Long-time readers will recall that last year I commented so often on the fallacy of assuming that all discrimination is fungible, that one kind of discrimination is just like (and just as bad as) another, that in desperation I started calling this sloppy reasoning by its own name, an Invidious Ubiquitous Non-Sequitur, or IUNS for short. Do a search on those terms here if you want to get an earful (or is reading such things an eyeful?)
The classic IUNS is the accusation, always hurled as though the hurler had thought of an irrefutable original point, that anyone who opposes racial preferences but tolerates preferences for [athletes, musicians, legacies, whatever] is inconsistent, hypocritical, or stupid (or all three).
The reply, of course, is that all choices involve discrimination (subsidies, for example, to peanut but not tobacco farmers; tax exemptions for this but not that), but that those discriminations do not, and should not, raise constitutional issues. Discrimination on the basis of race or religion, however, should and does.
I think this point is plain and simple, and driving a stake through the heart of the argument a dozen or so times ought to be enough, but the IUNS mongers never stop. They’re at it again in Texas, for example.
As reported in the Houston Chronicle yesterday (thanks to Howard Bashman),
Minority politicians and activists around the state Wednesday urged Texas A&M University to bring consistency to an admissions policy that doesn’t consider race or ethnicity but includes a “legacy” program that favors whites.
….
“This legacy program thing is nothing more than conservative affirmative action,” said state Rep. Paul Moreno, D-El Paso. “It’s admission by invitation only.”
Jim Harrington, a veteran civil rights lawyer who heads the Texas Civil Rights Project, said A&M needs to change its policy or “it’s going to be Brown vs. the board of regents of Texas A&M,” an allusion to the landmark desegregation case of the 1950s.
Legacy preferences may be a bad idea, although they presumably do work to promote loyalty to an institution and to increase alumni contributions. They are certainly inconsistent with a commitment to rely only on pure academic merit, at least some of the time. At others times, however, not: last year at Middlebury College, the thirty legacies in the freshman class had an average SAT score that was 33 points higher than the class as a whole, as I pointed out in one of many posts on this topic here. But they raise none — none — of the civil rights issues trumpeted by the Morenos and Harringtons quoted above.
Discrimination on the basis of race or religion is simply not the same as discrimination on the basis of athletic ability or legacy status. Anyone who supports racial preferences logically should call for the repeal of all laws banning racial discrimination.
Inconsistency in opposing race preferences while tolerating legacy or athlete preferences occurs only for those who argue that academic merit alone is the only acceptable criterion for receiving any benefit, admission, etc. Although I myself happen to be fond of merit as traditionally defined, I would never say that discrimination on grounds other than race/ethnicity/national origin or religion is illegal, unconstitutional, or immoral.
On the other hand, I would, and do, say that its abandonment of the principle of colorblind non-discrimination is one of the greatest tragedies of modern liberalism.
UPDATE
On January 10, the Houston Chronicle reported (thanks to Howard Bashman):
Texas A&M University President Robert Gates on Friday ended the school’s legacy program, acknowledging that giving preference to applicants with blood ties to alumni is inconsistent with an admissions policy based solely on merit.
As I’ve argued here too many times to cite, legacy admissions are indeed inconsistent with a commitment to pure merit, but it is not necessary to be committed to pure merit in order to oppose race preferences. The fact that some forms of discrimination are acceptable does not mean that all forms of discrimination are acceptable. You’d think that people who believe in civil rights would understand that.
Legacy programs do currently favor whites, since whites have traditionally been the ones graduating from college. However, the legacy program of an institution would favor the decendants of *any* graduate, and therefore, those of a black or Hispanic graduate as well. It takes time to build a legacy.
John is right on about the non-mutual exclusivity of not having to be against both wrongs. For the record however, although I have attacked race preferences separately, without addressing the legacy question, my first research into internal U-Michigan documents attacked both simultaneously.
Each is independently immoral for different reasons, although race preferences are directly unconstitutional (or should have been held thus), while legacy preferences could be indirectly held unconstutitional (if they foreseeably discriminate against a group, and I’d argue that they foreseeably discriminate against blacks and minorities because of the history involved and their unique tie, through birth and time, to that history).
I support A&M’s courageous moves on both fronts.
We beleive that Montgomery County Housing Authority HUD is violating our Civil Rights. Please see correspondence to follow demonstrating the violation. Your assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Tony Guidry
Tony & Denise Guidry
14447 W. Lee Shore Drive ~ Willis, Texas 77318
(936) 890-4728 ~ email: email hidden; JavaScript is required
August 30, 2004
Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
Room 516
Department of Housing and Urban Development
451 Seventh Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20410-2000
ATTENTION: Directors, Managers & Supervisors of Section 8 Voucher
Program
REFERENCE: Section 8 Voucher Number: 10638
We believe we are currently being harassed as well as our civil rights being violated. We have been on Housing since October of 2000. I am totally and permanently disabled. I am currently diagnosed with: CHF, Ischemic Heart Disease, Diabetes, Diabetic Neuropathy, Rheumatoid Arthritis, COPD, TIA Strokes, and Sleep Apnea. Over the past 5 years I have had several heart catheterizations and now have 11 stents in 3 of my arteries. In addition, only 35% of my heart is functioning. I take 21 different medications every day, some of them more than once a day.
