Saturday, July 10, 2010

Section 342 of the Dodd-Frank Bill Will Impose Gender and Racial Quotas on the Financial Industry; Even Though the House Committee is 82% Male, and the Senate Committe is 96% Male, 100% White

Here's something that has great potential to ruin your day, from Diana Furchtgott-Roth:

"Section 342 of the Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill declares that race and gender employment ratios, if not quotas, must be observed by private financial institutions that do business with the government. In a major power grab, the new law inserts race and gender quotas into America's financial industry.

In addition to this bill's well-publicized plans to establish over a dozen new financial regulatory offices, Section 342 sets up at least 20 Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion. This has had no coverage by the news media and has large implications.

The Treasury, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the 12 Federal Reserve regional banks, the Board of Governors of the Fed, the National Credit Union Administration, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau...all would get their own Office of Minority and Women Inclusion.

Each office would have its own director and staff to develop policies promoting equal employment opportunities and racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of not just the agency's workforce, but also the workforces of its contractors and sub-contractors.

What would be the mission of this new corps of Federal monitors? The Dodd-Frank bill sets it forth succinctly and simply - all too simply. The mission, it says, is to assure "to the maximum extent possible the fair inclusion" of women and minorities, individually and through businesses they own, in the activities of the agencies, including contracting.

Lest there be any narrow interpretation of Congress's intent, either by agencies or eventually by the courts, the bill specifies that the "fair" employment test shall apply to "financial institutions, investment banking firms, mortgage banking firms, asset management firms, brokers, dealers, financial services entities, underwriters, accountants, investment consultants and providers of legal services." That last would appear to rope in law firms working for financial entities.

This latest attempt by Congress to dictate what "fair" employment means is likely to encourage administrators and managers, in government and in the private sector, to hire women and minorities for the sake of appearances, even if some new hires are less qualified than other applicants. The result is likely to be redundant hiring and a wasteful expansion of payroll overhead.

With the new financial regulation law, the federal government is moving from outlawing discrimination to setting up a system of quotas. Ultimately, the only way that financial firms doing business with the government would be able to comply with the law is by showing that a certain percentage of their workforce is female or minority.

The new Offices of Women and Minorities represent a major change in employment law by imposing gender and racial quotas on the financial industry. The issue deserves careful debate - rather than a few pages slipped into the financial regulation bill."

MP: As Thomas Sowell reminds us: If there is ever a contest to pick which word has done the most damage to people's thinking, and to actions to carry out that thinking, my nomination would be the word "fair."

Update: Gender composition of The House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Barney Frank: 

Male: 81.7%
Female: 18.3% (only 13 female members out of 71)

Gender composition of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs:

Male: 96% (all white)
Female: 4% (only one white female member out of 23)
Minorities: 0%

16 Comments:

At 7/10/2010 10:42 AM, Anonymous gettingrational said...

The Office of Women and Minorites should be changed to The Office of Men and Minorities. Barney and Chris ignore The Great Mancession. Section 342 further puts the beatdown on men by discriminatory and strident government enforcers. Walk into any bank and they are mostly women employees but that doesn't matter.

 
At 7/10/2010 10:50 AM, Blogger Jason said...

The quest for fairness is a fool's errand. What is fair exactly?

 
At 7/10/2010 12:23 PM, Anonymous JW said...

I also think they should change the title to "Office of Blacks and Hispanics and Women Inclusion" since it's pretty clear they don't consider Asian or Indian people minorities.

Then again the moment one is qualified for a job on their own merit then they fall into the Majority. And the majority of people don't require legislation to do the heavy lifting on their behalf.

 
At 7/10/2010 12:47 PM, Blogger juandos said...

"Barney and Chris ignore The Great Mancession"...

Hmmm, I'm thinking the only man Barney Frank was interested in was James Ready and the only man Chris Dodd was interested in was Angelo Mozilo...

 
At 7/10/2010 1:23 PM, Anonymous Benny The Man said...

