-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/851697c42e9ae05048e8e9fe587c14aa.pdf
1c7b35cd4cbcadf85935033f1cedd9cc
PDF Text
Text
WithdrawalIRedaction Sheet
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
SUBJECTffITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
001. memo
Carol H. Rasco to Christopher F. Edley, Jr. Re: Civil Rights (2 pages)
6/15/1994
,P5
002. memo
Carol H. Rasco to Christopher F. Edley, Jr. Re: Civil Rights Working
Group (1 page)
111111994
P5
003. memo
Christopher F. Edley, Jr. to Carol H. Rasco re: Civil Rights Working
Group (l page)
1/1211994
P5
004. memo
Jeremy D. Benami to Stephen C. Warnath re: Korematsu Event (1
page)
11/1/1994
P5
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Domestic Policy Council
Stephen Warnath (Civil Rights)
OAlBox Number: 9590
FOLDER TITLE:
Civil Rights Working Group [1]
ds50
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
PI National Security Classified Information [(a)(I) of the PRA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
P5 Release would disclose confidential advise between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(l) National security classified information [(b)(I) of the FOIA]
b(2) Releasc would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes I(b)(7) ofthe FOIA]
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�.
"
~.
. !,I
./
SENT BY:
EEOC-OCLA....
..
EXEcurlv~
202 456 7028;# 2
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
Or-TIC\. ;' 'M4N~ME:NT AND IJ..CJGIrt
,/, ~4HOTON. D,C J06N
...",~, :~uar)' 1,0. 1991
. ICENORANDUM FOR DESIGNA'l'!" ~.GINCY HEADS
(SE!
PROM!
ATT.~.:!::.D
DIS'l'RIBUTION LIST)'
Robert C. i'<,mua
(lI-O
. Aeting Go;-r.","!l Counsel
Proposed .~r,""orandum Entitled. -,Civil Right .. Werking
SUBJECT: ,
Group"
Attached is .. propo~F'-} rneJ1lorandum entitled ·Civil Rights
Group,"' that was: '<:'pared by this office.
W~i'king
On behalf of the D:,r:~~or of the Office of Naaagement and
Budget, I would appreci·
recei.ving any comments you may have
concerning this propose', rf you have any comments er
objecti.ona, they sboul(
:,'eeeived ftO late%' tba.n12 :00 n.OOh
Tuesday, January 11. lS, "
pl•• se be ac!viiled that agencle. that
do not re8pOnd by the...;' , '..... '1 11, 1994 deadline will be recorded
a. not objecting to th~
;QBal.
Comments
or
inquiri ,.;
rna)'
be 8\lbmlt.tecl by telephone to Mr.
Mac Reed of this office -::.oe: 395-3563, "ax:, 395·'294) •
,
\
.
Th.!U1k
~ 'ou •
Att:.ach.ll\ents - Distribut ~ .... .-: !,i8t
Preposed
,-: anQum
eel Alice aivlin
Chris Sdley
Gordon Adams
John Angell
,
'
,
Kartha Poley
Clauthier
Joe Minar i le·
Isabelle Sawhl11
1:.J.
Nancy-Ann Min
Sally ICatzen
Steve Kelman
'Barry Toiv
Jim Hurr
�· .I
:
l-ll~~i
SENT BY:
pr~TRIBUTI0N
Kono~.ble
Warren
EEOC-OCLA'"
~:23AM
LIST
Chr~8toph~r
Secl"et&~l'
J)epartl'ftent. of State '
Honorable Lloyd Bentsen
Secretary
,
Departlnent of the
Treasu:ry
Honorable Les Aspin
Secr6tary
nepa~tmant of Defenae
Honorable Mike Espy
,Secretary
Department of Agriculture
Honorable Henry G. CiBnere~
',secretary
Department of Housing and t'!"ban Developsftent
Honorable Janet Reno
Attorney 0<:':'","1'1"&1
United Statea
Honorable Ron Brown
Sec:ratary
Depart.ant of Commerce
Honorable Feder1eo Pena
Secretary
Department of
Transport~t~~n
Honorable Bruce Babbitt
Sect'etary
Department of the
lnter~ ~:r
"
Honorable Robert Reich
Secretary
D.partment of Labor
Honorable Richard W.
Ril~y
Seere~ary
Department o~ Education
Honorable Donna E.
Secretary
Shal!'-J~
Department of Health anc' w'lmanServicea
Honorable Hazel O'Leary
seeretary
Department of Energy
202.4567028:# 3
�1-1l-9~
SENT BY:
Honorable Jesse 8rown
'Secretary
Department of Veterans
9:24AM·
Aff~irs
Honorable Carol M., Bro~~r
Administrator
Bnvironmental Proteetion ~ency
liO:1.orable R. James '1001sp.v
Director
'
CentrAl Intelligenee Agency
Honorable James B. King
Director
Office of Personnel
~an~a~~ent
Honorabl. Tony E:., Gallpoc,5
Chairmfln
BqUalEmplQl'lller:c:, Oppcrt1''',;''Y commission
Honorable Mary r,am:is
Chairman
l~-:-y
commi•• lon on c~'::l Ris~""
, Honorable John C:'.bbons
Assistant to tr" ?reeic,,~t
for Sci.ne~ ~": ':;'e,hn,<"(":rY Poliey
Honorable 8ern e ~', ': W; Nur - ", l urn
Counsel to t.hfi ; ~~siden'.
Honora!:>le John I ":1est~
Aaaiat.ant. to t l l ; re.siden':
and St.aff
Sec
Honorable JAck
Chief of Staff
~l\ry
r,,: nn
:.i-I\! V~ce President'
EEOC-QCLA'"
202 456 7028;# u4
...
__
"";.VA.'
••
�,/
EEOC-OCLA-t
1-11-94 ; 9:24AM
SENT BY:
.).
I
202 456 7028:# 5
A..,.
January I, J"4
l\IF.J\IORANDUM rCR HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTs AND AGENCIES
I
\\'Iilcconcernin~
('ur
respon~ihility
to promote cqull opportunity C(vall Americans.
A~
we:
celebrate the COntri,,\.!,bnsof Dr. Martm Luther klnS on tho ~Iion ofilia bildldaYt we
recall ~t Dr~ Kin? r· .. -l'!1"d of I society that included all AmcriWUlS. Hit ebeam iDtptRld us
10
besin Q1e process C': 0 0
ey~
0ing
our hearts au the humanity of every penon aDd opeDiDg our
to the injustices B rou nd us. Twenty-six years afler his death, Dr. Klng',·le@.acy endures
ThrouahoulW nati()l'\. • 'J ,,~ us must rededicate oU)' effortS to prolllGf.ean opcr1lad iDclusive
~icty.
and those c( .'
"'l;~
enjoy the honor of.being public servants have. spccia1 duty in
that TeJard. At the ~>"'F! levcl. ~'e must reevaluate Federal ale~y civil ri&bts missions.
polic.:ies an4
rclOUr('"r-'·"~
that agencie,:carry
oppoltLunty
C" ',: '.
ant tr';:-"'.
barrien but ,1.0 t('l i·
local governments u·:
10
improve and expand govcmmenl-wicie coordination. IDd CDSUre
~r missions in a manner consilient wirll our CommilmeJlti to equal
,-; ~\,jewing
our IliC:tivilic&. we mus1 seck
. '., C"Ir'JxHTtlllit;es fOT
--:'1~;Ht
Dl)t
only to lllimiDBte
innovation. And \YC IbouJd cmcou.ralC State and
f'Jds tado dte5lJ11C.
1
�EEOC-OCLA'"
V
,:, ....
SENT BY:
J'H •
T\1C.llt}'. J l&tVC
b~~ul'c F"I t'CCU1!VC
$ccn:&ary of Hnu!til"f:
E.r~'ul'
..
202 456 7028;# 6
11 • .;':1
I~CI .UL~
Orc.icl' Cfolablt,hing a fail' lluu~inI; ~nc:iI. chaiNd by IJw
Urban DevclC1fln\enl. WurkiOl acrosB a,.:ncieJ and proJI"lm1l. thl~
i l'j
wm 'bring IIt'\>' L"',:IJ i to onl! of the: n,,,,, climtult al'¥J critical elelllentl of Ihe
O('portunity a,ends.
P':'(,~lJse
thrr.: lIf: additiQIli\IIn:al' in which \W mUSl limilarly
sca~b
for nmrc creati"e 3r:~ r:~'clivc ml';Jn!' of ,,~erciJ~ laadenhip, 1 hcR:by cstablilh • Civil
('>
Right!! Wl,rkiftg
c..,~
,- '., ~vBI\.IBte. and improve Ihc effccti\'CDCls of Pedcn' civil rlgh'R
,
'
,
impedimonlSto
,
tIT·:,,:,· "~forcerr~nt
our communities
? r. . .
of &he law. Ind opponunillel to promote 101eranct in
MOM imponanI. I expect abc Working Grovp to
.'~ place~.
develop. conabor;"
The prim;:ipal
fOCt! ~ ;
,
'.
adequate 10 !be UI'\',
.
~.vorki~?
~ha[
~,·lI
rul
Group will be our civil rijhll
':c
eDfo~ent
,from. We
and private enfcm:emem rclOllr'CeS will never be. fUlJy
of tl:·.: retnaiDiDa Obstacles 10 DppQnvnity cannot be n:moved
1hrough lit.jpti(lr "
identify
innovatj\'~
.' Ie'S tl~~t
,:,:11 leverage
our
linured ~SDUrCCl to provide new
Ivenuct\ for cqua1 \"
":'."1 am! \'''u81 rlg~lS. Amo~glhoSepo&'emial &trategiellfC new
Dl"surtS re]y~ ('.
':: :educ\tt;:'!l and affirmative Yoluntll)' efforts to involve citizens
and the public ant', .
. r-rga.ni 7' " ''")n5 in oVerComint Ibe cffCCIS of put di~rimination and
,
'
,
denial of civft ri f l .
'~e new ~''''gram .tratcgi~s
improve4, n=invi r .
. "orccm'", rffort.
.2
sbould be desiailed·to complemcat all
Y
.~Jb
�'1
1-11-9-1
SENT BY:
9: 25AM
,.
EEOC-OCLA':'
.....
-
_.
lIP·
.1
202 456 7028;# 7
r·.UI
·"v
I.W~VJ:..,
The At1()tney Ocner?t en~ thl: Director of the' omrc uf Management Ind Rudlc. will atchair the Work inS;! On.)lJp. The:
rpllowi~
Adn1tnl!oinltinn offk:ials \\'llIsefYt: Iii menlbclS:
,~ *relary or lln: TrC'a~ur)'. llw Secn:lary c1f C(llluncn:c.
abc: ~~IIf)' uf Asrlcuhun:.
the
SeCret.ry o'f .he I nteorim. (he SCC'I't'lIul, of F.duallion~ Ihe Secretary \tf lfeaUh and Human
the Chair ()f'Equ~' :', ': '~ymcnt C"r-;"on"nhy Comlll;~'ion.J at", hJvc Invjted thcpair of
the CivJl Rights C':
:";'~n (0 p-nicipalc
re.pectfuJ of the
, ':"~nl fmd \~hical
j,"
membership list h ;'
""~~ivr.
The Working GrC"""
~~vise r~
might seek to
mo~:'
';-~:l
.',
IndirecLly.
""-1.:1n:
I dirt>("
(a)
exami~
('
r invite .111 cnco"raae ell Cabinet OfficeN and agency
9nd approprla(e
arr~ :.' cf
'~':~11y
every six months.
voice we elpect of tharCommiuion. Plnally. this
Admjni~tral)on
offICial. on bow we
h\"'. rules anc! regulations and on bow 10 improve
coorc:Unatiou amor:
rl
in \his crucial ~ed\'or. on In infuJ11111 basi» '
'-~.I~rfl'
Federal programs .ffcelina clvD risJU. direc1,ly and
l>"up 10 provide mc wIth & piog1eIs ICport DO less than
I,'
fie the Working GroUp to:
;wI'ney with. lignificaDl civil riabtS mj~on and
provide m ~ , ' - Va T" ,; "" of how ,hal mJ~SiOD is bcb~ implemented. Tbcse
analylCs st>·
enfon:emtr'
"~
:'le .,. ':her oath agenc), uses the experit:rlCle laiued from
~'
of ;', "r a,cncles and Qtber Icvel~ of government.
3
�/
:j
SENT BY:
EEOC-OCLA"
('ounl~IT'f"!:'.~'.'I'I~"'" , ",J
for chanrc
fr.)n::!-"~!;!~g
cnvironmC""': ':),
idemif~'
hQ
,*naincd Ind prorullh~
"".!~.t_.,I:
r··'
(b) exam in<'
!"It'ntl5islc:nc l'r.1k.'C~ sbeNld
202 456 7028;# 8
civil rip hIs enforcement challcnilcs ($Uth"
melror('llilall 5e8rc,atlon! ""ting. rl&hta)\ aDd
i';,~!crn.< of
i '1'
(e) de\1etop t,· '.
which shn'. ,I'
,- ~d'CS of perfol'lnance for Federal civil riaht' programs.
. ',:, , :',: ~" ,~~eOUnl
the real Impact of programs On tbedaily Jives of
our pet'; ! .
(d) SUpPt'!"
. ', .. ·\"r
.' , .
for Ibe P';'
WiLb this
inte~ ""
n',
GroLiP will prey,'
will he among
~~.'
"~en8nd
:hr
~"/\motion
a~
we reliwenlOUr Itrafelies
inclusive society.
., : ," ,r! ~rscore the
"
and Igencies
eftons or all agencies
commitment or Chis Admlnistration 10 brina new
of an open IDd inclcllvc aaclcty. In deparunenu
" ""! goverruucnt, this
work has alrcad) bc,UIl. The WorkioS
. : .. ' to cxpand8Dd accelerate that viLli work. ADd that work
. :I,tuuons CO the people we IOn'C.
�E X E CUT I V E
OFF ICE
o
F
THE
PRE SID E N T
16-Nov-1994 02:57pm
TO:
TO:
TO:
TO:
Susan M. Carr
Adrien L. Silas
Stephen C. Warnath
Margaret R. Shaw
FROM:
Lori L. Victor
Office of Mgmt and Budget, EG
SUBJECT:
Civil Rights Deputies Meeting
Has been scheduled with Deval Patrick'for 11/30 from 3:00 to 4:30
pm (although we have reserved 2 hours on their calendars, assuming
the meeting will go over).
, Patrick's office should be handling invites.
trying to get a conference room.
I am in process of
Please let me know what your needs are in respect to prebriefs.
Thanks.
�E X E CUT I V E
OFF ICE
o F
THE
PRE SID E N T
30-Nov-1994 02:35pm
TO:
Christopher F. Edley, Jr
FROM:
Margaret R. Shaw
Office of Mgmt and Budget, HTS
CC:
CC:
CC:
Stephen C. Warnath
Susan M. Carr
Lori L. Victor
SUBJECT:
MFBerry & Civil Rights WG
FYI. Berry called last night for a quick update on civil rights
WG process.
[She thoguht she'd missed a meeting.] Her Board
members were asking for an update, and she didn't know what to
say.
I told her that you, Warnath, ,and Patrick were meeting on the 12th
to plan the agenda for a principals meeting this month (currently
not scheduled). I asked if she wanted to attend on the 12th; she
said she wasn't "looking for meetings" but would be happy to act
as counselor/sounding board and review anything the trio produced.
Steve/Chris, let me know what the plan is for relevant agencies,
and Susan, Adrien and I will pass it on. Steve, do you need
anything'?
�E X E CUT I V E
OFF ICE
o
F
THE
PRE SID E N T
30-Nov-1994 03:02pm
TO:
Margaret R. Shaw
FROM:
Lori L. Victor
Office of Mgmt and Budget, EG
CC:
CC:
CC:
Christopher F. Edley, Jr
Stephen C. Warnath
Susan M. Carr
SUBJECT:
RE: MFBerry & Civil Rights WG
The meeting on the 12th is a deputies meeting of the Civil Rights
WG. Helaine, Deval Patrick's office, is coordinating invites.
�"
-,
'
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
TO:
Robert G. Damus
Acting General Counsel
OMB
ATTN:
Mac Reed
~asco~
FROM:
Carol H.
SUBJ:
Proposed Memorandum on civil Rights
DATE:
January 11, 199'9..~
I am seriously concerned that a memo has been distributed
outlining a working group to be under the umbrella of the
Domestic Policy Council and (1) we at DPC had no knowledge of the
proposed working group and (2) we weren't even included in the
distribution list of the proposed memo. Only because an agency
called to discuss it with us did we learn of the memo this
morning.
We wish to register serious objections to the process used thus
far and to the establishment of the group until further
sUbstantive discussions can be held on the matter.
Thank you.
cc: Leon Panetta
Alice Rivlin
John Podesta
"
�P6/(b)(6)
FAX COVER SHEET
OFFICE OF DOMESTIC POLICY
Old Executive Office Building
Washington, DC 20500
FAX: (202) 456-7028
TO:
FA.XNo.
.PHONE;
FRO~1: _ _ _ _ _ _
DATE:
-------,--------,--
------------~---------
NU!vfBER OF PAGES (Including cover sheet)-~. COMMENTS:
�01/11/94
18:22
~003
SENT BY!Xerox ;e:ecooier 7021
1-"-94
3:15PM
2023954639..;
RXECUTIVE OFFICE 01'
o~"c:Et O~
TH~
:he Whits Housei# 2
PRESIDENT
MANAGltMiNT ANC aUDGIiT
\MAC\.I\NCTOl\l, 0. C. 2OSO'lI
AJ!!lSOCI.t.TI DI~!C:TO"
January 11, 1994
FeR £I:ONOMIC8 "ND GovIRIoI"'!:NT
MEMOR.r\NDtJM FOR CAKOL RASCO
t~.
FROM:
Christopher Edle)'. Jr.
SUBJECT:
Civil Rights Wormg GlWp
OMB General CounMl Rob D.amw gave me a copy of your ftOte (attaclled.) objecting 10
the propoS" Ci vi! Rights Working Group; or the process for developing the initiative; or DPe'lI
role in tae proposed group; or aU of lbc above.
.
I
1.
i, apolog.i,ze for
the. surprise: and for any miscommunication. Prankly, this has been
tnovinll' en Ill1 ~eeJ.erated time ftame -- essem:ially. siDe: wL Thursday nishr. aiminz for
~. s birthdaY., b isaeace, however, this is a. revival of Nl effort begun last spring aDd
fabled pt;'J.lding completion of the Pn:sid=ntial itppciatmcnu.
.
..
..
1
2.
I
pur intention was tQ (orward the proposal' to senior Whib: House Staff today for your
formal n.action, but 1 did not waD! to send it to the White House for blessing without
rtrlng "4cctiom from tho affected asenci4s.
3.
That is what the c:.learance process is for,
here i ~·':'£H]Ced ,ro ,create tbc .womma StOUP, as'a sub-entity of tbe :Ole. That W1I5 O'I'M ·-M.M1 sJu...
lnventi')D in order to help SUPPOrt your role as patic;y coordinator; it would be just as ~::d
~ tc, ;hak;e me WarlciDg Group a free floating enterprise or an NEe project. You
~.
~bDuld:, ',m mow that the Vi;e' 'Praidcat'. 'staff bas the draft and is ehecldDg to ,ee
~ :
'piheth~)'
the Vice Presidcm WDWd.like to chair the effort.
I
,
,
,
4. ' 'i'd'like to
you or Rpeak with yoU as soon as possible aboUt lhis. and my assistant bas
,~1ed yO!J.! offICe to request an appointmeDt. Meauwbile. we will rewrite ~ draft
't:n;;:~:'. '~{~::a:.eliminam refe~es to the DPe. and incorpomte~y sugg.stions from
see
5,
I
I ha\'e::jy};-:en with Leon. who is aware of your objections, as I undentaJJd them.
I '
J ,
'
.',
I
'
~ialn, rr'.y
.
/rh. O~,."".;":tor
i Bob
I
I
\
i'
!
,.,,',.
.,;,
'
apolQgic:s for the rouJh ;dg;a
I
Attacmrent
~c:
'
T1:. ' .... ILl' ~
... -,.~ "
,
•
U1 the
, ", "
proc.cslI.
,
.
�.
fr
18:23
01/11/94
SENT e~!XerQ~ ~e;ecODier 7021 ; 1-11-94 ; 3:15PM;
SENT aYlXtroM
Tel.eo~i.r
1Q20
i
'-:1-84 ;
~,:O'
~004
2q2395463S"
I
The White Hausei# S
Tn. \IIhtl
TI1I WHITC HOU'I
W.... W''''Cll'CW
':COl
rBOKI
I:::
.t.I~t
,',
'.; ~
P Q'pG••4
lftuary
D~'II
,
,j'
i~
XeaotMClu
OIl
civil 1'1yhfJ.
l., 1"3
, j~
afoUI1Y oonClUl\I4 'CUe
~
% ...
"
[OJ-=:!
II
otKlift
;1
• WOI'klnf
R'~ toD
~:~~c;"~l.:"ifl':":"'~ ::..nol.Joa~WY: ::.till
lutl> ~ion ~i.t If the
;,1
"
C
'L
;j
"
11_
Binu.
ba. »HI\ di.trzilrat:e4
un". 1m. waR.l1.. of ••
II S_g
».
0
pnpo... - - .
Oft1'1 HD&\1A. aft ...ftCf
eU.au.. it wi tb u 41. va l.arn af til.
_0
tbi..
=.,
•• vi_ t:Q t',,1ItlZ' ••1'10\1. CI!t~"iLeI\' to
pzOOl•• "-IN Qua
~ar aftd to thI ..~!.hrMft' 01 'lla P'~ untU fVthu
~U.t.'J\,1va eIi.ou••loft. c:reA 1Ja b~14 CD, tJ!. 8''tar
..
t
~~T'
'I
;1
I
i
,
,.
~
,
~O. %.e~
'Paa.....
A1 ca aivl£a
JQ
))04."
.,
-,,""':'!-',.,. .... ,
�E X'E CUT I V E
OFF ICE
o
F
THE
PRE SID E N T
Il-Jan-1994 04:09pm
TO:
Christopher F. Edley, Jr
FROM:
Carol H. Rasco
Economic and Domestic Policy
CC:
CC:
Donsia Strong
Rosalyn A. Miller,
SUBJECT:
Civil Rights Working Group
Thank you for your fax.
I would appreciate the opportunity to
talk with you about this matter. While it might very well belong
in the Domestic Policy Council I felt it should have been run by
us before it went to those departments. I question how smart it
is to set up such a group and open ourselves in the Administration
to even more criticism since the appointments within this area are
not complete. Also, should not those appointees guide the
formation of such a group?
Anyway, there may have been lots of thought put into this and
sensible answers that can be given to my questions/concerns but to
assume a group belongs within a certain area before including that
area is somewhat puzzling to me.
I look forward to hearing from you.
�E X E CUT I V E
OFF ICE
o
F
THE
PRE SID E N T
11-Jan-1994 07:43pm
TO:
Carol H. Rasco
FROM:
Oonsia Strong
Domestic Policy Council
SUBJECT:
civil rights
1. While the effort to catalog the civil rights budget (as it was presented last
spring) and enforcement efforts was broached last spring, under no circumstances
were we aware or informed that the effort was proceeding and a proposal
developed.
In addition, when the decsion was made to move forward on a
mechanism for developing civil rights policy, OPC could have been notified at
that point.
I
2. If the intent were to clear the proposal with agencies outside the WH why
were other senior officials such as Quinn, Podesta and Nussbaum notified to the
exclusion of policy offices. Also, how does a proposal develop in OMB, an
office in EOP, 'and circulate throughout agencies without any heads up to the
affected WH entities or personnel? How are we expected to field questions and
comments? Typically, the clearance process includes every USG office, including
all WH offices.
.
3. I think the suggestion that a civil rights coordinating entity, if
established, be placed anywhere other than OPC is ludicrous. Additionally, if
the intent in creating the entity as a sub-group of OPC were truly to support
you as the policy coordinator we must again question the lack of consultation.
Does the move suggest that an inadequacy in OPC's ability to work with OOJ to
coordinate this important area? Also, the move to inquire as to the
Vice-President's desire to coordinate civil rights policy seems highly suspect.
4. Why is Edley's office calling to schedule the appointment? Why did Edley
respond to a memo addressed to the General Counsel? We should strongly object
to any draft memorandum prepared with input from Bush holdovers in criticl
departments (EEOC).
I don't think he addressed your concern about establishing
the group fre standing or otherwise without further substantive discussions and
the guidance of specific appointees to guide the group's formation.
Why would OMB co-chair a policy developing group?
their role.
This is not and should not be
�E X E CUT I V E
OFF ICE
o F
THE
PRE S I 0 E N , T
ll-Jan-1994 08:46pm
TO:
Carol H. Rasco
FROM:
Christopher F. Edley, Jr
Office of Mgmt and Budget, EG
CC:
CC:
Oonsia Strong
Rosalyn A. Miller
SUBJECT:
RE: Civil Rights Working Group
I'm trying to get an appointment with you. Meanwhile, Leon may
raise it at the Senior Staff meeting tomorrow (Wednesday), lest we
lose the any chance at all of getting this out. The proposed
memorandum has been rewritten to eliminate references to OPC.
On the "merits," the logic is not unlike the logic of going ahead
with the Executive Order creating a Fair Housing Council -- this
Administration is moving ahead on the Civil Rights agenda, not
stalled while we wait for every vacancy to be filled • . It is for
that reason that the Attorney General, Leon and George
Stephanopolous are excited about moving on this quickly.
I hope you will reconsider, and I look forward to talking with
you.
�WithdrawallRedaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
001. memo
SUBJECTffITLE
DATE
Carol H. Rasco to Christopher F. Edley, Jr. Re: Civil Rights (2 pages)
6/15/1994
RESTRICTION
P5
This marker identifies the original location of the withdrawn item listed above.
For a complete list of items withdrawn from this folder, see the
WithdrawallRedaction Sheet at the front of the folder.
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Domestic Policy Council
Stephen Warnath (Civil Rights)
ONBox Number: 9590
FOLDER TITLE:
Civil Rights Working Group [1]
ds50
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act· [44 U.S.c. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act· [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
PI National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
P5 Release would disclose confidential advise between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(l) National security classified information [(b)(I) of the FOIA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
002. memo
SUBJECTrrITLE
DATE
Carol H. Rasco to Christopher F. Edley, Jr. Re: Civil Rights Working
Group (1 page)
111111994
RESTRICTION
P5
This marker identifies the original location of the withdrawn item listed above.
For a complete list of items withdrawn from this folder, see the
WithdrawaVRedaction Sheet at the front of the folder.
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Domestic Policy Council
Stephen Warnath (Civil Rights)
OA/Box Number: 9590
FOLDER TITLE:
Civil Rights Working Group [1]
ds50
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act· [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act· [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
PI National Security Classified Information [(a)(I) of the PRA]
Pi Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
fmancial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
P5 Release would disclose confidential advise between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(l) National security classified information [(b)(I) of the FOIA]
b(2) Release would disclose Internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or fmancial
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misnIe defmed in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
2201(3).
RR. Document wlll be reviewed upon request.
�WithdrawalIRedaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
003. memo
DATE
SUBJECTffITLE
Christopher F. Edley, Jr: to Carol H. Rasco re: Civil Rights Working
Group (1 page)
1112/1994
RESTRICTION
P5
This marker identifies the original location of the withdrawn item listed above.
For a complete list of items withdrawn from this folder, see the
WithdrawallRedaction Sheet at the front of the folder.
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Domestic Policy Council
Stephen Wamath (Civil Rights)
ONBox Number: ·9590
FOLDER TITLE:
Civil Rights Working Group [1]
ds50
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. SS2(b)]
PI National Security Classified Information [(a)(I) of the PRA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information [(a)(4) ofthe PRA]
PS Release would disclose confidential advise between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors [aleS) of the PRA]
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA1
b(l) National security classified information [(b)(I) of the FOlA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOlA1
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOlA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information [(b)(4) of the FOlA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOlA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOlA]
b(8) Release would diselose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOlA1
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOlA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misrlle defined in accordl;lnce with 44 U.S.C.
2201(3);
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�u.s. D~paitmeD.t·or Justice
'"
Civil Righis Division
.waslii~gron~ D.C
20530
Mt.
Ste'phen Warriath.
Domestic Policy Council
';rhe Whi,t'e, House l
.
waShington" ~.Ci ~
'Dear Mr y.~ tho
.;::.
. . '
"
you like.ly already khow, Dev~i L.' Patrick, th:~ Assista:ht.
Geneii9:I, fdr Civil Rights, has announced his, resignation,
effective January 20,1997. '. His colleagues here in the Division
are planning
farewell C'elebration :i!li his honoro'n January 16,
199'7 which we hope you will attend. :Your invitation should ,..
arri~e during tl;le first week in Janu~ry.
Pleasefeei. free, to •.
have your office contact us at 202-514-2151 if you have not
received it.
'
, . As
A,~forney
a:
In advance of that party, we are prepar~ng a book for hi'm'
that. we hope will contain letters, remembrances, mes'sag'e's, arid
,
even artwork .or : poetry, from his friends colleagues and ·ment'ors.
We are writing to ask you to contribute to this effort by.
..
submitting, whether in the form of a lette'rt'o Deval, or some
other format,
thoughts about hi$ tenure here in Washington,
, his effect . on th'e 01vision, the Department, your life,· whatever.
,( ~e have no, ruiee/. only the hope that ,Deval will be &bl~ to take ....
away with him Some lasting memories of his time here, of the
people whose lives he has touched, arid of the good friends he has
made.
;:1
I ..
YQur
; l
Our timeiibe is, 'of course, tight. So we ask that youfax.
your submissions as soon as possible, ,but no later than TuesdaY,
January,14th, to our attention at 514":'0293. Feel free to call,
either one of Ul; (Lisa Winst6:h at: eilei-2732'or Helairie Greenfeld:
. at: 514-'6860; .1.:E iybU ha~e .any qUestions. We thank' you iIi a:dvance'
'for t'aking the time to 'let, Deval know how much he will· be missed·;
sincerely yduis,
a lonston
elaine:i Greenfeld
Sp'ecial •Assistants to ,the
Assistant Attorney General.,
Civil Rights Division
�\
.
,
THE WHITE HOUSE
,Office of the p'ress Secretary
\
, (
. -,For_Immediate Release
,
-
"
(
!
,November 14, 1996
"
.'
'STATEMENT BY THE ,PRESIDENT'
~
..
,~
( .'
. ,'" .
. . It was with regret that I'accept~d'today the resignation of Deval P~triCk, Assistant -,'
Attorney Qen~ral' for Civil Rights ,at the Department of JuStice, who has decid~d to retUrIl to .
private life. Throughout his tenure, De:val was oneof~my clQsest and most trusted advisers ,in
"the area',~f cIvil rights: He brc:>ught to his job a love o(his country-and an llIlf1agging .
commitnient .to equal opportunity for all Americans.- .
.,
.
,
'
,
we
. .The country will miss hi; 'able service, hut
can all be' proud of the many .
.
accomplishmentshe leaves behind, including hiswork:at tile forefront or- my' Adririnistratlon's'
effort'to reform 'affinnative action programS in -federal procurement. Deval took to heart .my.
.. admonitioIl to' mend affirmative actiQn, not end.it. The. ~ntelligence and sensitivity. he Brought.
to this -difficult job has paid off with solid results.'
..
,
I -
,.
"
/.
.
' .
'"\,
t
,
.
,.,',
.
. ~other h~lma:rk of his tenure, Was hls stewardship, ofthe interagency .task force
created to investigate 'the raSh of fires threatening our nation's places ofworship. Deval was
ihstrumental' in leading the ,fight to protect these institutions and to bring perpetrato~s of the
, b~ngs to ju~tice. '
"
.
'
, :
'
. '
.
\ ' ,
,
. " , .:.
'
'
'. I will always appreCiate the sacrifice Deval's ~fe, Diane,. and their children m.ade so
"thatDeval could: provide this service tOhiSC011I1try. ' : ,
1 ;'
.'
','
,
"
:r
",'
,"
,
"
,'' :
f
.\
"
,
"
--/
-
"','
,
f'.
.
'
.
"\,
"
\
�E X E CUT I V E
OFF ICE
o
F
THE
PRE SID E N T
09-Aug-1994 03:24pm
TO:
Alice M. Rivlin
FROM:
Carol H. Rasco
Economic and Domestic Policy
CC:
Stephen C. Warnath
SUBJECT:
Civil Rights working group
I have learned from Staff Secretary here that the
order/memorandum/whatever was signed last week. He is sending me
a copy and I will route one to you.
In the meantime, Janet Reno
had answered my previous memo to her and Leon on the matter that
she diQn't see a need for the principals of the leadership to meet
but that our staffs meeting first would be fine.
It that is okay
with you I will ask my staff person to call a meeting to start the
organizational procedure ..• we could ask staff to draft a memo
outlining the process to follow, timelines, etc.? I will wait to
do anything further until I hear from you.
Thank you.
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
�CIVIL RIGII'tS
1993 -1994
.
,',
�,
"'.:
,y
-/
Patrick 1ellsPanel,-'
He's a' Pragmatist
'
t
':\'
}
',
.:'
,,'
.. :
:.
',:
"
. Reuter
'.
President Clinton's nominee
"
for assistant attorney general for
.civil rights, Deval Patrick, re~
ceived a warm welcOme frOm the
Senate Judiciary Committee yeS-' :
terday and appeared headed for .
:easy confumatiori>:' ~',.'.: ... " . . .
Patrick replaced LaniGUinier:·.
as nominee 'for the Justice.ne
partment post:';
. . ..
The 37-year-old BOston lawyer
portrayed himSelf "as .neither a"
so-<:alled liberal, nor a so-called
coriservative-but as a pragma
,.
..
nomination was .>,.'
.
.applauded by' civil.':
'
.
'
rights' advoca~~s.· ~:\',.
