Harry Reid's Views on Race

NOTE: A day after this post, Reid appeared on Meet the Press to deny the Sun-Times report that he believes - or told Gov. Blagojevich - that he believed top Illinois African American leaders were "unelectable." I'm glad Reid did this, and in the spirit of "innocent till proven guilty" and in light of what I originally noted was his stellar legislative record on race issues, I am inclined to believe him. That said, it doesn't negate the fundamental point of the original post, which is that in political circles, black candidates are often billed as politically inferior or "unelectable," - and that such latent racism is considered mundane. We need to get over that racism, and if this Reid controversy - whether rooted in fact or rooted in Blagojevich spin - helped forward the dialogue on that racism, then it's a good thing.

If you believe what the Chicago Sun-Times is reporting today*, then its fair to ask whether Harry Reid (D-NV) has some very disturbing - and very disturbingly outdated - views on race and politics:

Days before Gov. Blagojevich was charged with trying to sell President-elect Barack Obama's U.S. Senate seat to the highest bidder, top Senate Democrat Harry Reid made it clear who he didn't want in the post: Jesse Jackson, Jr., Danny Davis or Emil Jones.

Rather, Reid called Blagojevich to argue he appoint either state Veterans Affairs chief Tammy Duckworth or Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, sources told the Chicago Sun-Times.

Sources say the Senate majority leader pushed against Jackson and Davis -- both Democratic congressmen from Illinois -- and against Jones -- the Illinois Senate president who is the political godfather of President-elect Barack Obama -- because he did not believe the three men were electable.

Jackson, Davis and Jones are three top African American leaders in Illinois - they are each eminently qualified and have lots of experience winning elections. And yet according to the Sun-Times, Reid believes they are unelectable, while insisting that two non-black candidates are more electable. Sure, you can make individual arguments against each of those candidates - just like racially motivated employers can make individual arguments about why they fired this or that African American employee. But (if this story is correct) what gives away Reid's broader and more disturbing views on race as a whole - what tells us that this is less about individuals and more about an overarching view that black heritage is synonymous with inability to be elected - is his inclusion of Tammy Duckworth in the "electable" category.

This isn't to say that Madigan or Duckworth aren't "electable." In fact, the story really has nothing to do with them - it has to do with Reid pushing the idea that if you are a black person, you are a less politically attractive candidate to the Washington Democratic Establishment based on the discredited fallacy that if you are black and have won elections you are still less able to win elections than non-blacks who have never won elections.

Of course, winning elected office as an African American poses unique challenges. Racism remains alive and well in America - and especially in politics, where self-fulfilling ideologies (ie. if you are black you can't win) keep minority or female candidates down, and preserve the largely white male power structure inside the Beltway.

But as everyone from Barack Obama to Deval Patrick has shown, those challenges can be overcome. And what's so absurd about Reid's apparent view is that it is being expressed about an appointment to fill the seat of Obama - an African American who won statewide in Illinois - just after Obama won the presidency. It kinda makes you wonder if Reid would have told Illinois Democratic leaders back in 2004 not to back Obama for Senate because he was supposedly "unelectable."

Make no mistake about it - whether the Sun-Times story is accurate or not (and I sure hope it isn't), the undeniable fact is that the image of African Americans as inferior political candidates remains widespread in Washington's political circles even after the 2008 election, and such views are a more subtle form of racism than overt hatemongering.

Let's be real clear: Nothing in Reid's career suggests he dislikes African Americans or thinks they are inferior humans - but alleged moves like this (which are widespread throughout politics) suggests he believes African Americans are inherently inferior political candidates. That may be because he thinks America is a racist country, but his reasoning - however benevolent or not - matters far less than the expression of his belief - in this case, allegedly using his power to try to shove aside the major African American candidates because they are supposedly "unelectable." By allegedly lining up the Democratic Establishment against these candidates (and thus aligning money and infrastructure against them), he is indeed creating a self-fulfilling prophecy that actually makes these African Americans less electable.

The reason this Sun-Times story hasn't generated more news actually confirms the prevalence of these troubling views on race and politics. It's not newsy that a top Democratic official thinks the major black candidates are inferior to the major white candidates in a Senate race because that's how it's always been. Indeed, in many ways, the Democratic Establishment remains decidedly Old School in the worst sense of the term, too often seeing diversity - whether racial or gender - as a political liability rather than a strength. It may be the 21st century, but often the ugly ghosts of the 19th century still haunt the party.

*Let me add that I'm still hoping Reid issues a statement explaining how this story is wrong, or the Sun-Times retracts it.

Comments

[PRODEMO]

When this whole thing started ,impeaching Blagovjevich, Democrats warned him that they would not seat anyone he named to the senate. Burris was well aware of this, and for him to make it a racial point now is obscene and speaks very lowly of him.

[easarsfield]

well said. It's funny how Burris was calling for the senator to step down, but he will sure accept an appointment from him!

I firmly believe that Blago could have appointed Jesus Christ and the democrats would be denying him a seat.

[vjoseph]

Exactly! That is what bothers me with Burris and Rush. They were asking for Blago to step down, until Blago picked Burris! Talk about hypocrisy!

[vjoseph]

I am not defending Reid here, but, I have had a hard time believing anything coming out of the Sun Times, ever since the Rahm 21 phone calls rumor. The Sun Times has lost its credibility, so when that story broke, I did not believe it. Furthermore, this claim is coming from the Blago camp. Why the heck should I believe this crook?!!! That man is an opportunist, who's sole intention is to undermine Obama and the Dems! I reserve my judgment on Reid in this whole affair, but I am not jumping up and down and screaming racism quite yet, until I have solid, concrete proof

[easarsfield]

agreed. I was born and raised a chicago democrat, but my whole family reads the Trib. The Sun TImes is hogwash.

