Education and Affirmative Action

---

On Wednesday, February 25, 2004, at 1:30 p.m. at the St. Joseph Co.-City Building, 1st Floor, northeast corner, 227 W. Jefferson St., South Bend, Indiana, Tony Zirkle, Republican Candidate for Congress will hold a press conference in order to address a few issues that have been cited as important to African-American voters. February is black history month, and African-American voters deserve to hear each congressional candidate in the 2nd District state clearly his positions on the issues important to this community.

I. Education.

A. Historical Background.

The U.S. Supreme Court in San Antonio Ind. School Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973), in a 5-4 vote, declared that there was no fundamental right to equality in public-school education. Rodriguez claimed that “Texas’ system of financing public education violated equal protection, because it relied principally on local property taxes. Although there were other state and federal funds which remained available to each school district, districts with a high property tax base per pupil consistently spent more on education than those with a low base were able to do.” Emmanuel Constitutional Law Outline, 1996-7, p. 367.

Currently in Indiana, approximately 50% of the amount of money available to each public school student is derived from property taxes. About 1/3 of property tax receipts is directed towards funding the public school system. Therefore, the amount of money spent per pupil at one school could be substantially more than that spent per pupil at another.

I believe this Rodriguez case should be reexamined. Some are arguing that the recent decision last summer on Texas’ homosexual sodomy law has found a federal fundamental constitutional right to engage in those acts (the 10th Circuit has recently rejected that interpretation). In my opinion, the right to a quality education equal to that of someone on the other side of the tracks should be far more rooted in our constitutional 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause interpretation than the voluntary behavior that was almost universally deemed criminal when the constitution was written and amended.

In our current system of government and demographics, African-Americans (and increasingly Hispanics), who tend to live in the inner cities in greater proportionate percentages, often get the short end of the stick when it comes to education funding. The property tax base is often lower in the cities and this disparity is compounded by the corporate welfare that is regularly directed at recruiting new businesses by giving them property tax abatements.

B. Tony’s proposals.

i. Equal Bucks for Equal Chucks. Equal Bills for Equal Jills.

I will propose funding for a federal study to determine what the disparities are in educational funding. I will then seek to start a public debate so that we can intelligently vote as a society on what disparities we are comfortable with when it comes to public education funding and equality under the 14th Amendment. Perhaps after this study, we will conclude that the 50% property tax revenue to funding ratio is too high and that it needs to drop to 25%, for example.

ii. Free Exercise Clause of the 1st Amendment.

Two of the issue that have been flaming the controversies over public education are the evolution/creation debate and indoctrinating kindergarteners that homosexual domestic partners constitute merely one more acceptable, alternative lifestyle. Our public schools should not be exploiting our elementary school children to become pawns in these highly emotional, divisive debates.

Under the 1st and 14th Amendments, Congress has authority under the due process clause to ensure that states are not depriving citizens of their religious free exercise. Therefore, in any district where public schools take either position on these two issues and force their opinions on public school children, I will propose legislation that will entitle parent(s) to a refund of the approximately 1/3 of their property taxes (or percentage of rent that derives from property taxes) that go the public schools so that the parent(s) can either home school or send their children to a private school. I will support no other voucher or educational tax credit proposals at this time.

However, I do wish to start a public debate on this issue. We currently spend around $6,000 for every public school student in our system. The NEA and the Teacher unions’ position of opposing all voucher/tax credit proposals under the theory that they would destroy the public school system does not seem to hold all of its water in my opinion. For example, if a family pays $3,000 in property taxes and we give them a credit of 1/3 or $1,000 to use for the private education of their choice, it appears to me that the public school system will receive a net gain of $5,000 that could be spread to other students to decrease class size and increase the dollars per pupil that are available. This result will make the public schools more attractive and competitive, which will in turn lead more parents to desire to place their children back into the public schools.

iii. Jurisdiction to pass No Child Left Behind and to fund the Department of Education.

The federal government was meant to be a government of limited powers. Congress can only act when is does so under a specific provision of the constitution. We should ask ourselves where Congress gets it authority to pass legislation such as No Child Left Behind and to fund the Department of Education.

In 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Gun-Free Schools Act in U.S. v. Lopez, 115 S.Ct. 1624, that made it a crime to possess a gun in a school zone. The court held that Congress exceeded is power under the Commerce Clause in that it did not make appropriate findings that guns near schools substantially affected interstate commerce in this educational arena. Additionally, the constitution does not grant what is called “police powers” to the federal government. Police powers have been defined as those involving health, education, welfare and morality, which are the exclusive jurisdiction of the states when no other constitutional provision such as interstate commerce, equal protection or due process is involved.

Therefore, I am proposing a public debate on what the proper role should be for the federal government when it comes to education. Perhaps we will decide that we wish to vote for local control of education and that we wish to direct the federal government to deal with other matters that are more specifically delineated in the constitution.

II. Affirmative Action.

A. A 25 year goal to ending affirmative action.

I oppose affirmative action when it is based on the suspect class of race on its face. These programs do little to engender harmony between the races and punish children for the sins of their parents. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has suggested a goal of ending affirmative action it within 25 years. I can live with that goal. Anyone who promotes an affirmative action program to become a permanent structure in our society simultaneously concedes that this program is a failure in engendering equality.

