[Senate Hearing 107-305]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 107-305
NOMINATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,
LABOR, AND PENSIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
GERALD A. REYNOLDS, OF MISSOURI, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR CIVIL
RIGHTS
__________
FEBRUARY 6, 2002
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
77-980 WASHINGTON : 2002
________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire
TOM HARKIN, Iowa BILL FRIST, Tennessee
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
JAMES M. JEFFORDS (I), Vermont TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas
JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia
PAUL D. WELLSTONE, Minnesota CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
PATTY MURRAY, Washington PAT ROBERTS, Kansas
JACK REED, Rhode Island SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York MIKE DeWINE, Ohio
J. Michael Myers, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Townsend Lange McNitt, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
__________
STATEMENTS
Tuesday, February 26, 2002
Page
Jeffords, Hon. James M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont 1
Bond, Hon. Christopher S., a U.S. Senator from the State of
Missouri....................................................... 3
Gregg, Hon. Judd, a U.S. Senator from the State of New Hampshire. 4
Reynolds, Gerald A., nominated to be Assistant Secretary, Office
of Civil Rights, Washington, DC................................ 5
Prepared statement........................................... 27
(iii)
NOMINATION
----------
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2002
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:45 p.m., in
room SD-430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Jeffords
presiding.
Present: Senators Kennedy, Jeffords, Wellstone, Reed,
Murray, Gregg, and Sessions.
Opening Statement of Senator Jeffords
Senator Jeffords. [presiding]. The committee will come to
order. I have been asked to start the hearing. Senator Kennedy
will be here shortly, but I believe that it is appropriate that
we move on.
As everyone knows, this is the hearing on the committee's
obligation to ensure that every person who comes into a
position of importance has been examined, to the extent that we
can fully understand the views of the individual and their
appropriateness for accepting the position.
We have, today, the hearing of Gerald A. Reynolds before
this committee. Mr. Reynolds, we are pleased to have you with
us. I know you have your family with you.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, I do.
Senator Jeffords. Would you like to introduce them for
everybody.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes. First, I would like to point out my
lovely wife, and the noise-maker is my son, Ellison.
[Laughter.] Unfortunately, I think that he is going to be
somewhat disruptive, so we will probably have to ship him out
sooner or later, but this is my daughter, Emma Marie.
Senator Jeffords. I am pleased to meet you.
Senator Wellstone. And she is going to be perfect, I can
tell. [Laughter.]
Mr. Reynolds. Yes. She is 7 years old. This is my mother,
Emma; my father, Arthur; my mother-in-law, Janet Marie. Who
else do we have here? Oh, I almost forgot about you, my step-
son, Ghani; also, the Key family over here; Aunt Jane, Uncle
Man, Ray, Larry.
Senator Jeffords. Wow. OK. [Laughter.]
Mr. Reynolds. You asked. We have the Ethridge family in the
back on the wall there. I neglected to reserve a seat for them.
I apologize, Bill. I am sure that I have forgotten some other
people, and I will hear about it later. Oh, Tony John, Bruce
Anderson, Angie. And since we are starting late, I will cut
this off here. [Laughter.]
Senator Jeffords. You certainly have shown your energy in
your ability to get people together. [Laughter.]
Before we begin I have a statement from Senator Kennedy.
[The prepared statement of Senator Kennedy follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Kennedy
On behalf of the Committee, I welcome Gerald Reynolds and
his family. Senator Gregg and I will make opening statements,
and after hearing from the nominee we will proceed to
questions.
The Assistant Secretary for the Office of Civil Rights is
one of the key leadership positions in the Department of
Education. Many of the most complex and important legal and
policy matters are handled within the Office of Civil Rights.
Whether its assessing the validity of the testing required
under the new education bill or enforcing an array of civil
rights laws like Title VI, Title IX, Individuals with
Disabilities in Education Act, and the Rehabilitation Act, the
Office of Civil Rights is on the front lines.
After reviewing Mr. Reynolds' record, I was struck by his
lack of education policy experience and his longstanding
hostility to basic civil rights laws @ which together raise
legitimate questions about Mr. Reynolds' qualifications for the
job and his commitment to enforcing and defending basic civil
rights protections. These concerns are shared by a broad
coalition of civil rights, womens', education, and disability
groups who oppose his nomination.
I also have concerns about whether Mr. Reynolds has the
temperament for this important position. Many of his writings
are filled with inflammatory rhetoric. And his testimony at
Bill Lann Lee's confirmation hearing was deeply troubling. Here
is what Mr. Reynolds said about Mr. Lee:
``If confirmed as assistant attorney general [for civil
rights], Mr. Lee's background suggests that no democratic
principle, controlling legal authority, nor legal standard will
prevent him from furthering his particular ideological agenda .
. . Mr. Lee's conduct over a twenty-year period suggests that
he has adopted the late Malcolm X's phrase: By any means
necessary''
Ideological disagreements on issues are an important and
necessary part of the confirmation process, but there is
absolutely no place for the kind of merit less character
assassination that Mr. Lee was subjected to by Mr. Reynolds.
Although I recognize that we will not agree on every issue,
we do expect the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Civil
Rights to come to the position with a sense of fairness, a firm
understanding of education policy issues, and a genuine
commitment to continuing the progress on civil rights that has
been one of the nation's greatest achievements in recent
decades. Now is no time for on the job training or turn back
the clock on the progress we've made on civil rights.
Senator Jeffords. Senator, do you desire to have a
statement?
STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER BOND, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF MISSOURI
Senator Bond. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. If it is
appropriate, I would like to address Mr. Reynolds'
qualifications to you and the members of the committee and join
in welcoming the largest delegation of Missourians I have seen
this month. Needless to say, we in Missouri were very pleased
and honored when, on September 25th, the President formally
nominated Gerald Reynolds to be the Assistant Secretary for
Civil Rights at the Department of Education. It is my honor and
privilege to welcome Jerry Reynolds to our committee today.
I had the pleasure of meeting with him in October, and in
that meeting he made it clear that he shares the President's
commitment to closing the achievement gap and to providing
every child in America access to a quality education. He is a
skilled attorney who understands the fundamental role that the
Office of Civil Rights plays in meeting those goals.
Jerry is a resident of Kansas City, MO, a top attorney for
Kansas City Power & Light, our large public utility. His family
is quite involved in our community. His 7-year-old attends a
charter school in Kansas City, and his wife is president of the
Parents Association, in which Jerry is also an active
participant.
He has played a meaningful role in making Kansas City a
better place in a number of ways. He's worked with KCP&L to
strengthen the company's diversity efforts. He is a member of
the Hyde Park Association, a neighborhood association dedicated
to improving and preserving historic Hyde Park in Kansas City.
I also think he has the experience and the qualifications
necessary to be an effective Assistant Secretary for Civil
Rights. He has practiced law in both the corporate setting for
KCP&L, as well as in a private law firm as a litigator. He has
worked on education and civil rights issues for two Washington
public policy organizations. As president of the Center for New
Black Leadership, the CNBL, he placed a heavy emphasis on
education policy. In fact, while at CNBL he spent half of his
time on education issues.
He has a strong educational background as well, a graduate
of Boston University School of Law. He served as an editor for
the American Journal of Law and Medicine. His undergraduate
degree is from the City University of New York, at York
College. He grew up in South Bronx and Flushing, Queens, the
son of a retired New York City police officer and attended
public elementary and secondary schools there.
As I said before, he is a qualified and skilled attorney,
with a longstanding interest in education and commitment to
improving opportunities for America's students. He shares the
committee's commitment to disadvantaged and minority children
and understands the role the Office of Civil Rights plays in
addressing those goals. He will be a key player on the team,
whose goal is ``No Child Left Behind.''
While he was president of CNBL, he served as an advocate
for community-based affirmative action programs that promote
economic development of urban communities, provides students
with improved test scores, and enhance employment skills when
young people enter the workforce. He will seek to promote
affirmative action programs that are consistent with the U.S.
Constitution and achieve the critical goal of affirmative
access for all Americans.
Jerry told me supports Title IX. Several women in his
family participate in athletics and therefore benefit from
Title IX. His aunt, Theresa Wallace, was co-captain of a
championship collegiate basketball team in 1982, the Georgia
Southern Ladies Eagles, won the Southern Region.
The Office of Civil Rights, one of the leading civil rights
enforcement agencies in the Government and one of the largest
offices within the Department of Education, has now been
without an Assistant Secretary for a year. Because of the needs
of the Department for leadership and because of Mr. Reynolds'
demonstrated skills and commitment to serve in this important
post, I strongly urge the committee to take swift and favorable
action on his nomination.
Senator Jeffords. Senator Gregg?
Opening Statement of Senator Gregg
Senator Gregg. I thank Senator Bond for his introduction,
Mr. Reynolds, and it is nice that you brought your family. I
think that is excellent. They seem like quite a group here to
support you.
I appreciate Senator Kennedy scheduling this hearing,
although I wish it had been more prompt. As I understand, it
has been almost 7 months since the administration sent your
nomination up and almost 5 months since this committee has had
your papers. So I do hope, as Senator Bond has mentioned, that
we move promptly to your confirmation.
