July 8, 2010
Racial, Gender Quotas in the Financial Bill?
By Diana Furchtgott-Roth
"WASHINGTON - What one finds when reading congressional legislation is invariably surprising. Take the Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill, for instance, which was created by merging Senate and House bills. When the Senate returns from recess one of its first actions will be to vote on the bill, which passed the House on June 30.
I was searching the bill for a provision about derivatives. What did I find but Section 342, which declares that race and gender employment ratios, if not quotas, must be observed by private financial institutions that do business with the government. In a major power grab, the new law inserts race and gender quotas into America's financial industry.
In addition to this bill's well-publicized plans to establish over a dozen new financial regulatory offices, Section 342 sets up at least 20 Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion. This has had no coverage by the news media and has large implications.
The Treasury, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the 12 Federal Reserve regional banks, the Board of Governors of the Fed, the National Credit Union Administration, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau...all would get their own Office of Minority and Women Inclusion.
Each office would have its own director and staff to develop policies promoting equal employment opportunities and racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of not just the agency's workforce, but also the workforces of its contractors and sub-contractors.
What would be the mission of this new corps of Federal monitors? The Dodd-Frank bill sets it forth succinctly and simply - all too simply. The mission, it says, is to assure "to the maximum extent possible the fair inclusion" of women and minorities, individually and through businesses they own, in the activities of the agencies, including contracting.
How to define "fair" has bedeviled government administrators, university admissions officers, private employers, union shop stewards and all other supervisors since time immemorial - or at least since Congress first undertook to prohibit discrimination in employment.
Sometimes, "fair" has been defined in relation to population numbers, for example, by the U.S. Department of Education in its enforcement of Title IX, passed in 1972 as an amendment to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which pertains to varsity athletic opportunities for male and female undergraduates."
Read entire article here....
http://www.realclear...ctor_98562.html
Any thoughts on this?
Racial, Gender Quotas In The Financial Bill?
Started by
(MaxineR)
, Jul 08 2010 04:36 PM
2 replies to this topic
#2
Bill Z
-
- Premium Member
-
- 11,795 posts
Hopeless Addict
- Location:Briggs Ranch
Posted 09 July 2010 - 05:41 PM
WASS
I would say more but the above sums it pretty well.
I would say more but the above sums it pretty well.
I would rather be Backpacking
#3
(MaxineR)
(MaxineR)
-
- Visitors
Posted 12 July 2010 - 03:10 PM
QUOTE (Bill Z @ Jul 9 2010, 06:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
WASS
I would say more but the above sums it pretty well.
I would say more but the above sums it pretty well.
In recent days I have been made aware of just how racist the present administration is.
It's absolutely amazing that they make no attempt to hide it or conceal their desire to act in every way to promote black people in all they do and say, without concern for fairness or justice, or the way it comes off to the American people.
Obama is in very deep trouble and he has ensured it will be a very long time before we have another black president.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
