Citation
Black progress through race neutral policy

Material Information

Title:
Black progress through race neutral policy deconstructing American classical liberalism, the Workforce Investment Act, and modern racial inequality
Creator:
Briscoe, Chaz E. ( author )
Place of Publication:
Denver, CO
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
1 electronic file (107 pages). : ;

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( Master of Arts)
Degree Grantor:
University of Colorado Denver
Degree Divisions:
Department of Political Science, CU Denver
Degree Disciplines:
Political science

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Post-racialism -- United States ( lcsh )
Race discrimination -- United States ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Review:
Race neutral language has been used extensively as a solution to race explicit problems in America. Also termed colorblindness, the doctrine attempts to address racial disparity in this country by non-explicit racial means. In the case of the United States' Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination report to the United Nations this race neutral policy making proposes addressing the problem of racial disparity by targeting the neediest members of society. However with racial inequality at an all-time high the doctrine of race neutrality fails to accomplish its intended goal. By analyzing the theoretical liberal foundations of colorblindness, by analyzing race neutrality's practice during the New Deal, and by questioning its effectiveness within current policy, this study will approach the question of race neutrality's effect on elevating black progress. In attempting this analysis it became woefully insufficient to frame discrimination as an isolated occurrence within one race. It has been well documented that African American wealth is a small fraction of that of white Americans. However, by recreating a frame to compare the advantages and harms African Americans and white Americans encounter, a more comprehensive perspective can assess how discrimination structures opportunities in divergent, racially explicit patterns. In this pattern it becomes identifiable that racial exclusion is not a zero sum, but functions in way that collectively promotes and disenfranchises one group over the other. In essence obtaining this understanding contributes to a new narrative. This narrative is necessary and needed to obliterate the obscurity of persistent inequality. Even more this narrative will address racial progress while exposing the systematic acceleration of racial wealth disparity, power, and agency. In consequence of race neutrality's ambivalence the case study of the Workforce Investment Act will indicate that instead of race neutral policy facilitating a modern practice of racial remediation, it in actuality, continues the social status quo of proffering privileges to dominant white society. Understanding this outcome, an agenda of racial budgeting is provided to fill in where race neutral policy has failed. These racial budgets would create an analysis of policy that would gauge the impact of initiatives on communities of color. This arrangement would alter the frame of an undeserved privilege to one particular demographic, and democratically reaffirm the value of that community to the rest of society.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.A.)--University of Colorado Denver. Political science
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographic references.
System Details:
System requirements: Adobe Reader.
General Note:
Department of Political Science
Statement of Responsibility:
by Chaz E. Briscoe.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
903536508 ( OCLC )
ocn903536508

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
BLACK PROGRESS THROUGH RACE NEUTRAL POLICY:
DECONTRSUCTING AMERICAN CLASSICAL LIBERALISM, THE WORKFORCE INVESTMENT ACT, AND MODERN RACIAL INEQUALITY
by
CHAZ E. BRISCOE
B.A., Indiana University, New Albany, 2011
A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Political Science Program
2014


2014
CHAZ E. BRISCOE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
11


This thesis for
the Master of Arts degree by Chaz E. Briscoe has been approved for the Political Science Program
by
Lucy McGuffey, Chair Glenn Morris Michael Berry
November 21, 2014


Briscoe, Chaz E. (M.A., Political Science)
Black Progress through Race Neutral Policy: Deconstructing American Classical Liberalism, the Workforce Investment Act, and Modern Racial Inequality Thesis directed by Associate Professor Lucy McGuffey.
ABSTRACT
Race neutral language has been used extensively as a solution to race explicit problems in America. Also termed colorblindness, the doctrine attempts to address racial disparity in this country by non-explicit racial means. In the case of the United States Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination report to the United Nations this race neutral policy making proposes addressing the problem of racial disparity by targeting the neediest members of society. However with racial inequality at an all-time high the doctrine of race neutrality fails to accomplish its intended goal. By analyzing the theoretical liberal foundations of colorblindness, by analyzing race neutralitys practice during the New Deal, and by questioning its effectiveness within current policy, this study will approach the question of race neutralitys effect on elevating black progress.
In attempting this analysis it became woefully insufficient to frame discrimination as an isolated occurrence within one race. It has been well documented that African American wealth is a small fraction of that of white Americans. However, by recreating a frame to compare the advantages and harms African Americans and white Americans encounter, a more comprehensive perspective can assess how discrimination structures opportunities in divergent, racially explicit patterns. In this pattern it becomes identifiable that racial exclusion is not a zero sum, but functions in way that collectively promotes and disenfranchises one group over the other. In essence obtaining this understanding


contributes to a new narrative. This narrative is necessary and needed to obliterate the obscurity of persistent inequality. Even more this narrative will address racial progress while exposing the systematic acceleration of racial wealth disparity, power, and agency.
In consequence of race neutralitys ambivalence the case study of the Workforce Investment Act will indicate that instead of race neutral policy facilitating a modern practice of racial remediation, it in actuality, continues the social status quo of proffering privileges to dominant white society. Understanding this outcome, an agenda of racial budgeting is provided to fill in where race neutral policy has failed. These racial budgets would create an analysis of policy that would gauge the impact of initiatives on communities of color. This arrangement would alter the frame of an undeserved privilege to one particular demographic, and democratically reaffirm the value of that community to the rest of society.
The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication.
Approved: Lucy McGuffey
v


DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to all the various streams of existence. Existence is comprised of random firings, mistakes, and accidents. However in the beauty of it all, as human beings experiencing this existence, life plays out seamlessly. Out of all the chance in the universe the current moment is created, not too soon, not too late, but right on time. So to all those voices that came before, to all those voices that now dont know to speak, and to all those voices that will come; this work is dedicated to you.
Im not interested in anybodys guilt. Guilt is a luxury that we can no longer afford. I know you didnt do it, and I didnt do it either, but I am responsible for it because I am a man and a citizen of this country and you are responsible for it, too, for the very same reason... Anyone who is trying to be conscious must begin to dismiss the vocabulary which weve used so long to cover it up, to lie about the way things are.
- James Baldwin
vi


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author of this thesis seeks to acknowledge all those who have supported the culmination of this effort. That explicitly means my parents, my friends, my professors, and my colleagues. However I must also acknowledge those random strangers who shared a kind word or even those potential connections that I have lost in the process. From offering monetary support, an ear to listen, challenging my positions, providing mentorship over coffee, a shoulder to cry on, or simply the silence and quiet understanding of my absence, words cannot express how important every minute contribution has been. I take none of it for granted. I humbly accept lifes blessings, as simply a guy from Kentucky trying to live the love that has continually found its way in my direction.
vn


TABLES OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
I. FOREWORD 1
Introduction 1
Thesis Argument & Organization 5
Scholastic Context 7
Conclusion 13
II. LITERATURE REVIEW 16
Introduction 16
Liberalism 19
Plessyv. Ferguson 22
The New Deal 24
Civil Rights 1960s to the 1980s 27
Current Disparities 32
Race Forward Conclusion 35
III. THEORETICAL & METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK 39
Introduction 39
Ira Katznelson Theoretical Frame 41
Wealth Accumulation/Racial Dispossession Methodological Frame 51 Conclusion 59
IV. WORKFORCE INVESTMENT ACT: CASE STUDY 61
61
viii
Introduction


Research Design 62
Variable Description 66
Observations 71
Evaluation & Conclusion 78
V. SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY 82
Introduction 82
Gender/Racial Budgeting 84
The Rallying Cry of Ferguson 87
Institutional Criticism 89
Conclusion Post Racial America and the Current Reality 90
BIBFIOGRAPHY 92
APPENDIX 97
ix


LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
1. Representation of Data for Illinois 73
2. Representation of Data for New Jersey 74
3. Representation of Data for Florida 74
4. Representation of Data for Arkansas 75
5. Representation of Data for Texas 75
6. Representation of Data for Arizona 76
7. Representation of Data for California 76
8. Representation of Data for Washington 77
9. Significance Test 77
x


CHAPTER I
FOREWORD
Introduction
The question of this thesis came out of the persistence of racial disparities. After graduate study and working for the Obama Campaign in 2008, the realization set in that there was a lot to learn in terms of social movements and power in politics. In particular, the African American experience had a substantial foundation and dynamic contribution to American democracy. There were revolutionaries, and moderates. The ideological stances of African Americans were as completely polarizing, from Integrationists to those who advocated African Nationalism, as among any other political tradition. However, when faced with the modern American racial experience, this current generation appears to contribute little to the black freedom movement. Overall, from the age group 18-25, 47 percent oppose special efforts aimed at minority students, while only 38 percent favor them (Kingkade). As current youth turn their back on affirmative action, how would, without it, the academic diversity of many African Americans have differed. Or even more, what does it indicate that such race-conscious policies ass affirmative action are identified as detrimental pariahs to American politics.
It was these positions that produced an inquiry into how systems of race are perpetuated today. Even though it has become dominant hegemony to abhor discrimination and racial division, there is still such a wide racial wealth divide. It has been established that America is a colorblind nation, or at least proposes to be, but yet blacks and whites in employment face completely different truths. One race faces discrimination tactics such as last hired- first fired, lower labor participation rates and
1


occupational segregation while the other does not. So what does it truly mean to be colorblind or race-neutral? How is this American? How is this social construction post-racial?
The answers to the questions were as complex as African American experience and ideology itself, as complex as any life, and way too expansive to go uncritiqued. As the state is one of the main actors in politics, it felt apropos to examine how the state perpetuates, or at least fails to alleviate, inequality. State action is the trigger for constitutional review of policy and standardizes the context for such analysis. With economic disempowerment serving as the greatest encumbrance of historical black disenfranchisement, an analysis of how the government provides aid to foster black economic growth needed evaluation. The classic example of government efforts in social policy is the New Deal. Comprised of multiples acts targeting employment, housing, and education, the New Deal was an attempt by the U.S. government to relieve extreme poverty due to the Great Depression. One effort the federal government utilizes more recently to remediate racial discrimination is the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) (Department of State 2007). However, as the New Deal race neutral policy has exhibited, federal policy may produce white wealth accumulation while continuing patterns of racial discrimination (Katznelson 2005). In essence the inquiry of more present analysis must address whether contemporary race-neutral policies, such as WIA, contribute to trends of the splintering gap of black disaccumulation and white advancement.
To address black exclusion and economic disenfranchisement, the argument of this thesis will address what effect the Workforce Investment Act has had on black labor
2


participation. In providing a scope of the disparity between the black and white races, the case study investigation will analyze the effects of the WIA on white-labor participation as well. By analyzing these two demographics, an observation will be created detailing the discordant and discriminatory access for one race over the other. While the New Deal policies facilitated black disaccumulation, the policies at the same time enabled white Americans to accumulate assets. Given that fact, the case study analysis will attempt to draw out the patterns of these disparities. It is the argument of this essay that though the WIA is considered race-neutral, because of the racial underpinnings of colorblind liberalism, the benefit/target of the policy still disproportionately differs between the races. Through this study the reader will observe the connections of liberalism, race-neutral policy, and current racial inequities. By creating these links the reader can learn how current inequalities are a part of a historical disempowerment facilitated by a colorblind doctrine that neither represents material circumstances nor meets the necessary steps to reach black-white parity.
This work will place a critical eye on power in racial politics. Significant research has been conducted in racial politics; however less has been accomplished to characterize how current state policies perpetuate racial inequities. Studies of racial inequality instead tend to advocate both a mix of race neutral and race conscious policy, or conclude in advocating a multicultural alliance. For instance, studies will advocate that for people of color to advance it is necessary for the discourse to include a diversity of cultures instead of a particular focus on one race. As a consequence of the 1990s trend of identity politics, scholars within the field of political science have shied from single issue movements. However, instead of confronting the ineffectiveness of race neutral politics,
3


the field has tried to find the little good in its utility as to preserve government structures. Though agreement exists about the importance of the intersectionality of many forms of oppression, the first step must start by deconstructing the legacies of race, class, and gender in American society. This deconstruction must occur before scholars can consolidate the issues into a comprehensive discourse. Nevertheless, by not critiquing the state and contesting political homogenization, social justice advocates fall within the familiar power structure of the status quo. Every policy should be critiqued for its intended goals and its practical outcomes. For far too long policy has in fact been used to maintain power dominance. If social equality is the goal, then there must be accompanied by a redistribution of power, and at every turn a determination to alter repressive structures that proffer inequalities existence. This thesis provides a step toward this analysis by critiquing the racial legacy of race-neutral policy and by examining the racial impacts of state policy.
The re-election of President Barack Obama has shown that the American electorate no longer needs white liberal ideology to win elections. This means that it is no longer necessary to appeal to a white majority for fear of appearing too cozy with the 47%. The makeup of President Obamas re-election win demonstrates the diversity of the emerging electorate. As a consequence the next steps require renewed action, renewed mobilization and a renewed discourse, as the promise of an electoral shift is ripe for all demographics, especially minority communities, to decide what is in their best interest.
4


Thesis Argument & Organization
It is imperative to begin this discussion with the construction of the current context of race relations. Due to the ambivalent post-racial nature of colorblindness there has been a preponderance of confusion about where race relations actually stand in America. This ambivalence questions whether the racial dilemma is improving or deteriorating (Holmes 2007). This question goes along with the thesis, as the examination of the Workforce Investment Act serves as a proxy for current racial progress. The Workforce Investment Act is a federal policy that fund and structures job training programs. The colorblind doctrine tends to obfuscate the history of racial discrimination, so it is imperative to establish a foundation for current racial realities.
Linking the previous discussion of black disparity to black exclusion, this thesis argues that the Workforce Investment Act is a part of a systematic disparity perpetuated by race conscious benefits disguised as race neutral policy. In theory race neutral policy would apply universally to ah races equally. However in practice what has been shown is that benefits are instead bestowed to one race over another. The argument of race neutral intentions versus race neutral outcomes will be developed by analyzing parallel black and white workforce training participation and black and white labor access. The assumption is that the historical discrimination of African Americans in employment justifies a remedy to correct black labor exclusion. The Katznelson methodological approach presents that true remediation is necessary due to the evidence of how discordant benefits have been accumulated by whites and not African Americans. In that sense the argument investigates not simply how much one group increases compared to another, but the rate at which each racial group is benefiting or not benefiting from race neutral policy. Again,
5


this is understood with the consideration that true affirmative action would target the accelerating gap between the two demographics. At its most expansive breadth this argument will engage these issues of stubborn black/white disparity, address historic systemic patterns of racial discrimination, and contextually place this reality within race relations today.
The incongruent pattern of reversing affirmative action programs while racial wealth indicators are worsening creates an imbalanced reality of racial progress. If the gap is worsening, now is not the time to pull back assistance. This reality brings this thesis to an analysis of the idea and practice of colorblindness. This is an important place for this discussion as understanding the term is imperative to advancing the inefficiency or usefulness of the colorblind doctrine.
Colorblindness implicitly functions within the context of race and policy. Its application is primarily due to liberal assumptions about the role of race and the role of government. The assumptions are encapsulated in concepts such as universalism, meritocracy, class, and abstract individualism. The connection of colorblindness and American liberalism lies in their ability to fashion a society where rights are distributed to some, where policy is dominated by a limited majority, and where a false observation of minorities controls societal expectations.
This thesis is organized in the following manner: beginning with the introduction, the literature review, a historical analysis of race neutral language in policy, followed by a discussion of the methodological contribution of Ira Katznelson and capital accumulation, a case study of the WIA, and concludes with an evaluative look toward the future.
6


After a chapter on the connection of race neutrality and liberalism, the next chapter after that will introduce Ira Katznelson. His work will provide a lens and methodology of how the race-neutral New Deal policy racially stratified its benefits. The case study will ensue next, followed by the conclusion stating the evaluation and significance of this thesis. As a part of the literature review, this chapter will next link the theoretical argument of colorblindness and inequality to sources from the field and highlight the purpose/agenda of the thesis.
Scholastic Context
The research within the rest of this chapter will defend and expose scholarly perspectives on colorblindness and race neutrality, the history of race relations, Katznelsons work with capital disaccumulation, and highlight gender budgeting research. Throughout this chapter the discussion of the literature will support the thesis in what has been contributed to the field, detail how the literature differs from prior research, and provide insight into how this work situates itself within the broader context of race politics. As such, it is imperative this literature review begin with a discussion of the field of Critical Race Theory (CRT). Much of the theoretical background for this thesis comes from this discipline within social science, whether in a legal discourse or sociological, and as a subset of social sciences will begin the analysis of how this thesis can supplement the discourse at large.
Critical Race Theory provides for this thesis the foundation of race as a social construction, encompassing the need for nuances of subtle, institutional, or institutional implicit racism (Delgado). Even more CRT contributes lessons from the black freedom movement, through scholars such as W.E.B Du Bois and postcolonists, to target race as
7


normal and indicative of American power relations (Delgado). This construction of race during CRTs founding in the 1970s and 1980s diverges from the liberal assumptions of the 1960s integration and New Deal neoliberal satisfactions of colorblindness. For this thesis the contributions of CRT is facilitated through texts such as Critical Race Theory: the Cutting Edge (Delgado), Racism Without Racists (Bonilla-Silva), The New Jim Crow (Alexander), and The History of White People (Painter) Tim Wises work Colorblind can also be included in this category. These sources not only provided background knowledge on the formation of Americas race relations, but led to the discovery of many other useful sources. Critical Race Theory supplements this thesis as the central CRT theme of race and state action parallels the similar examination of the creation of power through racial dynamics in this text. The link between classical American liberalism and race is also facilitated through the Critical Race Theory canon and texts such as Race and Manifest Destiny (Horsman) and other journal articles such as Whiteness as Property that provide nuances to the discussion of race.
Cumulatively these sources support the work of this thesis and build a framework for analyzing power from a race positive perspective. This is dissimilar to sources such as the The Moynihan Report, the Bell curve study, and sociologist Nathan Glazer which provide a perspective that the issues of racial disparity are due to culture (Office of Policy Planning and Research, 1965). By looking at the race problem as a top-down issue, whereby people of color do not comply with mainstream norms, the Moynihan Report and human capital approaches highlight an alternative viewpoint than that of this thesis. However, importantly this influences why CRT, and the views of this thesis, contribute to the field, as they offer a new investigation into old narratives. Scrutiny under CRT is
8


placed on the dominant construction of white supremacy and enables a discourse of social liberation and racial emancipation.
A major criticism of Critical Race Theory (CRT) is based on its use of law (in this instance policy) as a structure within the system as opposed to practicing a libratory position that overcomes the system (Tevino et al, 2008). As applied to this thesis, it appropriate to consider that perhaps there is a function whereby African Americans benefit from current racial dynamics outside the realm of policy and government. It is possible that by utilizing the tools of the dominant society through law and policy that CRT is at the same time reifying the importance of dominant societys structures. This line of questioning is quite productive if truly pertinent the goal of the field is to change racial empowerment and produce libratory equality. The criticism is slightly addressed within the thesis as it attempts to empower people of color beyond narratives of colorblindness. However alternatives exist beyond a CRT reading of political science of structure and agency to challenge institutions. Changes to society can occur outside the political process and institutions. This thesis acknowledges this challenge of CRT by acknowledging the role of social movements but this is but one avenue out of many.
This papers discussion of colorblindness and race-neutrality gathers from the texts Whitewashing Race (Brown et al 2003) and Black Wealth/White Wealth (Oliver & Shapiro 1995), along with other peer-reviewed journal articles. These texts provide information on current disparities and the range of black disparity throughout the years. These sources are updated by present Pew Reports. The sources presented in this discussion developed a frame by which to question the value of the race neutral narrative. Whitewashing Races research chronicles the dire political and economic realities of
9


American minorities. The research demonstrates the substantial distance between minorities across several dimensions of society. Black Wealth/White Wealth offers its own contribution to racial understanding by shifting the discourse to wealth as opposed to earnings. The shift is important because as earnings close in between the races the extenuating disparity must explained by deeper patterns. Both works differ slightly in context and in their focus Whitewashing Race in its totality explores multiple dimensions of race inequity such as housing and education, and Black Wealth/White Wealth in its investigation of economic stratification. The sources inevitably supported each other in their critique that colorblindness concealed the destructive nature of racial disparity, even though each does so from a different social platform. In their importance these sources demonstrate the dynamic nuances of understanding racial disparity. However they also provide space to counter mainstream conversations on race that provide superficial understandings of these racial realities.
Katznelsons book, When Affirmative Action was White, was pivotal to this thesis for its methodological contribution. Utilizing Katznelsons dual stream of observing both white and black demographics, while including the advantages and disadvantages of each races experiences, allowed for a much more comprehensive view of racial disparity besides a zero sum construction of winners and losers. Katznelsons accompanying journal articles provided updates of current dynamics in the understanding of capital accumulation. Besides providing a methodological framework to observe the accumulation of wealth, Katznelsons work also provides a point of deviation. Whereas Katznelson attributes race conscious benefits and race neutral policy to Southern
10


congressional members, the focus of this thesis facilitates a foundation that American prejudice cannot be ascribed to a limited regional viewpoint.
An even deeper variance is evident in the way many critical studies attribute the negative effects of white opportunity hoarding to the systemic patterns of policy discrimination attribute these discriminations to the protection racial privilege, but yet offer modest solutions. Numerous scholars, including Katznelson and Lawrence III, couch their solutions to these trends within moderate attempts of coalition building (Delgado 2013, Katznelson 2007). This neglects Critical Race Theorys literature that gets right to the core of mainstream political science studies and the need to end these discriminatory cycles of power structures. True systemic change would have to completely disrupt the status quo and political and social arrangements. However this is a pivotal contradiction between the revolutionary possibility of Critical Race Theory and the institutionalism of more moderate political scientists. Deciding whether to reform the system or perceive the system as completely alien to your identity lead to completely different perspectives on solutions and outcomes.
For the case study of this thesis, source literature was gathered around multiple studies about government action and policy. These sources detailed the effects of government policy on identity, provided information regarding race as a social indicator, and represented literature about the WIA that facilitated the case analysis. Due to the diversity of sources there was very little similarity between them. For instance, How to Record Race (Evinger) was a useful article to maintain the validity of race as a social identifier within the study. However upon researching the topic there was very little information explicitly connecting the WIA and race. The article The Limited Local
11


Impacts of Ethnic and Racial Diversity (Hopkins) is another source used, and though it focuses on race and policy, it is more targeted to criminal justice policy than employment. One important contribution of the source was that it did provide a frame for the local impacts of racial diversity, not to local politics, but national agendas (Hopkins). The study of Limited Local Impacts demonstrated that when local crime rates lowered local crime budgets increased. This inverse relationship was explained due to the preponderance of national calls that continued to elevate crime. This reality supports the thesis that American ideology such as liberalism dictates overarching concerns of race over the hypothesis of aberrational regional racism.
The data from the case study is represented by information gathered from county, state and federal labor databases. The source for labor participation is provided by the Department of Labor. Demographic information on the WIA program participants is both collected at the county and state level and compiled in databases provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Graduation rates were also accessible through state level agencies. However it is important to note that in many cases the method of data collection differed by state and even influenced the format of the statistics.
Linally, the concluding evaluation of this thesis will attempt to offer an opt-in, opt-out strategy, contrary to the multi-cultural alliances proposed by more moderate scholars within political science. The proposed evaluation will also provide a method to overcome the limits of race neutrality. This strategy is built on a discussion of the field of gender budgeting initiatives (GBI). Collaborating with other social science studies techniques can build best practices and advance the discipline. Cross-sharing techniques allow claims from varying views of justice the ability to maintain their own identities
12


while engineering creative self-empowered solutions. The gender studies use of gender budgeting provides an illustration of how institutions outside of the government policy making system can agitate for policy consideration. Yet the literature also offers a perspective of how initiatives within-government can also have reformist effects. Each approach comes with drawbacks. However a review of the field of gender budgeting enables a link between efforts to influence policy and black disenfranchisement and black empowerment. This is most notable in the instances where the sources found applying gender budget initiatives had some significant marker of success in alleviating gender equality. If the approach could be manipulated toward race, perhaps there would be a similar success in eliminating racial disparity.
The utilization of this platform also connects the political process in social movements to aspects of democratic institution building. For example this can be achieved by opening spaces of discourse that are necessary for racial progress. By requiring a focus on race and policy, similar to efforts of gender and policy in GBI, a similar benefit of equality can be anticipated for race. Despite the studies use of different approaches, in all, most programs elevated the concerns of women and contributed to a new narrative of female value in society.
Conclusion
Most convincing to the contribution of this thesis was Katznelsons work on New Deal disenfranchisement. Never before had the statement white affirmative action appeared more appropriate when analyzing the benefits of the New Deal social policies. This is contrary to how the New Deal is usually referred as the great American welfare policy. As Katznelson notes, presidents as late as President Clinton have extolled the
13


social benefits of the policy (Katznelson 2005). Economists such as Paul Krugman have lauded the policys connection to the growth of the middle class (Krugman 2009). Katznelson argues that this is a superficial understanding of New Deal policies. As narratives around colorblindness today obscure current racial disparities, the narrative of a race neutral New Deal has also disguised the disenfranchisement and systemic discrimination of African Americans experienced. However, this construction supports a mainstream understanding of American ethos that has served to depreciate race conscious policies.
To the broader topic of race politics and political science, the ambiguity of race is discussed misinforms individual perceptions, and disillusion how anyone can approach to find the truth. How can the field open up the discourse when colorblindness and race neutrality have narrowed the understandings of power and narrative? The first step is to develop the nuances to provide the details that enable a critique of the narrative and dispel the truth. This critique is achieved by understanding the connection of historically racist paradigms in America and current manifestations of the same prejudice. Next the disparity must be plainly articulated so as to understand the depth of this harm on people of color. After which society must critique its own actions to observe how it furthers these patterns currently. Lastly, equipped with this understanding two routes develop.
One of which communities of color can begin to act on alternative narratives to empower their own self-determination. Alternatively, those aligned as allies will learn a deeper understanding of their own contribution, and will also be empowered to expressively choose how to better support democratic aspirations. Abolitionist movements, the activism of W.E.B. DuBois, and the civil rights movements never ended. With that
14


understanding of historical discrimination, it is imperative that this generation evaluate how these structures of race persist today.
15


CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
As mentioned, the past several years have marked a progression and regression in American race relations. In one regard, in the year 2013, Americans witnessed the first black president inaugurated for his second term, a feat that indicated that his 2008 election was not a fluke, but a reflection of a changing America. In cinema, there has been a recent retelling of African American experiences, with movies such as The Butler and 12 Years a Slave highlighting African American contributions to American society and portraying the harms of slavery and racism. Though anecdotal, these references reflect what could be seen as the social transformation of America from its squalid past.
Despite this apparent progress, the years in review also mark regressions in Americas ability to deal with racial conflict. In June of 2013 the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act which had set the criteria for state and local preclearance. The removal of this section of the Voting Rights Act ended the requirement that states obtain congressional approval before altering voting guidelines in their state. This legal change dealt a significant blow to the enforcement of the Voting Rights Act, deconstructing the symbolic crown achievement of the Civil Rights Movement. The nations racial tolerance would further be tested following the verdict of the Trayvon Martin trial. Perspectives on the justice of the trial would split America as conservatives would advocate gun rights while black communities would take the occurrence to question the disparate treatment of black male victimhood in America. The alternative
16


perceptions of this situation emphasize the diverse experiences of race in America. For white Americans this trial would represent an affront to individual rights while for blacks it would demonstrate collective devaluing of African American lives.
While Americans find themselves attempting to fulfill the promise of equal opportunity, the present racial context demonstrates how the discourse on race still embodies the historic legacy of racism. Current rhetoric concerning merit, black criminality, and economic inequality connect to past racist assumptions of black laziness, bestiality, and cultural deterioration. Can Americans, actually declare progress and a post-racial society, or is America, in light of reformulating racial patterns, actually living in the era of a New Jim Crow (Delgado 2013) (Alexander 2010)? The New Jim Crow symbolizes racism as system of deprivation by another name. By connecting current racial dynamics to this legacy of black experiences in America a critique develops that questions if contemporary race relations are anything new. To answer the question of in what direction is Americas racial relations proceeding, it can be said that American society is progressing yet still has significant inequalities to address. This chapter will focus on the historical developments that have given rise to this ambiguity by articulating American race relations.
The inarticulation of racial understanding is a consequence of how race has been handled in society. Author David Holmes explains that much of the confusion around the race debate is a result of minimizing or ignoring the legacies and current social realities of racism (12, 2007). This minimization of race has become acceptable to American society, however, due in part to the principle of race neutrality or colorblindness. The terms race neutrality and colorblindness are often used interchangeably. The terms
17


represent a concept of viewing racial redress first through non-racial means. They ascribe a doctrine of creating social policy by means other than explicitly based on race. If other means of adjudicating services without racial categories are not possible, then policy may be created with racial implications. However even this use of race as a category must limited, as the intended goal of race neutrality is to create an inherently more equal society. Continuing racial demarcations in policy only further system of racial power that have long been obsolete. Race neutrality and colorblindness as legal ethos was first articulated in the Plessyv. Ferguson dissenting opinion. During this court case, the race neutral doctrine was advanced by the Supreme Court due to the Constitutions implied impartiality of dealing with the races (Orbe and Urban, 2011). However missing from the current post-racial discourse, and from the understanding of colorblindness then and now, is the fact that the state has never been neutral in its relationship with minority communities. Liberalism inherently reflects the existing power structures it seeks to codify in law. In American society this reflection of power is displayed in liberalisms ignorance of its underlying racist assumptions. These assumptions are embodied in the majoritys conception of their power without accepting the racial underpinnings colonial factors allowed in its success. In this regard, the discussion will explore race neutral language, policies, and remedies, and expose how white paternalistic liberalism transmits systemic power relations that persistently disempower black peoples in US law, policy, and society.
This chapter will then analyze how the use of race neutrality within the discourse on race has disproportionately disempowered African Americans. The analysis will be demonstrated through the interwoven connections between colorblindness and liberalism.
18


This analysis will be facilitated by a discussion of: Justice Harlans Plessyv. Ferguson (1896) opinion, New Deal legislation, 1960s-1980s Civil Rights Movement legislation and judicial activity, and explained through the ways race neutrality currently shapes disparities. The historical analysis will lead to a renewed focus on the material circumstances of racial disparity. By developing an understanding of the actual disparities in health, education, employment, and wealth exhibited by communities of color, the discourse on race can expand to deal with the ambiguities of a black president and black success, in light of alternate perceptions of race in black poverty and black underachievement. Both realities exist. However, in both situations of success and deprivation due to the fact of being a person a color, systemic racism influences the daily experiences. Due to heightened levels of precariousness and deprived levels of accumulation compared to white Americans, regardless of geographic location, educational attainment, or socioeconomic status, people of color fare much worse in American society. Even further, this overall study will inspire a new understanding that combines the social reality with a critical understanding that real progress must be continually and creatively evaluated.
Liberalism
It is important to remember that America was built upon racial foundations. Since the early 17th century, the government has defined and refined the status of the races (Kuznicki 2009). The 1705 Virginia Statue exemplifies this trend as the law defines a Negro as anyone with up to one-eighth African descent (Kuznicki 2009) (Delgado 2013). However this designation would not simply be a symbolic marker, but thrust Americans of African descent into servitude. This process occurred when European indentured
19


servitude was abolished in favor of the chattel enslavement of African Americans (Wise 2010). Under the guise of individual property rights, American liberalism combined the oppressive considerations of race with the ideals of American society.
American classical liberalism demonstrates an emphasis on individualism, universalism, egalitarianism and meritocracy (Holmes 2007). During the development of American classical liberalism the most important values of society would also collectively address the power aspirations of Americas dominant class (Holmes 2007). Power paralleled race as dominant group interests combined with racist assumptions of superiority. Universalism would imply universal identity construction only in so far as it agreed with the dominant white property owners perspective. There would be, on one instance, the universally accepted right to property, and in the other, the view of minority unacceptable savage use of land (Horsman). There would be no universal application of majority white and minority communities of color right to property. Individualism would suit the dominant class position in society conveniently as the principle facilitated the dominant groups uncontested access to citizenship and resources. It is easy to value individualism when the subordinate groups sacrifices go unacknowledged. Egalitarianism would be possible because Negroes or slaves were biologically subhuman, so tolerance and equality could easily be extended to those of the same dominant ethnic group while other races could be justifiably excluded due to their lack of humanity (Horsman). Even meritocracy was justified as an American ethos, even though the construction of society would limit the agency of subordinated citizens to mount challenges to white opportunity. Those outside of whiteness would not deserve the same privileges.
20


