Quota Bill

IF PROOF were needed that the proposed civil rights bill is not a "quota bill," Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah provided it last year.Although he has opposed rights bills in the past, Hatch joined in marathon compromise efforts with Senate Republicans and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights to produce a bill he recommended to the White House.President Bush vetoed the bill anyway, insisting that it would induce employers to hire by racial quotas rather than defend their practices in court.Now, however, Hatch rejoins the "quota bill" crowd and retroactively denounces his impressive work product.

There were advances in civil rights and equal opportunity during the Bush years, but not always with the president's blessing.Of the two pieces of major civil rights legislation enacted during his administration, one had Mr. Bush's firm support. The other made it into law almost in spite of him.Perhaps the most sweeping civil rights legislation of the last quarter century was passed in 1989 to insure the 43,000 disabled Americans equal access to public accommodations, transportation and job opportunities.

WASHINGTON -- The Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives is expected to make public tomorrow a substitute civil rights "package" containing a number of proposed amendments to the bill now before the House.The leadership's expectation is that while the substitute bill will be put before the House this week, it is unlikely to be debated or voted on until next week because of other congressional business.The substitute bill would replace H.R. 1, which has already gone through House committee procedures and stands ready for floor action.

WASHINGTON -- As the Senate civil rights bill nears a final vote, leaders of the black civil rights establishment are pleased at the prospect that President Bush will eventually sign it into law. But there is no joy among them.Even with their success, after two years, in moving the president to the point of compromise, they fear a further erosion of civil rights by a conservative Supreme Court.Late last night, the Associated Press reported that the Senate leadership announced that a vote on passage of the civil rights bill would not take place until today.

WASHINGTON -- The Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives is expected to make public tomorrow a substitute civil rights "package" containing a number of proposed amendments to the bill now before the House.The leadership's expectation is that while the substitute bill will be put before the House this week, it is unlikely to be debated or voted on until next week because of other congressional business.The substitute bill would replace H.R. 1, which has already gone through House committee procedures and stands ready for floor action.

When Congress enacts a new civil rights bill, Sens. John Danforth, R-Mo., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., will probably get the credit. But we will always think of it as the Hill-Duke Act. Anita Hill and David Duke changed the public opinion environment in the nation in recent weeks, just enough to change the political perspectives and stakes in the debate over civil rights legislation.President Bush vetoed the 1990 civil rights bill. He called each subsequent substitute version "a quota bill" and would not endorse any. Even if it were a quota bill in 1990 (and it was not, in our view)

THERE ARE obvious connections between last week's Senate vote to confirm Clarence Thomas's nomination to the Supreme Court and the civil rights bill that came up in the Senate yesterday -- obvious, that is, to everyone except President Bush.One connection concerns race, another concerns Republican consistency and a third concerns decency to women in the workplace.At the Thomas hearings, Republicans helped the nominee denounce what he called a "high-tech lynching," a startling image of racial oppression.

There were advances in civil rights and equal opportunity during the Bush years, but not always with the president's blessing.Of the two pieces of major civil rights legislation enacted during his administration, one had Mr. Bush's firm support. The other made it into law almost in spite of him.Perhaps the most sweeping civil rights legislation of the last quarter century was passed in 1989 to insure the 43,000 disabled Americans equal access to public accommodations, transportation and job opportunities.

As House leaders put the finishing touches on what they hope will be a veto-proof Civil Rights Bill of 1991, fresh evidence of the need for such legislation was reported yesterday by a nationally recognized urban research organization in a study that found "entrenched and widespread" racial bias among U.S. employers.The study, conducted by the Urban Institute, analyzed the experiences of 476 pairs of black and white job applicants in Washington and Chicago last year. It found that in 20 percent of the cases, blacks were denied treatment equal to whites for the same entry level jobs.

WASHINGTON -- As the Senate civil rights bill nears a final vote, leaders of the black civil rights establishment are pleased at the prospect that President Bush will eventually sign it into law. But there is no joy among them.Even with their success, after two years, in moving the president to the point of compromise, they fear a further erosion of civil rights by a conservative Supreme Court.Late last night, the Associated Press reported that the Senate leadership announced that a vote on passage of the civil rights bill would not take place until today.

When Congress enacts a new civil rights bill, Sens. John Danforth, R-Mo., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., will probably get the credit. But we will always think of it as the Hill-Duke Act. Anita Hill and David Duke changed the public opinion environment in the nation in recent weeks, just enough to change the political perspectives and stakes in the debate over civil rights legislation.President Bush vetoed the 1990 civil rights bill. He called each subsequent substitute version "a quota bill" and would not endorse any. Even if it were a quota bill in 1990 (and it was not, in our view)

WASHINGTON -- A two-year stalemate over a landmark civil rights bill for the workplace ended yesterday when Senate Democrats unanimously backed a hard-wrung compromise that President Bush had accepted the night before.The action appeared to assure passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which would reverse a series of recent Supreme Court decisions that made it more difficult for victims of job bias to win lawsuits and collect damages.By all accounts, Mr. Bush changed his position to make the compromise possible, largely out of concern that the public might think he was stonewalling on the matter and was more interested in having a political issue than a bill.

THERE ARE obvious connections between last week's Senate vote to confirm Clarence Thomas's nomination to the Supreme Court and the civil rights bill that came up in the Senate yesterday -- obvious, that is, to everyone except President Bush.One connection concerns race, another concerns Republican consistency and a third concerns decency to women in the workplace.At the Thomas hearings, Republicans helped the nominee denounce what he called a "high-tech lynching," a startling image of racial oppression.

WASHINGTON -- Months of efforts by moderate Senate Republicans to effect a compromise with the White House on a civil rights bill are likely to give way this week to a test of congressional strength to override a presidential veto.The Senate is scheduled to take up consideration of the bill at some time this week. But debate could conflict with the chamber's deliberations on whether to confirm Judge Clarence Thomas for a Supreme Court seat, which are also on the Senate docket for this week.

WASHINGTON -- Helen Bentley strode off the floor of the House of Representatives looking determined, dour and grim.In other words, she looked like she always looks.The worry lines in her forehead, the downward cast of her mouth, the thrust of her jaw, all comprise what someone once described as Bentley's "dog on a tire" look.And though the look often tends to hide her genuine flashes of sentimentality and humor, Bentley wears it as a badge of pride.This day, she has just cast a vote against the Democratic-sponsored civil rights bill.

WASHINGTON -- The Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives is expected to make public tomorrow a substitute civil rights "package" containing a number of proposed amendments to the bill now before the House.The leadership's expectation is that while the substitute bill will be put before the House this week, it is unlikely to be debated or voted on until next week because of other congressional business.The substitute bill would replace H.R. 1, which has already gone through House committee procedures and stands ready for floor action.

WHO WOULD have thought that a pedigreed Connecticut Yankee, educated at Andover and Yale, would dabble in white backlash?But what other plausible explanation can there be for George Bush's veto of the first civil rights bill to come across his presidential desk?If Bush really believed that he was vetoing a "quota bill," he had to ignore impressive testimony -- easily a preponderance of the evidence -- to the contrary, and not just from the women and racial minorities who would have benefited from the measure's anti-discrimination provisions.

WASHINGTON -- A two-year stalemate over a landmark civil rights bill for the workplace ended yesterday when Senate Democrats unanimously backed a hard-wrung compromise that President Bush had accepted the night before.The action appeared to assure passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which would reverse a series of recent Supreme Court decisions that made it more difficult for victims of job bias to win lawsuits and collect damages.By all accounts, Mr. Bush changed his position to make the compromise possible, largely out of concern that the public might think he was stonewalling on the matter and was more interested in having a political issue than a bill.

WASHINGTON -- The Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives is expected to make public tomorrow a substitute civil rights "package" containing a number of proposed amendments to the bill now before the House.The leadership's expectation is that while the substitute bill will be put before the House this week, it is unlikely to be debated or voted on until next week because of other congressional business.The substitute bill would replace H.R. 1, which has already gone through House committee procedures and stands ready for floor action.

As House leaders put the finishing touches on what they hope will be a veto-proof Civil Rights Bill of 1991, fresh evidence of the need for such legislation was reported yesterday by a nationally recognized urban research organization in a study that found "entrenched and widespread" racial bias among U.S. employers.The study, conducted by the Urban Institute, analyzed the experiences of 476 pairs of black and white job applicants in Washington and Chicago last year. It found that in 20 percent of the cases, blacks were denied treatment equal to whites for the same entry level jobs.