Years ago, much was made of how Ron Brown was going to be the most senior African-American ever in the executive branch of our government. And until yesterday, Dec. 16, 2000, Brown’s post as Secretary of Commerce was the highest such post ever held by an African-American.
He was put in that office by a Democrat, Bill Clinton—neither of whose two U.S. Supreme Court picks was an African-American. The record of Democrats when it comes to giving minority Americans a chance at the reins of power, has not been impressive. Walter Mondale chose a woman to be his running mate against a popular incumbent in 1984, almost certainly hoping that the “wow” factor of having Geraldine Ferraro on his ticket would boost his chances. It didn’t. The “wow” factor of having Joseph Lieberman on his ticket this year may have helped tighten this year’s presidential election, but it’s more likely that scaremongering among the diehard Democrat constituencies was mostly responsible for that. There were complaints, initially, that Gore should have chosen an African-American, but those died down fairly quickly.
In fact, the one major breakthrough for African-Americans that came from the efforts of a Democrat, was the placement of Thurgood Marshall on the U.S. Supreme Court.
It took a Republican, Ronald Reagan, to put the first woman on that Court, even as radical feminists reviled Reagan for disagreeing with them on those parts of the extremist liberal agenda mislabeled “women’s issues.“ And it’s taking a Republican, George W. Bush, to put an African-American in the most senior Cabinet post even as Jesse Jackson, et al, are threatening that Bush will never be granted legitimacy by African-Americans.
African-Americans have little hope of seeing fellow African-Americans hold senior positions in any Democrat administration, nor placed on any Democrat ticket, for one very sound political reason: as long as African-Americans vote 9-to-1 for Democrats, that party’s high rollers have no reason to “shore up” that part of their constituency. If Hillary Clinton were to choose an African-American to be her running mate in 2004, what would that do for her share of that voting bloc? Bump it up from 90% to 91%? It just isn’t worth it, from their point of view.
Other American voting blocs manage to get courted by both major parties because they’re “in play”—large segments of those blocs have been known to break ranks and vote the opposite of others in that same bloc. Union voters are wooed by Republicans because many of them helped elect Ronald Reagan in 1980 and were helpful in changing Congress from a Democrat institution to a Republican one; Democrats expend resources trying to keep union voters in the “D” column for that same reason. Republican candidates have to reassure members of their “base” because even though they are unlikely to vote Democrat, such voters have been known to stay home on Election Day out of disgust; Democrats seek to lead Republican officeholders into glaring compromises precisely in order to disillusion conservative Republican voters into staying home on Election Day.
African-Americans, though, have very little actual political clout because they are so predictable in their voting behavior. Turnout may fluctuate from election to election, but rarely do Republicans manage to get more than perhaps one in six African-American votes nationwide. And when they do, they call it a victory because it’s usually about one in ten. Democrats, on the other hand, do little to reward such loyalty. They are convinced they don’t have to.
It’s up to African Americans, if they want to gain clout, to convince Democrats that their loyalty must be rewarded or it will be lost. And that means convincing Democrats their loyalty can be lost. Such a lesson will never be taught by the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons.
