Racism Supreme Court

Nobody Could Have Predicted

Less than a day after the Supreme Court ruled that states have a right to ban affirmative action, Republicans in Wisconsin announced plans to do just that.

“People do not realize — the average person does not realize — how extensive race and gender preferences are in our society,” Grothman said.

As an example of this, Grothman pointed to the targets for state and federal contracts to go to businesses owned by women and minorities or to businesses with certain hiring or subcontracting practices for those groups. Those kinds of requirements and targets are “divisive,” said Grothman, who is running to replace outgoing U.S. Rep. Tom Petri of Fond du Lac in the 6th Congressional District.

Got that? Ensuring that minority groups are able to obtain a slice of the pie is “divisive.”

White male contractors are the real oppressed.

  • Mart

    What will this do to all the Wisconsin state contracts given to white men owned company’s that are legally fronted by woman of color? All that money spent for legal work to get around state minority contracting requirements down the drain. It ain’t fair I tell you.

  • Zen Diesel

    I am not surprised that Wisc. is jumping on the bandwagon about this. There is a part of me that really hate the decision by the Supreme Court, but there is also a part of me that says let the freedumb states with the Republican Governors go through with trying to remove affirmative action from state procurement because their is a chance they will end biting their own ass. The reason why I say this is because the dirty little secret that you rarely hear about affirmative action, is that white women and disabled white men benefit from affirmative action too.
    One of my first jobs out of college several years ago, was to crunch numbers for the Minority Business Enterprise program for the state of MD. Whenever a state agency made a purchase for goods and services, they had to get three bids, and one of those bids had to be from one of the MBE businesses. I was tasked with tallying the number of members who owned companies who participated in the MBE program who had state procurements and divide them according to race. When I finished crunching the numbers, my mind was blown. The breakdown according to race went something like this white 92% ( 75% for white women 17% white disabled veterans) , 7% split with (Blacks, Asians, American Indians, Hispanics, Latinos). Up until that point, I had no idea that white women and disabled white men fell were covered under some affirmative action programs.
    My report ended up making it’s way to the state legislature. The following year they made changes to the MBE program by mandating that at least 15% of state procurements from the MBE program had to go to non-white participants. That experience has always stuck in my mind, and pisses me off when pundits try to make it seem as if the only people benefiting from affirmative action are black.

  • Scopedog

    Another blunt reminder that elections really do matter.

    Anyone who is shocked by this….well, all I can say is that you should have seen this down the road back in 2000 when a guy named Ralph kept saying that both parties and both candidates were the same.

    • missliberties

      I am still angry about that. Also the fact that liberals starting hating on Obama, because Obamacare wasn’t perfect.

      I just don’t know how to get people to pay attention. If they did how could anyone in their right mind vote for the new right wing Republicans.

    • nathkatun7

      I agree with you: “elections really do matter.” I am convinced that President Albert Gore would never have appointed John Roberts and Sam Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court.

  • Badgerite

    When these kinds of things start to take place legislatively immediately after a SCOTUS ruling, one can’t help but see an agenda at work that the Court seems hell bent on furthering.
    Never let anyone convince you that there is no difference in candidates or parties and that your vote doesn’t matter. It always matters.

    • gescove

      ALEC has been active on the issue for a decade. They reaffirmed their BizarroWorld-named “Civil Rights Act” model policy last year which aims to dismantle affirmative action: “…prohibits any state entity from discriminating or giving preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin. As a result, all set-aside contracts and affirmative action programs targeted at such individuals or groups would be void.

      • D_C_Wilson

        It’s really chilling how many bills ALEC has ready for its minions across the country to submit to their respective state legislatures as soon as they get the green light. It’s like the will of the people has become completely irrelevant to how state governments operate.

    • bbiemeret

      I agree. Not to get all tin-foily, but it does seem somewhat like their bias is showing through those robes.

      Conservatives have become that vindictive homeowner who, before being forced to move out of it’s repossessed home, breaks the windows, steals the plumbing, and takes a steaming dump on the living room carpet.

      It sucks that, no matter how often it goes down the same way throughout history, the side of fear and greed and selfishness never learns and eventually paints itself into a corner. It is short-sighted, and sees itself as beyond reproach. But nature is as nature does, and there are always consequences. It might not always deliver that satisfying crunch of broken bones in the public square for all to enjoy, but they pay up eventually.

    • nathkatun7

      What Texas, North Carolina and other States did following the U.S. Supreme Court’s invalidation of Sec. 5 of the Voting Rights Act, and what Wisconsin is doing following the U.S. Supreme Court’s invalidation of Affirmative Action, are reminiscent of exactly what happened in the South following the 1883 Supreme Court’s “Civil Rights Cases” invalidating the 1975 Civil Right Act that had banned discrimination in transportation and public accommodation; and the 1896 Supreme Court’s decision in “Plessy v. Ferguson” that legalized racial segregation and introduced the phrase ;”Separate but Equal” in public discourse.

