Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Treading Into Dangerous Territory

It is still, at this moment, fewer than 24 hours since President Obama concluded his press conference on health care, and impossible to assume credibly the emphasis network and cable news coverage will give to the event over the next 48 hours. Still, if undue (relative to its importance) attention is given to the Dr. Henry Louis Gates affair, there is only one person to blame- Barack Obama. Comment on an issue tangentially involving race- and invoke race- and the floodgates open.

From the transcript (helpfully provided by Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times), the question from the Chicago Sun-Times' Lynn Sweet and the President's response:

Q Thank you, Mr. President. Recently, Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. was arrested at his home in Cambridge. What does that incident say to you? And what does it say about race relations in America?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I -- I should say at the outset that Skip Gates is a friend, so I may be a little biased here.

I don't know all the facts. What's been reported, though, is that the guy forgot his keys, jimmied his way to get into the house; there was a report called into the police station that there might be a burglary taking place.

So far, so good, right? I mean, if I was trying to jigger into -- well, I guess this is my house now, so -- (laughter) -- it probably wouldn't happen.

(Chuckling.) But let's say my old house in Chicago -- (laughter) -- here I'd get shot. (Laughter.) But so far, so good. They're -- they're -- they're reporting. The police are doing what they should. There's a call. They go investigate. What happens?

My understanding is, at that point, Professor Gates is already in his house. The police officer comes in. I'm sure there's some exchange of words. But my understanding is -- is that Professor Gates then shows his ID to show that this is his house, and at that point he gets arrested for disorderly conduct, charges which are later dropped.

Now, I've -- I don't know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home.

And number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcing disproportion ately. That's just a fact.

As you know, Lynn, when I was in the state legislature in Illinois, we worked on a racial profiling bill because there was indisputable evidence that blacks and Hispanics were being stopped disproportionately. And that is a sign, an example of how, you know, race remains a factor in the society.

That doesn't lessen the incredible progress that has been made. I am standing here as testimony to the progress that's been made. And yet the fact of the matter is, is that, you know, this still haunts us.

And even when there are honest misunderstandings, the fact that blacks and Hispanics are picked up more frequently, and oftentime for no cause, casts suspicion even when there is good cause. And that's why I think the more that we're working with local law enforcement to improve policing techniques so that we're eliminating potential bias, the safer everybody's going to be.


In a press conference replete with tough, probing questions, this one should have been a gimmee- or at least one easily punted. The nation's first black president could have remarked about the need for communication (perhaps even tying the principle in to the health care debate) among people of all ethnic groups. Similarly, he could have praised the Cambridge Police Department for dropping charges and thereby quelling the passions raised by this incident. Or he could have reminded Ms. Sweet that the press conference was called to discuss health care, arguably the second most pressing issue in the minds of the American people (and intimately connected to the most pressing issue, the economy).

Instead, the President, fresh off acknowledging "not having been there and not seeing all the facts," proceeded to

1- assume everyone would react the same: "number one, any of us would be pretty angry";

2- blame the investigating officer: ""But I think it's fair to say.... number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home;"

3- charge the Police Department with disproportionate treatment of minorities and, with it, imply racism: "And number three,what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcing disproportionately. That's just a fact."

4- suggest there was no basis whatsoever for the arrest, stating without qualification: "And even when there are honest misunderstandings, the fact that blacks and Hispanics are picked up more frequently, and oftentime for no cause...."

To take these in reverse order:

4) Blacks and Hispanics are picked up more frequently, per capita, than non-Hispanic whites. But whether that is the case here is unknown, especially when the President of the United States himself concedes that he does not know all the facts. And as to the implication that only minorities are susceptible to being arrested "for no cause".... (see my next blog, please);

3) Certainly, there is "a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcing (sic) disproportionately." And there is a long history of minorities, especially blacks, being arrested disproportionately, which suggests that not all these stops are unjustified. And, to quote Mr. Obama, that's just a fact.

2) Clearly the officer did act "stupidly" in arresting Mr. Gates. Dropping the charges against the professor demonstrated that (and nothing else), the arrest having sparked a controversy the Cambridge P.D. would rather do without. But there is no law or procedure absolutely precluding someone from being arrested when he is in his own home; and though Gates did not possess illegal drugs, weapons, or anything else which precipitated the arrest, the police report does indicate behavior on the part of the subject which would have resulted in most individuals, similarly situated, being charged;

1) It's an unsubstantiated generalization, as generalizations usually are, that "any of us would be particularly angry." This assumption might remind some of us in middle age and beyond of the "they're all the same" generalization many white Americans would voice, most often prior to the 1990s. There was a word often applied to those individuals prone to generalizing about another race (although Obama was speaking more universally): bigots.

As further facts become known- if in fact they are- President Obama should be asked for clarification of his analysis of the racially-based policies or procedures of law enforcement in this nation.

No comments:

Overwrought Reaction

Take the "L" and just move on.  162 Democrats joining Republicans to attack free speech and condemn a phrase that advocates one t...