Liberals and their obsession with race/gender, as with conservatives and their hard-on for militarism, can't seem to stop fighting the battles of yesteryear.

Dudes, get over it. The Soviet Union is gone, and so is the Ku Klux Klan.

 
At 7/10/2010 1:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well Dodd and Frank, What about congress? Are congressional members representing their quota of faces?
And also, any office located in Washington DC should be staffed by90% black, since it reflects the city's racial make-up.

 
At 7/10/2010 2:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And basketball teams? They should be mostly white--it's only "fair".

 
At 7/10/2010 2:50 PM, Anonymous grant said...

The almost nonexistent level of economic understanding exposed in last weeks senate sub committee hearings on investigations into the financial system exposed my trepidation into what is driving the financial reform agenda.POLITICS???

 
At 7/10/2010 2:53 PM, Anonymous grant said...

Take off to a tanning studio and click the menu to WELL DONE.

 
At 7/10/2010 3:29 PM, Blogger juandos said...

"The almost nonexistent level of economic understanding exposed in last weeks senate sub committee hearings on investigations into the financial system exposed my trepidation into what is driving the financial reform agenda.POLITICS???"...

Well grant you might want to take a look at this: Live From the Gulf: How Much Will President Obama’s Drilling Moratorium Cost? (VIDEO)

 
At 7/10/2010 3:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

hey, look at what barney has done for the representation of gay men at the high end of finance by putting his boy toys into positions of power at the GSE's...

 
At 7/10/2010 9:24 PM, Anonymous Ralph Short said...

I read this was the left wing nut case Maxine Waters insertion. I am sure all of her fellow libs nodded their quota heads yes.

While I don't disagree with Thomas Sowell I would also submit there is another word that has caused more BS from the federales, states and local government and that word is "discriminate". years ago it was qualified with the word "unfair". Now it stands alone as something no one should do ever, under any circumstances. Well, the opposite of it is indiscriminate, and that is what our hiring and promotion practices are fast becoming. The financial "reform" is obviously intended to speed the process along.

Personally, I have never known an indiscriminate person who was worth a dam.

 
At 7/11/2010 11:26 AM, Blogger Dr William J McKibbin said...

The worst that would happen is that the largest banks in America would cease hiring males in favor of females -- what is ironic to me is that such language would appear in the Dodd-Frank Bill, but that the Volcker Rule in its original form will not -- the absurdidy of this bill is increasingly apparent -- "big" government and "big" business rule the US via corruption, regulatory malfeasance, and propaganda through the press -- in the mean time, immigration out of the US may be the only interesting way forward for blue-eyed white males with skills...

 
At 7/11/2010 11:30 AM, Blogger Dr William J McKibbin said...

I meant to type, "absurdity" -- thanks...

 
At 7/11/2010 5:24 PM, Anonymous Dave said...

I'm not generally a big fan of affirmative action, but I find it hard to get worked up about this, for two reasons. First, affirmative action is already a factor in federal government employment; why be surprised that it would be extended to financial businesses dependent on the federal government's largess? Doesn't affirmative action already get extended to non-financial contractors hired by the federal government?

Second, one of the main criticisms of affirmative action is that it puts less qualified individuals in positions of responsibility. Given the calamity ostensibly meritocratic big Wall Street firms unleashed on the economy, it's hard to imagine affirmative action hires doing much worse. If anything, maybe a surge of affirmative action on Wall Street will drive some of the more talented folks in finance out of rent seeking and into more productive fields of endeavor.

 
At 11/30/2010 9:58 AM, Blogger SQL Book said...

Section 342 is the exact reason why I refuse to vote for Democrats. The Democrats need to change their name to the Socialist Party. I am so sick of the elite cramming another diversity idea down the throat of America. The real racist are the Socialist who perpetuate poverty in minority groups through social programs. Affirmative Action hurts the white males who may not be privileged like Chris Dodd, the Socialist.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home