Racial and Ethnic Inequality

Learning Objectives

• Critically analyze social problems by identifying value perspectives and applying concepts of sociology, political science, and economics;

• Use knowledge and analyses of social problems to evaluate public policy, and to suggest policy alternatives, with special reference to questions of social justice, the common good, and public and individual responsibility.

Voting Rights act of 1965

• Ends State attempts to deny suffrage to African-Americans

• African Americans vote at almost the same rates as Whites today.

Affirmative Action

• Results vs. Opportunities– Equality of Opportunity– Equality of Outcome

• Racial Preferences may be used, but hard quotas are discouraged

• Very Contentious Policy

Despite these gains, African Americans Still Lag in

• Education

• Health Care

• Economics

Public Policy and Hispanic Americans

• Race vs. Ethnicity

• Problems within the Hispanic Community

Hispanics in America

• 13.4% of the Population- the largest racial/ethnic minority group

• One of the fastest growing groups

The Largest Hispanic Groups in America

Hispanic Groups

• Puerto Rico

• Mexico

• Cuba

• Other nations in Latin America

Immigration- The Defining Issue for Hispanics

• Sources of Immigration

Current Immigration Policies

• The U.S. accepts more immigrants than all other nations of the world combined– 1,000,000 per Year

• We also have many people here illegally– Visa violations– False Documentation– Surreptitious crossings

Immigration Policy

• Legal Immigration– The end of quotas– Preferences for Family members and skilled persons– The ICRA

• Illegal Immigration– No constitutional right to enter the US– Once you do, you are protected by the Constitution

Immigration in the United States

• 38 million foreign born Americans

• Immigrants are 12% of the population

• Estimated 10-15 million illegal immigrants in the United States.

Why People Come to the USA

• Economic Opportunity

• The American Dream

• This is a reason that immigration of all forms is down!

Who is in charge of Immigration Policy?

• The Federal Government sets the rules

• States Bear the costs

This causes animosity (e.g. Arizona)

Policy Stalemate

• This does not break down on party or ideological lines.– Business

– High Tech

– Ethnic Groups

• This makes reform difficult

What to do?

• Enforcing the Current Laws

• Securing the Border

• Comprehensive Immigration Reform

Political Impact of Reform

• Hispanic Voters are a political unknown

• They have the potential to be a decisive block of voters

• The Hispanic electorate currently favors the Democratic Party

What Should be Done?

Homosexuality

• Not based on a visibly ascribed status

• Not counted in the U.S. Census

Homophobia

• What it is it?

• What are the results

Legal Protections

• Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act

• Lawrence v. Texas (2003)

Legal Restrictions

• Don’t Ask Don’t Tell– http://movieclips.com/watch/stripes-1981/willing-to-learn/

• Defense of Marriage Act

• The laws in Texas

Age Discrimination

• Work and Retirement

• Age discrimination in Employment Act of 1967

• Work Place discrimination

Dilemmas Paper II

Summer 2010

About Paper 2

• What it Contains– Revised Paper I paper – A critical analysis and a moral analysis of the

Controversial Policy Solution

• 9-11 Pages- 15 Works Cited

• Due in class on 7/29

How it Should Be Organized

• Stuff From Paper I– Identification of the Social Problem– Scope of the Social Problem– Causes of the Social Problem– History of Policy on the Social Problem– Proposed Policy alternatives

• YOU DO NOT NEED THE DEFINITIONS SECTION

On Revising Paper I

• Read through the rubric and see where you lost points– Get the easy points (MLA, Format, Grammar)– Add to your history section if it is lacking– Gather better data and evidence demonstrating it

is a problem

• Make sure that you have clearly demonstrated that this is a social problem

New Information For Paper II

I. Clearly identify and define your controversial policy solution“Should the Federal Government Raise the Retirement Age”

II. Pro and Con- Stakeholders, Positions and Arguments III. Stakeholder Values and AnalysisIV. Analysis of Argumentation (in light of logic, evidence, and

values held)

I. Stating the Controversial Solution

• Make sure you identify it as a normative question (should, ought)

• Describe what the policy intends to do

• Describe how the policy might be implemented and by whom

II. Identifying Stakeholders

• Relevant parties who answer your topic question ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ (your ‘Pro’ and ‘Con’ parties)

• Must be organized, or have some kind of power to effect change on the issue. (elected officials, organized interests, formal and informal governmental institutions)

II. Bad Stakeholders

• Bad Stakeholders– Crazy people with web access are not legitimate

stakeholders– People who cannot influence policy – Stakeholders are rarely absolutes

• Not all of one type of people ever take one position.• E.g. not all Democrats or Republicans favor or oppose a policy• Use Qualifiers (some, many)

II. Stakeholders Continued

• Good Stakeholders– Are clearly identifiable• Specific Individuals (Senators, Representatives,

President Obama, legitimate activists)

• Named Groups (NRA, Labor Unions, AARP, AMA)

– Have the power to make policy change

II. Stakeholders in the Paper

• Your paper will have stakeholders on both sides

• For efficiency, you might give all those who hold one particular position or stance a label: like advocates of X, or opponents of X. – Opponents and proponents– Side A and Side B– Those for/Those against

II Stakeholder Issues and Arguments

• Issues: Broad areas of dispute for and against the policy solution. (e.g. costs)

• Arguments: The actual reasons why a stakeholder believes we should or should not adopt the policy solution

• Do not make these up, but use research to uncover them.