. ,
'
'"
/'r:;!,:
:(
:~
~':";~~;<'~'''':''''., I
~.""':" ',' ,,'::',>::
tist with very high ideals," .'He .
said he. hoped to use his post,'
which has been vacant since Clin~
ton came to the White House, as' :~
. a "bully pulpit to speak .out . '.
against bigotry,"
.
He said he believed the term
"racial quotas" meant numerical
straitjackets and would .be Wl1aW:7
. ful. He said a more subtle way of
.dealing with discriIniDation.· was .
through affirmative action and' .
streSsed it had to' be flexible.. He
also' said he had strorig:::r~r;Va-:,:.
tions abOut the death penaltYand~'"
whether it could applied fairly/'
Patrick worked. as staff attor-'
ney for' three yearS with the'
NAACP's Legal Defense anilEd
ucational Fund.' His nomination ..
was applauded by civil rights .ad
vocates and members of the Con- .
.gressional Black Caucus, He is
gniduate of Harvard University
and earned his law degree at Har- .
vard University Law School.
.. The judiciary Cominittee could
... app~ove his,nomination n~jt;"week
and send it to the full Senat~., .
J'
"
.,
>' •
"
•
re
a
~.,._.•:' ".:,1~:7': ';)"J:..
�"",',
"";-:<;~'~i;':;~::"i,L~D~t~.:~:!~"'::/:"'i':"":j:;:~',r:: ::'; '.:::'
.Blacks'{(and:Wome·n
Fii~~·;:';~B:i~§;·iri·:Md.
. .
";
:;
il• .
;
'~;~
.. '
' . ' ".
''.
.,
.
.La:Wiliaiers;Assert
:.':<.. ,/':~»l)1~~~~~~~'
.' .. .
... :. ANNAPOUS~ ·Oct. ·2s-:.Black lawmakers
: ~ue(t~i~pPrt t~yalleging that blacks and
:Womenare.~ofWidespread discrimina~
liOn iD:St3tf{g~vdmnenC J<"C, ';. . . :. .
:. Meintier~vot ble. 'MaX;i~~d li.egislativ~
.
alack:taucici'; sai4;tbey .will offer legiSlation
next
trihj' t.O .redu~ the discrimination
rear
1.
andwilJ k&p·the.1te:it on'state agencies that .
are not providing~ual' treatment for all em
'.
t
I
hi
ployeeS' . .
. I :,',
~
I
"
i
'(~i;h"i'i;iti~i';O;:':;8~':"';::"C::::0!<:,.:'i!';i:~~f~i;:i~;i",/,''';t;'';!,.
';{
"
;~
f
~
~.'
S
:t
.
i
:
'
I
'
. .
D
i.
I
I
\
: ~tioii ~cltta.raSSmtmt
·.pJitst::;tt~~~~::against them. . :
:~~~~~!\IDoog\:other~actioris::: the report recom
mends surVeying}state employees to meas-,'
me theif'unaerstandirig ofiacisn1; senSitivity
~·:and.esta,~liShing .aD' EquaI Employ
menfop~tj Officeafthe state level. .
'catiCUs'ih"e'mbel-S"S3ia SOme agencies have
resPofided to Conjplaints.Tbe MasS Tiansit
director, John
Adaililistriltion,under.its
I Agror~ singJed:out (or praise ,for moving'
!",c"toJrnprove cOnditiOns fot: black employees.
:
I
h~gsi·Ia~>wiltter·,about; instances ofdis-..
1
,
.
mean.s
:to ellininate this terri
ble,' terrible discrimination that continues to
e:xiSti~m the.'Siil1f:.of MMyland;" said' Sen.
Ralp~¥S)i~t~BaltiIitore).· .": . . .
' ThEt.caitcus'report ,was -based on testimo-:·
'."
ny. Of 130 ':witnesses 'who: spoke at . public
1,
'!
.
.'
necesSarYk..
,
~::
'.:.' .
"Tbe'~ucus:k ',going; to' use wh~tever
. . .' Ii,....
,i
,f .. ,
!.
new
�i' ,
.f
r;
//
~ ~\~\~\
~o
Funding Summary for Civil Rights Enforcement Programs
(in millions of dollars)
1996
Agenc)'
u.S. Commission on Civil Rights
~
_
1997
1998
1998
Reguest Pass back
Delta:
Request to 1997
Dollars
Percent
Delta:
Passback to 1997
Dollars
Percent
----
Budget Authority .......................................... .
Outlays ........................................................ .
8.75
7.88
8.74
·7.86
13.26
11.93
9.00
8.10
4.52
4.07
52%
52%
0.26
0.24
3%
3%
67.00
64.00
28%
26%
0.00
-3.00
0%
-1%
The Commission received a 3 percent increase over the 1997 level in their OMB pass back.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Budget Authority .......................................... .
Outlays ...................................... ;................. .
233.00
232.00
240.00
242.00
307.00
306.00
240.00
239.00
A $12 million addback to the target level funds the EEOC at the 1997 level and provides additional resources to assist in reducing the
85,000 pius backlog of employment discrimination charges pending before the Commission.
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
. Budget Authority .......................................... .
. Outl<;lys........................................................ .
30.00
24.90
30.00
29.80
45.00
31.40
28.50
32.75
15.00
1.60
50%
5%
-1.50
2.95
The overall program level is cut 5 percent below 1997. However, an increase for the Fair Housing Initiatives Program was
provided inpassback. A decrease to the Fair Housing Assistance Program was recommended due to an estimated decrease
in the number of discrimination charge receipts.
12/04/96 , 04:07 PM
-5%
10%
�•..
Funding Summary for Civil Rights Enforcement Programs
(in millions of dollars)
Agency'
1996
1997
1998
1998
Reguest Pass back
Delta:
Request to 1997
Dollars
Percent
Delta:
Pass back to 1997
Dollars
Percent
Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
Budget Authority ........................................ ,..
Outlays ............................................ .- ........... .
62.55
62.20
62.42
77.45
67.55
68.19
64.34
65.39
5.13
-9.26
8%
-12%
1.92
-12.06
63.73
57.36
31.10
27.99
53%
53%
4.67
4.20
3%
-16%
Passback includes small adjustments to base, but no program increases.
Department of Labor, Office of Federal
Contractor Compliance Programs (OFCCP)
Budget Authority .......................................... .
Outlays ................................................. ,...... .
56.17
50.55
59.06
53.15
90.16
81.14
8%
8%
All Department of Labor enforcement agencies were provided with increases, averaging 5 percent. The OFCCP program received 8 percent.
Department of Education
Office For Civil Rights
Budget Authority .......................................... .
Outlays ......................................................... .
55.00
57.00
55.00
55.00
62.00
59.00
60.00
59.00
7.00
4.00
13%
7%
5.00
4.00
9%
7%
The passback provides additional resources for estimated increases in investigations, reviews, and to complete a survey/report that is overdue.
12/04/96 , 04:07 PM
�"
'!".
Funding Summary for Civil Rights Enforcement Programs
(in millions of dollars)
Agenc~
Department of Health and Human Services
Office of Civil Rights
Budget Authority .......................................... .
Outlays ........................................................ .
1996
19.71
, 19.77
1997
19.53
19.55
1998
1998
Reguest Passback
22.30
22.20
20.53
20.49
Delta:
Request to 1997
Dollars
Percent
2.77
2.65
Delta:
Passback to 1997
Dollars
Percent
1.00
0.94
5%
5%
-0.65
-0.62
14%
14%
-12%
-11%
A $1 million increase was provided to the Office to respond to health related immigration issues and HIV/AIDS issues.
Department of Transportation
Office of Civil Rights
Budget Authority .......................................... .
Outlays ........................................................ .
5.63
5.06
5.57
5.58
5.43
5.44
4.93
4.96
-0.15
-0.13
-3%
-2%
The Office of the Secretary has an unallocated amount which could be used to increase funding for the Office of Civil Rights.
----------
Total Funding for Civil Rights Enforcement Programs
470.80
Budget Authority .................................
459.37
Outlays ...............................................
12/04/96 , 04:07 PM
----------
----------
----------
----------
----------
----------
----------
480.32
490.39
612.70
585.30
491.03
487.04
132.38
94.91
28%
19%
10.71
-3.35
2%
-1%
�,.
Funding Summary for Civil Rights Non-Enforcement Programs
(in millions of dollars)
/
Agency
1996
1997
1998
1998
Request Passback
Delta:
Request to 1997
Dollars
Percent
Delta:
Pass back to 1997
Dollars
Percent
Department of Commerce
Minority Business Development Agency
Budget Authority .......................................... .
Outlays ......................................................... .
32.00
39.80
28.00
34.50
36.10
32.80
27.50
28.50.
8.10
-1.70
29%
-5%
-0.50
. -6.00
-2%
-17%
While proposed as a decrease from the 1997 level, the pass back provides some adjustments to base and an additional $300,000 to increase
the number of Community Based Enhanced Service Centers.
Department of Labor
Women's Bureau
Budget Authority ......................................... ..
Outlays ........................................................ .
7.74
6.97
7.74
6.97
16.64
'14.98
7.57
6.81
8.90
8.01
115%
115%
-0.17
. -0.16
-2%
-2%
-0.11
-0.10
-2%
-2%
This agency's passback includes a small addback from within the Department's allocation over the 5 percent cut.
Directorate of Civil Rights
Budget Authority .......................................... .
Outlays .................. ~ .............................. :...... .
4.54
4.08'
4.54
4.08
4.59
4.13
4.42
3.98
0.06
0.05
1%
1%
This agency's passback includes a small addback from within the Department's allocation over the 5 percent cut.
12/04/96 , 04:07 PM
�-,
.I.
...
•
Funding Summary for Civil Rights Non-Enforcement Programs
(in millions of dollars)
AgeJ1CY
1996
1997
1998
1998
R eguest Passback
Delta:
. Request to 1997
Percent
DQllars
Delta:
Passback to 1997
Dollars
Percent
. Department of Transportation .
Minority Business Resource Center
Budget Authority ..... :.....................................
Outlays .........................................................
2.90
1.90
2.90
1.90
3.00
1.90
2.76
1.81
0.10
0.00
. 3%
0%
-0.15
-0.10
-5%
-5%
24.60
21.30
11.30
10.50
18.10
14.90
278%
233%
4.80
4.10
74%
64%
Passback provides the target level of funding,S percent below 1997.
Small Business Administration 8(a) and 7(j) Programs
Budget Authority ...........................................
Outlays .........................................................
E).20
7.40
6.50
6.40
The 74 percent increase over 1997 supports an anticipated increase in workload following the decision in Adarand v. Pena.
Department of Justice
Community Relations Service
Budget Authority ........... ,.. " .. " .. ,................... .
Outlays ........................................................ .
5.32
5.66
7.50
7.14
5.50
5.44
2.18
1.47
41%
26%
0.18
-0.23
3%
-4%
Total Funding for Civil Rights Non-Enforcement Programs
Budget Authority.................................
58.70
55.00
Outlays...............................................
65.45
59.51
92.43
82.25
59.05
57.03
37.44
22.73
68%
38%
4.05
-2.48
7%
-4%
12/04/96.04:07 PM
5.32
5.30
�Short term agenda for the Civil Rights Enforcement Working Group
Select a cross-cutting issue subject to study
Title VI
Employment Opportunity (If having Working Group involvement
at this point is helpful to Gil) (Multiple responsiblity and
completely unacceptable backlog)
Other possibilities:
health and safety
Housing, voting, education, credit,
Develop consensus on shared goals and performance measures
Focus enforcement review on tools and strategies
Prepare first progress report
Updating and expanding Civil Rights Fact Sheet
First mtg.
Discuss Presidential Memorandum's call for action
Especially report requirement
Title VI
Equal Employment Opportunity backlog"
�July 14, 1994 Memorandum from Attorney General to all
Federal agencies with Title VI enforcement responsibilities.
Working group Presidential Memorandum
Fair Housing enforcement Executive Order
NPR report language
-- EEOj procurement, housing
Justice draft regulations re: Title VI
Title VI -- What is the existing mechanism(s) for assessing
compliance?
Enforcement monitoring is done by relevant
agencies, correct? How effective? Proper resources
dedicated, etc.?
What is status of Title VI actions?
How are they selected?
Did all the states file compliance reports required as of
June 1994?
Title VI is intended to prohibit discriminiation on the basis of
race, color, or national orgin in federal 1 assisted programs.
It
applies to discriminiation by all nonfederal recipients of
federal aistance. I applies even iffedral money fcomprises
onlay a protion of the programs budget.
-It is the responsibiltity of A.G. to coordinate the
implementation and enforcement by executive agenices of Title VI.
Also in consultation with affected agencies to: prepare a Ian fo
rth eimplementation of rules; deflop standarsds for taking
enforcemtn action; issue guidelines for establishing time limits
on efforts to secrure volutary compliance; establish a schedue
for the review of agencies' regulations; establish guidelines for
the development of effective record keeping by exective agencies;
and establish training, informationk" and cooperative programs.
�Cabinet that looks more like America.
Appointed aggressive advocates of civil rights as Assistant
Attorney General, Deval Patrick, and Chair of the EEOC, Gil
Casellas
Created Civil Rights Enforcement Working Group
More minorities and women appointed as judges
Signed Fair Housing Executive Order
ECs/EZs
General:
Motor voter
Family and Medical Leave Act
Increased funding for Head Start
Passed National sErvice
Promoting strength of family
Fighting for Health care for the uninsured
Effective civil rights policy requires tough enforcement of
existing civil rights laws. That is the basis of our country's
citizenship and a mature society.
But it is more.
The absence of discrimination is not the same as
�the presence of opportunity. [Pres. Clinton]It includes efforts
to create opportunity and foster individual empowerment for all
Americans. This Administration seeks to create economic and
educational opportunities for all and to empower people to take
advantage fo the opportunities.
Poverty fight
Voting Rights Act
Develop and fulfill the promise of the Americans with
Disabilities Act
Concepts of justice, opportunity and empowerment
�Short term agenda
Updating and expanding Civil Rights Fact Sheet
First mtg.
Discuss Presidential Memorandum's call for action
Especially report requirement
Title VI
Equal Employment Opportunity backlog
July 14, 1994 Memorandum from Attorney General to all
Federal agencies with Title VI enforcement responsibilities.
Working group Presidential Memorandum
Fair Housing enforcement Executive Order
NPR report language
-- EEO; procurement, housing
Justice draft regulations re: Title VI
Title VI
What is the existing mechanism(s) for assessing
compliance?
Enforcement monitoring is done by relevant
agencies, correct? How effective? Proper resources
dedicated, etc.?
�E X E CUT I V E
OFF ICE
o
F
THE
PRE SID E N T
Ol-Nov-1994 lO:53am
TO:
Stephen C. Warnath
FROM:
Carol H. Rasco
Economic and Domestic Policy
SUBJECT:
RE: civil rights mtg
I assume these issues will be forwarded to the agenda for the next
meeting if /when it is held. As to whom attends meetings I don't
know that I have a strong opinion and would be interested in the
opinions of the two co-chairs.
�E X E CUT I V E
OFF ICE
o F
THE
PRE SID E N T
03-Mar-1997 11:40am
TO:
warnath s
FROM:
Sharon Thomas
CC:
thomass
SUBJECT:
Civil·Rights Working Group
The following are the current participants:
The Honorable Gilbert Casellas, Chairman
Equal Employment Opportunity Commision (EEOC)
1801 L Street, Room 10004 N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20507
(202)663-4001
fax-(202)663-4110
The Honorable Paul Igasaki, Vice-Chair
EEOC
1801 L Street, 10th Floor
Washington, D.C.
20507
(202) 663-4027 fax (202)'663-7121
I
Ms. Claire Gonzales, Director of Communications
and'Legislative Affairs
EEOC
1801 L Street Room 9027 N.W.
Washingtori, D.C. 20507
(202)663-4915 fax (202)663-4912
The Honorable Ellen Vargyas, Legal Counsel
EEOC
1801 L Street 6th Floor N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20507
(202)663-4637
fax (202)663-4639
Ms. April Marchese, Acting Deputy Director
Department of Transportation, Office of Civil Rights
400 7th Street, Room 10215/S-30, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
(202)366-4648 fax (202)366-9371
The Honorable Dennis Hayashi, Director
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of
civil Rights
330 Independence Avenue, 5400 Cohen Bldg., Room 5400, S.W.
Washington, D.C. .20201
(202)619-0403
fax-(202)619-3437
The Honorable· Judith Winston, General Counsel
u.S. Department of Education
1
�00
Q)
.....
u
Q
~
.....
>
Q)
~
~.
~
~
$..<
cS
<:
00
.....
~
~ ..
-
.....
>
.....
u
.....
~
"tl
::::s
~
\0
0'1
0'1
-
.G:
".
�Table of Contents
TAB
Introduction . .............. '.. ' ...' ... ,.. ,'. .. '................ ~ ........... ~ ........ .- ........ ; . . . 1
Funding Summaries, . .'-: .................., ...., ............... : ............ : ........'. ..... '. ..... 2
. "
:
~rogrammatic Areas Evaluated:
Commerce, Housing and Credit .............................. '........ ~' .. '~ ......... , ...... : .... 3
Fair Housing programs
,
Department of Housing and Urban Development: Fair Housing .Equal Opportunity programs
.'
.
.
Department of Justice; Fair Housing Enforcement,
Fair Lending programs
,
,
Department of Commerce: Minority Small Business Development Agency
Small Business Administration: Minority Small Business Development programs
Employment .... '.'" ....... '................ .- ......,.... '.. ,: .. '................... '. . ;, ... "
..... : . 4
.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Department of Labor: Office of Federal Contractor Compliance
Public Safety and the Administration of Justice ......... , ...., ....... :. '................ '........... 5
I?epartmerit of Justice: Hate Crimes Enforcement
�Table of Contents
,
Environment .................................... : ........................................... 6
. Environmental Justice: Status
Assessment of Performance :~easures for Enforcement Agencies, ... " ' .. , . , . ~ '. : . : .' ... , ...' ... , ,
'c' : , • • • •
7
. Other.Current Policy Initiatives .... , .. , , .............. , , .. , . , ........... .' ......... ". " .... ,' ..... 8
Commission on Civil Rights
Department 'of Justice: Civil Rights Division
Title VI, Department of Justice
.'
��Introduction
. The approach used for this review of Civil Rights programs is intended to serve as an initial baseline for further
analysis of Civil Rights agencies.' It will focus on several agencies engaged in activities under the following programmatic
areas:
•
•
•
•
Commerce. Housing, and Credit
Employment'
Public Safety and the Administration'of Justice
Environment
., Programs in the-Educational area'~n not analyzed in this review..
The funding summaries presented are broken out into two categories: 1) enforcement agencies evaluated and 2).
non-enforcement agencies. The programmatic evaluations consist of all of the enforcement agencies. Additional agencies:'
, were chosen for this review because 'they .are engaged in activities to promote fair lending. Performance measures for the
.. enforcement agencies are also discussed.. Finally, current policy initiatives worth noting for this review are evaluated.
We also hope that this review provides useful information tothe Civil Rights Working Group.
��Funding and FTE Summary for Civil RightS Enforcement Programs
(funding in millions of dollars)
Commission on Civil Rights
Budget Authority...................................
OUUays...............................................
FTEs........: ................................:......... ·
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Budget Authority..................................
OUUaYs.................................. ,............
FTEs............................................ ~ ......
5.7
5.9
66
5.7 .
5.1
·64
7.1
6.3
72
7.2
7.4
76
7.8
8.0
84
7.8
7.8
92
10.2
9.9
117.
222.0
218.0
2,831
230.0
228.4
2,850
233.0
232.0
2,834
33.4
28.4
783
27.2 V
29.9 11
785
10.0
10.0
123
180.7
182.0
3,170
184.9
180.8
2,853
201.9
192.1
2,796
211.3
208.8
2,791
Department of Housing and Urban Development:
Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
BuctQet Authority.......- ..........................
.
10.0
6.0
OUUays......., .......................................
·637
FTEs ...................... ;............................
12.4
5.3
697
12.4
10.8
740
13.0
11.6
724
15.0·
8.9
729
20.5.
7.7
32.5
31.8
427
44.2
42.6
433
47.6
46.9
55.6
55.1
529
62.7
61.7
69.1 11
483
52.7
52.0
496
5n
58711
53.0
53.0
940
53.0
52.0
55.0
54.0
880
56.0
55.0
855
56.0
56.0
830
59.0
59.0
810
60.0
60.0
820
334.0
328.8
4,954
353.5
341.9
4,995.
369.8
355.0
5,073
398.3
391.0
5,121
n2
240.0
243.0
3,019
12.8
12.4
131
293.0
293;0
3,359
45.0 .
21.3
]85
..
Department of JusUoe:
Civil Rights Division
Budget Authority.................... :.............
OUUays....................................... :.......
FTEs...........................................; ... , ...
27.8
27.4
394
Department of Labor:
Omoe of Federal Contractor: Compllanc.e Programs
Budget Authority..................................
52.0.
OUUays............ :......................: ...........
52.0
FTEs...................................................
980
900
74.6
74.6
.71.7
587
69.0
69.0
820
Total Funding and FTE levels for Civil Rights Enforcement Programs 21:
Budget Authority.............. :.... ;: .............
OUUays................. ,................. :...........
FTEs........................................;; ..•.... :..
276.2
273.3
5,247
288.5
276.0
4,981
318.6
303.8
4,941
11 . Guidance not provided at this level of detail. The ratio of total agency Increase or decrease of FY 1996 OMS Planning Guidance from
21 Numbers may not add due to rounding.
FY 1995 Enacted was used.
411.8
412.0
5,334
494.4
467.4
5,682
�FundIng Summary for CIvil RIghts Non-Enforcement Programs
(funding In millions of dollars)
FY 1989
Actual
FY 1990
Actual
FY 1991 .
. Actual
FY 1992
Actual
FY 1993
Actual
FY 1994
Actual
FY 1995
Enacted
FY 1996
Guidance
Department of Commerce:
Minority Business Development Agen·cy
BlJdget Authority........................................
Oullays.•...••••..•..•••.•..••..••.•.•.•..•...•....•....•••••
39.7.
39.6
39.7
·37.7
40.5
38.6
42.5
39.7
37.9
42.6
. 41.6
42.0
43.8
48.0
53.4
48.6
Department of Education
O!fIce For Civil Rights
Budget Authority,...................................'••••
Outlays •...•.....•...•..•.......••...••••••.•........•••.. :••
42.0
44.0
. 45.0·
44.0
48.0
45.0
-54.0
52.0
56.0
52.0
57.0
SS.O
58.0
58.0
59.2 ·11
61.6 11
Department of Health and Human Services
Office of Civil Rights
Budget Authority........................................
Outlays •....•..•...., ...................;..........•..•.•••..
16.0
15.5
17.3
17.0
17.1.
17.9
18.3
18.3
18.3
18.1
18.3
18.1
18.4
18.2
18.5
18.5
Department of Labor:
Women's Bureau
Budget Auth!>rity.•......••.••••.••:................,.-•.•
Outlays ........... :.•.•...... :,..-;....•... :..................
6.0
6.0
7.0
6.0
7.0
7.0
8.0.
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
10.0
·10.0
Directorate of Civil Rights
Budget Authority........................................
Outlays.................................:•....... ~ •••.•......
4.0
3.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
·4.0·
5.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
24.0
23.5
25.6
25.1
27.2
26.6
28.5
28.0
28.2
27.6
29.6
29.0
·32.1
31.4
33.0
32.3
35.0
34.3
5.0
4.0·
5.0
4.0
5.0
3.0
2.0
5.0
2.0
7.0
2.0
3.0
9.0
·9.0
9.0
9.0
15.0
15.0 .
3.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
3.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
195.4
181.7
221.7
197.1
274.6
2532
276.6
262.9
314.0
284.3
360.1
325.2
Small Business Administration:
.Minority Small Business Development Program
Budget Authority........................................
Outlays .•.••...........•.....•....•...•;.•.•.....••••.-.......
I
..
s(
'\
\s::.'\
·65.0
65.0·
18.7.
18.7
Department of Transportation:
')Offl:::;'::'~ __ ._..._
........_....:
Outlays.•••••.••.•.•..••.....••..••...•,.....................
- . Minority Business Resource Center
~\ ::S' .. i]r.<:>
~~l
'L'. N'i
53.4
48.6
Budget Authority•...•.....•........••........••: •.••..••
Outlays ....................., .............•.....•...•..•....•
Total Spending on Non-Enforcement Civil Rights Programs 31:
Budget Authority........................................
Outlays.................................;••••••.•..•...••.•••
178.7
171.8
11 Guidance not provided et this level of detail. The ratio of total agency increase or decrease of planning guidance from FY 1995 Enacted was used.
21 The Education Branch does not believe any proxy is acceptable for determining guidance for this level of detail. These estimates are provided without their consent.
31 Numbers may not add due to rounding.
385.8.
3332
406.1
~1.6
�Major Civil Rights Enforcement Agencies
Distribution of SA Growth
FY 1993 - FY 1996 Request
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Commission on Civil Rights
DOJ: Civil Rights Division
HUD: Fair Housing Equal Opportunity
DOL: Office of Federal Contractor Compliance
These five Civil Rights Agencies are requesting a 40 percent increase of budget authority over FY 1993.
�Major Civil Rights Enforcement Agencies
Distribution of FTE Growth
FY 1993 - FY 1996 Request
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Commission on Civil Rights
DOJ: Civil Rights
Division
. HUD: Fair Housing Equal Opportunity
NOTE: DOL's Office of Federal Contractor Compliance (OFCCP) request for FTEs falls 4% from FY 1993.
�Growth Rates of Agency Budget Authority
1993 - 1996 Request
Percent Growth
250
200
150
100
Average Growth
Rate is 40%
50
+
o
Civil Rights
Commission
EEOC
HUD: FHEO
DOJ: Civil Rights
Division
DOL:
OFCCP
��"
,
The Department of Housing and Urba~ Development:
Fair Housing Equal Opportunity
.
FY 1989
AC.tual
FY 1990
Actual
FY 1991
Actual
FY 1992
Actual'
FY 1993
Actual
FY 1994
Actual
FY1995
Enacted
BA
10.0
12.4
. 12.4
13.0.
15.0
20.5.
33.4
OL'
6.0
FTE
637
.
FY 1996
Guidance·
•
FY i996
.Request
.'
.
45.0
5.3
10.8
11.6
·8.9
7.7
2,8.4
.
21.3
697
740
724
729
772
783
785
785
,Background:
. Housing trends have' historically shown a wide gap between minority and non-minority .homeownership_rate$'\. (see
accompanying chart). Since 1920, this di'sparityhB:S remained fairly constant. Moreover, as of 1991,it remains clear that
homeownersh,ip disparities remain, for married couples with children, even after al/owingjor age. and income factors (see
accompanying chart).
"
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUn) places a high priority on developing and implementing
approaches to reverse, eliminate and prevent housing discrimination through its Fair Housing Equal Opportunity (f.EFP)
.programs. The FY 1996 Budget ,contains four major areas in FHEO:
"
.
The Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP). This program was established by the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1987 for the purpose of eliminating and preventing housing discrimination thro~h p-roj!l~Js_and_actiyities
designed to enhance compliance with the 1988 Fair Housing Amendments Act and substantially equivalent State' and local laws.
It is an effort to complement HUn's enforcement and compliance programs through a coordinated approach to: further the
.
purposes of the Fair Housing Law; guarantee the rights of all Americans to seek housing in an open market free of
discrimination; and, inform the American citizenry of its rights and obligations under the Fair Housing Act.'
.
,
1
�The Fair Housing Assistdnce Program (FHAPJ. The other major component of HUD's comprehensive fair housing
strategy is FHAP, which is authoriied by the Fair Housing Act of 1968, as amended. FHAP complements HUD's.enforcement
activities by RroY.iding-financiaLassistance-to-state-and-l~tcjll",,(lgencies,..administer:i!!g-fair-housing:l;:iws-and-ordinanc.es~re .
s~bstantial!y-equi:valent"'torthe-Fair. ::Ho.us~ing-AcJ. Resources are targeted for case processing, training and support services,
incentive, and capacity building activities._
", Choice in Residency." ,This new program will broaden the housing and locational choices _of low-income fainilies who hold
SEction 8 certificates.
Section 8 Units for the Disabled. Approximately half of non-elderly -disabled persons faut. the highest incidence of acute
housing pro~lems among population groups. This new program will provide Section 8 certificates to persons with disabilities.
Additional programs in FHEO include the Voluntary Compliance Program and the Mortage Lending and Property
Insurance program. The Mortgage Insurance Program assists in eliminating racial isolation through an increased awareness of
discriminatory lending'~nd insurance practices; increased use of Secretary-initated violation complaints; and the conduct of
systemic investigations; and increased punitive monetary awards from hosuing discrimination. caes~. The Office of Investigations
carries out fair housing cQmplaint investigation activities which include the review of complaint processing efforts. The Office is
also required to conduct fair housing investigations in the absence of complaints to determine if the Secretary will file a
- .
Secretarial-initiated complaint.
Status:
• On January 17, 1994, President Clinton issued Executive Qrder No. -12892 and gave -~ew visibility to fair housing enforcement
by strengthening the coordinationand implementation of Federal fair housing policy. On April 15, 1994, HUD began the
implementation of a reorganization plan that will give the Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal.Opportunity greater
authority in supervising the processing of complaints. New regulations on disparate impact, insurance redlining, and mortgage
discrimination are included. The issuance of this plan is scheduled for inid-Decembet.
• The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights released in September, 1994, a report titled The Fair Housing Amendments Act of
1988: The Enforcement Report.' The report assesses the fair housing activities of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development and the Department of Justice, both of which have major responsibilities in the effort to combat housing
discrimination. The report details 33 findings and recommendations in detail that address the problems associated with
enforcement and implementation of fair housing laws.
2
�•
FHIP andFHAP program objectives for FY 1996 include:
'. Bolster the activities of State and pri~ate organizations by funding grants, contracts, 'or cooperativ,e agreements with' 53
State or local agehcies,-public or private nonprofit organizations. This represents a)~-:::perc~~!)hcrea.~e in the number of
organizations in FY 1,996 than in FY 1995. ' "
-----
• Fund 59 national education and outreach' projects, a 13 percent increase than FHEO expects to fund in FY 1995.'
'. Ensure that 5,580 complainant~ who file with State and local agencies receive housing units, a 50 percent increase Jhan is
,
,
expected in FY 1995. '
• Ensure that State and local agencies process 3,000 fair housing caes in a timely manner, a lOO-=p~ent increase oveer FY ,
1995.
"
Through the Choicein Residency (GIR)counsel'ing_program, FHEO, alo~g with PUf,plans to actively participate in the
pJacem~nt-oLminor.ities-into-neigh.borhood_s-with-lo:w-minority-~ncentrati9ns. The FY 1996 Budget request of $J 53 million for
this program will: '
."
•
,
• Bring intensive co-tinseling and support to 50,000 Section' 8, recipients.
'
• Provide mobility assistance to 2,000 persons on metro-wide assisted housing waiting lists.,
• Allow FHEo" to monitor the percentage change in the distribution ofpulic housing units by racialcompositiiontrack, as
well as by income track.
•
The $205.7 million FY 1996 Budget Request for the Section 8 program will be used to: ~
• Double, to 10,000, the number of Section 8 certificates earmarked for persons with disabilities.
~ Double from FY 1994, the number of Section 8 rental assistance programs with mobility counseling programs.
• FHEO will promote fair housing compliance in the private sector and with oth.er Federal agencies through the Voluntary
Compliance Program. FHEO intends,to sign 100 best practice agreements with mortgage lenders in FY 1996, a 33 percent
increase in agreements than is ant~cipatedin FY 1995.
"'"
'
',
,
• FHEO will begin to track' measures punitive monetary awards in the Mortage Lending and Property Ins~rance program' in FY
1996.
'
3
�Performance measures:
Performance measu'rements have 1l0Lbeen":'used extensively in this program area. The FHEO should develop strong and
.
" ,appropriate measures of performance to qualitatively assess not only the agency's process oriented work but measures that can be
used to develop more fully analytical approaches to evaluating the status and perhaps· causes of housing discrimination. Measures
" that track, for example, areas in which the nation is making progress toward eliminating housing. discrimination, e.g., th~ rental
market, mortgage lending, etc. would be effective in evaluating the status and trend of current housing discrimination and assist in
:allocating resources toward enforcement in these areas.
,~
Recommendations and .Questions:
• Propose the c'reation of a "performance}und", consisting of I 0 percent of all grant funding to municipalities engaged in
furthering fair. housing goals. Municipalities who meet established criteria for satisfactory performance will receive their funds iii
the form of grants and those ,who perform unsatisfactorily will lose their 10 percent. Propose that remaining monies in the fund
". will be divided among the outstanding performeri
•
Propose that HUD withhold grant fund monies from municipalities ,with a track record of blatant discrimination.
• The Assistant Secretary ofFHEO issue and begin Implementation of new regulations for the enforcement of disparate
. '" treatment and mortgage lending as soon as politically feasible.
-
.'
• Review the findings and recommendations provided in the Civil Rights Commission's Report on the status of the Fair Housing
Amendments Act of 1988.
• How do we determine, if "ABC" 'program is funded at "X" level, does it lead to a "Y" reduction in the incidence of housing
discrimination, over "Z"time period? Will this help in determining where resources are best spent, i.e., on prevention programs
or enforcement efforts? 'Is it necessary for an effective civil rights strategy? .
'
4
�u.s. Homeownership Rates
1920-1991
Percent
80
70
Non-minority owner-occupied
~
/
60
National average
50
40
30
Minority owner-occupied
20
10
o
1920
1930
1940
Source: Statistical Abstract of the U.S., 1994
1950·
1960.
