U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS
BEFORE
THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
I. INTRODUCTION
Chairman Chabot, Congressman Nadler and members of the Subcommittee, I am Les Jin, the Staff Director of the United States Commission on Civil Rights. I have served in this position for approximately 1-½ years and I thank you for this invitation to provide testimony on the management practices of the agency.
As an independent, bipartisan, fact-finding agency of the federal government, the Commission is mandated to collect, study, and publish information concerning denials of equal protection of the laws because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin, or in the administration of justice. More specifically, the Commission is charged to investigate allegations in writing under oath or affirmation relating to deprivations (A) because of color, race, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin; or (B) as a result of any pattern or practice of fraud; of the right of citizens of the United States to vote and have those votes counted. The Commission reports its findings and recommendations to the President and Congress.
As the Staff Director of the Commission, I serve as the administrative head of the agency and am responsible for its day-to-day activities. The Commissioners meet each month, with the exception of August, in order to establish the agenda of the agency. It is my responsibility to execute the Commission’s agreed upon agenda by working with the agency’s management team. I regularly meet each week, if not more often, with the managers in order to discuss the status of ongoing activities.
I am proud of the work of the managers and staff of the Commission. They perform in an exemplary fashion, despite the challenging constraints brought upon by the Commission’s diminished resources over the past almost decade. The agency has received flat-lined appropriations since its last reauthorization. In 1995, the Commission received $9,000,000 and was authorized at 95 FTEs. Under our most recent appropriation
(FY 2002), the Commission received $9,096,000 and was authorized at 76 FTEs. Adjusted for inflation, the Commission would be appropriated $10,459,934 if the 1995 appropriation were reflected in 2002 dollars.
In your letter of invitation Mr. Chairman, you indicated that you wanted me to provide testimony on my “thoughts on the management practices of the Civil Rights Commission.” I am pleased to provide you and the Subcommittee with this information, and I also look forward to discussing the substantive results of these “management practices.” It is no secret that at times the Commission is very divided based on political philosophy. Sometimes these philosophical differences get translated into other arenas, such as management issues. Thus, I believe that the Subcommittee will find that many of the alleged management issues are the result of disagreements based on civil rights policy that have spilled over into a debate on Commission management. The ultimate test of good management is that the Commission has produced quality work in a timely manner, covering a broad range of civil rights topics.
Two issues on which the Commission has made enormous contributions to the public discussion are civil rights issues with respect to election reform and post-September 11. I would encourage the Subcommittee to schedule hearings before this Congress adjourns on both topics and invite the Commission to present testimony on these issues that are so fundamental to the civil rights of our citizens.
II. ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF COMMISSION
As the nation’s conscience on matters of civil rights, the Commission strives to keep the President, the Congress, and the public informed about civil rights issues that deserve concentrated attention. In doing so, the agency continually reminds all Americans why vigorous civil rights enforcement is in our national interest. Within the past two years, the Commission has approved and published several reports on a diverse range of topics that include studies on the enforcement of the Americans with Disabilities Act, police practices, voting irregularities during the 2000 presidential election and proposed recommendations for election reform legislation. Attached to this statement is a full list of projects the Commission has produced recently and on which it is currently working.
As America confronts the tragic circumstances surrounding September 11, incidents of harassment and direct attacks against Arab and Muslim Americans and others perceived as members of these groups continue to emerge. The Commission is uniquely situated to respond to the Muslim and Arab American communities by offering assistance in addressing incidents of religious and ethnic intolerance. To date, the Commission has established a complaint hotline to solicit and catalogue discrimination complaints from members of the affected communities; held a briefing on U.S. immigration policies in the aftermath of recent terrorist activities; sought the advice of a renowned expert on bioterrorism and its relationship to access to health care; and had its State Advisory Committees organize forums or engage in other efforts on post September 11 civil rights issues. As they are completed, summaries of the Advisory Committees’ reviews will be posted on the Commission’s Web site. To our knowledge, this collection of projects and efforts by the Commission and its advisory committees comprise the broadest and most extensive examination of these civil rights issues by any public or private entity. Such reviews bolster the greatness of our nation, which rests on our exceptional diversity of religions, nationalities, and ethnic backgrounds.
