Watch out, Saturn, this grad is gonna run rings around you!'” reported the Orange County Register on June 3. “And on the audio chip that plays once the card is opened, [characters] Hoops and Yoyo continue their riffing on all the things new graduates are going to do once they get out there to take on the universe…’And you black holes — you’re so ominous! And you planets? Watch your back!'”  But as KABC-TV reported, folks at the NAACP hear the words “black whores” (video follows with additional quotes from the OC Register and commentary, h/t Hot Air headlines ): Sounds like an innocent enough reference to that peculiar feature of the solar system known as a black hole to us. But members of the NAACP hear it differently, saying the high-pitched voice of Hoops — or Yoyo, we still can’t keep ’em straight — says “black whores” and is a racist slur against African-American women. Hallmark’s response to KABC was to defend the card — which has been sold for three years now with no complaints — as not being racist at all, but then to go ahead and pull it from all its stores anyway.  Imagine that. The card has been around for three years, has a planetary theme addressing a common astronomical term “black holes,” but because some people hear the word “whores,” it has to be pulled — in the same week America’s media lined up to support Helen Thomas despite her anti-Semitic remarks to a rabbi. Sure is an interesting world we live in today.

Link:
NAACP Forces Hallmark To Pull ‘Racist’ Graduation Card