What is most disturbing about this construction of liberalism is that the narrow comprehensions of these ideals limit racial understanding today. This construction survives despite the fact that the US has never fully realized nor committed to applying these principles to everyone. It would take the social reform liberalism movement of the early 20th century for disenfranchised groups to use liberal rhetoric to expand access to the races and classes (Holmes 2007). However, progress in America has generally developed in this way. It has been Americas fundamental journey to democracy. Whether it is embodied in the womens rights, abolitionist, or anti-war movements, the process has been one of opening up American democracy to the rights of all people, whether workers, veterans, or minorities.
The individual rights perspective rather than group rights established in classical liberalism would facilitate the privileges of the dominant class. Focusing on individual interests can blur the connections to collective group experiences. By believing in a meritorious colorblind America, most Americans are able to ignore the privileges that come from being in the dominant white ethnic group. Individually, the law would grant citizens their rights, but obscure racial group preferences, creating a dichotomy that would recognize the rights of individuals, while conversely creating a blind spot to collective discrimination. This abstract liberalism acknowledges freedom and equal access, but nonetheless does nothing when it comes to implementing progressive strategies to change the whole of society (Holmes 2007). If anything the abstraction only obscures the discourse with questions of morality, without ever evaluating practically how well outcomes advance efforts to stated goals. In other words, the goals of freedom and equality will remain unattainable as long as progress is gauged by well-meaning
21


intentions and not statistical evidence of racial parity. To get to this parity however, classical liberalism and expressively American values must not only find room for collective minority experiences but must also provide space for how those experiences are produced by interactions with a dominant white group. True racial progress does not shy away from addressing these realities. Rather substantial progress would directly deconstruct these norms and social institutions.
Plessy\. Ferguson
As the sole dissent in the trial that would create the separate but equal doctrine, Justice Harlans lauded opinion presents one of the clearest examples of Americas race neutral ambivalence. In declaring the Constitution of the United States does not, I think permit any authority to know the race of those entitled to be protected in the enjoyment of such rights, and while pronouncing our Constitution is color-blind, (1, Mckenna 1984) Justice Harlan also proclaims the superiority of the white race. He deems [the white race] to be the dominant race in this country (1, Mckenna 1984). However how does this logically occur? The dominant race is dominant because of its monopoly of power. So, wouldnt it be exactly the point of majoritarian politics to protect the minority races? By supporting the colorblind adjudication of the law while also defending racial hierarchy, Justice Harlan attempts to separate the innate relationship of power and structure in society. The expectation that the preferences of society are not reflected in law and the law does not reflect the preferences of society strikes at the core of Justice Harlans argument. Instead of taking on the subjective nature of legal interpretation, Justice Harlan attempts to reinforce the objectivity of the Constitution and the objectivity of racial supremacy. Justice Harlan ignores the subjective influences of society on the law and
22


infers the laws objectivity, meaning unbiased, neutral, and impartial. An assumed connection prevails that legal procedure equates substantive social equality. While it is logically understandable that a justices interest would be to maintain order and protect the Constitution, his legal pronouncement obscured the racial realities of the era.
Justice Harlan has gained notoriety for his attempt to disagree with the majority in the Plessy v. Ferguson court case in that he viewed that the Louisiana law was explicitly meant to exclude African Americans (coloreds) from white-designated coaches (Delgado 2013)1. Justice Harlans perspective that the recent amendments of the supreme law [the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments]... obliterated the race line from our systems of governments (1, Mckenna 1984) does more, however, to disempower race progress as solved, than it does to empower African Americans. By acknowledging that African Americans were now under the protection of Reconstruction-era amendments, Justice Harlan was making the claim that declaration was all that was necessary to solve racial discrimination. Economic remediation for slavery, disenfranchisement from settlement law, and all past injuries had been addressed in the creation of the Reconstruction-era amendments. The race question appeared settled. Equality gained. In Justice Harlans view the dominant class had made the Constitution colorblind in the execution of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments. Conveniently Justice Harlan ignores the grounds of slavery that led to the creation of the Amendments in the first place (Kuznicki 2009).
However, any student of history knows race had been far from obliterated. Almost 60 years after the Plessy ruling, the Civil Rights Movement would make continued claims of justice based on the equal protections within the 14th amendment (Ochs 2006). However, in the six decades following the Plessy ruling, the decision of separate but
1 Proceedings and context of Plessyv. Ferguson: Slaughterhouse Case, Tilden-Hayes
23


equal would make possible the devastating implementation of Jim Crow. This would facilitate the mass lynchings of African Americans, dilapidated school resources, and de jure segregation. Race relations got worse before they got better. Claims of white superiority, affirmed by the courts and social context, would increase the dominant class oppression.
Even worse than the Jim Crow era to come, was what African Americans had lost due to the Plessy ruling. In one fatal decision years of black chattel servitude were putatively wiped away, their memory obscured. Regardless of material conditions, equal standing and citizenship had been extended to the Negro and the Negro had joyously accepted. However, the dominant class was still the dominant class and the law had not challenged any of that construction. The white majority still held power over minority citizens as it had held power over them before as slaves. Even more, due to the new equality garnered by the Reconstruction-era amendments there would be nothing minority African Americans could do to further their appeal to highlight their condition. The judiciary helped only those who could not help themselves (Carter 2011). African Americans now had equal protection under the law. By the 1930s, this white paternalistic liberalism that subjected African Americans to societal degradation, not fair standing, would develop to such a degree that effectively 60 to 75 percent of African Americans would be excluded from the New Deal, Americas most progressive welfare policy (Katznelson 2005).
The New Deal
If the Constitution is colorblind, then the legislation of Congress should analogously be race neutral as well. However, by targeting exclusionary practices in the
24


New Deal toward predominately black industries, southern politicians were able to recreate in America a second -class slave system all over again. The two industries excluded from the benefits of the program were agricultural workers and domestic workers. These industries would coincidentally parallel the farmhand and house slave occupations of the American slave and sharecropping systems. The dominant class was not letting go of its power. This is evident in personalities such as Theodore Bilbo, Eugene Bull Connor, and Strom Thurmond (Kuznicki 2009). Important to these personages were that they maintained the racial status quo. Their own self-interest of perpetuating this racial order became instrumental to their own privilege in society.
It would be through the unlikely pairing of progressive northern Democrats and southern Dixiecrats that the New Deal legislation would pass. For both sides the passage of the New Deal would be a result of their own interest-based reading of liberalism. However for both northern Democrats and southern Dixiecrats maintaining the exclusion of African Americans would have minimal effect on their own interests. The obvious exclusion of African Americans through targeted industries would undermine liberal claims of universal policy applicability. The exclusion of African Americans also meant that the legislation was not egalitarian either. By stratifying the access and benefits of the program, the policy did not hold up to the value of equal opportunity of all persons. Nevertheless the legislation did provide a moral framework for ameliorating the Depression era economic crisis. This goal of addressing economic deprivation while not explicitly deviating from a race-neutral interpretation, allowed politicians at the time the ability to satisfy both agendas.
25


In consequence, the race-neutral New Deal policy exacerbated the wealth gap between the races to outlandish proportions. The state and local administration of New Deal policies would limit African American access to aid in housing, education, welfare, and labor (Kuznicki 2009). In some southern counties federal relief monies would exclude all blacks entirely (Katznelson 2005). African Americans would share in the cost of being US citizens, paying taxes and participating in war efforts, while not enjoying most of the benefits (Grigsby 1994). By 1947, 55% of eligible black veterans would be denied college acceptance despite GI funding (Katznelson 2005). Between 1947 and 1971 the Service Adjustment Act of the New Deal would appropriate ninety-five billion dollars through educational assistance, federal home loans, and business loans. However, in 1984 when these guarantees matured, it would be exposed that the majority of the allocations had created asset accumulation for whites, and left behind African Americans (Katznelson 2005). Home ownership as a result of New Deal programs had facilitated a white median household net worth of $39,135 compared to a black median household net worth of $3,397 (Katznelson 2005). These vast differences in net worth emphasized the disparate realities of black home ownership and white home ownership. Even further though this disparity demonstrates the considerable benefit that access to the New Deal provided.
The economic disparity of the races would also disempower African Americans in political and social contexts. Segregation throughout much of the United States would test the humanity of African Americans. Segregation not only meant dilapidated amenities, but also humiliation, intimidation, and death. Socially, the African American experience would be wholly different. Redlining had isolated African Americans into
26


urban ghettos, as white flight would move the dominant class to the suburbs (Katznelson 2005). During Reconstruction African Americans had managed to gain some political offices. However, in the New Deal era blacks would also regress in the political franchise. In 1901, the last African American would serve his term in Congress and another 72 years would pass before another African Americans would represent the South in Congress again. Pessimistically this reality portrayed for blacks in America a community without representation in their own society.
This construction of society set the course for the Civil Rights Movement. Similar to the abolitionist movements around the Civil War and the Plessy v. Ferguson Reconstruction-era, and akin to the social reform movements of the New Deal era, the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s would attempt to fulfill these gaps in access. It would be through social agitation that the Civil Rights Movement would endeavor to reshape Americas potential and move the nation towards democracy.
Civil Rights 1960s to the 1980s
The time period from 1960 to the mid-1980s would evince rapid change in American race relations. It would represent the worst and the best in African American social progress. It would combine the progressivism of the 1930s and 1940s with the separate-but-equal moral collapse of Reconstruction in a short span of 20 years. In one generation race relations would go from being the most prominent issue on the American agenda to one of the least tolerated topics. However, by tracing race neutralitys ideological influence it is possible to understand why.
One of the key contributions of the Civil Rights Movement and Johnsons Great Society lies in their ability to remove the distribution of resources from the state level to
27


the federal (Kuznicki 2009). As a result of successful political advocacy by African Americans, the US would pass the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965. These pieces of legislation would effectively empower African Americans in the areas of labor, education, and voter protection. Utilizing the 14th Amendments Equal Protection Clause the Civil Rights legislation would pry open industries African Americans had struggled to enter. African Americans would also gain access to the nations most prestigious universities (Katznelson 2005). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), instituted by the Civil Rights Act, would create a pattern of affirmative action in federal contracts and education that would become a significant part of new African American achievement (Katznelson 2005).
Besides the difference in state versus federal jurisdiction, African Americans were also empowered by the transformation of affirmative action from not just the avoidance of discrimination, but a progressive policy that could also provide compensatory remedies (Katznelson 2005). Food aid and rental housing would be extended to African Americans for being members of a victimized category, extending coverage beyond widows and poor women (Katzenlson 2005, Kuznicki 2009). The EEOC would address the larger patterns of racial exclusion rather than case-by-case discrimination to create structural changes (Katzelson 2005). The early years of the Nixon administration would see affirmative action go even further, adopting a doctrine of disparate impact (Katznelson 2005). With this, discrimination would not only be defined by intentional individual acts of disparate treatment but also include procedures and processes that had adverse impacts on African Americans as a group (Katnzelson 2005).
28


However, where the Civil Rights era legislation fell short is in its inability to tackle the systemic causes of racial inequality, primarily capital accumulation (Kuznicki 2009). Though affirmative action was actually limiting discrimination, it did little to remedy years of black disenfranchisement and economic exclusion. Despite gains in income parity, without the similar gains of a New Deal welfare system African Americans were still trapped in poverty (Betsey 1992, Kuznicki 2009). Access to upper-level management, as a part of Nixons Philadelphia Plan, was diversifying the labor force like never before (Katznelson 2005). This advancement evidenced the social transformation of race relations. As with the Reconstruction amendments however, these measures only applied to the current situation and situations in the future. The effects had little to do with the past. The Philadelphia Plan helped African Americans in the labor market as it was at that time. Nevertheless, the policy still did not deal with the accumulated disadvantages that accrued from previous inaccessibility to upper-level incomes and the loss of wealth associated with this exclusion.
By the late 1970s the public would tire of the 1960s civil rights discourse of race conscious policy. Writing in the mid-1970s, sociologist Nathan Glazer would comment on how government actions were racially dividing the country into groups with differential rights (Katznelson 2005). The perception of unmerited help based on group claims and not individual rights would resonate with the conservative base. For conservative leaders this view would serve their political agenda as they would use any rationale to dismantle 1960s and 1970s social programs and question the legitimacy of any program committed to bringing about social equality (Betsey 1992).
29


The 1978 Regents of the University of California v. Bakke case highlights this changing attitude towards race conscious policy in the post 1960s liberal discourse. In a 5-4 vote the court would decide the colleges admission policy unconstitutional for the University of California Davis attempt to reserve 16 of its one hundred medical spaces for minority students (Katznelson 2005). Citing the 14th amendment, the court deemed that the quota system violated the constitutional equal protection requirement, but that race could be utilized as factor if not the sole determinant (Katznelson 2005).2 At issue was whether it was justifiable to allow preferential treatment for a group based on race. The case would begin the case law since Bakke to narrow and entrench strict scrutiny. Interestingly, after centuries of preferential treatment for the dominant white ethnic group the court would suddenly find it detrimental to extend preferential privileges to minorities (Katznelson 2005). As in the case of Plessyv. Ferguson, the extension of concern by the dominant class was enough to facilitate remediation and create racial parity. The courts would reason that the protections of the colorblind Constitution and the Civil Rights Act would be enough of a testament to Americas amelioration of racial discrimination. The unmerited privilege of alumni status in education as a racial benefit of white status failed to ever be challenged (Winkler 2003).
As a result of the Bakke case all affirmative action programs are evaluated under strict scrutiny. This means that affirmative action programs, to be constitutional, have to display a compelling governmental interest and yet also be narrowly tailored to specific harms, but only after exhausting race neutral options first (Betsey 1992). Not only did this precedent completely reverse the understanding of equal protection that had been gained during the Civil Rights Movement, but created a standard in place of an almost
2 Grutter v. Bollinger, Gratz v. Bollinger, and Roberts decisions.
30


unattainable threshold for racial discrimination (Carter 2011). The threshold became excessive due to its demands of proving governmental interest and intent, the thresholds requirement of limited responsibility and specific harms, and the requirement the doctrine places on the defendant to find creative race adverse options.
Strict scrutiny would frustrate progressive policy attempts. Conservatives suspicions of affirmative action and race conscious policies were complemented by a legal doctrine of strict scrutiny. By subjecting policy to strict scrutiny American conservatives had found a way to implement their discourse of reverse discrimination. In their perspective, African Americans had so abruptly reached parity to whites that the legitimacy of any government action undertaken explicitly to correct racial inequality warranted heightened suspicion (Carter 2011). Anti-white bias had overnight become a larger societal issue than anti-black discrimination (Carter 2011). In accord with their own views of reality, members of the dominant class justified dismantling affirmative action by using the dogmas of liberalism, such as individualism and meritocracy, as a foundation for their critique, without understanding the particularistic privilege their own positions afforded (Holmes 2007). Perceptions of white victimization relied on liberalisms individualistic view of society. Individual white Americans were not the cause of the racial discrimination and did not feel they deserved to carry the burden of paying for it. For example, to stereotype a needy welfare queen corroborated with principles of deserved merit. It became the view of many Americans that the benefits enjoyed by the welfare queen were underserved. In the eyes of a majority of whites minorities did not deserve privileges. Even more so, these whites definitely felt minorities did not deserve the privileges of whiteness.
31


Colorblindness would also facilitate a race neutral subjective reading of Martin Luther King, Jr.s I Have a Dream speech. To correspond to a colorblind interpretation of the speech judgment by individual character became the goal of racial tolerance. This interpretation would be dictated by the dominant class (Holmes 2007). It would not serve to empower a new racial understanding as it was intended. Post-1960s liberal discourse would see government action and not white reactionaries as the threat to social cohesion. Those controlling the discourse would forget the totality of Kings speech that had included a history of discrimination and an accumulation its effects detailing the economic, political, and social ramifications (Carter 2011).
Current Disparities
By the 1980s white economists were proclaiming, black progress. However, the perceived progress was an illusion. After a group of black economists detailed the sample selectivity bias of black progress studies, the economists would prove that the individual earnings of the initial study would not hold true for household samples (Betsey 1992). By only looking at those within the labor force, the initial study would fail to represent the systemic pattern of black exclusion in the labor market (Betsey 1992).
Black achievement gained through the 1960s had crested and by the 1980s was either stagnating or declining.
The practice of placing the blame on the victim was overplayed. It would serve to explain peoples fears or justify their own depravity. However blaming the victim was not a new tactic. Perceptions that remaining racial disparities were due more to selfsabotage or cultural determinism than to actual inequality would follow the historic pattern of American racial stereotyping and prejudice (Hamilton 2012). African slaves
32


were inferior not due to the violent system of American colonialism, but due to an inherent weakness. African Americans in the Jim Crow South would not be depraved due to oppressive systems of segregation and economic exploitation, but an inability to maximize the benefits given to them. By the time of the 1991 Civil Rights Restoration Act, caps were being put in place to limit the amount of damages retrievable from discrimination suits (Duster 2005). These caps were premised on the idea that only so much racial remediation could be accomplished through legal action. Of those damages, rewards were only applicable in cases of intentional discrimination, limiting justifiable discrimination to actions where intent and malice could be determined (Duster 2005). This has limited most Title VII discrimination cases to issues of harassment, termination, demotion or refusal to promote (Duster 2005). Very few cases are proactive and question discrimination in hiring and opening access to opportunities, where remedial efforts would have significant effect (Duster 2005). These changes, however, were premised on the ideas of colorblindness and the triviality of black plight.
As a result of strict scrutiny and reverse discrimination, most discrimination suits now benefit cases of age prejudice (Duster 2005). The applicability to age discrimination is removed from the intention of civil rights legislation to address racial issues. Age discrimination claims make up one-quarter of all EEOC cases and one-half of all monetary awards (Duster 2005). Even more detrimental to racial equality, is that of all age discrimination suits, three quarters of the cases were filed by Caucasian men (Duster 2005). The preponderance of white men claiming discrimination is counter to the intention of the legislation to aid in minority relief.
33


When considering the devastating effects of the 2007 financial crisis and resulting recession, it is hard to believe that it is white men who need protecting in American society. Take for example the 2008 median hourly wage. For a black male full time worker the median hourly wage was $14.90 (Hamilton 2012). However, for a white male full time worker in the same period the median hourly wage was $20.84, almost a $6 dollar difference (Hamilton 2012). This is in spite of educational attainment and merit. Black males with a high school diploma or bachelors degree in 2008 still made 74% of what white males earned and 61% percent of white male earnings when compared to white high school dropouts (Hamilton 2012). The difference in earnings despite the educational achievement of blacks, or higher earnings in spite of lower educational status for whites, illustrates how much racial privilege exists and displays disenfranchisement of African Americans.
Observing disparities in unemployment further details Americas racial dilemma. For instance, in September of 2011, while white unemployment stood at 8%, twice as many African Americans were unemployed (Hamilton 2012). However this pattern is not an aberration but the historical trend. During the past 40 years there has been only one year in which black unemployment fell below 8% (Hamilton). Conversely there have been fewer than 5 years in the past 40 in which white unemployment has exceeded the same 8% benchmark (Hamilton 2012). In other words, these statistics show that when white unemployment exceeds a certain level it becomes a national issue, while when black unemployment exceeds a far greater level it is still a considered norm. Yet it is minority affirmative action programs that are deemed suspicious while it is the plight of the minorities that is so undervalued. These are the statistics presented to prove America
34


is a post racial society. These are the numbers that support reverse discrimination. Nevertheless the unequal importance of one group and not the other portrays the epitome of discrimination.
Racial wealth disparity is but another example of American discrimination. Between these two racial groups of black and whites the absolute wealth gap exceeds $100,000 (Hamilton 2012). While prior to 2007 a typical black family possessed a dime to every dollar of white household wealth, since the recession the typical black family had only a nickel to every dollar of white wealth now (Hamilton 2012). Nevertheless, post-racial Obama liberalism posits that racial minorities societal gains combined with presumed [absent] contemporary discrimination... renders measures explicitly aimed at redressing racial inequality both unnecessary and counterproductive (Carter 2011). However, economic parity is more divergent, and power significantly more elusive than ever. Race-neutral policies that have never recognized subordination cannot resolve this problem (Winkler 2003).
Race Forward Conclusion
The fact is these race-neutral policies cannot help ameliorate racial disparity. Throughout this chapter it has been shown that race neutral policies have continually relied on subjective liberal principles and consistently produced race-negative consequences for minorities. However, the point is not to give up hope, but to consider what could have been done better. Without race-conscious policies the gap in wealth disparity and capital accumulation cannot be overcome because it cannot be observed how it occurs. To understand racial inequality requires an honest conversation about the patterns of systemic discrimination.
35


New Deal legislation has proven that targeted policymaking can be effective. The following chapter will provide a methodological framework of how such New Deal assistance can alter racial demographics. However, it is no longer useful to circle the wagons around racist labels and instances of individual bigotry. Intentional acts of discrimination should not be tolerated, but the bigger picture must remain in the forefront of social advocates minds. Labeling individual acts of discrimination too easily fuels resentment as liberal thought has taught most Americans to morally abhor racism (Holmes 2007). Racial parity however connects society as a whole.
The argument must be altered to frame one groups exponential growth and the others relative rate of decline. Much of the accumulation and dis-accumulation of resources mentioned in this chapter are a reflection of New Deal policy. Effectively, white Americans observed middle class growth throughout the 1950s and 1960s, while minorities, especially African American communities did not. In an effort to remediate this divide, wealth would have to pivot to privilege the discriminated group and slow the growth of the primary dominant group. Real racial equality would consequently balance this equation. So, yes one group may grow more slowly, but only for the greater good so that both groups may advance towards parity (Duster 2005).
Still, it is imperative that Americans fully understand the implications of their ideological assumptions. Hopefully this understanding will be inspired by an alternate narrative of renewed radicalism. For progressives this means that they finally get off of the sidelines and be progressive, as those who are conservative do not shy away from the extremes of their conservativism. The abstract liberalism that feels complicit to advocate anti-discrimination must evolve to do more to reform the systemic patterns of racial
36


inequity. Realities of racial oppression must be expressed regardless of the power structures. That means revisiting how systemic shifts in society and assistance policies distribute aid in housing, education, welfare, and labor. Utilizing New Deal black disenfranchisement and current systemic disparities as the backdrop to resistance, these renewed claims for justice would satisfy both a foundational legitimacy and directly target past harms (Katznelson 2005). However a line must be drawn. Progressive liberals must be willing to lose and those supporting social liberation must provide an alternate path to the so far paralyzing discourse.
The universalistic perspective of American liberalism must also recognize its inadequacies. As state after state rolls back its prohibitions on gay relationships and marijuana legalization, continuing disparities will become only more and more suspect. As more battles are won, the reason why society ends up with consistent outcomes and unchanged material circumstances will puzzle many. Regardless of a white or black president, if the doctrinal underpinnings of race neutral policies stay the same so will the results. The conservative reading of colorblindness obfuscates its dominant class privileges, justifies its misreading of Civil Rights, and obliterates any understanding of the racisms disempowering effect on black communities. Martin Luther King, Jr. did advocate a judgment by content of character, but he also believed that to get there society must work to open democracy to all Americans. Kings understanding meant an equality that guaranteed everyone an income, fair housing, compensatory education, and where necessary, preferential treatment to redress discrimination and economic deficiencies (Holmes 2007). His vision opposed the abstract, hands-off liberal approach to race and
37


poverty. In his ideal equality existed in a democracy when its entire people had the power to be recognized, and the freedom to fulfill societys ideals.
38


CHAPTER III
THEORETICAL & METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Introduction
Race neutrality today influences racial stratification in American society. Relating to the previous discussion of the race neutral doctrine, US policy created in this fashion fails to provide remedy to racial inequality. These assertions can be stated. The assumption of race neutral policy is that by targeting the neediest members of society it is possible to superficially approach issues in a non-racial manner while substantively obtaining a race positive outcome. The United States implies this assumption of race neutrality in its policy. The U.S. states in its report to the U.N. Committee on Racial Elimination and Discrimination that:
special measures taken for the sole purpose of securing adequate advancement of certain racial or ethnic groups or individuals requiring such protection may or may not in themselves be race-based. For example, a special measure might address the development or protection of a racial group without the measure itself applying on the basis of race (e.g., a measure might be directed at the neediest members of society without expressly drawing racial distinctions).
This statement reflects the much deeper and insidious deception of race neutrality as it ties to the American claim of colorblindness. However this principle of colorblindness, likewise as when it was created, delivers a language that obscures the fundamentally divided reality of race currently.
To facilitate an analysis of whether racial policy today is still discriminatory despite all of its race neutral predispositions, this chapter attempts to foster a methodological approach that observes the different policy advantages by race. Ira Katznelsons approach of racial stratification of benefits within the New Deal policy will
39


serve as a lens for this chapters analysis. It will be the attempt of this chapter to create a dynamic similar to Katznelson of diverging racial stratification, for current policy. At length this section of the thesis will demonstrate a methodological approach that chronicles how past patterns of discrimination created vast differences in access and resource benefits. The patterns of previous discrimination facilitated patterns of disparity such that current policies require a greater examination to analyze their difference in access and resource retrieval today.
The investigation of this chapter will include a study of Ira Katznelsons When Affirmative Action was White. Utilizing this text will provide an examination of the relative growth in wealth of the white demographic and relative stagnation of African Americans due to New Deal policies. African Americans would encounter an entirely different experience in regard to the economic benefits that whites would acquire from the New Deal policies. The analysis of this circumstance will be followed by an understanding of the forces behind the racial wealth gap, connecting patterns of wealth accumulation from the New Deal to the inheritance of resources and the development of contradictory demographic asset profiles. The analysis will provide the framework for the subsequent case study as the study endeavors to highlight the racial composition of the benefits of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) and the harms of dislocation. By understanding how race-neutral language provides patterned channels for exclusion, this chapter will serve the larger purpose to dispel the effectiveness of colorblindness. This chapter will argue that instead of race-neutrality preventing racial discrimination, the methodological application of colorblindness illustrates that colorblindness actually provides cover for new layers of racial hierarchy and racial discrimination.
40


Ira Katznelson Theoretical Frame
Ira Katznelson begins his in-depth study of the racialization of the New Deal with President Johnson speaking to Howard University, delivering his speech To Fulfill These Rights. The concern of Johnsons speech was with the Negro problem of poverty and opportunity. The speech occurs after the implementation of the civil rights movement. An incongruity arises that even after such landmark legislation more needed to be done to assert the full rights of African Americans. The fact that such a major policy accomplishment had not produced significant changes for African Americans would inspire Johnsons claim that more needed to be done to fulfill African American rights. This paradox of significant effort and lackluster results grows even more luminous to highlight racisms intransience as Katznelson links the failures of the race-neutral New Deal social policies to the disparities faced by the graduates the President is speaking to.
Katznelsons analysis highlights elements of discrimination in housing, employment, military service, and education. Through this analysis, the author is able to connect the patterns of racial inequities around housing, employment, and education to New Deal legislation. This thesis argues, however, a counternarrative from Katznelsons range of inequality from the New Deal forward in history. It is the argument of this thesis that the inequalities of housing, employment, and education have a deeper historical pattern than the New Deal, and argues that Americas race-neutral doctrine is but apart of persistent falsification of American classical liberalism. For the purpose of affirmative action Katznelsons analysis provides significant detail for why by the 1960s the racial gap was persistently widening. This appreciation for not only disparate treatment but also
41


disparate benefits subsequently serves as a pattern for understanding the hidden consequences of race neutrality today.
Katznelson analysis, specifically, provides this thesis with a perspective of how African Americans were not only excluded from social policy but his analysis also details the important benefits that inclusion within the New Deal policies extended. African Americans were not simply excluded from Federal Housing Authority (FHA) loans, but blacks suffered doubly as their white counterparts with access to the policy where simultaneously leaving them behind in location and wealth. This situation inclusion and exclusion created a pattern so colossal in proportion that it would facilitate the greatest economic expansion in the history of the American middle class. The significance of this fact is that most of this accumulation in economic power would go to white Americans and not shared with black minorities.
Where Katznelsons work excels is in the depiction of the white American benefits due to the New Deal and his emphasis of the effects of African American exclusion. It is important to first define clearly what is meant by the New Deaf The New Deal almost exclusively points to the beginning of the Social Security Act in 1935, which saw its first benefits in 1940 (Katznelson 2005). Most beneficial to this program was the coverage of old age security, unemployment, and old age assistance. Due to the economic position of African Americans during this time it can be assumed that African Americans would have been prime candidates for aid from this program in light of their time spent in the labor pool, levels of unemployment, and discrepancies in wages. However due to the race-neutral language of the legislation that excluded agricultural workers, domestic servants, home workers, and the self-employed (sharecroppers) across the nation, fully
42


65 percent of African Americans, would fall outside of the program (Katznelson 2005 43).
Between Katznelson and this thesis it is acknowledged that the racially stratified benefits of the New Deal were purposeful. The dynamic of advantaging white economic power and disadvantaging African American economic power was created to maintain a way life and social order (Katznelson 2005). However where Katznelson attributes the responsibility for racially neutral, almost racially manipulative language with Southern Congressional members, it is the perspective of this thesis that this pattern of racial economic subjugation is at the core of American race issues. Katznelsons chapter Welfare in Black and White hints at this legacy of economic oppression. Beginning his analysis after the formal end of slavery, Katznelson highlights the economic conditions of African Americans prior to the New Deal. With three in four blacks living in the South during this time, the author goes on to show that despite high representation within the agricultural industry, only 8% of southern farmland was operated by black owners (Katznelson 2005). Black farmers often did not own their land. The land they did possess was often smaller 63 acres compared to an average 145 acres for whites (Katznelson 2005). On average these farms in 1935 would be valued at $1864 for blacks compared to $5239 for whites (Katznelson 2005).
The lack of farm assets that marginalized black farmers is but the beginning of the picture in describing the black laborer and his economic position in the 1930s. Sharecropping in the South had made the situation direr, where slavery had been replaced by land peonage. In this system debts were paid off by a share of the lands product. This created a vicious cycle of exploitation by which limited crops were expected to feed
43


workers, cover debts, and provide surplus. This nevertheless kept African American sharecroppers tied to the vagrancies of the land and ceaselessly owing their landlords (Katznelson 2005).
The contours of race, gender, and class created even more nuance and complexity to the African American experience. The position of the African American female worker was even bleaker than that of the male farmer. For black women this meant 85% either worked in agriculture or domestic service. Where sharecropping earnings could range from $38 to $87 per person, domestic work scarcely afforded $2 per week (Katznelson 2005). This created a situation where in 1937 African Americans in the rural South averaged a family income of $565 per year compared to an average family income of $1535 for poor whites (Katznelson 2005). Urban blacks were in a slightly better position able to reach an income of $635 compared to the average earnings of $2019 for urban whites (Katznelson 2005). These numbers not only reflect a limited potential for income and asset accumulation but demonstrates how basic employment was nearly inaccessible to African Americans. In a liberal capitalist society where a citizen is viewed based on their merit and contribution, these individuals were seen as a pariah despite the fact they were willing to contribute yet lacked sufficient opportunity. The importance of employment cannot be overstated. As Katznelson goes on to describe, this lack of employment created a poverty level whereby the low incomes of blacks influenced their poor living conditions, their poor health and their lack of education (Katznelson 2005).
However, where Katznelson attributes the dire circumstances of African Americans to easy acceptance in welfare policy and their subsequent exclusion to southern Congressional members, the perspective of this thesis finds that assumption too
44


easy to restrict to one region of the United States. As mentioned in the previous chapter in relation to the racist conclusions of liberalism, American egalitarianism allowed African American exclusion because the exclusion would not undermine American society. Justice Harlans 1896 pronouncement of the perfection of the American liberal experiment by the passage of the Reconstruction era amendments was an initial start to the colorblindness doctrine. So too in this instance did Liberal Northerners and Southern Dixiecrats in the 1930s embrace the racial stratification of the New Deal because it similarly supported their liberal ideals. The New Deal supported their ideals because to truly live up to American universalism would have required a much larger reform and much deeper reflection into American identity. The significance of this reflection would have revealed a much more diverse representation of who is American. It would be sufficiently easier to ignore these hard-truths and keep the rewards of the New Deal tailored to a white demographic. This narrowing of the act would maintain the division of citizen and non-citizen, or more accurately reaffirm the boundaries between white and non-white, between different divisions of labor, between the poor and impoverished. It would be easier to deny access to resources to those who did not qualify as white. An effort to define whiteness would have limited the power of whiteness to be subjective, controlled, and to manipulate others.
When thinking about labor and African American incomes, African Americans would also be excluded from the National Labor Relations Act and Fair Labor Standards Act of the New Deal. Key again to the racial groups omission was their predominance in certain industries. However, for wages the cause of exclusion connects even deeper. Due to the exclusion of agricultural and domestic workers, floor wages could be kept as low
45


as possible, maintaining tantamount 19th century slavery conditions (Katznelson 2005). The exclusion would not only hurt incomes, but create a surplus of cheap labor. The direct benefit that could have been gained by African Americans, instead kept them in poverty; demonstrating, yet again, yet more clearly, the economic component of American race. For white Americans this opportunity offered many prospects. Yet this inclusion/exclusion by race-neutral policy facilitated an immense wealth schism that directly links to current wealth disparity.
When analyzing the wealth gap it is important also to consider the ways in which people accumulate wealth and understand how the educational opportunities included in the New Deal additionally exacerbated the racial problem. This is evident within the Second World War, as Katznelson highlights. Within the beginning years of the war effort African Americans would represent a mere ten percent of all armed soldiers (Katznelson 2005). This is critical to education and African American advancement, as those who entered the military often received remedial training resulting in higher literacy rates (Katznelson 2005). High proportions, 11 percent, of new white recruits were classified as illiterate, but fully 45 percent of black recruits lacked basic reading skills (Katznelson 2005 109). By observing the low number of African American military recruits but over representation of African American illiteracy, this juxtaposition reveals how much African Americans could have gained from these training programs. Refusing to recruit African Americans placed the community at a disadvantage to receive crucial remedial training, adding to the overall disenfranchisement of blacks. If the remedial training had been extended to African Americans then the community could have translated those skills into employment and wealth accumulation.
46


Black exposure to programs of remedial training would have increased African American gains. However there developed another layer of discrimination for the African Americans who were recruited due to limits placed on their opportunities of upward mobility. As African Americans rose in training their ability to become officers and to enter special training programs were severely limited due to rigid racial separation. These limits would hinder African American possibilities to gain better employment after service due to their inability to access advanced skills. Even more while African Americans were being excluded, white access was expedited at a much more vigorous rate (Katznelson 112), exacerbating racial cleavages. Pivotal to understanding this situation is that while only 12 percent of black companies had black lieutenants, and virtually no white companies had all black officers 58 percent of black companies had all white lieutenants, allowing white Americans of any skill level much more opportunity to lead military units. From these leadership opportunities white Americans gained exponentially.
The fact that white Americans gained tremendously from black disenfranchisement is no more obvious than in the New Deal policy the Selective Service Readjustment Bill. Within the Selective Service Readjustment Bill, commonly referred to as the GI Bill, between 1944 and 1974, federal spending for former soldiers in this model welfare system totaled over $95 billion (Katznelson 113). With these funds veterans bought homes, attended college, started business ventures, and found jobs commensurate with their skills (Katznelson 2005), and from this opportunity pumped tremendous amounts of money into the economy. In one year, from 1946 to 1947, VA backed mortgage loans would account for 40 percent of all new home loans (Katznelson
47


2005). Residential ownership [would become] the key foundation of economic security for the burgeoning and overwhelmingly white middle class (Katznelson 2005 116). Important to note here is that the economic security was only being extended to white Americans. The financial assistance distributed by the GI Bill would be so enormous that it would take white Americans from poverty to middle class status. African Americans would contribute equally to funding the GI Bill. However the disenfranchisement of African Americans would doubly place the black community in a negative position since they would forego the economic benefits of the GI Bill, while also exhibiting a loss of social power due to whites elevated status.
The benefits of the GI Bill, and the damages of its racial exclusion, cannot be overstated. In the area of education alone, by 1955 2.2 million veterans would have participated in the GI Bills higher education assistance (Katznelson 2005). Another 5.6 million veterans would use the assistance to enroll in vocational institutions (Katznelson 2005). Being a race neutral piece of legislation, the GI Bill was expected to offer all of these benefits to each veteran. However studies show that racial inclusion was limited. On balance there was no greater instrument for widening an already huge racial gap in postwar America than the GI Bill (Katznelson 2005 121). Instead of closing the gap between black and white parity the policy would racially stratify its benefits exasperating the divide between blacks and whites.
The GI Bill was able to stratify its benefits through language in the policy that allowed local implementation of its resources. Rather than including the exclusionary language of agricultural workers and domestic workers exhibited in the Social Security Act and Fair Labor Standards Act, the legislation became discriminatory in the way local
48


Veterans Affairs institutions provided benefits and how private and public educational and financial institutions either granted or limited access. Most important to the GI Bills exclusionary practices was its ability to take the power of a federal program and implement it through state and local institutions. Across the nation programs could be executed in regard to keeping with local favor (Katznelson 2005 128). Eliminating from the colorblind ethos that race-neutral is enough to end discrimination, this example of exclusion emphasizes even more the annihilation of liberal beliefs of universalism and egalitarianism. As Ira Katznelson states, these programs were intrinsically affirmative action programs for white Americans as they were the ones to benefit from the attainment of education, job skills, home loans, and employment opportunities. Unemployment assistance, wage bargaining, and old age support were all barred from African Americans reach.
Even more, black access to primarily white colleges and universities remained limited outside of the South, debunking the regional perspective of racisms effects (Katznelson 2005). This facet is crucial as Liberals, even Katznelson, attempt to limit racism to a regional aberration. During the late 1940s black enrollment in white colleges in the North and West never exceeded 5,000 (Katznelson 2005). Under-funded historically black colleges would absorb nearly 95 percent of all black veterans (Katznelson 2005). While these colleges adequately trained and prepared these veterans, to argue the race-neutral implications of the New Deal provided equality of opportunity is completely disingenuous. In a truly egalitarian environment black veterans GI Bills would have been just as accepted at any white institutions as any other educational institution. Again this is not to say that these black institutions were insufficient, but for
49


ominous reasons networks of power and access placed white institutions at a superior advantage. In some of these African Americans institutions students faced a lack of access to libraries, limited enrollment caps and limited accreditation (Katznelson 2005). Those seeking on-the-job training education would have to obtain employment before being accepted in educational programs (Katznelson 2005). However this would effectively prohibit most black veterans who had already been unemployed or sharecroppers before the war effort. The issue would come down to not the comingling of the races but the inadequate democratic dispersal of access to power.
The culmination of the disparate effects of the New Deal has never been recovered. The disparity in farm values for the different races in the 1930s mirrors the disparity of home values for blacks and whites today. The accumulation of assets gained by white Americans furthered a disparity between blacks and whites that can not be addressed by anything other than the same kind of New Deal assistance that made the disparity so considerable. This would demand assistance in education, housing, job training, and loan support. Even after the Civil Rights Movement and the implementation of workplace discrimination legislation, the racial wealth gap between blacks and whites still patterns itself after the difference in access to assets described since the Great Depression. Differences in inheritances, asset portfolio composition, and differences in intergenerational transfers such as business resources explain much of the persistence in wealth inequality. However the New Deal directly supported the differences in the inheritances of black and white Americans by creating a middle class for whites who had access to home ownership and employment opportunity. The New Deal directly contributed to differences in asset portfolio composition by fostering a financial acuity in
50


white Americans that was gained through the policys grant of business loans. Similarly differences in intergenerational transfers can be paralleled to differences in access to home equity, educational attainment, and business opportunity. These advantages were extended by the New Deal. However for African Americans this lack of equity became a handicap to wealth accumulation that still persists currently regardless of age, education, and income.
Wealth Accumulation/Racial Dispossession Methodological Frame
The purpose of this section of the chapter is to highlight the connection between patterns of wealth accumulation exhibited in the New Deal to trends in racial disparity. Most often issues of racial wealth disparity are written off by limited approaches to human capital endowment and income. These approaches can be encapsulated in the Jensen School, Chicago School, and Moynihan methods. All of the typologies, however, are challenged by this studys full assessment of the New Deals impact on racial wealth. It is the focus on culture or income that makes most efforts to remediate racial disparity fail. Instead by recognizing the historical patterns of wealth dis-accumulation, researchers can observe why the prior limited focuses of liberal race neutrality have also sufficiently failed.
Within the Jensen School, the first excuse of racial wealth inequality lies in their emphasis of a genetic difference in intelligence between whites and blacks (Darity 1982). The Chicago School sees difference in education as the chief cause of racial disparity (Darity 1982). This approach more or less counts on an assumption that African Americans inabilities to put off short-term advantages keep these communities from long-term planning; education being the key long term investment missing (Darity 1982).
51


The Moynihan method or Elkins School attributes wealth disparity to African American socialization (Darity 1982). This viewpoint reinforces a perception of a cycle of poverty. The combination of African American female heads of household and a high rate of unemployment for African American males contribute to characteristics that facilitate wealth disparity. This cycle of poverty is accepted as opposed to investigating the structural and historic reasons for African American unemployment and female single family homes (Darity 1982). Despite differences in income among blacks and whites, the approaches support their perspectives by acknowledging the narrowing of income among young people as an implication for the narrowing of racial disparity (Darity 1982). Yet these rebuttals must be questioned.
The human capital approaches present one method of observing tendencies in wealth accumulation. The approaches give an impression of validity as the logic they display present a sequence of events that satisfy societys expectations of how those separate from themselves would behave. However these approaches do not reflect reality. Regardless of age, income, educational attainment, or social status African Americans are behind white Americans in every category. Even for those of equal ability they receive unequal earnings (Darity 1982). Despite the narrowing of incomes among young people, black youth experience higher unemployment and different employment experiences than white Americans (Darity 1982). The Moynihan method disregards that the largest pool of unemployed is job-losers, not job-leavers (Darity 1982). The difference of job-losers and job-leavers is that in one instance job losers are forced into unemployment due to employment circumstances. Job-leavers tend to represent people who have decided to willfully quit their positions. This reality dismantles the idea that so many African
52


Americans desert employment or are simply too lazy. Even for the Chicago School the delay of immediate gratification is misleading as savings are more influenced by income than any other indicator, underlining the fact that African Americans and white Americans of the same income tend to save at the same rate (Darity 1982) (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). Significantly the congruence of savings rates is a departure from the cultural perspective of the Chicago School to the material necessity of income.
The Elkins School human capital approach exaggerates their assumptions when it comes to income. Simply obtaining employment will not end wealth disparity. The importance of income is extremely overplayed especially when considering the other factors of wealth disparity such as the starting point for black wealth, the rate of wealth appreciation between blacks and whites, differences in inheritances and asset portfolio composition (capital holdings), and unequal access in opportunities. The principal reason that income is not enough to satisfy their position is that even as things stand now it would take years to reduce the income gap between the races. In 2011, median white household income was 7 2% higher than median black household income (Resnikoff 2014). This focus says nothing of the fact that for wealth, median black family wealth was even more staggering at one-twentieth (0.05%) compared to that of white families (Kochhar, Fry, & Taylor 2011). The data just does not provide that parity within income alone will close the racial gap.
What the human capital approaches fail to examine are the patterns and components of actual wealth accumulation. As with the previously mentioned New Deal policys use of housing, education, and direct financial loans, cumulatively assets are collected through the same channels such as the value of their homes, through advanced
53


education, higher incomes and savings, the inheritances of assets, and intergenerational business transfers/ farm equity (Gittleman & Wolff 2004) (Blau & Graham 1990) ( Furstenberg 2001). Wealth is also influenced as mentioned by absolute wealth disparity, but also influenced by the rate of wealth appreciation (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). Most of the research gathered, however, concluded that more than any other categories -inheritances/intergenerational transfers, asset portfolio composition, and the disparity in wealth appreciation are the principal contributors to racial wealth disparity. These categories of asset accumulation parallel the benefits of the New Deal as the creation of inheritance for white Americans can be connected to their increased ability to gain employment. This employment allowed for higher incomes as white Americans gained skills in the labor force. These higher incomes subsequently allowed for higher savings that could pass to relatives in the form of further aid in gifts, low interest loans, and inherited property (Blau & Graham 1990). Similarly access to capital through the GI Bill, along with higher incomes, allowed for increased access to capital holdings (stocks, business assets, home equity) for higher returns in asset composition. Intergenerational transfers similarly mirror this pattern as it reflects the absolute disparity between blacks and whites. Examining estate records for deceased persons.. .finds that mean black net worth for males was less than one sixth of white male net worth (BWD 334). The disparity exhibited between blacks and whites in terms of estate holdings directly reflect the inability of black families to transfer wealth generationally. Even further, the disparity contributes to the overall racial wealth divide. For African Americans the difference of intergenerational transfers exacerbates the distance between black and white wealth.
54


The asset portfolio of blacks and whites are also affected by differing rates of inheritance. The evidence shows that between 1984-1994 inheritances were 3% of African American assets, whereas it was 14% for whites (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). This translates into a difference on average of $75,236 for white Americans versus $48,946 for those few blacks who do receive inheritances (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). This disparity compounded over generations creates an insurmountable schism in wealth. These differences in wealth arent just isolated but make possible the vast differences in African American and white American economic power. According to the 1995 Survey of Consumer Finances white households reported an inheritance of 24% or an average $115,000, compared to 11% for African Americans who averaged $32,000 (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). This consistent 12:1 ratio displays the limited opportunity for blacks and the connection of financial assistance that has matriculated to the middle class since the New Deal. The disproportion of inheritance paired with the overall absolute disparity underlines a disadvantage whereby blacks lack access to capital. This deficiency reverberates in all aspects of social life for African Americans. Instead of cultural perspectives or myths about saving propensities what is needed here is to observe the structural differences of opportunity for African Americans. Along with limits to wealth come limits to educational opportunities, health care, and quality of life.
As the difference in inheritances suggests, white wealth and black wealth are worlds apart. These differences are not only influenced by a divergence in inheritance but also due to differences in asset composition. Assets gained by inheritance are but one example. The article Racial Differences in Patterns of Wealth Accumulation explains that the breakdown of white and black wealth is much different in regard also to home
55


ownership, assets in business, assets in farming industry, and capital holdings. These differences are even more articulated as each asset represents a different proportion of either races total portfolio. For instance the value of home equity is three times higher for whites than it was African Americans (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). However for blacks home equity represents 45.8% of their total wealth compared to 28.6% for whites (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). This creates a dynamic whereby the lower equity value coupled with the disproportionate representation of home equity in blacks asset portfolio, reinforces a cycle of unequal wealth accumulation. If the homes values are less, but yet make up a larger proportion of wealth, a situation is created through which African Americans are continually at a disadvantaged position.
African American wealth portfolios show a difference in business assets and capital holdings as well. In business or farming, only 2.1% of African Americans held assets in these categories, opposed to 13.1% for white Americans (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). This statistics also reiterates a lower self-employment rate for Africans American. This fact resembles the pattern of low self-employment discussed during the 1920s and 1930s. The influence of stock holdings is also disproportionately beneficial for white Americans. For white Americans 37.5 % held their wealth in stocks compared to 10.4% for African Americans (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). When constructing patterns of wealth accumulation and wealth disparity the diversity of white Americans assets in such resources as stocks contributes to why the argument of wealth disparity is not simply isolated to income or savings of wealth. Race neutral policies cannot reach these systemic issues. Up until this point race neutrality has been unable to affect the more preponderant contributor to wealth in diverging rates of wealth appreciation. Stocks in themselves
56


usually pay back higher capital dividends (Furstenberg 2001). These gains over a multitude of generations only strengthened the racial divide as white wealth grew more quickly. For white Americans stocks and capital holdings were the second most important asset, representing 19.7% of total wealth (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). However for blacks this means a much higher proportion of assets in net liquid and net business assets (Blau & Graham 1990). These assets consequently are also assets that provide diminutively in terms of wealth.
The cumulative result of the diverse asset portfolios for blacks and whites is that wealth between the two races appreciated at a much different scale. Between the periods 1984-1994 for each category of wealth accumulation the absolute climb in wealth was greater for whites than African Americans, with increases in each category also being larger (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). At the median, household wealth appreciation for whites was a staggering 35.4% compared to 6.1% for African Americans (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). For white Americans this meant that their wealth will quickly create more wealth; as is the case for capital holdings. Institutional knowledge cannot be the only reason for the asset portfolio that whites have, for savings rates by income mirror each other for both races (Gittleman & Wolff 2004) (Furstenberg 2001). However for wealth disparity, the sizeable difference in wealth appreciation opens an entirely distinct conversation about the structural nature of wealth and what is needed to conquer the racial disparity.
Beyond liberal tactics of income and superficial perspectives of culture and intelligence what has race neutral done to address race issues? If anything the race neutral doctrine has served more to cover up the contours of racial discrimination and to
57


narrow the race conversation, than to offer racial remediation and support. The deep structural inequities of racial disparities will persist as long as race neutrality guides policy. Gains in unemployment may alleviate concerns of societal weakness, but the gains obscure the systemic barriers African Americans experience to enter employment. Take for instance the 1970s economic recovery. During this recovery black unemployment rates fell 6% (Job 1979). However in the same period white unemployment fell 32% (Job 1979). Many would laud this as an accomplishment of liberal economics lifting all boats and trickling down to minorities. Accepting this narrative would conceal the fact that during the 1970s recovery for blacks the labor participation would grow from 59.2% to 62% (Job 1979). Instead of laziness blacks were taking advantages of opportunities. Even further if the narrative of appreciation was wholly accepted, it would also critically conceal a lack of opportunity. The lack of opportunity is revealed as it was not until the 1970s recovery that black labor participation rates had increased since the 1950s (Job 1979). The narratives miss that despite the recovery aiding in lowering unemployment, the black to white unemployment ratio increased (Job 1979). Like a rocket taking off from a lower trajectory, pulling up into a higher stratosphere requires more energy. Black disparity is not a result of lack of effort, but attributable to a lower starting position that has never been made up. If anything in light of continual discrimination it is surprising that the inequality is not more extreme. No one in power observes these profound depths of disparity. Even more these discriminations against blacks have never been restricted but continually augmented. These discriminations have wreaked havoc on black life in the face of Reconstruction amendments, race neutral New Deal social policy, the civil rights movement, and
58


Americans first black president. For these discriminations live in the ways societies form policy, create perceptions of the needy, moralize its actions, and thinks of itself. Conclusion
The New Deal was structured is such a way that it could have never been race neutral. By configuring New Deal policy benefits in such a way as to leave out agricultural workers and domestic workers, to leave out blacks in the south, and by channeling benefits through local administrations the New Deal effectively exacerbated the disparity between blacks and whites in America. Though presented as a race neutral policy, the New Deal instead obscured the ramifications of white supremacist policymaking. Just as Justice Harlan had represented Reconstruction Era amendments as colorblind, so too has modern liberalism presented the New Deal, civil rights legislation and current social policy as standards for a race neutral society. Any residual discrimination must be due to blacks themselves. The approaches to human capital have shown propensities to make long-term investments, tendencies for African Americans to lack of education and possess inferior genetic dispositions, are much easier narratives to believe and to reconcile than to critically analyze the systemic patterns of discrimination. To engage in such a critical analysis would subject uncertainty into American ideology.
In one sense anything different would violate the ideal that people get what they deserve in a meritocracy. Individual citizens have no responsibility to the issues of others. Liberal universalism and egalitarianism has provided the same opportunities to everyone.
However as the discussion of wealth accumulation has shown this is simply not the case. Through financial assistance paid for by ah Americans, white Americans saw their responsibilities eased. Opportunities were given to white Americans through
59


education aid, housing loans, business grants, and unlimited channels of potential. Yet despite this white affirmative action, today white Americans observe no culpability. They have no skin in the game. Discrimination was their grandparents generation, their parents generation. However it is directly because of advantages proffered by the New Deal in inheritances, access to business loans, farm training, home equity, and educational attainment that current structures remove the innocence of all Americans.
The current reality is but a byproduct of systemic patterns of accumulation and dis-accumulation. Narratives painting blame on the victim only reinforce this arrogance. Narratives highlighting the convergence of incomes ignore the disparity of black incomes regardless of education. Narratives of educational prioritizing ignore the barriers blacks faced to obtain education despite serving just as white Americans and having the same GI. Still, diverse asset portfolios are but the evidence of these disparate opportunity structures.
Nevertheless it is not until the races are compared against each other, as Katznelson attempts in his methodological approach, as attempted by the referenced articles, as two ends of the same scale, that not only can white Americans see their privilege, but blacks may be empowered to demand their full citizenship in this democratic society. What has to be confronted is that the concern has never been to aid the neediest members of society. The goal continually has been to configure society in such a way that supports race neutral ambiguity, that supports a white supremacist construction of society, and that justifies inequality.
60


CHAPTER IV
WORKFORCE INVESTMENT ACT: CASE STUDY
Introduction
Utilizing the methodological approach of Ira Katznelson of disaggregating the benefits of the New Deal policy by race, this case study will attempt to further the framework to current social policy. The policy used in particular will be the Workforce Improvement Act (WIA). The WIA is used due to its similarity to the New Deal. Using the aforementioned New Deal as a framework, the policies of the New Deal provided not only financial assistance, but provided also employment training. The WIA likewise provides educational benefits that facilitate employment training and advances in employment attainment. Similar to the New Deal, the WIA also satisfies the race neutral component of providing benefits not on a basis of racial categorization, but need. Satisfying the criterion of employment and race neutrality, this case study will attempt to examine the racial demography of the WIAs beneficiaries. This chapter will focus on asking the question through utilizing the WIA as a case study of whether race neutral policy provides race positive remediation.
Race neutral policy has had a varied record in account to its effect on racial disparity. The record on race neutral policy has satisfied the goal of not utilizing racial markers to determine policy access. However, for correcting racial disparity the policy has not been as successful. If race neutral/colorblind policy cannot address wealth disparity as a legal doctrine then it ought to be critiqued for its inadequacies. Even further, if racial wealth disparity is a systemic issue then the practice should also be evaluated for its involvement in the persistence of such inequalities as well. If race
61


neutral policy does address these concerns then more must be done to encourage these race-neutral practices in light of widening inequities. This study will attempt to analyze what effects the Workforce Investment Act is having on labor participation rates. WIA program exiters, program allocations, and state graduation rates will serve to test to the significance of the WIA program to the benefits of employment. First, this essay will highlight a set of hypotheses and variables to answer the research question. Following a discussion of data and sampling this chapter will provide a context for the research design. A discussion of measurements will demonstrate the association between the variables and the context. Next the case study will offer a methodological framework to test each variable. The final section will offer an evaluation of results.
Research Design
For the study of this essay five hypotheses are tested.
1. if the number of adult African American exiters who complete workforce training increase, then the proportion of African Americans in the workforce will increase. Exiters is a term used by the source material to explain those who have successfully entered and also completed a workforce training program (Social Policy Research Associates 2009).
The variable for exiters will be categorized as program completers for variable identification purposes.
2. if the dollars allocated to workforce programs increase, then the proportion of African Americans in the workforce will increase.
3. if the graduation rates of African Americans increase, then the proportion of African Americans in the workforce will increase.
62


4. if the Workforce Investment Act is a race neutral policy, then the relationship of white labor participation to white exiters or white graduation rates will be also neutral or less of an influence than for African Americans.
For the variables of participation, program completers, and high school graduates, the study will also collect demographic data to test the significance of the policy to white Americans and black Americans. Keeping in line with the Katznelson methodology, the results will depict the influence of the policy in possibly promoting white Americans and disadvantaging blacks as a continuation of discrimination. This investigation of privilege and discrimination creates a dependent variable of African American participation in the workforce along with that of white Americans. The independent variables are African American and white American workforce training program completion (exiters), budgetary allocations, and African American and white American graduation rates. Through the analysis it will be observed how these factors affect the outcome of African Americans employment or whether it also continues white affirmative action. Education was added also with a perspective to the historical discrimination African Americans have experienced in this area and to test whether an outside variable to the WIA is affecting labor participation.
To collect data on the dependent variable, the different states Department of Employment Offices will serve as a source, along with U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics, and the Current Population Survey. These sources provide annual state employment participation rates by racial group (IDES 2013). These annual reports range from 1976 to 2012. The independent variable of the number of adult
63


exiters in workforce training programs is provided by the Social Policy Research Associates. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Labor, this source provides information on the service programs offered under the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) (Social Policy Research Associates 2009). The WIA fund is a federal program enacted in 1998 that states use to support their workforce training programs. The independent variable of budget allocations to workforce programs comes from data provided by the U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration. These data show how much each state is allocated under the WIA annually. The third variable of African American and white American graduation rates are found in the State Board of Education annual report cards. These data demonstrate the graduation rate of African Americans against the depiction of white American graduation. Due to the fact that data is being collected for multiple variables over a span of time this study will employ a cross sectional time series (Gerring 2012).
The time period of this study is drawn around the years 2002 to 2008. Due to the unavailability of data representing graduation rates before the year 2002 by racial demography, the beginning of the study starts with that year. In the financial crisis of 2007-2008 workers across the board were affected. With this in mind, it was reasoned that even with government workforce programs in place employment rates would dramatically decrease. For that reason years after 2009 were not included. A range of years would need to still be studied though as the effects of policies take time to influence the data. A range was needed to monitor a potential ripple effect. To satisfy this requirement the frame of 2002 2008 was expanded as much as possible. Figures for the independent variable of WIA participants were found at least to the year 2000 and as far
64


as 2012. However the stimulus package that resulted from the crisis provides a caveat to using more years. Monies allocated through the stimulus were tied to WIA funding through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)(IDES 2013). This mix of funds muddles the streams of where the money is going as funds after the ARRA were diverted to weatherization and green jobs and not specifically employment training (IDES 2013).
After researching the United States periodic report to the U.N. on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the population utilizes a four region sample. Potentially the scope could be narrowed to southern states where race relations are visibly at their worst. Racial discrimination however is a national issue that no state can escape as it foundation is itself embodied in American norms. A national survey however would potentially miss idiosyncrasies present at lower level analysis. For that reason a purposive sample is proposed utilizing four regions each with two states as the case study. The states of Illinois and New Jersey will represent the Northeast, the states Florida and Arkansas will represent the South, the states Texas and Arizona will represent the Southwest, and the states Montana and Washington will represent the Northwest. These states were chosen due to their inclusion in the governments report to the U.N. and due to the states diversity and varied demographics. In the CERD report for example Illinois is referred to as mirroring the overall composition of the U.S. (U.S Department of State 2007). Illinois was also noted for its attempt at addressing racial discrimination concerns (U.S. Department of State 2007). The other states are likewise used for their makeup, but to also provide a range of experiences that represent the entire United States.
65


Collecting data for each state in the United States would have turned into a behemoth of a project. Each state would have also required constructing a database of a multitude of data sources. Most of the data is not centralized. Each state might utilize different agencies to manage and collect the data. Some data is also not available by demographic, by year, and by state. Ciphering through these data and connecting it to one variable across 50 cases would be extremely tedious task and beyond the scope of this study. For an initial observation into the effects of governmental policies on direct communities, this regional cross-section fits appropriately. Maximizing the representative connection of variables within each state to the question of race neutrality makes it becomes possible to observe a statement of the relationship between governmental policy access and the policys effectiveness on racial remediation.
Variable Description
Employment is an important area of discrimination for African Americans. The dependent variable of this study attempts to reflect that. Employment participation rates where most applicable to fit the dynamic of employment in the labor market. This ratio would depict the labor force of African Americans against the eligible population of African American workers. A declining rate could possibly symbolize increasing barriers to employment. Increasing rates would signal an increased participation of African Americans in the labor force. This variable will be a ratio variable as it could be possible to have zero participation. Over the course of the five years the rate shifts up and down, but not dramatically. For the years 2002-2008 for the state of Illinois the rate was 61.6, 60.5, 62.0, 61.5, 62.3, 61.5, and 61.2 for each year respectively (IDES 2013). The
66


distribution of the variables is quite close in range. The variables on average vary by year by .83 percent in either direction (IDES 2013).
Validity of the measure is fairly sufficient as the data reflects the labor force of African American workers who are employed and those noninstitutional individuals who are unemployed but available for work and actively looking for work (IDES 2013). The original question of the WIAs efficacy in promoting African Americans in the labor market should be reflected through the use of labor participation variable. The choice to not use the entire labor force allows for a more targeted perspective of employment policies effect on directly the African American community. Reflecting historical trends it is reasoned that as barriers of discrimination subside, due to changing racial perceptions, more African Americans will enter the workforce. This mirrors the perspective of discriminations effect today. Primarily the variable focuses on one area of discrimination. The direct focus of the measure strengthens the validity of the concept as well (Shively 2013). This validity is due to the variables correspondence to the case studys analysis. A caveat arises since the data is collected from household samples, so that questions of reliability might occur due to the possibility of falsifiability or coercion of respondent information. The measure is derived from reputable sources to counter the prospect of coercion. The data are sourced from state and federal level labor and economic agencies. The sources of the data are transparent and available for checks of repeatability (Shively 2013). The attempts to create these consistent patterns will hopefully overcome any errors in the interpretation of the data.
To measure whether involvement in workforce training programs affect participation rates the independent variable of the number of adult program completers
67


(those who completed training programs) is used. The variable is ratio since the number of participants can reach zero if there is no one in the program. This data is provided over the time for 2000-2008 for each region and each state. In this regard validity is strengthened to fit the design. The data is broken down by race for both black and white demographics. It should be noted however that in some instances the years national average is used in cases where demographic data is not available for that particular year.
It should be addressed here that the U.S. periodic U.N. report warns of the difficultly in ascertaining disaggregated data by race. In its report it mentions that racial distinctions have changed throughout American history. (U.S. Department of State, 2007) Americans also view themselves as a tolerant society so information by race is not always maintained. As such, most governmental policies attempt to target those most in need of assistance. (U.S. Department of State, 2007) Since African Americans disproportionately represent those in poverty, for validity it is assumed that these measures will also reflect in African-American communities. For the years 2007 and 2008 demographic data is most available for all data points. Data for the years 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 will be aggregated for the entire states adult workers. An approximate participation rate for the African American community and white participants is assumed for the years the demographic data is not available based off of the years corresponding national average.
For each state the total number of program completers ranges from 788 to 63,661, with African Americans exhibiting a smaller scale of 258 to 17,710, and white Americans 509 exiters to 22,843. (Social Policy Research Associates, 2009) These differences reflect the respective total population size of each state, funding for the programs, and variances in necessity. Observing the average distribution of values (mean) between the
68


year times periods also highlights the rate of change. The distribution of the values demonstrates sufficient variation in the variables. The reliability of the measure should be satisfactory as the data are sourced from federal statistics and has a transparent codebook for attempting original replications.
The independent variable of government allocations used to fund employment training programs adds another dimension of how government actions might attempt to affect African American employment. Data for this variable are represented as a ratio in dollars. These data directly reflect the funds from Workforce Investment Act as they are sourced from governmental sources responsible for the implementation of the program. This fact should help with the validity of the concepts connection to workforce training programs. By funding employment training programs, the government is acting to aid African Americans in obtaining employment and concurrently acting to ease past discriminations, while doing so race neutrally. Reliability, as with all the variables, is provided by the openness of the data to be repeated and the consistency of using a federal source for information. Having found these data it can be observed that most of the allocations for adult programs vary tremendously from state to state, from $7,653,158 for the state Arkansas to 150,741,436 for a state like California. (Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration, 2006) However, within each state the breadth of these allotments are a lot less drastic. Still they reflect the funding prioritization of the WIA program.
It is important to note for consistency that for both workforce training programs exiters and workforce training allocations, the focus relies on adult workers. This focus removed the need to also incorporate additional figures on youth and dislocated workers.
69


The majority of participants in workforce programs predominately come from the adult programs category. Though youth unemployment for the African American community is alarming, the adult workers were viewed as being sufficiently representative of the majority of the population. Adult workers also subsume both male and female workers. This barrier again arises from the limits of this study. It is interesting that through the data collection process it was observed that the proportion of workers is very much influenced by gender. In certain instances it was white males and black females that made up majority participants. This is an interesting pattern though due to its similarity to historical patterns of employment discussed in earlier portions of this thesis.
An increase of African American high school graduates might also correlate with an increase in African American employment. In this theoretical sense more students graduating with diplomas will provide additional skilled workers to the labor force. This is contrary to the idea that it is the increased presence of WIA participants that is increasing African American and white representation in labor. With the desegregation of schools not complete in some parts of the country until the 1970s, African Americans still find themselves catching up the educational attainment ladder. With this in mind the independent variable of African American and white American graduation rates is also included. Variations in the percentage would signal more or less African Americans graduating high school. For the years 2002 to 2008 the graduation rates for the state of Texas, which are some of the highest in the study, are 79.8, 81.1, 81.1, 81.7, 74.5, 71, and 72%, and 88.2, 89.8, 88.1, 89.5, 89, 88, and 89% respectively for African Americans and white Americans. (Texas Education Agency 2002-2008, TEA hereafter). The increase or decrease of these distances might correlate with changes in employment participation.
70


