Race-neutral Policies Research Articles

Beyond Race: Social Justice as a Race Neutral Ideal

Theory: The theory of policy particularism attributes the greater popularity of raceneutral policies compared to race-specific policies not to the fact the former only benefit blacks or minorities but to the fact they target only a particular segment of the population. The theory, moreover, points to a neglected distinction-between how a policy is targeted and how it is justified. Applied to race, a policy may be particularistic or race-specific in its focus, yet universalistic or race-neutral in its justification, or universalistic in both, with politically significant consequences for the level of public support the policy wins. Hypotheses: If what limits the appeal of racially-specific politics is not that they are restricted to blacks specifically but that they aim to benefit only a particular and limited group, then policies targeted to an equivalently particularistic group of whites should be similarly limited in their appeal. There should be more support among whites, moreover, even for policies explicitly targeted to blacks if they are justified on more universalistic grounds. Methods: Regression analysis and analysis of variance is used in a survey-based experimental design that varies randomly both the target of the policy and the justification for it. Results: Public support for programs directed at an equivalently limited group of whites-new immigrants from Europe is not just as limited as support for blacks and minorities, but more so. Differentiating between the target of a policy and its justification is also important because even programs directed at blacks gain more support if justified on more universalistic grounds, although programs that are universalistic in both focus and justification gain the widest measure of support. Universalistic arguments in behalf of government assistance for minorities have a persuasive force for whites generally, very much including liberals. Only conservatives are relatively unaffected by altering the justification and focus of proposed government programs.

Prointegrative Policy: Theory and Practice

The authors argue that race neutral policies will be inadquate to overcome the historical momentum of race conscious behaviors and stereotypes that perpetuate segregation; explicitly race conscious...

Community Economic Development: Some Critical Issues

Community development is an issue of continuing interest not only because of the need for more successful economic development within our cities, but because the survival of a significant portion of African-American poor is at stake. Community development planning seeks to improve all aspects of community life, including health, education, crime prevention, employment and training, business development, family stability, and housing. Community economic development must arise from our black churches, historically black colleges and universities, African-American officials, business leaders, teachers, and health and welfare professionals. In the real world, where group welfare functions are interdependent, only two possible long-term outcomes are both just and stable: win-win or lose-lose. Consequently, there is a need for significant Pareto improvements in all social programs. There are roles for both race-specific and race-neutral policies because long-term Pareto improvements can result both from programs such as targeted minority employment and training as well as color-blind policies that encourage legislators to forgo the coffers of the gun lobby and control the sale and use of guns. The paper will focus on the historical logic of public policy as reflected in housing policy, financing mechanisms under community development corporations, and the issue of an urban underclass. By reestablishing its commitment to the inner cities, the government can redress the onerous impact of two and a half decades of social and economic neglect and private investment retrenchment.

Is Higher Education Desegregation a Remedy for Segregation but not Educational Inequality?: A Study of the Ayers v. Mabus Desegregation Case

The Supreme Court has recently been asked to rule if the state of Mississippi has met the freedom of choice standard used to determine whether or not to end a state's obligation to enact affirmative measures to undo the effects and vestiges of racial inequality brought about by segregation in public systems of higher education. In previous court rulings (Ayers I, 1987; Ayers III, 1990) the state has prevailed in arguing that it has ceased discriminatory enrollment practices at its public institutions of higher education and that Blacks are no longer restricted to racially defined schools. Blacks and Whites currently attend and are employed in all eight schools in Mississippi's public institutions of higher learning (IHL) system, which includes its three formerly all-Black colleges (Alcorn State University, Jackson State University, and Mississippi Valley State University) and its five formerly all-White colleges (University of Mississippi, University of Southern Mississippi, Mississippi State University, Delta State University, and Mississippi University for Women). The state further contends that because it has adopted race-neutral policies and procedures that give all college-bound students, Black and White, unfettered freedom of choice, its public system of higher education is now desegregated. The overriding argument is that freedom of choice constitutes equal opportunity. In higher education students do choose their schools, and enrollment in a specific college (or any college at all) is not required by the state. However, the presence of freedom of choice has long been denied as evidence of satisfactorily remedying segregation in public schools. In 1976 the state of Mississippi was sued by Ayers, the Black plaintiff, for operating a separate and unequal system of higher education. The case was tried in the northern district court of Mississippi in 1987. At that time, the judge ruled that the state had fulfilled its duty to create a free-choice, race-neutral system. The decision was reversed by a three-