Dan Coats: “We are considering an amendment offered by the Senator from Kentucky, which is designed to address one part of the…”

“We are considering an amendment offered by the Senator from Kentucky, which is designed to address one part of the increasingly contentious debate over affirmative action. The Supreme Court's ruling in the Adarand decision most probably makes the existing Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program unconstitutional; and, therefore, I think the Senator's amendment is appropriate. There is a growing sense, however, that as well-intentioned as affirmative action and set-aside programs are, whether they are constitutional or not, really in any way can be reconciled to the American commitment to equal justice under law. At the same time, I think it is important to point out that Americans do remain deeply troubled by the persistent poverty and lack of opportunity that quotas and affirmative action were originally meant to remedy. As unemployment approaches zero in much of the country, the inner cities are still overwhelmed by double-digit joblessness, social breakdown, and education failure. I want to be clear here this evening: Quotas and set-asides are not the answer to these problems. We have tried that. It has not worked. It does, I believe, violate constitutional principles of equal justice under law. Set-asides and quota programs have been largely a non sequitur to the social and economic questions faced by the urban poor. Quotas and set-asides do not strengthen civil society and do not strengthen our neighborhoods.”