« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Financial Regs Bill/Affirmative Action all in one!

I haven’t figured out why no one is really talking about this yet, so here goes.

The Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill, which passed on June 30th, is a mess. As is anything that has “Dodd” and “financial regulations” in the title. Liberty Central did a grat breakdown of some of the issues with this bill here.

However, it’s this part that I want to highlight:

Did you know…that the bill is full of measures that continue to divide Americans by race by creating specific programs for racial minorities and women, including an Office of Fair Lending and Equal Opportunity (Title X, Sub. A), Office of Housing Counseling (TITLE XIV, Sub. D), the Office of Minority and Women Inclusion (Title III, Sub. D), and requires recruitment at historically black colleges and other minority serving institutions (TITLE III, Sub. D)?

What this is in effect doing is introducing an Affirmative Action style of gender and race quotas to the financial regulation industry.

Without belaboring the point, this is a huge strain on the industry. It’s a major shift in employment law, and gives directors the power to fire any administrator they believe hasn’t put forth a strong enough effort to balance out the workforce. Really, the only way the administrator can hold on to their job is to make sure that their staff is sufficiently diversified.

This puts undue pressure on the system. It’s ultimately unfair to women and minorities who may not be qualified for the job, but are pulled in anyway to make people feel all warm and fuzzy that they’ve got their racial balance. As with any industry, people shouldn’t be hired because they are black or female. It lowers the curve and helps no one. Now, if there’s a black man who’s more qualified than a white man, have at it! Hire him! If a woman can do a better job than the white guy, bring her onto the team! But the idea that a director would be forced to hire someone who isn’t as qualified for the sake of appearances is detrimental to the integrity of the industry. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link and such. They’ll enact these new quotas, and when everything starts falling apart, they’ll wonder why the agency is an inefficient money suck. It dosn’t take a genius to figure out the problem here.

The way things are set up now, there are discrimination laws that don’t allow hiring or firing based on race or gender. That’s quite different than setting up quotas. This is a huge change, and something that has not even been a part of the larger conversation.

Real Clear Markets sums up the whole issue right here:

Setting up these Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion is a troubling indictment of current law. Women and minorities have an ample range of legal avenues already to ensure that businesses engage in nondiscriminatory practices. By creating these new offices, Congress does not believe that existing law is sufficient.

Don’t you love when Congress decides that the laws that only they have the power to change are insufficient, and instead of altering the existing law, they build in the fixes to other unrelated legislation?

Apparently, this is how they think they can fix racism and sexism in America. Who knew you could legislate that away?

COMMENTS

  • constitutionalconservative

    If this party can’t stand against race and gender quotas that are profoundly repugnant to the American idea and hostile to the cause of conservatism, they are wasting our time.

  • strategerist

    This is horrible, but hardly surprising.

    Imagine you are a minority who has worked hard to get where you are. After this policy is in place, many people will see you as the “token minority” and have trouble taking you seriously.

    For those that are hired into positions beyond their ability, they will struggle to appear competent while being insulated from any sort of realistic feedback mechanism.

    I once took a job I thought I was qualified for only to realize too late that it was a bad situation. I lasted 3 months. It was a horrible experience, but it was also a beneficial experience. We learn from these kinds of situations and if we allow them to instruct us, we can grow.

    By removing that kind of natural consequence / feedback loop for minorities – or at least heavily distorting it, this bill dooms minority employees to career mediocrity.

    And this is 100,000% the intended effect.

    Where are they going to go in a few years when a statistics show this program is not “working”?

    Yeah, you know where.

  • jimbo51

    Of course Congress always exempts itself from all the burdens they impose on others.

  • pamela1631

    This administration has done until we are back to basics.
    Then cut taxes and spending.

    Be practical and prudent with what needs to be done.

    Set long term schedules on what needs to be repaired or replaced.

    Lock any funding in accounts and only use the funds for that specific purpose.

    Stop trying to legislate normal behaviors and thoughts.

    Please stop trying to heal peoples souls with money or feel goods.
    It has never worked and never will.
    Damage (whether real or culturally perceived) is damage and some hold that pain until it cloaks them like a shroud.

    Five hundred years from now, I pray the USA is still here, strong, practical and as our Founders intended- a Republic.
    And that this time is taught in school and is known as the Re-Awakening and Re-Founding of our core values and principals.

    I know there are many who will scream all manner of invectives and find myriad of reasons…too hard, too unfair, takes too long, this is racist and violates whatever can be dredged up as an excuse.

    It is time to set aside the childish rants and grievances.
    Life has never been fair and that cannot be legislated.
    No matter what belief system or school of philosophy you adhere to or practice.

    So please stand aside, there is hard work that needs doing.
    It will take some time, so learn the fine art of practicing patience and please check that ego at the door.

    • Flagstaff

      Rare, yet well done.

      • pamela1631

        Kind Sir.

  • Flagstaff

    I think that not much attention paid is because we are swamped. And I think that’s the plan.

    The bill is how long? Let’s say 2500 pages. Karl Rove’s autobio is about 500 pages. That means this technical bill, covering details of how the financial industry must run, is five times as long.

    Now, I have just finished Courage and Consequence (it’s even better than I expected), but I’d be hard pressed to relate any of its details to anybody. Yet we are expected to believe that our attention-challenged Congressmen can keep 2500 pages of detail straight and that they can direct the financial industry better than the free market. The ones not involved in writing the thing can’t possibly read it and understand it. How can they vote for it?

    Why does it take 2500 pages to say, “Don’t cheat your customers”?

    IOW, there is no way a bill longer than a few hundred pages can possibly be anything other than a complete mess, as we will find out when the details of Obamacare start to be revealed. 2500 pages isn’t a bill, it’s a paper version of the mountains of Afghanistan, full of hiding places for loopholes for the favored few.

    Why don’t we hear that more, too?

    • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica

      great analogy, FS.

      That one’s for the books!

      • Flagstaff

        we review and edit even comments.a

        Also, coming up with that stuff is what makes writing fun.

        Thanks, Veronica.

        • Flagstaff
    • persiflage

      Yeah, I imagine it is “a paper version of the mountains of Afghanistan” alright, very rough terrain to get through, filled with concealed goblin-holes. And the goblins in those holes were nurtured and placed there by both the K Street and Wall Street lobbyists, with the wholehearted concurrence of the bill’s sponsors, who are their beneficiaries. How many un-American. unconstitutional provisions and perverse incentives are in there? We just have to allow the bill to pass to find out!

  • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica

    because this is the final step for congress to lock-in “corporate sociali responsibility” or “corporate citizenship” — with legislation.

    I think we know that big corporations play both sides of the field and for the longest time, corporations have been going along voluntarily, tacitly with the whomever was in charge.

    But, like sheep led to the slaughter .. they didn’t speak up when
    greenies or gays leaned on them .. or Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson blackmailed them.

    We think corporations are getting a raw deal b/c the progressive are trying to reign in Citizens United?

    They’ve been PUSHED by the left for years into corporate citizenship and sponsorships of their PACS and have never said anything or so much as sued to preserve their corporate culture or voice.

    Like sheep to the slaughter. Now they have mandates and quotas.

    Forget the economy…

    And, really, who wants to piss off this administration and get a direct take-over within days?

    This is social democracy, based on social justice in action, a lighter form or socialism.

    But, of course, it all leads to the same end.

    Great, inspiring read, Tabitha. Thank you.

    • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica

      I edit within the frame, going back and forth — and don’t finalize.

      Apologies to the reader.

      Bad, bad Veronica.

      I’ll try harder. (yeah, right.. I’m lazy and I know you guys get it. ;) )

      • Flagstaff

        this one. I just read this and realized the first one might have sounded like a smart alec remark. That wasn’t my intention. (*;*)

        • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica

          no such thing.

          had I been offended, I would have been one petty you-know-what.

          not in the least, but thanks. :)

  • http://www.asmallcornerofsanity.com NosferatusCoffin

    via the Real Clear Markets link, here

    It has not gotten a lot of play, but it really only came out about 48 hours ago and now is starting to seep into blogosphere. With so much going on, on a nearly hourly basis with this crowd, it is literally hard to keep up everyday with what they will come up with next.

    As Flagstaff said, the swamping is on purpose and has been the Left’s whole strategy since even before Obama was elected. Once Reid and Pelosi saw that they had a stooge in the White House (and a red-blooded Marxist, to boot), they knew they could just cobble together anything they wanted, in any bill they wanted, not bother to read it, (or even vote on it in some cases), then eternally blame Bush and pay off all of their union and ACORN buds and all would be Utopia for them and Hell for the rest of us.