1970
1980
1991
�1991 Homeownership Rates of Married Couples, with Children
Minorities v. Non-minorities, by Age, by Income
25 - 34 Years
""'con,
35 - 44 Years
PGfcenl
100 ,-------------------------------------------------,
100
90
90
80
::1~-
70
60
60
50
50
40
40
30
30
20
----------
20
10
10
o
o
,'
<$20K
$20-39K
$40-591<
$60-79K
>$80K
,
<$20K
45 - 54 Years
""'con,
I,
$20-39K
$60-79K
>$80K
55 - 64 Years
PorC$l'lt
100.---------------------------------------------~
$40-59K
I
100,---------------------------------------------,
90
90
80
80
70
-
70
60
60
50
50
40
----- ----------
-~-----======----
40
30
30
i·
20·
10
20
I
0·1
< $20K
-.-$2O-39K
I.
$40-59K
I
$60-79K
10
,
0.1,
> $8OK
•
Non-minority
<$20K
•
,I
$20-39K
Minority
Source: Based on special tabulations by Paul Burke, HUD from American Housing Survey for 1991·
$40-59K
$6O-79K
> $8OK
�Percent of Black and Hispanic Homeseekers
Experiencing Discriminatory Treatment
1991
Percent
100 ~----------------------------------------------------------~
90
80
70
60
50
"40
30
20
10
o
Renters
Black
Source: Turner, Struyk, and Yinger 1991.
Buyers
Hispanic
�Department of Justice
Funding History Civil Rights Division (Housing & Civil Enfon:ement Only)
(Dollars in Millions)
122~
1989
1m
BA
2.1
9.3
10:0
OL
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
FI'E
31
89
97
Enacted
1996 CeiliJl2
1996 R.eQuest
•••
10.4
.....
.....
Not Available
97
......*The civil rights division is subject to a single.set of resource ceilings that encompass the division as well as other organizations.
Background:
.
.
.
'.
.Since January of 1993, fair housing and fair lending enforcemenfhas been on of the highest priorities of the Justice
DepartIrient. Housing discrimination is at the root of many civil rights issues, as it is related to--and frequently the cause of-
, '.' ' other forms of disadvantage. It limits job' oPPortunities, increases segregation in schools, and fosters concentrations of
.. disadvantaged people. The department's enforcement program is geared to attacking discrimination in both the rental and home
..
ownership markets.
:
The Fair Housing Act of 1988 expanded protections against housing discrimination to include discrimination against the
disabled as· well as discrimination against families. It alsO·expanded the Government's enforcement powers. .Together, these,
changes dramaticalJ.y' affected the enforcement workload. '
..
"
'.
m \.
, .
.
. . , ~f~Ne~
.,
Previously, the Ju~tice_Q~ent had brought "pattern and practice" fair housing lawsuits. The 1988 act authorized-.,,
p
and in fact, required--the department to bring suits in behalf ofindividuals. ThpSF;-Yiho_obtained-a-~-fu,tding_oLm:o~ble Q;:3 . .r
d
~J!~_~atJLviolation_oLth~:-Eair7liQusing.:A.~t..J)cc.urre(Lc(wJ.d_~l~~roceed ~ Eedera1-court-rather-than-in.admini~e ~ qA~q~~ .
p~g!:aJ=IIUI>.-:-In-@!_ev.ent,_ffie_Ius~..lL~artm~nt was re.qurreo to aefen~em.
.
~~8~
The Civil Rights Division~s Housing and Civil Enforcement Section handles fair housing cases for the Justice Department.
The requirement of taking individual lawsuits increased the section's caseload from 13 new cases in 1988 to 176 new cases in'
1994, an increase ofover 13 Wiles. Staff and funding increased, five-fold from 1989 to 1994.
.
5'
�'.~f
,PeJ1'oi1IUlnce~easures:
The Section uses perfortriance measures sum~Ud in the chart below. '
~
t
c
,Houshlg~d Civil Enforament Section Penonnance
.,
Productivity M~,
<
. '
".
,
~
• 'If mortgage lending ~ .
filed""
.If cases filed based on:
M~~
'
. .Efficiency..
. , Effectiveness
·M~
.
.
,
Measures
ExtenlaIities
" .If precedent-setting
cases
• aCtive Pllrticipation of U.S.
Attomeysin: HUD referriUs
• availabl~ resources'
, housing' testing
.
• If non-discretionary caseS
1
.,
filed
.
.,
.Status:
...
'.
-'
.:
, .
. ,. DelegatiDg to tbefield: .To m~ge its. exploding nori'-discretionary easeload, th~· Attotri~y'General in 19.93';authorized
the section,to d~ga~.,..faj£J~pqsi,ng",~~to U.nite4.:States-Attomeys~offices. ". . :,'
.
~. "
'
':
.• Mortgage'lendi:rig: The section recently, has ,been very active in mortgage lending, enforcement, e.g~; cases' brought., .
.
against Shawmut Bank in, New .England anqChevy Chase ~vings locally..
.'
.'
,'
,. '
,.
~
.
"
,
, ) .
'.. ProPerly:iI1Surance: The 'sectionrecently litigate4 issues of discriimnation in the provision of property insurance, as
).n.sPJance.:i~~~~p~re~u~i~~-to-the~p-~h8se;of.,~ home: Courts have ,held that this issue falls within the purview of the Fair '
Housing Act. '
.'
"
".'
~',
~
~
'.. Testing program: The section began :a program U)test for discrimination' a few years ago. The pr~gram consists of
fiye f.un,::time-tesL~rdinatp!s.. The ~diI)atorS either contract with private fair housin~ groups for testing or use
volunteersfl'om the Justi~ Depart:rrlent staff.. The program primarily tests the housing rental' market. I~ is especially
effective in communities where there has been little.enforcement activity, such as recent testing in. So~th Dakota for
housing, discrimination. against Native' AlJleriCans~ The program has led to several: cases the section considers very' .
important: .
6
,\~
�'" .', iI9u,sing tor the disabled: ' TIle sectiOil recently has worked on issues involving group homes ;for the disabled,· , '
"
" inCluding those battling alCohol and drug addictions. Communities often are reluc~t 'to accept theSe, homes and zoning .'
'restrictions sOmetimes make their establishment difficult. Since homelessness intersects addiction, -the' issue has drawn. the
. ,
.
.'
,
.section into homelessness issues.
Recoinmendation and Questions:
7
A more fundamental change may be necessarY to addftss the ~tion's nori:discr~tionary caSeload.' in 1993,ihese 'cases
, consu~~ about 80% o~ staf,f tiine. Sin~~o.Y.er_oPr=llal~,of.tp.e_H:uD~referred:-~dividl!al~~ses=involve-discr-iIllination.:pn:th~~basl~~
9f_familial-statu~,:-the~high::.v:olume:of=these;:cases-may..:hinder-the~~tion~s~api!ity~to_~dress:-Il1Qre~fully_t\lesprpble~ of: race ,and~
n~tional-origin.,disciimination~ It also moves the, section away from pattern and practice cases, which have' a, larget impact in " t.
society~
,
.. , '
"
.
.'
.
It may De appropria,tetO, ~xploreholIlelessness as a civil·rights
~
issue~urt!Ier,
in' the context of transitional group
ho~~'. '
..
/
"
'-,:.- ,
-5:... .".
"
,.
,7
. . fn
.
:~· .
.
.
-
"
-
\ 9
<.'
_.
�t;D~partment
of Commerce:
6¥in..0.r:Uy~B.usiness~Dev.elopmei1f-:-Ag~yj
FY 1989
, Actual·'
39.7
39.7
FY 1991
Actual
BA
OL
39.6
37.7
.
FY 1992'
Actual
FY1993
Actual
FY 1994
Actual
FY 1995
Enacted
,FY 1996
Guidance
FY 1996
Request.
40.5
FY1990
Actual
42.5
37.9
41.6
43:8
53.4
53.4
38.6
39.7
42.6
42.0
48.0
46.6
48.6
'
Background:
. The' MBDA in the Department of Commerce (DOC) is the only fedenii agency specifically created to foster the
establishment and growth of minority-owned businesses. There are,.however, other agencies with specific programs that target
comparable' objectives, e.g., SBA's 8(a) and 7(j) programs.
'.
.
MBDA's primary mission is to·promote the establishment and growth of minority-owned businesses bcY....:.pco~ng
. m~gemenLand_te.chnicaLassistance ~en'.ic.~~ and by- fQstering~pto~curemenLapd~financiaJ OImQrt~n!ties ,for m i~?rity~b9siness
.
e~pLLsE,s;
Status:
• Current research i~dicates that there are certain areas of the economy where the needs of min~rities in overall economic
maintenance and development are not being met. These include minority youth, minorities in rural America, and state and local
government procurement and export trade targeted to minority populations.' MBDA plans to provide, assistance in these areas and
further the impact on economic development to previously underserved populations with additional resources.
• The increased funding level for FY 1996 proposes' to address concerns such as the lo~g-standing need for additional business
start-ups, capital availability, and minority business. expansion. FY 1996 funding levels meet the OMB Planning Guidance. OMB'
has proposed an increase of $9.6 million dollars, or 22 percent, in budget authority for FY 1996 from FY 1995 Enacted. This
8
�increase is proposed to address needing funding for business start-.ups, capital
av~ilability,
and minority business expansion.
Performance Measures:
•
MBDA currently uses the following criteria to evaluate overall program goals:
•.
•
•
•
•
The number of clients assisted and the number o(management and technical assistance hours provided
The number of business clients assisted and total number of paid employees in firms assisted
The number of contracts approved and the dollar value of contracts approved
The number" of financial packages approved and the dollar value of those packages.
The"number of newly started businesses and the number of employees in newly started businesses
The ffrst four measures are proc~ss oriented; that is, they measure the efficiency of the organization to'produce the output it· is
required to. The last indicatQr, however, is better oriented toward measuring the outcome of the program.
Recommendations:
.
• MBDA should develop additional measures of program. effectiveness, designed to document the success and/or failures of
minority businesses. This will assist in determining effective strategies for promoting access to credit and technical assistance to
minority populations.
.
"..
.
"
"
: 9
�Small' Business Administration:
\\ .
~inor-ifI-Small-Business-Develo~ment-:~~ogra.y) .
FY 1989
Actual
FY 1990
Actual
FY 1991
Actual'
BA
24.0
25.6
27.2
OL
23.5
25.1
26.6
FY.1992
. Actual
FY 1993
Actual'
FY 1994
Actual
FY 1995
Enacted
FY 1996
Guidance'
FY 1996
Request
.. 28.5
28.2
29.6
32.1
33.0
35.0
28.0
27.6
29.0.
31.4'
. .32:3
34.~3
Background:
-:
...
The Small Business Administration (SBA) is the largest, single lender of funds to small businesses in the couritry. The'
Small Business Administration (SBA) includes several programs to provide increased economic. opportunity for previously
'underserved populations. The largest program is the Minority Small Business Development Program, also known as the Section
.8(a) and 7(j) program, which supports minority businesses who are contracting with the government through its 8(a) and 7(j)
· programs. This program improves the competitive viability of minority firms by providing contract, financial, technical and
managerial assistance.
Status:
•
SBNs_reform-proposals for the Minority Small Business Development Program have been developed. and are being
<---- '.
,..;;
..
· considered on the Hill. Reform legislation may pass next year. These reforms would establish specified goals for 8(8.) awards to
allocate dollars that are set aside for specific industries. SBA believes that these set ~ide contracts would enable·the SBA to
. award additional contracts in higher skill industries like construction and technology.
.
.
•
As shown on the following chart, th,e value of loans to minority firms lags behind the number oOoans made. However, it
· also appears that the gap is closing; that is the ratio of the value of loans to the number is closing. This chart also shows that the
percentage of loans made to minority firms, abo.ut 15 percent in 1993, represents'a return to the previously high level of 15
.
perc~nt in 1984. Throughout this period, the percentage of loans to minority firms. has not pushed through the 15 percent m,ark.
10
�•
Histori~ally, SBAassists approximatelY'100 firms out of 4,000 available minority firms through.the MSBDP. Th~se 100
. received'roughly 50 percent of the $4 billion dollars iI) procurement'contracts issued by the federal government. SBA shouid
, work toj~creasethe capacity or firms recei~ing '8(a) contra~ts by expanding technical assistance and trainingprograms:.·
.
-.
'
.
;:1
'
J:aerforniance Measures: .'
"
SBA;'scurrent'perfoimance' measures incltlde:
.
.
- '
~~
•
.' ~
;'.
'-
the n~mher of firms who' getgovernm~ntcontracts, and
how long firms have }:)een in'the program. .
'
,
. ' H~wever, S~A has ~ot; 't~ date:u$ed these perform!U1ce measures to 'make progr,8m management decisions. Impr~ved,
.."inanagemeQt, usingp,~ogram measures, is part of SSA's 'proposed reforms.
' .
,
'I· ~
'
' ... 'Recommendations:
,
,
"
"
'"
~~.
'
"
. .', As with the MiIiority Business Development Center, SBA needs to develop its measures ofprogram results. Only through,
, adequate measures of program effecti~eness can policy .decisioflS be .made on,·resource allocatio~ among programs designed to.
. pI:o'mote economic opportunity for underserved populations and ciVil rights enforcemeQt programs in preyenting and reversing
c
discrimination.
,.
'.'
'.
.
"
. '
..'
"
'/i
,'.
'f
..t
,.-:
..
11
�Small Business Administration
Minority Loan Approval v. Loan Value Rates
Percent
16
15
14
Minority Loans Approved
... /'
as a Percent of Total
Loans Approved
13
12
11
/
10
. Minority Loans' Value as
. a Percent of Total
Approved Value
9
8
i
/
1984
1985
1986
1987 .
Source: Statistical Abstract of the U.S., 1994
1988
1980
1990
1991
1992
1993
��The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
FY 1989
Actual
FY 1990
Actual
FY 1991
Actual
FY 1992
Actual
FY 1993
Actual
FY 1994
Actual
FY 1995
Enacted
FY 1996
Guidance
BA
180.7
184.9
201.9
211.3
222.0
230.0
233.0
240.0
293.0 .
OL
,182.0
180.8 ,
192.1
208.8
218.0
228.4
232.0
243.0
293.0'
FTE
3,170
' 2,796
2,791
2,831
2,850
2,834
3,019
' 3,359
'2,853
FY 1996
Request
'-
. d'
B ac k groun..
x~
.
\;11" .f) rI'\ 1[,
01" ~/\
\0~',or..
" ,~
.
C)
.'
,.~);
TIle Equal Employment OpportU!1ityCommission (EEOC) is the federal.agency charged with enforcing laws that prohibit:
employment discriminat!on based on race,sex, religion, national origin, age, or handicap status. These laws include the Age
~. ~/
Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967; title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended; the Equal Pay Act of 1963; in '. ,.0{
the 'F e.4etal sector only, section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1963; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; and the Civil
Rights Act of 19.91. '
~J. '
~,,~
,
~'I¥,{JV"\. r
. oJ' I}/
.Status:
• Three new EEOC Commissioners were formally appointed by the President on Friday, September 30, 1994, including the
'Honorable Gilbert F. Casellas. Chairman. Mr. Casellas and his staff are currently undertaking a comprehensive review of the
EEOC to improve enforcement of employment laws and to improve the organization's productivity,
.
,\rJ? '
-f .
~
.!
1~
~{'/,)
.
I'.
~tv, 0-
• EEOC's ~d inventory is escalating drastically. Already, there is ~ significant inventory of caseloads.to process.
Additionally. legislated mandates have increased EEOC's scope of responsibility and consequently have increased the number of'
private and federal sector cases which must flow through the EEOC. There' has been no comparable increase in appropriated
funding. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Civil Rights Act of 1991 have increas~d the responsibility of
EEOC to process complaint and hearings. Projected inventory ~ackl<!gs are shown on the following charts.
12
;(Y
'
v"'\'
',,) 0
\{jvV.
,
�-
There is no General Counsel. This position is the top authority for enforcement of equal employment opportunity laws.
-In tv 1995, the Commission on Cilvl Rights will complete a study on 'the enforceinenLof Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights
.Act It will also begin a study to evaluate the Federal Government's effort to eliminate employment discrimination through an
examination of the policies and procedures of the Equal Employment OpPQrtunity Commission and the Department of Justice..
Performance Measures:
Current performance measures used by the:'EEOC include:
: - Private Sector:
number of charges received by enforcement units
pending inventory of c h a r g e s '
• number of enforcement resolutions .
• number ?f complaints forwarded
months of pending inventory
charges per investigator. .
. resolutions per investigator'
-
-
. Federal Sector:
- number of complaints received
- pending inventory of hearings and of appeals and reviews
• months of pend'inginv~ritory
• number of hearings and appeals and reviews resolutions
- number of cases processed by its investigators .
. Recommendations.and Questions:
•
EEOC has not results oriented performance measures. The data collected, while necessary and important to measure
administrative effectiveness in carrying out its mandates, says nothing about the status of empioymenfdiscriminatiori in the
country.'
' .
,
--
Trend data should be developed to measure the number 9f cases processed under various laws to determine if growth is the'
13
�· number of cl~ims is increasing or decreasing. This may provide a better measure of where the agency if being more effective.
