New Haven Independent

(Click here for a related story: Joe’s Greatest Hits Vol. I: The Torture Speech.)

* * * *
At a meeting with members of The National Press Club in 1995, Sen. Joe Lieberman called affirmative action “un-American.” Here is a snippet of the conversation, as transcribed by the Advocate/Weekly newspapers.

A reporter asks if Lieberman would support California’s Proposition 209, an anti-discrimination law drafted to derail affirmative action programs.

“Peter Brown (Scripps-Howard): If you were a California resident, would you vote for CCRI [California Civil Rights Initiative, Proposition 209] and will the DLC [Democratic Leadership Council] have a position on it?

“Senator Lieberman: Ah, I don’t know and I’ll yield to Al on that question of the DLC in a minute. I don’t know that we’ll have a specific position. We have a very active chapter out in California, and I think that they will probably want to take a position on it… I’ll give you a first reaction. I must say I haven’t talked to a lot of people about it, but looking at the wording of the Civil Rights Initiative, and this is a personal reaction, looking at the wording of the Civil Rights Initiative in California, I don’t see…I can’t see how I could be opposed to it…because it basically is a statement of American values, and it takes the values and the language underlying the Civil Rights Act that Congress has passed, and says not only should we not discriminate based on group…against somebody, we shouldn’t discriminate in favor of somebody based on the group they represent.

“You know I was thinking the other day, that this business of deciding by group, in a sense is the flip side of the argument that has flared up here in the last year about…genetics, if you will. And the argument that some make that some groups are genetically less able than others.

“That’s an un-American argument. And it’s an un-American argument because it’s based on averages, not individuals. And that’s the same when we come to group preferences and quotas. America’s about individuals, not about averages or groups.

“So, I personally… my sense is… and I’m going a little further probably than I have authority to go, because we’ll hear from the DLC chapter, but from the people I’ve talked to in California… There were a couple there last night, they’re sympathetic to the underlying values in the Civil Rights Initiative. I think we all want to say that we’re against quotas…and ah…and against group preferences, but that there ought to be some room for the kind of outreach that has been part of affirmative action programs without getting into quotas. And how we bring those two together remains the work, the sort of subtlety, of developing good policy here.”

* * * *

On Julyl 19, 1995, Lieberman urged his colleagues to think of affirmative action as a “temporary” program, in this speech on the Senate floor:

Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I want to speak for just a few moments in reaction to the speech made this morning by President Clinton on the subject of affirmative action. The principle that every individual should have an equal opportunity to rise as high as his or her ability will take them, regardless of race, gender, religion, nationality, or
other group characteristic, is a defining ideal of our society. We must be very wary of any deviation from that principle, no matter how well intended. That is why it is clearly time to review all Government affirmative action programs in which an individual’s membership in a group, whether defined by race, gender, national origin, or other
similar characteristics, may determine whether he or she will be awarded a Government benefit.

Mr. President, while America has clearly not yet realized the national [*S10316] ideal of equal opportunity for all, it is important to note that we have made considerable progress over the three decades since President Johnson issued the first Executive order calling for affirmative action to end job discrimination. I think we should be
proud of that progress-long overdue as it may have been. Every President since President Johnson, and every Supreme Court since then, has acknowledged that affirmative action programs were intended to be temporary. In the debate that is ongoing now, and on which the President made a major statement today, I believe we should pause to acknowledge not only our continuing commitment to equal opportunity and the work we still have to do to realize it for all Americans, but also to acknowledge our success in overcoming what was not only a
legally sanctioned system of discrimination in our country but also ingrained biases about race and gender which were extremely widespread in our country. We have come a long way from those days. Today, poll after poll shows a very high and broad national consensus about ensuring equal opportunity for all, which, of course, was what the civil rights movement was all about.

Unfortunately, Mr. President, some poorly conceived and implemented affirmative action programs have done more to disturb and confuse that broadly accepted national consensus about equal opportunity than they have done to help their intended beneficiaries. Affirmative action is dividing us in ways its creators could never have intended because most Americans who do support equal opportunity, and are not biased, do not think it is fair to discriminate against some Americans as a way to make up for historic discrimination against other Americans. For, after all, if you discriminate in favor of one group on the basis of race, you thereby discriminate against another group on the basis of race. In discussing this subject the other day, a young man offered me this simple wisdom that we all learned from our mothers and fathers: ”Two wrongs,” he said, ”don’t make a right.”

President Clinton deserves our praise for his willingness to wade into this fray and examine whether affirmative action programs are advancing our goal of equal opportunity in a manner that is consistent with our ideals and our Constitution. In particular, I am encouraged by the President’s expressed commitment to implement the Supreme
Court’s recent Adarand decision on affirmative action. The Department of Justice has informed all Federal agencies that every program employing race-based or similar criteria must be rigorously examined to ensure that it is narrowly tailored to meet a compelling governmental interest that cannot otherwise be achieved. If a program
does not meet that test, it must be significantly changed, or it must be eliminated.

In my own view, Mr. President, most Government programs in which race, gender, or similar status are dominant factors, will not survive the Supreme Court’s new Adarand test. If that is in fact the case, we must work together to find new and, I would hope, more broadly acceptable ways to achieve the goal of promoting equal opportunity for all-particularly our poorest neighbors. I accept the premise, as I believe most Americans do, that there is still much work to be done. We must be prepared to devote more resources to enforcing our civil rights laws vigorously. We need to direct our attention, energy, and money to helping poor people, regardless of race or ethnic background, by making greater investments in education and job training, economic opportunity, and empowerment. Doing so would not only be more effective in achieving our national ideal of equal opportunity for all, but I think would restore a sense of traditional American fair play to this field that, sadly, for too many has been lost.

Some critics of affirmative action are simultaneously urging the dismantling of programs that are keys to helping poor people gain the education and skills that will make equal opportunity real for them. I will join the President, as I have before, in fighting both to preserve and reform, where necessary, those programs, and in ways to address the profound problems faced by those who are victims not only of discrimination, but of poverty.

I invite all our colleagues within this Chamber, in the House, and all people of good will throughout the country, who are committed to making our society as fair as possible-whatever their party affiliation or views on affirmative action-to join this important effort in the months and years ahead.

Sign Up for Email AlertsEmail This Story Email the Author

Your Email:

Recipient's Email:
Your Email:
Message (optional):

Your Name:
Your Email:
Message: