ADVERTISEMENT

Racist infrastructure bill is racist...

The Tradition

HB King
Apr 23, 2002
124,887
99,025
113
The infrastructure bill the Senate passed Tuesday discriminates against white people at every turn.

Americans are enthusiastic about spending money on physical infrastructure — bridges, roads, broadband. But this racist bill hands out jobs and contracts and locates projects based on race, not merit. Minority businesses and neighborhoods hold the inside track. If you’re white, you’re low-priority.

The bill includes grants to install solar or wind technologies and generate jobs in areas decimated by closing coal mines or coal-fired electric plants. Here’s the catch: When contractors bid, the bill says minority-owned businesses will get selected first. Bad news for small-time white contractors in depressed areas.

The same is true for the bill’s proposals to improve traffic patterns in cities. Contractors and subcontractors get priority only if they’re owned by minorities or women. White male business owners can take a hike.

Americans should be outraged — but not surprised. After all, President Biden’s American Rescue Plan Act, passed in March, also put into place an ugly system of discrimination against whites. It offered debt relief to black farmers, but not white farmers. Another provision offered billions in aid to minority-owned and women-owned restaurants, but told struggling restaurants owners who happened to be white men that they had to go to the back of the line.

The injustice was obvious. White male farmers and restaurant owners sued, claiming the anti-white provisions are unconstitutional. So far, these challengers are winning. In every case, federal judges have halted the race-based programs in the American Rescue Plan Act until the challengers have their day in court. Politico reported last week that Biden’s Justice Department may fold without a fight on the black-farmer debt relief cases, because the law isn’t on the administration’s side.

You would think Democrats and the Biden White House would get the message. Instead, they’re doubling down on rigging legislation and divvying up taxpayer dollars to benefit minorities and shortchange whites.

Chances are high the infrastructure bill’s hodgepodge of anti-white discrimination will be struck down by federal courts. In 1989, the Supreme Court ruled that the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution bars government from trying to even the score by discriminating against whites and in favor of minorities. The justices warned against creating “a patchwork of racial preferences based on statistical generalizations” to correct past injustices. That’s precisely what this infrastructure bill does.

The bill’s backers would have you believe that obsolete airports, dilapidated public works and deteriorating roads and public spaces are evidence of racial injustice. Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY) rails that “our infrastructure is racist” and calls on the Congress to pass a bill that “puts the needs of underserved and disadvantaged communities at the fore.”

That’s code for minority communities. But the truth is, there are plenty of poor white people in this country, too, and poor, predominantly white communities that could benefit from a bold federal infrastructure initiative. Race and ethnicity should have nothing to do with it. Locate the projects and put the funds where the economic need is greatest, regardless of race.

West Virginia has the lowest average income in the nation and ranks 46th in internet connectivity. Maine ranks 36th out of 50 states for income, and 34th in broadband connectivity. People in these states could really benefit from federal broadband assistance. Here’s the hitch: The infrastructure bill tilts the grant scale in favor of states with high minority and non-English-speaking populations, instead of considering only economic need and existing broadband capacity. Because Maine and West Virginia are 94 percent white, they’ll get less.

Polls show that Americans favor fixing roads, bridges, tunnels and airports. They know that good infrastructure promotes economic growth. But they’ve been kept in the dark about the fine print in the bill. Under the guise of upgrading the nation, the bill unfairly treats whites like second-class citizens.

Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York.

 
Let this be a lesson to all of you, when it comes time to fill out your census (or application or school demographics for your children) ALWAYS, and I mean ALWAYS, select a minority such as Native American or African American (not Asian though because we don't count as a minority). Even if you aren't really one it doesn't matter-- you can just plead ignorance and say, "well my 23 and Me said I was .01% African so I put that down".

You can also just mark female because you felt like a woman that day.
 
The infrastructure bill the Senate passed Tuesday discriminates against white people at every turn.

Americans are enthusiastic about spending money on physical infrastructure — bridges, roads, broadband. But this racist bill hands out jobs and contracts and locates projects based on race, not merit. Minority businesses and neighborhoods hold the inside track. If you’re white, you’re low-priority.

The bill includes grants to install solar or wind technologies and generate jobs in areas decimated by closing coal mines or coal-fired electric plants. Here’s the catch: When contractors bid, the bill says minority-owned businesses will get selected first. Bad news for small-time white contractors in depressed areas.