•
Punitive m·onetary damages awards should ·aJso be tracked. Is there a correlation between the size of a judgement against a
respondent and a drop in the number and kinds of claims?
•
Is there a relationship betWeen the kinds of claims and particular industries? particular geographic areas?
•
Are the size of the. aWards simply not large enough to .warrant serious attention?
14
�Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Private Sector Inventory Backlog
Cases
250,000 - , - - - - - - ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . , . - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
200,000
BACKLOG WITH
FROZEN FTEs
150,000
100,000
BACKLOG WITH
REQUESTED FTEs
50,000
o
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
,
1998
1999
�Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Federal Sector Inventory Backlog - Hearings
Hearings
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
BACKLOG WITH
FROZEN FTEs
10,000
5,000
BACKLOG WITH
REQUESTED FTEs
o
1993
·~994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
�Department of Labor:
"
.
I
'.
.
~.Qmce-of-Federal-GontF~ctor-Gompliance-P-rogra~-(OFCcP-t
FY 1989
Actual
FY 1990 . , FY 1991
Actual
Actual'
FY 1992
Actual
Fy 1993
Actual
FY 1994
Actual
FY 1995
Enacted
FY 1996
Guidance
FY 1996
Request
BA
52.0
53.0
" 53.0
55.0
56.0
56.0
59.0
60.0
69.0
OL
52.0
5~.0
52.0
54.0
55.0
56.0
59.0
60.0
69.0
940'
900
880
855
830
810
"820
820
FTE.
. 980
'.
Background:
.
.
~
'
.
The Office of Federal Contractor Compliance Program (OEC.:tR) in the Department of Labor (DOL) enforc~regulatlons
~qW!igKE~er:al contr,actor's to take affirmatiy.e-action-and-eliminate-discrimination_from-the_workplace'-:-fand it seeks to obtain
remedies for victims of discrimination. OFCCP enforces the non4iscrimination and affirmative action requirements of Executive
Order 11246; Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; 38 U.S.C. 4212, the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Act of
1974; 29 CFR Part 30, the EEO provisions under the National Apprenticeship Act of 1937; and' the Americans with. Disabilities
Act of 1990.
Status:
• :Authority. to enforce the above civil rights acts was consolidated into DOL in 1978 just prior to a drop in the emphasis placed
by the Federal government on civil rights enforcement. The agency has just begun to come out of the subsequent twelve year
~period and is experiencing the growing paiI?-s one would expect of a new agency. OFCCP is in the process ofreworki':lg
its central civil rights authority and the regulations that implement E.O. 11246, which should be finished 'by the end' of next year.
C~upled with its streamlining and reinvention activities,-this effort will make OFCCP a much more effective civil rights· agency.
15
�• OFCCP is in the process of reworking its performance measures to capture outcomes instead of the traditional workload
measures. ~"Likely future performance measures will be
•
•
•
percent of contractor universe covered
speed of case resolutions
number of positive actions taken by contractors as a result of OFCCP reviews (back wage payments, rehires, etc.).
• OFCCPhas requested streamlining and reinvention funds that will allow it to automate its field offices, cut out surperfluous
regional and fi~ld offices, and provide technical assistance to the contractor community, all to achieve increased efficiencies in the
face of future 'reduced staffing levels. Given the work OFCCP is undertaking on the E.O. 11246 regulations and its performance
measures, its effectiveness should improve whether increased funding is available or p.ot.
Recommendations and Questions:
\
• As OFCCP expands, deiiberate consideration shoul4 be given to the development ofperformance measures. OFCCP'shouid
enhance its baseline of measures to inClude data by the types of industries and'level of punitive damages assessed against
discrim inatory federal, contractors,
,
~.t~e~ .ny'. r.e"'\ln ",hY' .conlr'oJ"' <ll!llicled of discr1l;'i:u'lion c z : s ~o recei~!S? ..~=>=J>
~Are the
sIze of the
~wards
Slplply
n~t large enough
to .warrant senous attentIon?
16
'(ff)
~
��Hate Crime Enforcement
Department of Justice
General Legal Activities, Civil Rights Division
Funding History (Civil Rigbts Prosection Only)
(Dollars in Millions)
.1m
BA
OL
Not Available
FTE
,
3.0
41
~
1995 Enacted
4.4
4.4
. Not Available
. Not Available
48
47
1996 Calig
.....
.....
.....
1996 Request
4.7
Not Available
48
......*The Civil Rights Division is subject to a single set of resource ceilings that encompass the service as well as other organizations.
.
.
.
DepartJpent of Justice
Community Relations Senice
Funding History (Conflict R~lution Only)
(Dollars in Millions)
1m
1m
1995 Enacted
BA
7.2
9.8
10.4
OL
6.4
10.9
10.6
90
100
FTE
. 90
1996 CeilirU!'
.....
.....
.....
. 1996 Request
11.4
9.6 .
lOS
......*The Conimunity Relations Service is subject to a single set of resource ceilings that encompass the service. as well as other organizations.
Department of Justice
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Available data is not specific to hate crime activity.
17
�HATE CRIMB ENFORCEMENT'l
Background:
FBI Data
, " The Hate Crime Statistics Act of 1990 vests the fI;!lI~with the responsibility of collecting data on bias-related offenses.
According· to the FBI, in 1992, police received reports of over 8,900 "hate" crimes. Racial bias motivated six of every, ten hate
crimes, religious bias motivated two of ten, and ethnic and sexual orientation motivated one of ten. More specifically, anti-black
offenses constituted 36% of reported bias offenses, anti-white offenses,constituted 21 %, and anti-Jewish offenses constituted 13%.
,
"
Of the over 8,900 offenses, 3,300 'were intimidation, 2,000 were vand.81ism, 1,800 were simple assault and 1,400 were'
aggravated assault. Police ~uspected that 2,900 of the offenders were white and 1,SOO were African-American. The race of 2,900
,offenders·wasunknown. Agencies in New York and New Jersey reported the largest number of hate crimes 1,100 each.
It is impossible to know the number and composition of crime not reported to pOlice. The Office of Justice Programs collects
crime victimiza:tion data generally. .But the Congress placed data gathering responsibilities With the FBI who generally tally only
, poliCe reports.
'"
'
No historical information was available for this report. However, the FBI reports that there has been an' increase in right-wing'
terrorist activity in' the United States. The activi!y has been pJUti~ularly_preva1enLon-the-West:Coast. Since 1987/in the 1..0s
Angeles, C3.lifornia, arci:ltnere has been a rise in the number of racially motivated crimes perpetrated by various factions of
Skinheads. The bureau reports an increase in anti-Semitic incidents in the United States during 1993.
CO.mmtinity Relations Servi~ Data
'The Community Relations Service helps communitjes resolve difficulties arising from discrimination based upon race" color
, or national origin. The service mediates disputes between community groups, assists groups in developing plans to avoid recurring
sources of tension, and assists groups iri preparing for events likely to generate tension. The service operates through ten regional
offices and maintains a toll-free hot line. Although the service has no authority to investigate or'enforce criminal statutes, it is active
in preventing and addressing violence and the effects of criminal activity on the social fabric of the community. Through this activity,
it accumulates information on hate crime.
'
18
~
o
�HATE CRIME ENFORCEMENT3
Annually, the service responds to a number of incidents of cross-burnings at residences and distribution of hate-oriented flyers
at schools, public places, and businesses. Frequently, the cross-burnings are related to interracial marrlagesor minoritY families-
principally African-American families--moving into predominantly and demographically unchanging white neighborhoods. Of the
34 cases of organized hate group (not necessarily criminal) activity in which the service became involved in 1994', most occurred
'
" in the Midwest or the mid-Atlantic areas. ' .
According to the serVice, "the States that most frequently experienCe Ku Klux Klan' and "Skinhead activities are New JerS¢y"
Maryland, Georgia, Missouri, Colorado, Texas, IdahQ, Oregon,. Washington, California, and Arizona. Many Skinhead activities"
","" in the West involve a very mobile group of Skinheads that operate out of Las Vegas~ Nevada.
'
"
, Where a community perceives law enforcementofficers ~ using excessive foree against members ofa minority group,they
often view it as a form of hate crime. These incidents Can create .high levels of racial tension and often precipitate wide-scale
violence and community disorder. Since the beginning of fiscal'year',1993, the service has logged 269 such cases.
Status:
In addition to collecting reports of hate crime,the FBI investigates, them through two units: the Domestic Counterterrorism'
Section and the Public Corruption and Civil Rights Section. The counterterrorism section investigates offenses Committed by groups
that advocate violence to accomp-lish ~al_change._The_civiLrights,section,investigates-offenses-committed-by-individuals-unaffiliated-~~~
with these groups .. -The section supervises field agents on,civil rights matters within its jurisdiction. In the last three years, the civil '
"
rights sectiori opened almost 500 hate crime eases and another 1,109 police brutality cases.
Iii addition to the activities of the FBlin collecting data and the Community Relations Service in lessening community tension,'
the civil rights division prosecutes violations of Federal civil rights laws. The division has prepared a draft strategic plan which may
delineate the direction it proposes to take.,
'
Performance Measures: .
The chart below shows performance measures used by the agencies principally involved in controlling hate crime. '
19
�HATE CRIME ENFORCEMENT 4
Hate Crimes Perfonnance Measures
Section
Productivity Measures
Effectiveness Measures
Efficiency Measures
FBI
Externalities
• # State and local agencies
responding with hate crime
-
statisticS
Community Relations Service _
• # communities in which technical • .# joint projects with
assistance/training provided to.
other 001 components
police and community leaders
.• 9b staff assigned
•. # communities assisted during
computers
major -CQDflicts
• #_ staff training courseS
• 9b conciliation staffreceiving skills
development training
• # of cases in which
racial/ethnic tension reduced
after intervention
• average # racial groups
involved in conciliation
service
• 9b favorable responses to
customer surveys
Civii Rights Division, Civil
Rights Prosecution
• # cases investigated
• # cases filed
.• ratio of cases received to cases
reviewed
• # preced.ent-setting cases
~J
:'f;
i
:
• inherent # and
gravity of
incidents
reported ._
• available
-
Recommendation and QuestionS:
The Community Relations Service has done an outstanding job ofidentifying performance measures. Both the FBI and the
civil rights-division cOUld benefit by identifying more measures ofeffectiveness. All three ageri~es should fully identify extenlalities.
This is absolutely critical. Failure to do so could undermine efforts to .hold adopt meaningful, results-oriented measures.
Together, -these agencies have a discrete mission with respect to the outside world, preventing imminent hate crimes and
responding to those that have occurred. Their performance measures should refl~t the necessity they worktogether and make them
accountable as a team. - This will bea delicate matter since the Community Relations Service must retain its independence from civil
.rights enforcement in order to have legitimacy as a conciliator.
20
�HATE CRIME ENFORCEMENT 5
.
.
-"
.
.
.
.
.
'
The service has 'no authority to address matters pertaining to sexual orientation, as arose in Ovett, Mississippi. In that
. incident, the Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute iriformed the service of a potentially
violent situation arising from harassment of and threats of violence against two lesbian directors of a local femiriist educational center,
Camp Sister Spirit. Despite entreaties from Representative Don Edwards, the service had no authority to intervene. The service
, was able to become involved only because the women may have received a threat through the United States postal system and the
Attorney General used her broad statutory authority to exercise all functions of the Justice Department and to delegate these functions
'to any agency officer or employer or employee of the Department. A lawsuit ensued which did not resolve the issue. A
congressional hearing on expanding the service's mandate, ' .
originally scheduled to occur on October 5, 1994, was postponed.
,
'.
-
The Administration should consider whether current statutes governing hate crime jurisdiction are sufficiently broad.
, . 21
�Civil Rights Prosecutions Involving Racial Violence
,
Civil Rights Prosecutions Involving Racial Violence
, , Cases Initiated
Defendan~
40
Charged
60
so
30
40
t.l
:J
~20
U
i
en
30
°20
10
IIII,.,C
10. 'I
o •
16
',/',.
"
I
•
\/
"
1977 1979 1981
1983
1985 1987 1989 1991 1993
1978
1980 1982
1984" 1986 . 1988 1990 1992 1994
..... KKK. and Organized Hate Group Defendants
Unaffiliated Defendants _____- - -
'
Soun:e: Federal Bureau ofJnvestigauon
22 '
:'
�".','
�.. Environmental Justice: Statu~ of Implementation of E.O. 12898
Background:
Executive Order 12898 ("Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in. Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations"); which wasissued February 11, 1994, requires aU Federal agencies to assess whether their actions have
disproportionate human health or environmental effects on minoriJ;y or low-income populations.
The executive order is designed to focus Federal attention on the environmental and human health conditions in minority
communities, promote 'non-discrimination in .Federal programs substantially affecting human health and the environment, and
improve access and public participation in human health and environmental matters. It covers agencies that conduct programs or
. activities that substantially affect human health or the environment. (OMB participates 'ort the Interagency Working Group, but is
not subject to the executive order's various: reporting requirements.) .
Status:
~
' .
.
.
.
.
The Executive Order set out several specific requirements and deadlines> The major requirements and the'status of
'achievementare set out below: .
• .
Interagency Working Group. The executiveordeu~eates a 17-meniber (including OMB) interagency working group,
chaired by the EPA Administrator, to provide guidance to agencies, coordinate data and implementation of the order, and
collect and analyze data The Working Group has been meeting on a regular basis since early May. Over 200 Federal
agency staff are involved in t.he eight separate Task Forces set up under the Working Group to address specific
implementation issues.. Specific guidance has been issued on several implementation issues, including a "model" strategy
that i,dentifies a suggested form and content for agency environmental justice strategies and draft guidance on integration
of etivironmental justiCe concerns into the National Environmental Policy' Act ("NEP A") process.
.
•
Development of Agency Strategies. Each Federal agency must finalize within one year (by February 11, 1995) an agency..;
. wide environmental justice strategy. The strategy must identify and address disproportionately high and adverse effects of
the agency's programs, policies, and activities on minority and low-income populations..The executive. order set out
several interim deadlines for agency plans. EPA reports that all agencies met the executive order's August deadline for
completion of an outline of their strategies and that all agencies appear to be on schedule to meet the November deadline
23
�for submitting their'~trategies to the Working Group. (OMB is not an agency required under the executive order to
prepare an, environmental justice strategy.)
•
, Public Participation and Access to Information. In April, EPA established the National Environmental Justice Advisory
Council (a FACA-chartered council), whose 25 members include representatives of community groups, business, industry,
Federal and ,state government officials, tribal and local governments, universities, and environmental and other non
governmental groups. ~ In addition, four subcommittees of NEJAC were set up with another ~4 advisory positions. The
NEJAC was established to advise the EPA .Administrator Qn a·wide range of environmental and environmental justice
issues. The NEJAC has met once (in May) 8.Q.d is next scheduled to meet on October 25th to be bri'efed on progress of the
'
Working Group and Tas'k Forces and to address other issues.
Notable, among other accomplishments is an inventory of,about 30 specific environmental' justice projects have been
. i,dentified government-wide. Attached 'are descriptions of two such projects. '
Funding:
..
.
.
,
.
.
",
"
The executive order explicitly requires Federal agencies to assume -any financial costs of complying with the order, unless
otherwise provided by law; In part because environmentaljustice activities permeate all facets of agency programs and cannot be .
separately identified, there has been no attewpt to develop a government-wide accounting of these activities. EPA has developed
...,.c--~_~~,_a_preliminl!!Y estimate of $22 million in FY' 1996'Qf::eYA~funds_targeted_specifically_to_its_environmentaLjustice_activities-and-----~
projects.
Performance Measures:
,Environmental Justice Performance Measures - EPA's StrategicPlqn identifies environmental justice as one of the
seven guiding principles for how ,the agency will achieve its environmental goals. Aithough EPA still is working to refine the
performance measures it intends to. use foreI1vironmental justice' activities, its Strategic Plan does set out a mix of preliminary
"
output and outcome measures. ' These include measures related to specific deadlines in the executive order, e.g., "full
implementation of the Agency's environmentaljustice strategy by February 1995", which should be relatively easy to monitor and
evaluate.However~ other measures to evaluate actual human health and environmental outcomes, e.g., "to show quantitative risk
reductions t!Irough measures based on risk assessment methodologies that reflect the cumulative and synergistic effects of
exposure, or multiple and different pathways of exposure") are not yet well developed for environmental justice activiti~s' (or for
24
�mo'st o'ther EPA pro'gram areas).· Develo'pment. o'f the data and systems necess~ly to' evaal uate perfo'rmance fo'r these o'utco~e
measures Will require mo're time and sustained effo'rt by the agency. '.
Other agencies sho'uld develo'P similar means to' evaluate their pro'grams as,'part o'f the develo'pment o'f agency enviro'nmental ,
justice strategies. There will be a better picture o'f the status o'f develo'pment o'f these meaSures when ag~ncy plans are submitted
in No'vember.