You bring to this position, the civil rights position, the
type of background and strength which this position needs,
which is a commitment, obviously, to fairness in our society,
an understanding of the important role that things like
affirmative action play and Title IX play, but more importantly
the fact that we are in a transition as a society, constantly
growing as a society and that we have to adjust to that
transition and be sure that our laws today are applicable to
our time today.
You have been an innovative thinker in a variety of areas
and an advocate, and that is something I think we need in this
position in order to make sure that people get fair play when
they deal with the Department of Education and programs the
Department of Education has jurisdiction over.
I know that you have got a lot of people who support you,
and I wish to submit to the record a series of letters of
endorsement on your behalf.
Senator Jeffords. They will be made a part of the record.
[The letters of endorsement were not received in time for
printing, however they will be retained in the files of the
committee.]
Senator Gregg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We look forward to hearing your thoughts and ideas, and
rather than listening to us, we would like to listen to you.
Senator Jeffords. You are on. Please proceed.
Senator Bond. If you will excuse me, I have gotten a call.
Senator Jeffords. That is fine. Thank you.
Senator Bond. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Gregg.
Senator Jeffords. It is a pleasure to have you before the
committee. I know we had an opportunity to meet together, and I
therefore am pleased to have you here for an opportunity to be
able to express yourself on what you intend to do and why you
should be allowed to do what you want to do, so please proceed.
STATEMENT OF GERALD A. REYNOLDS, NOMINATED TO BE ASSISTANT
SECRETARY, OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Reynolds. Thank you, Senator Jeffords.
First of all, I would like to thank my home State Senator,
Senator Bond, for that generous introduction. Senator Jeffords,
Senator Gregg, and members of the committee, thank you for
providing me with this opportunity to discuss my views on civil
rights enforcement and educational issues. I am truly honored
and humbled to be here.
I would also like to thank President Bush for honoring me
with his trust and his confidence. He has given me an
extraordinary opportunity to serve my country as guardian for
civil rights for students across the Nation.
I would also like to thank my family. It is their guidance,
support and love that has made all of my accomplishments
possible.
I have provided a brief introduction, but if you do not
mind, I would like to stay on my family a bit because they
inform my views on civil rights, the lives that they have led
in the South and in the North. Their experiences have shaped my
views.
I have introduced my father and mother, Arthur Reynolds and
Emma Reynolds Simon. They have been the greatest influences in
my life. My father was raised in Jackson, SC, in the 1940s.
Back then, blacks did not have much in the way of educational
opportunities, but my father had a thirst for knowledge and a
devotion to reading, a level of learning that he passed on to
me. He made the most of what was available. I am proud to say
that he eventually became a New York City police officer. He
retired from Harlem's 28th precinct.
My mother, too, has overcome large hurdles in her life. The
manner in which she has conducted her life has taught me the
value of fighting for my beliefs.
My mother-in-law, Janet Marie Sloan, she was a retired
nurse. Now she is a world-class grandmother.
Now, after my parents left the South, they initially
settled in the South Bronx near my Aunt Jane and Uncle Man.
They are over there. Aunt Jane, and Uncle Man, and two of her
sons, James and Larry Key, are here today. James now works for
the U.S. Customs Service. Prior to September 11th, he was
stationed in lower Manhattan. On September 11th, he risked his
life to protect others. In fact, the Customs Service has
recognized James as a hero for his actions at 6 World Trade
Center on September 11th. It has been said that a man realizes
his liberty by sacrificing his private interests for the wider
community. James is living proof of that, and I am honored that
he is here today to support me.
Now, my wife. She is the most distinguished guest here.
Without her, I would not be here today. She puts up with me,
she keeps my life in order, and as I said, without her help and
support, I would not be here. She is a former Defense analyst,
but she is now the chief executive officer of the Reynolds
household. As well, she is the president of the Parents
Association for Academie Lafayette, my daughter's school.
My children, you notice my noisy son, and I have introduced
my daughter.
Senator Jeffords, Senators, when I think about my family,
when I look at my children, it reminds me of why I am eager to
serve as Assistant Secretary in the Department of Education's
Office for Civil Rights. Quite simply, the Office protects our
Nation's students, whether they are in first grade or graduate
school, against the evils of invidious discrimination. Students
have these protections because of the great works of civil
rights organizations and many members of Congress.
These individuals and organizations played key roles in the
enactment of civil rights legislation. Those laws marked a
turning point in the life of the country and, more personally,
a turning point in the lives of members of my family.
Senator Jeffords, Senators, Senator Kennedy recently joined
with President Bush and Secretary Paige in providing leadership
and the vision that led to the No Child Left Behind Act. The No
Child Left Behind Act is the most sweeping reform of grade
school education in the last 30 years. As President Bush said
at the signing ceremony, bipartisan leadership demonstrates
that honorable people can disagree, yet compromise, and come
together for the good of our Nation's children. With this
body's advice and consent, it is in that spirit that I intend
to take up the task that President Bush assigned to me.
My passion for education comes not only from the influence
of my family and my own life experiences, but also from my
desire to see that others are afforded the same kinds of
opportunities that I have enjoyed. To limit an individual's
education is to limit his freedom. As president of the Center
for New Black Leadership, I focus on the significant
achievement gap between white students and black. I came to the
conclusion that we need to expand the concept of civil rights
so that it includes improving the quality of education for
America's disadvantaged students.
My work at the Center for New Black Leadership led me to
conclude that education is the answer to many civil rights
issues. Education gives poor children the skills that they need
to succeed in the marketplace. A sound education is the
fastest, and sometimes the only, way out of poverty.
At the Center, I spent most of my time reviewing research
literature, meeting with individuals who run schools and
promoting education reform. I also learned a great deal from a
broad range of experienced education reformers, from Republican
Congressman J.C. Watts to Democratic former mayor of Baltimore,
Kurt Schmoke, and former Congressman Floyd Flake.
After leaving the Center, I transitioned from being a
public policy advocate to being a regulatory attorney. I
understand quite clearly that those are two quite different
roles. If I have the privilege of being confirmed, I am sure
that the experience that I have had in these two distinct
areas, as a public policy advocate and as an attorney advising
a client, will make me a more effective law-enforcement
official in the Office for Civil Rights.
If confirmed, my primary mission as the head of the Office
for Civil Rights will be to uphold the Constitution and enforce
Federal civil rights laws. One of the most significant and, in
my mind, successful civil rights laws has been Title IX, which
prohibits schools that receive Federal funds from
discriminating on the basis of sex.
Before Title IX, schools and universities could, and did,
treat men better than women. Many high schools routinely
shepherded girls into courses such as home economics and
typing, while preparing boys for college and professional
schools. This is inherently unfair. A system that distributes
benefits and burdens on the basis of an individual's sex is a
system that curtails freedom of choice.
If confirmed, another one of my important duties will be to
ensure that students with disabilities receive appropriate
services so that they can achieve academic excellence. If we
fail to help students with disabilities achieve their potential
in our schools, we will be responsible for limiting their
opportunities in life. I, for one, do not want that
responsibility.
Recently, I was horrified to learn how Freddy Ramirez was
treated by a DC. public school. Freddy was a 9-year-old boy who
was confined to a wheelchair. Because his elementary school had
no accessible bathrooms, this young boy had to park his
wheelchair at the door of the bathroom and then crawl across
the filthy floor to reach a stall. This went on for 18 months
until the school finally took action. These things must never
be allowed. It is humiliating, and degrading and unworthy of a
nation committed to civic equality. And more simply, how is
this young boy supposed to learn effectively in this type of
environment?
Congress enacted two landmark statutes, section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the Americans with
Disabilities Act. I am strongly committed to these laws and to
the President's New Freedom Initiative. In implementing the
initiative, President Bush has instructed his administration to
fully enforce civil rights laws protecting people with
disabilities.
There is much work to do. Over 60 percent of all complaints
filed with OCR concern disability-based discrimination. If
confirmed, I will obey the President's directive and enforce
these statutes to the letter so that kids like Freddy need face
only the challenges of teachers and tests, not of getting to a
bathroom stall.
If confirmed, I will vigorously enforce Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, which made the promise of the
Fourteenth Amendment a reality, prohibiting discrimination
based on race, color and national origin. The backlash against
innocent Muslim and Arab students demonstrates the continued
need for vigorous enforcement of our Nation's civil rights
laws.
I join President Bush, Secretary Paige, and members of the
Senate in their concern that the horrors of September 11th do
not lead to mistreatment of Arab Americans. Racial
discrimination and harassment have no place in our schools.
While president of the Center for New Black Leadership, I
supported affirmative action programs that promoted economic
development in communities, that provided quality education for
disadvantaged students and that enhance employment skills for
young people entering the workforce.
Along with President Bush and Secretary Paige, I support
``affirmative access'' for all Americans. If confirmed, I will
seek to promote affirmative action programs that are consistent
with the Constitution and that achieve the critical goal of
leaving no child behind.
Senators, I want to thank you for providing me with this
opportunity to speak with you today. I am honored that
President Bush has nominated me to serve as Assistant Secretary
for Civil Rights. If confirmed, I will uphold the Constitution
and vigorously enforce the Nation's civil rights laws. I am
eager to begin that work, with the Senate's consent, but for
now, I look forward to your questions.
Thank you.
Senator Jeffords. Thank you for an excellent statement.