The same is true for the bill’s proposals to improve traffic patterns in cities. Contractors and subcontractors get priority only if they’re owned by minorities or women. White male business owners can take a hike.

Americans should be outraged — but not surprised. After all, President Biden’s American Rescue Plan Act, passed in March, also put into place an ugly system of discrimination against whites. It offered debt relief to black farmers, but not white farmers. Another provision offered billions in aid to minority-owned and women-owned restaurants, but told struggling restaurants owners who happened to be white men that they had to go to the back of the line.

The injustice was obvious. White male farmers and restaurant owners sued, claiming the anti-white provisions are unconstitutional. So far, these challengers are winning. In every case, federal judges have halted the race-based programs in the American Rescue Plan Act until the challengers have their day in court. Politico reported last week that Biden’s Justice Department may fold without a fight on the black-farmer debt relief cases, because the law isn’t on the administration’s side.

You would think Democrats and the Biden White House would get the message. Instead, they’re doubling down on rigging legislation and divvying up taxpayer dollars to benefit minorities and shortchange whites.

Chances are high the infrastructure bill’s hodgepodge of anti-white discrimination will be struck down by federal courts. In 1989, the Supreme Court ruled that the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution bars government from trying to even the score by discriminating against whites and in favor of minorities. The justices warned against creating “a patchwork of racial preferences based on statistical generalizations” to correct past injustices. That’s precisely what this infrastructure bill does.

The bill’s backers would have you believe that obsolete airports, dilapidated public works and deteriorating roads and public spaces are evidence of racial injustice. Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY) rails that “our infrastructure is racist” and calls on the Congress to pass a bill that “puts the needs of underserved and disadvantaged communities at the fore.”

That’s code for minority communities. But the truth is, there are plenty of poor white people in this country, too, and poor, predominantly white communities that could benefit from a bold federal infrastructure initiative. Race and ethnicity should have nothing to do with it. Locate the projects and put the funds where the economic need is greatest, regardless of race.

West Virginia has the lowest average income in the nation and ranks 46th in internet connectivity. Maine ranks 36th out of 50 states for income, and 34th in broadband connectivity. People in these states could really benefit from federal broadband assistance. Here’s the hitch: The infrastructure bill tilts the grant scale in favor of states with high minority and non-English-speaking populations, instead of considering only economic need and existing broadband capacity. Because Maine and West Virginia are 94 percent white, they’ll get less.

Polls show that Americans favor fixing roads, bridges, tunnels and airports. They know that good infrastructure promotes economic growth. But they’ve been kept in the dark about the fine print in the bill. Under the guise of upgrading the nation, the bill unfairly treats whites like second-class citizens.

Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York.

My very wealthy friend in New Jersey saw this coming down the line. He has started a few health care providing companies and has given 51% of ownership to African American women he has worked with and trusts, knowing he will be getting the inside track on all government contracts. Knowing him, he will probably jump into the energy game and do the same thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LuciousBDragon
I love op ed pieces whose every link is back to more content by the same outlet. Gee. Maybe link to the actual bill?

OP clams to think US media sucks, specifically that US media is in the tank for libs. Then posts an op ed from the NY freaking Post, whose content exists almost entirely to loop you into more of its content.

OP is a critic of journalism, mind you.

He's also a kiddie-pool dumbass.
 
Let this be a lesson to all of you, when it comes time to fill out your census (or application or school demographics for your children) ALWAYS, and I mean ALWAYS, select a minority such as Native American or African American (not Asian though because we don't count as a minority). Even if you aren't really one it doesn't matter-- you can just plead ignorance and say, "well my 23 and Me said I was .01% African so I put that down".

You can also just mark female because you felt like a woman that day.

 
Interesting, OP, how easily triggered you are by this, while somehow just as easily remaining ignorant of, you know, racism/discrimination against minorities.

And I love the author's bio.

Looking her up on wikipedia it seems like everything she's done since leaving office has been to lie and bullshit on behalf of Republicans.
 
Looking her up on wikipedia it seems like everything she's done since leaving office has been to lie and bullshit on behalf of Republicans.
She found her gravy-train, and she doesn't appear to have deviated since. America.
 
We will never get this issue behind ourselves until this type of stuff is totally eliminated...
 
I just read some of the bill itself, locating quickly a part of the bill that this op ed author is promoting (to her and NY Post's click-addiction-addled benefit) as racist.