The distribution of the data stays fairly consistent however. The data facilitates an analysis that fits the time period, demographic, and the case of the design. This consistent connection contributes to the validity of the concept to the measure of graduation. Reliability is addressed as a measure that could be replicated in other states and reaches the same conclusions.
Observations
To test the hypotheses of this essay a descriptive analysis would be most appropriate. With so few cases being measured this approach seemed most appropriate to allow a visual display of the interaction. A parallel rate of change either way might possibly signal a relationship between the described dependent variable and the independent variables. However there may be no relationship as well. Due to the studys number of cases at 56, this study will fall into the qualitative category. A test of significance of the variables and observations would best represent the data. This test would allow for this study to analyze which relationship of variables was most significant to the question of government action impacting African American equity. With a smaller sample size a quantitative approach would not be able to adequately address this research question. It is for this reason of being more qualitative that this design additionally fits with a descriptive correlation test of significance. Since most of the data are available the types of statistics will be raw numbers and average rates. (Table 1)
There is an expectation that the results of this analysis will doubtlessly remain varied. Due to issues of disaggregated data by state and race, overall values may not reflect participation rates by African Americans or white Americans in these government training programs. In the future it would be helpful to have statewide data by all
71


demographic indicators. Also the fact that there are multiple factors affecting employment participation rates will cause any result to exhibit uncertainty. Isolating for all possible influences would be difficult to achieve. However these are all similar complaints that other sources conducting racial studies have found. As in the case of this research design, most comparable sources collected their data from governmental agencies and committees (Rubin and Bartle 2005). The variables focusing on employment have attempted to highlight an area of significant historical discrimination for African Americans. The use of influential cases fits the design of this study as the goal attempts to segregate the influence of each case. (Gerring & Seawright, 2008) Attempting to use a similar frame and methodology as Katznelson, sheds light on the African American communitys current racial circumstances and any advantages white Americans may receive.
Tables 1 through 8 represent the collected data. The years are reflective of the mentioned timeframe. The participation rate for African Americans in each state corresponds to the column participation rate. The number of African American program completers in Illinois is reflected in the column: Program Completers AFAM, followed by the state abbreviation. The same code corresponds to column Program Completers-WA for white Americans. To find the number of program completers for years 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, an average proportion of program completers for the years 2007 and 2008 is used against the total number of program completers for that year. Government allocations to the WIA program are listed in the category allocations. The column graduation rate reflects the high school graduation rate for African American students in the state. The succeeding column represents high school graduation rates for
72


white American per state. Here is important to note that whenever possible 4 year graduation rates were used to gauge the impact that would cross over to the workforce. However in some instances five graduation rates were used. This construction of evidence follows through Table 8.
(Table 1- Representation of Data for Illinois)
Illino is
Year Black Participati on Rate White Participati on Rate Total # of Exiters -IL Exiters AFAMI L Exiter s WAIL Allocatio ns Graduati on Rate -BLK Graduati on Rate -WHT
2002 61.6 64.20 5,922. 00 2842.5 6 2943. 23 51,107,3 13 74.5 89.2
2003 52.5 63.10 6,061. 00 2909.2 8 3303. 26 43,516,5 43 73.3 91.0
2004 54 63.50 6,429. 00 3085.9 2 3381. 65 41,671,9 09 74.0 91.8
2005 54.4 64.20 5,581. 00 2941 2935. 61 41,778,8 80 77.7 92.2
2006 56.1 65.70 5,549. 00 2521 3268. 36 42,381,2 92 78.3 92.3
2007 54.9 66.00 5,748. 00 2855 1,938 41,551,4 16 73.8 92.2
2008 53.8 64.70 4,588. 00 2118 1,680 38,269,1 86 74.9 92.5
73


(Table 2 Representation of Data for New Jersey)
New Jerse y
Year Black Participati on Rate* White Participati on Rate* Total #of Exiter s-NJ Exiters AFAM NJ Exiter s WAN J Allocatio ns Graduati on Rate -BLK Graduati on Rate -WHT
2002 68.4 64.68 2917.0 0 1149.3 1553.5 9 18,844,9 95 73.4 88.3
2003 59.6 62.40 2901.0 0 1142.99 1545.0 7 20,462,7 77 73.4 88.3
2004 59.3 63.00 2892.0 0 1139.45 1540.2 8 24,489,0 69 73.4 88.3
2005 61.4 63.40 3090.0 0 1217.46 1645.7 3 22,409,8 67 73.4 88.3
2006 60 63.40 2773.0 0 1092.56 1476.9 19,595,2 28 74.5 88.3
2007 58 63.80 2968.0 0 1426 694 17,635,7 13 72.9 88.4
2008 56.9 63.70 2383.0 0 916 730 16,435,0 03 72.9 88.3
(Table 3 Representation of Data for Florida)
Florid a
Year Black Participati on Rate White Participati on Rate Total #of Exite rs -FL Exiters AFAMF L Exiter s WAF L Allocatio ns Graduati on Rate -BLK Graduati on Rate -WHT
2002 64.15 64.90 11,70 6 4963.34 5817.8 8 35,800,6 88 57.0 75.6
2003 60.8 57.90 9,632 3650.53 5102.2 9 42,506,4 73 54.2 78.1
2004 59.6 59.00 15,09 6 6174.26 7940.5 41,406,0 06 57.3 80.2
2005 60.3 60.30 12,54 1 5129.27 6345.7 5 53,987,8 25 57.1 80.8
2006 61.8 61.20 17,79 1 6209.06 10478. 9 37,171,1 88 56.9 79.9
2007 62.1 60.90 18,46 8 3,950 9,650 29,020,0 19 58.7 81.0
2008 60.2 59.10 16,28 8 3,122 8,671 26,037,6 59 62.5 83.6
74


(Table 4 Representation of Data for Arkansas)
Arkans as
Year Black Participati on Rate* White Participati on Rate* Total #of Exite rs -AR Exiters AFAM AR Exiter s WAA R Allocatio ns Graduati on Rate -BLK Graduati on Rate -WHT
2002 63.9 64.65 1286 545.26 639.1 4 9,708,23 2 69.6 76.6
2003 54.5 58.00 1,089 412.7 593.5 1 8,510,82 5 69.6 76.6
2004 54.4 59.10 1,052 430.27 553.3 5 7,660,70 4 69.6 76.6
2005 58.5 61.60 1,084 443.36 548.5 8,822,50 9 69.6 76.6
2006 56.2 60.80 937 327.01 551.8 9 7,653,15 8 72.9 81.9
2007 50.8 61.30 958 266 662 9,506,72 0 65.8 70.2
2008 56.2 60.40 788 258 509 9,810,39 8 70.2 77.7
Average 69.6 76.6
(Table 5 Representation of Data for Texas)
Texa s
Year Black Participati on Rate* White Participati on Rate* Total #of Exite rs -TX Exiters -AFAMT X Exiters WART X Allocatio ns Graduati on Rate -BLK Graduati on Rate -WHT
2002 64.4 63.70 19,82 9 8407.5 9855.0 1 77,919,0 02 79.8 88.2
2003 62.2 63.50 15,08 5 5712.22 8221.3 3 74,481,3 12 81.1 89.8
2004 58.6 63.50 14,10 0 5766.9 7416.6 76,924,2 35 81.1 88.1
2005 60.1 63.80 20,10 0 8220.9 10170. 6 77,097,5 49 81.7 89.5
2006 58.6 63.90 21,46 1 7489.99 12640. 53 74,988,0 40 74.5 89.0
2007 60 63.00 15,27 6 8,640 6,470 74,025,9 81 70.7 88.2
2008 58.6 62.80 17,31 0 5,396 5,161 66,418,4 00 71.8 88.8
Average: 77.2 88.8
75


(Table 6 Representation of Data for Arizona)
Arizo na
Year Black Participati on Rate* White Participati on Rate* Total #of Exite rs -AZ Exiters AFAM AZ Exiters WAR AZ Allocatio ns Graduati on Rate -BLK Graduati on Rate -WHT
2002 64.9 61.90 3,356 1422.94 1667.9 3 16,247,0 51 70.2 83.3
2003 52.4 60.90 3,079 1166.94 1678.0 6 16,106,4 96 71.4 84.4
2004 60.8 62.00 3,490 1427.41 1835.7 4 17,731,2 72 76.6 86.2
2005 66.4 60.90 3,541 1448.27 1794.7 5 15,594,6 17 72.0 83.0
2006 66.3 62.30 3,691 1288.16 2173.9 9 13,527,6 79 69.0 79.0
2007 59.3 62.10 5,028 651 1,859 15,909,8 85 72.0 81.0
2008 58.9 61.00 3,847 474 1,544 14,729,0 41 72.7 82.5
Average: 72.0 82.8
(Table 7 Representation of Data for California)
Californ ia
Year Black Particip ation Rate* White Particip ation Rate* Total # of Exiters -CA Exiters AFAM CA Exiters WARC A Allocati ons Graduat ion Rate -BLK Graduat ion Rate -WHT
2002 55.4 63.40 40,379 17120.7 20068.3 6 150,741 ,436 56.0 74.0
2003 56.3 62.30 41,914 15885.4 1 22843.1 3 128,352 ,398 58.0 76.5
2004 55.4 62.20 28,912 11825.0 1 15207.7 1 132,993 ,142 57.5 76.5
2005 55.9 62.50 34,111 13951.4 17260.1 7 128,964 ,901 58.5 76.5
2006 55.3 62.60 32,378 11299.9 2 19070.6 4 111,871 ,663 54.0 75.5
2007 55 62.80 27,721 5,836 8,315 117,265 ,072 53.0 76.0
2008 55.3 61.50 63,661 11,185 19,611 126,947 ,190 52.5 77.0
76


(Table 8 Representation of Data for Washington)
Washin gton
Year Black Particip ation Rate* White Particip ation Rate* Total # of Exiters -WA Exiters AFAM WA Exiters -WARW A Allocati ons Graduat ion Rate BLK Graduat ion Rate WHT
2002 67.6 62.40 3,365 1426.76 1672.41 27,274, 610 66.4 83.8
2003 57.2 62.10 4,277 1620.98 2330.97 28,857, 712 48.3 69.7
2004 64.5 63.50 4,197 1716.57 2207.62 23,274, 862 53.9 73.6
2005 56.2 64.10 3,911 1599.6 1978.97 22,992, 788 60.8 77.7
2006 61.9 63.60 3,781 1319.57 2227.01 19,945, 283 53.6 74.1
2007 59.2 64.50 3,449 380 2,276 18,747, 455 60.6 75.6
2008 65 63.00 3,639 362 2,375 18,747, 476 59.9 75.4
(Table 9 S ignificance Test)(* denoting significant relati onship)
Black Participati on Rate White Participati on Rate Exite rs -AFA M Exite rs -WA Allocatio ns Graduati on Rate -BLK Graduati on Rate -WHT
Black Participati on Rate 1.000
White Participati on Rate 0.093 0.4959 1.000
Exiters -AFAM -0.186 0.1697 0.058 0.6709 1.000
Exiters -WA -0.164 0.2271 -0.030 0.8277 0.957 * 1.000
Allocation s -0.259 0.0541 0.146 0.2826 0.947 * 0.905 * 1.000
Graduatio n Rate -BLK 0.019 0.8886 0.300* 0.0246 0.326 0.014 3 0.412 0.001 6 -0.293* 0.0284 1.000
Graduatio n Rate -WHT 0.017 0.9008 0.394* 0.0026 0.132 0.332 3 0.212 0.116 9 -0.082* 0.5485 0.802 1.000
77


Evaluation & Conclusion
Table 9 is a correlation test to see which variable is significant to the dependent variable of participation rates. From Table 9 it is determined that graduation rates present the strongest relationship. Graduation rates appear the most significant, however as a contribution to white labor participation than black labor participation. The variables influenced by the WIA were negative for African Americans. The negative sign attributed to the significance of WIA programs represent a negative correlation between the variables. The findings of the test are verified as there is an expected significance for program completers of WIA programs and WIA allocations. The correlation between these variables is identified by the .9 significance. The .9 significance falls close to a complete correlation value of 1. The connection is a positive also. The close correlation can be logically expected as one would anticipate money put into a program would equate to the outcome. It is interesting for this study however that the strongest relationship is education and not the actions taken by the government policy.
In actuality most of the figures seemed to represent very little of a relationship to the labor participation of African Americans. At the very least black high school graduation rates appeared to move in a positive correlation for African American participation even though there was little significance. For white Americans graduation rates provided a significant relationship to labor access and participation. For a preliminary step, the significance evidence seems to support the view that these government actions are not impacting African American communities opportunities. Even more, the significance levels appear to support a racially discriminatory pattern of privileging whites. From Table 9, the first and second hypotheses of WIA program
78


completion and WIA allocations can be rejected due to negative correlation and lack of significance. The relationship between the variable participation rate and graduation enjoys a positive relationship. With a higher level of significance, it would have been easier to accept the third hypothesis that high school graduation rates are influencing African American labor. However for the fourth hypothesis where the hypothesis should be accepted, the limited evidence supports a rejection of the WIA as race neutral. Corresponding to historical patterns of race inequity, it is the advantages of white Americans in educational opportunities that is a part of furthering the race gap. This variable display the most significance (white graduation rates) on white labor participation. This dynamic of significance also interestingly displays a continuation of a pattern of discrimination similar to the pattern of disenfranchisement articulated by Katznelson in the 1930s New Deal. This realization makes the question of race neutral effectiveness in addressing racial inequality even more questionable.
The main strength of this research design is that it is possibly breaking into an area where limited research has been directed. The weakness of the design is presented in the difficulty of the design to fully represent the question of race neutral policy and its affect on communities of color. Issues with data collection, with isolating variables, and issues with a limited time frame collectively contribute to the weaknesses of this study. It would have been beneficial to this case study to additionally look at the relationship of black labor participation in combination with white labor, as opposed to observing from each as a distinctive racial labor pool. This arrangement of variables would have facilitated an even greater depiction of where the benfits were being received. Additionally facilitating the research from a gendered perspective would have also
79


created a deeper understanding of how race and gender cut across discrimination. White male representation in most of the labor data was very different from white female representation. In a lot of cases white male labor participation more closely mirrored black female participation in the labor market than any other demographic. This fact is interesting in light of the Elkins School research, mentioned in the previous chapter, of black female heads of households.
Further research into this area of labor participation could possibly examine the different experiences different perspectives encounter in the labor market. For the field of political science this is a needed debate. In a time when society needs more than ever a policy that prefigures the world as it should be, if the correlation test of this study is in any way correct then the possibility that these assistance programs provide any sort of remediation needs to be completely reevaluated. Instead of viewing other citizens as unwarranted of support, this study could shed light on the fact that the people suspected of receiving so much assistance are actually receiving the bare minimal. If anything, it is the policy decisions of government that are exasperating societys racial divide.
Opening up future research to county and city levels would provide a much more nuanced perspective of how this discrimination occurs. The discriminations of the New Deal most often occurred on the state and local level. Utilizing lower levels of analysis might allow for a more in-depth study of these government programs. It could be possible that the programs are effective but elude the communities that need it most. Investigating discrimination at this level would allow for more cases to build a more representative study. Monitoring other streams of revenue besides simply program allocations might also facilitate a better understanding of the effects of government aid on community
80


choices. These alternative revenue streams could be identified as campaign funding and demographic property values. Unemployment data could be cross referenced with years that demographic information is unavailable. Gathering this information would allow a greater reliability of sources than employing averages. Most importantly it is imperative that there is continued investigation into how structures inhibit or promote opportunities in communities of color. It is not enough to assume. Actual investigations into historically deprived areas of discrimination are necessary to monitor progress.
81


CHAPTER V
SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
Introduction Significance
Alternatively to the current race neutral construction of policy society could create policy more democratically. Realizing the increasingly dynamic intersectionality of common issues, addressing policy from a minority and gendered perspective would radically alter patterns of destructive liberalism. These narratives conceal oppression that has a foundation in the American ideology. Combined with racist power structures, contemporary race neutrality has distorted the self-determination of individualism into blind arrogance. Meritocracy has turned into entitlement, but only for the individual. At its best, this form of colorblind neoliberalism has little effect on the remediation of discrimination. Instead of applying race neutral standards to policies such as the WIA, society could create a race budgeting threshold to tackle disparaging racial inequality.
The significance of the case study elaborates the point that race neutral policy cannot positively influence racial disparity. In this instance, race neutral policy could not affect employment. However from the status of social indicators for blacks, in reference to black housing, black education, and black health, it can also be true that the race neutral doctrine more broadly is insufficient. After understanding the possible relevance of gender budgeting to the solution of race budgeting, this chapter will connect current racial tensions to the overarching issue of racialized liberalism, offer an update on the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discriminations (CERD) perspective on U.S. racial issues, and finally offer a conclusion to the thesis. Understanding the relationship of race, its narratives, and how current disparity is but an outgrowth of this legacy, societal change can occur. If proposing to create meaningful change then that change
82


must either use this capability to empower people of color and prefigure how society should be or be honest about true allegiances to the status quo.
Instead of dedicating the Workforce Investment Act to the neediest members of society, race budgeting would suggest analyzing the policy particularly for its impacts on communities of color. In the past, when alleviating inequities, it has been the government response most often to mediate and remedy discrimination. However, political transformation, like anything else, is a social process. To understand contemporary dynamics, this research seeks to analyze the impact government actions have on racial equity. Policy in itself represents these actions in budget allocations. On the search to find how to elaborate on the relationship between the effects of government actions on identity groups, most literature discovered on gender budgeting appropriately provided a complimentary lens. Gender budgeting attempts to understand and explain the opening of opportunities (or closures) that are structured by government spending on programs and policies. For example, policies affecting childcare influence the consumption patterns of female citizens more than males. This illustrates how policy affects demographics differently. The differences provide an analogous frame to understand not only gendered experiences and also form a paradigm for this thesis purpose of race based policy.
Gender budgeting offers a tool of analysis for how the decisions concerning government spending benefit or harm women and provides a method to parallel that construction against the priorities of males. Here again a similarity between Katznelsons methodology can be drawn in comparing black-white advantage and disadvantage to gender budgetings dichotomy of female-male advantage and disadvantage. In examining the methods of gender budgeting literature, models of racial budgeting could possibly be
83


created likewise to explain how government expenditures affect racial groups. In connecting gender budgets and racial equity, hopefully this alternative can embody how perceptions of race otherwise influence the opportunities of African American communities. By understanding how government allocations are distributed, the connection of the case studys influence on black labor can be further understood as to why systematic deprivations persist.
Gender/Racial Budgeting
Most gender budgeting analysis concentrates on three areas of budget expenditures: distribution, adequacy, and equity (Elson 2004). These three categories can be defined as the proportion of government funds allocated by gender, the adequacy of policy measures to gender equality, and equity demonstrated in how allocations influence the group members lives. These three categories present three different questions that can be asked of the research. For this discussion however, there will be a concentration on the category of equity as it most aptly applies to the disparity of black-white racial dynamics.
Contemplating the original research topic of racial equity, the overall question of whether government programs are addressing the discrimination of African American communities can overlap with a gender budget initiative (GBI) perspective. This focus targets more than just equality, but also addresses how the result or outcome positively or negatively affects individual lives, resources, or power relations (Botlhale 2011). The overall research question is additionally tied to the idea of budgets in the assumption that current cleavages in equity standards (e.g. income, employment, education, and health) are the result of systematic discrimination. Underneath this is an understanding that given
84


how far racial perceptions on the surface have progressed, any residual disadvantages are further assumed to be structural and require government authority to resolve them.
From the gender budgeting literature one research query continually stood out -primarily concerning the impacts of fiscal spending on gender equality. Utilizing the first two observed examples of gender budgeting as the starting point for many of the studies for the field, the Australian and South African governments were the first to attempt this kind of analysis to assess how well they were attending to gender issues (Rubin and Bartle 2005). These initial budget statements required all departments and agencies to submit in-depth reports demonstrating the impact of their programs on women (Rubin and Bartle 261, 2005). Other countries then replicated the South African and Australian examples. Regardless of whether the Australian within-government model or the South African out-of-government model was utilized, in most instances of utility, gender budget analysis satisfied its intended goal of addressing gender equality. Even in cases which there were declines in enforcement of gender equality standards the exercise of gender budgeting usually had some effect on gendered issues. In France all ministries are required to identify expenditures targeted to women (Elson 2003). Gender budget initiatives have spread throughout the world to other countries and have become a part of the United Nations Beijing Platform for Action (Sharp & Broomhill 2002). However, owing to these examples of continual efficacy, a general supposition of GBIs utility in the budget decision making process can attest to its influence on gender equality.
Most notably, gender budget analysis typically occurred, as mentioned, either within or outside of the government. The programs were government sponsored, which embodies the within-government model This is displayed in the Australian example of
85


gender budgeting. Conversely, some gender budgeting activities were sponsored by those outside of government, namely NGOs and womens advocacy groups. This example models the South African experience. This is important, because for the Australian, within-government model, the model allowed a greater degree of access for collection of data and more direct impact for policy proposals. However the South African model of outside-government benefitted from more social movement buy in to facilitate long term mobilization. Though outside structures, as in the South African case, lacked some formal information it can be argued that the participatory engagement might have helped sustain the GBI practice. Unlike the South African case, the Australian model declined when government cutbacks influenced the governments priorities (Rubin & Bartle 2005). And so, the sources propose these differences as potential areas for more investigation in the future.
By testing a common hypothesis and by sharing common ideals of equality, most sources of gender budgeting form a cohesive image of the field in respect to gender budget analysis. To extrapolate gender budgetings utility the sources used examples of gender budget initiatives to further their analysis. These cases also reflect however an important thread throughout the source materials, political context. To advocate for gender budget analysis in Botswana, Botlhale employed examples of GBI in Uganda, South Africa, and Tanzania (2011). Another study not only used the Australian case as its focus, but also used Canada as a case for the GBI approach. In using these examples the sources attempt to build a set of best practices. By using GBI as their source, the cases appear to attempt to highlight the constraints to implementing gender analysis. The patterns of in-government and out-government models correlate to the studys larger idea
86


of racial budgeting and racial disparity; as in the American case it would similarly take social movement participation and government action to get over the political context of liberal, white hegemony. However, in some contexts the social agitation for mass movement support is already occurring.
The Rallying Cry of Ferguson
On Saturday, August 9th, 2014 Michael Brown was shot to death by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, a St. Louis suburb (USA Today). In the days and weeks since this incident the streets of Ferguson have been ablaze with protest, clashes with the police, and bitter political jockeying. Citizen concerns have been met by hostile police action, riots have been met by deplorable arguments of law and order, and demands by the community have been ignored by the political establishment. However, as black communities have rallied to the cry of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Trayvon Martin, Renisha McBride, and John Crawford, there appears to be a surging storm of mass mobilization around the concerns of black identity.
On a national level, people seem to be responding to the effects of race neutral liberalism. No longer are people accepting the narratives of black criminality that obscure the historical legacy of discrimination and poverty in black communities. No longer are people accepting the claim of individualism that protects private property at the expense of black victimhood an ignorance that actually perpetuates violence in black communities. These are the foments of a social movement to democratize American liberalism.
its that racism stark, in-your-face, never-ending, frequently murderous that has so many African Americans so angry and frustrated, so furious, so enraged.
Black people ah across America, not just in Ferguson, are
87


angry about the killing of Michael Brown. And they remain angry over the killing of Trayvon Martin. And many are seething over the fatal chokehold clamped on the throat of Eric Garner by a cop on Staten Island in New York...
They are angry about all those things, but they are also angry and frustrated about so much more... Bob Herbert (2014)
The continued patterns of structural racial disparity outlined in the previous chapter fuel this fire. The discrimination of the New Deal has perpetuated a status quo whereby even the hardest working black family cannot reach parity. As the 1930s Depression era analysis of Katznelson demonstrated, black poverty is not white poverty. Farm values then can be paralleled to the divergent business equity blacks and whites display now in assets. The bottom position of blacks due to barriers in employment and as a result of sharecropping in the 1930s was perpetuated by the New Deal, and by the 1970s reinforced. These are the instances that ignite flames of unrest when post racialism fails to answer African American claims of legitimacy, of merit. These are the sparks that detonate when the truth is that American society has never paid on its debts to minorities. Because black progress during the 1970s came at the detriment of white Americans, the liberal ethos of egalitarianism meant that any attempt at racial redress had to also attempt first to find a race neutral method. Strict scrutiny would make it even more strenuous of a process to prove the black experience. However, this view of racism keeps situations like Ferguson bubbling under the surface. The obscured legacy of discrimination, the frustrated justice, and the constricted rights of blacks are becoming more and more unsustainable.
88


Institutional Criticism
Efforts to constructively alter our government from within are being articulated as well. Here the United Nations, through the CERD, has recently criticized the State Departments for its June 2013 periodic report (Carasik). The U.N. committee made concrete recommendations that the government could take to better manage race, including legislative changes, policy initiatives, resource allocations and the development of a national action plan (Carasik). Even more, the UN kept their attention on government institutions. These collective narratives of merit, what is equal agency, and what is universal create the structures of how the government frames policy and qualifies rights. The U.N. takes concern that the U.S. is in breach of these basic human rights (Carasik). By making the suggested changes the government could reverse the feedback loop of societal inequality and policy disenfranchisement. Just as the GI Bill was interpreted with the local flavor in mind, policy can also transmit an alternative way of dealing with race besides the race neutral ambiguity of liberalism.
Though the U.N. received the report from the State Department and functions outside of the U.S. government, the force of a treaty expands the U.N. access to information and punitive capabilities. The within-government correlation to GBI is developed by this dynamic. The process the CERD places on governmental actions make U.S. agencies attempt an internal evaluation to produce the information. The within-government perspective is also supported by the fact that the statements of the UN further legitimize government restructuring as a result of the role and power of the United Nations. Cumulatively, racial parity might gain traction as a result of the agitation of
89


social movements like Ferguson, and due to the within government recommendations of the UN.
Conclusion Post Racial America and the Current Reality
Without a completely different doctrine to direct race consciousness in America it can be expected that Americas race problem will continue ad infinitum. Race can easily be tied back to slavery and ignored. Many people attempt to isolate race as an unprecedented mark in history that cannot be repeated. However, the point of focusing on the New Deal and the WIA is to show the legacy of racial discrimination now. Limited liberal views have closed the door on civil rights continually: after the Reconstruction, the Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act. Liberal colorblindness ignores the systemic disadvantages of blackness, but also fails to see how the advantages constructed in this present moment supports whiteness.
Narratives of Americas liberal principles of meritocracy, egalitarianism, and individualism are a part of the same trend that has developed race neutral language.
These stories connect in their complete refusal to understand and accurately represent the realities of people of color. The black freedom movement has always existed as a counterpoint to this view of mainstream American ideology. For the history detailed in this thesis black identity has always been a marginalized one. However, the information that could absolutely overturn the race neutral pattern of ignorance on its head exists. The persistence of racial disparity is not due a lack of effort by African Americans or cultural or genetic dispositions, but is a result of repeated forms of discrimination that channel wealth accumulation and more. Increasingly, communities of color are attempting to shed this disempowerment, indicating that the time has come for Americans to decide to either
90


Full Text

PAGE 1

BLACK PROGRESS THROUGH RACE NEUTRAL POLICY: DECONTRSUCTING AMERICAN CLASSICAL LIBERALISM, THE W ORKFORCE INVESTMENT ACT, AND MODERN RACIAL INEQUALITY by CHAZ E. BRISCOE B.A., Indiana University, New Albany, 2011 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Political Science Program 2014

PAGE 2

ii 2014 CHAZ E. BRISCOE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PAGE 3

iii This thesis for the Master of Arts degree by Chaz E. Briscoe has been approved for the Political Science Program by Lucy McGuffey, Chair Glenn Morris Michael Berry November 21, 2014

PAGE 4

iv Briscoe, Chaz E. (M.A., Political Science) Black Progress through Race Neutral Policy: Deconst ructing American Classical Liberalism, the Workforce Investment Act, and Moder n Racial Inequality Thesis directed by Associate Professor Lucy McGuffe y. ABSTRACT Race neutral language has been used extensively as a solution to race explicit problems in America. Also termed colorblindness, th e doctrine attempts to address racial disparity in this country by non-explicit racial me ans. In the case of the United StatesÂ’ Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discriminati on report to the United Nations this race neutral policy making proposes addressing the problem of racial disparity by targeting the neediest members of society. However with racial inequality at an all-time high the doctrine of race neutrality fails to accom plish its intended goal. By analyzing the theoretical liberal foundations of colorblindness, by analyzing race neutralityÂ’s practice during the New Deal, and by questioning its effecti veness within current policy, this study will approach the question of race neutrality Â’s effect on elevating black progress. In attempting this analysis it became woefully ins ufficient to frame discrimination as an isolated occurrence within one race. It has b een well documented that African American wealth is a small fraction of that of whit e Americans. However, by recreating a frame to compare the advantages and harms African A mericans and white Americans encounter, a more comprehensive perspective can ass ess how discrimination structures opportunities in divergent, racially explicit patte rns. In this pattern it becomes identifiable that racial exclusion is not a zero sum, but functi ons in way that collectively promotes and disenfranchises one group over the other. In es sence obtaining this understanding

PAGE 5

v contributes to a new narrative. This narrative is n ecessary and needed to obliterate the obscurity of persistent inequality. Even more this narrative will address racial progress while exposing the systematic acceleration of racia l wealth disparity, power, and agency. In consequence of race neutralityÂ’s ambivalence th e case study of the Workforce Investment Act will indicate that instead of race n eutral policy facilitating a modern practice of racial remediation, it in actuality, co ntinues the social status quo of proffering privileges to dominant white society. Understanding this outcome, an agenda of racial budgeting is provided to fill in where race neutral policy has failed. These racial budgets would create an analysis of policy that would gauge the impact of initiatives on communities of color. This arrangement would alter the frame of an undeserved privilege to one particular demographic, and democratically r eaffirm the value of that community to the rest of society. The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication. Approved: Lucy McGuffey

PAGE 6

vi DEDICATION This work is dedicated to all the various streams of existence. Existence is comprised of random firings, mistakes, and accident s. However in the beauty of it all, as human beings experiencing this existence, life play s out seamlessly. Out of all the chance in the universe the current moment is created, not too soon, not too late, but right on time. So to all those voices that came before, to all tho se voices that now don’t know to speak, and to all those voices that will come; this work i s dedicated to you. “I’m not interested in anybody’s guilt. Guilt is a luxury that we can no longer afford. I know you didn’t do it, and I didn’t do it either, but I am responsible for it because I am a man and a citizen of this country an d you are responsible for it, too, for the very same reason… Anyone who is trying to be co nscious must begin to dismiss the vocabulary which we’ve used so long to cover it up, to lie ab out the way things are.” – James Baldwin

PAGE 7

vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author of this thesis seeks to acknowledge all those who have supported the culmination of this effort. That explicitly means m y parents, my friends, my professors, and my colleagues. However I must also acknowledge those random strangers who shared a kind word or even those potential connecti ons that I have lost in the process. From offering monetary support, an ear to listen, c hallenging my positions, providing mentorship over coffee, a shoulder to cry on, or si mply the silence and quiet understanding of my absence, words cannot express h ow important every minute contribution has been. I take none of it for grante d. I humbly accept lifeÂ’s blessings, as simply a guy from Kentucky trying to live the love that has continually found its way in my direction.

