Leftists are extremely concerned with the onerous concept of “systemic racism.”
They claim that black people and other minorities are unable to get ahead in this country (despite scores of successful minority individuals) because racist systems hold them down.
In the name of “social and racial justice,” therefore, Democratic leaders institute clearly racist policies in favor of minorities.
The most recent example is San Francisco’s new Abundant Birth Project, which will provide $1,000 per month to approximately 150 black and Pacific Islander women during their pregnancies and for six months after, according to The Hill.
The goal is to eventually provide financial support for as long as two years after a child is born.
While there is nothing inherently wrong with providing support to pregnant women and new mothers, this program ties participation to the race of the mother rather than any need-based criteria. That is the definition of a racist policy.
San Francisco Mayor London Breed praised the Abundant Birth Project as the first of its kind.
“Providing guaranteed income support to mothers during pregnancy is an innovative and equitable approach that will ease some of the financial stress that all too often keeps women from being able to put their health first,” she said.
“The Abundant Birth Project is rooted in racial justice and recognizes that Black and Pacific Islander mothers suffer disparate health impacts, in part because of the persistent wealth and income gap. Thanks to the work of the many partners involved, we are taking real action to end these disparities and are empowering mothers with the resources they need to have healthy pregnancies and births,” she continued.
In San Francisco, black and Pacific Islander infants are more likely to be born prematurely than white infants: 13.8 percent of black infants and 10.4 percent of Pacific Islander infants were premature from 2012-2016, compared to 7.3 percent of white infants, according to the mayor’s office.
However, the mayor’s office did not provide any data to support that the disparity in infant mortality rates is due to the mother’s race, as opposed to non-racial factors such as income.
Indeed, Mayor Breed cited the wealth and income gap affecting black and Pacific Islander women as a significant motivator for the project — but project participation does not appear to be limited to low-income mothers. Rather, it appears the sole criterion for participation is race.
Thus, the policy seems to conflate “minority” with “poor,” which is clearly a racist sentiment.
Moreover, California already has resources in place for low-income pregnant women — programs that are not bound by the mother’s race. Covered California’s website describes a number of state programs covering most or all of the cost of pregnancy and birth for low-income women.
Of course, the left’s response to claims that the Abundant Birth Project is racist is likely to be an assertion that “reverse racism” — that is, racism against white people — simply doesn’t exist because of the “institutional power” held by white people.
Never mind the fact that the legal barriers previously entrenched in this country to keep minorities from having the same opportunities as white people have long been removed.
Never mind the fact that there is substantial evidence demonstrating that disparities in outcomes among racial groups are largely based on factors other than race.
Never mind the fact that the only “systemic racism” legally allowed in the United States in 2020 actually cuts against white people in favor of certain minority groups — for instance, affirmative action programs.
Programs like the Abundant Birth Project may be well-intentioned, but they don’t actually support long-term racial equality.
Rather, they sow further division between Americans of different races.
If the goal is greater racial harmony in San Francisco, and in America at large, the solution is for government to step away from race, not codify it into government and law.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.