In 1996, the Commission created a Web site that continues to increase in popularity as we work to make it more user friendly. Hits to our Web site have increased more than ten fold between 2000 and 2001. Visitors to the Web site can download Commission reports, order publications, file a civil rights complaint, and view certain briefings online.
Beyond holding public forums and issuing reports, the Commission has worked to monitor and track the impact of our activities, since it is our hope that our work leads to positive changes and progress in the struggle for equality. Although the results of the Commission’s activities are not always quantifiable, primarily because we are a study commission and do not possess enforcement powers, there are many instances where the Commission’s activities played a role in creating substantive changes that improved the area of civil rights. These include:
· The Commission held high profile hearings in Florida in January and February, 2001, highlighting many of the shortcomings in the Florida November 2000 election. In May of 2001, Governor Jeb Bush signed into law the Florida Election Reform Act of 2001. This state legislation as well as the national election reform proposal currently being debated in this Congress address some of the recommendations and concerns raised in the Commission’s reports, Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election and Election Reform: An Analysis of Proposals and the Commission’s Recommendations for Improving America’s Election System.
· In August 2000, the Commission studied the issue of racial profiling and police-community relations in a report titled Police Practices and Civil Rights in New York City. Since that time the NYPD chief has issued a strongly worded order against the use of any racial profiling for arrests, car stops, or any other law enforcement actions.
· In March 1999, as a result of recommendations made in a Commission report titled Helping Employers Comply with the ADA, the EEOC issued enforcement guidance on reasonable accommodation and undue hardship under the ADA.
· In a 1992 report titled Civil Rights Issues Facing Asian Americans in the 1990s, the Commission recommended that the Department of Justice prepare and disseminate a “civil rights handbook” that informs all groups, particularly recent immigrants, of their civil rights. Subsequent to this recommendation, the Justice Department published a brochure that resembles our recommendation entitled “Federal Protections Against National Origin Discrimination,” which is printed in 12 languages and is available on Justice’s Web site.
· In 1999, the Justice Department issued a major policy guidance and established a formal technical assistance and training program on Title VI requirements and enforcement. The Department of Justice’s Coordination and Review Section attributed this development to the recommendation made in the Commission’s report, Federal Title VI Enforcement to Ensure Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs.
While conducting studies and issuing reports are the Commission’s main vehicles for fulfilling its civil rights mission, they are not its only tools. Other tools include the Commission’s Web site, national complaints tracking and referral unit, library, and public service announcements, as well as other publications.
III. IMPROVEMENTS
In preparing for today’s hearing, I reviewed some of the records from the 1986 oversight hearings this Subcommittee convened. These hearings were held in response to a GAO audit and observations by the Subcommittee, which found that from approximately 1984 to 1986, the agency issued only one report, which was on comparable worth, no State Advisory Committee reports, and no reports analyzing federal civil rights enforcement. With this unfortunate track record, I am pleased to report that the Commission has issued a civil rights enforcement report every year since 1989.
Nearly 10 years later in July 1997, the GAO performed another audit of the agency that recommended some areas of improvement for the Commission. These 1997 recommendations pale in comparison to the 1986 findings of improper personnel practices and operating procedures and charges of financial mismanagement. I emphasize these GAO reports because I believe that it is crucial that the Subcommittee’s review of today’s management issues be placed in proper context when considering where this Commission has been and how far it has come. Moreover, as noted in the next section, these accomplishments have occurred in a most difficult budgetary environment that becomes more precarious every year.
IV. BUDGETARY NEEDS
The Commission’s appropriations have remained stagnant for close to a decade. It has received level or “flat-lined” funding since it was last authorized in 1994. The requests that the Commission has submitted have been well justified, but these flat-lined appropriations have had a significant effect on the agency.
Further, funding cuts in the mid to late eighties forced the Commission to eliminate or consolidate five major offices: the Office of Program and Policy, the Office of Research, the Planning and Coordination Unit, the Solicitor’s Unit, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Unit. The duties of the staff assigned to these offices have placed a greater workload on the remaining Commission staff.
Managing and working in such an environment are difficult for a number of other reasons. Planning is hard with a stagnant budget that does not account for inflation. As a result, our budget shrinks each year. Additionally, our diminishing budget makes it difficult to recruit and retain committed and qualified staff.
A review of the positions that we have had to leave vacant illustrates an important story. The Commission does not have a director of Congressional Affairs. In fact it does not have one full time staff dedicated to Congressional Affairs. The director of our Budget and Finance Division is also serving as the director of Human Resources. Further stretching the management team is the fact that the Commission’s deputy director position has been vacant for many years. In most agencies, this position is responsible for the organization’s day-to-day management.
Another consequence of being a small agency with poor and inadequate funding levels is a significant portion of our staff resources is used toward fundamental administrative support functions, rather than services or programs. No matter how small an agency, the Commission remains a federal agency with the same fixed costs and responsibilities to operate in accordance to all the rules and requirements applicable to all federal agencies.
V. CONCLUSION
Day-to-day management is a significant challenge, aggravated by the Commission’s severe budgetary problems and a structure where policy and philosophical disagreements sometimes are converted into alleged management problems. When examining the “management practices” of the Commission, one has to begin with the question of whether it is effectively and efficiently accomplishing its mission as stated in our legislation. As demonstrated in the forgoing sections, the answer is it is and, in recent years, has been improving.
Attachment
Within the limits of our sparse budget, the Commission has accomplished a great deal. The Commission accomplishments include (i) conducting oversight responsibilities over federal agencies; (ii) investigating other civil rights matters, and (iii) addressing emerging issues.
The Commission is statutorily mandated to monitor the federal government, including agencies like the U.S. Department of Justice, to ensure the federal government is fulfilling its civil rights enforcement responsibilities. Our role is particularly significant because the Commission serves as the only independent federal agency possessing this important oversight function. Generally, the Commission accomplishes this function through conducting fact-finding studies and publishing reports. For example, the Commission has conducted during the past 18 months or plans to initiate during FY 2002 the following studies and reports:
· Funding Federal Civil Rights Enforcement: 2000 and Beyond (February 2001): Examined the budgets of civil rights enforcement agencies and found that their resources lag behind their workloads.
· A Bridge to One America: The Civil Rights Performance of the Clinton Administration (April 2001): Provided an overview of civil rights issues from 1993 to 2000, highlighted initiatives of the Clinton administration, and assessed the administration’s effectiveness in addressing civil rights issues.
· Federal Efforts to Eradicate Employment Discrimination in State and Local Governments: An Assessment of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Employment Litigation Section (September 2001): Evaluated the efforts of the Department of Justice’s Employment Litigation Section (ELS) in enforcing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. In particular, the Commission’s report focused on the extent to which ELS is fulfilling its mandate as the lead federal office charged with eliminating employment discrimination in the public sector.
· Ten-Year Review of Commission Recommendations: Will examine the impact of previous Commission reports and evaluate federal agencies’ efforts to implement recommendations stemming from Commission reports issued between 1991 and 2000.
In addition to monitoring federal agencies, the Commission is also responsible for identifying and investigating denials of civil rights and equal protection under the laws. The Commission achieves this mission through investigations and hearings, which culminate in fact-finding reports, statements, and recommendations addressing these problems.
Among key accomplishments in this area are the following:
· Sharing the Dream: Is the Americans with Disabilities Act Accommodating All? (October 2000): Analyzed the ADA’s goals and the impact the act has had on those it was intended to protect. The report also discussed the practical effects of the ADA and court decisions affecting its scope.
· Police Practices and Civil Rights in New York City (August 2000): Looked into the police practices of New York City and the impact these practices have on the civil rights of individuals living in communities served by the NYPD.
· Racial and Ethnic Tensions in American Communities: Poverty, Inequality, and Discrimination-Volume VII: The Mississippi Delta Report (February 2001): Examined three topics with respect to racial and ethnic tensions in the Delta: economic opportunity, educational opportunity, and voting rights.
· Revisiting Who Is Guarding the Guardians? A Report on Police Practices and Civil Rights in America (November 2000): Explored how police practices have evolved since the Commission’s landmark 1981 report, Who Is Guarding the Guardians?