[vinny]

So far, Reid has not disputed the Sun Times report. Apparently, Reid DID make a call to the governor to discuss his own preferences for the position. That is the real point.

[AnnfromCA]

No, he denied it categorically.

[robXdion]

Obama couldn't get into the 2000 DNC convention for this very reason. But Dem party leaders don't want to talk about that.

[lpeggy]

He sure got the last laugh! :-)

[moda31]

it's the same garbage that had all the purveyors of CW saying that obama had problems winning over working class white voters despite the fact that he already had to do that to win his senate seat in illinois, and it's what was behind hillary's argument about electability during the primary, so harry reid is hardly alone in this; it's been around a long time and obama's election wasn't going to change that (correct me if i'm wrong, but harry reid didn't think obama could get elected either until he had no choice but to support him as the party's nominee).

[Eyewideopen]

This is an outstanding article and like you, I hope the allegations are untrue.

If not, it explains why Blacks believe, and rightly so, the Democratic Party has taken our support for granted for many decades. Perhaps Bobby Rush's racial broadside was just the kind of preemptive strike needed to make the Democrats in the Senate rethink their position on the Illinois seat.

[diogenes1967]

I have thought this for a long time, I didn't vote at all in 1996 because of it. Blacks aren't the only group in the Dempcratic Party this happens too but I don't see a coalition between the 2 groups I am thinking of happening anytime soon, sadly.

[CC1]

Racial broadside.­.. a great term for the racist attack posts against me for no reason in the past!!

[mjc]

Reid said on This Week...I think that was the show...tha­t Blagojevich lied about the conversation that Reid had with him about a Senator from Illinois. He also pointed to a very personal record of support for blacks in any office but especially in the Senate even though there have been very few. Burris, in the race for the Senate which Obama won, supported the white millionaire, Blair, rather than Obama. And although the campaign gift to Blagojevich wasn't particularly significant, Burris did make a good contribution to Blagojevich's successful run for Governor of Illinois. So it looks as if the racial charges are just as much smoke as everything that Blago touches.

[jcwtts1]

aren't we lucky there is a tape. I believe Reid made the call and frankly I believe he made it on behalf of Obama. Obama wanted Duckworth.

[mjc]

Reid didn't deny that he talked to Blagojevich about the Senate appointment; he talked to all the governors who would be appointing Senators---his job. But he denied telling Blagojevich that he would not accept Jackson, Jones or Davis, and saying that he would only accept two? women.

[trishl127]

I really do understand the point you are all trying to make, but how many people that visit this site thought when they first heard Obama was going to run for President "He is awesome but the people in this country will never vote a black man in for President". I know that I did, & I don't think that it reflects my personal views on race as much as it reflects my personal views on the racism that is still alive & well in this country.

[glsesq]

Nice post David. It's too bad that the media won't pay as much attention to Reid's statements as they did to those by Obama's staff. Bias runs deep.

[HowJoeSeesIt]

If this is true, it is even more hard to comprehend after what we've just been through as a nation. Clearly our President-Elect is a remarkable man, regardless of race or skin color, but he has gathered an enormous amount of support from across the political and racial spectrum. You'd have to asleep at the wheel to not believe a strong candidate is electable, irrespective of skin color.

[mjc]

Emil Jones is more than just an African American, godfather of Obama or not. He has had a fairly big career deciding who will be this representative and who will not. He doesn't seem to me to be a particularly great choice to be a Senator. Jesse Jackson, that's a bit different but it looks to me, from afar, that Jackson was one Blagojevich's legislators and someone who might be controlled by Blago. That is certainly not Senator material either. But I don't really know much about Harry Reid or his views on anything, especially race. Don't think he is especially effective as the majority leader for the Dems in the Senate.

[standforpeace]

Great post. As we celebrate Barack Obama, we need to work to make sure that he is not another Tiger Woods -- an extraordinary talent that defied the odds but so far has resulted in no other African Americans coming up behind him. We need to continue to create a political playing field on which Americans of every ethnic and racial background can succeed as candidates so that all Americans can truly feel represented by those who govern. My hope this new year is that Americans will be inspired by the racial barrier we have kicked down together in electing Obama and use that inspiration to renew our efforts to bring down the remaining barriers rather than sinking into a false sense that Obama's election signals the end of institutional racism.

[LeeScho]

Your instincts and intentions are laudable, but your perspective is counter-intuitive. It has always taken an extraordinary person to finally clear the wall, be it Cinque, or Fredrick Douglass, or W.E.B. DuBois, or Jackie Robinson, or Dr. Martin Luther King, or James Baldwin, or Toni Morrison, or Althea Gibson, or Arthur Ashe, or Tiger Woods, or Barbara Jordan, or DeVal Patrick, or Barack Obama.

The problem is, of course, that these standard-bearers set the bar so high as to make the task for those who would follow daunting. And I think that is your point. Could an African-American of Geroge W. Bush's incompetence and mediocrity ever be elected president? No. Making us eternally grateful to those African-American standard-bearers.

Black Americans have always known that we have had to be twice as good as our white counterparts to advance an equal distance. Given that we, at the outset, are twice as far behind, I like that challenge. Because when we arrive, we are a knockout. And in the case of Barack Obama, we even floor each other.

[FaceYourFears]

Excellent post!

[zell]

I agree with David. It is mandatory that Senator Reid issue a statement explaining that the story is wrong. If not, then we will know that the story is right. This is not a good beginning for President-elect Obama's new administration.

[vjoseph]

Its called Meet the Press, go check it and please do tell how does that affect the new administration?

[ksyellowdog]

David:
Only when these dinosaurs are dead will be be able to elect qualified progressives verses "old school" like you point out.