The Republcians have been ducking racial preferences for years. Robert Dole, after co-sponsoring colorblind legislation, dodged the issue in his campaign. Bush more or less dodged the issue as well during his campaign, saying that he favored “affirmative access” but letting it be known, I think, that he does not favor racial preferences. His appointments of John Ashcroft as Attorney General and Ted Olson as Solicitor general confirmed that suspicion.
On the other hand his administration actually supported preferences when the Adarand case made its last appearance before the Supremes. And now the Washington Post reports that
President Bush’s legal and political advisers are split over whether to take a stand on the racially charged subject of affirmative action as the Supreme Court prepares to take up a landmark case on racial preferences.
….
[S]ources said Bush’s political aides and White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales oppose an administration stance against affirmative action because it could impair Bush’s efforts to woo Hispanics and other minorities to the Republican Party.
Needless to say at this point, the hand of the preferences appeasers has been strenghtened by Lott’s past escaping its closet. Many believe that
the Lott incident, regardless of its resolution, will make the White House reluctant to engage in racially charged issues — and the Michigan affirmative action case is front and center. The Lott imbroglio, said Bruce Fein, a Reagan administration lawyer and affirmative action foe, makes it “politically unthinkable” for Bush to oppose the Michigan programs.
Backing down on preferences would be a terrible blunder, both wrong and stupid. Wrong, because the administration would be abandoning principle, or at least the principle of its most loyal supporters, to curry political favor with interest groups. Stupid, because it wouldn’t work. Republicans can never win a bidding war for the favor of minorities. Even a Republican administration willing to pander could never pander as much as Democrats.
How ironic that the administration is divided over whether to pander to Hispanics just when a Pew Charitable Trusts report (discussed here, below) demonstrates that Hispanics are diverse, do not share the same values and attitudes, and do not see themselves as a cohesive group.
The administration would be much better served by appealing to Hispanics (whoever they are) the same way it should appeal to all Americans, on the basis of uniform principles that apply equally to all, especially the fundamental principle that every American has a right to be judged as an individual, not as a fungible member of a racial or ethnic group.
