Content Objective
The word “Democracy” is NOWHERE to be found in the Declaration of Independence (July 4th, 1776) or the United States Constitution (written in September 1787, ratified in June 1788, and put into effect in March 1789). In the 18th century, the general consensus was that a government ruled by the people will lead to chaos and disasters; not all people are equal, and some people are unqualified to rule themselves. The Federalist Papers is a series of 85 essays written by James Madison, John Jay, and Alexander Hamilton, published under the pen name “Publius,” in a number of New York newspapers. Written between October 1787 and May 1788, these essays were used to rally support to ratify the Constitution by addressing the general fear of a democratic government where "instability, injustice, and confusion… have in truth been the mortal disease under which popular governments everywhere perished.”15 So why do we call our government a democracy, when equality for all is more a promise than a reality? What is the difference between a democracy and a republic? Who really governs us?
The Preamble of the Declaration of Independence
The Declaration of Independence is a point of departure and a promise, while the Constitution is more like a set of living laws and commitments: some troubling, some transformative, and some lasting. Without debate, the most famous sentence from the Declaration of Independence is the 2nd paragraph: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”16 At that time, the phrase “all men are created equal” was only meant for the colonists who were white, male, over the age of 21, and owned property (therefore, voters). By 1850, almost 7 decades after the Constitution and a decade before the Civil War (1861-1865), most white men WITHOUT property were enfranchised with the right to vote.17 Slaves, women, Native Americans, non-English speakers, all people of color, and citizens between the ages of 18 to 21 had to fight for the right to be included, and often with multiple failed attempts. As of July 4th, 2021, the United States is still a young country of 245 years.
The Declaration of Independence (July 4, 1776) was designed to multitask with the goal to rally domestic and foreign support for the American Revolution in order to form a new country separated from Great Britain. The introductory sentence “declare the causes which impel them [the colonists] to the separation” explains the main purpose of this letter.18 The Congress knew separation from the mother country will threatened the colonists’ sense of security, economic stability, and identity, and also saw the need to stir emotion and inspire the colonists to put their lives on line for a better future. A list of 27 complaints against King George III secured the colonists’ right to rebellion. Our Founding Fathers cast the revolution in universal terms for an international audience to read the subtext and join the global fight against tyranny. At the end of the document, it declares a complete break with Great Britain, and rightly claims “the United Colonies” as “Free and Independent States.”19
The Preamble of the U.S. Constitution
The Preamble of the U.S. Constitution reads: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”20 Why is it important for elementary school students to study the Preamble of the Constitution? Studying the Preamble will help students to understand the essence and philosophy of our democracy. For about 100 days in the hot summer of 1787 (5 years after the American Revolution 1775-1783), some of the most forward thinkers of that times including Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and Roger Sherman came together to draft a new Constitution that would replace the weak Articles of Confederation (written in 1777 and ratified in 1781).
Wealth Disparity and White Poverty v. Black Poverty
In 1960, Lyndon B. Johnson was quoted to have said: “If you can convince the lowest white man, he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.” 21 During the passing of Civil Rights Act of 1964, LBJ was impressively skillful in his handling of Congress and the harsh objection from the White majority, especially in his native South. Poverty is not an equal opportunity experience, and is more persistent across generations of Black families than White families. According to Bernie Sander’s 2015 presidential campaign speech, 400 wealthy Americans own more than the bottom half of the population (150 million people), and 25 best-paid hedge fund managers earn more than the combined salaries of the 425,000 public school teachers.22 In 2014, the child poverty rate is higher than it was in 1974 (21%), and a Black child in 2014 is still 3 times more likely to be in poverty than a White child.23 In a period of 40 years from 1974-2014, at least one-third of Black children was living in poverty.24 Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote: “In its pervasiveness, concentration, and reach across class lines, black poverty proves itself to be ‘fundamentally distinct’ from white poverty.”25
So, should we look at Black poverty differently than White poverty? There is no denying that many White Americans experience poverty. In number, there are more White Americans in poverty than Black Americans or members of any other racial or ethnic group.26 In 2014, 19.6 million non-Hispanic White Americans were living in poverty, compared with 10.2 million Black Americans, 2.3 million Asian Americans, and 13.4 million Hispanic Americans of any race.27 But on the persistence of poverty, White and Black Americans have different experiences.
