Here’s the beginning of an article, authored
by Lyle Denniston on April 22, 2014, in which Mr. Denniston expressed his opinions
about the Supreme Court’s very recent decision on an Affirmative Action case:
“Casting aside
a three-decade-old constitutional theory that allowed racial minorities to
protect public policies that favor equality, the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that a state’s voters have the power
to stop officials from using race to shape government programs. The lead
opinion expressed the confident belief that the Court was only encouraging a
useful civic conversation about race, hopefully free of rancor.”
“By a vote of six to two (with
Justice Elena Kagan not taking part), the Court cleared the way for voters
elsewhere in the nation to opt to put an end to so- called “affirmative action”
policies — as seven
states now do. While the ruling focused on the use of race in selecting new
students for public colleges, it
presumably also would permit voters to end race-conscious policies in
hiring of state and local employees and in
awarding public contracts.”
You can read the
full article at this link:
Blog Publisher’s
Comments:
I previously
expressed my views about Affirmative Action programs in a post I put up on the
blog about 2 ½ years ago:
When a
reprographics services BID or RFP – in the government sector - is designated as
a “set-aside” for MBE, DBE, or WBE certified businesses, effectively excluding
non-certified (and non-certifiable) businesses from participating in the BID or
RFP, that, generally speaking, reduces competition and, again generally
speaking, means that taxpayers are going to wind up paying more than might
otherwise have been the case.
If the BID/RFP
isn’t a “set-aside” and, instead, provides a “bid preference”, meaning that a
certified vendor can bid higher than a non-certified vendor and still be
awarded the BID (or RFP), that also means that taxpayers are going to foot a
higher bill than would otherwise have been the case.
And, when a
government agency hires a design/build or A/E/C team to design/construct a
large project, let’s say it’s a new airport terminal or a courthouse, and
requires the A/E/C team to spend at least a certain specific percentage of the
total-project-spend with MBE, DBE, or WBE vendors (this, refers to “quotas” or “goals”),
which, in the A/E/C space, often prohibits non-certified businesses from
participating, at all, in these types of projects, that, too, drives up the cost
to taxpayers.
So, my conclusion
is that, if taxpayers don’t want to pay more than would otherwise be the case they
have to vote into office representatives who will sponsor and/or vote for bills
that ban Affirmative Action programs in their states. I don’t see this happening in my lifetimes,
even though, gee-whiz, everyone seems to complain and whine about the cost of
government.