II. Stakeholder Evidence• What each side uses to SUPPORT its arguments• Can include:

– Statistical information– Case Studies– Studies (i.e. by industries, government organizations, scholars or

universities)– Expert testimony (legitimate journalists, think tanks, members of

congress)

• You will evaluate the evidence for its level of bias, quantity, quality, recent-ness, expertise.

III. Stakeholder Values and Evidence (moral reasoning)

• Using the methodology of "Obligations, Values, and Consequences" for ethical decision making, identify and discuss these aspects of both sides of the policy dilemma.

• This is the most difficult part of the paper

IV. Analysis of Argumentation

• Discuss the Strengths and weaknesses of each side of the debate

• "Which side has presented a stronger case and why?“

• Avoid personal biases- judge their evidence, not what you want

MORAL REASONING

• A methodology to help people deal with moral dilemmas

• The Key to doing well on paper 2

WHAT IS A MORAL DILEMMA?

• Occurs when you are facing a value-laden problem (policy, personal, etc) and…

• All the choices appear to have merit

WHAT IS MORAL REASONING?

• Ability to work through moral dilemmas using a rule-based framework

• Involves both decision-making and taking action

• Focuses on situations that involve value conflicts – Beliefs about what is good/desirable and undesirable

Pretty much useless in the real world of politics

What are Morals?

• What are morals?

• Moral Relativism

• Moral Absolutism

INSUFFICIENT, CRITERIA FOR MORAL DECISION-MAKING

• Feelings

• Religion

• Majority view

• Law

ACCEPTABLE CRITERIA FOR MORAL DECISION-MAKING

• Obligations

• Values

• Consequences

Be sure to consider each criteria before making any moral decisions.

OBLIGATIONS

• Relationships imply obligations

• Obligations imply restrictions

• Formal– Contracts, vows

• Informal– Citizenship, friendship, family, professions

When Obligations Conflict

• When examining Policy Choices– Give preference to the more important one

– Try to find a middle ground and serve both

– If only one can be served• What is the first obligation• What will cause the greatest harm if not filled

WHAT ARE VALUES?

• Beliefs about what is good/desirable and bad/undesirable

• Guide us on how to behave• Unique to each individual• Change due to time, experience

• In a policy dilemma, opposite sides will often share the same core values

SOME EXAMPLES OF VALUES

(terminology: Milton Rokeach)

TERMINALNational securityFamily securityEconomic prosperityA peaceful worldInner harmonySalvationEqualityWisdomJusticeAn exciting life

INSTRUMENTALImaginativeHonestKindFriendlyProductivePoliteFairObedientGenerous

When Values Conflict

• Select the higher ideal

• Select the action that will achieve the greatest good

• If there is no good, then choose the one with the lesser evil

CONSEQUENCES

They are the projected results that might occur from any given action.

• Beneficial or detrimental• Immediate or long-range• Intentional or unintentional• Involve the person performing the action

and/or others

Measuring Consequences

• Difficult to predict because people behave irrationally

• Immoral Acts that produce good results – No• Moral Acts that produce mixed consequences-

maybe• What if a choice must be made

FOUNDATIONAL NORMATIVE PRINCIPLE:RESPECT FOR PERSONS

• Honor others’ rights• Do not treat them as a means to our ends• Theological – Humans are created in God’s image

• Philosophical – We wish the best for others, since they are the

same as us

OTHER FOUNDATIONAL NORMATIVE PRINCIPLES

• Principle of consistency

• Principle of impartiality

• Principle of rationality

• Principle of least harm• Principle of right desire

Principle of Consistency

Moral reasons and actions are binding on all people at all times in all places, given the same relevant circumstances.

Principle of Impartiality

Each person should be treated equally unless there is a good reason not to do this.

Principle of Rationality

All legitimate moral acts must be supported by generally accepted reasons.

Principle of Least Harm

When one has to choose between evils, he/she should choose the one which will cause the least harm. When one has to choose between goods, one should choose the one which will cause the most good.

Principle of Right Desire

• we ought to desire what is really good for us and nothing else

USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY

1. Study the details of the case

2. Identify the relevant criteria• Obligations• Values• Consequences

3. Determine courses of action

4. Choose the most morally responsible action