Civil Rights | Bacon’s Rise up

by James C. Sherlock

Previously, I looked at the current method of collecting race and ethnicity data to enforce civil rights and found that it was missing.

Why are we doing this? Because we’ve been doing it for a long time? The constitutional concerns cannot be addressed, and there is new evidence in genetic testing databases that the data was incorrectly constructed and incorrectly answered.

On my last assignment with the Navy nearly 30 years ago, I spent some time building and operating the largest military simulation facility in the country in Suffolk, Virginia.

What if we at least test alternatives using modern computer simulation methods and see what the results show? Simulations can provide better estimates than the current system or, importantly, show that civil rights concerns can be more efficiently and effectively targeted at class than race. Continue reading

by James C. Sherlock

The federal and state executive and legislative branches, as well as the courts, make thousands of decisions every day based on data on race and ethnicity.

Federal regulations for the collection and reporting of this data were enacted in response to civil rights laws. The iron law of unintended consequences prevails, as is often the case in such matters.

We absolutely know that this data is wrong: both artificially constructed and inaccurately reported. The basic assumption in drafting the regulations is that the data is close enough for government work. Let’s take a look.

Racial and ethnic information about participants in the education system is required by the federal government from the federal states, by the federal states from school districts and universities as well as from these institutions from individuals, all of which are determined by federal regulations.

Data on school staff, teachers and students are collected at each of these levels and consolidated in reporting at each level. Continue reading

Comments are closed.