Every since we have been on Housing at least once per year and more we have been harassed for one thing or another. Well Today I believe not only in the letter that was sent by Montgomery County Housing Authority is not only additional harassment, but this must also be a violation of our civil rights and a violation of the Montgomery County Housing Authority Family Responsibilities supplied by the Housing Authority.
Recently I had to pay a price for bad judgment on picking my friends. To make a long story short these so called friends put me and my family at risk. Through this horrible nightmare I was charged and convicted of a state jail felony for ID-Theft/Fraud. Although to this day I have proclaimed my innocence due to my severe medical condition it would not have been to my benefit to go thru trial. I was charged in 2 counties, Harris & Montgomery. I served 15 days in jail in Montgomery County and 105 days in Harris County. In both cases I have made arrangements for payments for restitution and have been released with all time served. Although I was innocent, I paid the price and have been released with time served. Now HUD and Montgomery County Housing Authority want to administer more punishment, not only for me but for my 14-year-old daughter and my wife.
Please find to follow the first “Family Responsibilities” sheet provided by MCHA.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Montgomery County Housing Authority
Family Responsibilities
1. Rental Payments-I/We will pay all of my/our share of the rent on time and in full.
2. Changes in family circumstances-I/We will report to Montgomery County Housing Authority any change in family composition, income childcare, and/or medical expenses (for elderly/disabled) in writing within (30) days of the date of change.
3. Utility Bills- I/We will pay the utility bills if they are not included in the rent. Should your utilities (electric, water, or gas) be disconnected, you rental assistance may be terminated.
4. Be a good neighbor- Continuing complaints from other may be cause for your landlord to evict you and/or may result in termination of assistance.
5. Take care of the rental unit- I/We will keep the assisted unit in decent, safe, and sanitary condition. I/We will not damage the dwelling. Any damages caused by any family member or visitor is my/our responsibility.
6. Notify your landlord in writing of any needed repairs or unsafe conditions immediately.
7. Permit inspections as required- I/We will allow the Housing Coordinator and MCHA to inspect the assisted unit periodically in respect to reasonable time and reasonable notice. An adult family representative must be present with twenty-four (24) hours notice for the purposes listed in the lease. If the owner deems and emergency exists, her may enter without notice (smoke, screams, and apparent absence from the unit.)
8. Annual recertification- I/We are required to furnish information requested by the local coordinator to predetermine program eligibility and amount of assistance. Only one reminder letter will be sent to you each year. All procedures must be completed prior to the anniversary date of your contract.
9. Moving- I/We will give both the owner and the Housing Coordinator a written (30) day notice prior to the anniversary of the initial contract. Any period less than thirty (30) days is a violation of the tenant’s obligation unless the owner has given a written release and has forwarded the approval to MCHA.
10. Security deposit- I/We will pay the amount in full. HUD will not pay damage claims on my behalf.
11. Slide payments are not allowed- I/We do not have to pay more money than my/our share or the rent stated in the lease and the lease addendum’s or notifications. Furniture rental or other agreements must be written and submitted in advance to MCHA for approval.
12. Assisted unit- I/We will use the dwelling unit solely as the principle place of residence. The dwelling unit will not be sublet or used as a place of business. I/We do not have any ownership interest in the unit.
13. Cooperation- i/We are required to cooperate in supplying all information needed to determine my eligibility, level of benefits, or verify my true circumstances. Cooperation includes keeping appointments scheduled by the housing coordinator, furnishing requested information, completing and signing needed forms, and conducting myself/ourselves in a manner, which does not interfere with the Housing Coordinator’s ability to conduct business. I/We furthermore agree to abide by reasonable rules and regulations for occupancy as established by the property owner/manager.
14. Loss of Assistance- I/We understand the I/we must abide by this list of family responsibilities and program obligations listed on the certificate and all the terms and conditions of the HAP lease or my/our rental assistance may be subject to termination.
15. Fraud and criminal activity- I/We understand that I/We, my/our family will not commit fraud, bribery, or any other corrupt criminal act in connection with the program. I/We understand that I/we and my/our family and/or visitors may not engage in drug related criminal activity or violent criminal activity.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*** #15. Again the charges of ID-Theft/Fraud is a state jail felony and is a non violent crime and in no way has any drug criminal connection, so again, this would not apply.