I would now like to ask some questions of you and start off
with this one: What are your thoughts on discrimination issues
facing students with disabilities? I know you went over this,
but I would like you to concentrate on it again, in particular,
with regard to section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the
Americans with Disabilities Act, in other words IDEA, and how
will you enforce both public and private schools' compliance
with 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Americans with
Disabilities Act and, most importantly, IDEA?
Mr. Reynolds. Thank you, Senator.
That question is extremely important. As I mentioned in my
statement, 60 percent of the cases at OCR involve disability-
based discrimination. It is unacceptable. Because you have the
misfortune of being disabled does not mean that you should be
treated as a second-class citizen. We have a situation where 70
percent of disabled people are unemployed. I think that the
reason that we have this high unemployment rate is that we have
done a poor job of educating many of our disabled students. A
sound education is the gateway to employment, and unless we do
a better job, this horrendous unemployment rate is going to
stay where it is today.
I think that there are many things that we can do at the
Office for Civil Rights. We have the two statutes that you
referenced, in addition to that, the Freedom Initiative that
President Bush has promulgated.
It is important that schools across the country realize
that they have a statutory obligation, and in my opinion, an
ethical and a moral obligation to ensure that students with
disabilities receive a free and appropriate education. And if I
am confirmed, I will do everything within my power to ensure
that the civil rights statutes are fully enforced so that they
protect disabled students.
Senator Jeffords. I would like to pursue this area.
What are some of the civil rights problems students in this
Nation are facing today, and how do you intend to eradicate
these problems to ensure equal access to education of all
students, and are there any proactive measures the Office of
Civil Rights should take to ensure equal access?
Mr. Reynolds. Senator, there are many problems that we will
have to confront, that we are confronting today. Unfortunately,
racism and discrimination are still with us, discrimination
based on age, based on sex, based on disability, that is still
with us.
Some people may say that I have a dark view of man, but I
think that these prejudices will stay with us, and that is why
I believe that it is important that we realize that these
enforcement actions, they are with us for the long haul. We
must vigorously enforce all laws to ensure that we protect our
students. I think that we all agree that this should not
happen, at least most of us, but there are a handful of people
who feel otherwise. And I think that it is the Government's
responsibility, when people discriminate based on invidious
grounds, it is the Government's responsibility to go in there
and ensure that it does not happen.
Senator Jeffords. The Office of Civil Rights has the
authority to withhold funding from institutions that violate
Title IX. What remedial and affirmative actions would you deem
appropriate to remedy discrimination on the basis of sex?
Mr. Reynolds. As I said in my opening statement, to
distribute benefits and burdens on the basis of sex, that is
the antithesis of freedom of choice. I think that women/girls
should have the same opportunities as men and boys. I think
that it is important that we have vigorous enforcement, and
that includes taking affirmative steps to remedy any type of
discriminatory conduct, that includes when there has been a
finding of discrimination, that includes the use of racial
classifications.
And those events where there has not been a finding of
discrimination, I think that schools are free to take
affirmative steps to improve access, to provide more
opportunities to women and men.
Senator Jeffords. There has been some discussion regarding
your views on the disparate impact theory of the civil rights
laws. Could you please clarify your views on this subject. It
is a little complicated one, I know, but go ahead.
Mr. Reynolds. Thank you, Senator. This is a wonderful
opportunity. I have been cooped up for quite some time, unable
to address these issues. So thank you for providing me with
this opportunity.
The disparate impact theory, it is a very powerful tool for
smoking out discrimination. It permits you to use statistical
analysis to draw an inference of discrimination. OCR's
regulations permit it, and if I am confirmed, we will continue
to use that powerful tool, as well as all of the other tools
that we have in our tool kit at the Office of Civil Rights.
Senator Jeffords. How would you enforce compliance with
Department regulations which prohibit recipients of Federal
funds from using criteria which have the effect of subjecting
individuals to discrimination on the basis of race, sex or
disability?
Mr. Reynolds. I will enforce all regulations vigorously. If
we have a situation where a school has discriminated against a
study, we are duty bound to use all of the tools in the tool
kit to ensure that not only do these discriminatory actions
stop, but that the effects from this discriminatory conduct is
remedied.
Senator Jeffords. You have talked about ending racial
preference programs. How will you enforce antidiscrimination
laws and regulations in instances where there is a past history
of discrimination?
Mr. Reynolds. The U.S. Supreme Court is clear on this
issue. Where there has been a finding of discrimination, the
use of racial classifications may be permitted. The standard is
clear. It is the strict scrutiny standard that was articulated
in Croson and the Adarand decisions. With that standard, if the
State can show a compelling interest and also demonstrate that
the means are narrowly tailored, then the use of a racial
classification is permitted. That is the law, and that is what
I will enforce.
Senator Jeffords. Senator Gregg?
Senator Gregg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think those
questions, first, they were an excellent series of questions,
Mr. Chairman. I believe they addressed a number of issues which
have been raised, and I thought the responses were even better.
I also note that I believe that Secretary Paige has sent us
a response to a letter which you received from Senator Kennedy,
which outlined a response to a letter which was sent out by the
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, which is a very good,
in-depth explanation of your views in a number of areas, and
especially the fact that you feel the Conference letter
regrettably misrepresented your positions and inaccurately
represented your positions in a variety of ways. So I would ask
that that response be included in the record.
Senator Jeffords. Without objection.
[The letter of Secretary Paige was not received in time for
printing, however it will be retained in the files of the
committee.]
Senator Gregg. We have touched on a number of areas that
you obviously feel strongly about. I did notice that, and I
found the statement to be, on its face, a little hard to
accept, but the letter from the Conference said, ``In addition
to Mr. Reynolds' all-out opposition to affirmative action, he
put in direct conflict with carefully crafted policies that the
Office of Civil Rights is charged with implementing.
In fact, that is not your position at all, is it?
Mr. Reynolds. No, it is not. Senator, I found the letter
curious because my support for affirmative action, it is in my
writings. Going back as far as, well, when I entered the public
policy world, when I have discussed affirmative action, I have
discussed it in various aspects, but it is clear from my
writings that I support affirmative action policies.
Now I have made a distinction between affirmative action
policies that use a racial classification. Even those are
permitted under a limited set of circumstances; the standard
that I articulated earlier, the U.S. Supreme Court strict
scrutiny standard. But I support affirmative action, it is in
my record, and I am somewhat surprised that someone would make
the statement that I am an all-out opponent of affirmative
action.
Senator Gregg. I noticed that they also said in this
letter, and I found this to be even more surprising, that ``He
expressly denied that racism is a barrier to preventing African
Americans from making progress.'' That is obviously not your
position. I mean, you have already alluded to that in your
opening statement, but you might expand on your thoughts in
that area because, clearly, somebody has misunderstood your
views.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes. I wish I had an opportunity to sit down
with the authors of the letter because my view is clear from my
writings, it is clear from my debates. I have a view of the
world that some may view as somewhat dark. I believe that
people will discriminate. I believe that they will always
discriminate, and that is why I believe that we will always
need vigorous enforcement of our civil rights laws.
Now I have mentioned barriers. In one article, well,
actually several articles, I talked about the different types
of barriers that blacks have confronted since we were brought
here. Up until, gees, 30 years ago, we had a racial caste
system in large parts of this country. It really did not matter
how smart you were. It did not matter how industrious you were.
Your skin color, my son's skin color, would determine his fate.
Now things have changed. That is not to say, though, that
discrimination is no longer with us. In that article, I went on
to talk about some of the current barriers that we are
confronting. I talked about the poor quality of education in
many urban centers. I talked about some regulatory barriers
that make it difficult for black entrepreneurs to open up
businesses. Here, in Washington, DC., I worked with a gentleman
by the name of Taliq Gupta, who runs a place where he braids
hair. They shut him down, and it was not justified. His
business is thriving now, but that is an example of some of the
new types of barriers that we must contend with.
That article in no way states that racism and
discrimination is no longer with us. As I said earlier, it will
always be with us. It is just, unfortunately, men will find
reasons to hate each other.
Senator Gregg. You raised a really interesting issue which
is, as we move into this century, what are the barriers which
are really affecting people as they try to get ahead, and I
think you are sort of pointing at education as being one of the
key issues, one of the key areas in your going into the
Education Department.
Maybe you could talk a little bit more about that,
especially our urban school systems, and what is wrong, where
is the problem. As you see it, how should we address those
things?
Mr. Reynolds. Well, I do not believe in magic, but the
closest thing that we have to magic is education. We could look
at it from a number of angles. We could look at that unmanned
drone that we are firing Hellcat missiles into Afghanistan. The
basis of that is our educational system. But for the human
capital that we have in this country that is augmented, that is
nurtured in our educational institutions, we cannot do that.
Another area, we worry about Social Security. Now I have
spoken to a number of economists, and the modeling that has
been done does not assume that the residents of urban
communities are going to earn high incomes. If we straighten
out our school systems in urban and rural communities, that
assumption then becomes inaccurate, and then that worry that we
have over what to do with Social Security, that problem is
pushed back a number of years, because the assumption is that
many minorities in urban communities are not going to earn a
lot of money.
We can do something about that because what you earn is
highly correlated to your education. The more education you
have, the higher the quality of the education you receive, the
more, well, the greater the opportunity that you will have to
earn a high income.
So, I guess, a part of my approach, I was taught by a
professor, Professor Rickman at Boston University.
Senator Gregg. A good school, by the way.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, thank you.
Senator Gregg. A fine institution in a wonderful State.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, I have warm feelings for the State of
Massachusetts.
He looked at the world, he viewed the world as this
connected web, and I approach life that way myself. These
problems are all connected. If we can solve the problems in our
educational institutions, especially in our urban communities,
there are so many positive things that will flow.
Right now we have a very disruptive debate over the
propriety of racial preferences and higher education. If we
straighten out our educational system and urban communities,
that problem goes away. If we can increase the pool of highly
qualified black applicants, the problem goes away.
While at the Center for New Black Leadership, one of the
things I did, I just called around across the country and had
Stanford 9 test scores sent to me from Detroit, Los Angeles,
parts of New York, the South Bronx, Bed-Stuy, Washington, DC.,
and it is clear from these tests that we are doing a lousy job.
We are failing black students across the country.
So, when I say that we have some additional barriers, some
new barriers, I am not discounting discrimination. We need to
vigorously enforce our antidiscrimination laws, but we also
need to expand the problem because the problem is not merely
discrimination now. I think that education is a problem in many
urban communities. I think that we have some regulations that
prevent black entrepreneurs from opening up businesses. That is
a problem. So we need to step out of the box. We need to look
at these problems in a fresh way.
Thank you for providing me with an opportunity to address
that issue.
Senator Gregg. I think that was an excellent answer. I
think my time is up. I do want to thank you for your
presentation. I also want to thank your father for his years of
service in the Police Department in New York City. I had the
chance to be under his protection when I was in college. That
was the 28th Harlem District.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
Senator Jeffords. Well, that is a real credit to him.
Senator Gregg. He got me through.
Senator Jeffords. Thank you.
Senator Wellstone?
Senator Wellstone. Thank you. First of all, let me thank
you, Mr. Reynolds for being here.
When you talked about the whole question of disparate
impact statement, you cited a law. I wonder what your own view
is about disparate impact, in terms of how we evaluate laws and
whether or not they are civil rights violations. Do you,
yourself, philosophically support this standard?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes. Senator, I understand why some people
have some questions. The disparate impact standard, again, it
is a powerful tool for smoking out discrimination, and I think
that we should use all of the tools in the toolbox. I think the
misunderstanding occurred because in an article I discussed the
misuse of statistical analyses. That is a different kettle of
fish. There are standards for using statistics. There is a
standard for properly using the disparate impact standard, and
again there is no philosophical disagreement. I have no
philosophical disagreement with using a disparate impact
standard or any other tool that we have in the tool kit.
Senator Wellstone. Let me go through maybe an example of
this whole question of the testing requirements in the
education bill. If confirmed, what steps will you take to
ensure that the new testing requirements--and we tried to make
it as high a quality of testing as possible, in the education
bill. Remember, we are going to now require that every school
district test every child Grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8--do not
have a disparate impact on minority students?
Mr. Reynolds. Well, I congratulate Senator Kennedy and the
President for coming together and putting political differences
aside and enacting this historic piece of legislation.
I think that the testing component of the legislation is
extremely important. It is a diagnostic tool that will help us
identify problems. It is important that we catch our problems
as early as possible and provide students with the help they
need so that they can excel academically.
Now, once we fully implement the No Child Left Behind Act,
and especially the testing component, I suspect that there are
going to be disparities, statistical disparities on race. I do
not think I am going out on a limb here. I think that we are
going to see blacks and Hispanics not doing as well as whites
and Asians.
Now I think that if the tests are properly constructed so
that they measure what is taught in class, then under those
circumstances, discrimination is probably not implicated. Now I
hesitate because this type of determination requires all of the
facts, and you provided me with a hypothetical, but at the end
of the day, it is going to require a thorough examination of
all of the facts surrounding a particular instance.
So I hope I have answered your question.
Senator Wellstone. Look, I appreciate your frankness.
Actually, the Office of Civil Rights, under the Clinton
administration, they issued a guidance, which is exactly what
is called, for schools on the use of high-stakes testing. I
guess my understanding is the guidance has been ``archived'' by
the Department right now.
So I guess what I want to ask you is what you think about
the guidance and whether or not you plan on using it to give
school districts some direction. If done the wrong way, it will
have a disparate impact. I mean, there is no question about it.
So my question for you is, number one, why is the guidance
archived, although that is not your decision; number two, are
you familiar with it? Do you plan on using it? Do you plan on
getting it out to school districts so they have some
information as to how to make sure that we do not have testing
that has this discriminatory impact?
Mr. Reynolds. Well, as I mentioned before, I have been
somewhat, well, I have been holed up in a cocoon, unable to not
only speak, but also consult with the career staff over at OCR.
The reasons why it was archived, unfortunately, I do not know.
Senator, I will look into that. I believe that a guidance will
probably be issued. That guidance was probably prepared prior
to the No Child Left Behind Act, and I think that it is
important that we go over it carefully, that we examine it, and
that we eventually issue some guidance so schools have a road
map for testing students, for using diagnostic tools to
measure, but doing so in a way that does not discriminate.
Senator Wellstone. Let me just ask you a last question. I
appreciate your response.
So what you are saying is you have no familiarity with the
guidance. You have not seen it; is that what you are saying?
Mr. Reynolds. Oh, no, I have seen the guidance.
Senator Wellstone. OK. Well, if that is the case, but then
what you were saying is I have seen it, but I do not really
know why it has been archived.
Mr. Reynolds. That is correct.
Senator Wellstone. But since you have seen it, my question
then for you--I am not a lawyer. So I am doing cross-
examination, and I would not know how to--but since you have
seen it, do you intend to issue it and get it out to schools,
school districts?
Mr. Reynolds. As I said before, I cannot make that
determination without consulting with career staff. I need to
sit down with them, and we need to go over the guidance
together. We also need to go over the guidance with the No
Child Left Behind Act in mind. And until that is done, I cannot
say whether it will be issued in its current form, but I do
suspect that some type of testing guidance will be issued by
the Office of Civil Rights.
Senator Wellstone. My last question. Well, if the No Child
Left Behind legislation is in contradiction to the guidance, we
have got problems. Because the guidance is all about how to
make sure that the testing is done in such a way that it does
not have a disparate impact on ``students of color'' or on
girls or you name it. So we have got something to work out
here.
Let me ask you this: Do you believe that the testing
systems on the State and local level should comply with the
civil rights laws, such as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, section 204 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Title IX of
the education amendments of 1972?
Mr. Reynolds. I think any institution receiving Federal
funds must comply with those civil rights statutes.
Senator Wellstone. And your position on Title IX, again?
You said it earlier in testimony. I know you mentioned it. I
come from a State which has a strong wrestling community. I am
a strong supporter of Title IX, but I also think the wrestling
community and others have raised questions about, ``My God, all
of these minor men's sports have been eliminated, and they are
trying to figure out something that can be done, I believe, in
Title IX, but I am still looking for something that can be
done--''
What is your position in relation to what some of these
communities, like the wrestling community, have had to say on
Title IX?
Mr. Reynolds. My position on Title IX, I am an enthusiastic
supporter. I picked up the newspaper 1 day and discovered that
I opposed it. That was news to me. I felt that maybe I had
developed amnesia, so I went and reviewed all of my writings. I
discovered nothing, and I recall never making a critical
comment of Title IX.
Title IX, because of it, my aunt Terry, who is here
somewhere, she received an athletic scholarship. She was a co-
captain of the Lady Eagles. They won a championship in 1982,
the Southern Regional championship, and I am glad to say I was
there at that game. So I am an enthusiastic supporter of Title
IX.
Now you mentioned the controversy involving, well,
allegations. Some people feel that Title IX or the policy
guidance is, it is enforced in a way that discriminates against
certain male sports. Now I have heard allegations on both
sides. I think that it is incumbent upon whoever sits in that
job as Assistant Secretary to investigate these allegations, to
see if it is true.
I have not had an opportunity to speak with career staff or
to consult with athletic directors around the country and other
involved parties so that I can collect the necessary data to
arrive at an informed decision, but I assure you that if I am
privileged to be confirmed, I will look into it.
Senator Wellstone. Thank you.
Senator Jeffords. Senator Murray?
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I really
appreciate your holding this hearing today and giving us the
opportunity to talk about some of the essential intersections
of civil rights and education. I believe, like many committee
members, that education is the cornerstone of our democracy,
and a child's education is their chance to succeed in life. And
I believe that guaranteeing every child, regardless of gender,
race, religion, sexual orientation or disability, receives a
high-quality education is really one of our most sacred
responsibilities and privileges.
Our civil rights laws, although they are not perfect,
represent our attempt to build a nation of equal opportunity,
guaranteeing that every child has the chance to reach those
dreams.
Mr. Reynolds, I really appreciate your appearing before the
committee today and hope that, with this hearing, we can
explore some of your essential understandings of this position
and assess your ability to do the job.
First, I want to talk about your understanding of our civil
rights laws, especially as they relate to education, not just
the knowledge of the relevant statutes or court decisions or
regulations and guidances, which I think is very impressive,
but I think also your understanding of the history of these
principles and the role they play in our society; and, second,
how you plan to interpret and enforce those laws and
regulations as they stand.
The reason those questions are critical is because those
laws are more than words on paper or issues for debate here in
the Senate. They really initiate real change and create real
opportunities for Americans in all walks of life.
I remember, when I went to college, money was very tight. I
do not know if I was a good enough athlete to ever win an
athletic scholarship because I never had a chance to try. I
played intramural sports in college because that was, as a
woman, the only option I had, and there was not any others. I
was pretty proud to watch the Olympic athletes this last few
weeks and see us win 34 medals, with one-third of them being
women.
And I think it is pretty clear that Title IX has increased
women's access to scholarships, and coaching, and other
opportunities to succeed. So I appreciate your answer to
Senator Wellstone's question, but I think it is important to
note that Title IX has really contributed to a dramatic
increase in number of women competing in athletics, but there
are a lot of side benefits to that too: better grades, women
completing college, decreasing use of drugs, health care, a lot
of things.
Some people have attacked the Title IX standard saying that
it creates a quota and forces cuts in men's athletic programs
and scholarships, and I am glad that Senator Wellstone did not
go that far, but, Mr. Reynolds, I wanted to ask you today can
you tell me what your understanding is of the three-part test
under Title IX and its application under current law?
Mr. Reynolds. Senator, thank you for providing me with a
second opportunity to address this issue. As I suggested in my
testimony, freedom is important to me. I do not think anybody's
freedom should be curtailed by invidious discrimination. It
seems to me that the fact that you are a woman, the fact that
you have a brown skin should be of no consequence. I know that
that is a goal, and I know that some of us will fall far short
of that goal, and that is why we need vigorous enforcement of
our civil rights statutes, including Title IX.
I mentioned my aunt. She was the first college graduate in
my family. Could the family have afforded to send her to
college without that athletic scholarship? I doubt it. I think
that a female athlete should be given the same privileges as
male athletes. It is only fair. So----
Senator Murray. Do you know the three-part test, in terms
of Title IX?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, the first prong--well, the first safe
harbor is the proportionality test. Basically, it requires that
participation opportunities between male and females be
proportionate to enrollment.
The second one, and these are safe harbors. A university, a
school, any school would have an opportunity to demonstrate
that it is not in violation of Title IX in other ways. These
are merely safe harbors.
Senator Murray. So you do not see the three-part test as
ever requiring a quota?
Mr. Reynolds. No. The way it is drafted, on its face, it
does not require a quota.
The second test, you can demonstrate that you have not
violated Title IX by showing a continuing history of program
expansion, and the third prong is by showing that the athletic,
well, the interests of the underrepresented sect is fully
accommodated.
Senator Murray. So I am hearing you that you do not see
Title IX as requiring a quota. You do see it as providing safe
harbor provisions and that you do not agree with some people
who say it has created quotas or created opportunities more for
female than male athletes?
Mr. Reynolds. On its face, Title IX and the--well, the 1996
clarification that contains the three safe harbors is
clarifying the 1979 regulation. Those two documents provide
several ways for a school to comply with Title IX. I think it
is important that we judge each allegation on its own merits. I
should not make, and I will not make, any broad statements. I
think that it is possible for a school to use a quota. In that
instance, I think that that would implicate some legal
problems, but the 1979 regulation and the 1996 clarification,
on its face, does not require that schools set aside a set
number of athletic spots or scholarships.
Senator Murray. I appreciate that response. Let me ask you
one other question quickly. It is my understanding that
following a 1990 court decision, Davis versus Monroe County
Board of Education, clarifying that student-on-student
harassment is illegal, OCR decided to update its 1997 sexual
harassment policy guidance, and after extensive meetings with
representatives from a wide range of organizations,
comprehensive legal review by the Departments of Justice and
Education, and appropriate public comment, the final guidance
was announced in the Federal Register on January 19th of 2001.
Are there any parts of that guidance that you oppose or
disagree with? And, if so, which parts?
Mr. Reynolds. At this point, I would have to say, gees, I
have read it. It has been a while. Nothing jumps out at me, but
again, just like the testing guidance, I think that I am going
to have to sit down with career staff, consult with the
relevant parties, including members of the Senate and see if
that particular guidance will be issued in its current form.
It is possible that, after a review, that we may modify it,
but at this point, I just do not know.
Senator Murray. Are there any modifications, in particular,
that you are looking at?
Mr. Reynolds. No.
Senator Murray. Mr. Chairman, my time has run out. Thank
you.
Senator Jeffords. Senator Reed?
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
Mr. Reynolds, for your testimony today.
In response to a question from Senator Wellstone, you said
that you do support the disparate impact standard when it comes
to Title VI enforcement; is that correct?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
Senator Reed. What would be the position of the Center for
New Black Leadership with respect to the disparate impact
standard?
Mr. Reynolds. Well, I served as president for the Center
for New Black Leadership, and I also served on its board. I am
no longer affiliated with the Center for New Black Leadership,
so I cannot speak for the Center.
Senator Reed. What was the position while you were
president or on board there?
Mr. Reynolds. While I was president, the Center for New
Black Leadership did no work involving that issue.
Senator Reed. So there has been no position, either
formally or informally, adopted by the Center for New Black
Leadership with respect to the standard, no discussions you are
aware of? It was a nonissue while you were president?
Mr. Reynolds. You are referring to Title IX?
Senator Reed. I am referring to Title VI.
Mr. Reynolds. Oh, I am sorry, disparate impact. No, there
was no--discussions, yes; policy, no. Again, the disparate
impact standard, it is a powerful tool. It is used in
employment cases. It is accepted by courts. It permits you to
draw--sometimes it is difficult to get direct evidence of
discrimination. This tool permits you, if used properly, to
draw an inference, and I support it.
Senator Reed. One of the reasons why it is so critical is
that, as you well know, under the Sandoval decision, that there
is no private right of action in this Title VI litigation, so
that it would be incumbent upon you, as the Director of this
office, to initiate suits to vindicate the rights of thousands
of Americans who do not have that right.
Mr. Reynolds. That is correct.
Senator Reed. So this is not merely a technical sort of
issue. Because as I think you pointed out, very seldom will you
find a situation where someone says, I did not promote Jane or
Johnny because of their race or because of their disability. It
is not that clear cut.
Most of what you said in your testimony is that you will
vigorously enforce the law, once there is a finding of
discrimination. So the issue becomes how do you find
discrimination, and that is where the disparate impact
statement I think comes in. You seem to imply that your
criticism of this standard previously has been misinterpreted.
You were simply criticizing the statistical methods used to
arrive at that; is that your position?
Mr. Reynolds. Senator Reed, when I mentioned the notion
that we need a finding of discrimination, I did not use that
phrase in the context of Title VI, it was used in the context
of the use of a racial classification. The U.S. Supreme Court
requires a finding of discrimination or has strongly suggested
that a finding of discrimination is required before a State
actor can use a racial classification. It was not in this
context.
Senator Reed. But going back to the context of Title VI,
and thank you, the point is that you would have to, as the, in
your proposed job, use the disparate impact standard. And the
suggestion of your previous testimony is that you do not have
any criticism with the standard, it is just the statistical
manipulation to come up with the numbers. I do not want to put
words in your mouth, but can you explicate that a bit?
Mr. Reynolds. Well, I support--well, as a lawyer, I think
that we should use all of the tools in the toolbox, and, where
appropriate, using disparate impact analysis is the only way to
go or the best way to go. So there is no conflict between my
views of Title IX, there is no philosophical objection to it.
It is, as I said before, it is a powerful tool.
Senator Reed. Have you criticized it in the past?
Mr. Reynolds. No.
Senator Reed. I seem to have heard you, in your dialogue
with Senator Wellstone, you said you criticized at least its
application.
Mr. Reynolds. No, I--okay. Here is an example. If there is,
say, in New York City, tugboat operators, over 90 percent of
the tugboat operators in New York City's harbor are of
Scandinavian descent. That is a statistic. Now, based on that,
some people have concluded that discrimination has occurred. I
think that that statistic may be grounds for an investigation,
but standing by itself, I do not think that that necessarily
means that discrimination has occurred.
There are statistical disparities all around us that may or
may not mean that discrimination has occurred. When I
criticized the use of statistics, that was the context.
Senator Reed. It seems to me you say you are going to
support the standard of disparate impact or look at disparate
impacts in policies, and then you suggest that it becomes a
statistical sort of device or at least statistical problems,
not legal problems, but I thank you for your answers.
Senator Jeffords. Senator Sessions?
Senator Sessions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Reynolds, on this question of affirmative action, and
quotas, and outreach, and all of those different phrases we
use, each one of them have a different meaning, and I think
leads us to confusion.
Would you share with us where you stand on the question of
quotas, as opposed to affirmative action, as opposed to
affirmative outreach and how you see those terms, what you
believe in and what you do not believe in.
Mr. Reynolds. Senator, you bring up a very important point.
I think a lot of the disputes that take place occur because we
fail to take the time to define our terms. The phrase
``affirmative action'' means anything to anybody. It is an
empty vessel. You can pour into it what you will.
Quotas, that could be an affirmative action program. The
U.S. Supreme Court has declared that to be illegal, and no one
will admit to supporting quotas. You can have----
Senator Sessions. I think that is right. I do not think any
people in the Senate will say they favor quotas. I do not think
there is a single one that says they favor quotas, all right?
And the U.S. Supreme Court, I believe, agrees with that, does
it not?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
Senator Sessions. Then where do we go from there? What is
the next step down in affirmative action?
Mr. Reynolds. OK. I want to start off by talking about my
view. I think that it must include the vigorous enforcement of
our antidiscrimination laws. The Government, in the main,
should not be in the business of distributing benefits and
burdens on the basis of race. I do not think employers should
be in the business of distributing benefits and burdens on the
basis of race or anyone who receives Federal dollars.
Now that is the foundation, but I think it is important
that we start to build on top of that foundation, and we have
already started. Because of Senator Kennedy's efforts, along
with President Bush's, we have enacted historical educational
reform legislation. Again, your ability to get a high-paying
job is highly correlated with the amount of education you have
received and the quality of education that you have received.
Now, in many urban communities, the students may get 12
years of education, courtesy of the Government, but we have to
look at the quality of the education that these students
receive. I am not satisfied with the quality of education.
While I was at the Center for New Black Leadership, the Center
was involved in raising money, scholarship money, for
underprivileged kids to go to private schools. Now this
information got out in the community, and I was inundated with
mothers, grandmothers, aunts and fathers who were desperate to
get their children out of failing schools.
Now I think that we need to expand our definition of
affirmative action so that it includes improving the quality of
education received by our students. I think that we also need
to take a look at, again, regulatory--regulations. There is no
reason why Taliq Gupta should have been, his establishment
should have been closed down. He braided hair for a living. The
State Cosmetology Board said that he could not do it. He is not
using chemicals. If a woman does not like the product, she does
not pay him. She takes it out, no harm, no foul. Yet, because
of regulations that were enacted in a different area, these
regulations were adopted to protect us from barbers who use
chemicals, who used a scissors and other implements.
So I think that we need to revisit some of our regulatory
laws to ensure that economic development in urban communities
is not smothered. So that is a part of my vision of affirmative
action.
Another example of affirmative action would be the use of
racial classifications. As a general proposition, it is not
permitted. It is permitted, under limited circumstances. The
U.S. Supreme Court has declared that whenever the State uses a
racial classification, that the State has to come up, has to
demonstrate that there is a compelling State interest, and in
addition to that, the State has to demonstrate that its plan is
narrowly tailored.
Now I think that it is proper to use racial classification
in a limited set of circumstances. It has to comply with
constitutional requirements. So that is my thumbnail sketch of
affirmative action.
Senator Sessions. Well, I thank you. I know my time has
expired, and I just would say it is a delicate and important
issue. How can we encourage and open doors for people who have
had difficulty getting a fair chance in life, at the same time
without violating the great principles of who is most qualified
gets to be able to do the job or get on the baseball team or
get the promotion at business. It is extremely complex. I think
sometimes that someone may oppose one kind of quotas and be
correct and be interpreted as opposing a lot of affirmative
programs that are good.
Mr. Reynolds. That is correct.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Senator Jeffords. Senator Kennedy?
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
apologize for being late for the hearing and will read over the
testimony and the exchanges with our colleagues.
I want to congratulate you, Mr. Reynolds, for getting the
nomination of the President for this position and for your
impressive background. I have read through the resume, and it
is an impressive one, and I think you are to be commended for
that progress that you have made over the years.
The real question I think, for us on this committee, is how
that background that has been very tied into economic
development is really related to a central challenge that we
are facing in this Nation, and that is improving the quality of
education of children and ensuring that children are not going
to be left out and left behind. That is the question about the
qualifications that you have, which are ample and robust.
In a number of different areas, we have to ask ourselves
whether you are the man for this particular job, and what in
your background, what in your background makes you qualified
for that, brings you with qualifications to this particular
job, which is highly technical. It is not, generally, a broad-
based kind of political judgment or a political decision, it is
really a highly technical question that is very, very
significant in importance to millions of children in this
country, and not just to children of not only people of color,
but to those with disability and also what you bring to this
office in terms of understanding what we have tried to do with
the President and the robust support of the members of this
committee, in terms of the education reform. That is what I am
very much concerned about in terms of your particular
nomination. That is my primary concern.
If you are confirmed, as has been mentioned over the course
of this hearing, you will be enforcing the Title VI, Title IX,
Rehabilitation Act, Americans with Disabilities, all of which
have been central, core issues this committee has been dealing
with over the period of the time.
You will be responsible, as well, for--you were talking
about the tugboats. I was remembering back the Wards Cove
decision, which was directly related to some of the things that
you were talking about, but that ``ain't'' it. This is
education, which you are up for, and that is what we are
interested in finding out about, what in your background, other
than getting briefed up, which I do not dismiss, on Title VI,
IX, Rehabilitation, Americans with Disabilities Act, what is
going to bring you to make sure that these testing provisions,
which are complex and difficult, in understanding this,
evaluating, measuring annual yearly progress, disaggregation of
numbers based upon race and about progress that is going to be
made, understanding about the tests, where they are related to
State standards, how they are related to the kinds of quality
issues that my good friend, Paul Wellstone, made to try and
raise them so we are not getting off-the-shelf tests, what is
the role of inadequate teachers in there, what is going to be
the judgment made in terms of graduation rates, drop-out rates,
school tests go up, drop-outs go up, what have we got in the
school, and to know whether we are really going to give life to
these questions.
The hate crimes prevention programs that are included in
this, very important in terms of the after-school programs,
single-sex provisions, that disabled students receive
reasonable accommodations under the SEI. In looking at your
resume, it does not appear that this education policy has been
in these areas, and what work have you done over the period of
the recent years in any of these areas, any of these areas?
Mr. Reynolds. Senator Kennedy, I will direct you, if you
have my resume in front of you, I would direct you to the
section Center for New Black Leadership.
While I was at the Center for New Black Leadership, I spent
50 percent of my time on educational policy. What I did there,
I looked at research literature, I met with individuals who
operate schools, I went to----
The Chairman. This is, just in fairness, this is New Black
Leadership, this is from March of 1997 to August of 1998; is
that correct?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
The Chairman. I am looking at the last 4 years, 1999, 2000,
2001, 2002, we have just passed, in the last 4 or 5 years. You
are giving me now a reference. Your answer to my question about
what, in your background, has been related to Title VI, IX,
Rehabilitation, Americans with Disabilities, testing, hate
crimes, after school, and now you are referring me to your
resume and pointing out what you did in the New Black
Leadership in 1997 and 1998.
Mr. Reynolds. That is where I would like to start.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Reynolds. While at the Center for New Black Leadership,
I met with the pastor of Pilgrim Baptist in Brooklyn, I met
with the pastor of the Christian Life Center in Brooklyn, I met
with Congressman Floyd Flake, who is a pastor of Allen AME. All
of these churches run schools.
There is a lot to be learned from going in and looking at
these schools. I did that. I reviewed research literature. I
sat down with experts in the field. I met with Nobel Laureate
Gary Becker to discuss some of these issues.
Now what is not in my resume, Senator Kennedy, is the fact
that once upon a time I was an education major in college. I
was a student teacher. I had the privilege of going back to my
alma mater, Jamaica High School, to work as a student teacher.
I have been in the classroom.
Yes, you are right, these are technical issues. I am a
regulatory attorney for Kansas City Power & Light Company. We
do not go to court here. OCR, all of the enforcement actions
occur in the regulatory environment. What I do for a living, I
am senior regulatory counsel for Kansas City Power & Light
Company. That is what I do, dealing with technical, difficult
issues.
The Chairman. I do not question that you are an able,
gifted, talented regulatory lawyer and that you do an
outstanding job for the Power & Light Company. I do not just
question. What I am interested in is what is in your background
in terms of these pieces of civil rights legislation, which are
at the heart of the challenges of discrimination in our
schools. And your response, which you said would be just the
beginning, talks about visiting with--I know Congressman Flake.
I know the schools there, and the talking with a nobel
laureate, you talked of that, and that you worked as a student
teacher, I have got. That is your response as to what you have
been doing in the last 4 years on the matters that I have just
mentioned here that are really the heart of the enforcement of
the program.
OK. Let me ask you this: What is your sense of the civil
rights protection provisions in the newly enacted education
bill? Does the civil rights provisions in the newly enacted
education prohibit a religious organization receiving Federal
funds from admitting students to an after-school program based
upon their race, gender, religion or disability?
Mr. Reynolds. Senator, I would have to see all of the
facts, but if a religious organization is receiving Federal
funds, then without having all of the facts, my inclination is
to say that that would be prohibited.
The Chairman. The civil rights protections, have you read
these protections?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
The Chairman. Well, your assessment of them, the ones that
have been read, that you read, that we passed in the law that
are dealing with--you would obviously read them, in terms of
the preparation for today, you would obviously read them and be
familiar with them, and do you have any hesitancy about whether
they would permit, in after-school programs based upon race,
gender, religion or disability, whether they prohibit a
religious organization receiving those funds from admitting
students based upon the race, gender or religion?
Mr. Reynolds. If an institution is receiving, if any
individual organization is receiving Federal funds, and again
this is without having any facts of a particular case, this is
a stripped-down hypothetical, and that is----
The Chairman. This is what we are trying to do, and I want
to make it very clear, that is exactly what the purpose is.
There should be no permission or use of Federal funds where you
could get around that. If we did not draft it right, I would
welcome the fact that you would say, ``Well, it is not drafted
because it has got loopholes in it,'' but we drafted it so it
would not permit that.
And so I guess your answer is that is what the language
says, that is the way I would read it. I do not want to put
words in your mouth, but I want to give you the third
opportunity to respond to it. This language is clear. We spent
a lot of time on it. If you read the debates and the
explanation by the managers of the bill, it is one of the most
important parts of that whole legislation, one of the most
important parts, and there should not be any question in your
mind what we intended.
I agree there may be facts or other situations, but we are
talking about reading language and understanding what we were
attempting to do.
Let me say does the civil rights protection provisions
prohibit discrimination in hiring for after-school programs
based on race, gender, religion or disability?
Mr. Reynolds. My answer is the same.
The Chairman. I did not get it the first two times.
Mr. Reynolds. Senator, I believe that the answer is yes.
Again, I hesitate because I do not feel comfortable, I do not
feel that I can provide you with an informed decision unless I
have all of the facts.
The Chairman. What would you want to do, what would be your
own instruction to us, as somebody--would you come and say to
us now, if you are going to pass a bill and you are going to
provide Federal funds, that you should not permit them to be
used to be able to discriminate?
Mr. Reynolds. Senator, if I am a Senator, that would be my
position. That is what I would fight for.
The Chairman. Well, that is what we have tried to do with
the language. There was not any dispute, there is no difference
in all of the members and their explanation of this provision.
I want you to understand, as a lawyer reading it, whether you
agree that it does or not, and I am troubled by your hesitancy
in saying that that is the way I read it, Senator. That is the
way we have explained it, the managers of it. That is the way
we have explained it, the way the President has signed it, and
we have got to be able to know that the person who is going to
enforce it believes it too.
Mr. Reynolds. Again, Senator, I am not sure that we are in
disagreement here. I am telling you that I believe that if you
receive Federal funds, that racial discrimination is
prohibited. I hesitate because, unlike the other civil rights
statutes, that one has not been around a long time, and I have
not had an opportunity to absorb it. Yes, I reviewed it, but I
would feel far more comfortable if I had it in front of me, and
I do not.
But I am telling you that I believe, without having it in
front of me and without having any facts, that I believe that
if you receive Federal funds, it is modeled like all of the
other civil rights statutes that OCR has jurisdiction over,
if----
The Chairman. Let me ask you, just as the Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights, would you vigorously enforce the
statutes, case law, and policy guidance protecting the rights
of LEP students, even if that means that some will receive the
native language instruction?
Mr. Reynolds. I am duty bound to enforce all of the laws,
all of the regulations and all of the policy guidance.
The Chairman. What is your--duty bound? I mean, yes, that
is my----
Mr. Reynolds. I will enforce not only that provision, all
of----
The Chairman. All I am saying is, if the statute says that
the, as Assistant, would you enforce statutes, laws, policies
protecting the rights of LEP students, even if it means that
some receive native language instruction? I would think the
answer is, yes, if that is what the statute says, then I would
enforce it. If it does not say that, then we have a different
issue.
Mr. Reynolds. If you would like, I will just answer with a
yes.
The Chairman. Do not try and please me. Do not do this just
to please me. I have been around here a while, and you do not
have to do this just to please me. I want frank and candid
answers. If you want to give them, you can give them, but do
not pander to me.
Now the organization that you work for, the Center for
Equal Opportunity, has opposed the use of native language in
the instruction of LEP children. Do you share the
organization's view on bilingual education?
Mr. Reynolds. No.
The Chairman. And have you ever discussed the Equal
Opportunities Act of 1974 related guidance addressing the
education of Limited English Proficient children with Linda
Chavez?
Mr. Reynolds. It was probably Jorge Ansell, if I had a
conversation about this issue. I had a limited role at the
Center for Equal Opportunity, and it did not include bilingual
education.
The Chairman. Just, finally, in your testimony before the
committee, on Bill Lann Lee, this is what you said: ``If
confirmed as an Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights,
Mr. Lee's background suggests that no democratic principle,
controlling legal authority, nor legal standard will prevent
him from furthering his particular ideological agenda. Mr.
Lee's conduct over a 20-year period suggests he has adopted the
late Malcolm X phrase, `by any means necessary.'''
What was the basis for that?
Mr. Reynolds. The basis of that was the Adarand decision.
That was the trigger. Shortly before that hearing, the U.S.
Supreme Court issued a new standard. It applied the strict
scrutiny standard to the Federal Government. And during
Assistant Attorney----
The Chairman. He indicated his support for it, that he
would follow it.
Mr. Reynolds. During that hearing, Senator Hatch asked
several times for Assistant Attorney General Lee to State the
standard of Adarand case. His response was that racial
preferences are permissible if conducted in a limited and
measured manner.
Now I would submit that that is not the holding, that is
not the standard in the Adarand decision. We have three
standards for reviewing the constitutionality of statutes, and
if not----
The Chairman. Let me just--okay, I will let, but this is
one part. Is your answer based upon just the response to
Senator Hatch about his lifetime of involvement and commitment
in terms of advancing the cause of civil rights? You are
telling us here today that your judgment and decision, where
you said Mr. Lee's conduct over a 20-year period suggests he
has adopted the late Malcolm X, this statement says 20-year
period, ``by any means possible.''
Mr. Reynolds. In my testimony, I started out by saying that
he was a fine man, that he was a fine litigator, that he was a
very, very good advocate. What he did in courtrooms for 20
years, that is fine, in his capacity as an advocate.
However, in the capacity as Assistant Attorney General for
Civil Rights, that is a different role, and the only thing that
concerned me, well, the primary thing that concerned me was his
willingness to apply the constitutional standard that was
articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Adarand decision,
he was asked on several occasions, ``What was the standard?''
And his response was, ``Racial preferences are permissible if
conducted in a limited and measured manner.''
Now this is no small fact here. This is extremely
important. In the VMI case, the VMI case you had a State
institution that discriminated against women.
The Chairman. There is, of course, a different standard on
gender, is there not?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, there is. And the point that I am making
is, if I were before you and if I were asked, what is the
standard in cases where a classification is used based on sex,
and I replied to you that discrimination against women is
permissible if it is conducted in a limited and a measured
manner, then you would be justified in being a little upset
with me. Not only is that going to affect women, more
importantly, that is not the standard articulated in the VMI
case.
The Chairman. Mr. Chairman, my time has expired. As I
understand it, the vote is----
Senator Jeffords. They are waiting for us.
Senator Sessions. Do you plan to return, Mr. Chairman?
Senator Jeffords. I am sorry?
Senator Sessions. Do you intend to return or not after
this?
Senator Jeffords. The record will be kept open until
Monday, but we will cease the hearing process at this time
here.
Senator Sessions. If I could have 1 minute, do we have that
much time or not?
The Chairman. I will hold it for you.
Senator Sessions. I trust you.
Senator Jeffords. OK. Go ahead, yes, please.
Senator Sessions. You know the Bill Lann Lee matter, it
involved a pivotal issue. You are exactly correct. We had a
lady here whose daughter, she was Chinese American, and worked
to get in the school, and she was surprised when she made a
good test score and did not get in. They told her too many
Chinese. That is why her daughter did not get in, and she did
not think that was right.
Mrs. Adarand testified in the committee, and I do agree
with you that, as fine a person as Bill Lann Lee was, he was so
determined in his view of how quotas or affirmative action
should be interpreted that he did not recognize what the U.S.
Supreme Court had said in Adarand and did not commit to
adhering to it, at least according to the plain interpretation
that should have been given to it. So I think that is why he
was not confirmed and did not get a majority.
You were asked earlier about this question of disparate
impact analysis, that a statistical finding, that a statistical
finding, of a difference between the races in an analysis does
not automatically mean the difference is due to discrimination;
is that your view?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, although I will say that a statistical
disparity could be the basis for an investigation to determine
if discrimination has occurred.
Senator Sessions. Well said. But just in itself, is that
not what the courts say too?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, this is not Jerry Reynolds' standard.
Senator Sessions. Right, this is what the law is today.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
Senator Sessions. So it is incumbent then, if the
statistics do reveal some sort of discrimination or an analysis
of these statistics uncovers a discrimination, it would be your
duty in Civil Rights there to focus on that and determine
whether any discrimination took place and to remedy that, would
it not?
Mr. Reynolds. That is correct, Senator.
Senator Sessions. And would you be willing to do that and
take action to remedy discriminations that are properly found,
based on the facts in the law?
Mr. Reynolds. Senator, if I am privileged enough to be the
next Assistant Secretary for the Office of Civil Rights, I
assure you that I am going to use all of the tools in the tool
kit. I mean, I----
Senator Sessions. I think you are right. I just wanted to
bring that out because, look, we know, and you know, and I
know, and most people that have been around here know there are
some complex, big-time issues with regard to how these matters
are decided, and we have to be very careful.
And there is a strong lobby for pushing the law beyond what
it is today. And that means following Adarand, and following
the disparate impact analysis and those kind of facts, and I
think we want a lawyer in this position to be supervising many
lawyers who have been there for a career in this Department.
