I have written several times about Virginia senate candidate Jim Webb’s confusion over affirmative action. First he opposed it; then he supported it; now he sort of supports it. (See here, here, here, and here.) Based on his comments in his first debate with Sen. George Allen, he’s still confused.
During the primary, some African Americans questioned Webb’s commitment to affirmative action. Webb said Saturday that he supports affirmative action for African Americans but does not believe it should be extended to other minority groups. If it is, Webb said he wants affirmative action programs opened up to poor whites.
So, Webb favors preferences for blacks but not Hispanics or Native Americans. Thus he obviously does not believe in the “diversity” justification that the Supremes have narrowly endorsed, but he does believe in the compensation-for-past-injustice rationale that the Supremes firmly rejected in a case from Richmond, Richmond v. Croson.
As we’ve seen (too many times to cite), the liberal women of Michigan are having a fit because of fear that MCRI will take away their preferential treatment. I wonder if Webb believes in preferences for women. If not, he should say so. If he does, and if he also supports extending current preferences for blacks to Hispanics, Native Americans, probably Pacific Islanders, and poor whites, exactly who in this new Webb-world would be excluded from preferences? (And some people wonder why Democrats have trouble attracting the votes of middle class white men.)