  • izoneguy

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/10/financial-overhaul-provision-promote-diversity-hiring-federal-agencies-stirs/

    In an editorial, The Wall Street Journal accused Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., author of the provision, of trying to politicize the Federal Reserve.

    “The Waters provision will also give Congress and the White House a new and powerful lever to influence the operation of the 12 regional Fed banks,” the newspaper wrote. “Accusations of racial or gender indifference, much less outright bias, are politically deadly.”

    “With the threat of such an accusation in their holster, the Waters czars will have enormous clout to influence Fed governance and regulatory decisions, perhaps including monetary policy,” the newspaper added.

    Waters’ office did not respond to a request for comment but the lawmaker vigorously defended the provision in a letter to the editor of The Wall Street Journal, saying the newspaper’s critical editorial was “filled with misrepresentations, unsupported conclusions and outright distortions.”

    Ah, ha the same Maxine Waters that said this:

    • izoneguy

      http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38206757

      So much for Brown’s re-election

      • Scope

        and wanted to puke. He voted for some Dem legislation in the past because he said he had hundreds of phone calls from some union people. In more recent legislation, he again voted with the D’s he said because he had 4 phone calls from Harry Reid in the 12mins. before the vote. Obama has him over at the WH often talking him into voting for his agenda. I honestly wonder what he is being promised in return.

        It would be bad enough if he voted for D legislation that spends a wad, but, the Financial Deform bill gives more power to the Obama Federal Government, and, does nothing to address any problems.

        Since Scott Brown was seated in the Senate, just exactly what has he helped the Republicans with? I know that many believe that if you vote with the Republicans only 80%-60%-50% of the time, it’s better than any D. What are his ratios so far?

        • Scope

          http://libertypundits.net/article/scott-brown-has-listened-to-his-constituents-and-will-definitely-vote-no-on-financial-reform/

      • chihank

        Brown being from MA is put in a tough spot. If Brown is perceived to be too “right wing”, then MA voters will vote him out. But if he votes in line with MA voters, national conservatives will not give money for his re-election.

        I predict Brown will vote for the home town, Kagan. If Brown voted against Kagan, the Boston media will be all over Brown for not voting for the home town heroine.

        • Scope

          your reply. Apparently his “constituents” don’t matter to him. It didn’t take him long to learn the evil ways of DC.

          I hope the Republicans come up with a better choice when he is up for re-election. Just what good does it do for the Republicans when some of our own vote for federal government takeovers. I expected the Maine Twins to vote yes, and they are, but Brown seems to now be to the left of even them.

        • izoneguy

          Voting for a Supreme Court Justice is not a popularity contest….

          http://article.nationalreview.com/437869/the-case-against-confirmation/orrin-g-hatch

          Liberty requires limits on government; it always has, and it always will. That includes limits on judges. Measured against that standard, Elena Kagan

  • izoneguy

    Tell Scott Brown he is making a wrong move in supporting Obama.

    http://scottbrown.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contactscott?p=EmailScottBrown

    • earlgrey

      I can ‘t wait to get another email from his campaign asking for $$. I did contribute to his election and he has done nothing to help me. I can spend my money on better candidates.

      • izoneguy

        http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/13/tea-partiers-target-scott-brown-support-financial-overhaul/

        Scotty Boy – I told you were would come after you….

        Sen. Scott Brown’s last-minute support for President Obama’s sweeping financial overhaul legislation has put him in the crosshairs of Tea Party activists who have sharply criticized the bill and could dim his re-election hopes for 2012.

        The group said if Brown wants its continued support, “he must consider how legislation he supports upholds” constitutional principles of limited government, free markets and individual liberty.

        Brown’s office did not return messages seeking comment.

        Scotty Boy – you won’t get re-elected by acting like a RINO.
        We got you to D.C. and now you are supporting the wrong side.
        What are you going to do in retirement?

  • Pingback: BREAKING NEWS FROM GOOGLE !

  • Pingback: kizi

  • http://www.2010blog.net jsanzone

    They manage to insert affirmative action clauses all the time, whether it’s before or after the bill actually passes.

    Anyway, this is yet another reason to oppose this “financial reform” bill, which for whatever reason hasn’t gotten the attentive opposition that ObamaCare did.