I have recently been supplied by MCHA an 18 point “Reasons for Termination of the Housing Assistance” Please find to follow:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Reasons for Termination of Housing Assistance
1. Violation of Family Responsibilities Agreement
2. If any member of the family has ever been evicted from public housing
3. If a Housing Authority has ever terminated assistance under the certificate or voucher program for any member of the family.
4. If any member of the family commits fraud, bribery, or any other corrupt criminal acts in connection with any federal program.
5. If the family currently owes rent or other amounts to the Housing Authority or to another Housing Authority in connection with section 8 or public housing assistance under the 1937 act.
6. If the family has not reimbursed any Housing Authority for amounts paid to an owner under a HAP contract for rent, damages to the unit, or other amounts owed by the family under the lease.
7. If the family breaches an agreement with the Housing Authority to pay the amounts owed to the Housing Authority or amounts paid to an owner by a Housing Authority. The Housing Authority, at its discretion, may offer the family the opportunity to enter an agreement to pay amounts owed to the Housing Authority or amounts paid to an owner by the Housing Authority. The Housing Authority may prescribe the terms of this agreement.
8. If a family participating in the FSS Program fails to comply, without good cause, with the family’s FSS contract of participation.
9. If the family has engaged in or threatened abusive or violent behavior toward the Housing Authority Personnel.
10. If any false information is provided by the family.
11. If the family is responsible for an HQS breach caused by any of the following:
a. The family fails to pay for any utilities that the owner is not required to pay for, but which are to be paid by the tenant.
b. The family fails to provide and maintain any appliances that the owner is not required to provide, but which are to be provided by the tenant.
c. Any member of the household or guest damages the dwelling unit or premises- (damages beyond normal wear and tear)
If an HQS breach caused by the family is life threatening, the family must correct the defect within no more than twenty-four (24) hours. Other family caused defects must be corrected within thirty (30) calendar days or any Housing Authority approved extension.
If the family has caused a breach of the HQA, the Housing Authority must take immediate and aggressive action to enforce family obligations. The Housing Authority may terminate assistance for the family.
12. The family must allow the Housing Authority to inspect the unit at reasonable times and after reasonable notice.
13. The family may not commit any serious or repeated violation of the lease.
14. The family must notify the Housing Authority and the owner before the family moves from the unit or terminates the lease on notice to the owner.
15. The family must promptly give the Housing Authority a copy of any owner eviction notice.
16. The family must promptly inform the Housing Authority of the birth, adoption or current award custody of a child. The family must request Housing Authority approval to add any other family member as an occupant of the unit.
17. The family must promptly notify the Housing Authority if any family member no longer resides in the unit.
18. Members of the family may engage in legal profit making activities in the unit, but only if such activities are incidental to primary use of the unit for residence by members of the family.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
**** 4. My charge was a state jail felony and no Federal Program connection, it would not apply in this situation.
As you can see we have not as stated broken any violations of the Family Responsibilities. As seen to follow in Montgomery County Housing Authority letter from Ms. Diane Pyles, Housing Coordinator.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Montgomery County Housing Authority
1022 McCall
Conroe, Texas 77301
936-539-4984
FAX: 936-539-9239
August 26, 2004
Tony Guidry
14447 W. Lee shore Dr.
Willis, Texas 77318
Dear Mr. Guidry,
During the processing of your renewal, and updated criminal history report was performed through Public Data. It was discovered that you had committed act that resulted in a felony arrest\conviction during the term of your assistance. The Board of Director of Montgomery County Housing Authority voted in a resolution to the Admin Plan a policy that states: participants in the Housing Choice Voucher Program that commit a criminal act(s) resulting in a felony arrest\conviction is grounds for termination of assistance. This policy is in line with the Family Responsibilities and the One Strike Policy implemented by HUD.
Your assistance will terminate September 30, 2004 due to violation of family responsibilities and regulatory policy.
If you are not in agreement with this decision, you have a right to an informal hearing. An appeal must be submitted in writing within 10 days from the date of this letter.
Sincerely
Diane Pyles
Housing Coordinator
Montgomery County Housing Authority
1022 McCall Street
Conroe, Texas 77301
936.539.4984 telephone
936.539.9239 fax
Date: Aug. 26, 2004
Re: Termination of Contract
Dear Tony Guidry
Contract # 10638 will terminate effective Sept 30, 2004. According to the HAPP Contract, when the lease terminates the Contract terminates. The lease will terminate because:
Violation of family responsibilities
If you disagree with this action you have a right to request an informal review. A review must be requested in writing within ten days from the date of this letter.
Sincerely,
Diane Pyles,
Housing Coordinator
Cc: Landlord/file
Please, our family needs your help. We currently receive:
· SSI $ 514.00
· TANF: $ 188.00
· Food Stamps: $ 256.00
Our total monthly household income is: $ 702.00 a month. If we loose Housing we will be homeless and destitute. This cannot be right. Please help.
Sincerely,
Tony A. Guidry
Tony A. Guidry