You will be hearing the briefings, and discussing the issues,
and wrestling with them, doing your own research and analyzing
and respecting the staff that is already there, but you will
have the final decision because you have the confidence of the
Secretary of Education and the confidence of the President of
to United States; is that not correct?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, I am----
Senator Sessions. That is the way I see it.
Mr. Reynolds. The Office of Civil Rights has some fine
attorneys. I have only met with a handful of them.
Unfortunately, I have not been able to get into the substance
with them out of my respect for the Senate's advice and consent
rule.
Senator Sessions. Having been in the Department of Justice
and seeing how these matters go, it is usually 20 dozen
memorandums written before it ever gets to you. The issues
would be crystallized, and you will have the--you will be doing
that, but you are not going to be trying cases all over America
involving these issues.
Mr. Reynolds. That is correct.
Senator Sessions. Mr. Chairman, I guess our vote is about
done. Thank you for staying. I am sure they would no call that
vote if you are not there, and maybe you can----
Senator Jeffords. Thank you, Senator. You have been very
helpful with your interrogation.
I want to thank the witness for your patience and your
statements. I think you have given us all a much better idea on
how to make up our minds and judgment. I just thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Reynolds follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gerald A. Reynolds
First I'd like to thank my home state senator, Senator Bond, for
that generous introduction. Mr. Chairman, Senator Gregg, and members of
the committee, thank you for providing me with this opportunity to
discuss my views on civil rights enforcement, and educational issues. I
am truly honored and humbled to be here. I would also like to thank
President Bush for honoring me with his trust and confidence. He has
given me an extraordinary opportunity to serve my country as a guardian
for the civil rights of students across America. I'd also thank my
family. Their guidance, support and love have made all of my
accomplishments possible. Mr. Chairman, let me introduce some of my
family.
My parents, Arthur Reynolds and Emma Reynolds Simon have been the
greatest influences in my life. My father was raised in Jackson, South
Carolina during the 1940s. Back then, blacks didn't have much in the
way of educational opportunities, but my father had a thirst for
knowledge, and a devotion to reading--a love of learning that he passed
on to me. He made the most of what was available and I'm proud to say
that he eventually became a New York City police officer. He retired
from Harlem's 28th precinct. My mother too has overcome large hurdles
in her life. The manner in which she has conducted her life has taught
me the value of fighting for my beliefs.
Janet Marie Sloan, my mother-in-law and second mother, has joined
us today. She was a registered nurse and is now a full-time
grandmother.
After my parents left the South, they initially settled in the
South Bronx near my Aunt Jane and Uncle Man. Aunt Jane, as well as two
of her sons, James and Larry Key, are here today. James now works for
the U.S. Customs Service. Prior to September 11th, he was stationed in
lower Manhattan. On September 11th, he risked his life to protect
others. In fact, Customs Service has recognized James as a hero for his
actions at 6 World Trade Center on September 11th. It has been said
that a man realizes his liberty by sacrificing his private interests
for the wider community. James is living proof of that, and I am
honored that he is here today.
The most distinguished guest here today is my wife, Renee. Without
her I would not be here today. Renee is a former defense analyst. She
is now the Chief Executive Officer for the Reynolds household. She also
serves our community in Kansas City, Missouri as the President of the
Parents Association for my daughter's school. Finally I'd like to
introduce my children. My stepson Ghani is a high school history
teacher in Baltimore, Maryland. His fiancee, Sarah McKitrick, also
teaches in Baltimore. My daughter, Emma Marie, is a first grader at
Academie Lafayette, a public charter school located in Kansas City,
Missouri. The troublemaker on my wife's lap is my son Ellison.
Mr. Chairman, when I think about my family, and when I look at my
children, it reminds me of why I am eager to serve as the Assistant
Secretary in the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights.
Quite simply, the Office protects our nation's students--whether
they're in first grade or in graduate school--against the evils of
invidious discrimination. Students have these protections because of
the great work of civil rights organizations, and many members of
Congress--including some on this committee, including you Mr.
Chairman--who played key roles in the enactment of civil rights
legislation. Those laws marked a turning point in the life of the
country, and, more personally, a turning point in the lives of members
of my family.
Mr. Chairman, you recently joined with President Bush and Secretary
Paige in providing the leadership and vision that led to the No Child
Left Behind Act--the most sweeping reform of grade-school education in
30 years. As President Bush said at the signing ceremony, bipartisan
leadership demonstrates that honorable people can disagree, yet
compromise, and come together for the good of our nation's children.
With this body's advice and consent, it is in that spirit that I intend
to take up the task that President Bush has assigned me.
My passion for education comes not only from the influence of my
family and my own life experiences, but also from my desire to see that
others are afforded the same kinds of opportunities that I have
enjoyed. To limit an individual's education is to limit his freedom. As
President of the Center for New Black Leadership, I focused on the
significant achievement gap between white and black students. I came to
the conclusion that we need to expand the concept of civil rights so
that it includes improving the quality of education for America's
disadvantaged children.
My work at the Center for New Black Leadership led me to conclude
that education is the answer to many civil rights issues. Education
gives poor children the skills they need to succeed in the marketplace.
A sound education is the fastest, and sometimes the only, way out of
poverty. At the Center for New Black Leadership, I spent most of my
time reviewing research literature, meeting with individuals who run
schools, and promoting education reform. I also learned a great deal
from a broad range of experienced education reformers, from Republican
Congressman J.C. Watts to Democratic former mayor of Baltimore, Kurt
Schmoke, and former Congressman Floyd Flake.
After leaving the Center for New Black Leadership, I transitioned
from being a public policy advocate to being a regulatory attorney. I
understand quite clearly that those two roles are very different. If I
have the privilege of being confirmed, I am. sure the experiences I
have had in these distinct arenas--as a public policy advocate and as
an attorney advising a client--will make me a more effective law
enforcement official in the Office for Civil Rights.
If confirmed, my primary mission, as the head of the Office for
Civil Rights will be to uphold the Constitution and enforce federal
civil rights laws. One of the most significant, and in my mind
successful, civil rights laws has been Title IX, which prohibits
schools that receive federal funds from discriminating on the basis of
sex.
title ix
Before Title IX, schools and universities could, and did, treat men
better than women. Many high schools routinely shepherded girls into
courses such as home economics and typing, while boys were prepared for
college and professional schools. This is inherently unfair. A system
that distributes benefits and burdens on the basis of an individual's
sex is a system that curtails freedom of choice.
disability law
If confirmed, another of my duties will be to ensure that students
with disabilities receive appropriate services so that they can achieve
excellence in education. If we fail to help students with disabilities
achieve their potential in our schools, we will be responsible for
limiting their opportunities in life.
Recently, I was horrified to learn how Freddy Ramirez was treated
by a DC public school. Freddy was 9 year-old boy who was confined to a
wheelchair. Because his elementary school had no accessible bathrooms,
this young boy had to park his wheelchair at the door of the bathroom
and then crawl across the filthy floor to reach a stall. This went on
18 months until the school took action. These things must never be
allowed. It is humiliating and degrading and unworthy of a nation
committed to civic equality. And more simply, how is that young boy
supposed to learn effectively in an environment like that?
Congress enacted two landmark statutes, Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
I am strongly committed to these laws, and to the President's New
Freedom Initiative. In implementing that Initiative, President Bush has
instructed his Administration to fully enforce the civil rights laws
protecting people with disabilities.
There is much work to do. Over 60 percent of all complaints filed
with OCR concern disability-based discrimination. If confirmed, I will
obey President Bush's directive, and enforce these statutes to the
letter, so that kids like Freddy need face only the challenges of
teachers and of tests, not of getting to a bathroom stall.
title vi
If confirmed, I will vigorously enforce Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, which made the promise of the Fourteenth Amendment
a reality, prohibiting discrimination based on race, color or national
origin. The backlash against innocent Muslim and Arab students
demonstrates the continued need for vigorous enforcement of our
nation's civil rights laws. I join President Bush, Secretary Paige, and
members of the Senate in their concern that the horrors of September
11th do not lead to mistreatment of Arab-Americans. Racial
discrimination and harassment have no place in our schools.
While President of the Center for New Black Leadership, I supported
affirmative action programs that promoted economic development of urban
communities, improved the quality of education for disadvantaged
students, and enhanced employment skills for young people entering the
workforce. Along with President Bush and Secretary Paige, I support
``affirmative access'' for all Americans. If confirmed, I will seek to
promote affirmative action programs that are consistent with the
Constitution and achieve the critical goal of leaving no child behind.
conclusion
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you and the members of this Committee
for the opportunity you have given me to speak with you today. I am
honored that President Bush has nominated me to serve as Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights. If confirmed, I will uphold Constitution
and vigorously enforce this nation's civil rights laws. I am eager to
begin that work with the Senate's consent; but for now, I look forward
to your questions. Thank you.
Senator Jeffords. The hearing will be held open for the purposes of
record until Monday at midnight. That does not mean anything to you, it
means something for us. That means we can throw a bunch of paper at
somebody, so do not worry about it.
Senator Sessions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
Mr. Reynolds.
Senator Jeffords. The hearing is recessed.
[Whereupon, at 5:16 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]