“Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.”—Thomas Paine
Race peddlers are at the scheme of reparations again. This time, they are playing the game in higher education, hoping to get progressive government agencies to legislate racial preferences in college admissions. Will they succeed?
California Assemblyman Isaac Bryan of Los Angeles promotes educational benefits for descendants of slaves, whom the state lawmaker says should receive admission priority from California’s public and private universities. Asm. Bryan, incoming vice chair of the California Legislative Black Caucus, believes enacting legislation for such preferences is a “moral responsibility,” necessary for addressing racial inequality and systemic injustices. On December 2, Bryan introduced Assembly Bill No. 7 (AB7) in the California State Legislature, which proposes adding the following paragraph to the state’s education code:
[T]he California State University, the University of California, independent institutions of higher education, and private postsecondary educational institutions may consider providing a preference in admissions to an applicant who is a descendant of slavery, as defined, to the extent it does not conflict with federal law.
A junior state legislator who was not well known by the public until now, Bryan received national press for pushing forward reparations amidst disappointments befallen on the movement. He told the Associated Press that California must “rectify … and heal that harm” from “perpetuating the inequalities that arose from slavery.” In this sense, the effort to provide admissions preferences for descendants of slaves goes beyond cash reparations. It is “a much bigger process” about repairing the inequality. Just to rub it in, Bryan also said his measure is partly a response to Trump’s war on “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) programs.
AB 7 is sponsored by many “A-list” California Democrats, including Assemblywoman Mia Bonta, wife of the State Attorney General Rob Bonta, and State Senator Akilah Weber, daughter of the California Secretary of State Shirley Weber. The entire bill consists of three short paragraphs, two of which merely restate existing state laws. In a move that can be interpreted almost as an insult, the proposal notes that the California Constitution prohibits racial preferences in public education, as spelled out in Proposition 209, approved by over 55 percent of the electorate first in 1996 and defended by 57 percent of California voters in 2020.
To be fair, the measure does not mention race explicitly, other than acknowledging the state bans racial preferences. It is, however, abundantly clear that descendance from slavery is employed as a race proxy in the bill and throughout the entire movement to institutionalize reparations. In an interview with California Black Media on the day he introduced AB 7, Bryan pledged to advocate for Black Californians in his new leadership role at the Black Legislative Caucus. He vows to fight for their “fair access to resources and opportunities in every aspect of life, whether it’s education, jobs, or health.”
The incessant moralizing of reparations leaders becomes even more pronounced in the face of mounting political setbacks and legal hurdles. Framing the issue as a “moral responsibility” is nearly a defense mechanism after California’s progressive governor rejected cash reparations and vetoed a reparations bill on “racially motivated eminent domain.” Prior to the leadership change, the California Legislative Black Caucus also blocked voting on two key reparations bills, which would have established a freedman affairs agency to confirm claims and created a state fund for reparations. ACA 7, another priority reparations measure to introduce “research-based/-informed” exemptions to Prop. 209, died in the State Senate in late summer as Democratic Senators weighed their ideological affiliation for race-preferential policies against the harsh realities of electoral politics.
Throughout the nation, campaigns for reparations have stalled, with Evanston’s restitution policies being challenged in court and Harvard dragging its feet on delivering reparations promises.
Instead of doing the long, hard work to reduce persistent achievement gaps at the K-12 level and to reverse a cultural apathy to academic excellence, race-obsessed lawmakers like Assemblyman Bryan are again looking for racial fixes. Empirical evidence is yet to be unearthed to show any educational efficacy of racial preferences. Progressive politicians abort the mission the moment when reparations become cost-prohibitive. The Supreme Court has banned race-based college admissions. A growing majority of the American public doesn’t support slavery reparations. But these failures don’t deter racially motivated legislators who are, in essence, fulfilling the definition of “insanity,” doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Image of California State Capitol, Sacramento, California by Ken Lund on Flickr