· The Commission concluded two days of hearings on environmental justice in February 2002 and will issue a report in either late FY 2002 or early FY 2003. The project evaluates the effects of waste treatment or poisonous chemical facilities in minority or disadvantaged communities and whether environmental statutes and regulations are adopted and enforced without discrimination based on race, ethnicity, and/or other bases.
· During FY 2002, the Commission will examine the issue of Educational Accountability. This project will focus on the civil rights implications and the methods of holding public education institutions accountable for how well children are being educated.
· In the second half of FY 2002, the Commission will study Native American Access and Justice Issues. The Commission will examine the criminal justice system to determine the extent to which Native Americans experience discrimination in the administration of justice. This is a national examination of issues raised earlier in South Dakota on the same subject, which resulted in the March 2000 South Dakota Advisory Committee report, Native Americans in South Dakota: An Erosion of Confidence in the Justice System.
The Commission has volunteer State Advisory Committees (SACs) in every state and the District of Columbia. The SACs serve as the Commission’s “eyes and ears” and advise it on civil rights developments in their respective states. The SACs fulfill this role in many ways, including through the issuance of reports. Among the reports published in the past 12 months are the following:
· Equal Educational Opportunity for Native American Students in Montana Public Schools (July 2001)
·
Race Relations and Des Moines’ New Immigrants
(May 2001)
· Civil Rights Issues Facing Arab Americans in Michigan (May 2001)
· The Decision to Prosecute Drug Offenders and Homicides in Marion County, Indiana (April 2001)
· Community Forum on Race Relations in Racine County, Wisconsin (March 2001)
Most Commission projects are proposed, developed, and implemented through a process of advanced planning. Despite this planning, unexpected issues arise that are of a nature that compels the Commissioners to address them. These “emerging issues” have such a significant impact on civil rights that the Commission’s role as “conscience of America” on civil rights issues would be severely undermined if the Commission failed to address them immediately or if the Commission was unable to properly address these issues due to inadequate resources. Among emerging issues the Commission has addressed in the past 12 months are the following:
· Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election (June 2001): Completed a formal investigation of alleged voting irregularities in the state of Florida arising out of the November 7, 2000, presidential election. This report examines the extent of and reasons for voter disenfranchisement in Florida and covers such issues as Election Day problems, disenfranchisement of citizens with disabilities and those with limited English proficiency, felon exclusion lists, voting technology, resource allocation, and election responsibility and accountability.
· Election Reform: An Analysis of Proposals and the Commission’s Recommendations for Improving America’s Election System (November 2001): Continued the Commission’s ongoing monitoring of voting rights enforcement and election reform. The report reviewed national election reform initiatives, as well as studies and proposals of both public and private entities, and provided recommendations for reform.
·
Reconciliation at a Crossroads: The
Implications of the Apology Resolution and Rice v. Cayetano for Federal and
State Programs Benefiting Native Hawaiians (June 2001): Addressed new
issues affecting Native Hawaiians resulting from a U.S. Supreme Court decision.
While this was an Advisory Committee project, it exemplified an effective
collaboration between the Commission’s headquarters office and a SAC. It
included active participation of three Commissioners at the SAC-sponsored
community forum and allocation of headquarters resources in developing the
final report.
· Boundaries of Justice Briefing: The civil rights issues stemming from the tragic events of September 11 serve as an example of an emerging issue that required immediate Commission action. The events of September 11, 2001, led Americans to join together in their commitment to combat terrorism. However, the Commission found that too frequently the events also led individuals to commit hate crimes and acts of discrimination. In October 2001, the Commission held a briefing to identify and address some of these concerns. Additionally, a number of the Commission’s SACs are conducting forums and engaging in other activities on these topics.
·
Alaska Forum: In August 2001, the Alaska
Advisory Committee organized a fact-finding forum primarily focusing on three
areas of civil rights concerns: education, employment, and the administration
of justice. This forum was sparked by numerous incidents of hatred and bias
that culminated in January 2001, when a group of teenagers attacked unarmed
Native Alaskans with paintball guns and videotaped their escapades. Three
Commissioners also participated in this forum. The SAC held a second forum in
conjunction with the annual Conference of the Alaska Federation of Natives in
October 2001. A report will soon be published that summarizes the issues that
arose in the two forums and provides recommendations.