PAGE 8

viii TABLES OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. FOREWORD 1 Introduction 1 Thesis Argument & Organization 5 Scholastic Context 7 Conclusion 13 II. LITERATURE REVIEW 16 Introduction 16 Liberalism 19 Plessy v. Ferguson 22 The New Deal 24 Civil Rights – 1960s to the 1980s 27 Current Disparities 32 Race Forward – Conclusion 35 III. THEORETICAL & METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK 39 Introduction 39 Ira Katznelson – Theoretical Frame 41 Wealth Accumulation/Racial Dispossession – Methodol ogical Frame 51 Conclusion 59 IV. WORKFORCE INVESTMENT ACT: CASE STUDY 61 Introduction 61

PAGE 9

ix Research Design 62 Variable Description 66 Observations 71 Evaluation & Conclusion 78 V. SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY 82 Introduction 82 Gender/Racial Budgeting 84 The Rallying Cry of Ferguson 87 Institutional Criticism 89 Conclusion – Post Racial America and the Current Re ality 90 BIBLIOGRAPHY 92 APPENDIX 97

PAGE 10

x LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. Representation of Data for Illinois 73 2. Representation of Data for New Jersey 74 3. Representation of Data for Florida 74 4. Representation of Data for Arkansas 75 5. Representation of Data for Texas 75 6. Representation of Data for Arizona 76 7. Representation of Data for California 76 8. Representation of Data for Washington 77 9. Significance Test 77

PAGE 11

1 CHAPTER I FOREWORD Introduction The question of this thesis came out of the persist ence of racial disparities. After graduate study and working for the Obama Campaign i n 2008, the realization set in that there was a lot to learn in terms of social movemen ts and power in politics. In particular, the African American experience had a substantial f oundation and dynamic contribution to American democracy. There were revolutionaries, and moderates. The ideological stances of African Americans were as completely pol arizing, from Integrationists to those who advocated African Nationalism, as among any oth er political tradition. However, when faced with the modern American racial experien ce, this current generation appears to contribute little to the black freedom movement. Overall, from the age group 18-25, 47 percent oppose special efforts aimed at minority st udents, while only 38 percent favor them (Kingkade). As current youth turn their back o n affirmative action, how would, without it, the academic diversity of many African Americans have differed. Or even more, what does it indicate that such race-consciou s policies ass affirmative action are identified as detrimental pariahs to American polit ics. It was these positions that produced an inquiry int o how systems of race are perpetuated today. Even though it has become domina nt hegemony to abhor discrimination and racial division, there is still such a wide racial wealth divide. It has been established that America is a colorblind natio n, or at least proposes to be, but yet blacks and whites in employment face completely dif ferent truths. One race faces discrimination tactics such as last hiredfirst fi red, lower labor participation rates and

PAGE 12

2 occupational segregation while the other does not. So what does it truly mean to be colorblind or race-neutral? How is this American? H ow is this social construction postracial? The answers to the questions were as complex as Afr ican American experience and ideology itself, as complex as any life, and wa y too expansive to go uncritiqued. As the state is one of the main actors in politics, it felt apropos to examine how the state perpetuates, or at least fails to alleviate, inequa lity. State action is the trigger for constitutional review of policy and standardizes th e context for such analysis. With economic disempowerment serving as the greatest enc umbrance of historical black disenfranchisement, an analysis of how the governme nt provides aid to foster black economic growth needed evaluation. The classic exam ple of government efforts in social policy is the New Deal. Comprised of multiples acts targeting employment, housing, and education, the New Deal was an attempt by the U.S. government to relieve extreme poverty due to the Great Depression. One effort the federal government utilizes more recently to remediate racial discrimination is the Workforce Investment Act (WIA)(Department of State 2007). However, as the Ne w Deal race neutral policy has exhibited, federal policy may produce white wealth accumulation while continuing patterns of racial discrimination (Katznelson 2005) In essence the inquiry of more present analysis must address whether contemporary race-neutral policies, such as WIA, contribute to trends of the splintering gap of blac k disaccumulation and white advancement. To address black exclusion and economic disenfranch isement, the argument of this thesis will address what effect the Workforce Investment Act has had on black labor

PAGE 13

3 participation. In providing a scope of the disparit y between the black and white races, the case study investigation will analyze the effects o f the WIA on white-labor participation as well. By analyzing these two demographics, an ob servation will be created detailing the discordant and discriminatory access for one ra ce over the other. While the New Deal policies facilitated black disaccumulation, the pol icies at the same time enabled white Americans to accumulate assets. Given that fact, th e case study analysis will attempt to draw out the patterns of these disparities. It is t he argument of this essay that though the WIA is considered race-neutral, because of the raci al underpinnings of colorblind liberalism, the benefit/target of the policy still disproportionately differs between the races. Through this study the reader will observe t he connections of liberalism, raceneutral policy, and current racial inequities. By c reating these links the reader can learn how current inequalities are a part of a historical disempowerment facilitated by a colorblind doctrine that neither represents materia l circumstances nor meets the necessary steps to reach black-white parity. This work will place a critical eye on power in rac ial politics. Significant research has been conducted in racial politics; however less has been accomplished to characterize how current state policies perpetuate racial inequi ties. Studies of racial inequality instead tend to advocate both a mix of race neutral and rac e conscious policy, or conclude in advocating a multicultural alliance. For instance, studies will advocate that for people of color to advance it is necessary for the discourse to include a diversity of cultures instead of a particular focus on one race. As a consequence of the 1990Â’s trend of identity politics, scholars within the field of political sc ience have shied from single issue movements. However, instead of confronting the inef fectiveness of race neutral politics,

PAGE 14

4 the field has tried to find the little good in its utility as to preserve government structures. Though agreement exists about the importance of the intersectionality of many forms of oppression, the first step must start by deconstruc ting the legacies of race, class, and gender in American society. This deconstruction mus t occur before scholars can consolidate the issues into a comprehensive discour se. Nevertheless, by not critiquing the state and contesting political homogenization, soci al justice advocates fall within the familiar power structure of the status quo. Every p olicy should be critiqued for its intended goals and its practical outcomes. For far too long policy has in fact been used to maintain power dominance. If social equality is the goal, then there must be accompanied by a redistribution of power, and at every turn a d etermination to alter repressive structures that proffer inequalities existence. Thi s thesis provides a step toward this analysis by critiquing the racial legacy of race-ne utral policy and by examining the racial impacts of state policy. The re-election of President Barack Obama has shown that the American electorate no longer needs white liberal ideology t o win elections. This means that it is no longer necessary to appeal to a white majority for fear of appearing too cozy with the “47%.” The makeup of President Obama’s re-election win demonstrates the diversity of the emerging electorate. As a consequence the next steps require renewed action, renewed mobilization and a renewed discourse, as th e promise of an electoral shift is ripe for all demographics, especially minority communiti es, to decide what is in their best interest.

PAGE 15

5 Thesis Argument & Organization It is imperative to begin this discussion with the construction of the current context of race relations. Due to the ambivalent po st-racial nature of colorblindness there has been a preponderance of confusion about where r ace relations actually stand in America. This ambivalence questions whether the rac ial dilemma is improving or deteriorating (Holmes 2007). This question goes alo ng with the thesis, as the examination of the Workforce Investment Act serves as a proxy f or current racial progress. The Workforce Investment Act is a federal policy that f und and structures job training programs. The colorblind doctrine tends to obfuscat e the history of racial discrimination, so it is imperative to establish a foundation for c urrent racial realities. Linking the previous discussion of black disparity to black exclusion, this thesis argues that the Workforce Investment Act is a part of a systematic disparity perpetuated by race conscious benefits disguised as race neutra l policy. In theory race neutral policy would apply universally to all races equally. Howev er in practice what has been shown is that benefits are instead bestowed to one race over another. The argument of race neutral intentions versus race neutral outcomes will be dev eloped by analyzing parallel black and white workforce training participation and black an d white labor access. The assumption is that the historical discrimination of African Am ericans in employment justifies a remedy to correct black labor exclusion. The Katzne lson methodological approach presents that true remediation is necessary due to the evidence of how discordant benefits have been accumulated by whites and not African Ame ricans. In that sense the argument investigates not simply how much one group increase s compared to another, but the rate at which each racial group is benefiting or not ben efiting from race neutral policy. Again,

PAGE 16

6 this is understood with the consideration that true affirmative action would target the accelerating gap between the two demographics. At i ts most expansive breadth this argument will engage these issues of stubborn black /white disparity, address historic systemic patterns of racial discrimination, and con textually place this reality within race relations today. The incongruent pattern of reversing affirmative ac tion programs while racial wealth indicators are worsening creates an imbalanc ed reality of racial progress. If the gap is worsening, now is not the time to pull back assistance. This reality brings this thesis to an analysis of the idea and practice of c olorblindness. This is an important place for this discussion as understanding the term is im perative to advancing the inefficiency or usefulness of the colorblind doctrine. Colorblindness implicitly functions within the cont ext of race and policy. Its application is primarily due to liberal assumptions about the role of race and the role of government. The assumptions are encapsulated in con cepts such as universalism, meritocracy, class, and abstract individualism. The connection of colorblindness and American liberalism lies in their ability to fashio n a society where rights are distributed to some, where policy is dominated by a limited majori ty, and where a false observation of minorities controls societal expectations. This thesis is organized in the following manner: b eginning with the introduction, the literature review, a historical analysis of rac e neutral language in policy, followed by a discussion of the methodological contribution of Ira Katznelson and capital accumulation, a case study of the WIA, and conclude s with an evaluative look toward the future.

PAGE 17

7 After a chapter on the connection of race neutralit y and liberalism, the next chapter after that will introduce Ira Katznelson. H is work will provide a lens and methodology of how the race-neutral New Deal policy racially stratified its benefits. The case study will ensue next, followed by the conclus ion stating the evaluation and significance of this thesis. As a part of the liter ature review, this chapter will next link the theoretical argument of colorblindness and inequali ty to sources from the field and highlight the purpose/agenda of the thesis. Scholastic Context The research within the rest of this chapter will d efend and expose scholarly perspectives on colorblindness and race neutrality, the history of race relations, KatznelsonÂ’s work with capital disaccumulation, and highlight gender budgeting research. Throughout this chapter the discussion of the literature will support the thesis in what has been contributed to the field, detail how the literature differs from prior research, and provide insight into how this work si tuates itself within the broader context of race politics. As such, it is imperative this li terature review begin with a discussion of the field of Critical Race Theory (CRT). Much of th e theoretical background for this thesis comes from this discipline within social sci ence, whether in a legal discourse or sociological, and as a subset of social sciences wi ll begin the analysis of how this thesis can supplement the discourse at large. Critical Race Theory provides for this thesis the f oundation of race as a social construction, encompassing the need for nuances of subtle, institutional, or institutional implicit racism (Delgado). Even more CRT contribute s lessons from the black freedom movement, through scholars such as W.E.B Du Bois an d postcolonists, to target race as

PAGE 18

8 normal and indicative of American power relations ( Delgado). This construction of race during CRT’s founding in the 1970s and 1980s diverg es from the liberal assumptions of the 1960s integration and New Deal neoliberal satis factions of colorblindness. For this thesis the contributions of CRT is facilitated thro ugh texts such as Critical Race Theory: the Cutting Edge (Delgado), Racism Without Racists (Bonilla-Silva), The New Jim Crow (Alexander), and The History of White People (Painter) Tim Wise’s work Colorblind can also be included in this category. These source s not only provided background knowledge on the formation of America’s race relati ons, but led to the discovery of many other useful sources. Critical Race Theory suppleme nts this thesis as the central CRT theme of race and state action parallels the simila r examination of the creation of power through racial dynamics in this text. The link betw een classical American liberalism and race is also facilitated through the Critical Race Theory canon and texts such as Race and Manifest Destiny (Horsman) and other journal articles such as “Whit eness as Property” that provide nuances to the discussion of race. Cumulatively these sources support the work of this thesis and build a framework for analyzing power from a race positive perspectiv e. This is dissimilar to sources such as the “The Moynihan Report”, the Bell curve study, an d sociologist Nathan Glazer which provide a perspective that the issues of racial dis parity are due to culture (Office of Policy Planning and Research, 1965). By looking at the “ra ce problem” as a top-down issue, whereby people of color do not comply with mainstre am norms, the Moynihan Report and human capital approaches highlight an alternati ve viewpoint than that of this thesis. However, importantly this influences why CRT, and t he views of this thesis, contribute to the field, as they offer a new investigation into o ld narratives. Scrutiny under CRT is

PAGE 19

9 placed on the dominant construction of white suprem acy and enables a discourse of social liberation and racial emancipation. A major criticism of Critical Race Theory (CRT) is based on its use of law (in this instance policy) as a structure within the system as opposed to practicing a libratory position that overcomes the system (Tevino et al, 2 008). As applied to this thesis, it appropriate to consider that perhaps there is a fun ction whereby African Americans benefit from current racial dynamics outside the re alm of policy and government. It is possible that by utilizing the tools of the dominan t society through law and policy that CRT is at the same time reifying the importance of dominant societyÂ’s structures. This line of questioning is quite productive if truly pe rtinent the goal of the field is to change racial empowerment and produce libratory equality. The criticism is slightly addressed within the thesis as it attempts to empower people of color beyond narratives of colorblindness. However alternatives exist beyond a CRT reading of political science of structure and agency to challenge institutions. Cha nges to society can occur outside the political process and institutions. This thesis ack nowledges this challenge of CRT by acknowledging the role of social movements but this is but one avenue out of many. This paperÂ’s discussion of colorblindness and raceneutrality gathers from the texts Whitewashing Race (Brown et al 2003) and Black Wealth/White Wealth (Oliver & Shapiro 1995) along with other peer-reviewed journal articles. T hese texts provide information on current disparities and the range of black disparity throughout the years. These sources are updated by present Pew Reports. T he sources presented in this discussion developed a frame by which to question t he value of the race neutral narrative. Whitewashing RaceÂ’s research chronicles the dire political and economi c realities of

PAGE 20

10 American minorities. The research demonstrates the substantial distance between minorities across several dimensions of society. Black Wealth/White Wealth offers its own contribution to racial understanding by shiftin g the discourse to wealth as opposed to earnings. The shift is important because as earning s close in between the races the extenuating disparity must explained by deeper patt erns. Both works differ slightly in context and in their focus – Whitewashing Race in its totality explores multiple dimensions of race inequity such as housing and edu cation, and Black Wealth/White Wealth in its investigation of economic stratification. T he sources inevitably supported each other in their critique that colorblindness co ncealed the destructive nature of racial disparity, even though each does so from a differen t social platform. In their importance these sources demonstrate the dynamic nuances of un derstanding racial disparity. However they also provide space to counter mainstre am conversations on race that provide superficial understandings of these racial realities. Katznelson’s book, When Affirmative Action was White was pivotal to this thesis for its methodological contribution. Utilizing Katz nelson’s dual stream of observing both white and black demographics, while including the a dvantages and disadvantages of each races’ experiences, allowed for a much more compreh ensive view of racial disparity besides a zero sum construction of winners and lose rs. Katznelson’s accompanying journal articles provided updates of current dynami cs in the understanding of capital accumulation. Besides providing a methodological fr amework to observe the accumulation of wealth, Katznelson’s work also prov ides a point of deviation. Whereas Katznelson attributes race conscious benefits and r ace neutral policy to Southern

PAGE 21

11 congressional members, the focus of this thesis fac ilitates a foundation that American prejudice cannot be ascribed to a limited regional viewpoint. An even deeper variance is evident in the way many critical studies attribute the negative effects of white opportunity hoarding to t he systemic patterns of policy discrimination attribute these discriminations to t he protection racial privilege, but yet offer modest solutions. Numerous scholars, includin g Katznelson and Lawrence III, couch their solutions to these trends within modera te attempts of coalition building (Delgado 2013, Katznelson 2007). This neglects Crit ical Race Theory’s literature that gets right to the core of mainstream political scie nce studies and the need to end these discriminatory cycles of power structures. True sys temic change would have to completely disrupt the status quo and political and social arrangements. However this is a pivotal contradiction between the revolutionary pos sibility of Critical Race Theory and the institutionalism of more moderate political sci entists. Deciding whether to reform the system or perceive the system as completely alien t o your identity lead to completely different perspectives on solutions and outcomes. For the case study of this thesis, source literatur e was gathered around multiple studies about government action and policy. These s ources detailed the effects of government policy on identity, provided information regarding race as a social indicator, and represented literature about the WIA that facil itated the case analysis. Due to the diversity of sources there was very little similari ty between them. For instance, “How to Record Race” (Evinger) was a useful article to main tain the validity of race as a social identifier within the study. However upon researchi ng the topic there was very little information explicitly connecting the WIA and race. The article “The Limited Local

PAGE 22

12 Impacts of Ethnic and Racial Diversity” (Hopkins) i s another source used, and though it focuses on race and policy, it is more targeted to criminal justice policy than employment. One important contribution of the sourc e was that it did provide a frame for the local impacts of racial diversity, not to local politics, but national agendas (Hopkins). The study of “Limited Local Impacts” demonstrated t hat when local crime rates lowered local crime budgets increased. This inverse relatio nship was explained due to the preponderance of national calls that continued to e levate crime. This reality supports the thesis that American ideology such as liberalism di ctates overarching concerns of race over the hypothesis of aberrational regional racism The data from the case study is represented by info rmation gathered from county, state and federal labor databases. The source for l abor participation is provided by the Department of Labor. Demographic information on the WIA program participants is both collected at the county and state level and compile d in databases provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Graduation rates were also acc essible through state level agencies. However it is important to note that in many cases the method of data collection differed by state and even influenced the format of the stat istics. Finally, the concluding evaluation of this thesis w ill attempt to offer an opt-in, opt-out strategy, contrary to the multi-cultural al liances proposed by more moderate scholars within political science. The proposed eva luation will also provide a method to overcome the limits of race neutrality. This strate gy is built on a discussion of the field of gender budgeting initiatives (GBI). Collaborating w ith other social science studies’ techniques can build best practices and advance the discipline. Cross-sharing techniques allow claims from varying views of justice the abil ity to maintain their own identities

PAGE 23

13 while engineering creative self-empowered solutions The gender studies use of gender budgeting provides an illustration of how instituti ons outside of the government policy making system can agitate for policy consideration. Yet the literature also offers a perspective of how initiatives within-government ca n also have reformist effects. Each approach comes with drawbacks. However a review of the field of gender budgeting enables a link between efforts to influence policy and black disenfranchisement and black empowerment. This is most notable in the instances where the sources found applying gender budget initiatives had some significant mark er of success in alleviating gender equality. If the approach could be manipulated towa rd race, perhaps there would be a similar success in eliminating racial disparity. The utilization of this platform also connects the political process in social movements to aspects of democratic institution buil ding. For example this can be achieved by opening spaces of discourse that are ne cessary for racial progress. By requiring a focus on race and policy, similar to ef forts of gender and policy in GBI, a similar benefit of equality can be anticipated for race. Despite the studies use of different approaches, in all, most programs elevated the conc erns of women and contributed to a new narrative of female value in society. Conclusion Most convincing to the contribution of this thesis was Katznelson’s work on New Deal disenfranchisement. Never before had the state ment “white affirmative action” appeared more appropriate when analyzing the benefi ts of the New Deal social policies. This is contrary to how the New Deal is usually ref erred as the great American welfare policy. As Katznelson notes, presidents as late as President Clinton have extolled the

PAGE 24

14 social benefits of the policy (Katznelson 2005). Ec onomists such as Paul Krugman have lauded the policy’s connection to the growth of the middle class (Krugman 2009). Katznelson argues that this is a superficial unders tanding of New Deal policies. As narratives around colorblindness today obscure curr ent racial disparities, the narrative of a race neutral New Deal has also disguised the dise nfranchisement and systemic discrimination of African Americans experienced. Ho wever, this construction supports a mainstream understanding of American ethos that has served to depreciate race conscious policies. To the broader topic of race politics – and politic al science, the ambiguity of race is discussed misinforms individual perceptions, and disillusion how anyone can approach to find the truth. How can the field open up the di scourse when colorblindness and race neutrality have narrowed the understandings of powe r and narrative? The first step is to develop the nuances to provide the details that ena ble a critique of the narrative and dispel the truth. This critique is achieved by unde rstanding the connection of historically racist paradigms in America and current manifestati ons of the same prejudice. Next the disparity must be plainly articulated so as to unde rstand the depth of this harm on people of color. After which society must critique its own actions to observe how it furthers these patterns currently. Lastly, equipped with thi s understanding two routes develop. One of which communities of color can begin to act on alternative narratives to empower their own self-determination. Alternatively, those aligned as allies will learn a deeper understanding of their own contribution, and will a lso be empowered to expressively choose how to better support democratic aspirations Abolitionist movements, the activism of W.E.B. DuBois, and the civil rights mov ements never ended. With that

PAGE 25

15 understanding of historical discrimination, it is i mperative that this generation evaluate how these structures of race persist today.

PAGE 26

16 CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction As mentioned, the past several years have marked a progression and regression in American race relations. In one regard, in the year 2013, Americans witnessed the first “black” president inaugurated for his second term, a feat that indicated that his 2008 election was not a fluke, but a reflection of a cha nging America. In cinema, there has been a recent retelling of African American experie nces, with movies such as “The Butler” and “12 Years a Slave” highlighting African American contributions to American society and portraying the harms of slavery and rac ism. Though anecdotal, these references reflect what could be seen as the social transformation of America from its squalid past. Despite this apparent progress, the years in review also mark regressions in America’s ability to deal with racial conflict. In June of 2013 the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act which had s et the criteria for state and local preclearance. The removal of this section of the Vo ting Rights Act ended the requirement that states obtain congressional approval before al tering voting guidelines in their state. This legal change dealt a significant blow to the e nforcement of the Voting Rights Act, deconstructing the symbolic crown achievement of th e Civil Rights Movement. The nation’s racial tolerance would further be tested f ollowing the verdict of the Trayvon Martin trial. Perspectives on the justice of the tr ial would split America as conservatives would advocate gun rights while black communities w ould take the occurrence to question the disparate treatment of black male vict imhood in America. The alternative

PAGE 27

17 perceptions of this situation emphasize the diverse experiences of race in America. For white Americans this trial would represent an affro nt to individual rights while for blacks it would demonstrate collective devaluing of Africa n American lives. While Americans find themselves attempting to fulfi ll the promise of equal opportunity, the present racial context demonstrate s how the discourse on race still embodies the historic legacy of racism. Current rh etoric concerning merit, black criminality, and economic inequality connect to pas t racist assumptions of black laziness, bestiality, and cultural deterioration. Can America ns, actually declare progress and a post-racial society, or is America, in light of ref ormulating racial patterns, actually living in the era of a New Jim Crow (Delgado 2013)(Alexand er 2010)? The New Jim Crow symbolizes racism as system of deprivation by anoth er name. By connecting current racial dynamics to this legacy of black experiences in America a critique develops that questions if contemporary race relations are anythi ng new. To answer the question of in what direction is America’s racial relations procee ding, it can be said that American society is progressing yet still has significant in equalities to address. This chapter will focus on the historical developments that have give n rise to this ambiguity by articulating American race relations. The inarticulation of racial understanding is a con sequence of how race has been handled in society. Author David Holmes explains th at much of the confusion around the race debate is a result of “minimizing or ignoring the legacies and current social realities of racism” (12, 2007). This minimization of race ha s become acceptable to American society, however, due in part to the principle of r ace neutrality or colorblindness. The terms race neutrality and colorblindness are often used interchangeably. The terms

PAGE 28

18 represent a concept of viewing racial redress first through non-racial means. They ascribe a doctrine of creating social policy by means other than explicitly based on race. If other means of adjudicating services without racial categ ories are not possible, then policy may be created with racial implications. However even t his use of race as a category must limited, as the intended goal of race neutrality is to create an inherently more equal society. Continuing racial demarcations in policy o nly further system of racial power that have long been obsolete. Race neutrality and colorb lindness as legal ethos was first articulated in the Plessy v. Ferguson dissenting opinion. During this court case, the ra ce neutral doctrine was advanced by the Supreme Court due to the ConstitutionÂ’s implied impartiality of dealing with the races (Orbe and Ur ban, 2011). However missing from the current post-racial discourse, and from the underst anding of colorblindness then and now, is the fact that the state has never been neutral i n its relationship with minority communities. Liberalism inherently reflects the exi sting power structures it seeks to codify in law. In American society this reflection of power is displayed in liberalismÂ’s ignorance of its underlying racist assumptions. The se assumptions are embodied in the majorityÂ’s conception of their power without accept ing the racial underpinnings colonial factors allowed in its success. In this regard, the discussion will explore race neutral language, policies, and remedies, and expose how wh ite paternalistic liberalism transmits systemic power relations that persistently disempow er black peoples in US law, policy, and society. This chapter will then analyze how the use of race neutrality within the discourse on race has disproportionately disempowered African Americans. The analysis will be demonstrated through the interwoven connections bet ween colorblindness and liberalism.

PAGE 29

19 This analysis will be facilitated by a discussion o f: Justice HarlanÂ’s Plessy v Ferguson (1896) opinion, New Deal legislation, 1960s-1980s C ivil Rights Movement legislation and judicial activity, and explained through the wa ys race neutrality currently shapes disparities. The historical analysis will lead to a renewed focus on the material circumstances of racial disparity. By developing an understanding of the actual disparities in health, education, employment, and wealth exhibi ted by communities of color, the discourse on race can expand to deal with the ambig uities of a black president and black success, in light of alternate perceptions of race in black poverty and black underachievement. Both realities exist. However, in both situations of success and deprivation due to the fact of being a person a color, systemic racism influences the daily experiences. Due to heightened levels of precarious ness and deprived levels of accumulation compared to white Americans, regardles s of geographic location, educational attainment, or socioeconomic status, pe ople of color fare much worse in American society. Even further, this overall study will inspire a new understanding that combines the social reality with a critical underst anding that real progress must be continually and creatively evaluated. Liberalism It is important to remember that America was built upon racial foundations. Since the early 17th century, the government has defined and refined the status of the races (Kuznicki 2009). The 1705 Virginia Statue exemplifi es this trend as the law defines a Negro as anyone with up to one-eighth African desce nt (Kuznicki 2009)(Delgado 2013). However this designation would not simply be a symb olic marker, but thrust Americans of African descent into servitude. This process occ urred when European indentured

PAGE 30

20 servitude was abolished in favor of the chattel ens lavement of African Americans (Wise 2010). Under the guise of individual property right s, American liberalism combined the oppressive considerations of race with the ideals o f American society. American classical liberalism demonstrates an empha sis on individualism, universalism, egalitarianism and meritocracy (Holme s 2007). During the development of American classical liberalism the most important va lues of society would also collectively address the power aspirations of Ameri ca’s dominant class (Holmes 2007). Power paralleled race as dominant group interests c ombined with racist assumptions of superiority. Universalism would imply universal ide ntity construction only in so far as it agreed with the dominant white property owners’ per spective. There would be, on one instance, the universally accepted right to propert y, and in the other, the view of minority unacceptable “savage” use of land (Horsman). There would be no universal application of majority white and minority communities of color right to property. Individualism would suit the dominant class’ position in society conveniently as the principle facilitated the dominant group’s uncontested access to citizens hip and resources. It is easy to value individualism when the subordinate group’s sacrific es go unacknowledged. Egalitarianism would be possible because “Negroes” or slaves were biologically subhuman, so tolerance and equality could easily be ex tended to those of the same dominant ethnic group while other races could be justifiably excluded due to their lack of humanity (Horsman). Even meritocracy was justified as an Ame rican ethos, even though the construction of society would limit the agency of s ubordinated citizens to mount challenges to white opportunity. Those outside of w hiteness would not deserve the same privileges.

PAGE 31

21 What is most disturbing about this construction of liberalism is that the narrow comprehensions of these ideals limit racial underst anding today. This construction survives despite the fact that the US has never ful ly realized nor committed to applying these principles to everyone. It would take the soc ial reform liberalism movement of the early 20th century for disenfranchised groups to use liberal rhetoric to expand access to the races and classes (Holmes 2007). However, progr ess in America has generally developed in this way. It has been AmericaÂ’s fundam ental journey to democracy. Whether it is embodied in the womenÂ’s rights, aboli tionist, or anti-war movements, the process has been one of opening up American democra cy to the rights of all people, whether workers, veterans, or minorities. The individual rights perspective rather than group rights established in classical liberalism would facilitate the privileges of the d ominant class. Focusing on individual interests can blur the connections to collective gr oup experiences. By believing in a meritorious colorblind America, most Americans are able to ignore the privileges that come from being in the dominant white ethnic group. Individually, the law would grant citizens their rights, but obscure racial group pre ferences, creating a dichotomy that would recognize the rights of individuals, while co nversely creating a blind spot to collective discrimination. This abstract liberalism acknowledges freedom and equal access, but nonetheless does nothing when it comes to implementing progressive strategies to change the whole of society (Holmes 2 007). If anything the abstraction only obscures the discourse with questions of morality, without ever evaluating practically how well outcomes advance efforts to stated goals. In other words, the goals of freedom and equality will remain unattainable as long as pr ogress is gauged by well-meaning

PAGE 32

22 intentions and not statistical evidence of racial p arity. To get to this parity however, classical liberalism and expressively American valu es must not only find room for collective minority experiences but must also provi de space for how those experiences are produced by interactions with a dominant white group. True racial progress does not shy away from addressing these realities. Rather su bstantial progress would directly deconstruct these norms and social institutions. Plessy v Ferguson As the sole dissent in the trial that would create the separate but equal doctrine, Justice Harlan’s lauded opinion presents one of the clearest examples of America’s race neutral ambivalence. In declaring the “Constitution of the United States does not, I think permit any authority to know the race of those enti tled to be protected in the enjoyment of such rights,” and while pronouncing “our Constituti on is color-blind,” (1, Mckenna 1984) Justice Harlan also proclaims the superiority of th e “white race.” He “deems [the white race] to be the dominant race in this country” (1, Mckenna 1984). However how does this logically occur? The dominant race is dominant beca use of its monopoly of power. So, wouldn’t it be exactly the point of majoritarian po litics to protect the minority races? By supporting the colorblind adjudication of the law w hile also defending racial hierarchy, Justice Harlan attempts to separate the innate rela tionship of power and structure in society. The expectation that the preferences of so ciety are not reflected in law and the law does not reflect the preferences of society str ikes at the core of Justice Harlan’s argument. Instead of taking on the subjective natur e of legal interpretation, Justice Harlan attempts to reinforce the objectivity of the Consti tution and the objectivity of racial supremacy. Justice Harlan ignores the subjective in fluences of society on the law and

PAGE 33

23 infers the law’s objectivity, meaning unbiased, n eutral, and impartial. An assumed connection prevails that legal procedure equates su bstantive social equality. While it is logically understandable that a justice’s interest would be to maintain order and protect the Constitution, his legal pronouncement obscured the racial realities of the era. Justice Harlan has gained notoriety for his attempt to disagree with the majority in the Plessy v Ferguson court case in that he viewed that the Louisiana law was explicitly meant to exclude African Americans (coloreds) from white-designated coaches (Delgado 2013)1. Justice Harlan’s perspective that “the recent ame ndments of the supreme law [the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments]… obliterated the r ace line from our systems of governments” (1, Mckenna 1984) does more, however, to disempower race progress as solved than it does to empower African Americans. By ack nowledging that African Americans were now under the protection of Reconstr uction-era amendments, Justice Harlan was making the claim that declaration was al l that was necessary to solve racial discrimination. Economic remediation for slavery, d isenfranchisement from settlement law, and all past injuries had been addressed in th e creation of the Reconstruction-era amendments. The race question appeared settled. Equ ality gained. In Justice Harlan’s view the dominant class had made the Constitution c olorblind in the execution of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments. Conveniently Justi ce Harlan ignores the grounds of slavery that led to the creation of the Amendments in the first place (Kuznicki 2009). However, any student of history knows race had been far from obliterated. Almost 60 years after the Plessy ruling, the Civil Rights Movement would make conti nued claims of justice based on the equal protections within th e 14th amendment (Ochs 2006). However, in the six decades following the Plessy ruling, the decision of separate but 1 Proceedings and context of Plessy v. Ferguson : Slaughterhouse Case, Tilden-Hayes

PAGE 34

24 equal would make possible the devastating implement ation of Jim Crow. This would facilitate the mass lynchings of African Americans, dilapidated school resources, and de jure segregation. Race relations got worse before they got better. Claims of white superiority, affirmed by the courts and social cont ext, would increase the dominant class’ oppression. Even worse than the Jim Crow era to come, was what African Americans had lost due to the Plessy ruling. In one fatal decision years of black chatt el servitude were putatively wiped away, their memory obscured. Regar dless of material conditions, equal standing and citizenship had been extended to the “ Negro” and the “Negro” had joyously accepted. However, the dominant class was still the dominant class and the law had not challenged any of that construction. The white majo rity still held power over minority citizens as it had held power over them before as s laves. Even more, due to the new equality garnered by the Reconstruction-era amendme nts there would be nothing minority African Americans could do to further thei r appeal to highlight their condition. The judiciary helped only those who could not help themselves (Carter 2011). African Americans now had equal protection under the law. B y the 1930s, this white paternalistic liberalism that subjected African Americans to soci etal degradation, not fair standing, would develop to such a degree that effectively 60 to 75 percent of African Americans would be excluded from the New Deal, America’s most progressive welfare policy (Katznelson 2005). The New Deal If the Constitution is colorblind, then the legisla tion of Congress should analogously be race neutral as well. However, by ta rgeting exclusionary practices in the

PAGE 35

25 New Deal toward predominately black industries, sou thern politicians were able to recreate in America a second -class ‘slave’ system all over again. The two industries excluded from the benefits of the program were agri cultural workers and domestic workers. These industries would coincidentally para llel the farmhand and house slave occupations of the American slave and sharecropping systems. The dominant class was not letting go of its power. This is evident in per sonalities such as Theodore Bilbo, Eugene “Bull” Connor, and Strom Thurmond (Kuznicki 2009). Important to these personages were that they maintained the racial sta tus quo. Their own self-interest of perpetuating this racial order became instrumental to their own privilege in society. It would be through the unlikely pairing of progres sive northern Democrats and southern Dixiecrats that the New Deal legislation w ould pass. For both sides the passage of the New Deal would be a result of their own inte rest-based reading of liberalism. However for both northern Democrats and southern Di xiecrats maintaining the exclusion of African Americans would have minimal effect on t heir own interests. The obvious exclusion of African Americans through targeted ind ustries would undermine liberal claims of universal policy applicability. The exclu sion of African Americans also meant that the legislation was not egalitarian either. By stratifying the access and benefits of the program, the policy did not hold up to the value of equal opportunity of all persons. Nevertheless the legislation did provide a moral fr amework for ameliorating the Depression era economic crisis. This goal of addres sing economic deprivation while not explicitly deviating from a race-neutral interpreta tion, allowed politicians at the time the ability to satisfy both agendas.

PAGE 36

26 In consequence, the race-neutral New Deal policy ex acerbated the wealth gap between the races to outlandish proportions. The st ate and local administration of New Deal policies would limit African American access t o aid in housing, education, welfare, and labor (Kuznicki 2009). In some southern counti es federal relief monies would exclude all blacks entirely (Katznelson 2005). Afri can Americans would share in the cost of being US citizens, paying taxes and participatin g in war efforts, while not enjoying most of the benefits (Grigsby 1994). By 1947, 55% o f eligible black veterans would be denied college acceptance despite GI funding (Katzn elson 2005). Between 1947 and 1971 the Service Adjustment Act of the New Deal wou ld appropriate ninety-five billion dollars through educational assistance, federal hom e loans, and business loans. However, in 1984 when these guarantees matured, it would be exposed that the majority of the allocations had created asset accumulation for whit es, and left behind African Americans (Katznelson 2005). Home ownership as a result of Ne w Deal programs had facilitated a white median household net worth of $39,135 compare d to a black median household net worth of $3,397 (Katznelson 2005). These vast diffe rences in net worth emphasized the disparate realities of black home ownership and whi te home ownership. Even further though this disparity demonstrates the considerable benefit that access to the New Deal provided. The economic disparity of the races would also dise mpower African Americans in political and social contexts. Segregation througho ut much of the United States would test the humanity of African Americans. Segregation not only meant dilapidated amenities, but also humiliation, intimidation, and death. Socially, the African American experience would be wholly different. Redlining ha d isolated African Americans into

PAGE 37

27 urban ghettos, as white flight would move the domin ant class to the suburbs (Katznelson 2005). During Reconstruction African Americans had managed to gain some political offices. However, in the New Deal era blacks would also regress in the political franchise. In 1901, the last African American would serve his term in Congress and another 72 years would pass before another African Americans would represent the South in Congress again. Pessimistically this reality por trayed for blacks in America a community without representation in their own socie ty. This construction of society set the course for the Civil Rights Movement. Similar to the abolitionist movements around the Civil War and the Plessy v. Ferguson Reconstruction-era, and akin to the social reform m ovements of the New Deal era, the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s would attempt to fulfill these gaps in access. It would be through social agitation that the Civil Ri ghts Movement would endeavor to reshape America’s potential and move the nation tow ards democracy. Civil Rights – 1960s to the 1980s The time period from 1960 to the mid-1980s would ev ince rapid change in American race relations. It would represent the wor st and the best in African American social progress. It would combine the progressivism of the 1930s and 1940s with the separate-but-equal moral collapse of Reconstruction in a short span of 20 years. In one generation race relations would go from being the m ost prominent issue on the American agenda to one of the least tolerated topics. Howeve r, by tracing race neutrality’s ideological influence it is possible to understand why. One of the key contributions of the Civil Rights Mo vement and Johnson’s Great Society lies in their ability to remove the distrib ution of resources from the state level to

PAGE 38

28 the federal (Kuznicki 2009). As a result of success ful political advocacy by African Americans, the US would pass the landmark Civil Rig hts Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965. These pieces of legislation would effe ctively empower African Americans in the areas of labor, education, and voter protect ion. Utilizing the 14th AmendmentÂ’s Equal Protection Clause the Civil Rights legislatio n would pry open industries African Americans had struggled to enter. African Americans would also gain access to the nationÂ’s most prestigious universities (Katznelson 2005). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), instituted by the Ci vil Rights Act, would create a pattern of affirmative action in federal contracts and education that would become a significant part of new African American achievemen t (Katznelson 2005). Besides the difference in state versus federal juri sdiction, African Americans were also empowered by the transformation of affirmative action from not just the avoidance of discrimination, but a progressive policy that co uld also provide compensatory remedies (Katznelson 2005). Food aid and rental hou sing would be extended to African Americans for being members of a victimized categor y, extending coverage beyond widows and poor women (Katzenlson 2005, Kuznicki 20 09). The EEOC would address the larger patterns of racial exclusion rather than case-by-case discrimination to create structural changes (Katzelson 2005). The early year s of the Nixon administration would see affirmative action go even further, adopting a doctrine of disparate impact (Katznelson 2005). With this, discrimination would not only be defined by intentional individual acts of disparate treatment but also inc lude procedures and processes that had adverse impacts on African Americans as a group (Ka tnzelson 2005).

PAGE 39

29 However, where the Civil Rights era legislation fel l short is in its inability to tackle the systemic causes of racial inequality, pr imarily capital accumulation (Kuznicki 2009). Though affirmative action was actually limit ing discrimination, it did little to remedy years of black disenfranchisement and econom ic exclusion. Despite gains in income parity, without the similar gains of a New D eal welfare system African Americans were still trapped in poverty (Betsey 199 2, Kuznicki 2009). Access to upperlevel management, as a part of Nixon’s Philadelphia Plan, was diversifying the labor force like never before (Katznelson 2005). This adv ancement evidenced the social transformation of race relations. As with the Recon struction amendments however, these measures only applied to the current situation and situations in the future. The effects had little to do with the past. The Philadelphia Plan h elped African Americans in the labor market as it was at that time. Nevertheless, the po licy still did not deal with the accumulated disadvantages that accrued from previou s inaccessibility to upper-level incomes and the loss of wealth associated with this exclusion. By the late 1970s the public would tire of the 1960 s civil rights discourse of race conscious policy. Writing in the mid-1970s, sociolo gist Nathan Glazer would comment on how government actions were racially dividing th e country into groups with “differential rights” (Katznelson 2005). The percep tion of unmerited help based on group claims and not individual rights would resonate wit h the conservative base. For conservative leaders this view would serve their po litical agenda as they would use any rationale to dismantle 1960s and 1970s social progr ams and question the legitimacy of any program committed to bringing about social equa lity (Betsey 1992).

PAGE 40

30 The 1978 Regents of the University of California v Bakke case highlights this changing attitude towards race conscious policy in the post 1960s liberal discourse. In a 5-4 vote the court would decide the collegeÂ’s admis sion policy unconstitutional for the University of California DavisÂ’ attempt to reserve 16 of its one hundred medical spaces for minority students (Katznelson 2005). Citing the 14th amendment, the court deemed that the quota system violated the constitutional e qual protection requirement, but that race could be utilized as factor if not the sole de terminant (Katznelson 2005).2 At issue was whether it was justifiable to allow preferentia l treatment for a group based on race. The case would begin the case law since Bakke to narrow and entrench strict scrutiny. Interestingly, after centuries of preferential trea tment for the dominant white ethnic group the court would suddenly find it detrimental to ext end preferential privileges to minorities (Katznelson 2005). As in the case of Plessy v Ferguson the extension of concern by the dominant class was enough to facilitate remediation and create racial parity. The courts would reason that the protections of the colorblind Constitution and the Civil Rights Act would be enough of a testament to AmericaÂ’s amelior ation of racial discrimination. The unmerited privilege of alumni status in education a s a racial benefit of white status failed to ever be challenged (Winkler 2003). As a result of the Bakke case all affirmative action programs are evaluated under strict scrutiny. This means that affirmative action programs, to be constitutional, have to display a compelling governmental interest and yet also be narrowly tailored to specific harms, but only after exhausting race neutral optio ns first (Betsey 1992). Not only did this precedent completely reverse the understanding of equal protection that had been gained during the Civil Rights Movement, but create d a standard in place of an almost 2 Grutter v. Bollinger Gratz v. Bollinger and RobertÂ’s decisions.

PAGE 41

31 unattainable threshold for racial discrimination (C arter 2011). The threshold became excessive due to its demands of proving governmenta l interest and intent, the thresholds requirement of limited responsibility and specific harms, and the requirement the doctrine places on the defendant to find creative race adver se options. Strict scrutiny would frustrate progressive policy attempts. Conservatives suspicions of affirmative action and race conscious policies were complemented by a legal doctrine of strict scrutiny. By subjecting po licy to strict scrutiny American conservatives had found a way to implement their di scourse of reverse discrimination. In their perspective, African Americans had so abruptl y reached parity to whites that the legitimacy of any government action undertaken expl icitly to correct racial inequality warranted heightened suspicion (Carter 2011). Antiwhite bias had overnight become a larger societal issue than anti-black discriminatio n (Carter 2011). In accord with their own views of reality, members of the dominant class justified dismantling affirmative action by using the dogmas of liberalism, such as i ndividualism and meritocracy, as a foundation for their critique, without understandin g the particularistic privilege their own positions afforded (Holmes 2007). Perceptions of wh ite victimization relied on liberalismÂ’s individualistic view of society. Indiv idual white Americans were not the cause of the racial discrimination and did not feel they deserved to carry the burden of paying for it. For example, to stereotype a needy w elfare queen corroborated with principles of deserved merit. It became the view of many Americans that the benefits enjoyed by the welfare queen were underserved. In t he eyes of a majority of whites minorities did not deserve privileges. Even more so these whites definitely felt minorities did not deserve the privileges of whiteness.

PAGE 42

32 Colorblindness would also facilitate a race neutral subjective reading of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech. To corr espond to a colorblind interpretation of the speech judgment by individual character beca me the goal of racial tolerance. This interpretation would be dictated by the dominant cl ass (Holmes 2007). It would not serve to empower a new racial understanding as it was int ended. Post-1960s liberal discourse would see government action and not white reactiona ries as the threat to social cohesion. Those controlling the discourse would forget the to tality of King’s speech that had included a history of discrimination and an accumul ation its effects – detailing the economic, political, and social ramifications (Cart er 2011). Current Disparities By the 1980s white economists were proclaiming, “bl ack progress”. However, the perceived progress was an illusion. After a group o f black economists detailed the sample selectivity bias of “black progress” studies, the e conomists would prove that the individual earnings of the initial study would not hold true for household samples (Betsey 1992). By only looking at those within the labor fo rce, the initial study would fail to represent the systemic pattern of black exclusion i n the labor market (Betsey 1992). Black achievement gained through the 1960s had cres ted and by the 1980s was either stagnating or declining. The practice of placing the blame on the victim was overplayed. It would serve to explain people’s fears or justify their own depravi ty. However blaming the victim was not a new tactic. Perceptions that remaining racial disparities were due more to selfsabotage or cultural determinism than to actual ine quality would follow the historic pattern of American racial stereotyping and prejudi ce (Hamilton 2012). African slaves

PAGE 43

33 were inferior not due to the violent system of Amer ican colonialism, but due to an inherent weakness. African Americans in the Jim Cro w South would not be depraved due to oppressive systems of segregation and economic e xploitation, but an inability to maximize the benefits given to them. By the time of the 1991 Civil Rights Restoration Act, caps were being put in place to limit the amou nt of damages retrievable from discrimination suits (Duster 2005). These caps were premised on the idea that only so much racial remediation could be accomplished throu gh legal action. Of those damages, rewards were only applicable in cases of intentiona l discrimination, limiting justifiable discrimination to actions where intent and malice c ould be determined (Duster 2005). This has limited most Title VII discrimination case s to issues of harassment, termination, demotion or refusal to promote (Duster 2005). Very few cases are proactive and question discrimination in hiring and opening access to oppo rtunities, where remedial efforts would have significant effect (Duster 2005). These changes, however, were premised on the ideas of colorblindness and the triviality of b lack plight. As a result of strict scrutiny and reverse discrimi nation, most discrimination suits now benefit cases of age prejudice (Duster 2005). T he applicability to age discrimination is removed from the intention of civil rights legis lation to address racial issues. Age discrimination claims make up one-quarter of all EE OC cases and one-half of all monetary awards (Duster 2005). Even more detrimenta l to racial equality, is that of all age discrimination suits, three quarters of the cas es were filed by Caucasian men (Duster 2005). The preponderance of white men claiming disc rimination is counter to the intention of the legislation to aid in minority rel ief.

PAGE 44

34 When considering the devastating effects of the 200 7 financial crisis and resulting recession, it is hard to believe that it is white m en who need protecting in American society. Take for example the 2008 median hourly wa ge. For a black male full time worker the median hourly wage was $14.90 (Hamilton 2012). However, for a white male full time worker in the same period the median hour ly wage was $20.84, almost a $6 dollar difference (Hamilton 2012). This is in spite of educational attainment and merit. Black males with a high school diploma or bachelorÂ’ s degree in 2008 still made 74% of what white males earned and 61% percent of white ma le earnings when compared to white high school dropouts (Hamilton 2012). The dif ference in earnings despite the educational achievement of blacks, or higher earnin gs in spite of lower educational status for whites, illustrates how much racial privilege e xists and displays disenfranchisement of African Americans. Observing disparities in unemployment further detai ls AmericaÂ’s racial dilemma. For instance, in September of 2011, while white une mployment stood at 8%, twice as many African Americans were unemployed (Hamilton 20 12). However this pattern is not an aberration but the historical trend. During the past 40 years there has been only one year in which black unemployment fell below 8% (Ham ilton). Conversely there have been fewer than 5 years in the past 40 in which whi te unemployment has exceeded the same 8% benchmark (Hamilton 2012). In other words, these statistics show that when white unemployment exceeds a certain level it becom es a national issue, while when black unemployment exceeds a far greater level it i s still a considered norm. Yet it is minority affirmative action programs that are deeme d suspicious while it is the plight of the minorities that is so undervalued. These are th e statistics presented to prove America

PAGE 45

35 is a post racial society. These are the numbers tha t support reverse discrimination. Nevertheless the unequal importance of one group an d not the other portrays the epitome of discrimination. Racial wealth disparity is but another example of A merican discrimination. Between these two racial groups of black and whites the absolute wealth gap exceeds $100,000 (Hamilton 2012). While prior to 2007 a typ ical black family possessed a dime to every dollar of white household wealth, since th e recession the typical black family had only a nickel to every dollar of white wealth n ow (Hamilton 2012). Nevertheless, post-racial Obama liberalism “posits that racial mi norities’ societal gains combined with presumed [absent] contemporary discrimination… rend ers measures explicitly aimed at redressing racial inequality both unnecessary and c ounterproductive” (Carter 2011). However, economic parity is more divergent, and pow er significantly more elusive than ever. Race-neutral policies that have never recogni zed subordination cannot resolve this problem (Winkler 2003). Race Forward – Conclusion The fact is these race-neutral policies cannot hel p ameliorate racial disparity. Throughout this chapter it has been shown that race neutral policies have continually relied on subjective liberal principles and consist ently produced race-negative consequences for minorities. However, the point is not to give up hope, but to consider what could have been done better. Without race-cons cious policies the gap in wealth disparity and capital accumulation cannot be overco me because it cannot be observed how it occurs. To understand racial inequality requ ires an honest conversation about the patterns of systemic discrimination.

PAGE 46

36 New Deal legislation has proven that targeted polic ymaking can be effective. The following chapter will provide a methodological fra mework of how such New Deal assistance can alter racial demographics. However, it is no longer useful to circle the wagons around racist labels and instances of indivi dual bigotry. Intentional acts of discrimination should not be tolerated, but the big ger picture must remain in the forefront of social advocatesÂ’ minds. Labeling individual act s of discrimination too easily fuels resentment as liberal thought has taught most Ameri cans to morally abhor racism (Holmes 2007). Racial parity however connects socie ty as a whole. The argument must be altered to frame one groupÂ’s e xponential growth and the otherÂ’s relative rate of decline. Much of the accum ulation and dis-accumulation of resources mentioned in this chapter are a reflectio n of New Deal policy. Effectively, white Americans observed middle class growth throug hout the 1950s and 1960s, while minorities, especially African American communities did not. In an effort to remediate this divide, wealth would have to pivot to privileg e the discriminated group and slow the growth of the primary dominant group. Real racial e quality would consequently balance this equation. So, yes one group may grow more slow ly, but only for the greater good so that both groups may advance towards parity (Duster 2005). Still, it is imperative that Americans fully unders tand the implications of their ideological assumptions. Hopefully this understandi ng will be inspired by an alternate narrative of renewed radicalism. For progressives t his means that they finally get off of the sidelines and be progressive, as those who are conservative do not shy away from the extremes of their conservativism. The abstract libe ralism that feels complicit to advocate anti-discrimination must evolve to do more to refor m the systemic patterns of racial

PAGE 47

37 inequity. Realities of racial oppression must be ex pressed regardless of the power structures. That means revisiting how systemic shif ts in society and assistance policies distribute aid in housing, education, welfare, and labor. Utilizing New Deal black disenfranchisement and current systemic disparities as the backdrop to resistance, these renewed claims for justice would satisfy both a fou ndational legitimacy and directly target past harms (Katznelson 2005). However a line must be drawn. Progressive liberals must be willing to lose and those supporting social liberation must provide an alternate path to the so far paralyzing discourse. The universalistic perspective of American liberali sm must also recognize its inadequacies. As state after state rolls back its p rohibitions on gay relationships and marijuana legalization, continuing disparities will become only more and more suspect. As more battles are won, the reason why society end s up with consistent outcomes and unchanged material circumstances will puzzle many. Regardless of a white or black president, if the doctrinal underpinnings of race n eutral policies stay the same so will the results. The conservative reading of colorblindness obfuscates its dominant class privileges, justifies its misreading of Civil Right s, and obliterates any understanding of the racismÂ’s disempowering effect on black communit ies. Martin Luther King, Jr. did advocate a judgment by content of character, but he also believed that to get there society must work to open democracy to all Americans. KingÂ’ s understanding meant an equality that guaranteed everyone an income, fair housing, c ompensatory education, and where necessary, preferential treatment to redress discri mination and economic deficiencies (Holmes 2007). His vision opposed the abstract, han ds-off liberal approach to race and

PAGE 48

38 poverty. In his ideal equality existed in a democra cy when its entire people had the power to be recognized, and the freedom to fulfill societ yÂ’s ideals.

PAGE 49

39 CHAPTER III THEORETICAL & METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Introduction Race neutrality today influences racial stratificat ion in American society. Relating to the previous discussion of the race neutral doct rine, US policy created in this fashion fails to provide remedy to racial inequality. These assertions can be stated. The assumption of race neutral policy is that by target ing the neediest members of society it is possible to superficially approach issues in a nonracial manner while substantively obtaining a race positive outcome. The United State s implies this assumption of race neutrality in its policy. The U.S. states in its re port to the U.N. Committee on Racial Elimination and Discrimination that: special measures taken for the sole purpose of secu ring adequate advancement of certain racial or ethnic groups or i ndividuals requiring such protection may or may not in themselves be rac e-based. For example, a “special measure” might address the development o r protection of a racial group without the measure itself applying on the basis of race (e.g., a measure might be directed at the neediest members of society without expressly drawing racial distinctions). This statement reflects the much deeper and insidio us deception of race neutrality as it ties to the American claim of colorblindness. Howev er this principle of colorblindness, likewise as when it was created, delivers a languag e that obscures the fundamentally divided reality of race currently. To facilitate an analysis of whether racial policy today is still discriminatory despite all of its race neutral predispositions, th is chapter attempts to foster a methodological approach that observes the different policy advantages by race. Ira Katznelson’s approach of racial stratification of b enefits within the New Deal policy will

PAGE 50

40 serve as a lens for this chapter’s analysis. It wil l be the attempt of this chapter to create a dynamic similar to Katznelson of diverging racial s tratification, for current policy. At length this section of the thesis will demonstrate a methodological approach that chronicles how past patterns of discrimination crea ted vast differences in access and resource benefits. The patterns of previous discrim ination facilitated patterns of disparity such that current policies require a greater examin ation to analyze their difference in access and resource retrieval today. The investigation of this chapter will include a st udy of Ira Katznelson’s “When Affirmative Action was White.” Utilizing this text will provide an examination of the relative growth in wealth of the white demographic and relative stagnation of African Americans due to New Deal policies. African America ns would encounter an entirely different experience in regard to the economic bene fits that whites would acquire from the New Deal policies. The analysis of this circums tance will be followed by an understanding of the forces behind the racial wealt h gap, connecting patterns of wealth accumulation from the New Deal to the inheritance o f resources and the development of contradictory demographic asset profiles. The analy sis will provide the framework for the subsequent case study as the study endeavors to hig hlight the racial composition of the benefits of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) and the harms of dislocation. By understanding how race-neutral language provides pa tterned channels for exclusion, this chapter will serve the larger purpose to dispel the effectiveness of colorblindness. This chapter will argue that instead of race-neutrality preventing racial discrimination, the methodological application of colorblindness illust rates that colorblindness actually provides cover for new layers of racial hierarchy a nd racial discrimination.

PAGE 51

41 Ira Katznelson – Theoretical Frame Ira Katznelson begins his in-depth study of the rac ialization of the New Deal with President Johnson speaking to Howard University, de livering his speech “To Fulfill These Rights.” The concern of Johnson’s speech was with the “Negro” problem of poverty and opportunity. The speech occurs after th e implementation of the civil rights movement. An incongruity arises that even after suc h landmark legislation more needed to be done to assert the full rights of African Ame ricans. The fact that such a major policy accomplishment had not produced significant changes for African Americans would inspire Johnson’s claim that more needed to be done to fulfill African American rights. This paradox of significant effort and lackluster r esults grows even more luminous to highlight racisms intransience as Katznelson links the failures of the race-neutral New Deal social policies to the disparities faced by th e graduates the President is speaking to. Katznelson’s analysis highlights elements of discri mination in housing, employment, military service, and education. Throug h this analysis, the author is able to connect the patterns of racial inequities around ho using, employment, and education to New Deal legislation. This thesis argues, however, a counternarrative from Katznelson’s range of inequality from the New Deal forward in hi story. It is the argument of this thesis that the inequalities of housing, employment, and e ducation have a deeper historical pattern than the New Deal, and argues that America’ s race-neutral doctrine is but apart of persistent falsification of American classical libe ralism. For the purpose of affirmative action Katznelson’s analysis provides significant d etail for why by the 1960s the racial gap was persistently widening. This appreciation fo r not only disparate treatment but also

PAGE 52

42 disparate benefits subsequently serves as a pattern for understanding the hidden consequences of race neutrality today. Katznelson analysis, specifically, provides this th esis with a perspective of how African Americans were not only excluded from socia l policy but his analysis also details the important benefits that inclusion within the Ne w Deal policies extended. African Americans were not simply excluded from Federal Hou sing Authority (FHA) loans, but blacks suffered doubly as their white counterparts with access to the policy where simultaneously leaving them behind in location and wealth. This situation inclusion and exclusion created a pattern so colossal in proporti on that it would facilitate the greatest economic expansion in the history of the American m iddle class. The significance of this fact is that most of this accumulation in economic power would go to white Americans and not shared with black minorities. Where Katznelson’s work excels is in the depiction of the white American benefits due to the New Deal and his emphasis of th e effects of African American exclusion. It is important to first define clearly what is meant by the New Deal. The New Deal almost exclusively points to the beginning of the Social Security Act in 1935, which saw its first benefits in 1940 (Katznelson 2005). M ost beneficial to this program was the coverage of old age security, unemployment, and old age assistance. Due to the economic position of African Americans during this time it c an be assumed that African Americans would have been prime candidates for aid from this program in light of their time spent in the labor pool, levels of unemployment, and discrep ancies in wages. However due to the race-neutral language of the legislation that exclu ded agricultural workers, domestic servants, home workers, and the self-employed (shar ecroppers) – across the nation, fully

PAGE 53

43 65 percent of African Americans, would fall outside of the program (Katznelson 2005 43). Between Katznelson and this thesis it is acknowledg ed that the racially stratified benefits of the New Deal were purposeful. The dynam ic of advantaging white economic power and disadvantaging African American economic power was created to maintain a way life and social order (Katznelson 2005). Howeve r where Katznelson attributes the responsibility for racially neutral, almost raciall y manipulative language with Southern Congressional members, it is the perspective of thi s thesis that this pattern of racial economic subjugation is at the core of American rac e issues. Katznelson’s chapter “Welfare in Black and White” hints at this legacy o f economic oppression. Beginning his analysis after the formal end of slavery, Katznelso n highlights the economic conditions of African Americans prior to the New Deal. With three in four blacks living in the South during this time, the author goes on to show that d espite high representation within the agricultural industry, only 8% of southern farmland was operated by black owners (Katznelson 2005). Black farmers often did not own their land. The land they did possess was often smaller – 63 acres compared to an average 145 acres for whites (Katznelson 2005). On average these farms in 1935 would be valu ed at $1864 for blacks compared to $5239 for whites (Katznelson 2005). The lack of farm assets that marginalized black far mers is but the beginning of the picture in describing the black laborer and his eco nomic position in the 1930s. Sharecropping in the South had made the situation d irer, where slavery had been replaced by land peonage. In this system debts were paid off by a share of the land’s product. This created a vicious cycle of exploitation by which li mited crops were expected to feed

PAGE 54

44 workers, cover debts, and provide surplus. This nev ertheless kept African American sharecroppers tied to the vagrancies of the land an d ceaselessly owing their landlords (Katznelson 2005). The contours of race, gender, and class created eve n more nuance and complexity to the African American experience. The position of the African American female worker was even bleaker than that of the male farmer. For black women this meant 85% either worked in agriculture or domestic service. Where sh arecropping earnings could range from $38 to $87 per person, domestic work scarcely afforded $2 per week (Katznelson 2005). This created a situation where in 1937 Afric an Americans in the rural South averaged a family income of $565 per year compared to an average family income of $1535 for poor whites (Katznelson 2005). Urban blac ks were in a slightly better position able to reach an income of $635 compared to the ave rage earnings of $2019 for urban whites (Katznelson 2005). These numbers not only re flect a limited potential for income and asset accumulation but demonstrates how basic e mployment was nearly inaccessible to African Americans. In a liberal capitalist socie ty where a citizen is viewed based on their merit and contribution, these individuals wer e seen as a pariah despite the fact they were willing to contribute yet lacked sufficient op portunity. The importance of employment cannot be overstated. As Katznelson goes on to describe, this lack of employment created a poverty level whereby the low incomes of blacks influenced their poor living conditions, their poor health and their lack of education (Katznelson 2005). However, where Katznelson attributes the dire circu mstances of African Americans to easy acceptance in welfare policy and their subsequent exclusion to southern Congressional members, the perspective of this thesis finds that assumption too

PAGE 55

45 easy to restrict to one region of the United States As mentioned in the previous chapter in relation to the racist conclusions of liberalism American egalitarianism allowed African American exclusion because the exclusion wo uld not undermine American society. Justice HarlanÂ’s 1896 pronouncement of the perfection of the American liberal experiment by the passage of the Reconstruction era amendments was an initial start to the colorblindness doctrine. So too in this instanc e did Liberal Northerners and Southern Dixiecrats in the 1930s embrace the racial stratifi cation of the New Deal because it similarly supported their liberal ideals. The New D eal supported their ideals because to truly live up to American universalism would have r equired a much larger reform and much deeper reflection into American identity. The significance of this reflection would have revealed a much more diverse representation of who is American. It would be sufficiently easier to ignore these hard-truths and keep the rewards of the New Deal tailored to a white demographic. This narrowing of the act would maintain the division of citizen and non-citizen, or more accurately reaffir m the boundaries between white and non-white, between different divisions of labor, be tween the poor and impoverished. It would be easier to deny access to resources to thos e who did not qualify as white. An effort to define whiteness would have limited the p ower of whiteness to be subjective, controlled, and to manipulate others. When thinking about labor and African American inco mes, African Americans would also be excluded from the National Labor Rela tions Act and Fair Labor Standards Act of the New Deal. Key again to the racial groupÂ’ s omission was their predominance in certain industries. However, for wages the cause of exclusion connects even deeper. Due to the exclusion of agricultural and domestic worke rs, floor wages could be kept as low

PAGE 56

46 as possible, maintaining tantamount 19th century slavery conditions (Katznelson 2005). The exclusion would not only hurt incomes, but crea te a surplus of cheap labor. The direct benefit that could have been gained by Afric an Americans, instead kept them in poverty; demonstrating, yet again, yet more clearly the economic component of American race. For white Americans this opportunity offered many prospects. Yet this inclusion/exclusion by race-neutral policy facilita ted an immense wealth schism that directly links to current wealth disparity. When analyzing the wealth gap it is important also to consider the ways in which people accumulate wealth and understand how the edu cational opportunities included in the New Deal additionally exacerbated the racial pr oblem. This is evident within the Second World War, as Katznelson highlights. Within the beginning years of the war effort African Americans would represent a mere ten percent of all armed soldiers (Katznelson 2005). This is critical to education an d African American advancement, as those who entered the military often received remed ial training resulting in higher literacy rates (Katznelson 2005). “High proportions 11 percent, of new white recruits were classified as illiterate, but fully 45 percent of black recruits lacked basic reading skills” (Katznelson 2005 109). By observing the low number of African American military recruits but over representation of Africa n American illiteracy, this juxtaposition reveals how much African Americans could have gaine d from these training programs. Refusing to recruit African Americans placed the co mmunity at a disadvantage to receive crucial remedial training, adding to the overall di senfranchisement of blacks. If the remedial training had been extended to African Amer icans then the community could have translated those skills into employment and we alth accumulation.

PAGE 57

47 Black exposure to programs of remedial training wou ld have increased African American gains. However there developed another lay er of discrimination for the African Americans who were recruited due to limits placed o n their opportunities of upward mobility. As African Americans rose in training the ir ability to become officers and to enter special training programs were severely limit ed due to rigid racial separation. These limits would hinder African American possibilities to gain better employment after service due to their inability to access advanced s kills. Even more while African Americans were being excluded, white access was exp edited at a “much more vigorous rate” (Katznelson 112), exacerbating racial cleavag es. Pivotal to understanding this situation is that while only 12 percent of black co mpanies had black lieutenants, and virtually no white companies had all black officers 58 percent of black companies had all white lieutenants, allowing white Americans of any skill level much more opportunity to lead military units. From these leadership oppor tunities white Americans gained exponentially. The fact that white Americans gained tremendously f rom black disenfranchisement is no more obvious than in the N ew Deal policy – the Selective Service Readjustment Bill. Within the Selective Ser vice Readjustment Bill, commonly referred to as the GI Bill, “between 1944 and 1974, federal spending for former soldiers in this ‘model welfare system” totaled over $95 bil lion (Katznelson 113).” With these funds veterans’ bought homes, attended college, sta rted business ventures, and found jobs commensurate with their skills (Katznelson 2005), a nd from this opportunity pumped tremendous amounts of money into the economy. In on e year, from 1946 to 1947, VA backed mortgage loans would account for 40 percent of all new home loans (Katznelson

PAGE 58

48 2005). “Residential ownership [would become] the ke y foundation of economic security for the burgeoning and overwhelmingly white middle class (Katznelson 2005 116).” Important to note here is that the economic securit y was only being extended to white Americans. The financial assistance distributed by the GI Bill would be so enormous that it would take white Americans from poverty to middl e class status. African Americans would contribute equally to funding the GI Bill. Ho wever the disenfranchisement of African Americans would doubly place the black comm unity in a negative position since they would forego the economic benefits of the GI B ill, while also exhibiting a loss of social power due to whites’ elevated status. The benefits of the GI Bill, and the damages of its racial exclusion, cannot be overstated. In the area of education alone, by 1955 2.2 million veterans would have participated in the GI Bill’s higher education assi stance (Katznelson 2005). Another 5.6 million veterans would use the assistance to enroll in vocational institutions (Katznelson 2005). Being a race neutral piece of legislation, t he GI Bill was expected to offer all of these benefits to each veteran. However studies sho w that racial inclusion was limited. “On balance there was no greater instrument for wid ening an already huge racial gap in postwar America than the GI Bill (Katznelson 2005 1 21).” Instead of closing the gap between black and white parity the policy would rac ially stratify its benefits exasperating the divide between blacks and whites. The GI Bill was able to stratify its benefits throu gh language in the policy that allowed local implementation of its resources. Rath er than including the exclusionary language of agricultural workers and domestic worke rs exhibited in the Social Security Act and Fair Labor Standards Act, the legislation b ecame discriminatory in the way local

PAGE 59

49 Veteran’s Affairs institutions provided benefits an d how private and public educational and financial institutions either granted or limite d access. Most important to the GI Bill’s exclusionary practices was its ability to take the power of a federal program and implement it through state and local institutions. Across the nation programs could be executed in regard to “keeping with local favor” (K atznelson 2005 128). Eliminating from the colorblind ethos that race-neutral is enou gh to end discrimination, this example of exclusion emphasizes even more the annihilation of liberal beliefs of universalism and egalitarianism. As Ira Katznelson states, these pro grams were intrinsically affirmative action programs for white Americans as they were th e ones to benefit from the attainment of education, job skills, home loans, and employmen t opportunities. Unemployment assistance, wage bargaining, and old age support we re all barred from African American’s reach. Even more, black access to primarily white colleges and universities remained limited outside of the South, debunking the regiona l perspective of racism’s effects (Katznelson 2005). This facet is crucial as Liberal s, even Katznelson, attempt to limit racism to a regional aberration. During the late 19 40s black enrollment in white colleges in the North and West never exceeded 5,000 (Katznel son 2005). Under-funded historically black colleges would absorb nearly 95 percent of all black veterans (Katznelson 2005). While these colleges adequately trained and prepared these veterans, to argue the race-neutral implications of the New D eal provided equality of opportunity is completely disingenuous. In a truly egalitarian env ironment black veterans’ GI Bills would have been just as accepted at any white insti tutions as any other educational institution. Again this is not to say that these bl ack institutions were insufficient, but for

PAGE 60

50 ominous reasons networks of power and access placed white institutions at a superior advantage. In some of these African Americans insti tutions students faced a lack of access to libraries, limited enrollment caps and li mited accreditation (Katznelson 2005). Those seeking on-the-job training education would h ave to obtain employment before being accepted in educational programs (Katznelson 2005). However this would effectively prohibit most black veterans who had al ready been unemployed or sharecroppers before the war effort. The issue woul d come down to not the comingling of the races but the inadequate democratic dispersal o f access to power. The culmination of the disparate effects of the New Deal has never been recovered. The disparity in farm values for the dif ferent races in the 1930s mirrors the disparity of home values for blacks and whites toda y. The accumulation of assets gained by white Americans furthered a disparity between bl acks and whites that can not be addressed by anything other than the same kind of N ew Deal assistance that made the disparity so considerable. This would demand assist ance in education, housing, job training, and loan support. Even after the Civil Ri ghts Movement and the implementation of workplace discrimination legislation, the racial wealth gap between blacks and whites still patterns itself after the difference in acces s to assets described since the Great Depression. Differences in inheritances, asset port folio composition, and differences in intergenerational transfers such as business resour ces explain much of the persistence in wealth inequality. However the New Deal directly su pported the differences in the inheritances of black and white Americans by creati ng a middle class for whites who had access to home ownership and employment opportunity The New Deal directly contributed to differences in asset portfolio compo sition by fostering a financial acuity in

PAGE 61

51 white Americans that was gained through the policy’ s grant of business loans. Similarly differences in intergenerational transfers can be p aralleled to differences in access to home equity, educational attainment, and business o pportunity. These advantages were extended by the New Deal. However for African Ameri cans this lack of equity became a handicap to wealth accumulation that still persists currently regardless of age, education, and income. Wealth Accumulation/Racial Dispossession – Methodol ogical Frame The purpose of this section of the chapter is to hi ghlight the connection between patterns of wealth accumulation exhibited in the Ne w Deal to trends in racial disparity. Most often issues of racial wealth disparity are wr itten off by limited approaches to human capital endowment and income. These approache s can be encapsulated in the Jensen School, Chicago School, and Moynihan methods All of the typologies, however, are challenged by this study’s full assessment of t he New Deal’s impact on racial wealth. It is the focus on culture or income that makes mos t efforts to remediate racial disparity fail. Instead by recognizing the historical pattern s of wealth “dis-accumulation”, researchers can observe why the prior limited focus es of liberal race neutrality have also sufficiently failed. Within the Jensen School, the first excuse of racia l wealth inequality lies in their emphasis of a genetic difference in intelligence be tween whites and blacks (Darity 1982). The Chicago School sees difference in education as the chief cause of racial disparity (Darity 1982). This approach more or less counts on an assumption that African Americans inabilities to put off short-term advanta ges keep these communities from long-term planning; education being the key long te rm investment missing (Darity 1982).

PAGE 62

52 The Moynihan method or Elkins School attributes wea lth disparity to African American socialization (Darity 1982). This viewpoint reinfor ces a perception of a cycle of poverty. The combination of African American female heads of household and a high rate of unemployment for African American males contribute to characteristics that facilitate wealth disparity. This cycle of poverty is accepted as opposed to investigating the structural and historic reasons for African America n unemployment and female single family homes (Darity 1982). Despite differences in income among blacks and whites, the approaches support their perspectives by acknowledg ing the narrowing of income among young people as an implication for the narrowing of racial disparity (Darity 1982). Yet these rebuttals must be questioned. The human capital approaches present one method of observing tendencies in wealth accumulation. The approaches give an impress ion of validity as the logic they display present a sequence of events that satisfy s ociety’s expectations of how those separate from themselves would behave. However thes e approaches do not reflect reality. Regardless of age, income, educational attainment, or social status African Americans are behind white Americans in every category. Even for those of equal ability they receive unequal earnings (Darity 1982). Despite the narrowi ng of incomes among young people, black youth experience higher unemployment and diff erent employment experiences than white Americans (Darity 1982). The Moynihan method disregards that the largest pool of unemployed is “job-losers,” not “job-leavers” (Dari ty 1982). The difference of job-losers and job-leavers is that in one instance job losers are forced into unemployment due to employment circumstances. Job-leavers tend to repre sent people who have decided to willfully quit their positions. This reality disman tles the idea that so many African

PAGE 63

53 Americans desert employment or are simply too lazy. Even for the Chicago School the delay of immediate gratification is misleading as s avings are more influenced by income than any other indicator, underlining the fact that African Americans and white Americans of the same income tend to save at the sa me rate (Darity 1982)(Gittleman & Wolff 2004). Significantly the congruence of saving s rates is a departure from the cultural perspective of the Chicago School to the m aterial necessity of income. The Elkins School human capital approach exaggerate s their assumptions when it comes to income. Simply obtaining employment will n ot end wealth disparity. The importance of income is extremely overplayed especi ally when considering the other factors of wealth disparity such as the starting po int for black wealth, the rate of wealth appreciation between blacks and whites, differences in inheritances and asset portfolio composition (capital holdings), and unequal access in opportunities. The principal reason that income is not enough to satisfy their position is that even as things stand now it would take years to reduce the income gap between t he races. In 2011, “median white household income was 72% higher than median black h ousehold income (Resnikoff 2014).” This focus says nothing of the fact that fo r wealth, median black family wealth was even more staggering at one-twentieth (0.05%) c ompared to that of white families (Kochhar, Fry, & Taylor 2011). The data just does n ot provide that parity within income alone will close the racial gap. What the human capital approaches fail to examine a re the patterns and components of actual wealth accumulation. As with t he previously mentioned New Deal policy’s use of housing, education, and direct fina ncial loans, cumulatively assets are collected through the same channels such as the v alue of their homes, through advanced

PAGE 64

54 education, higher incomes and savings, the inherita nces of assets, and intergenerational business transfers/ farm equity (Gittleman & Wolff 2004)(Blau & Graham 1990)( Furstenberg 2001). Wealth is also influenced as men tioned by absolute wealth disparity, but also influenced by the rate of wealth appreciat ion (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). Most of the research gathered, however, concluded that more than any other categories – inheritances/intergenerational transfers, asset por tfolio composition, and the disparity in wealth appreciation are the principal contributors to racial wealth dis parity. These categories of asset accumulation parallel the benef its of the New Deal as the creation of inheritance for white Americans can be connected to their increased ability to gain employment. This employment allowed for higher inco mes as white Americans gained skills in the labor force. These higher incomes sub sequently allowed for higher savings that could pass to relatives in the form of further aid in gifts, low interest loans, and inherited property (Blau & Graham 1990). Similarly access to capital through the GI Bill, along with higher incomes, allowed for increased ac cess to capital holdings (stocks, business assets, home equity) for higher returns in asset composition. Intergenerational transfers similarly mirror this pattern as it refle cts the absolute disparity between blacks and whites. “Examining estate records for deceased persons…finds that mean black net worth for males was less than one sixth of white ma le net worth (BWD 334).” The disparity exhibited between blacks and whites in te rms of estate holdings directly reflect the inability of black families to transfer wealth generationally. Even further, the disparity contributes to the overall racial wealth divide. Fo r African Americans the difference of intergenerational transfers exacerbates the distanc e between black and white wealth.

PAGE 65

55 The asset portfolio of blacks and whites are also a ffected by differing rates of inheritance. The evidence shows that between 1984-1 994 inheritances were 3% of African American assets, whereas it was 14% for whi tes (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). This translates into a difference on average of $75,236 for white Americans versus $48,946 for those few blacks who do receive inheritances (Gittl eman & Wolff 2004). This disparity compounded over generations creates an insurmountab le schism in wealth. These differences in wealth aren’t just isolated but make possible the vast differences in African American and white American economic power. Accordi ng to the 1995 Survey of Consumer Finances white households reported an inhe ritance of 24% or an average $115,000, compared to 11% for African Americans who averaged $32,000 (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). This consistent 12:1 ratio displays t he limited opportunity for blacks and the connection of financial assistance that has mat riculated to the middle class since the New Deal. The disproportion of inheritance paired w ith the overall absolute disparity underlines a disadvantage whereby blacks lack acces s to capital. This deficiency reverberates in all aspects of social life for Afri can Americans. Instead of cultural perspectives or myths about saving propensities wha t is needed here is to observe the structural differences of opportunity for African A mericans. Along with limits to wealth come limits to educational opportunities, health ca re, and quality of life. As the difference in inheritances suggests, white w ealth and black wealth are worlds apart. These differences are not only influe nced by a divergence in inheritance but also due to differences in asset composition. Asset s gained by inheritance are but one example. The article “Racial Differences in Pattern s of Wealth Accumulation” explains that the breakdown of white and black wealth is muc h different in regard also to home

PAGE 66

56 ownership, assets in business, assets in farming in dustry, and capital holdings. These differences are even more articulated as each asset represents a different proportion of either races total portfolio. For instance the val ue of home equity is three times higher for whites than it was African Americans (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). However for blacks home equity represents 45.8% of their total wealth compared to 28.6% for whites (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). This creates a dynamic wh ereby the lower equity value coupled with the disproportionate representation of home equity in blackÂ’s asset portfolio, reinforces a cycle of unequal wealth acc umulation. If the homes values are less, but yet make up a larger proportion of wealth, a si tuation is created through which African Americans are continually at a disadvantage d position. African American wealth portfolios show a differenc e in business assets and capital holdings as well. In business or farming, o nly 2.1% of African Americans held assets in these categories, opposed to 13.1% for wh ite Americans (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). This statistics also reiterates a lower self -employment rate for Africans American. This fact resembles the pattern of low self-employm ent discussed during the 1920s and 1930s. The influence of stock holdings is also disp roportionately beneficial for white Americans. For white Americans 37.5 % held their we alth in stocks compared to 10.4% for African Americans (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). Whe n constructing patterns of wealth accumulation and wealth disparity the diversity of white Americans assets in such resources as stocks contributes to why the argument of wealth disparity is not simply isolated to income or savings of wealth. Race neutr al policies cannot reach these systemic issues. Up until this point race neutrality has bee n unable to affect the more preponderant contributor to wealth in diverging rates of wealth appreciation. Stocks in themselves

PAGE 67

57 usually pay back higher capital dividends (Furstenb erg 2001). These gains over a multitude of generations only strengthened the raci al divide as white wealth grew more quickly. For white Americans stocks and capital hol dings were the second most important asset, representing 19.7% of total wealth (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). However for blacks this means a much higher proportion of a ssets in net liquid and net business assets (Blau & Graham 1990). These assets consequen tly are also assets that provide diminutively in terms of wealth. The cumulative result of the diverse asset portfoli os for blacks and whites is that wealth between the two races appreciated at a much different scale. Between the periods 1984-1994 for each category of wealth accumulation the absolute climb in wealth was greater for whites than African Americans, with inc reases in each category also being larger (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). At the median, hou sehold wealth appreciation for whites was a staggering 35.4% compared to 6.1% for African Americans (Gittleman & Wolff 2004). For white Americans this meant that th eir wealth will quickly create more wealth; as is the case for capital holdings. Instit utional knowledge cannot be the only reason for the asset portfolio that whites have, fo r savings rates by income mirror each other for both races (Gittleman & Wolff 2004)(Furst enberg 2001). However for wealth disparity, the sizeable difference in wealth apprec iation opens an entirely distinct conversation about the structural nature of wealth and what is needed to conquer the racial disparity. Beyond liberal tactics of income and superficial pe rspectives of culture and intelligence – what has race neutral done to addres s race issues? If anything the race neutral doctrine has served more to cover up the co ntours of racial discrimination and to

PAGE 68

58 narrow the race conversation, than to offer racial remediation and support. The deep structural inequities of racial disparities will pe rsist as long as race neutrality guides policy. Gains in unemployment may alleviate concern s of societal weakness, but the gains obscure the systemic barriers African America ns experience to enter employment. Take for instance the 1970s economic recovery. Duri ng this recovery black unemployment rates fell 6% (Job 1979). However in t he same period white unemployment fell 32% (Job 1979). Many would laud t his as an accomplishment of liberal economics lifting all boats and trickling d own to minorities. Accepting this narrative would conceal the fact that during the 19 70s recovery for blacks the labor participation would grow from 59.2% to 62% (Job 197 9). Instead of laziness blacks were taking advantages of opportunities. Even further if the narrative of appreciation was wholly accepted, it would also critically conceal a lack of opportunity. The lack of opportunity is revealed as it was not until the 197 0s recovery that black labor participation rates had increased since the 1950s ( Job 1979). The narratives miss that despite the recovery aiding in lowering unemploymen t, the black to white unemployment ratio increased (Job 1979). Like a rocket taking of f from a lower trajectory, pulling up into a higher stratosphere requires more energy. Bl ack disparity is not a result of lack of effort, but attributable to a lower starting positi on that has never been made up. If anything in light of continual discrimination it is surprising that the inequality is not more extreme. No one in power observes these profound de pths of disparity. Even more these discriminations against blacks have never been rest ricted but continually augmented. These discriminations have wreaked havoc on black l ife in the face of Reconstruction amendments, race neutral New Deal social policy, th e civil rights movement, and

PAGE 69

59 American’s first black president. For these discrim inations live in the ways societies form policy, create perceptions of the needy, moralize i ts actions, and thinks of itself. Conclusion The New Deal was structured is such a way that it c ould have never been race neutral. By configuring New Deal policy benefits in such a way as to leave out agricultural workers and domestic workers, to leave out blacks in the south, and by channeling benefits through local administrations – the New Deal effectively exacerbated the disparity between blacks and whites in America. Though presented as a race neutral policy, the New Deal instead obscured the ramificat ions of white supremacist policymaking. Just as Justice Harlan had represente d Reconstruction Era amendments as colorblind, so too has modern liberalism presented the New Deal, civil rights legislation and current social policy as standards for a race n eutral society. Any residual discrimination must be due to blacks themselves. Th e approaches to human capital have shown propensities to make long-term investments, tendencies for African Americans to lack of education and possess inferior genetic disp ositions, are much easier narratives to believe and to reconcile than to critically analyze the systemic patterns of discrimination. To engage in such a critical analysis would subject uncertainty into American ideology. In one sense anything different would violate the i deal that people get what they deserve in a meritocracy. Individual citizens have no respo nsibility to the issues of others. Liberal universalism and egalitarianism has provided the sa me opportunities to everyone. However as the discussion of wealth accumulation ha s shown this is simply not the case. Through financial assistance paid for by all Americans, white Americans saw their responsibilities eased. Opportunities were gi ven to white Americans through

PAGE 70

60 education aid, housing loans, business grants, and unlimited channels of potential. Yet despite this “white affirmative action,” today whit e Americans observe no culpability. They have no skin in the game. Discrimination was t heir grandparents generation, their parents generation. However it is directly because of advantages proffered by the New Deal in inheritances, access to business loans, far m training, home equity, and educational attainment that current structures remo ve the innocence of all Americans. The current reality is but a byproduct of systemic patterns of accumulation and disaccumulation. Narratives painting blame on the vict im only reinforce this arrogance. Narratives highlighting the convergence of incomes ignore the disparity of black incomes regardless of education. Narratives of educational prioritizing ignore the barriers blacks faced to obtain education despite serving just as w hite Americans and having the same GI. Still, diverse asset portfolios are but the evi dence of these disparate opportunity structures. Nevertheless it is not until the races are compared against each other, as Katznelson attempts in his methodological approach, as attempted by the referenced articles, as two ends of the same scale, that not o nly can white Americans see their “privilege,” but blacks may be empowered to demand their full citizenship in this democratic society. What has to be confronted is t hat the concern has never been to aid the neediest members of society. The goal continual ly has been to configure society in such a way that supports race neutral ambiguity, th at supports a white supremacist construction of society, and that justifies inequal ity.

PAGE 71

61 CHAPTER IV WORKFORCE INVESTMENT ACT: CASE STUDY Introduction Utilizing the methodological approach of Ira Katzne lson of disaggregating the benefits of the New Deal policy by race, this case study will attempt to further the framework to current social policy. The policy used in particular will be the Workforce Improvement Act (WIA). The WIA is used due to its s imilarity to the New Deal. Using the aforementioned New Deal as a framework, the pol icies of the New Deal provided not only financial assistance, but provided also employ ment training. The WIA likewise provides educational benefits that facilitate emplo yment training and advances in employment attainment. Similar to the New Deal, the WIA also satisfies the race neutral component of providing benefits not on a basis of r acial categorization, but need. Satisfying the criterion of employment and race neu trality, this case study will attempt to examine the racial demography of the WIAÂ’s benefici aries. This chapter will focus on asking the question through utilizing the WIA as a case study of whether race neutral policy provides race positive remediation. Race neutral policy has had a varied record in acc ount to its effect on racial disparity. The record on race neutral policy has sa tisfied the goal of not utilizing racial markers to determine policy access. However, for co rrecting racial disparity the policy has not been as successful. If race neutral/colorbl ind policy cannot address wealth disparity as a legal doctrine then it ought to be c ritiqued for its inadequacies. Even further, if racial wealth disparity is a systemic i ssue then the practice should also be evaluated for its involvement in the persistence of such inequalities as well. If race

PAGE 72

62 neutral policy does address these concerns then mor e must be done to encourage these race-neutral practices in light of widening inequit ies. This study will attempt to analyze what effects the Workforce Investment Act is having on labor participation rates. WIA program “exiters”, program allocations, and state g raduation rates will serve to test to the significance of the WIA program to the benefits of employment. First, this essay will highlight a set of hypotheses and variables to answ er the research question. Following a discussion of data and sampling this chapter will p rovide a context for the research design. A discussion of measurements will demonstra te the association between the variables and the context. Next the case study will offer a methodological framework to test each variable. The final section will offer an evaluation of results. Research Design For the study of this essay five hypotheses are tes ted. 1. “if the number of adult African American exiters wh o complete workforce training increase, then the proportion of African A mericans in the workforce will increase.” Exiters is a term used by the source material to explain those who have successfully entered and als o completed a workforce training program (Social Policy Research Associates 2009). The variable for exiters will be categorized as “pr ogram completers” for variable identification purposes. 2. “if the dollars allocated to workforce programs in crease, then the proportion of African Americans in the workforce wi ll increase.” 3. “if the graduation rates of African Americans incre ase, then the proportion of African Americans in the workforce will increase .”

PAGE 73

63 4. “if the Workforce Investment Act is a race neutral policy, then the relationship of white labor participation to white exiters or white graduation rates will be also neutral or less of an influence than for African Americans.” For the variables of participation, program complet ers, and high school graduates, the study will also collect demographic data to tes t the significance of the policy to white Americans and black Americans. Keeping in line with the Katznelson methodology, the results will depict the influence of the policy in possibly promoting white Americans and disadvantaging blacks as a continuation of discrimi nation. This investigation of privilege and discrimination creates a dependent variable of African American participation in the workforce along with that of white Americans. The i ndependent variables are African American and white American workforce training prog ram completion (exiters), budgetary allocations, and African American and whi te American graduation rates. Through the analysis it will be observed how these factors affect the outcome of African Americans employment or whether it also continues “ white affirmative action.” Education was added also with a perspective to the historical discrimination African Americans have experienced in this area and to test whether an outside variable to the WIA is affecting labor participation. To collect data on the dependent variable, the diff erent states’ Department of Employment Offices will serve as a source, along wi th U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics, and the Current Population Survey. These sources provide annual state employment participation rates by racial group (IDES 2013). These annual reports range from 1976 to 2012. The indepen dent variable of the number of adult

PAGE 74

64 exiters in workforce training programs is provided by the Social Policy Research Associates. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Lab or, this source provides information on the service programs offered under the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) (Social Policy Research Associates 2009). The WIA fund is a federal program enacted in 1998 that states use to support their workforce training programs. The independent variable of budget allocations to workforce programs comes from data provided by the U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Adminis tration. These data show how much each state is allocated under the WIA annually The third variable of African American and white American graduation rates are fo und in the State Board of Education annual report cards. These data demonstrate the gra duation rate of African Americans against the depiction of white American graduation. Due to the fact that data is being collected for multiple variables over a span of tim e this study will employ a cross sectional time series (Gerring 2012). The time period of this study is drawn around the y ears 2002 to 2008. Due to the unavailability of data representing graduation rate s before the year 2002 by racial demography, the beginning of the study starts with that year. In the financial crisis of 2007-2008 workers across the board were affected. W ith this in mind, it was reasoned that even with government workforce programs in pla ce employment rates would dramatically decrease. For that reason years after 2009 were not included. A range of years would need to still be studied though as the effects of policies take time to influence the data. A range was needed to monitor a potential ripple effect. To satisfy this requirement the frame of 2002 – 2008 was expanded a s much as possible. Figures for the independent variable of WIA participants were found at least to the year 2000 and as far

PAGE 75

65 as 2012. However the stimulus package that resulted from the crisis provides a caveat to using more years. Monies allocated through the stim ulus were tied to WIA funding through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)(IDES 2013). This mix of funds muddles the streams of where the money is goi ng as funds after the ARRA were diverted to weatherization and green jobs and not s pecifically employment training (IDES 2013). After researching the United StatesÂ’ periodic repor t to the U.N. on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the population utilizes a four region sample. Potentially the scope could be narrowed to southern states where ra ce relations are visibly at their worst. Racial discrimination however is a national issue t hat no state can escape as it foundation is itself embodied in American norms. A national su rvey however would potentially miss idiosyncrasies present at lower level analysis. For that reason a purposive sample is proposed utilizing four regions each with two state s as the case study. The states of Illinois and New Jersey will represent the Northeas t, the states Florida and Arkansas will represent the South, the states Texas and Arizona w ill represent the Southwest, and the states Montana and Washington will represent the No rthwest. These states were chosen due to their inclusion in the governmentÂ’s report t o the U.N. and due to the statesÂ’ diversity and varied demographics. In the CERD repo rt for example Illinois is referred to as mirroring the overall composition of the U.S. (U .S Department of State 2007). Illinois was also noted for its attempt at addressing racial discrimination concerns (U.S. Department of State 2007). The other states are lik ewise used for their makeup, but to also provide a range of experiences that represent the entire United States.

PAGE 76

66 Collecting data for each state in the United States would have turned into a behemoth of a project. Each state would have also r equired constructing a database of a multitude of data sources. Most of the data is not centralized. Each state might utilize different agencies to manage and collect the data. Some data is also not available by demographic, by year, and by state. Ciphering throu gh these data and connecting it to one variable across 50 cases would be extremely tedious task and beyond the scope of this study. For an initial observation into the effects of governmental policies on direct communities, this regional cross-section fits appro priately. Maximizing the representative connection of variables within each state to the qu estion of race neutrality makes it becomes possible to observe a statement of the rela tionship between governmental policy access and the policyÂ’s effectiveness on racial rem ediation. Variable Description Employment is an important area of discrimination f or African Americans. The dependent variable of this study attempts to reflec t that. Employment participation rates where most applicable to fit the dynamic of employm ent in the labor market. This ratio would depict the labor force of African Americans a gainst the eligible population of African American workers. A declining rate could po ssibly symbolize increasing barriers to employment. Increasing rates would signal an inc reased participation of African Americans in the labor force. This variable will be a ratio variable as it could be possible to have zero participation. Over the course of the five years the rate shifts up and down, but not dramatically. For the years 2002-2008 for t he state of Illinois the rate was 61.6, 60.5, 62.0, 61.5, 62.3, 61.5, and 61.2 for each yea r respectively (IDES 2013). The

PAGE 77

67 distribution of the variables is quite close in ran ge. The variables on average vary by year by .83 percent in either direction (IDES 2013). Validity of the measure is fairly sufficient as the data reflects the labor force of African American workers who are employed and those noninstitutional individuals who are unemployed but available for work and actively looking for work (IDES 2013). The original question of the WIAÂ’s efficacy in promotin g African Americans in the labor market should be reflected through the use of labor participation variable. The choice to not use the entire labor force allows for a more ta rgeted perspective of employment policies effect on directly the African American co mmunity. Reflecting historical trends it is reasoned that as barriers of discrimination s ubside, due to changing racial perceptions, more African Americans will enter the workforce. This mirrors the perspective of discriminationÂ’s effect today. Prima rily the variable focuses on one area of discrimination. The direct focus of the measure str engthens the validity of the concept as well (Shively 2013). This validity is due to the va riablesÂ’ correspondence to the case studyÂ’s analysis. A caveat arises since the data is collected from household samples, so that questions of reliability might occur due to th e possibility of falsifiability or coercion of respondent information. The measure is derived f rom reputable sources to counter the prospect of coercion. The data are sourced from sta te and federal level labor and economic agencies. The sources of the data are tran sparent and available for checks of repeatability (Shively 2013). The attempts to creat e these consistent patterns will hopefully overcome any errors in the interpretation of the data. To measure whether involvement in workforce trainin g programs affect participation rates the independent variable of the number of adult program completers

PAGE 78

68 (those who completed training programs) is used. Th e variable is ratio since the number of participants can reach zero if there is no one i n the program. This data is provided over the time for 2000-2008 for each region and each sta te. In this regard validity is strengthened to fit the design. The data is broken down by race for both black and white demographics. It should be noted however that in so me instances the yearÂ’s national average is used in cases where demographic data is not available for that particular year. It should be addressed here that the U.S. periodic U.N. report warns of the difficultly in ascertaining disaggregated data by race. In its rep ort it mentions that racial distinctions have changed throughout American history. (U.S. Dep artment of State, 2007) Americans also view themselves as a tolerant society so infor mation by race is not always maintained. As such, most governmental policies att empt to target those most in need of assistance. (U.S. Department of State, 2007) Since African Americans disproportionately represent those in poverty, for validity it is assu med that these measures will also reflect in African-American communities. For the years 2007 and 2008 demographic data is most available for all data points. Data for the ye ars 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 will be aggregated for the entire states adult work ers. An approximate participation rate for the African American community and white partic ipants is assumed for the years the demographic data is not available based off of the yearÂ’s corresponding national average. For each state the total number of program complete rs ranges from 788 to 63,661, with African Americans exhibiting a smaller scale o f 258 to 17,710, and white Americans 509 exiters to 22,843. (Social Policy Research Ass ociates, 2009) These differences reflect the respective total population size of eac h state, funding for the programs, and variances in necessity. Observing the average distr ibution of values (mean) between the

PAGE 79

69 year times periods also highlights the rate of chan ge. The distribution of the values demonstrates sufficient variation in the variables. The reliability of the measure should be satisfactory as the data are sourced from federal s tatistics and has a transparent codebook for attempting original replications. The independent variable of government allocations used to fund employment training programs adds another dimension of how gov ernment actions might attempt to affect African American employment. Data for this v ariable are represented as a ratio in dollars. These data directly reflect the funds from Workforce Investment Act as they are sourced from governmental sources responsible for t he implementation of the program. This fact should help with the validity of the conc eptÂ’s connection to workforce training programs. By funding employment training programs, the government is acting to aid African Americans in obtaining employment and concu rrently acting to ease past discriminations, while doing so race neutrally. Rel iability, as with all the variables, is provided by the openness of the data to be repeated and the consistency of using a federal source for information. Having found these data it can be observed that most of the allocations for adult programs vary tremendously fr om state to state, from $7,653,158 for the state Arkansas to 150,741,436 for a state like California. (Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration, 2006) Howev er, within each state the breadth of these allotments are a lot less drastic. Still t hey reflect the funding prioritization of the WIA program. It is important to note for consistency that for bo th workforce training programs exiters and workforce training allocations, the foc us relies on adult workers. This focus removed the need to also incorporate additional fig ures on youth and dislocated workers.

PAGE 80

70 The majority of participants in workforce programs predominately come from the adult programs category. Though youth unemployment for th e African American community is alarming, the adult workers were viewed as being su fficiently representative of the majority of the population. Adult workers also subs ume both male and female workers. This barrier again arises from the limits of this s tudy. It is interesting that through the data collection process it was observed that the pr oportion of workers is very much influenced by gender. In certain instances it was w hite males and black females that made up majority participants. This is an interesting pa ttern though due to its similarity to historical patterns of employment discussed in earl ier portions of this thesis. An increase of African American high school graduat es might also correlate with an increase in African American employment. In this theoretical sense more students graduating with diplomas will provide additional sk illed workers to the labor force. This is contrary to the idea that it is the increased pr esence of WIA participants that is increasing African American and white representatio n in labor. With the desegregation of schools not complete in some parts of the country u ntil the 1970s, African Americans still find themselves catching up the educational attainm ent ladder. With this in mind the independent variable of African American and white American graduation rates is also included. Variations in the percentage would signal more or less African Americans graduating high school. For the years 2002 to 2008 the graduation rates for the state of Texas, which are some of the highest in the study, are 79.8, 81.1, 81.1, 81.7, 74.5, 71, and 72%, and 88.2, 89.8, 88.1, 89.5, 89, 88, and 89% re spectively for African Americans and white Americans. (Texas Education Agency 2002-2008,TEA hereafter) The increase or decrease of these distances might correlate with ch anges in employment participation.

PAGE 81

71 The distribution of the data stays fairly consisten t however. The data facilitates an analysis that fits the time period, demographic, an d the case of the design. This consistent connection contributes to the validity of the conce pt to the measure of graduation. Reliability is addressed as a measure that could be replicated in other states and reaches the same conclusions. Observations To test the hypotheses of this essay a descriptive analysis would be most appropriate. With so few cases being measured this approach seemed most appropriate to allow a visual display of the interaction. A parall el rate of change either way might possibly signal a relationship between the describe d dependent variable and the independent variables. However there may be no rela tionship as well. Due to the studyÂ’s number of cases at 56, this study will fall into th e qualitative category. A test of significance of the variables and observations woul d best represent the data. This test would allow for this study to analyze which relatio nship of variables was most significant to the question of government action impacting Afri can American equity. With a smaller sample size a quantitative approach would not be ab le to adequately address this research question. It is for this reason of being more quali tative that this design additionally fits with a descriptive correlation test of significance Since most of the data are available the types of statistics will be raw numbers and average rates. (Table 1) There is an expectation that the results of this an alysis will doubtlessly remain varied. Due to issues of disaggregated data by stat e and race, overall values may not reflect participation rates by African Americans or white Americans in these government training programs. In the future it would be helpfu l to have statewide data by all

PAGE 82

72 demographic indicators. Also the fact that there ar e multiple factors affecting employment participation rates will cause any resul t to exhibit uncertainty. Isolating for all possible influences would be difficult to achie ve. However these are all similar complaints that other sources conducting racial stu dies have found. As in the case of this research design, most comparable sources collected their data from governmental agencies and committees (Rubin and Bartle 2005). Th e variables focusing on employment have attempted to highlight an area of s ignificant historical discrimination for African Americans. The use of influential cases fits the design of this study as the goal attempts to segregate the influence of each ca se. (Gerring & Seawright, 2008) Attempting to use a similar frame and methodology a s Katznelson, sheds light on the African American community’s current racial circums tances and any advantages white Americans may receive. Tables 1 through 8 represent the collected data. Th e years are reflective of the mentioned timeframe. The participation rate for Afr ican Americans in each state corresponds to the column participation rate. The n umber of African American program completers in Illinois is reflected in the column: Program Completers – AFAM, followed by the state abbreviation. The same code correspond s to column Program CompletersWA for white Americans. To find the number of progr am completers for years 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, an average proportion o f program completers for the years 2007 and 2008 is used against the total number of p rogram completers for that year. Government allocations to the WIA program are liste d in the category allocations. The column graduation rate reflects the high school gra duation rate for African American students in the state. The succeeding column repres ents high school graduation rates for

PAGE 83

73 white American per state. Here is important to note that whenever possible 4 year graduation rates were used to gauge the impact that would cross over to the workforce. However in some instances five graduation rates wer e used. This construction of evidence follows through Table 8. (Table 1Representation of Data for Illinois) Illinois Year Black Participation Rate White Participation Rate Total # of Exiters – IL Exiters – AFAMIL Exiters WAIL Allocations Graduation Rate BLK Graduation Rate WHT 2002 61.6 64.20 5,922. 00 2842.56 2943.23 51,107,313 74.5 89.2 2003 52.5 63.10 6,061. 00 2909.28 3303.26 43,516,543 73.3 91.0 2004 54 63.50 6,429. 00 3085.92 3381.65 41,671,909 74.0 91.8 2005 54.4 64.20 5,581. 00 2941 2935. 61 41,778,880 77.7 92.2 2006 56.1 65.70 5,549. 00 2521 3268. 36 42,381,292 78.3 92.3 2007 54.9 66.00 5,748. 00 2855 1,938 41,551,4 16 73.8 92.2 2008 53.8 64.70 4,588. 00 2118 1,680 38,269,1 86 74.9 92.5

PAGE 84

74 (Table 2 Representation of Data for New Jersey) New Jersey Year Black Participation Rate* White Participation Rate* Total # of Exiters – NJ Exiters – AFAMNJ Exiters WANJ Allocations Graduation Rate BLK Graduation Rate WHT 2002 68.4 64.68 2917.0 0 1149.3 1553.5 9 18,844,995 73.4 88.3 2003 59.6 62.40 2901.0 0 1142.99 1545.0 7 20,462,777 73.4 88.3 2004 59.3 63.00 2892.0 0 1139.45 1540.2 8 24,489,069 73.4 88.3 2005 61.4 63.40 3090.0 0 1217.46 1645.7 3 22,409,867 73.4 88.3 2006 60 63.40 2773.0 0 1092.56 1476.9 19,595,228 74.5 88.3 2007 58 63.80 2968.0 0 1426 694 17,635,7 13 72.9 88.4 2008 56.9 63.70 2383.0 0 916 730 16,435,0 03 72.9 88.3 (Table 3 Representation of Data for Florida) Florida Year Black Participation Rate White Participation Rate Total # of Exiters FL Exiters – AFAMFL Exiters WAFL Allocations Graduation Rate BLK Graduation Rate WHT 2002 64.15 64.90 11,70 6 4963.34 5817.8 8 35,800,688 57.0 75.6 2003 60.8 57.90 9,632 3650.53 5102.2 9 42,506,473 54.2 78.1 2004 59.6 59.00 15,09 6 6174.26 7940.5 41,406,006 57.3 80.2 2005 60.3 60.30 12,54 1 5129.27 6345.7 5 53,987,825 57.1 80.8 2006 61.8 61.20 17,79 1 6209.06 10478. 9 37,171,188 56.9 79.9 2007 62.1 60.90 18,46 8 3,950 9,650 29,020,0 19 58.7 81.0 2008 60.2 59.10 16,28 8 3,122 8,671 26,037,6 59 62.5 83.6

PAGE 85

75 (Table 4 Representation of Data for Arkansas) Arkansas Year Black Participation Rate* White Participation Rate* Total # of Exiters AR Exiters AFAMAR Exiters WAAR Allocations Graduation Rate BLK Graduation Rate WHT 2002 63.9 64.65 1286 545.26 639.1 4 9,708,232 69.6 76.6 2003 54.5 58.00 1,089 412.7 593.5 1 8,510,825 69.6 76.6 2004 54.4 59.10 1,052 430.27 553.3 5 7,660,704 69.6 76.6 2005 58.5 61.60 1,084 443.36 548.5 8,822,50 9 69.6 76.6 2006 56.2 60.80 937 327.01 551.8 9 7,653,158 72.9 81.9 2007 50.8 61.30 958 266 662 9,506,72 0 65.8 70.2 2008 56.2 60.40 788 258 509 9,810,39 8 70.2 77.7 Average 69.6 76.6 (Table 5 Representation of Data for Texas) Texas Year Black Participation Rate* White Participation Rate* Total # of Exiters TX Exiters AFAMTX Exiters WARTX Allocations Graduation Rate BLK Graduation Rate WHT 2002 64.4 63.70 19,82 9 8407.5 9855.0 1 77,919,002 79.8 88.2 2003 62.2 63.50 15,08 5 5712.22 8221.3 3 74,481,312 81.1 89.8 2004 58.6 63.50 14,10 0 5766.9 7416.6 76,924,2 35 81.1 88.1 2005 60.1 63.80 20,10 0 8220.9 10170. 6 77,097,549 81.7 89.5 2006 58.6 63.90 21,46 1 7489.99 12640. 53 74,988,040 74.5 89.0 2007 60 63.00 15,27 6 8,640 6,470 74,025,9 81 70.7 88.2 2008 58.6 62.80 17,31 0 5,396 5,161 66,418,4 00 71.8 88.8 Average: 77.2 88.8

PAGE 86

76 (Table 6 Representation of Data for Arizona) Arizona Year Black Participation Rate* White Participation Rate* Total # of Exiters AZ Exiters – AFAMAZ Exiters WARAZ Allocations Graduation Rate BLK Graduation Rate WHT 2002 64.9 61.90 3,356 1422.94 1667.9 3 16,247,051 70.2 83.3 2003 52.4 60.90 3,079 1166.94 1678.0 6 16,106,496 71.4 84.4 2004 60.8 62.00 3,490 1427.41 1835.7 4 17,731,272 76.6 86.2 2005 66.4 60.90 3,541 1448.27 1794.7 5 15,594,617 72.0 83.0 2006 66.3 62.30 3,691 1288.16 2173.9 9 13,527,679 69.0 79.0 2007 59.3 62.10 5,028 651 1,859 15,909,8 85 72.0 81.0 2008 58.9 61.00 3,847 474 1,544 14,729,0 41 72.7 82.5 Average: 72.0 82.8 (Table 7 Representation of Data for California) California Year Black Participation Rate* White Participation Rate* Total # of Exiters CA Exiters AFAMCA Exiters WARCA Allocations Graduation Rate BLK Graduation Rate WHT 2002 55.4 63.40 40,379 17120.7 20068.3 6 150,741,436 56.0 74.0 2003 56.3 62.30 41,914 15885.4 1 22843.13 128,352,398 58.0 76.5 2004 55.4 62.20 28,912 11825.0 1 15207.71 132,993,142 57.5 76.5 2005 55.9 62.50 34,111 13951.4 17260.1 7 128,964,901 58.5 76.5 2006 55.3 62.60 32,378 11299.9 2 19070.64 111,871,663 54.0 75.5 2007 55 62.80 27,721 5,836 8,315 117,265 ,072 53.0 76.0 2008 55.3 61.50 63,661 11,185 19,611 126,947 ,190 52.5 77.0

PAGE 87

77 (Table 8 Representation of Data for Washington) Washington Year Black Participation Rate* White Participation Rate* Total # of Exiters WA Exiters – AFAMWA Exiters WARWA Allocations Graduation Rate BLK Graduation Rate WHT 2002 67.6 62.40 3,365 1426.76 1672.41 27,274, 610 66.4 83.8 2003 57.2 62.10 4,277 1620.98 2330.97 28,857, 712 48.3 69.7 2004 64.5 63.50 4,197 1716.57 2207.62 23,274, 862 53.9 73.6 2005 56.2 64.10 3,911 1599.6 1978.97 22,992, 788 60.8 77.7 2006 61.9 63.60 3,781 1319.57 2227.01 19,945, 283 53.6 74.1 2007 59.2 64.50 3,449 380 2,276 18,747, 455 60.6 75.6 2008 65 63.00 3,639 362 2,375 18,747, 476 59.9 75.4 (Table 9 – Significance Test)(* denoting significan t relationship) Black Participation Rate White Participation Rate Exiters AFAM Exiters WA Allocations Graduation Rate BLK Graduation Rate WHT Black Participation Rate 1.000 White Participation Rate 0.093 0.4959 1.000 Exiters AFAM -0.186 0.1697 0.058 0.6709 1.000 Exiters WA -0.164 0.2271 -0.030 0.8277 0.957* 1.000 Allocations -0.259 0.0541 0.146 0.2826 0.947* 0.905* 1.000 Graduation Rate BLK 0.019 0.8886 0.300 0.0246 -0.326* 0.0143 -0.412* 0.0016 -0.293 0.0284 1.000 Graduation Rate WHT 0.017 0.9008 0.394 0.0026 -0.132 0.3323 -0.212 0.1169 -0.082 0.5485 0.802 1.000

PAGE 88

78 Evaluation & Conclusion Table 9 is a correlation test to see which variable is significant to the dependent variable of participation rates. From Table 9 it is determined that graduation rates present the strongest relationship. Graduation rates appear the most significant, however as a contribution to white labor participation than blac k labor participation. The variables influenced by the WIA were negative for African Ame ricans. The negative sign attributed to the significance of WIA programs repr esent a negative correlation between the variables. The findings of the test are verifie d as there is an expected significance for program completers of WIA programs and WIA allocati ons. The correlation between these variables is identified by the .9 significanc e. The .9 significance falls close to a complete correlation value of 1. The connection is a positive also. The close correlation can be logically expected as one would anticipate m oney put into a program would equate to the outcome. It is interesting for this s tudy however that the strongest relationship is education and not the actions taken by the government policy. In actuality most of the figures seemed to represen t very little of a relationship to the labor participation of African Americans. At th e very least black high school graduation rates appeared to move in a positive cor relation for African American participation even though there was little signific ance. For white Americans graduation rates provided a significant relationship to labor access and participation. For a preliminary step, the significance evidence seems t o support the view that these government actions are not impacting African Americ an communitiesÂ’ opportunities. Even more, the significance levels appear to suppor t a racially discriminatory pattern of privileging whites. From Table 9, the first and sec ond hypotheses of WIA program

PAGE 89

79 completion and WIA allocations can be rejected due to negative correlation and lack of significance. The relationship between the variable participation rate and graduation enjoys a positive relationship. With a higher level of significance, it would have been easier to accept the third hypothesis that high sch ool graduation rates are influencing African American labor. However for the fourth hypo thesis where the hypothesis should be accepted, the limited evidence supports a reject ion of the WIA as race neutral. Corresponding to historical patterns of race inequi ty, it is the advantages of white Americans in educational opportunities that is a pa rt of furthering the race gap. This variable display the most significance (white gradu ation rates) on white labor participation. This dynamic of significance also in terestingly displays a continuation of a pattern of discrimination similar to the pattern of disenfranchisement articulated by Katznelson in the 1930s New Deal. This realization makes the question of race neutral effectiveness in addressing racial inequality even more questionable. The main strength of this research design is that i t is possibly breaking into an area where limited research has been directed. The weakness of the design is presented in the difficulty of the design to fully represent the question of race neutral policy and its affect on communities of color. Issues with data co llection, with isolating variables, and issues with a limited time frame collectively contr ibute to the weaknesses of this study. It would have been beneficial to this case study to ad ditionally look at the relationship of black labor participation in combination with white labor, as opposed to observing from each as a distinctive racial labor pool. This arran gement of variables would have facilitated an even greater depiction of where the benfits were being received. Additionally facilitating the research from a gende red perspective would have also

PAGE 90

80 created a deeper understanding of how race and gend er cut across discrimination. White male representation in most of the labor data was v ery different from white female representation. In a lot of cases white male labor participation more closely mirrored black female participation in the labor market than any other demographic. This fact is interesting in light of the Elkins School research, mentioned in the previous chapter, of black female heads of households. Further research into this area of labor participat ion could possibly examine the different experiences different perspectives encoun ter in the labor market. For the field of political science this is a needed debate. In a tim e when society needs more than ever a policy that prefigures the world as it should be, i f the correlation test of this study is in any way correct then the possibility that these ass istance programs provide any sort of remediation needs to be completely reevaluated. Ins tead of viewing other citizens as unwarranted of support, this study could shed light on the fact that the people suspected of receiving so much assistance are actually receiv ing the bare minimal. If anything, it is the policy decisions of government that are exasper ating societyÂ’s racial divide. Opening up future research to county and city level s would provide a much more nuanced perspective of how this discrimination occu rs. The discriminations of the New Deal most often occurred on the state and local lev el. Utilizing lower levels of analysis might allow for a more in-depth study of these gove rnment programs. It could be possible that the programs are effective but elude the commu nities that need it most. Investigating discrimination at this level would allow for more c ases to build a more representative study. Monitoring other streams of revenue besides simply program allocations might also facilitate a better understanding of the effec ts of government aid on community

PAGE 91

81 choices. These alternative revenue streams could be identified as campaign funding and demographic property values. Unemployment data coul d be cross referenced with years that demographic information is unavailable. Gather ing this information would allow a greater reliability of sources than employing avera ges. Most importantly it is imperative that there is continued investigation into how stru ctures inhibit or promote opportunities in communities of color. It is not enough to assume Actual investigations into historically deprived areas of discrimination are n ecessary to monitor progress.

PAGE 92

82 CHAPTER V SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY Introduction Significance Alternatively to the current race neutral construct ion of policy society could create policy more democratically. Realizing the in creasingly dynamic intersectionality of common issues, addressing policy from a minority and gendered perspective would radically alter patterns of destructive liberalism. These narratives conceal oppression that has a foundation in the American ideology. Combined with racist power structures, contemporary race neutrality has distorted the self -determination of individualism into blind arrogance. Meritocracy has turned into entitl ement, but only for the individual. At its best, this form of colorblind neoliberalism has little effect on the remediation of discrimination. Instead of applying race neutral st andards to policies such as the WIA, society could create a race budgeting threshold to tackle disparaging racial inequality. The significance of the case study elaborates the p oint that race neutral policy cannot positively influence racial disparity. In t his instance, race neutral policy could not affect employment. However from the status of socia l indicators for blacks, in reference to black housing, black education, and black health it can also be true that the race neutral doctrine more broadly is insufficient. Afte r understanding the possible relevance of gender budgeting to the solution of race budgeti ng, this chapter will connect current racial tensions to the overarching issue of raciali zed liberalism, offer an update on the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discriminati onÂ’s (CERD) perspective on U.S. racial issues, and finally offer a conclusion to th e thesis. Understanding the relationship of race, its narratives, and how current disparity is but an outgrowth of this legacy, societal change can occur. If proposing to create m eaningful change then that change

PAGE 93

83 must either use this capability to empower people o f color and prefigure how society should be or be honest about true allegiances to th e status quo. Instead of dedicating the Workforce Investment Act to the neediest members of society, race budgeting would suggest analyzing the policy particularly for its impacts on communities of color. In the past, when alleviating inequities, it has been the government response most often to mediate and remedy discrimin ation. However, political transformation, like anything else, is a social pro cess. To understand contemporary dynamics, this research seeks to analyze the impact government actions have on racial equity. Policy in itself represents these actions i n budget allocations. On the search to find how to elaborate on the relationship between the ef fects of government actions on identity groups, most literature discovered on gend er budgeting appropriately provided a complimentary lens. Gender budgeting attempts to un derstand and explain the opening of opportunities (or closures) that are structured by government spending on programs and policies. For example, policies affecting childcare influence the consumption patterns of female citizens more than males. This illustrates h ow policy affects demographics differently. The differences provide an analogous f rame to understand not only gendered experiences and also form a paradigm for this thesi sÂ’ purpose of race based policy. Gender budgeting offers a tool of analysis for how the decisions concerning government spending benefit or harm women and provi des a method to parallel that construction against the priorities of males. Here again a similarity between KatznelsonÂ’s methodology can be drawn in comparing black-white a dvantage and disadvantage to gender budgetingÂ’s dichotomy of female-male advanta ge and disadvantage. In examining the methods of gender budgeting literature, models of racial budgeting could possibly be

PAGE 94

84 created likewise to explain how government expendit ures affect racial groups. In connecting gender budgets and racial equity, hopefu lly this alternative can embody how perceptions of race otherwise influence the opportu nities of African American communities. By understanding how government alloca tions are distributed, the connection of the case studyÂ’s influence on black l abor can be further understood as to why systematic deprivations persist. Gender/Racial Budgeting Most gender budgeting analysis concentrates on thre e areas of budget expenditures: distribution, adequacy, and equity (E lson 2004). These three categories can be defined as the proportion of government funds al located by gender, the adequacy of policy measures to gender equality, and equity demo nstrated in how allocations influence the group membersÂ’ lives. These three categories pr esent three different questions that can be asked of the research. For this discussion h owever, there will be a concentration on the category of equity as it most aptly applies to the disparity of black-white racial dynamics. Contemplating the original research topic of racial equity, the overall question of whether government programs are addressing the disc rimination of African American communities can overlap with a gender budget initia tive (GBI) perspective. This focus targets more than just equality, but also addresses how the result or outcome positively or negatively affects individual lives, resources, or power relations (Botlhale 2011). The overall research question is additionally tied to t he idea of budgets in the assumption that current cleavages in equity standards (e.g. income, employment, education, and health) are the result of systematic discrimination. Undern eath this is an understanding that given

PAGE 95

85 how far racial perceptions on the surface have prog ressed, any residual disadvantages are further assumed to be structural and require govern ment authority to resolve them. From the gender budgeting literature one research q uery continually stood out – primarily concerning the impacts of fiscal spending on gender equality. Utilizing the first two observed examples of gender budgeting as the st arting point for many of the studies for the field, the Australian and South African gov ernments were the first to attempt this kind of analysis to assess how well they were atten ding to gender issues (Rubin and Bartle 2005). These initial budget statements “requ ired all departments and agencies to submit in-depth reports demonstrating the impact of their programs on women” (Rubin and Bartle 261, 2005). Other countries then replica ted the South African and Australian examples. Regardless of whether the Australian with in-government model or the South African out-of-government model was utilized, in mo st instances of utility, gender budget analysis satisfied its intended goal of addressing gender equality. Even in cases which there were declines in enforcement of gender equali ty standards the exercise of gender budgeting usually had some effect on gendered issue s. In France all ministries are required to identify expenditures targeted to women (Elson 2003). Gender budget initiatives have spread throughout the world to oth er countries and have become a part of the United Nations’ Beijing Platform for Action (Sh arp & Broomhill 2002). However, owing to these examples of continual efficacy, a ge neral supposition of GBI’s utility in the budget decision making process can attest to it s influence on gender equality. Most notably, gender budget analysis typically occu rred, as mentioned, either within or outside of the government. The programs w ere government sponsored, which embodies the within-government model. This is displ ayed in the Australian example of

PAGE 96

86 gender budgeting. Conversely, some gender budgeting activities were sponsored by those outside of government, namely NGOs and womenÂ’s advo cacy groups. This example models the South African experience. This is import ant, because for the Australian, within-government model, the model allowed a greate r degree of access for collection of data and more direct impact for policy proposals. H owever the South African model of outside-government benefitted from more social move ment buy in to facilitate long term mobilization. Though outside structures, as in the South African case, lacked some formal information it can be argued that the partic ipatory engagement might have helped sustain the GBI practice. Unlike the South African case, the Australian model declined when government cutbacks influenced the governmentÂ’ s priorities (Rubin & Bartle 2005). And so, the sources propose these difference s as potential areas for more investigation in the future. By testing a common hypothesis and by sharing commo n ideals of equality, most sources of gender budgeting form a cohesive image o f the field in respect to gender budget analysis. To extrapolate gender budgetingÂ’s utility the sources used examples of gender budget initiatives to further their analysis These cases also reflect however an important thread throughout the source materials, p olitical context. To advocate for gender budget analysis in Botswana, Botlhale employ ed examples of GBI in Uganda, South Africa, and Tanzania (2011). Another study no t only used the Australian case as its focus, but also used Canada as a case for the GBI a pproach. In using these examples the sources attempt to build a set of best practices. B y using GBI as their source, the cases appear to attempt to highlight the constraints to i mplementing gender analysis. The patterns of in-government and out-government models correlate to the studyÂ’s larger idea

PAGE 97

87 of racial budgeting and racial disparity; as in the American case it would similarly take social movement participation and government action to get over the political context of liberal, white hegemony. However, in some contexts the social agitation for mass movement support is already occurring. The Rallying Cry of Ferguson On Saturday, August 9th, 2014 Michael Brown was shot to death by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, a St. Louis suburb ( USA Today). In the days and weeks since this incident the streets of Ferguson have be en ablaze with protest, clashes with the police, and bitter political jockeying. Citizen con cerns have been met by hostile police action, riots have been met by deplorable arguments of law and order, and demands by the community have been ignored by the political es tablishment. However, as black communities have rallied to the cry of Michael Brow n, Eric Garner, Trayvon Martin, Renisha McBride, and John Crawford, there appears t o be a surging storm of mass mobilization around the concerns of black identity. On a national level, people seem to be responding t o the effects of race neutral liberalism. No longer are people accepting the narr atives of black criminality that obscure the historical legacy of discrimination and poverty in black communities. No longer are people accepting the claim of individualism that pr otects private property at the expense of black victimhood an ignorance that actually pe rpetuates violence in black communities. These are the foments of a social move ment to democratize American liberalism. “it’s that racism — stark, in-your-face, never-endi ng, frequently murderous — that has so many African Americans so angry and frustrated, so furious, so e nraged. Black people all across America, not just in Fergus on, are

PAGE 98

88 angry about the killing of Michael Brown. And they remain angry over the killing of Trayvon Martin. And many are seething over the fatal chokehold clamped on the th roat of Eric Garner by a cop on Staten Island in New Yor k… They are angry about all those things, but they are also angry and frustrated about so much more…” – Bob Her bert (2014) The continued patterns of structural racial dispari ty outlined in the previous chapter fuel this fire. The discrimination of the N ew Deal has perpetuated a status quo whereby even the hardest working black family canno t reach parity. As the 1930s Depression era analysis of Katznelson demonstrated, black poverty is not white poverty. Farm values then can be paralleled to the divergent business equity blacks and whites display now in assets. The bottom position of black s due to barriers in employment and as a result of sharecropping in the 1930s was perpe tuated by the New Deal, and by the 1970s reinforced. These are the instances that igni te flames of unrest when post racialism fails to answer African American claims of legitima cy, of merit. These are the sparks that detonate when the truth is that American society ha s never paid on its debts to minorities. Because black progress during the 1970s came at the detriment of white Americans, the liberal ethos of egalitarianism meant that any atte mpt at racial redress had to also attempt first to find a race neutral method. Strict scrutin y would make it even more strenuous of a process to prove the black experience. However, thi s view of racism keeps situations like Ferguson bubbling under the surface. The obscured legacy of discrimination, the frustrated justice, and the constricted rights of b lacks are becoming more and more unsustainable.

PAGE 99

89 Institutional Criticism Efforts to constructively alter our government from within are being articulated as well. Here the United Nations, through the CERD, ha s recently criticized the State Departments for its June 2013 periodic report (Cara sik). The U.N. committee made concrete recommendations that the government could take to better manage race, including legislative changes, policy initiatives, resource allocations and the development of a national action plan (Carasik). Even more, the UN kept their attention on government institutions. These collective narratives of merit, what is equal agency, and what is universal create the structures of how the governme nt frames policy and qualifies rights. The U.N. takes concern that the U.S. is in breach o f these basic human rights (Carasik). By making the suggested changes the government coul d reverse the feedback loop of societal inequality and policy disenfranchisement. Just as the GI Bill was interpreted with the “local flavor” in mind, policy can also transmi t an alternative way of dealing with race besides the race neutral ambiguity of liberali sm. Though the U.N. received the report from the State Department and functions outside of the U.S. government, the force of a trea ty expands the U.N. access to information and punitive capabilities. The within-g overnment correlation to GBI is developed by this dynamic. The process the CERD pla ces on governmental actions make U.S. agencies attempt an internal evaluation to pro duce the information. The withingovernment perspective is also supported by the fac t that the statements of the UN further legitimize government restructuring as a result of the role and power of the United Nations. Cumulatively, racial parity might gain tra ction as a result of the agitation of

PAGE 100

90 social movements like Ferguson, and due to the with in government recommendations of the UN. Conclusion – Post Racial America and the Current Re ality Without a completely different doctrine to direct r ace consciousness in America it can be expected that America’s race problem will co ntinue ad infinitum Race can easily be tied back to slavery and ignored. Many people at tempt to isolate race as an unprecedented mark in history that cannot be repeat ed. However, the point of focusing on the New Deal and the WIA is to show the legacy of r acial discrimination now. Limited liberal views have closed the door on civil rights continually: after the Reconstruction, the Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act. Liberal colorblindness ignores the systemic disadvantages of blackness, but also fails to see h ow the advantages constructed in this present moment supports whiteness. Narratives of America’s liberal principles of merit ocracy, egalitarianism, and individualism are a part of the same trend that has developed race neutral language. These stories connect in their complete refusal to understand and accurately represent the realities of people of color. The black freedom mov ement has always existed as a counterpoint to this view of mainstream American id eology. For the history detailed in this thesis black identity has always been a margin alized one. However, the information that could absolutely overturn the race neutral pat tern of ignorance on its head exists. The persistence of racial disparity is not due a lack o f effort by African Americans or cultural or genetic dispositions, but is a result of repeate d forms of discrimination that channel wealth accumulation and more. Increasingly, communi ties of color are attempting to shed this disempowerment, indicating that the time has c ome for Americans to decide to either

PAGE 101

91 support the self-determination of these communities or honestly proclaim their loyalty to existing depravity. For black identity, regardless, the lesson is not to fit in the frame, but employ a critical ethos to completely obliterate it

PAGE 102

92 BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, Michelle. 2010. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness New York City: The New Press. Arizona Department of Education. 2014. “State Repor t Cards.” Betsey, Charles L. 1992. “NEA PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: The Role of RaceConscious Policies in Addressing Past and Present D iscrimination.” The Review of Black Political Economy : 5-35. Blau, Francine D., & Graham, John W.,. 1990 “BlackWhite Differences in Wealth and Asset Composition.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 321-339. Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. 2006. Racism Without Racists. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publisher. Botlhale, E. (2011). Gender Responsive budgeting: T he case for Botswana. Development Southern Africa 61-74. Brown, Michael K., Carnoy, Martin, Currie, Elliott, Duster, Troy, Oppenheimer, David B., Shultz, Marjorie, and Wellman, David. 2003. Whitewashing Race: The Myth of a Color-Blind Society Oakland, CA: University of California Press. California Depart of Education. 2014. “Public High School Graduation Rates.” California Postsecondary Commission.” Sacramento, California. Carasik, Lauren. 2014. “United Nations watchdog blasts U.S. for persistent racism” Aljazeera America September 8. http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/9/united -nationsracismracialandethnicdiscriminationintheus.html (Ac cessed October 3, 2014). Carter, William M. 2011. “The Paradox of Political Power: Post-Racialism, Equal Protection, and Democracy.” Emory Law Review 61: 1123-1152. Darity Jr., William A. 1982. “The Human Capital App roach to Black-White Earnings Inequality: Some Unsettled Question.” The Journal of Human Resources 17(1): 72-93. Darity, William and Darrick Hamilton. 2012. “Bold P olicies for Economic Justice.” Review of Black Political Economy (2012) 39:79–85. Delgado, Richard & Stefanic, Jean. 2013. Critical Race Theory: The Cutting Edge Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Department of Labor Employment and Training Adminis tration. 2006. “Program Year (PY) 2006 WIA Final Allotments for Adult and Youth Activities and Additional

PAGE 103

93 Funds From WIA Section 173(e) for Adult/Dislocated Worker Activities for Eligible States.” Federal Register. https://federalregister.gov/a/06-6849 (Accessed August 28, 2014). Elson, D. (2003). Gender Equality and Europe's Futu re. European Commission, DG Education and Culture and Jean Monnet Project (pp. 1-19). Brussels. Elson, D. (2004). Engendering Government Budgets in the Context of Globalization. International Feminist Journal of Politics 623-642. Evinger, Susan. “How to Record Race.” American Demographics 18 (May): 36-42. Felice, W. F. (2002). The UN Committee on the Elimi nation of All Forms of Racial Discrimination: Race, and Economic and Social Human Rights. Human Rights Quarterly 205-236. Florida Department of Education. Education and Acco untability Services. “Florida Public Graduation Rates 2001-2008.” Furstenberg, George M. von. 2001. “The Interrelatio n between Labor and Capital Components of Racial Income Differences.” Journal of Political Economy 152162. Gerring, John & Seawright, Jason. 2008. “Case Selec tion Techniques in Case Study Research.” Political Research Quarterly 64 (June): 294-308. Gerring, John. 2012. Social Science Methodology: A Unified Framework 2nd Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gittleman, Maury & Wolff, Edward N.,. 2004. “Racial Differences in Patterns of Wealth Accumulation.” The Journal of Human Resources 39: 193-227. Grigsby III, J. Eugene. 1994. “In Planning There is No Such Thing as a ‘Race Neutral’ Policy.” Journal of the American Planning Association 60(Spring): 240-242. Harris, Cheryl. 1993. “Whiteness as Property.” Harvard Law Review 6(106): 1707-1791. Hansman, Catherine, John Hopkins, and Catherine Mon aghan. "Conflict and Collaboration: Providers and Planners Implementing the Workforce Investment Act (WIA)." Adult Education Quarterly 59 (May): 208-226. Herbert, Bob. 2014. “The Fire This Time.” Jacobin Magazine August 20. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/08/the-fire-this-ti me/ (Accessed October 3, 2014). Holmes, David G. 2007. “Affirmative Reaction: Kenne dy, Nixon, King, and the Evolution of Color-Blind Rhetoric.” Rhetoric Review 26(1): 25-41.

PAGE 104

94 Hopkins, Daniel J. 2011. “The Limited Local Impacts of Ethnic and Racial Diversity.” American Politics Research 39: 344-379. Horsman, Reginald. 1986. Race and Manifest Destiny: Origins of American Raci al Anglo-Saxonism Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Illinois Department of Economic Security. 2013. “An nual Illinois Employment Participation Rates by Gender and Racial Group.” Sp ringfield, IL: Illinois Department of Economic Security. Illinois State Board of Education 2002-2008. Illinois State Report Card Springfield, IL: Illinois State Board of Education. Job, Barbara Cottman. 1979. “The Black Labor Force During 1975-78.” Monthly Labor Review 3-7. Katznelson, Ira. 2005. When Affirmative Action was White New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Katznelson, Ira. 2006. “When is Affirmative Action Fair? On Grievous Harms and Public Remedies.” Social Research 2(73): 541-568 Katznelson, Ira. 2013. “Where Democracy Meets Fear. ” Chronicle of Higher Education pB14-pB16. Kingkade, Tyler. 2014. “Students Split On Affirmati ve Action For College Admissions Ahead Of Fisher V. University Of Texas At Austin Su preme Court Case: Report.” Huffington Post October 5. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05/affirmativ e-action-fisher-universityof-texas-at-austin_n_1942720.html (October 5, 2014) Kochhar, Rakesh, Fry, Richard, Taylor, Paul, Velasc o, Gabriel, & Motel, Seth. “Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks, H ispanics.” Pew Research Center July 26. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/201 1/07/SDT-WealthReport_7-26-11_FINAL.pdf (November 20, 2014). Krugman, Paul. 2009. The Conscience of a Liberal New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Kuznicki, Jason. 2009. “Never a Neutral State: Amer ican Race Relations and Government Power.” Cato Journal 29(Fall): 417-453. McKenna, George. 1984. “A Guide to the Constitution That Delicate Balance.” 384-386.

PAGE 105

95 New Jersey Department of Labor & Workforce Developm ent. 2013. “Civilian Labor Force Composition: New Jersey and United States, 20 01 – 2013.” Newark, New Jersey. Ochs, Holona L. 2006. “‘Colorblind’ Policy in Blac k and White: Racial Consequences of Disenfranchisement Policy.” The Policy Studies Journal 34(1): 81-93. Office of Policy Planning and Research. 1965. The Negro Family: The Case for National Action United States Department of Labor. Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. 201 4. “Graduation and Dropout Statistics Reports.” Olympia, WA Oliver, Melvin L., & Shapiro, Thomas M.,. 1995. Black Wealth, White Wealth: A New Perspective on Racial Inequality London, UK: Routledge. Orbe, Mark P. and Ewa L Urban. 2011. “‘Race Matters ’ in the Obama Era.” Communication Studies 62(September – October): 349-352. Painter, Nell Irvin. 2011. The History of White People New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Plessy v. Ferguson 1896. 163 U.S. 537. Rattansi, Ali. 2007. Racism: A Very Short Introduction Oxford: Oxford University Press. Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. Bakke 438 U.S. 265. Resnikoff, Ned. 2014. “Race is the Elephant in the Room When it Comes to Inequality.” March 13. http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/washingtons-si lence-the-racial-wealthgap (September 29, 2014). Rubin, Marilyn Marks and Bartle, John R. “Integrati ng Gender into Government Budgets: A New Perspective.” Public Administration Review 65(May/June): 259272. Sharp, Rhonda and Broomhill, Ray. 2002. “Budgeting for Equality: The Australian Experience.” Feminist Economics 8: 25-47. Social Policy Research Associates. 2003-2009. PY 2002-2008 WIASRD Data Book Oakland, CA: U.S. Department of Labor. Texas Education Agency. 2014. “Four-Year Rates” Aus tin, Texas Trevino, A. Javier, Harris, Michelle A., and Wallac e, Derron. 2008. “What’s so critical about critical race theory?” Contemporary Justice Review 11(March): 7-10.

PAGE 106

96 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2014. “Employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population in states by sex, race, Hispanic or Lati no ethnicity, marital status, and detailed age.” Local Area Unemployment Statistics I nformation and Analysis. Washington, DC. U.S. Department of State. 2007. Periodic Report of the United States to the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discriminati on Washington, DC: Department of State. USA Today. 2014. “Timeline: Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Mo.” USA Today August 25. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/natio n/2014/08/14/michaelbrown-ferguson-missouri-timeline/14051827/ (Accesse d October 3, 2015). Winkler, Erin. 2003. “The Attack on Affirmative Act ion: The ‘Race Neutral’ Excuse.” The Black Scholar 33(3-4) 37-40. Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (or WIA), Pub.L. 1 05–220, 112 Stat. 936, 29 U.S.C. § 2801 Wise, Tim. 2010. Colorblind: The Rise of Post-Racial Politics and th e Retreat from Racial Equity San Francisco: City Lights Books.

PAGE 107

97 APPENDIX Flow of Chart of Variable Interactions nrn nn n n n nr nr nrn nrr n nr rnn n n