, Re~ommendationand Questions:
There ~e no' majo'r implementatio'n issues at this Po'int. Ho'wever, there is So'me Co'ncern in the agencies that tight budgets
may affect their ability ti) co'mply with 'the o'rder. EPA repo'rts that the quality o'fagency enviro'nmental justice strategies is
varied, but agencies"have taken serio'uslythe requirements o'f the executive o'rder. Achievement o'f the ,executive o'rder's deadlines
fo'r co'mpletio'no'f agency~nviro'nmental justice strategies appears to' be o'n schedule.
.
' .
.
.
'25'
��Performance Measures Used in Civil Rigbts Enforcement Agencies
Most of the enforcement agencies have performance and program execution measures~ in other words, they are process
oriented measures. Many of these focus on internal, administratiye activities that are important determinants of organizational'
efficiency. The next step, however, is to focus on developing relevant measures that evaluate mis~ion=.<;>riented_J;.esults,:
'
.
~_, ,Develo ping-measures . 'of.results-is-often-difficult, ·because,the~outcome~of -a·:Jederal agency' is "ofien'a-statement-ofbasic- ~"-. ',:-,
expectation grounded in law. For the Civil Rights programs, the expected outcome of federal involvement is a major change in
public behavior. Achievement often lags years after the funds are spent.· Thus, it is difficult, when making public-policy
to know
,adequate; or -not enough.
decisions on the allocation of scarce resources,. . ' whether .the funding is necessary. .
.
.
,
.
"
'The development of performance measures that evaluate the effectiveness of outcomes or results are intended to 'provide'
. thed~cision-maker with information from which to make choices amongs(themost effective programmatic tools and techniques
that must be used to combat discrimination .. They can also be effective in determining; "are we doing enough?"..
The table below provides measures of performance; both
enforcement agencies disucssed in this review.
'
,
~rocess-
_ _ _ _~
and outcome-oriented,.io'Lthe3ixe_Ci:viLRights _ _ _-
.
.
Agell cy
Process-Oriented
Commission <;>n
Civil Rights
• List of accomplishments by year. Includes
. descriptions of research studies I reports that
'.
the Commission issues.
Comments
Outcome-Oriented
None.
,
.'
26
..
The Civil Rights Commission could
assist agencies in developing better
measures of successes and failures for all .
.',
civil rights areas .
�Performance Measures Used in Civil Rights Enforcement Agencies
. Process-Oriented
Agency
Outcome-Oriented
Comments
.'
Equal ,
Employment_
Opportunity
- Commission
- -----
-
"-~-
.--
None.
Private Sector:
• # of charges received by enforcement units
.,
• Pending inventory of charges
.- .
.# of enforcement resolutions
• # of complaints forwarded
.------"-- .--- ---
··Months-ofpending-inveniory-
.• Charges per investigator
• Resolutions per investigator
----
-.
<
'.
,
----~--.-
--
,
Federal Sector:,
. • #of complaints received
• Pending inventory of hearings / appeals
and reviews (A&R)
• Months of pending inventory
• Hearings / A8?B..I~sQbltions_,__- .
• Hearings / A&R complaints forwarded
--
EEOC needs to- develop better measures
of where employment. discrimination is
increasing or decreasing; and in what
in<;tustries; in what geographic areas. As
an enforce.rgen(llg~nj:y,~EQC_ is... :_. _____
_.
--involved after the alleged discrimination
took place. Therefore, its refined
measures of where discrimination exists
,
. should' assi~t 'in developing preventative
activities .
.
.,
'.
-'
"
,C,'
27
�Performance Measures Used in Civil Rights Enforcement Agencies-
I Agency
HUD: Fair
Housing and
Equal Opportunity
Process':'Oriented
Outcome-Oriented
• # fair housing complaints,
• #, fair housing complaints processed
FHEO has developed some excellent
• Public awareness of
, discriminatory lending
outcome-oriented meas,ures.
and, ;nsurance practices
and their rights under
Surveys can provide a sense of public
the F~A
'_.. __ . __~_~~r~n~~i olUh<!issue.of housing
_,' __ .. __
• Levels racial isolation discrimin,ation.
for HUD-assisted
housing recipients
• # of Best Practices
agreements with
homdng lenders
• # and Level of
punitive monetary
awards
.# fair housing complaints resolved
• Time required Jorcase 'resolution
-II-"-~~,-;-
DOJ: Civil Rights
Division -
Hate Crime
Enforcement
• # communities provided'technical assistance,
• # communities assisted during major conflicts
• # cases investigated and filed
• Ratio of cases received to cases reviewed
• # State and, local
agenCies responding
with hate crime stats
• # cases in which
racial/ethnic tension
reduced after
intervention
• average # raciaL groups
involved in
conciliation servIce
• ,% favorable responses
~o customer surveys
• # precedent-setting cases
28.
Comments
Exce,Ilent sHirt. Proceed with identifying
more measures of effectiveness,
�Performance Measures Used in Civil Rights Enforcement Agencies
Agency
. ,
Outcome-Oriented
DOJ: Civil Rights
Division -
Federal Appellate
Activity
------
Process-Oriented·
• # appellate cases filed
.# amicus briefs filed
• Success rate (benchmark
50%)
,
-- - -
DOJ: -€ i vil-Rights-' . ·-#-cases:-investigated- --
.# cases filed
Division -
Civil' Rights
• Ratio of cases received to reviewed
Prosecution
,-
-'-'
..
~
Comments
.. '
-. !#.'prec-ed-ent::'setrlfigc-ases-- .
.-
.....
-~.-----"
.
DOJ: Civil Rights
Division -- ".
S pecialLitigation
DOJ:Civil Rights
. Division -- .
Voting,
DOJ: Civil Rights
Division -
Employment
Litigation
',. #
.#
•#
•#
•#
•
•
•
•
investigation~
initiated
affirmative CRIP A cases
affirmative FACE cases
institutional tours conducted
consent decrees entered
• # precedent-setting cases
'
.
'"
# cases filed
# ,section 5 submissions reviewed
amount of outreach activity on MotorNoter
# consent decrees entered
• # cases investigated
• # right-to-sue notices issued
• # consent decrees entered
-
• # precedent-setting .cases
• # precedent~setting cases
'.
29
-
--
........
�Performance Measures Used in Civil Rights Enforcement Agencies
Agency.
Process-Oriented
,
,
DOJ: Civil Rights • # mortgage lending cases filed
• # cases filed based on housing testing
Division -
Housing and Civil. • # non-:-discretionary' cases filed
Enforcement
--......-- .. _--_ ...... _--..--- .. --
.
._.
-_._."""""
.'-'
DOJ: Civil Rights
Division --'
Education'
Opportunities
• # language barrier cases filed .
• # judgments/agreements subject to monitoring
• # consent· decrees entered
Outcome-Oriented
'.
Comments
...,
• # precedent-setting cases
:
_... - -
.
__
__
....
. , - - --.....
______ • -_.--r
'
. C"
-~-------
---_..
-
• # non-traditional, cases
filed.
..
','
DOJ: Civil Rights
Division -
.Public Access
,
..
'.
"
.
• # cases. filed
• instances of ADA information dissemination
• # regulations/policy documents developed
-DOJ;""'C iv-iI-RIghts -·-#-investigations-initiated
• # formal settlements
Division -
Office of Special
• # instances of public outreach
Counsel
None.
-None:
.
"
DOJ: Civil Rights
:
Division -
Management a.nd
. Administration
DOJ: Civil Rights
Division -
Coordination and
Review
• # organizational reviews
. • Scope of major policy
initiatives
• Level of division ADP
capacity
...
• #. compliance reviews conducted
• # policy documents deyeloped or reviewed
• # responses to inquiries under E.O. 12250
..
• # recommendations
resulting from
compliance reviews
....
30
..
...'-:
i-
�Performance Measures Used in Civil Rights Enforcement Agencies
Agency
Process-Oriented
DOL: Office of
Contractor.
Compliance
None.
... -
..
---- -
"-----.----
. -.
Outcome-Oriented
--+~
--'".
-
--~"--
- - --
Comments
• Percent of contractor
A good start. ·OFCCP should try to
undertake more .refined outcome-oriented
universe covered
• Speed of case resolution measures .
.. # of positive actions
_t.?~e!l. by.c()Ilt!~~t9r~ .a,~~ . A91i<.ms.Jalcen...al1d theJexeLof awards .by_·
--
a result of OFCCP
corttrac.tingindustry at:ld location would
reviews·
be a suggestion.
'.
31
:
~
,.
��United States.Commission on Civil
Right~
,
FY 1989
Actmll
FY 1990
Actual
FY 1991
Actual
FY 1992
Actual
FY 1993
'Actual
FY 1994
Actual
BA
5.7
5.7
7.1
7.2
7.8
7.8
10.2
OL
5.9'
5.1
6.3
7.4
8.0
7.8
,9.9
10.0
12'.4
66 "
64
72
76
84
92
117 .
123
131
FTE
,
,
FY 1995
Enacted .
FY 1996
Guidance
--.10.0
.
FY 1996
Request
..
12.8 .--
~
. Background:
The United States Commission on Civil Rights (the Commission) is an ip$fp-end~t, bJp..ru:Hs.~n agency, originally
established by the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (P.L. 85-315). Since 1957, the Commission has been cha~g~thjd.entify.ing_the
~n~)1.:ing=causes=Of'::discrimination-in-our-c.£tuntfY..,recommending:SoIUfiops;-and~rep'or:ting.,.the-results-to-the-P-residerit-and-to-the ,
~gr.ess.o,
'
,
The G:ommission..!app;aise[~~the law and poli~ies of the Federal government with respect to'discrimination or deni~ls of
, equal protection of the la;-s' under tI1crConstitution because of race, color, religion, sex; age, handicap, or national origin or in the
administration of justice"., 42 U.S. C. Section 1975c(a)(3). It is "a national clearinghouse for information, in respect to
'
, discrimination or denials of equal protection of the laws .. .including but not limited to the fields of voting, education, housing,
employment, the use OfpubJic facilities, and transportation, or in the admini~tratioh of justice". 42 U.S.C. Section 1975c(a)(4).
The Commission must "submit at least one annual report that monitors Federal civil rights enforcement efforts in the United
States to Congress and to the President". 42 U.S.C. S,ection 1975c(f).
, Status:
'. ,The Commissiori released its last broad eval~ation of Government policy in 1983. That report analyzed Reagan
Administration funding requests for agencies engaging in legal enforcement of civil rights .. The report was highly critical of
Reagan Administration policies and ceased being produced. Since 1983, the Commission has issued issue specific reports to
32
�satisfy the requirement that it report annually,
• During the Reagan Administration, the Commissioners became highly controversial for their conservative philosophies and
,'funding'for the Commission fell from $12~iIlion in 1982 to $5,7 million-in'FYI988.Since the'n, the Commission has received
a steady, but modest increase in funding. OMS guidance levels for FY 1996 are still short of funding received by the
'Commission in .FY 1982.
_u·~ ~,I!1~y~lft95,. theS'?r.!.l.l!l,ission will~.o_I11R!~t~_~ .~_~u~y, 9~~!he~~J1f.Qr.c~m~IJLQf TJtlut,ofJhe.J 9_6~LCiyiLRights_ AcL- It-wilt-also
begin a study to evaluate the Federal Government's effort to eliminate employment discriminationthrough an examination of the
policies and procedures of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Justice, A second study will
be initiated to evaluate the efforts of the Department of Education and its Office for Civil Rights to enforce a variety oflaws
mandating equal educational opportunity.
ra,c,ial
• In F'Y 1996,the Cominission-will issue reports from the FY 1995 hearings on c ' and .eJhnic tensionsjn Miami andjhe
,
'
.
."
"
Mississip'p'i Delta} completing a multi-yearproje~t on Racial and Ethnic Tensions in American Communities., New studies
planne<rforFY-1996 include such topics as: ,~:'. '
",
"'
,
.~
··-the-enforcement':'of-Americans-with-Disabilities~A'cCanne-Federal;Slate' ana-locarlevelS;--"'--'
'. the naturalization processes of the Federal Governmentr
• economic opportunities for minority youth;
;. how Fedenl~ programs and 'policies help women, minorities and older persons part~cipate in a changing,high technology
economy;
• religious accommodation concerns in tne. public schools;
• an assessment of the funaing of higher education for minority students;
• an analysis of recent court decisions on the, Voting Rights Act of 1965; and
• a study of environmental justice.
. .
.
.
Recommendations and Questions:
,
,
• Consider a discussion to assess the most effective role for a Civil Rights Commission is, including the development of
objective measures of incidences of discrimination in each of the civil rights sectors. ' This may, perhaps, depend in large part of
the statutory requirements . the composition of the board.
for
.
.
,
33 .,
�• Consider asking the Commission to report a status on IIbest practices"; that is, to highlight the progress made in particular civil
rights 'programs and indicate techniques used by the fe~eral gO'vernment that .seem to be working toward eliminating
. .
discriminatiqn of any kind.
A'
.~---
'.'
34
�"
Department of Justice -:
General Legal Activities
•
IVISlon
CIV-n Rights D· ••
Funding History
(DoDan in MD6oi1s)
m2
1994
19?5Enaded
1996 Ceiling
1996 Request -
BA
27.8
SS.6
62.7
74.6
OL
27.4
SS.1
61.7
•••
•••
-~29
577-
----394--
-FfE-
-~-
...
71.7
--
S87
, ••*The civil rights division is subject to a single set of resource ceilings that encompass the division as well as other organizations.
- Background:
The ,ustice Department's 'ciVil-rights division litigates to enforCe th~ nation's civil rights laws. It also administers some civil
rights-related programs, such as clearance of new State and local election procedures for their civil rights implications or the program
to-compensate Japanese-Americans interned during World_ War II.! The division operates through eleven sections:
•
<'.
'
.
.
•
--Federal-appe#ate-activity.~This-section-handles-or-supervises-the-ti:andling ofaIlappeaIsrrom Doffi--------
favorable and adverse judgments ofcivil-rights matters in which the Government participated. Supreme
Court cases require coordination with the Office of Solicitor General. The section develops new
- legislmo~ or modifications or amendments to existing legislation to protect civil rights. It provides
CfegaIcounsel to Federal agencies responsible for the administration and development of programs with
civil righ~ implications.
Civil rights prosecution. This section investigates and prosecutes violations of Federal cririrlnal civil
rights statutes. These statutes protect personal li1;rerties, including religious freedoms, and prohibit
involuntary servitUde. -About 3;000 of the complaints and inquiries received ~h year result in the-
onli
IFunding for the civil rights division supports
the processing of payments. A separate appropriation funds the payments themselves. See generally, Civil
Liberties Act of 1988, Pub. L. No. 383, 102 stat. 903, tOOth Cong., 2d Sesa. (Aug. 10, 1988).
35
�DEPT. JUSTICE CIVIL RIGHTS DMSION 2
Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") submitting investigative reports. Line attorneys and paralegals
review the complaints ,and investigations and recommend further action. The section presents
approximately 50 investigations to Federal grand juries each year for additional investigation or
indictment. It tries approximately 25- cases annually. The section works 'closely With the Justice
'Department's United States Attorneys (the department's field attorneys) whenever its resourceS permit.
Section attorneys are familiar with civil rights issues and assistant United States Attorneys are familiar
with local court, practices.
Special litigation.' This section enforces the' 'Federal Ciy!1. ~gh~_ofJ~~!itQtiol1aU~~:Le~rs:~>ns_Act.
--'("CRIPA"),-wfiicli authon.zei tI1e'J\ltOmey Generafto Investigate and initiate civil actions in behalf of
'personsconfined to publicly operated institutions in, which they suffer flagrant deprivation of their
constitUtional rights. The section must afford State and local officials reasonable opportunity to remedy
,these conditions before initiating enforcement proceedings. CRIPA covers inmates of State prisons and
'locaL jails; clients of publicly operated mental health, mental retardation ~d juvenile detention centers;
and residents of nursing homes, and -facilities for the physi~ly handicapped and chronically ill. The,
"
: section ,also enforces FederaI laws prohibiting discrimination in public facilities on the, basis of a
person's race~ color, sex, religion or national origin. The section joins in litigation initiated by private
,parties to establish constitutionally acceptable conditions within an institution. The section moriitors '
,_~___'----'.__ ~_-comp1iance-with-judgments-by,~conducting· 'on-site~inspections,reviewing-orderOO-Dyt1ie courtS,
, 'authorizing ;FBI investigations and maintaining contact with court-appointed compliance monitors.
,
,"
'~'-"-''''--'-
Voting. Pursuant to section 5 of the,Federal Voting Rights Act, the voting rights section approves new
State and local election policies for 91l-covered counties before the policies take effect. The purpose
of the review is to prevent abridgment of the'voting rights of racial or language minorities. ,The section
, defends lawsuits brought against, the Government based upon the section's action·in "pre-clearing"
election policies. The section also ensures the assignment of FederaI observers, to polling places within
these counties, where necessary tQ document voting irregularities or to ensure confidence in the electoral
process.
It provides alternative Federal voter registration where local election procedures
discriminatorily abridge racial and language minorities' right to register. The section alsO monitors and
remedies election policies that: ,a) dilute the voting strength of racial or language minorities; or b)
36
-.~ .~.,..-
�.
DEPT. JUSTICE CIVIL RIGHTS DMSioN 3
prevent full and fair participation by racial or language minorities, United States citizens overseas, or
elderly, disabled or illiterate voters.