      George Santayana way absolutely spot-on: “Those who forget history are bound to repeat it.” Jim crow laws were enacted to halt the progress Blacks had made during Reconstruction, and especially the unprecedented elections of Blacks to public office after Black males were enfranchised. The Jim crow period represented white backlash, especially by the segment of the white population intent on maintaining white supremacy, by undoing the gains Blacks had made during the Reconstruction period. The election of the first President of the United States, in over 220 years of the U.S. presidency, seems to be generating the same white backlash from right wing Republicans.

      • Badgerite

        I think you mean 1895 Civil Rights Act. And I think you are right. After Brown V Board of Education and the Warren Court, the right started on a campaign to undermine the effectiveness of the Federal Court system as a guardian of civil liberties, while the left was taking the more liberal rulings of the federal courts as a given with the blithe phrase “settled law”.
        Law, like politics, is an ongoing process. And it is never ‘settled’.

        • nathkatun7

          Sorry for the error! I actually meant the “1875 Civil Rights Act”– the last hurrah of the “Radical” Congress that had enacted the 1866 Civil Rights Act, the 1867 Reconstruction Acts and the14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution. That 1875 law banned racial discrimination in motels, hotels, restaurants, public transportation on land and water, public parks, and jury selection. This was the law that was overturned by the Supreme Court decision in the “1883 Civil Rights Cases.” i am not familiar with the “1895 Civil Rights Act.”

          • Badgerite

            That was my typo. I meant 1875.
            Yeah. Most people are unaware of this early brief flowering of civil rights that occurred as a product of Reconstruction. And how it was thwarted. And the part the Supreme Court played in thwarting it.
            It is not taught in school. As many things about our country’s true history are not taught in school. It is not even mentioned as it casts the country, and certainly the Supreme Court, in a less than heroic light.
            I learned about it through the Lawrence Goldstone book,
            Inherently Unequal: The Betrayal of Equal Rights by the Supreme Court 1865-1903.
            Should be required reading in history classes under the heading of
            ‘This Is How Your Country Really Works’.

          • nathkatun7

            “Should be required reading in history classes under the heading of ‘This Is How Your Country Really Works’.”

            Indeed! I think that’s what President Obama was alluding to when he said history can go forward, backward, or sideways. The vast majority of Americans are totally ignorant of the Reconstruction period, when African Americans gained unprecedented (some historians call this period revolutionary) access to political power. Yet all of a sudden all those advances were totally erased by the Jim Crow system. In the period of 1868-1880s African American Americans were serving in Congress, State governments and local governments. But beginning in 1890’s Southern State laws, with the Green light of approval from the U.S. Supreme Court, began to systematically impose legal racial segregation and political disfranchisement of Blacks. Ironically, the legal devices, such as Poll-tax requirement and Literacy/understanding tests, used to prevent African Americans from voting, were, on the surface, “color-blind.” Just as the current voter suppression devices, aided and abetted by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to invalidate a major section of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, are presented as being color-blind.

            I see similarities between what happened after African Americans gained the right to vote after the Civil war and elected unprecedented numbers of Blacks to public office, and what is happening now because this country elected, and re-elected, a black president. As was the case during Reconstruction period, powerful forces, determined to restore and maintain “White Supremacy” are doing everything to reverse what happened in 2008 and 2012.

          • Badgerite

            Totally agree. Which is why I think it is so important now not to let those recently imposed impediments to minority voting have the clearly desired effect. I was so amazed and gratified by the determination those voters showed in 2012. It was one of those moments that make you proud to be a part of this country. I hope those efforts are maintained and expanded. Both legally and in terms of organizing.

  • kscoyote


    Wisconsin: Worst State in Nation for Black Children

    No state is worse for African-American kids, according to a new study.

    • Badgerite

      Good link.

    • bbiemeret

      I am an African American male, living in, and originally from, Southern California. However, I lived in Wisconsin’s Fox Valley for several years, including high school. I recall regular harassment at the hands of the Green Bay Police Department in the late 80’s, early 90’s. It wasn’t quite Stop and Frisk, but there was a lot of Stop and Identify, running one’s name through the warrant database just to be sure one wasn’t wanted. I haven’t been back to visit anyone there in over 5 years.

      The “otherness” I felt living there affected me so bad, I still feel it sometimes, and I live in neighborhood so diverse, over 70 languages are spoken in it. There were a few OK years during Doyle’s tenure, but Thompson was horrible, and somehow Walker has lowered the bar yet again.

  • Ipecac

    I was waiting for this shoe to drop. Sure didn’t take long.

  • Kennet

    “People do not realize — the average person does not realize — how extensive race and gender preferences are in our society,” Grothman said.

    I agree completely. So much so that I’d argue we need some laws and regulations to protect and help those who aren’t preferred or treated preferentially by our society – like LGBT peoples, women, and people of color…