Kamala Harris wants an “opportunity economy for black men.” Citing her experience participating in the civil rights movement as a child, she recently pledged to “remove historic barriers” that have impeded “wealth creation, education, employment, income, and health.” Economic opportunity is an important and underappreciated aspect of the civil rights movement. But Harris’ proposals for stronger race-based laws and government regulation misunderstand both equality and opportunity. And that is against the Constitution.
While the link between equality and civil rights is well known, the link between civil rights and economic freedom is less appreciated. In the aftermath of the Civil War, the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment were deeply concerned with securing economic rights, including the freedom to enter into contracts, own and dispose of property, and retain and enjoy the fruits of one’s labor. I had it. They knew that these rights were especially important to ensure the well-being of former slaves. One lawmaker said, “People have the right to live, but denying them the right to enter into contracts to secure labor privileges and remuneration is a mockery.”
This theme has been repeated by civil rights leaders throughout history. As Martin Luther King Jr. famously said, the civil rights agenda should not be “Burn, Baby, Burn,” but “Build, Baby, Build.” It should be “Learn, learn, and we will earn, learn, learn.” That’s why the Fourteenth Amendment includes not only the Equal Protection Clause, but also guarantees of due process and the promise that the government cannot take away the privileges and immunities of citizenship, another term for individual rights. is.
Despite these constitutional protections, the government often stands in the way of economic opportunity. It has created a thicket of regulations that suffocates entrepreneurs, especially up-and-coming entrepreneurs who cannot afford to navigate a world of expensive and complex regulations. Between long, cumbersome and uncertain permitting, zoning laws, licensing systems and high fees, many would-be entrepreneurs give up before they even get started.
President Obama’s 2015 report details some of these issues. The report found that occupational licensing poses a significant barrier to employment and innovation, disproportionately affecting political minorities of all types. The report estimates that licensing restrictions alone would cost millions of jobs and increase costs by more than $100 billion annually, but would have limited impact on quality and public safety.
The victims are exactly the people Harris claims to help. A Nevada man was prevented from starting a moving business. People who would benefit from innovative medical companies aiming to lower the cost of dental care. and education entrepreneurs who are bringing promising new learning models to struggling regions.
So Harris’ plan to “remove historic barriers” to economic opportunity, health care, and education sounds promising. But instead of scaling back, her proposals seem to go further. For example, providing 1 million forgivable loans to Black entrepreneurs (and others) to start their businesses, creating a new regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies, and health issues that disproportionately impact Black men. This includes launching initiatives focused on In other words, her policies promote unequal treatment and increased regulation.
Although the Harris campaign recently said any measure would be race-neutral, the original framework appeared to indicate targeting people specifically, if not exclusively, based on race. The Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution mandates equal treatment on the basis of race, for good reason. First, governments are particularly bad at classifying people. Consider the government’s broad and inaccurate classification of “Asian”, which groups people from dozens of countries, languages, and cultures as if they all share the same experiences. The government’s definition of Asians collectively includes 60% of the world’s population.
Race is also a crude proxy for what the government is trying to do. Even if we are of the same race, we do not necessarily have the same experiences or history. Instead, racial categories include people of different ethnicities who live in different states and have a myriad of different experiences and characteristics. Simply put, not all people of the same race experience the same inequities.
One of Harris’ recent tweets illustrates this point. She praised the Pentagon’s announcement to right the wrongs of past policies targeting LGBTQ+ individuals. The bill would provide honorable discharges to 800 veterans who were discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” unlocking benefits not currently available to them. This is an example of a policy that does not use agents to correct wrongs. This not only provides some benefit to every LGBTQ+ person who has ever served. It applies to those directly affected in a way that corrects specific historical wrongs.
In other words, meaningful and constitutional opportunity issues target the real barriers people face and avoid relying on racial categories. In the words of one Supreme Court Justice, “We are but one race here; we are Americans,” and all Americans are entitled to both the equality and opportunity promised by the Constitution. .
