Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
55034333
label
Race Clips 6/97
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
Source extras
naId
55034333
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-7431954-20160194F-007-009-2017
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
d3b108f2c596b5b7
ocrText
PAGE 30 85TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 News World Communications, Inc. The Washington Times June 24, 1997, Tuesday, Final Edition SECTION: Part A; NATION; Pg. A4 LENGTH: 667 words 622-1206 HEADLINE: NAACP to air disputes over mandatory busing; Internal dissent, previously quashed, now open BYLINE: Ralph Z. Hallow; THE WASHINGTON TIMES BODY: The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, in a historic move, will permit the public airing of its long-simmering internal doubts about forced busing, President Kweisi Mfume said yesterday. The organization will formally debate the issue at the NAACP national convention in Pittsburgh next month, Mr. Mfume told The Washington Times. "We believe a dialogue and discussion in Pittsburgh on forced busing does not change our course, Mr. Mfume said, but added, "Busing is but one tool to achieve desegregation of the public schools. Housing, new-school construction, magnet schools and gifted-and-talented programs are among the others.' "If you have a predominately black school system, then forced busing is not the issue, but whether we can get enough resources into it to make sure there is equal opportunity, Mr. Mfume said. NAACP Chairman Myrlie Evers-Williams expects the delegates to vote on whether to change the 88-year-old organization's advocacy of public-school integration. Michael Meyers, a former assistant national director of the NAACP, said no issue as important as this one is permitted to come to the floor for open debate unless the leadership wants to change policy. Mr. Meyers called the move a sellout of integrationist principles on which the civil rights organization was founded. "The leadership of the NAACP has capitulated to the forces of black nationalism and black separatism," said Mr. Meyers, who now heads the New York Civil Rights Coalition. "It has been occurring privately behind closed doors for years. This breaks it wide open now. They' 11 vote to change it in Pittsburgh. It's a fait accompli." Mr. Mfume vehemently disagreed, saying, "It's definitely not a fait accompli. The NAACP stands by its founding principles of a single, integrated society for all of America. PAGE 31 The Washington Times, June 24, 1997 "We believe we can still support integrative policies and at the same time fight to guarantee educational quality for students within the public schools. Public shifts in attitudes on race and changing demographics periodically require a careful review of policies and positions in an effort to measure their effect versus their intent. " Until now, the NAACP has not permitted internal dissent on segregation to surface without recrimination. Over the last two years, the group has dismissed a branch president in New Jersey and another in New York for publicly questioning the utility of busing to achieve integration. Asked if there would be more such dismissals, Mr. Mfume said, "I think you will see a great deal more tolerance with respect to a divergence of opinion. Every possible future situation should be measured case by case and judged on its merits. 11 Opponents of forced busing say it has harmed black and white communities, causing "white flight" to the suburbs and leaving many inner cities predominantly black with fewer job opportunities. Meanwhile, the educational performance and safety of inner-city public schools have declined precipitously. "The NAACP would be smart to end its support of forced busing because it would show the NAACP is in touch with the true feelings of the black community," said William Keyes, a black critic of forced busing who was a senior policy adviser in the Reagan White house. "For more than 25 years, most black people have known that the best way to educate their children is in schools within the community where a support system exists, " Mr. Keyes said. "The only thing busing has done is take the kids away from their natural support system.' Mr. Meyers said the NAACP had stopped bringing school desegregation suits some time ago because, the group claimed, it was broke. Mr. Meyers said the last three NAACP chairmen have sought to reverse the organization's dwindling membership and resources by trying to attract young blacks who were not alive during the civil-rights movement and who identify with black separatist philosophies and leaders. LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: June 24, 1997 PAGE 28 62ND STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 The New York Times Company The New York Times June 25, 1997, Wednesday, Late Edition - Final SECTION: Section A; Page 19; Column 1; Editorial Desk LENGTH: 570 words HEADLINE: Saving the N.A.A.C.P.'s Soul BYLINE: By Denton L. Watson; Denton L. Watson, a former public relations director for the N.A.A.C.P., is author of "Lion in the Lobby, Clarence Mitchell Jr.'s Struggle for the Passage of Civil Rights Laws." DATELINE: FREEPORT, N.Y. BODY: Twenty-five years ago, when the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People was at its influential peak, its leaders looked forward to the day when the United States would no longer need an N.A.A.C.P. The nation's endemic racism clearly shows that that day is far away. Yet the organization is now talking of abandoning the fight for integration of public schools that had defined its very soul. Myrlie Evers-Williams, the group's chairwoman, recently said that she expected delegates to the N.A.A.C.P. convention next month in Pittsburgh to consider modifying the organization's stand on integration. Kweisi Mfume, the group's president, tried to soften those comments yesterday by saying the N.A.A.C.P. remained committed to an integrated society. But his statement only confirmed the confusion on the issue. Ms. Evers-Williams's comment indicates that she is willing to accept the notion that many black Americans are, like the biblical Israelites, tired of the struggle for freedom. Disillusioned with integration in public schools and overwhelmed by the conservative onslaught on liberal social policies, some African-Americans are ready to revert to the separate-but-equal doctrine that until 1954 gave constitutional sanction to second-class citizenship for the race. Such a seismic change in the N.A.A.C.P.'s policy not only would change the constructive nature of the organization but also would deprive the nation of its best hope for mobilizing political pressure to attack problems that continue to destroy the lives of many African-Americans. The N.A.A.C.P. needs to learn from its own history. In the 1930's, for example, when Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois, a founder of the organization, shifted from advocating integration to embracing self-segregation for blacks because the N.A.A.C.P. was encountering fierce opposition to its policies, Walter White, the group's executive secretary, promptly blocked his efforts and forced his resignation. About the same time, White also defused the demands by black intellectuals that the organization abandon its anti-lynching and other legal campaigns and instead make economic development for blacks a priority. PAGE 29 The New York Times, June 25, 1997 Twenty years later the Supreme Court resoundingly vindicated White's vision in Brown V. Board of Education. That decision, in turn, made it possible for the N.A.A.C.P. to lead the fight for civil rights laws -- laws that have benefited those same African-Americans who now want the organization to abandon its tried and tested course. The problem that has caused so many blacks to be SO cynical about the nation's commitment to full equality is the N.A.A.C.P.'s inability to develop new programs to combat systemic discrimination. Clarence Mitchell Jr., the late director of the N.A.A.C.P.'s Washington bureau, warned in 1977 that the civil rights battlefront had shifted from the South to the North. And, he said, "some of those who were with us before now realize the problem is on their doorstep, and they are becoming selfish." The incipient white backlash that so worried Mr. Mitchell and others has now mushroomed into a conservative counter-revolution. Rather than running from the new challenges, however, the N.A.A.C.P. needs to reaffirm the historical wisdom of those like Medgar Evers, Ms. Evers-Williams's late husband, in pursuing the long and bitter struggle to give America a truly integrated and better society. LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: June 25, 1997 PAGE 23 22ND STORY of Level 2 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 News & Record (Greensboro, NC) News & Record (Greensboro, NC) July 1, 1997, Tuesday, ALL EDITIONS SECTION: EDITORIAL, Pg. A6 LENGTH: 428 words HEADLINE: A GOOD EDUCATION IS A STUDENT'S RIGHT BYLINE: BY LORETTA GREEN; Knight Ridder Newspapers BODY: True or false? The segregated school I attended was better than an integrated school. The segregated school was worse than an integrated school. The answer to both is ''true'' - and false. No one can fail the questions because the reality is that there were both good and bad aspects of being in a racially segregated school. I hated opening my worn textbook in the fall and seeing that it was a discard from the ' white' ' schools. But I loved singing ''No Hiding Place'' for the class and knowing everyone there knew it. Now the NAACP has a tiger by the tail as it grapples with the idea of abandoning its long-standing commitment to school integration. The NAACP may well have been caught in a time warp of the old Brown V. Board of Education of Topeka school desegregation case in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that ''in the field of education the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place'' because segregated facilities were found to be inherently unequal. It was critical then to have that 1950s legislation. But today's black Americans are moving on and recognizing that the mere act of busing children out of the nation's inner cities will not by itself make them learn. Sitting beside white students for the first time as a college freshman didn't make me smarter. Good equipment, teachers and academic discipline did. Children can learn anywhere if they have the support of parents, community and teachers who expect them to learn and give them good facilities, curriculum and resources. It makes sense to take the energy being expended to integrate schools and use it to make inner city schools better. PAGE 24 News & Record (Greensboro, NC), July 1, 1997 The struggle to integrate the South, including its schools, was won by blood. As a child, hearing of the integration efforts, I could not help feeling that it would be wonderful to do arithmetic with privileged Americans who drank different water from fountains and were allowed to play in the city park. But some ''colored'' school alumni say modern-day schools integrated by busing have flunked their test. Students suffer isolation and teachers' expectations of them are low. But it is one thing to wish that inner city schools could reach parity and quite another to have it happen. Students should be able to go to school in their neighborhoods, but every student is entitled to a good education. We must not fail them. Loretta Green is a columnist for the San Jose Mercury News. Write to her at: 750 Ridder Park Dr., San Jose, Calif. 95190, or by e-mail at LGreen (at)sjmercury.com. LOAD-DATE: July 1, 1997 PAGE 21 18TH STORY of Level 2 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Inc. St. Louis Post-Dispatch July 3, 1997, Thursday, FIVE STAR LIFT EDITION SECTION: EDITORIAL, Pg. 06B LENGTH: 558 words HEADLINE: BACK TO 'SEPARATE BUT EQUAL'? BODY: It would be a shame if the nation's largest mass civil rights group, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, withdrew its support for integration of public schools. Support for an integrated society has been a core NAACP belief. For the organization to turn its back on this ideal would be devastating, especially at a time when the courts have largely abdicated their role in pushing for desegregation and when much of society seems willing to abandon an idea it never fully embraced. NAACP chairwoman Myrlie Evers-Williams brought up the issue when she said the group would reassess its view at its national meeting in Pittsburgh this month. Fortunately, NAACP president Kweisi Mfume softened her statement. He said the NAACP could talk about bringing educational quality to mostly black schools without giving up on its "founding proposition of a single, fully integrated society, for all of America." The NAACP's position has particular importance in St. Louis where the local chapter spearheaded the school desegregation suit. The rights of the black children could be jeopardized if the federal judges now deciding the fate of the program think its backers have lost their will. Dr. James DeClue adamantly says they haven't. The head of the NAACP's education committee sharply criticized Ms. Evers-Williams. "I think it was an inappropriate statement, Mr. DeClue said in an interview. "She's essentially saying, we're tired of fighting SO let's go back to the old situation of separate but equal. But that's illegal." Admittedly, there are reasons that blacks might be disillusioned by school integration. They usually bear the burden of riding the buses. They sometimes get a cool reception at the end of the bus ride. They have a harder time participating in extracurricular activities. Their parents have trouble getting to school functions. And some black leaders believe busing undermines urban neighborhoods. It's demeaning that blacks still have to plead for desegregation. And it's insulting to say that a black child has to sit next to a white child to learn. Justice Clarence Thomas said it passionately when he wrote, "It never ceases to amaze me that the courts are so willing to assume that anything that is predominantly black must be inferior.' But a recent national study of remedial education showed that poor children who go to predominantly middle-class schools do much better than poor children PAGE 22 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, July 3, 1997 who go to schools where most children are poor. The St. Louis school desegregation plan bears this out. Black children who attend suburban and magnet schools are graduating from high school at twice the rate of students who stay behind in the all-black schools. Even though more than $ 100 million has been spent improving all-black city schools, test scores of 12th graders fell between 1990 and 1995. If Attorney General Jay Nixon succeeds in bringing a precipitous end to the desegregation plan, there will be more all-black classrooms with less money. Then the number of black and white students with a chance to get to know each other will plummet. We'll soon be back to separate and unequal. Maybe the courts will order up this prescription for educational disaster. But that's no reason for the grand old dame of the civil rights movement to throw in the towel. LANGUAGE: English LOAD-DATE: July 3, 1997 PAGE 19 17TH STORY of Level 2 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 The Advertiser Company The Montgomery Advertiser July 03, 1997, Thursday SECTION: Op Ed; Pg. 15A LENGTH: 598 words HEADLINE: INTEGRATION FAILED TO PRODUCE WHAT MANY PROPONENTS HOPED BYLINE: By SALIM MUWAKKIL BODY: Integration: The word that became the mantra of the civil-rights movement has been falling out of favor among the very people who used to support it. The group that inserted integration into the public discourse -- the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People - - is stepping away from its traditional support of public school integration. The NAACP adopted integration as official policy in the early 1940s, when it began pushing for an integrated military. And the nation's oldest civil rights group also led the legal battle that broke the back of school segregation in the Brown V. Board of Education Supreme Court ruling of 1954. Thus, for many, the NAACP's move away from integration is akin to heresy. TO BE FAIR, the group has yet to take any official action. Speculation about impending policy changes was churned up by a New York Times article detailing internal debates on the issue of school desegregation. But NAACP President Kweisi Mfume said the Times' story exaggerated the significance of the group's internal debates. There's no denying that the issue has provoked conflict within the group, however; internal differences regarding school desegregation have forced the resignations of at least two branch presidents. And among African-Americans outside the NAACP, the ideal of integration is even more endangered. For some critics, the four-syllable word may as well be a four-letter one. "It's obscene how this concept of integration has been used to dilute black power and delude black people," said Conrad Worrill, chair of the National Black United Front. Black nationalists such as Worrill condemn the quest for integration as a quest for fool's gold. By eliminating black control of schools and other community institutions, they argue, desegregation served to erode the natural foundation of political leverage in the struggle for black power and autonomy. OPPOSITION TO integration is growing among African-Americans across the ideological spectrum. Conservative African-Americans, like Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, have long expressed doubts about the value of school integration as effective social policy. Not only do they decry federal intervention into local issues of education, they oppose the policy for reasons of race as well. PAGE 20 The Montgomery Advertiser, July 03, 1997 Integration's unintended consequences have also soured many liberal African-Americans on the policy. Desegregation policies allowed many working-and middle-class blacks to leave ghetto neighborhoods to seek greener pastures. But they left behind a community bereft of the human and economic resources they provided; the declining quality of life in these communities, many argue, is a direct consequence of this black "brain drain. " At the same time, although many white Americans may pay obeisance to the ideal of integration, most have shunned its practical application. Black and white Americans still live in rigidly segregated worlds. "NO GROUP IN the history of the United States has ever experienced the sustained high level of residential segregation that has been imposed on blacks in large American cities for the past 50 years," write Douglas Massey and Nancy Denton in their book "American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. " The accelerated decline of these increasingly isolated communities is provoking a search for new strategies. The alluring promise of integration may have misled the black community. And rather than continuing to give lip service to this tarnished ideal, more and more black activists are abandoning it. LOAD-DATE: July 08, 1997 PAGE 17 15TH STORY of Level 2 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 The Washington Post The Washington Post July 04, 1997, Friday, Final Edition SECTION: OP-ED; Pg. A21 LENGTH: 775 words HEADLINE: Reason for Awkwardness BYLINE: William Raspberry BODY: A droll southern gentleman of my acquaintance once spoke of an awkward situation that had him "feeling like a bastard at a family reunion." It's a feeling I suspect many black Americans share on the Fourth of July. We'd rather be here than not; where else, after all, would we be? And yet we're sure that many of our fellow celebrants see our presence at this American birthday party as faintly embarrassing - - as not quite legitimate. We know the celebration wasn't planned with us in mind. But, then, there are lots of other Americans who weren't on the minds of the authors of the Declaration of Independence. Should they feel illegitimate, too? Or does our descent from slavery make our awkwardness special? How much of the awkwardness is in our own minds and how much the result of being treated as outsiders? Is it a permanent condition? Questions like these have haunted us for most of our sojourn in this country. They were implicit in W. E. B. Du Bois's reflections, nearly a century ago, on the "twoness" of being black in America. They are reflected today in Tiger Woods's self-designation as Cablinasian -- and in our reaction to it. Do we declare ourselves simply American, and risk the pain of rejection by those who arrogate unto themselves the right to tell us no? Or do we retreat to the comfort - - and limits -- of our blackness? Complicating all of this is the fact that a large number of white Americans find the whole thing self-pitying and silly. Since white people don't have to spend much time thinking about their whiteness (except, perhaps, during certain late hours in certain parts of town), many of them think African Americans spend too much time thinking about our nonwhiteness. Some suggest that if we'd just behave like ordinary Americans -- if we'd drop our hyphens, our sensitivity and our demands for affirmative action, for instance most of the problems we dwell on would just go away. (Those who think this way should have seen Tom Brokaw's NBC special last week on the Chicago suburb of Matteson, where whites are fleeing from the influx of middle-class blacks. It might have occurred to them that race as a way of organizing society and distributing benefits is not our invention.) Still, we're not sure we'd get rid of race even if we could. We don't like being outsiders, but we fear letting go of our racial identity enough to become simply American. PAGE 18 The Washington Post, July 04, 1997 I once described America as comprising a series of racial, ethnic and religious islands. Americanization, in this analogy, is the process of leaving the islands and joining the mainland. We've watched over the years as the residents of one island after another have gone through the process. The Irish island, the German island, the Scandinavian islands, the Mediterranean islands -- all have become essentially depopulated. They remain, if at all, as a sort of vacation home to visit on special occasions like St. Patrick's Day or Oktoberfest. Ah, but most of that depopulation was of islands with European labels -- that is, islands populated by people whose white skin made it easy to blend in. But in recent years, we've seen the gradual depopulation of islands bearing such labels as Chinese and Japanese and Vietnamese islands whose inhabitants are distinctly nonwhite. We still see a few Chinatowns, of course, but they are tourist attractions, or else they exist primarily for the old folk. When the old folk die, so will these ethnic islands. Do we believe the same thing can happen for us? How could there be any doubt? Isn't the answer as obvious as Colin and Tiger and Oprah? Aren't blacks leaving their ethnic island and becoming simply American all the time? And won't the process inevitably lead to the island's depopulation? The response from the pessimists among us is: Not necessarily. Of course "the system" will let a few blacks succeed -- particularly those who opt for assimilation at the expense of their left-behind brothers -- but don't ever kid yourself that the system intends depopulation. Suppose, for instance, that major-league baseball never had any purpose of real integration but only wanted enough "diversity" to sell black folk a few tickets and keep the NAACP from raising hell. In such a case, would Jackie Robinson and the first dozen black players who followed into the majors have been heroes? Or would they have been traitors for devastating the Negro Leagues? As it turns out, baseball really did achieve integration, at least on the playing field. Can the same thing happen for the entirety of America's black island? It's a question only white people can answer. LANGUAGE: ENGLISH COUNTRY: UNITED STATES; LOAD-DATE: July 04, 1997 PAGE 15 13TH STORY of Level 2 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 Plain Dealer Publishing Co. The Plain Dealer July 4, 1997 Friday, FINAL / ALL SECTION: NORTHEAST OHIO; Pg. 1B LENGTH: 428 words HEADLINE: LOCAL NAACP AFFIRMS STAND ON INTEGRATION BYLINE: By APRIL McCLELLAN-COPELAND; PLAIN DEALER REPORTER BODY: The Cleveland chapter of the NAACP has reaffirmed its support for integration of schools at a time when the national NAACP is rethinking its position The NAACP traditionally has supported integration as a way to improve education for black children. But at the upcoming convention in Pittsburgh July 11-17, members will discuss whether it is time for the organization to change its stance to strengthening majority-black schools. The Cleveland chapter's decision, announced yesterday, was made Tuesday, the day after the Cleveland School District and the state filed a motion in U.S. District Court seeking a declaration of "unitary status." If granted, the declaration would release the schools from the court's desegregation order. The order was issued in 1978 as the result of a lawsuit filed by the local chapter of the NAACP. Tuesday's decision was made by the chapter's executive board, which voted unanimously to continue supporting the "concept of integration both inside and outside school classrooms." "We cannot support unitary status, and I urge the national organization not to change its position on school integration," said George L. Forbes, president of the Cleveland branch of the NAACP. "I fully support the position we have taken. Lawyer James Hardiman, a local NAACP board member who represents the plaintiffs in the Cleveland school desegregation case, said: "This is not only symbolic, but consistent with the NAACP being the driving force behind school desegregation nationally and locally.' Last week in the midst of the national debate, Forbes had said it might be time for the NAACP to focus less on integration and more on providing quality education for black children. He said busing, while well intentioned, had not worked. Forbes said he was contacted last week by the national board to speak at the convention in favor of a change. However, at the time, he had not decided how he would vote if a resolution was presented. PAGE 16 The Plain Dealer, July 4, 1997 But Forbes made a decision this week after Cleveland school officials requested "unitary status," which would end court control by July 1, 2000. Forbes said that despite the end of court-imposed cross-town busing in 1996, the overall quality of education has not improved. So to support a change in the NAACP's national stance on integration, he said, would be a vote in support of unitary status. "I can't do that in light of what's happening in Cleveland," Forbes said. "It's unfair to the kids. If they end the desegregation lawsuit, they will end it by themselves, without our assistance." LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: July 5, 1997 PAGE 11 7TH STORY of Level 2 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 Gannett Company, Inc. Gannett News Service July 5, 1997, Saturday, FINAL EDITION LENGTH: 1402 words HEADLINE: New ideas needed for failed urban school integration efforts BYLINE: RICHARD WHITMIRE; Gannett News Service DATELINE: WASHINGTON BODY: WASHINGTON - - In Denver, Seattle and scores of other cities, the story is the same: Forced busing has failed to improve test results, school districts are winning releases from desegregation orders, parents want neighborhood schools. With the resegregation of America's urban schools well under way, many black parents -- those who have borne the greatest burdens of busing want the great experiment halted and a return to neighborhood schools. With that in mind, the NAACP will reconsider its position on busing at its national convention in Pittsburgh July 12. "I commend the NAACP for taking a second look at this historic position," said Aaron Gray, a black minister who won the presidency of Denver's school board on a platform of ending busing. The good side of years of busing in Denver, said Gray, is an agreement to funnel extra resources to the students who need help the most. Busing also produced devastating middle-class flight, no improvement in test scores and an estrangement of parents from local schools, said Gray. "After 20-some years of busing for integration, the gap between minority and Anglo students was not closing,' he said. The NAACP is split on generational lines, said Gray: the veterans of the civil rights wars want to stay the course; and young, black parents want to trade busing for a Denver-style solution -- neighborhood schools with souped-up resources. Said Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in a recent decision further hampering desegregation: "It never ceases to amaze me that the courts are so willing to assume that anything that is predominantly black must be inferior." America's separate-but-equal doctrine, first ruled unconstitutional in 1954, appears to have come full circle to a new policy: separate-but-equitable PAGE 12 GANNETT NEWS SERVICE, July 5, 1997 While they sound alike, there are differences. The former was born of racism, the latter arises from hard-fought agreements to share the wealth. "They don't strike me as the same things, said integration advocate Mike Casserly from the Council of the Great City Schools. "But, in some ways, it's a sadder argument because it solidifies the separation." Although several hundred cities still carry out segregation remedies, school busing in America has reached a tortured stalemate -- busing proponents cannot point to a solid success story, and opponents cannot point to an urban school district that is successfully educating large populations of poor children. Most Americans would cite the 1954 Brown VS. Board of Education as the landmark case in school desegregation, where the Supreme Court struck down separate-but-equal. However, the key decision was the more obscure 1974 Milliken V. Bradley, where the court stopped busing at the Detroit city line. Exempting the suburbs from court-ordered busing unleashed a flood of middle-class flight, leaving many American cities with an ever-dwindling number of whites available for mixing. Faced with white flight and black middle-class flight, and in many cases a surge of Latinos into the cities, busing proved pointless. Some examples: - - In the midst of the busing years in Denver, the Latino population, mostly exempted from busing orders, climbed to nearly half the entire student body. "We had the bizarre situation where whites and blacks continued to be bused, shipped across town and losing school time, when there were 10 or 12 elementary schools where nine out of 10 students were Hispanic and nobody was saying a word," said district spokesman Mark Stevens. The Denver busing extracted a huge social cost, said Gray. "I have come to believe that one of the downsides of busing was kids lost a sense of family, community and neighborhood. One reason you had the problems of gangs, graffiti and vandalism was that for kids, it's not theirs." -- In 1972 when the first busing order was issued in Prince George's County, a middle-class Maryland suburb of Washington, the student population was 80 percent white. Today, 73 percent of the students are black and school officials want to end the busing and return to neighborhood schools. One problem facing officials there: Upper middle-class black parents are leaving the county to seek better schools in a neighboring PAGE 13 GANNETT NEWS SERVICE, July 5, 1997 county. During 20 years of voluntary busing in Seattle, the white population dropped to 41 percent from 66 percent. Seattle's new superintendent is John Stanford, a retired African-American Army general who moved swiftly to end busing, which he said did nothing to improve test scores. The new priority, he said, is keeping middle-class families in Seattle. Said schools spokeswoman Dorothy Dubia: "We want to improve test scores and improve safety in schools. When we accomplish those things, we will attract more students of all types." - - Busing advocate Robert Crain from Columbia University's Teachers College picked Louisville, Ky., as his top candidate for a busing success story. What is different about Louisville is the absence of white flight, due mostly to merging the nearly all-white Jefferson County schools with Louisville city schools, which were about 50 percent black at the time. The good news in Louisville is that, more than 20 years after the merger, nearly 70 percent of students in the combined district are white. The bad news is the test gap between white students and blacks has widened over the last four years. Plus, an analysis by the Louisville Courier-Journal showed black parents pay a far higher price for racial integration. In the interest of maintaining racial balance, black students are more likely to be turned away from neighborhood schools and local magnet schools, the newspaper said. Despite the stalemate, busing proponents argue the NAACP should never reconsider its pro-integration position. "It would be catastrophic," said Jay Heubert from the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Integration, said Heubert and other proponents, still offers the best chance for both black children and an integrated society. Giving resegregation official sanction, he said, is unthinkable. "I don't know of a single urban district where they have more than a handful of schools with poor children where those students are doing well by any traditional measure," said Heubert. The expert who usually testifies against busing is David Armor, a George Washington University professor who just completed a book titled "Forced Justice." PAGE 14 GANNETT NEWS SERVICE, July 5, 1997 Forced busing can claim some credit for reducing segregation, said Armor, especially in several Southern cities. The success stories, such as Charlotte, N.C., were districts that started with large white populations, Armor said. Desegregation failed fastest, he said, in cities such as Detroit, Birmingham and Cleveland, where the districts had closer to a 50-50 balance. In those cities, white flight was immediate. Busing failed to produce any educational benefits, said Armor. "I don't know of a single, large-scale desegregation case where there's been a substantial improvement in test scores,' said Armor. Whatever the NAACP decision, it probably won't make any difference. School districts are moving quickly to shed their desegregation orders, shifts in minority populations continue to make a mockery of quarter century-old busing policies, and young black parents continue to ask for neighborhood schools. Many black parents also are enthusiastically embracing charter schools -- half the students in the nation's 428 charter schools are minorities. Board member Julian Bond doubts the NAACP will back away from advocating integrated schools -- "I just don't see that happening." What may emerge, said Bond, are new strategies for school districts that have become majority black. Both blacks and whites willing to resegregate are missing the larger point, warned Columbia University's Crain. Test scores, he said, should not be the central focus of school integration. "Going to integrated schools makes you want to live an integrated life," said Crain. Integrated schools, for example, teach black students how to survive in mostly white colleges, boosting their graduation rates, he said. Said Crain: "If you want to integrate society you have to integrate schools. LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: July 07, 1997 PAGE 4 4TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 The Dallas Morning News THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS July 6, 1997, Sunday, HOME FINAL EDITION SECTION: SUNDAY READER; Pg. 1J LENGTH: 1263 words HEADLINE: INTEGRATING PUBLIC SCHOOLS: YES; As the NAACP reconsiders its its stance, two civil-rights experts debate whether desegregation in education is still important BYLINE: Michael Meyers, Special Contributor to The Dallas Morning News BODY: Later this month, delegates to the annual convention of the NAACP, the nation's oldest and largest civil-rights group, will debate whether that once venerable organization should continue to pursue the integration of public schools. The alternative, detractors of school busing contend, is to put the bulk of the NAACP's resources into improving the inner-city schools attended by the masses of black children. Until recently, the NAACP has been a staunch defender of integration. The spreading influence of black nationalism, however, has reached its ranks. With so many blacks proclaiming, "We don't need to sit next to whites to get a quality education, the demise of integration seems at hand, especially if the NAACP gives in. So the question is, "Is integration still an important goal, even if blacks say they don't want it?" The answer is yes. It deserves endorsement, notwithstanding the wishes of cabals in society who resist it, and the courts' waning resolve to foster it. The courts have refused to interpret the federal and state constitutions' equal-protection clauses in ways that could provide for meaningful, effective remedies to racially-isolated urban school districts and resegregated Southern school systems. But the courts did not start the integration movement. That was always a grassroots effort, when litigants presented their claims of discrimination to judges. If the civil-rights groups stop bringing such cases, the courts will have no inducement to rethink the barriers they've imposed on school desegregation. Indeed, we are in danger - if even the NAACP is serious about its policy switch - of ending Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. 's dream of a single nation, free of racial segregation. America is supposed to stand for racial equality, Dr. King taught us. It was that principle, and an abiding faith in the Constitution, that brought the NAACP's Thurgood Marshall before the U.S. Supreme Court to argue that its infamous "separate but equal" doctrine of 1896 was wrong. Segregration, Marshall and a host of social scientists said, erodes the moral fiber of our nation and makes a mockery of its democratic institutions. In a real way, segregation teaches our citizens the very opposite of the skills they need to navigate into the 21st century - a world where "race" should have no more significance than hair or eye color. PAGE 5 THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, July 6, 1997 Schools play a special role in preparing children for democracy. If they, like our neighborhoods, are separated by race - as "black" and "white" and "theirs" and "ours" - children will inevitably learn that opportunity is color-coded. The persistence of such a dual society and system of schools will make a mockery of laws that purport to convey everyone's equality and that ours is an open society. Moreover, segregated schools and segregated neighborhoods instruct our citizenry in the "inevitability" of a racially structured society. They make it obvious to both minority- and majority-group children that American institutions don't reflect what we say they should. Segregation distorts and perverts the most basic values of American freedom and justice. This is what was meant when the Supreme Court - citing "modern social science" - said in 1954 that enforced segregation in the public schools harms black children's psychological development in ways "unlikely ever to be undone." Interestingly, the Supreme Court, while acting unanimously to strike down "separate but equal" public schools, did not say what social science revealed about segregation's harm to majority-group children. Segregation creates in whites moral conflict and confusion and gives them a false sense of superiority over other human beings - a status that many seek to preserve, either wittingly or unwittingly, as they oppose - or flee from - desegregated schools and communities. Of course, all progress toward a society where "racial distinctions" are overcome depends on the achievement, first, of desegregation. Yet, the courts have limited their involvement with desegregation to situations where agents of the states intentionally practiced racial discrimination. In fact, whenever the federal courts have ordered desegregation or busing, they've done so only after plaintiffs, represented by the Justice Department and civil rights groups such as the NAACP, showed government-induced segregation in the schools. As a remedy, courts have required the redrawing of school district lines, changes in school locations and transfer policies and the reassignment of students. Busing is a tool imposed to correct a pervasive pattern of segregation, caused by purposeful, extensive acts of government agents. However, busing per se was not designed or intended to either raise academic achievement levels or to be the express to an integrated society. Achieving high-performance schools and an integrated society will take much more in terms of human effort and coordinated strategy. Indeed, when Dr. King and other civil-rights figures marched for integration in the 1950s and 1960s, they realized that desegregation needed to be a halfway point, not a stopping point, or people would never proceed to dismantle in its entirety a system of racial privilege and subjugation. Racism, they surmised, was an entrenched habit - a complex, difficult, tenacious foe of individual freedom which required the commitment of vision, will and resources to defeat. Unfortunately, many civil-rights organizations, now perhaps including the NAACP, have raised the white flag of surrender. PAGE 6 THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, July 6, 1997 They are retreating behind the color line where separate but equal is not only acceptable again, but fashionable. This retreat is as philosophic as it is strategic. They're not just frustrated by barriers to integration; they no longer desire to cross over. They think that education is strictly about the three "r's" and not about human interaction. Their black nationalism is matched by whites' indifference and fear - reflected in the attitude that their quality of life is measured by their distance from dysfunctional, largely black school systems. In their separate schools and communities, whites and blacks continue to learn stereotypes about each other and show contempt for "those people" across the racial divide. Historically, the NAACP has drawn from such alienation moral clarity and resolve to persevere against segregation, maintaining that segregation perpetuated racial caste, whatever the qualitative similarities in facilities or services to a particular school or community. Freeing all people of their racial phobias and superstitions was such a high priority that the NAACP often battled against "de facto" segregation, as well as segregation sanctioned by law. Now, buffeted by demands for relevance to poor blacks in their "own" communities and schools, the NAACP is in danger of capitulating to cynics and racial separatists. Those weary souls compromise with racism and adopt a black pride version of it, thereby resurrecting the discredited separate but equal doctrine. Is this a course that the visionaries of the civil rights movement would have counseled? No way. The modern NAACP's not-so-subtle invitation to the nation to "go slow" on school desegregation opens the gates for sugarcoating a widescale retrenchment on remedies to society's racial divides. In this connection, the NAACP would do well to heed the advice of one of its former lawyers who said, "One does not feed sugar to a cavity.' Michael Meyers is executive director of the New York Civil Rights Coalition LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: July 7, 1997 PAGE 8 5TH STORY of Level 2 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 The Dallas Morning News THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS July 6, 1997, Sunday, HOME FINAL EDITION SECTION: SUNDAY READER; Pg. 1J LENGTH: 1340 words HEADLINE: INTEGRATING PUBLIC SCHOOLS: NO; As the NAACP reconsiders its support of the policy, two experts debate whether desegregation is still important BYLINE: Glenn C. Loury, Special Contributor to The Dallas Morning News BODY: The Harvard Project on School Desegregation issued a report several months ago finding that racial segregation in the nation's public schools has increased steadily over the past 15 years. According to the report, segregation is now greater than at any time since the era of "forced busing" to achieve racial balance in the public schools was launched by the Supreme Court with its 1971 decision, Swann vs. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education. And the NAACP, set to begin its weeklong national convention Friday in Pittsburgh, plans to consider a change in its policy emphasizing school desegregation. The evidence of growing segregation - and a decreasing emphasis on changing it in the African-American community - has set off an alarm among other civil-rights activists who are concerned that it must imply a decrease of educational opportunity for black youngsters. I believe those concerns are misplaced. This is not to say that all is well with the education of African-American youngsters. The National Assessment of Educational Progress, a comprehensive effort to test the knowledge of a representative national sample of primary and secondary school students, has revealed a widening gap between the educational achievements of white and black students over the past decade. Moreover, as Columbia University education scholar Linda Darling-Hammond has documented in a number of studies, racial minority students do not enjoy the same level of access to qualified teachers, courses, curriculum materials and equipment as do white students. But while great disparities do exist in the quality of public education - black and Latino students in central cities are especially poorly served - a renewed emphasis on busing to create racially integrated schools is the wrong response. Rather, achieving true equality of opportunity for the poorest public school students means securing for them better teachers, smaller class sizes, longer school hours and greater support services in the schools they attend. If these things can be achieved, minority youngsters will be well served, whatever the racial composition of their schools might happen to be. Of course, as should go without saying, we must not permit any public school district to discriminate on the basis of race, or to actively promote racial PAGE 9 THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, July 6, 1997 segregation. Other things being equal, and where possible, I believe it is better that children be exposed to the racial diversity of our society by attending integrated schools. But in the many public school districts where most students are non-white, it has long made more sense to address those students' educational needs directly, rather than to spend scarce resources trying to get white families to send their children to the same schools as minorities. In any event, both the Supreme Court and the American people have shown little enthusiasm for the kind of open-ended judicial intervention aimed at securing racial balance which civil rights activists have advocated over the years. To take but one example, the Court's opinion in the 1995 case Missouri vs. Jenkins reversed a lower court's order that Kansas City undertake an expensive plan to attract suburban whites to an increasingly black, inner-city district through specialized "magnet schools." Indeed, federal courts around the country, especially in the South, have relaxed earlier decrees ordering school districts to promote integration, even though those districts have been moving toward resegregation. I am not arguing that these cases were rightly decided in every instance. What is clear, however, is that it would be unwise to expect a revival of 1970s-style judicial activism on behalf of the cause of integration. Nor are the courts the only obstacle in the way of bringing about greater racial integration through activist social policy. As a practical matter, the flight of white middle-class families from urban districts subject to desegregation decrees has made it all but impossible to achieve anything beyond token integration in many places. In 1972, before court-ordered busing began in Boston, 60 percent of the city's public school students were white. Today, despite the fact that the courts have been more flexible about integration efforts in recent years, whites make up only 18 percent of the students in Boston's struggling school system. Throughout the country, the decisions of white parents to move to suburban communities or to send their children to private schools have limited the efficacy of desegregation efforts. Though not as dramatically as in Boston, white enrollments have also declined in Denver, Norfolk, Va., and Savannah, Ga., which were subject to mandatory busing orders as well. Such behavior by whites is a stubborn reality, limiting the extent to which judicial mandates can increase racial mixing in the schools. A Supreme Court decision of some twenty years ago, in the case Milliken vs. Bradley, sharply restricted the circumstances in which federal judges can order metropolitan-wide, cross-district busing plans to promote integration. Yet, even if the prospects for significant racial integration in a city like Boston are now minimal, there is still plenty of room to improve the quality of education delivered to the families who must rely on public schools in that city. Many nonwhite parents realize this all too well. Opinion surveys reveal that they are more concerned about the quality of their children's schools than about racial balance for its own sake. All parents, black or white, want basically the same things from public schools: safety, order and the teaching of solid academic skills. PAGE 10 THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, July 6, 1997 Schools that deliver these things, regardless of racial composition, will be judged successful. Some advocates argue that only where white students are sufficiently numerous can safety, order and good teaching be confidently expected. But, to take that view is to abdicate parental responsibility to hold school officials accountable. Parents must bring pressure to bear on teachers, principals, superintendents and local politicians, in order to ensure that the public schools are responsive to the needs of their children. Moreover, a compulsive focus on racial integration can involve condescension toward non-white students and their families. As Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in his concurring opinion in Missouri vs. Jenkins: "It never ceases to amaze me that the courts are so willing to assume that anything that is predominantly black must be inferior.' The belief that "black students suffer an unspecified psychological harm from segregation that retards their mental and educational development,' Justice Thomas said, rests on an assumption of black inferiority. This echoes something the great black intellectual, W.E.B. DuBois, said to other blacks earlier in this century: "Never in the world should our fight be against association with ourselves because by that very token we give upthe whole argument that we are worth associating with." To presume that blacks must have a sufficient quota of whites in the classroom in order to learn, is to presume that there is something inherently wrong with blacks. But while black kids may not need to have whites sitting nearby in order to master arithmetic, the most disadvantaged children do need better schools, with resources sufficient to compensate for the influences of poverty they bring to the classroom. Integrationists assume that the presence of whites is the only sure way to draw attention to this need. But that was yesterday's struggle. Advocates of the interests of African-American youngsters should instead focus on achieving equal educational opportunity, but not by forced racial mixing. Instead, we must demand that students isolated in hard-pressed, big-city school districts receive the attention and the resources which, as Americans, they so richly deserve. Glenn C. Loury is director of the Institute on Race and Social Division at Boston University. LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: July 7, 1997 PAGE 2 2ND STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 The Austin American-Statesman Austin American-Statesman July 6, 1997 SECTION: Editorial; Pg. H2 LENGTH: 541 words HEADLINE: Equity in schools BODY: More than 40 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed separate but equal'' schools. The nation embarked on school integration plans that now have virtually ground to a halt. An article in last Sunday's American-Statesman noted that housing segregation is a chief culprit in the resegregation of public schools, along with boundary and school site decisions. We cannot integrate public schools in Austin and the nation without challenging housing segregation. Yet we have dismissed the importance of economic and racial integration. Our social retreat is glaringly expressed by our racial camps called neighborhoods. Since 1987, the number of Austin schools with predominantly minority populations has nearly doubled. A City of Austin study shows that a majority of minorities and poor people in the area live east of Interstate 35. In Charlotte, N.C., city and county leaders are working with school officials to locate the best schools in the central city, where more minorities and low-income people live. They also are using their ability to locate affordable housing to encourage neighborhood integration. Such efforts can be augmented by ensuring that proper resources exist in schools in which minorities are the majority. Realtors know that schools influence home-buying decisions. AISD officials have attempted to influence school integration through the drawing of district boundaries. However, some parents still argue that the district made a big mistake when it returned to neighborhood elementary schools more than 10 years ago. During last year's AISD bond election, many minority parents argued that more money should be given to central city schools rather than new schools in Southwest Travis County. We can't look to past practices for all the answers anymore, as illustrated in the NAACP's discussion on the merits of integration. America's race problems have mutated to more complex and vexing forms. Racism wasn't going to end by placing black and brown students in seats next to white students. Racism is an intricate web of often belligerent beliefs and institutional practices that aren't overcome with songs. Today, the government and courts are not playing the role they once did in legislating change. Furthermore, some minority parents ask: Would it be wiser to fight for equity in minority schools rather than rely on busing to achieve a PAGE 3 Austin American-Statesman, July 6, 1997 better education for our kids? The frustration with integration has a lot to do with the unequal burden of busing and disappointment in its results, said Julian Bond, a former Georgia Congressman and civil rights activists, in a recent New York Times article. But we should not give up on school integration, Bond concluded. He is right. Most educators believe there are benefits to be gained by minority and white students attending the same schools. After all, the world is full of diverse people. However, attention must be paid to meeting students' sometimes different needs. As in Charlotte, school officials in Austin and nationwide should join hands with city and county leaders who can and should use their authority to help develop economically and racially integrated neighborhoods. LOAD-DATE: July 6, 1997 PAGE 33 93RD STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 Associated Press AP Online June 23, 1997; Monday 18:47 Eastern Time SECTION: Domestic, non-Washington, general news item LENGTH: 667 words HEADLINE: NAACP Mulls Its Fundamental Policy BYLINE: JENNIFER C. YATES DATELINE: BALTIMORE BODY: The NAACP, which fought for decades to put black and white children in the same classrooms, is reconsidering its support of integration amid criticism that the practice is failing. Critics say the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People should focus on improving predominantly black schools instead of busing children away from them. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, for example, have argued that it is demeaning to suggest that black children can only get a good education in predominantly white schools. NAACP President Kweisi Mfume said Monday that discussions about the group's integration policies have been ongoing, but that doesn't mean they will change anything. "We can still support integration while fighting other problems, Mfume said. The NAACP is a big enough tent to allow that discussion to take place. We believe that we're better for it. The debate comes as NAACP officials prepare for their annual meeting on July 11 in Pittsburgh. With desegregation, blacks have gained access to programs and schools that were once the sole domain of whites. But many white families have responded by enrolling children in private and parochial schools, or by moving away. Melvin Skip Alston, president of the North Carolina NAACP State Conference, understands the frustration with busing but said backing away from integration is not the answer. ''I think busing is a problem. I think it's a primary problem, Alston said. 'If busing is unequal to blacks, then we need to fix that. But I don't want my children to have to fight the same fight my grandparents fought. The NAACP has been a champion of integration since its inception more than 80 years ago. PAGE 34 AP Online, June 23, 1997 Thurgood Marshall, who headed the NAACP's legal department, successfully argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1954 Brown VS. Board of Education case, which struck down segregation in schools. Marshall later became the nation's first black Supreme Court justice. Thomas is the second. Gary Orfield, a Harvard professor of education and social policy, said that abandoning integration policies would hurt children. 'The practical problem is we tried (segregation) for 70 years and it never worked, Orfield said. Separation by race produces separation by poverty, he said. Integration, though, is the only way to teach children how to live with people who are different from them, argues Willis Hawley, dean of the University of Maryland College of Education. "We know school desegregation can make a difference for kids in positive ways when it is done in the right way and when it does not put enormous hardships on children, Hawley said. LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: June 23, 1997 PAGE 16 6TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 The Washington Post The Washington Post June 15, 1997, Sunday, Final Edition SECTION: OUTLOOK; Pg. C01 LENGTH: 989 words HEADLINE: Where Do We Go From Here? Clinton Must Resist the Impulse To Control the Race Debate to Come BYLINE: Randall Kennedy BODY: Promise and peril surround President Clinton's initiative on race relations. The promise is a focused examination of racial issues that will clarify dilemmas so that at least we can know where and why we agree or disagree with one another. This is a precondition for sensible reform. Nearly everyone recognizes, as the president recently said, that "we have a long way to go." What precisely, however, is our aim? Thirty years ago, in the title of a book, civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. asked "Where Do We Go From Here?" But neither he -- nor anyone since -- has answered that question in a compelling, detailed and comprehensive fashion. Do we want a society governed by racial demography in which presidential cabinets, criminal juries and editorial offices must "look like America"? Or do we want a society governed by an anti-discrimination principle that requires citizens to look beyond looks? To understand the ramifications of this choice, as well as many others along the way, requires considerable thought and discussion. That is why the public should eschew the objections of those who contend that we have had too much "mere" talk about racial matters. We have not had too much talk; we have had too much rhetoric and spectacle. We have not had enough focused conversations from which participants and observers leave with more information and insight than they had when the conversation began. The peril is that Clinton and his aides will squelch the possibilities for an informative, intense and perhaps surprising discussion and instead sponsor a series of scripted, pseudo-events devoid of the candor and contentiousness required for any serious attempt to grapple with the race question. I hope, of course, that the president will rise to the occasion and frame and participate in debates that will be looked upon subsequently as a significant and productive venture. I fear, though, that this will not occur and that the president will be swayed by the sort of advice that appears to triumph all too often in the Clinton White House -- advice that is primarily concerned with short-term benefits that are easily discernible by pollsters whose only frame of reference is political advertising. I fear that over the next year, we will hear little more than a series of extended exhortations in which the American people are told things that virtually all of them already know and believe: "Racism is bad; "Don't hate people because of the color of their skin," and so on. PAGE 17 The Washington Post, June 15, 1997 Most of what the president has said in his recent forays into race talk is unobjectionable. But most of it has also been devoid of challenge. The tribute to Jackie Robinson, the medals for the long-ignored black heroes of World War II, the apology for the Tuskegee experiment, and the condemnation of racially motivated violence were all politically safe gestures rendered according to wholly conventional formulas. That these gestures were so totally uncontroversial is a testament to their marginal relationship to America's racial divisions. The president's address yesterday at the University of California at San Diego was somewhat different in that the locale forced him to at least touch upon a current dispute. After all, during the past year, California had ended affirmative action in all state agencies and programs. As a supporter of affirmative action, Clinton disagrees with California's governor and a majority of its voters. Many who feared that Clinton would pull a "Lani Guinier" on affirmative action -- i.e., abandon his position in the face of strong opposition - - are relieved and pleased that he has reconfirmed his commitment to this embattled policy. In terms of public enlightenment, however, even Clinton's engagement with the affirmative action issue has been uninspiring, since his defense evades the deepest, most difficult questions posed by its critics. If Clinton's initiative is to amount to anything memorable it must create forums in which knowledgeable thoughtful people address their fellow citizens about the racial matters that touch them most intimately. We need to hear about and from people who live in the nation's black and brown ghettos. Do they have reason to believe that if they "play by the rules" their lives and the lives of their children will become more prosperous, secure and enjoyable? We need to hear about and from white women who view race as a signal that a black male stranger poses more of a threat to them than a white male stranger. Is their calculation sensible? Is it fair? We need to hear about and from those who view Asians as the model minority. Are they implicitly labeling blacks as the non-model minority? We need to hear about and from Latinos, Asian Americans and blacks, who view one another with racial resentment and distrust. What is the basis of their discord? What would satisfy the antagonists? We need to hear about and from those who encourage their children to marry persons within their race, religion or ethnic group. Does such advice warrant praise or condemnation? To pose these and even more pointed questions, and to permit and consider a range of divergent responses, might help to create the thought-provoking conversation that many Americans would like to have about their racial dilemmas. Allowing, much less facilitating, such a venture, however, cuts against the grain of the administration's style. It typically wants to control, not learn from, public discussion of difficult issues. PAGE 18 The Washington Post, June 15, 1997 The conversation about race that the country needs is one that entails taking risks. Because we are unlikely to see much presidential risk taking in the race initiative, we are unlikely to benefit much from it. Hopefully, the man from Hope will prove me wrong. Randall Kennedy is a professor at Harvard Law School and the author of "Race, Crime and Law, II published last month by Pantheon Books. GRAPHIC: Illustration, john overmeyer for The Washington Post; Illustration, oliphant LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: June 16, 1997 PAGE 2 1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 National Broadcasting Co. Inc. NBC News Transcripts SHOW: NBC NIGHTLY NEWS (6:30 PM ET) June 10, 1997, Tuesday 11:21 AM LENGTH: 313 words HEADLINE: HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR AND AUTHOR RANDALL KENNEDY DISCUSSES HIS VIEWS ON AMERICAN RACE RELATIONS ANCHORS: TOM BROKAW BODY: TOM BROKAW, anchor: Black Americans and white Americans still have very different views about opportunities for blacks to advance in this country. A new Gallup poll out this week says that whites believe there is not much of a problem, but blacks argue that discrimination still limits their chances in America. Almost equal percentages of both groups think that race relations will always be a problem in the United States. But Harvard law professor Randall Kennedy, a student of race relations, says that Americans have always depended too much on skin color and too little on achievement. He's written a provocative book called "Race, Crime, and the Law." Mr. RANDALL KENNEDY: My strong preference would be to have a social and political order in which race had really no moral, or political, or legal significance. BROKAW: Why don't you believe in Affirmative Action? Mr. KENNEDY: Well, I would prefer that we not treat people differently according to race. To the extent that Affirmative Action does that, it immediately causes me tremendous anxiety. Group of Children: (In unison) I am special. I am young and gifted. BROKAW: You write about blacks, for example, who are perfectly comfortable with the idea of bonding with other blacks, whether they know them or not, but are outraged when, for example, whites get together and say, We're proud of our white race and our white family. Mr. KENNEDY: People ought not to have racial pride. Why should anybody be proud of something that they merely inherit? People should be proud of things that they themselves accomplish. BROKAW: How do you fit into all of that? Do they call you brother? Mr. KENNEDY: Oh, sure. BROKAW: And how do you feel about that? PAGE 3 NBC News Transcripts, June 10, 1997 Mr. KENNEDY: Well, it's like many things. It has a good side and a bad side. I have lots of friends, lots of family members who were at the Million Man March, and it was uplifting for many people. On the other hand, things like the Million Man March entrenches race consciousness. It entrenches the idea that there are--that we belong to different racial teams. BROKAW: You seem to be divided between your heart and your mind on this issue of race. Is that a fair summary? Mr. KENNEDY: I'm no more immune to the various sentiments than anyone else. But I'm not uncomfortable with fighting these sentiments that are within me. BROKAW: Harvard law professor Randall Kennedy tonight. When we come back, this young man wants to be a police officer, but should his past stand in the way? LANGUAGE: English LOAD-DATE: June 11, 1997 PAGE 19 7TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 Times Mirror Company Los Angeles Times June 12, 1997, Thursday, Home Edition SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 9; Op Ed Desk LENGTH: 754 words HEADLINE: PERSPECTIVE ON RACE RELATIONS; SOCIAL JUSTICE DEMANDS SACRIFICE; THE PRESIDENT MUST PERSUADE THE AMERICAN MAJORITY TO SHARE POWER AND PRIVILEGE IN A 'PIGMENTOCRACY. BYLINE: RANDALL KENNEDY, Randall Kennedy is a professor at Harvard Law School and the author, of "Race, Crime and the Law. BODY: Thus far in his campaign to summon Americans to confront and overcome their racial problems, President Clinton has focused almost exclusively upon bigotry that virtually all intelligent and respectable people now abhor: the color barrier that excluded black baseball players from the major leagues, the notorious medical experiments on black men in Tuskegee, racially motivated, violent hate crimes. It is useful for the president to highlight these despicable acts insofar as some Americans remain unaware of the extent to which contempt for people of color has poisoned society. It would be a mistake, however, for the president to suggest that aggressive bigotry lay at the heart of our current racial dilemmas. If racially motivated violence, the Ku Klux Klan, the N-word, and the ugly sentiments that nourish these vile outcroppings of racial animus were suddenly to disappear, we surely would be left with a better society. This welcome development, however, would have little effect on the isolated, miserable, criminogetic circumstances in which disproportionately large numbers of blacks, Latinos and Native Americans live. Nor would the sudden, magical disappearance of racial hatred massively reduce the discriminations that unfairly burden minorities in the criminal justice system and housing and employment markets. Many of the deprivations that ensnare large numbers of racial minorities are vestiges of past injustices that perpetuate harms even in the absence of any continuing purposeful aim to do SO. Thus, unfortunately, the horrid conditions that menace so many Americans stuck in our black and brown ghettos continue to wreak havoc even without the aid of racial malevolence. Mere indifference will suffice. The problem facing the president or anyone else seriously concerned with addressing the core of racial inequity is not persuading the Great American Middle that burning black (or any other) churches is terrible or that it is disgusting to hate people simply because of the color of their skin. The vast majority of people have already been persuaded to embrace these propositions. The real problem is persuading the Great American Middle to reorient fundamentally the allocations of power and privilege that continue to make PAGE 20 Los Angeles Times, June 12, 1997 America a "pigmentocracy" despite the substantial and heartening changes for the better that have occurred over the past 50 years. To carry out this task will require more than a willingness to avoid gratuitously insulting or harming others because of their race. It will also require something that President Clinton has yet to mention with any real clarity: sacrifice. Redressing the wounds left by our long history of racial oppression will require an expensive reconstruction. But the ascendant politics of the moment is averse to redistributing wealth and opportunity downward, whether in terms of class, gender or race. To push the nation toward the realization of its ideals will require the president to tell the public something that he appears loath to articulate: that social justice, like many of the best things in life, is costly, and that for us to pay this cost is worthwhile. The president, like many commentators, speaks as if ceasing to engage in racial discrimination is cost-free, as if all that such a renunciation would entail is merely the forgoing of an arbitrary gesture. But that is often not SO. Of course, some racial discrimination stems solely from bigotry; but a lot of racial discrimination is strategic. Strategic racial discrimination arises when people calculate, often correctly, that they can attain some extra bit of security by using race (typically coloredness) as a proxy for an increased risk of danger. Much of the racial discrimination engaged in by home buyers, taxi drivers and employers is of this sort. They initially disfavor colored neighborhoods, potential customers and prospective employees not because they are bigots but because they perceive that doing so will maximize their self-interest, at least in the short term. If racial discrimination that adversely affects minorities were solely an activity carried out by marginal creeps, it would not constitute the major problem that it is.' The fact that racial discrimination often does advance the narrow self-interest of intelligent, decent, influential people is what gives it deep roots and makes any serious effort to uproot such practices a far more difficult and disruptive venture than the president's rhetoric has so far indicated. GRAPHIC: GRAPHIC-DRAWING: ( .), JEFF DANZIGER, New York PHOTO: RANDALL KENNEDY LANGUAGE: English LOAD-DATE: June 12, 1997 PAGE 5 5TH STORY of Level 2 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 The New York Times Company The New York Times June 23, 1997, Monday, Late Edition - Final SECTION: Section A; Page 1; Column 2; National Desk LENGTH: 1529 words HEADLINE: At N.A.A.C.P., Talk of a Shift On Integration BYLINE: By STEVEN A. HOLMES DATELINE: WASHINGTON, June 22 BODY: Facing continued white resistance to busing to achieve school desegregation, an increasingly conservative judiciary and now criticism from inside and outside its ranks, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is rethinking one of its fundamental principles: advocacy of public school integration. The N.A.A.C.P. has always supported school integration as a way to improve educational opportunities for black students, but other black leaders have begun voicing doubts about that goal. They say the organization should focus more heavily on seeking the improvement of majority-black schools. A change in the 88-year-old organization's position on school integration, should it occur, would come after years of criticism of the N.A.A.C.P. as being hidebound and lacking in appeal for younger blacks. Debating such a radical move would allow the organization to be seen as being more attuned to new thinking in civil rights. Officials of the organization have been in a quandary in recent years about members who oppose its traditional support for racially mixed schools, even ousting local chapter directors who expressed different views. Opposition to the N.A.A.C.P. policy has been growing at the same time that segregation in public schools has been on the rise. Other dissenting voices have added pressure. More black parents are complaining that under school integration plans, it is their children who are most likely to be the ones bused out of their neighborhoods. And some black self-help advocates, like Justice Clarence Thomas and Louis Farrakhan, head of the Nation of Islam, have argued that it is demeaning to suggest that black students can achieve a quality education only in largely white schools. At its national convention next month in Pittsburgh, the N.A.A.C.P. is expected to have a formal debate on its school-integration policy for the first time in more than a decade. Myrlie Evers-Williams, the chairwoman of the N.A.A.C.P., said she not only expected the delegates to debate the merits of continuing to promote integration in public schools but also expected them to consider modifying the group's position through a resolution. But her personal position is still in support of integrated schools. PAGE 6 The New York Times, June 23, 1997 "The N.A.A.C.P. has always believed in integration of the public schools," Ms. Evers-Williams said. "But a debate has been raging as to whether that's still the position we should take." Whether the delegates decide to alter their backing of integration efforts, including busing, or simply vote to study the issue, Ms. Evers-Williams said the N.A.A.C.P. board would also take up the issue either at the convention or at its next board meeting in October. Even the suggestion of a shift in position could further erode support for a policy that seems to be increasingly falling out of favor among blacks. Michael Meyers, head of the New York Civil Rights Coalition, a centrist group that still supports integration, interpreted Ms. Evers-Williams's statements as a tacit approval of some change in direction. "She is now sending a very clear and strong signal that she is ready to let their policy go by the wayside, II Mr. Meyers said. The rethinking of its stance on integration comes at a time when the N.A.A.C.P. is struggling to find its voice again after several years of internal discord that led to the dismissal of its former executive director Benjamin F. Chavis Jr., and the replacement with Ms. Evers-Williams of its chairman, William F. Gibson. The group has also had to pay off a $3.2 million debt that had hamstrung its legal and advocacy work. Last week Ms. Evers-Williams brought together a multiracial panel of experts to advise her and other N.A.A.C.P. leaders on issues and strategies the organization might pursue. "For the last two years, we have been focused on the survival of the N.A.A.C.P., Ms. Evers-Williams said. "We're trying to make the organization strong so that we can turn to an action plan." Efforts to reduce school busing are winning some black support. Earlier this year, the Board of Education in Guilford County, N.C., which includes Greensboro, voted to redraw its district lines to minimize its large-scale busing program and preserve neighborhood schools. Among the groups advocating the end of large-scale busing in the county was a group of black ministers called the Pulpit Forum. "Our biggest concern now is whether our schools will be equal," said Amos Quick, a black member of the 60-member citizens committee that will redraw the school boundaries, writing in The Greensboro News & Record last month. "Separate but truly equal would not be so bad." In some ways, a shift in the N.A.A.C.P.'s policy would have more symbolic meaning than real impact. Under what was essentially a peace treaty between two groups that are often in competition, the N.A.A.C.P. generally filed school desegregation suits in the North in the 1960's and 1970's, while the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, once part of the N.A.A.C.P., brought such suits in the South. But the Supreme Court's 1974 decision in Milliken V. Bradley made it more difficult and more expensive to win desegregation suits that resulted in. PAGE 7 The New York Times, June 23, 1997 busing between increasingly black inner-city districts and white suburbs, the general trend in northern metropolitan areas. With the increased costs of the lawsuits and the N.A.A.C.P.'s continued financial woes, the group has virtually stopped involving itself at the national level in school desegregation cases. "The N.A.A.C.P. is a large organization, and there are many local chapters who are still fighting the resegregation of schools that is going on," said Gary Orfield, a professor of education and social policy at Harvard. "But the national N.A.A.C.P. office has not been a major actor in this area for years." Still, the symbolism of an N.A.A.C.P. retreat from its unstinting support of school integration would have significance. The Justice Department monitors more than 400 school desegregation programs -- some court-ordered, some voluntary and some observers say it would become more difficult to defend those programs, especially the so-called metropolitan plans, which involve busing between cities and suburbs -- from attack. "If the N.A.A.C.P. is saying that separate is no longer unequal," Mr. Meyers said, "that functionally reverses Brown V. Board of Education. If the N.A.A.C.P. is pulling back, then they are sending a strong signal to the courts and making it extremely difficult for there to be metropolitan remedies for segregation." Support for school integration has been a defining principle of the N.A.A.C.P. almost since its inception. Indeed, it was litigation carried out by Thurgood Marshall, the late Supreme Court Justice who once headed the group's legal department, that eventually led to the landmark Brown V. Board of Education of Topeka, Kan., decision in 1954. That decision outlawed legal segregation and overturned the doctrine set forth in the 1896 Plessy V. Ferguson case, in which the Court said that separate but equal treatment of blacks and whites did not violate the equal protection guarantee of the Constitution. But in recent years, there has been growing disillusionment with busing and other efforts to achieve integration. Julian Bond, an N.A.A.C.P. board member who said he would oppose diminishing support for integrated schools, still empathized with those who are frustrated. "Generally among black Americans, Mr. Bond said, "there is a feeling that this has come to naught, that so much energy has been put into it without commensurate results and that white America has been SO resistant that you're butting your head against the wall. I think it's a wrong attitude, but it's an understandable attitude." The debate over integration has roiled the N.A.A.C.P. itself. Last year, the N.A.A.C.P. board dismissed Robert H. Robinson as president of its Bergen County branch in New Jersey for expressing the view that getting quality schools in black neighborhoods was more important than seeking integration. In October 1995, the group also ousted Kenneth W. Jenkins, president of the Yonkers branch, after he questioned the wisdom of the continued use of busing to achieve integration. That type of ferment within the black community is clearly influencing the N.A.A.C.P. to review its position, several board members said. "When you listen to the views of the community and listen to parents, they are telling us that things are not right," said Sandra McGary, chairwoman of the N.A.A.C.P. board's education committee. PAGE 8 The New York Times, June 23, 1997 Still, some board members say they fear that a less stalwart position would coincide with a worrisome trend of more segregation. A report issued last month by researchers from Harvard and Indiana Universities found that racial segregation in the public schools had been increasing since 1980, especially as more white families had moved out of inner cities and into the suburbs and as Federal courts had stopped ordering integration plans that linked cities and suburbs. The report's authors warned against giving in to that trend. LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: June 23, 1997 PAGE 2 12TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format. Copyright 1997 Times Mirror Company Los Angeles Times June 15, 1997, Sunday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Page 18; National Desk LENGTH: 1290 words HEADLINE: NEWS ANALYSIS; CLINTON'S SPEECH CONFIRMS LEFTWARD SHIFT ON RACE ISSUES; POLITICS: EARLY INITIATIVES RELYING ON INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY HAVE YIELDED TO MORE LIBERAL APPROACH. BYLINE: RONALD BROWNSTEIN, TIMES POLITICAL WRITER DATELINE: WASHINGTON BODY: With his long-awaited speech on race relations Saturday, President Clinton continued an odyssey toward convention on the most incendiary issue in American politics. Though Clinton has always spoken with great passion about the need for racial healing, at different points in his career he has prescribed different methods for achieving it. In his initial 1992 campaign--and at various points in his presidency--Clinton has offered a vision of racial reconciliation that departed from liberal conventions by emphasizing mutual responsibility among whites and minorities alike. But more often in the past few years--and again Saturday--Clinton has presented a much more traditionally liberal analysis that defended affirmative action, praised diversity and emphasized the history of discrimination against minorities. "There has been a great difference between his campaign mode and his governing mode on this," said Fred Siegel, a historian at Cooper Union, a New York City college. Beneath the shifting nuance of Clinton's message is a larger question about the best path to easing racial tensions and broadening opportunities for minorities. While African American leaders like Jesse Jackson believe that the key is new, racially targeted government programs to attack poverty and discrimination, centrist Democratic thinkers like Siegel believe that a more promising approach is Clinton's 1992 formula, which stressed reconciliation around the idea of shared values and race-neutral programs that link opportunity with responsibility. PAGE 3 Los Angeles Times, June 15, 1997 "We are far from a colorblind society, said Will Marshall, president of the centrist Progressive Policy Institute, "but the country believes the problem is less and less a problem of discrimination and more and more one of poor people in minority communities lacking the opportunity to join the burgeoning black middle class. II At the moment, Clinton appears to be adrift between these contending visions, offering neither a clear alternative to the traditional civil rights agenda nor specific initiatives for advancing it. Since the first days of his 1992 campaign, Clinton has repeatedly condemned racism, insisting that the nation could not move forward without racial and ethnic reconciliation. But, especially in that first presidential campaign, he linked that reconciliation to demanding greater "personal responsibility" among the poor--most notably by requiring work from welfare recipients--and carefully suggested that discrimination could not explain all the problems confronting minorities. * In effect, Clinton sought to bridge the racial and ideological divisions over race relations by arguing that the nation could come together around a vision that provided equal opportunity for, but demanded equal responsibility from, all Americans. In the 1992 campaign and beyond, that synthesis carried Clinton into unusually candid discussions of racial issues. On successive days in March 1992, he made dramatic back-to-back appeals for racial harmony in Macomb County--a Detroit suburb symbolic to many of white flight--and an inner-city black church in Detroit. In Macomb, he told members of an almost all-white audience that as president, he would work to "give you your values back" but in return would demand that they "give up some of the prejudices of the 1980s " The next day, at the black church, he said government efforts to help the needy would not work without greater initiative in poor communities. "I cannot do for you what you will not do for yourselves,' he said. Even more dramatically--and controversially--later that spring Clinton condemned a black rap singer, Sister Souljah, who had been quoted after the Los Angeles riots suggesting that African Americans should commit violence not against other minorities, but rather whites. Critics accused Clinton of exploiting racial animosities, but supporters like Marshall believed that Clinton was sending a powerful message that he intended to hold all races to common standards. Clinton was acutely aware that all of this represented a stark departure from the prevailing liberal discussion about race, which focused almost entirely on lingering problems of discrimination, said Stanley B. Greenberg, Clinton's 1992 campaign pollster. "What he was saying was there are values that unite black and white, and they the races were being divided by those who want to take advantage. He was PAGE 4 Los Angeles Times, June 15, 1997 saying the theme of personal responsibility provided the basis for the people in Macomb to reach out to Detroit and vice versa, Greenberg said. As president, Clinton has returned to this vision in some of his most powerful speeches--including his November 1993 address in the Memphis, Tenn. pulpit where Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his last sermon, and his impassioned remarks on the day of the "Million Man March" in October 1995. In the Memphis speech, Clinton emphasized the progress against discrimination and said King would have been horrified to see "13-year-old boys with automatic weapons" and "children" bearing children. In Texas, on the day of Louis Farrakhan's sprawling separatist oratory at the Capitol, Clinton pointedly declared that whites and blacks alike had to "clean their house of racism. " Little of that astringent language was evident in Clinton's speech on Saturday. His discussion of responsibility was cursory, muted and diffuse; he spent considerably more time emphasizing traditional liberal priorities like the defense of affirmative action and diversity. That fit his recent rhetorical pattern. In his 1996 campaign he mostly delivered broad, soft-edged appeals for interracial tolerance. As he did Saturday, Clinton in the 1995 speech in which he called for the continuation of affirmative action programs emphasized the "persistence of bigotry." Clinton's record on race-related issues shows the same division. Many of Clinton's key domestic policies have been infused with themes of individual initiative and responsibility. Over the objections of civil rights leaders, he signed anti-crime legislation that balanced funding for prevention programs with tough new punishment measures, and welfare reform legislation that required work and imposed a time limit on government assistance. His urban agenda is based less on direct government spending than on the promotion of development with increased access to private investment. But Clinton has disappointed centrist Democrats by refusing to consider alternatives to affirmative action that might be less racially divisive (like assistance based on economic class), though Clinton on Saturday fleetingly suggested that he would be receptive if anyone showed him a viable alternative. Exactly why Clinton has given greater emphasis recently to conventional liberal arguments on race isn't clear. But some close observers speculate that the push by some Republicans to eliminate all affirmative action programs has compelled him to intensify his defense of them. Conversely, Siegel suggests Clinton's renewed focus on race may also represent an effort to soothe minority leaders angry over the welfare reform and balanced-budget agreements. With these divergent strains of thought entwining through Clinton's record, even close observers can't predict with certainty whether his racial initiative will produce new directions or slide into the old grooves that have divided left from right, and black from white, on the issue. PAGE 5 Los Angeles Times, June 15, 1997 "He is right to think there is work to be done in reconciliation, and he as president can do it, Greenberg said. "But the tendency is to come back to it in more traditional terms rather than the terms he introduced in 1992." GRAPHIC: PHOTO: President Clinton takes in ceremony with UC San Diego associated students President Coleen Sabatini. PHOTOGRAPHER: GINA FERAZZI / Los Angeles Times LANGUAGE: English LOAD-DATE: June 15, 1997