B. Racially neutral, but socially disproportionately beneficial programs are preferable.

I would, however, prefer and actively support affirmative action social programs when they are racially neutral on their face and when they disproportionately benefit minorities.

i. Treating drug addiction and focusing on the root causes of crime is one appropriate program

One such program is my drug policy which was previously released in a press conference. About 50% of our prisons are stocked with African-Americans, yet they constitute only about 12-14% of the population. By providing alternatives to incarceration for drug addicts, who cause about 50% of all crime, the African-American community will disproportionately benefit. By treating the root causes of crime we can finally take a real bite out of it and not just a nibble. When crime in the minority community dramatically drops, one major incentive for white flight will simultaneously vanish. That is an affirmative action program that would potentially be far, far more beneficial to African Americans, Hispanics and other minorities than those now that merely give a few individuals a preference in a job or in college acceptance.

ii. The above educational proposal is another proper approach.

Additionally, my educational proposal noted above could be another racially neutral affirmative action program. By equalizing and increasing the level of educational funding to poorer school districts under the equal protection clause, whites will have less incentive to move to racially segregated school districts that have higher property tax bases and dollars per pupil.

C. Affirmative Action programs are sometimes based on faulty premises.

When we have defended affirmative action programs in the past, we have often cited language such as discrete and insular minorities that have a history of discrimination. This approach is simplistic and can only be defended if we assume a world view that began in the 17th Century in this nation while ignoring the rest of history and geography. The fact is this–nearly every group of races has been oppressed at one time or another. This is simply the history of man’s inhumanity to man. For example, affirmative action for current minorities raises the following difficult questions:

1. Should a black African-American who is a descendent of slaves get the same treatment as a black, 1st generation, African-American who was a wealthy a prince in Nigeria?

2. Should a first generation black South Africa African-American get preference while a white African-American from South Africa or Kenya is denied it?

3. Should we give preference to white Zimbabwe African-Americans who have recently had their farms seized by the government?

4. What do we do with the white “Arab” African Americans who lived north of the Sahara before they immigrated here?

5. Do we limit the history of discrimination to just the last few centuries? White people have been slaves too. I recall learning in a history class about one pope who was walking in the streets of Rome. He saw a blond haired, blue-eyed slave being auctioned in the streets of Rome. The pope, not used to seeing blond individuals, asked him who he was. He said he was an Angle. The pope then said no, you mean Angel. He promptly purchased the individual because he could not bear the thought of an angel being sold as a slave.

6. What do we do with the Jews? They probably have the record when it comes to historical discrimination. Should they be considered white or should they be given preference in college admissions? If Georgetown is representative, then Jews constitute 1/3 of all law students. If diversity is the goal, then giving them preference may not add to that result.

7. What about Asians? I have heard that there are enough qualified Asians in California to fill every slot in the public universities. Should they get a preference that would lead to over representation by population?

8. Should we fail to distinguish between Michael Jordan’s children, for example, who will get the benefit of the best education money can buy from an African-American who was raised in the ghetto to a single mom and whose life was constantly disrupted by the scourge of the drug trade and who constantly had to live in fear in a neighborhood filled with prostitution and murder?

9. According to one sociology text book, by 1991, more then 80% of African-Americans had “white” blood in them. So, how do we define a minority?

10. What percentage of African or Native American does one have to be to qualify for special favors? One of the U.S. Supreme Court cases, I believe it was Plessy v. Ferguson, had as its plaintiff a blond haired, blue eyed, 1/8 or 1/16 African-American female citizen.

11. Should we give preference to the Catholic Irish or Italians who were severely discriminated against just a century ago in our country? What about the French Protestants? Less than 400 years ago, the French King decided that he needed an indulgence, so he executed about 50% of all persons living in Southern France who were predominately protestant.

12. Are white English the same race as the Irish or the Scots or the Germans or the Russians? It was just last century that our nations used the racially charged term “Huns” to rally people to fight against them. What about the white Gypsies of Europe? Should they be lumped in the same basket with the descendants of the Hapsburgs?

13. What do we do about the white female sex slavery that became so wide spread just a century ago that Congress passed the Mann “White Slave Trade” Act? What do we do with the current mass sex slavery that is largely being ignored by local prosecutors and police departments if you accept the recent New York Times investigative reporter Peter Landesman’s(sp?) conclusions?

14. If you’re an evolutionists, you probably believe that we’re all Africans in our origin. If you accept the inspiration of the Bible, you might take the position that we’re all Asian Turks (or Kurds or Armenians) if you believe that Noah landed on the Mt. Ararat in Eastern Turkey.

In my opinion, affirmative action programs that are based solely on facially racial grounds can neither be fairly distributed nor logically supported, and even if they could be, my proposals to focus our efforts and attention on the social issues of crime and education have far greater potential to uplift the valleys of oppression.

Finally, it should be noted that I am not wedded to any particular idea noted here. I am simply one individual operating on limited information and 33 years of experience. I could be persuaded to alter my views. However, as Martin Luther once said, unless I am persuaded with clear reasoning, here I stand.

Your presence is welcome.

It’s the Kids, Smartie Campaign Committee