In 2018, 53.9 million students were enrolled in K-12th education with 50% non-Hispanic White, 14% Black (7.7 million), 5% Asian (2.6 million), and 25% Hispanic (13.6 million).28 Most K-12th grade students were native-born and a majority of 89% attended public schools and 11% attended private schools.29 Students in private schools came from homes with higher incomes than those students who attended public schools. Attendees of private schools came from households with median incomes of $109K, whereas students who attended public schools came from households with median incomes of $79K.30 In 2020 the median annual income earned by Black families was about $35K, and by the Asian families was about $53K which is $20K higher.31 No wonder Asian Americans are often mistreated with higher standards than White in college admission, and singled out as the Model Minority who doesn’t extra privileges.
According to the book Hollow Hope, laws and actions designed to preserve segregation in our public schools and local communities can be divided into the 2 basic camps:1) Politics (outside of a school and between school districts) include anti-NAACP laws, emergency power to officials, interposition, segregation committees, sovereignty commissions, and protests; 2) Policies (within a school) include compulsory attendance, school privatization, school closures, scholarship out-of-state, teacher removals, tuition grants, and withheld aid to desegregated schools.32 Drawing on the research from both higher education and K–12 education, it has been shown that an integrated classroom with racial and socioeconomic diversity can benefit all students with academic, cognitive, civic, social-emotional, and economic advantages.33
Part 1: Landmark Court Cases on Segregation and Affirmative Action
Tape v. Hurley, 66 Cal. 473 (1885)
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
Roberto Alvarez v. Board of Trustees of the Lemon Grove School District (1931)
Brown v. Board of Education (5 cases, 1954)
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2019, appealing)
Tape v. Hurley, 66 Cal. 473 (1885) is a less known landmark school segregation case. It was decided 7 years before the “separate but equal doctrine” segregation decision of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and almost 70 years before the “separate and unequal doctrine” desegregation decision of Brown v. Board of Education (1954). In 1884, a prosperous middle-class Chinese American couple tried to enroll their 8 years old daughter Mamie Tape at the all-white Spring Valley Primary School in San Francisco, California. Principal Jennie Hurley refused to admit their daughter citing the school-board policy against Chinese children. The parents of Mamie decided to file a lawsuit on behalf of their daughter against both Hurley and the San Francisco Board of Education. Andrew J. Moulder was the then-Superintendent who urged the passing of desegregation legislation. The California Supreme Court ruled that San Francisco’s public school system must admit children of Chinese descent. At the time, anti-Chinese sentiment ran high in California. Many White Americans blamed the Chinese immigrants for taking their jobs. In 1882, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act that initially banned Chinese immigration for 10 years, but the exclusion lasted for over 60 years. It was repealed in 1943 by the Magnuson Act allowing 105 Chinese immigrants per year. Below is an excerpt from Tape v. Hurley:
“Every school, unless otherwise provided by law, must be open for the admission of all children between six and twenty-one years of age residing in the district; and the board of trustees, or city board of education, have power to admit adults and children not residing in the district, whenever good reasons exist therefore. Trustees shall have the power to exclude children of filthy or vicious habits, or children suffering from contagious or infectious diseases.”34
Roberto Alvarez v. Board of Trustees of the Lemon Grove School District (1931) is another less known but successful desegregated case in California. Commonly known as the Lemon Grove Incident, the case happened during the Depression era (46 years after Tape v. Hurley). In January 1931, a group of Mexican-American students were barred from attending their local elementary school by then-Principal Jerome Green. Back in December 1930, Green disobeyed the school board and asked a 12 years old student named Roberto Alvarez to alert the families of the plan to build a segregated school for 75 children of Mexican origin. Alvarez was an exemplary 5th grade student who spoke excellent English, so the parents selected him as the chief plaintiff to represent all of the children. In March 1931, the district Superior Court of San Diego County ruled in favor of the plaintiffs stating that the school board had violated state laws because ethnic Mexicans were considered White under the Education Code. The school board meeting’s minutes did not record the court case. Principal Green was shortly fired after the court decision. The children’s book Todos Iguales, All Equal by Christy Hale recounts this landmark case with illustrations, a ballad, photographs, and other factual information. Below is an excerpt of a 2016 resolution filed with the Secretary of State to commemorate the case’s 85th anniversary.
“WHEREAS, The Alvarez case is important because it was an historic first… an example of a community taking action and establishing the rights of their children to equal education, despite the local, regional, and national sentiment of that era that favored not just segregation, but the actual deportation from the United States of persons of Mexican heritage; and WHEREAS, The parents of the excluded pupils refused to accept this injustice, and organized themselves into the Comite de Vecinos de Lemon Grove, sought help from the local Mexican community at large, and eventually obtained the professional services of distinguished San Diego attorneys Fred C. Noon and A.C. Brinkely.”35
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), was a landmark decision (commonly known as the “separate but equal” doctrine) by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) that ruled segregation laws was constitutional. In 1892, Homer Plessy, an octoroon (a person with 7/8 White and 1/8 Black ancestry) deliberately violated the Louisiana’s Separate Car Act of 1880 which required Black passengers to be seated in separate railroad cars from the White passengers. Plessy pleaded not guilty, but the Louisiana Supreme Court convicted him. He appealed to SCOTUS, and lost with a 7-1 decision that claimed the Louisiana Supreme Court did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.36 The decision gave power to states to enact laws that separated Black people from White people, and barred Black people from bathrooms, fountains, restaurants, hospitals, hotels, housing, job prospects reserved for White Only, and thus, legitimized the Jim Crow laws in many Southern Confederate States.
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) is a landmark SCOTUS case that overrides the ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson. SCOTUS declared state laws establishing separate public schools for students of different races to be unconstitutional. The decision dismantled the legal framework for racial segregation in public school. In February 1951, the Topeka NAACP filed suit at the District Court. Citing the decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, the District Court judges denied relief on the grounds that the Black and White schools were equal with respect to buildings, transportation, curricular, and qualifications of teachers. The plaintiffs appealed to the SCOTUS in 1952, and were joined by 4 similar NAACP-sponsored cases from Delaware, South Carolina, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. The Court’s ruling combined these five cases under the heading Oliver L. Brown et. al. vs. the Board of Education of Topeka. Mr. Brown was the assigned lead plaintiff in the Kansas class action suit, and became namesake of the court decision. Thurgood Marshall as Chief Council for the NAACP argued before the Court that separate school systems for Blacks and Whites were inherently unequal, and thus violated the "equal protection clause" of the 14th Amendment. Marshall also argued that segregated school systems had a tendency to make Black children feel inferior to White children, and thus such a system should not be legally permissible. In September, Chief Justice Fred Vinson, who had been a major stumbling block to a unanimous decision, died and was replaced by Governor Earl Warren of California. Warren had supported the integration of Mexican-American students in the 1947 case Mendez v. Westminster. When Brown v. Board of Education was reheard, Warren was able to bring the Justices to a unanimous decision.
In May 1954, Chief Justice Warren delivered the opinion stating, "We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.”37 The Brown v. Board of Education decision forced the desegregation of public schools in 21 states which intensified resistance and racial violence in the South, particularly among White supremacist groups and government officials sympathetic to the segregationist cause.38 In one of the most notorious resistance, Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus ordered the state’s National Guard in 1957 to bar nine Black students from entering Little Rock Central High School. The SCOTUS decision encouraged, empowered and mobilized activism across the nation. Boycotts, sit-ins, Freedom Rides, marches, nonviolent resistance, civil disobedience, and mass mobilization all come to define the Modern Civil Rights Movement.