Employment litigation.,
~,~ .-"
-" -
,
.'
.~
This section enforces Fedetal laws prohibiting unfair discrimination in,
employment. These laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion,' sex, 'national
origin or disability. For public sector employment, the seCtion enforces title vn of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964,tiile I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Civil Rights Act C?f 1991 through
investigation, litigation and negotiating consent decrees.
For both' public and private sector
employment, the section.rece~referrals-from~1h:e~D~p-~ment-of-Labor!.s-Office'9[F-egeraLCont,ract.
-~ -~. -_.. -eompliance-Progtams (for Feoenil contractors)-and-the-:~ual-EmRloyment-Qwortuni!y-Gomm!.ssion.
The s'&tion joins lawsuits affecting tlie development of employment discrimination law.' It monitors and
enforces existing employment discrimination court orders. It defends Federal civil rights programs
affecting employment' and disadvantaged busmesses.'
'.
Coordination and review. This section coordinates the enf,?rcement by Fedetalagencies of Title IT of
the Americans with DisabilitiesAct ("ADA ") provisions prohibiting disability-related discrimination by
State and local governments. The section investigates complaints for which the Iustice Department has
assumed administrative enforcement responsibilities. It .ensures that all Executive branch agencies
_ _~..,......-_~_implementstatutes-prohibiting-entities-who-receive-Federal-grants-from-discriminating on theoasisof---.- .
race, color, national origin,disability, religion or sex. Under Executive Order No. 12250, the section
reviews all new civil rights regulations for consistency, adequacy and clarity, it assists agencies in
develops. civil rights plans, and offers agencies training and technical assistance to iniprove their civil
rights enforcement programs. It promotes inter-agency cooperation in civil rights matters. It
investigates Complaints referred by the Iustice Department's National Institute of Corrections concerning
civil rights violations occurring in penal institutions that receive Federal financial assistance.
Housing and civil enforcement. This sec~on investigates and litigates compliance with the Fair Housing
Act of 1968 and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. Vpon.~f~rral from the Department of Housing and
Urban Development, the section enforces the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 against
State and local governments. It enforces title IT of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, relating to'public
accommodations.
37
�DEPT. JUSDCB CML RIGHTS DOOSION 4
Educational' opportunities. , this section litigates to bring about' orderly desegregation of schools
pursuant to Federal law, to eliminate the denial of equal protection of the law in educational institutions
on account of sex, and to secure equal educati<mal opportunities for students in public school systems
and educational institutions receiving Federal financial assistance. It
supplemental judicial relief
to eliminate the vestiges of raci3ny dual schooi systems., It litigates ·to enforce assurances of,
n()ndiscrimination made by educational institutions receiving Federal funds to the Department' of '
Education.'" ,
seeks
Public Access. This section litigak?s cases' under Titles II (State and local gQY~~!R.e.I'l! !cpyi,tiesl anjl~,
., --Ill '(actiVities of placi.~S'ofPubliC aCCommOdation) of the A.fJA~·· Itcertifies State and local building codes
.,C.,_._,,_
..
, for cOmpliance with the ADA standards for accessible design. It disseminates teChnical assistance
information and coordinates the technical assistance, other agencies provide.
~
.
._~ _~
-
Of/ice 01 Special Counsel. 'This section investigates and prosecutes employers charged with national
origin anci'citizenshipstatus discnmiilation under Section 192 of the Immigration Reform and Control
Act of 1986 ("IRCA").. The Congress created this office because of concern that making employers
subject to civil and criminal sanctions for knowingly hiring mdividuals unauthorized to work in the
United States might result in discrimination, either against those who look or sound "foreign" or who
'-.,--.'-are-not-United-States-citizens-.·In-addition,-the-office-conducts-an-outreach-and-educatiorcprogram to=----~
educate employers, potential ,victims of discrimination, and the general public about their rights and
responsibilities under IRCA~ ,
.
Management aiu:l administration. ,This section provides policy direction and administrative support to
,the division. It includes the Office of Redress Administration, which processes compensation payments
to Japanese-Americans interned during World War II.
Perfonnance Measures:
The division uses performance measures that vary with each section. The measures are summari..zed in the chart below.
.
.
38
�DEPT. JUSTICB COOL RIoHTS DMSION 5
Civil Rights Division Performance Measures
Section
F~
Efficiency Measures
Productivity Measures
Appellate Activity_
Externalities
• Success rate (benchmark:
50%)
• ff appellate cases .filed
• -ff amicuS briefs filed (benchnwk
-Effectiveness Measures
• available resources
of .80 annually)
Civil Rights Prosecution
.
---.-----
",-
-
• ff Cases investigated
• ff cases filed -
-
• ratio of cases received to cases
---reviewed~
...:.-,-
~----
Specia1Litigati~
-
~~--
:....--. -----... -"--,
• ff. investigation initiated
ff affirmative CRIPA'" cases
• ff affirmative FACE...... cases
• ff institutional tours conducted
• ff consent decrees entered
~:-~.
-.--.-~-.-.
."---.-"
-
• ff precedent-setting cases
~.
,
-,
- • ff precedent-setting cases
Ii
:-,
Voting
'
-
".
','
• ff precedent-settiIi.g ~ _ • available resources
,. amount of outreachJ~~tivity_on'-:'.
.
' ,
.
-'-------
.
---:------
............... --~-
• Ii consent decrees entered
CoOrdination and Review -"', '
,
'
-. ff cases investigated .
• ff right-to-sue notices issued
,• ff consent decrees entered
• ff precedent-setting cases
reviewed
,- ff responses to inquiries ,under
12250.........
39
• -adequacy of testing programs
• available resources
• ff recommendations
resulting from compliaJice
reviews
• ff Compliance, reviews conducted
• ff policy documents develOped or
Exec.
--~--.
. • available resources ..
:
--------,-----:---MotorNo~
Employment Litigation
--
.
• ,ff cases filed
• ff section 5 sUbmissions reviewed
"
• inherent ff and gravity of
.
incidentS reported
_! ..,.available resources-- -- - -_---
• available resources
-
-----
�DEPT. JUSTICE CIVIL RIoIITS DMSION6
Civil Rights Division Perfonnance Meas~
Section
Productivity Measures
Housing and Civil Enforcement
.
Effectiveness Measures
• # mortgage lending cases filed
.- # cases filed based on housing
,
. testing
• # non-discretionary cases filed
,
EduCational Opportunities
• # Iangwi.ge barner c8ses filed
--~-.~~ ---- - ---- --------------··-#judgmentstagreemeiits-subject- ---. -
to monitoring
• # consent decrees· entered
~-
----- _ --_.-
..
-
Externalities .
• # precedent-setting cases
Efficiency Measures
• active participation of U.S.
Attorneys in HUD referrals
• available resources
• # non-traditiOlllll cases
filed
-_ ..
• available resources
-
~
~-
-
--_...... ---, -
---
- -
.
'.
Public Access
,
• available resoUrceS
• # cases filed
• instances of ADA information
dissemination
• # regUlationsl policy dOCUJ:IJeIi.ts
developed
...
-
Office of Special Counsel
Management and
Administration
,
-.
.. available resourceS
• # investigatiOns initiated
• # formal· sewements
--. # instances of public outreach
--------
.)
•. scope of major policy
:
initiatives
• level of divisionADP
capacity
• # organizational reviews
,
• available resources
*CRIPA: Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons' Ac.t
**FACE:' Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances' Act
***Under Executive Ordef 12250, the division coordinates the enforcement by Federal agencies of virious statu~ that prohibit discrimination in programs that receive
, Federal financial assistance and discrimination on the basis of disability in programs conducted by the Federal Government.
.
.
"
40
....
-
,
�DEPT. JUSTICE CIVIL RIGHTS DMSION
7
. Status:
The division has proposed a 1995 reorganization which will create an additional Deputy Assistant Attorney General position,
create a new legislative unit,' consolidate all Americans with Disabilities Act responsibilities within one' section, rename the Public .
Access Section the "Disability Rights Section" ,and make other minor changes to enhance the division's operational effectiveness 'and
efficiency . The division recently completed a draft strategic plan for enforcing civil rights. The plan awaits approval by the Attorney
, General.
'
Recommendation and Questions:
~ --'~--- ..:.-.--~- -~-------------
-- -
--
'---"~-,:'----- ~- --
-
-~-.- --------_._- .-.
~
-
--
-----
. - . - --
--
----...,....-- ---- - -
A review of performance measures suggests that most measures relate to productivity rather than to efficiency, effectiveness
and externalities. Improving measures of efficiency will be especially difficult because litigation is very staff intensive and casework
varies greatly depending upon fact patterns and the activities of opposing counsel. It will be exceedingly difficult for the division'
to tie its performance to measures of effectiveness without first more precisely identifying the externalities that put these measures
into perspective.
Release of'the strategic plan
will shipe,dialogue on other issues.
41
�Title VI Enforcement
Department of Justice
General Legal Activities
Civil Rights Division
Funding History (Coordination and Review Only)
(Dollars in
1m
B1\
" 2.5
---OL-'--
Millions)
~
3.2 -- --
-_.
--
~.--~
--
Not Available
36
. 32
32
••*The civil rights division is subjectto a single set of
-
- ..- .-35 -- .. --
•••
•••
Not Available
FJ'E.
,
_____ !~.
'3.3
Not Available
1296 Request
1296 Ceilina
1295 Enacted
Not Available
32
resource ceilings that- encompass the divj.sion as well as other organiZations.
.
Background: ' ,
(!ftf~;-~e
o~activity 'receivin~
".
Civil Rights' Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in any' program
Federal financial
assistance:=--11laf1aw authorizes, Federal agencies,with the President's approval, to adopt rules implementing the prohibi!iort.~It=--:.... ___.
_~_ authorizes 3ge:1lcies_to_termirtate-the-assistance-they-provide-if-they-are-unable-to-secure. voluntary compliance.-~--- -,- .
,In Executive Order 12250, the President delegated to the Attorney General authority to coordinate the implementation of title
VI. PursUant to that order, the Civil Rights Division's Coordination and Review Section assures the consistent, effective and efficient
enforcement of various civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of:' .
,
,
• race, color, national origin" disability, sex, and religion by the mot:e than 25 agencies that administer programs of
"
'
'
Federal fmancial assistance
~.
disability in programs: conducted by the more than 90 Federal Executive- agencies.
The section serves as the Government's clearinghouse for complaints of discrimination against recipients of Federal assistance.
42
�'.
.
..'
Tl'I'LB VI ENFORCEMENT 2
Performance"Measures:
.
, ' . , , ' ,
'"
....
'
,
.
.
.
,
The Coordination and Re\'iew Section uses performance measures summarized in the chart below.
, CooreJination and Review Section Perfonnance Measures '
ProductivitY Measures ,
,
• 'compliance reviews
- -- - - ---'-:conducted ---- - ------- -- -- -- ----' -,-• '-policy documents
developed or reviewed
• 'responses to inquiries
under Exec. Order 12250
Efficiency
Measures '
Effectiveness
Measures
Externalities
• 'recommendations
available
- -- - - -- -- --- resw.tlllg
frOm --- - -- -- ---•- - -- ,- -resources~____ ~ ___
- --
'compliance reviews:
Measures specifically applicable to title VI were unavailable when during preparation of this document.
status:
_ _ _ _c _ , -
--:--J).n=luly=ht;:199A,;-tn conjunction with-the30Th-ariiiiversary of Title VI, the Attorney General signed a memorandum to all
Federal agencies With Title VI-enforcement responsibilities, reminding them that the "adverse effects" standard should be used, when
'appropriate, in cOnducting Title VI investigations. The memorandum stated that a showing of in\'idious intent is not required to
establish aviolation, and 'that the disparate impact pro\'isions of existing regulations are an essential component of an effeCtive
,-'
,
"
-'
compliance program.
--
The section recently complet~ly a draft regUlation that would update and otherwise improve coordination of colnpliance with
title VI. In addition, it has re\'iewed annual implementation_plans and performance and workload data submitted by Federal ,agencies
desCribing their federally assisted ciyil rights program enforcement priorities, acti\'ities, and results. The section received 22 plans.
, Five agencies did not submit plans:' the Department of Commerce; the Department of Defense; the Department of Health and Human
Semces, which submitted data only; the Department of State and the United States Information Agency. The section is maintaining
an ongoing liaison program with each agency.
43,
�TITLE VI ENFORCEMENT 3
In recent years, the Coordination and Review Section has a large portion of its resources to implementing the Americans with
Disabilities Act;. The division has proposed a 1995 reorganization--which OMB has approved--which will create an additional Deputy
Assistant Attorney General position, create a new legislative unit, consolidate all Americans with Disabilities Act responsibilities
within one section, rename the Public Access Section the "Disability Rights Section", and make other minor changes to enhance the
division's operational effectiveness and efficiency. This change will allow the section to sharpen its focus on ensuring agency
compliance with title VI. The recently completed, draft strategic plan for enforcing civil rights may affect the division's activities
under title VI. -Th: plan awaits approval J)y the Attorney General.
<
<
The Civil Riglits Commission is conducting a study of the~Government's activities under title VI and- will reyt~~Jhe_~tipn~s
. activip~~,~~~_.R3!t()f~t.study._~
------- ---.. ------
Recommendation and Questions:
Rel¢ase of the strategic plan will shape dialogueon title VI issues.
<
-------~----
44
<
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
,
Clinton Library
I
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
004. memo
DATE
SUBJECTffITLE
I
I
Jeremy D. Benami to Stephen C Warnath re: Korematsu Event (1
page)
111111994
RESTRICTION
P5
i
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
;
I
i
I
This marker identifies the qriginallocation of ~he withdrawn item listed above.
For a complete list of items withdrawn from this folder, see the
WithdrawallRedaction Sheet at tlie front of the folder.
I
!
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Domestic Policy Council
Stephen Warnath (Civil Rights)
OAlBox Number:
9590
FOLDER TITLE:
Civil Rights Working Group [1]
.
"
ds50
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act· [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act· [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
I
I
National Security Classified Information [(a)(I) of the ~RA]
Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PAA]
Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential cOnlmercial or
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
!
P5 Release would disclose confidential advise between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasio~ of
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
PI
P2
P3
P4
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
i
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
. 2201(3).
'
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
b(I') National Jecurity classified information [(b)(I) of the FOIA]
b(2) Release w6uld disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
I
an agencYj [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
b(4) Release w~uld disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
informati6n [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
b(6) Release whuld constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
b(7) Release wbuld disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial fustitutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
b(9) Release w~uld disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
I
�.
E X E CUT I V E
I
:
OFF I C E
I
o F.I
THE
PRE SID E N T
I
I
01-Nov-1994 10: 58 am
1
I
I
i
TO:
Jeremy D. Benami
FROM:
Carol H.: Rasco
\
Economic and Domestic Policy
CC:
Stephen C. Warnath
,
SUBJECT:
RE: Korematsu event
\
!
I
I
I
\
You or Steve should take the approach we discussed this a.m.,
I
Jeremy.
I
I
Thanks.
�I
I
I
I
EXEC UTI V E
OFF ICE
I
o F
THE
I
PRE SID E N T
1
26-Feb-1997 05:56pm
I
I
TO:
warnath!s
FROM:
Sharon Thomas
\
\
\
I
.
I.
CC:
thomass i
SUBJECT:
civil
I
R~ghts
I
!
I
Working Group\ participants
I
I
I
Hi, I left you a detailed VM. List is forthcoming. This is a test to see
if email to your address is workable like others 'within the WH complex.
" ,
.
\
As I probably am. one of the few at DoJ lnthe current century
computer-wise. After 12 years within the Whit~ House complex, I thought
DoJ's computer system is "the dark ages." smile.
.
I .
Let me know lf " works and I wll1 . "
thlS
emal1 11S~ to you tomorrow morning
for. Helaine Greenfeld . . Plea~ note my email adq.ress as well.
thanks.
1.
./
f
.J
'I
iI
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Stephen Warnath - Civil Rights Series
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Domestic Policy Council
Stephen Warnath
Civil Rights Series
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1993-1997
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36406" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="http://catalog.archives.gov/id/641686" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen Warnath served as Senior Policy Analyst in the Domestic Policy Council. The Civil Rights Series includes material pertaining to the Civil Rights Working Group and topics such as affirmative action, English only, age discrimination, religious freedom, and voting rights. The records also include confirmation briefing materials for Department of Justice (DOJ) and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) nominees. The records include briefing papers, correspondence, schedules, testimony, reports, clippings, articles, legislative referral memoranda, and memos. The majority of the memos are internal between the Domestic Policy Council staff and the staff of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and between the Domestic Policy Council staff and Congress.
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
134 folders in 13 boxes
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Civil Rights Working Group [1]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Domestic Policy Council
Steven Warnath
Civil Rights Series
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 3
<a href="http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/assets/Documents/Finding-Aids/Systematic/Warnath-DPC-Civil-Rights.pdf" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="http://catalog.archives.gov/id/641686" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
2/8/2012
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
641686-civil-rights-working-group-1a
641686