Warren Would Use Executive Action To Base Government Promotions on Race, Gender
At least with Elizabeth Warren, Democrats will know exactly what they’re getting.
The lifelong academic whose biggest claim to fame is pretending to have some mythical American Indian lineage issued a new policy position paper on Friday that makes it clear she doesn’t just want to be an activist president.
She wants to be an activist queen.
In the latest of a series of pronouncements, Warren published a paper on the website Medium on Friday that declared she would use executive action to “boost wages for women of color and open up new pathways to the leadership positions they deserve.”
That’s no doubt a laudable goal — and one most Americans could agree to.
But could there be a worse person making decisions about what anyone might deserve in the private industry than a law professor who has spent virtually her entire professional career in coddled faculty lounges?
Maybe. Especially if that former law professor decided to make such decisions based entirely on demographic data that apparently assumes every potential employee of every potential business has exactly the same ability to help that business grow and thrive.
And maybe if that former law professor decided it was the federal government’s job to ensure that every company that worked for the government had an employee pool balanced by gender and race — and was judged solely on that balance.
That would be worse. And that would be Elizabeth Warren.
This paragraph is particularly telling:
“The experiences of women of color are not one-dimensional: sexual orientation, gender identity, and ability all shape how a person’s work is valued in the workplace. But our economy should be working just as hard for women of color as women of color work for our economy and their families,” Warren wrote.
“For decades, the government has helped perpetuate the systemic discrimination that has denied women of color equal opportunities. It’s time for the government to try to right those wrongs — and boost our economy in the process.”
Note that, in the first sentence, Warren places the one attribute that truly matters last — ability.
In Warren’s world — and presumably in the worldview of Democrats who would support her — matters like “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” come first — even though they have literally nothing to do with the way any employee (man or woman) earns a paycheck.
She also explicitly promised to make decisions in the federal workforce.
Included in her policy paper is a vow to: “Make the senior ranks of the federal government look like America.”
“The federal government does a dismal job on diversity and inclusion. The share of Latinas in the federal workforce is about half that of the entire workforce. And even though Black women are disproportionately represented in the federal workforce, they are nearly absent from its leadership ranks. White workers make up nearly 80% of the senior civil service despite making up only 63% of the overall federal workforce.”
Note, it’s all about the numbers, sex and skin color. Warren’s paper makes no allowance that ability, experience or longevity of service have anything to do with the results she’s implicitly criticizing. She offers no proof that there’s actually a problem. She says nothing about that at all.
For Warren, government promotions would be based sex and race, simple as that.
Maybe most importantly, Warren makes no secret of her desire to act through executive action rather than through the legislative process. That’s a characteristic of pretty much the entire Democratic field at this point.
While conservatives viewed Barack Obama’s “pen and phone” presidency with a combination of revulsion and disdain, Democrats loved it. They love the idea of a sovereign simply commanding a compliant Congress (just ask Kamala Harris) and if Congress fails to obey — they’ll issue executive orders.
On social media, Warren’s paper got plenty of liberal support (naturally enough) but there were many, many critics who saw right through the woman running to be royalty.
Why are all the Democrat candidates coming out talking about the executive orders they will implement if elected? It’s kind of weird and hinting at a bit of authoritarianism.
— pertater (@pertater1) July 5, 2019
Pandering for votes nothing more.
— Cynthia Townsend (@Cynthia34318447) July 5, 2019
STOP w/ the damn Executive orders bs pic.twitter.com/UP2JVAeIom
— 1nonblonde (@1nonblonde2) July 5, 2019
In a way, Warren is like a grown-up version of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Ocasio-Cortez won a Democrat primary in a dead-dog Democrat congressional district in New York City and thinks that gave her a mandate to run the entire United States.
Warren actually won two statewide general elections, but she did it running as a Democrat in deep-blue Massachusetts. Still, she thinks that’s giving her a mandate to make business decisions on behalf of every firm that will do business with the federal government in a (horrors) Warren administration.
She has no experience running a business, but Warren thinks she knows how a business should be run.
She has no executive experience, but Warren thinks she knows how executive orders should be issued.
She doesn’t want to be president — she wants to be a queen.
And any Democrats who think that would win a general election are even bigger fools than liberals usually are.
But at least they know exactly what they’re getting.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