Lol is of course one reaction.

Basically the bill expresses commitment to continuing the work of the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program, which has been around since 1983. The bill provides background for why the Program remains relevant.

If the author is worth a shit she would make the case for why the Program is no longer relevant. Instead, she goes for a simple emotion-triggering, click-generating narrative that is just to damn candy-ass sweet for folks like @The Tradition to resist.
 
Last edited:
We will never get this issue behind ourselves until this type of stuff is totally eliminated...
Highways were constructed through urban corridors explicitly to cut off black neighborhoods. Those highways are still there and still doing their jobs. This bill goes a little way to addressing THAT issue and dumbasses like OP call that racist. Minority companies were not even allowed to compete for govt contracts in the past, funneling even more wealth into the white community. Now that the tables have turned allowing competent minority companies to take these jobs and start to make up the gap...NOW it's racist. As the saying goes, we were born on third base (thanks in no small part to the govt's explicitly racist policies) and think we hit a triple and we're bitching because somebody else gets an intentional walk.

Bullshit.
 
At some point these ill conceived attempts at reparation need to come to a halt,... equality should mean equality.
 
Also worth mentioning that
The responses here are sooooo predictable. Does the bill discriminate against white men or not? If it does, how does that possibly stand up to constitutional scrutiny?
Bro, like you actually give a damn. You crave cause for feeling aggrieved because it affirms you. You're stuck in a loop. Even the author doesn't really give a damn, nor the outlet that employs her. How do I know this? Because the bill isn't linked, nor does the op ed quote or direct folks to the relevant language in the bill, nor does the author bother to make the case why there is or isn't a need for the (not provided) language to exist in the bill.

They just want a click, and they know you will give it to them. They also know that you will then share the piece, thereby generating more clicks.

Could be so easy for this PhD author to provide better insights. But she doesn't. Why? Oh, that's right, because she can make a lot of really easy money writing something that probably would take her about 8 minutes.

What's truly alarming is she is involved in some RW think tanks. She's clearly very smart. Which begs the question—to what end is she choosing to write really base, really dumb, really weak, fully emotion-triggering op eds that are surely far below her intellect?

OP, I know you love to be skeptical of the motivations behind the writings of liberal-leaning op ed writers. Flex that skepticism, you know, indiscriminately, bro!
 
Highways were constructed through urban corridors explicitly to cut off black neighborhoods. Those highways are still there and still doing their jobs. This bill goes a little way to addressing THAT issue and dumbasses like OP call that racist. Minority companies were not even allowed to compete for govt contracts in the past, funneling even more wealth into the white community. Now that the tables have turned allowing competent minority companies to take these jobs and start to make up the gap...NOW it's racist. As the saying goes, we were born on third base (thanks in no small part to the govt's explicitly racist policies) and think we hit a triple and we're bitching because somebody else gets an intentional walk.

Bullshit.

Two wrongs don't make a right.
 
The responses here are sooooo predictable. Does the bill discriminate against white men or not? If it does, how does that possibly stand up to constitutional scrutiny?
Can you point to the specific part of the bill where it shows this?
 
And even if you accept this as a way to repair past injustices does anybody really think our politicians are smart enough to know when to take their foot off the scale?...
 
I'm hoping to some day see a "parody" account for poor Trad.

The current Trad is a tired, old act.

I liked it better when we had hurricane updates and stories about buying bottled water at Costco.
 
And even if you accept this as a way to repair past injustices does anybody really think our politicians are smart enough to know when to take their foot off the scale?...
It's funny your fear of what this type of policy consideration might enable, while somehow not realizing what is enabled by your fear.
 
And even if you accept this as a way to repair past injustices does anybody really think our politicians are smart enough to know when to take their foot off the scale?...
They have had their foot on the scale for white people for more than two centuries. But that's obviously fine by you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rudolph
And even if you accept this as a way to repair past injustices does anybody really think our politicians are smart enough to know when to take their foot off the scale?...
We have a population that has been - again - EXPLICITLY disenfranchised by official govt policy for many decades. What wealth they accumulated has been stolen time and again and that theft was sanctioned by the govt. And now we're just supposed to say "Too bad, so sad" because you don't think we have a duty to try and repair the damage done? You don't think we're capable of at least ameliorating some of that damage? What is it that you really fear? You're...what?...worried we might make them too uppity??

I can't even imagine how small such a mind would have to be.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT