Targets (racial and gender targets or goals) are new terms
preferred by the racial/gender quota industry. 'Targets' differ from quotas only
in that they are "moveable feasts" and they are designed by the Clinton
administration to do three things: (1) To attempt to by-pass the 'strict scrutiny
test' established by the Supreme Court for government imposition of race-based
remedies; (2) To 'hold harmless' the enforcing agency; and (3) To diffuse
responsibility for racial quotas (targets) across hundreds of state and local agencies,
thus hopefully making legal challenges and the collection of proof of reverse
discrimination much more difficult.
'Targets' are a shallow, verbal shell game, and Clinton / Gore, and their rainbow handlers hope the concept of 'targets' will work as follows: An agency (federal or state) establishes a "target" for race- or gender-quotas, but it is "adjustable", i.e., it is usually stated as a range, eg., "from 5% to 30% of (xyz state or federal agency) contracts will be awarded to women and minorities in this particular industry classification only". It is phrased as "a suggestion to the local/state agency receiving federal funds to award federal tax dollars to preferred minorities, but we (the feds) WILL seriously review the performance of the state-local agencies who receive these funds, and will adjust our distribution of these tax-payer funds based on the recipient office/agency/state/local authority's achievement of the 'target', BUT we, the feds, are not liable for any reverse discrimination charges that may obtain as a result of the recipient office/agency/state/local authority's means of achieving the 'target'."
The basis for the "targets" is the Clinton / Gore administration's alleged examination of all business and industrial classifications in the U.S. to selectively determine if there are "lingering effects of past discrimination" in those business categories. It is a beautiful, albeit flawed, scam based upon the childish hope that if an agency is legally challenged for reverse racial discrimination, the defendant agency (state, local or federal) can say to the court "Ooops! We're sorry your honor, we guess there is (A. not as much as we thought; or B. no longer) lingering discrimination in that industry. We'll revise our "targets", and we promise it won't happen again. And besides, your honor, they weren't quotas they were non-binding 'targets', and we can't be held responsible for the state/local actions to achieve those 'targets'. "
Close Frames and Return to Adversity.Net Home Page