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (438 U.S. 265) is a 1978 SCOTUS landmark decision about affirmative action. Allan Bakke, a White man who was twice rejected admission to the medical school of the University of California Davis (UCD), filed a suit against the university for “reverse discrimination” on the basis of him being White.39 Bakke charged that his grades and test scores were much better than those of many accepted minority applicants. The UCD countered saying its affirmative action program was justified to create more physicians likely to work in underserved areas. The SCOTUS, in a highly fractured ruling (6 separate opinions), upheld the lower court decision, and agreed that the use of strict racial quotas (16% reserved for minority applicants) was unconstitutional, and ordered the medical school to admit Bakke.40 HOWEVER, it also contended that race could be used as one criterion in college admissions. Bakke was admitted to UCD, the university cannot set strict racial quotas, but affirmative action programs that take race into account can continue in the college admissions process in order to create a diverse school environment. In the 2003 affirmative action case Grutter v. Bollinger, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor set the year 2028 (in 25 years) as a potential endpoint for racial preferences.41 Since the 1978 ruling of Bakke, most colleges use a “whole person review” model to consider many qualities about each candidate including race. SCOTUS also ruled in Fisher v. University of Texas (2016) that colleges must prove that race-based admissions policies are the only way to meet diversity goals.42
Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (2014 to Present) is a lawsuit concerning affirmative action in college admissions, filed by a neoconservative organization called the Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), representing a group of anonymous Asian Americans applicants rejected by Harvard admission.43 SFFA is led by Edward J. Blum and claims that Harvard discriminates against Asian-American applicants. The opinions of Asian American groups are divided regarding this affirmative action case. Some coalitions of Asian American organizations believe that the accusation of discrimination is an attempt to pit marginalized students against each other, and the case uses Asian Americans as the decoy to end affirmative action, and give a masked legitimacy for White supremacy.44 Critics of Blum accused him of spreading divisiveness to obliterate diversity programs and civil right protections that traditionally benefit all people of color. On the opposing side, in 2015, a coalition of more than 60 Asian-American organizations filed federal complaints with the U.S. Department of Education and Department of Justice against Harvard University.45
In 2019, U.S District Court Judge Allison Burroughs rejected SFFA’s claim and ruled that Harvard did not unduly discriminate against Asian Americans. The SFFA filed an appeal with the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals and lost. In February 2021, SFFA petitioned the SCOTUS to hear the appeal. In May 2021, Harvard filed its opposing brief. SCOTUS is expected to issue a decision on whether it will hear the case in August 2021.
An excerpt of the SFFA’s petition against Harvard reads: “Each year, many of Asian-American applicants with excellent leadership skills, competition medals, extraordinary SAT scores and GPAs, are unjustifiably rejected by Harvard and other Ivy League Schools. Studies have indicated that these universities have been engaged in systematic and continuous discrimination against Asian-Americans in the college admissions process, including: 1) Using racial stereotypes. 2) Using racially differentiated standards: highest [standard] for Asians, next for Whites and lowest for Blacks and Hispanics. 3) Racial rebalancing de facto racial quota: Asian admission rates in Ivy League Schools have been kept between 14-18% over the last twenty years despite the fact that Asian-American population has more than doubled since 1993…”46
An excerpt of Harvard’s petition against SFFA reads: “After years of discovery, SFFA produced no persuasive evidence to support its legal claims. The court of appeals found no error in the district court’s meticulous explanation... SFFA is not entitled to battle out the facts a third time in this Court… Harvard has a compelling interest in pursuing the educational benefits of diversity, finding the evidence at trial … [makes] clear that a heterogeneous student body promotes a more robust academic environment with a greater depth and breadth of learning, encourages learning outside the classroom, and creates a richer sense of community.”47
Part 2: Maps, Data Analysis, School Ratings, and Game Theories
In almost all 50 states, White students go to schools with other White students, and Black students go to schools with other Black students.48 In Part 2 of this unit, students will study and compare 3 segregated maps, and then create their own by color-coding maps based on data about race and income. Some guiding questions include: How can school districts be better determined and managed to reduce segregation? What are some reasons there may be segregation within a school and what does it look like? In a 2017 finding from the National Center for Education Statistics, it shows how school segregation and economic disparities continues between Black and White students.49 Black students are 5 times as likely as White students to attend a highly segregated school. 72.4% of Black students and only 31.3% of White students attend a high-poverty school. Black students who attend schools with more than 75% White students perform significantly better on standardized math tests than Black students in segregated Black and Brown schools. During school desegregation from 1960s to 1980s, the racial achievement gap in K–12 education was rapidly closing.50 However, in the 1990’s when many desegregation policies were dismantled, the racial achievement gap widened.51 The researcher Rucker Johnson tracked Black students exposed to the desegregation in the 1960s to 1980s and found a variety of positive outcomes such as better health, less likely to be incarcerated, higher earnings as adults.52
Rising Electoral Power of People of Color:
In regards to the increasing electoral power of minority, about 25% (124 lawmakers) of Congress identify themselves as Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander or Native American, making the 117th Congress (2020) the most racially and ethnically diverse in history.53 It’s a 97% increase from 63 minority lawmakers over the 107th Congress (17 years ago).54 The 2020 U.S. Census Bureau shows that the number of ethnic groups and its population has rapidly increased over the last decade. U.S. population in 2020 was 331.45 million people: 60% White (197.2 million), 18% Hispanic (60.47 million), 13% Black (44.08 million), <5.7% Asians (19.5 million), >1% American Indian & Alaska Native (4.19 million), 0.23% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander (0.81 million), and 2.7% Mixed race (9.14 million).55
Big Business of School Rankings
A company called Niche annually ranks schools under the categorization of Best Private Schools, Best Public Schools, Best Schools by State, Best Schools by City, and Best Teachers.56 Some guiding questions for students when analyzing school rankings: Why do we rank schools, teachers, and students like competitive sports? If there is a winner, then there must be a loser… which states are winners and which states are losers? If a school is number one, then another school has to be last… is it fair to rank schools this way? In Weapons of Math Destruction (WMD), the author Cathy O’Neil explains how a good teacher was reduced to a dismal score without anyone understanding how such a math algorithm for teacher evaluation works, and some colleges “game the system” to get a higher ranking on the U.S. News & World Report.57
Game Theories Redesigned for Students
Designing games for students to “play” and “have fun” is an effective way to teach the basic concepts of bargaining, voting with two-thirds majority rule, median voter model, and coalition-building. Divide-the-Dollar (DD) is a popular and hands-on game where 3 or more players simultaneously make demands to divide a dollar (or public funding) as they discuss social issues and form coalitions.58 According to the median voter model, candidates often position themselves at the center of a one-dimensional issue to meet the needs of the median voters (2/3 majority of that issue). Please note: For 2 players, a major setback of DD is that continuous division of a dollar will eventually yield a Nash equilibrium of 50/50 like a statemate.59
Schelling Model of Segregation: During the 1960s, the economist Thomas Schelling created a model that shows how a small racial preference for one’s neighbors to be of the same race could lead to total segregation over time.60 The model provides a surprising look at how otherwise civic individuals might self-segregate, even when that individual has no explicit prejudice. Schelling randomly placed equal number of nickels and pennies (representing 2 different agents or types of individuals) on a graph paper (representing a residential grid). If a coin has less than 33% (1/3) of its adjacent cells are of the same agent, that coin is “unhappy” and will prefer to move to another cell close to individuals like themselves. The 33% represents an individual’s preference to live next to individuals who are like them. The higher the percentage, the faster the speed to total segregation eventually. The team Vi Hart and Nicky Case has created an online game and website called Parable of the Polygon based on Schelling’s findings to how harmless choices can make a harmful world.61 The premise is: Yellow Triangles and Blue Squares (called “little cuties”) are only slightly bias (less than 33%). Even though every polygon prefers being in a diverse crowd, a polygon would want to move due to its small bias. This online game leads to the following conclusions: 1) equality is an unstable equilibrium like stacking a tower of cards, it is hard work that demands constant maintenance and is always in progress; 2) small individual bias can lead to large collective bias over time; 3) our world starts as segregated; 4) demanding diversity near your neighborhood over and over again may lead to a more diverse world.62
Part 3: Possible Solutions: Achievable or Unrealistic?
According to an AP News article, some 500 students packed tables at a high school in Trenton, New Jersey to debate how to ease racial division in schools.63 The conference brought together students from Ridgewood, Leonia, Cliffside Park and New Milford high schools. Students pitch solutions to end racial segregation in schools; these solutions included affordable housing, bank mortgages, residential rezoning, school rezoning, school choice, charter schools, privatizing schools, fixing existing schools, busing, and ending de facto segregation. One big insight from a student was: “Anything someone comes up with, somebody will have objections.”64
Building coalitions is an art and a progress in flux and unpredictability. In the book The Prize: Who’s in Charge of America’s School, the author Dale Russakoff recounts how a group of influential people tried unsuccessfully to improve the Trenton School District in New Jersey. The list of people includes then-mayor Cory Booker, then-governor Chris Christie, Mark Zuckerberg, consultant Christopher Cerf, Superintendent Cami Anderson, community leaders like Ras Baraka, principals like Jonna Belcher, teachers like Princess Williams, and students like Tariq Anderson. Zuckerberg contributed one million dollars to jumpstart this initiative, but once the money ran out and key people also moved on, the collective effort dissipated. Robert Dahl wrote in his book On Democracy: “Democracy, it appears, is a bit chancy… With adequate understanding of what democracy requires and the will to meet its requirements, we can act to preserve and, what is more, to advance democratic ideas and practices.”65 The will to improve the Trenton School District disappeared once the funding discontinued.
Comments: