Disenfranchised Americans Under Reagan
President Ronald Reagan, may have been the worst president to represent the disenfranchised population in America. The policies placed forth by the president, and his administration, stagnated Blacks to improve upon their inferior conditions post Civil Rights. The social, political, and economic improvement Blacks made in the late 1960s’, and early 1970s, was reverted by the Reagan Administration. Ronald Reagan deterred the progression of African Americans. His policies created detrimental repercussions for Black America after the successful Civil Rights Movement.
Civil Rights in the ‘60s
In 1964, African Americans, lead by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and other Black leaders, created history when the Civil Rights Act was legislated by President Lyndon B. Johnson. The Civil Rights Act, has generally been used to refer to a broad range of efforts to systematically increase the percentage of women and members of judicially and administratively designated minority groups in occupations and institutions in which they are statistically underrepresented relative to their numbers in the general population.” ( Detlefsen, 1991, 15). The Civil Rights Act was created to ensure minorities would not be discriminated against regarding employment and public treatment, no matter the race, color, sex, or religion of the individual. The law defined all Americans would receive equal opportunity under the law.
Affirmative action policies were created to give minorities equal opportunity under employment. It was essential for institutions and organizations to establish affirmative action as part of their moral conduct policies. Affirmative action requires all minorities and women to be represented in employment at proportional rates. The Civil Rights Act was advocated by Blacks primarily to represent disadvantaged groups in the United States, and reassert equal opportunity for minorities who were receiving racial malfeasance during the Jim Crow Era. Author, Robert Detlefsen, argued, “that the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 had effectively killed the civil rights movement.” (Detlefsen, 19)
Desegregation: Racism Dead in America?
The Civil Rights Act was implemented into law, and the federal government was now responsible for incorporating affirmative action plans to be sure African Americans were receiving equal treatment under the law. Detlefsen was leery about the slow progressing implications advancing Blacks towards first-class citizenry. He asserts, “winning substantial equality for the American Negro, once you have won for him his equality before the law, means first getting him out the ghettos in Chicago, Los Angeles, Detroit, Philadelphia and New York. Second putting money in his pockets, and both of these are objectives that are going to require drastic action that must, on pain of killing the movement off, show results in the short term.” (Detlefsen, 20). It was essential the government improve the conditions of African Americans immediately.
Since the spawn of integration, only a handful of civil rights movements continued because Black Americans believed integration and opportunity would be in their favor. Although, there were still social groups wary about the U.S. government and their commitment to progress the lives of African Americans. The Black Panther Party made an effort to drastically improve the lives of Blacks in America during the ‘70s, but were politically dismembered by U.S. federal officials with a strategic plot, known as COINTELPRO. At the same time, white America did not believe Blacks should receive preferential treatment from federal or state governments. Detlefsen explained, “when the Gallap organization surveyed public opinion on affirmative action in 1977, it found that only 11 percent of its sample agreed with the proposition (affirmative action) to make up for past discrimination.” (Detlefsen, 2).
Civil rights movements in the 1970s were scarce after the Black Panther Party. Black no longer contained a progressive movement based on the principle of enhance Black lives. For the first time in over two decades, Blacks were again dependent on the white population to improve their standards of living. The same Gallap organization surveyed “81 percent agreed with the alternative position that ability, as determined by test scores, should be the main consideration for employment or college admissions.” (Detlefsen, 2). The poll displayed 8 of 10 white Americans not in favor of minorities receiving preferential treatment regarding employment and education during the ‘70s. They believed Blacks should take exams; ignoring the fact that most white Americans achieve higher test scores due to the advancements in their education and schools.
The racist hearts of white America were never abolished and their were no drastic modifications to the lives of Black Americans. The results from the Gallap survey in 1977 could be an assertive reason for why the U.S. Federal government restrained from using cataclysmic actions to promote progression throughout Black communities. Detlefsen mentions, “the changes that occurred were bit as sweeping or as cataclysmic as one might have imagined; the U.S. economy was not converted to socialism, direct monetary reparations were not paid to blacks, and massive numbers of people were not systematically driven from their homes and forced to relocate in order to break up traditional patterns of residential segregation.” (Detlefsen, 22). There were no immediate programs developed to improve the social paradigms of Blacks in America. African Americans were still stationed in ghettos, and were not given monetary assets to improve upon their financial status. The United States did not change their economic foundation, which was requested by Dr. King before he was assassinated in 1968. Dr. King, and the Black Panther Party, believed the United States needed to change its economic policies to a Democratic Socialism to preserve power in the middle-class in the coming decades. Their ideas were not taken into consideration during the ‘70s, and Ronald Reagan was determined to establish new system of “law and order” for the minority class.
Reagan entered the White House as president January 20, 1981. Succeeding presidential administrations should reserve the responsibility to carryout policies previously legislated by Congress. President Reagan failed to carryout policies previously implemented to support African Americans and incoming minority groups. In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson, signed Executive Order 11246, which would orchestrate non-discrimination practices in the hiring process. The executive order would also require government contractors to take affirmative action to ensure that equal opportunity was provided in all aspects of employment. This particular executive order was established after the Civil Rights Act was implemented into law. It was enacted to ensure employers were using affirmative action practices to certify Blacks were given a fair chance with employment.
The managerial strategy of affirmative action was creating statistical data to show minorities and women were represented proportionally in the employment sector. Corporations and government agencies would need to show statistical data to be sure minorities and women were being hired justifiably. Statistics would reassure employers were not discriminating against women and minorities during the hiring process. Unfortunately, Defletsen claims, “on more than one occasion we have noted that the one area in which the Reagan Administration could have acted unilaterally to alter existing civil rights policy was through Executive Order 11246. By no longer requiring firms under contract to follow rigid numerical goals and timetables for the hiring and promotion of minorities and women, the administration would not only have advanced the cause of nondiscrimination, it would have also relieved employers of what would appear to be a onerous burden.” (Detlefsen, 151). The Reagan administration discontinued the executive order of in the ‘80s. This allowed employers to hire any individual they desired. Bigotry may account for one of the reason Blacks suffered from the highest unemployment rate since the enactment Civil Rights Act.
Blacks in America were hired and employed at a much higher rate shortly after the Civil Rights Act. According to the Economic Policy Institute, the unemployment rate for African Americans was 11 percent in 1972; at this time the unemployment rate for whites was 5 percent. (EPI). Meanwhile, as Reagan took office and no longer enforced Executive Order 11246, unemployment rates for Blacks reached a record high of 19 percent in 1983. This data shows intriguing evidence that abandoning the executive order may be one determinant for the increasing unemployment rate of Blacks. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate for whites increased to only 7 percent in 1983. Unemployment statistics show Caucasians were once again receiving preferential treatment into employment. Defletsen argued, “one scholar has concluded that a survey of the case-law reveals that although the courts are committed to the use of statistical proof, too often, their decisions displayed only a rudimentary and intuitive understanding of statistics.” (Defletsen, 44) The federal courts did not have a definitive understanding of statistical analysis. If the courts had a sufficient understanding of analytics and its impact on minorities, they may have required affirmative action plans to continue. The courts would not have tolerated President Reagan discontinuing Executive Order 11246 and found it to be unconstitutional under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Mr. Author S. Pendleton, chairman of the Civil Rights Committee asserted, in our judgment, there is situation after situation in both the private and public sector where you’re not going to achieve equal employment opportunity unless you utilize the management tool of affirmative action. (Raines, nytimes, 1981).
Education is one of the most significant components to a child’s human development. All children must be able to gain access to education in order to succeed in America’s capitalistic environment, which is predominately dominated by educated Caucasian men. In 1954, Brown v. Board of Education(1954), initiated desegregation within United States public schools. This case discontinued segregation within public schools, and allowed Blacks to receive the same education, on the same campuses, as white students. Less than ten years within integration, federal courts mandated a busing initiative to support affirmative action programing in 1971. The purpose was to improve integration within predominately white schools. “For the first time the Court upheld judicial orders requiring the busing of students to schools located beyond those closest to their homes, in order to achieve racial balance in other, more distant schools.” (Detlefsen, 106).
African Americans were still demographically separated from predominately white schools, because the geographic nature of Black families did not significantly change after the enactment of Civil Rights Act. The Learning Network claims, “In the Charlotte-Mecklenburg school system in North Carolina, 14,000 of the 24,000 black students in the 1968-69 school year had attended schools that were at least 99 percent black.” In 1969, Judge James B. McMillan, ruled that the school district must use busing to achieve racial diversity in its schools (TLN, 2012). This ruling allowed Black students to integrate with Caucasian schools using buses. Transportation was the essential component for the increase of Black students in white schools, and more importantly, receive an education using relevant resources and books.
To enhance African-American civil rights, future presidential administrations must promote the policies set forth by previous administrations. Detlefsen asserts, “department officials under new administration must decide what role the new administration will play in such actions- whether to continue in the same vein as the previous administration, to withdraw from the case altogether, or to reverse the position taken under the previous administration and thus, in effect, switch sides.” (Detlefsen, 112). The succeeding administrations were now responsible for the progression of minority’s civil rights. In 1978, Initiative 350 was introduced into the state of Washington. The policy no longer required the use of busing to integrate schools. The busing plan was no longer mandated because the federal government did not required “busing” mandatory. Reagan did nothing to promote the actions of busing during his term starting in 1981, and his administration did not enforce previous policies promoting school integration. Not even federal judges suggested any wrongdoing with the decisions to reverse integration plans. “The Supreme Court has told us, I don’t know how many times, that there is nothing wrong with a school that is racially imbalanced. That is not unconstitutional at all.” (Detlefsen, 131).
The New York Times published an article in 1981, that reported Reagan’s disparagement with the Civil Rights Committee. The same year he was elected, the president appointed Clarence M. Pendleton. Former chairman, Author S. Flemming, “warned tonight that the Reagan Administration was drifting back to a philosophy of ”separate but equal” in school desegregation cases. And Charles Rivera, a spokesman for the commission, linked Mr. Flemming’s dismissal to his strong advocacy of civil rights.” Flemming continues saying, “our commission has consistently been taking positions contrary to the positions’ of the Reagan Administration. The cumulative impact of civil rights decisions made by the Administration is very disturbing. Mr. Pendleton, despite his chairmanship of a civil rights organization, shares Mr. Reagan’s opposition to affirmative action hiring programs and to busing to achieve school desegregation.” (Raines, Howell. nytimes, 1981). With a chairman who opposed affirmative action and busing programs, Black adults and children would now lack financial and political support from the only committee concerned with their wellbeing.
It is physically impossible for minority students to travel to white neighborhoods without transportation. Given the extraction of jobs in America’s inner-cities during the mid-‘70s, students had parents financially incapable of taking them to a distant school in the mornings. Black adults were fortunate enough to have a job during the late ‘70s and ’80s. This was a tactic to keep underprivileged minorities from achieving the same education in the same schools as white students, who the latter have obviously been documented to score higher on statewide exams. The academic standards in suburban schools were much more prestigious than schools located in disenfranchised ghettos. These Black schools were depleting in the 1980s due to the hopeful promises of integration, and still in the 21st century, the black academia has never recovered from its educational deficiencies.
The Civil Rights Act of 1965 was legislated to guarantee Blacks proportional acceptance into United States employment and public institutions. The legislation was deemed to assist Blacks with equal protection under employment, housing, and public benefits, such as voting rights. In 1982, Ronald Reagan issued an initiative known as the War on Drugs. The president attempted to punish drug criminals slanging narcotics across the country, and he was preemptive to imprison any individual with possession of drugs, including marajuana. Michelle Alexander’s book, The New Jim Crow, asserts President Reagan’s objective was to capture and imprison Black and Brown people by any means necessary. She claims, “the Justice Department announced its intentions to cut in half the number of specialist assigned to identify and prosecute white collar criminals and shift its attention to street crime, especially drug law enforcement. At the time he declared this new war, less than 2 percent of the American public viewed drugs as the most important issue facing the nation.” (Alexander, 2011, 49). The American opinion was treated with disdain, and the Reagan Administration continued with their plot to focus on nonviolent drug offenses. The U.S. Federal Government found it reasonable to attack the streets, primarily ghetto areas, and disregard white-collared criminals. Ronald Reagan regarded this policy apposite albeit the use of illegal drug-use was on a decline. (Alexander, 6)
The War on Drugs was geared to spotlight minorities in the United States. The implementation of the Civil Rights Act caused working class whites to become displeased by the time Reagan rolled in to office. “The Civil Rights Movement was promptly followed by intense controversy over the implementation of the equality principle, especially busing and affirmative action. Condemning welfare queens and criminal predators, Reagan rode into office with the strong support of disaffected whites; poor and working class whites that felt betrayed by the Democratic Party’s embrace of the civil rights agenda.” (Alexander, 48). The majority of white America did not approve of the equality Blacks were receiving after the Civil Rights Movement. The term welfare queen was code for lazy, greedy, black ghetto women. Whites wanted Reagan to take political action and put the Negro back in their proper place (48). The majority of white Americans wanted Reagan to discharge drug criminals from social benefits. The president could not eradicate the Civil Rights Act or the social rights Blacks received from existing legislation; so he tempted to create an incarceration policy that could imprison nonviolent Black and Brown offenders and label them as an endangerment to America’s youth.
War on Drugs
The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights was established in 1957, with the intentions of protecting the liberties of minorities and women. Congress first had complete control over the committee and its appointees. (USCCR). The annual budget was 12 million dollars before Reagan took office. Congress instructed the committee to analyze court decisions involving discrimination, to serve as the national “clearhouse” for information on the civil rights, and report its findings and recommendations to the current president. In other words, this committee was created to oversee civil right developments and enhancements for underprivileged citizens. (Det, 150). Reagan’s relationship with the committee was disgruntled. In 1983, Reagan dismissed three members of the United States Commission on Civil Rights who have sharply criticized his policies toward blacks, women and Hispanic people over the last two years. ( Pear, nytimes, 1983). “The commission has criticized Mr. Reagan’s positions on affirmative action and on busing as a means of desegregating public schools. In a report earlier this month, the commission said the enforcement of civil rights had been seriously eroded by two years of fiscal austerity and personnel reductions ordered by the President.” (Pear, 1983)
Reagan did not approve of the CRC and extracted financial resources from the committee. “The reconstituted CRC was marginalized by the civil rights elite [federal government] something to be alternately pilloried and ignored. In 1986, the full House ultimately settled for a reduction in the CRC’s annual appropriation from $11.8 to $7.5 million.” (Detlefsen, 150). Reagan accepting reductions in CRC’s budget proclaims he did not primitively support the civil rights of minorities. He was fully committed to attacking the drug criminals in the ghetto streets of America. “Between 1980 and 1984, FBI anti-drug funding increased from $8 million to $95 million. From 1981 to 1991, FBI anti-drug allocations grew from $38 to $181 million.” (Alexander, 49). It was apparent the federal government was fully committed to the drug war and were determined to harass inner-city neighborhoods. The government found suitable the punishment regarding illegal drugs was transferring disenfranchised men into penitentiaries. The federal government did not even support the case for mentally-ill drug users as they extracted funds from rehabilitation centers. “The budget for the National Institute on Drug Abuse, for example, was reduced from $274 million to $57 million from 1981 to 1984, and anti-drug drug funds allocated to the Department of Education were cut from $14 million to $3 million (50).
The allocations toward the War on Drugs was ostensibly determined to put people of color into prison. Public opinion regarding drugs at the beginning of Reagan’s term was not regarded as a significant problem in the country. Rather, the media propagated the perception and usage of drugs. Alexander asserts, “A few years after the drug war was declared, crack began to spread rapidly in the poor black neighborhoods of Los Angeles and later emerged within inner-cities across the country. The Reagan administration hired staff to publicize the emergence of crack cocaine in 1985 as part of a strategic effort to build public and legislative support for the war.” (5).
Crack is a stimulating drug which primarily surfaced in Black communities. It is an extremely addictive substance, and Blacks were recognized to be the first race terrorized by this destructive drug. Coincidentally, the new drug emerged 3 years after Reagan declared his drug policy in 1982. Reagan used the media to popularize the devastating aspects of the new drug to evolve future policies. “Almost overnight the media was saturated with images of black “crack whores” and “crack babies-images that seemed to confirm the worst negative racial stereotypes about impoverished inner-city residents.” (5). Propaganda was used to influence the thoughts of the white public; to make the public believe Black neighborhoods needed to be cleaned up with Reagan’s defense policies.
Media, and the Perception of Black Americans
The media played a significant role in demonizing African Americans. In less than 20 years, civil rights were no longer the main objective for the United States. The media proliferated the standards to arrest all drug dealers and extinguish Black criminals from inner-city streets. “Joblessness and crack swept inner cities precisely at the moment that a fierce backlash against the Civil Rights Movement was manifesting itself throughout the War on Drugs. The media frenzy campaign inspired, simply could not have come at a worst time for African-Americans.” (51). Reagan’s policies completely destroyed the discourse to further accommodate the progression of civil rights.
The media is a neurological controlling substance predicated on manipulating public opinion. Black employment was at an all time low since the Civil Rights Movement, but it was as though Americans were more concerned with black drug dealers selling crack to their children albeit Michelle reported most white children get drugs from white drug dealers. The media destroyed the perception of African Americans and their reputation. Blacks were no longer seen as the progressive race that faced hundreds of years of discrimination, but, instead, were perceived as criminals and “crack whores”. Thousands of stories about the crack crises flooded the airwaves and newsstands, and the stories had a transparent racial subtext. The articles typically featured black “crack babies,” “crack whores” and gangbangers; reinforcing already prevalent stereotypes of Black men as “predators,” part of an inferior and criminal subculture. (Alexander, 52). The conceptive perception of the black race was now solidified and gave Reagan, and his administration, consent to legislate any policy they saw fit to corrupt inner-cities cities.
The perception of the black community was now branded into the American mind. The federal government could now implement any anti-drug policy. In 1989, New York Times/CBS News Poll reported that 64 percent of those polled, the highest percentage ever recorded, now thought that drugs were the most significant problem in the United States. (55). Within 7 years, the percentage of concern for illegal drugs increased by 500%. The media was a significant contribution to America’s opinion towards crack-cocaine. “The Senate proposed even tougher anti-drug legislation; the president enforced the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 into law. The legislation included mandatory minimum sentences for the distribution of cocaine, including more severe punishment for the distribution of crack-associated with blacks-than powder cocaine, associated with whites.” (53). The Judicial system set minimum sentences of 5 years for 5 grams of crack, while 500 grams of powder cocaine would deem individuals the same prison sentence. The policy was created to penetrate punishment towards African-Americans, because the government was aware of the higher rate of crack-cocaine usage within Black inner-city communities.
When Congress revised the policy in 1988, the newly improved legislation destroyed the civil right privileges granted to African Americans. “The new Anti-Drug Abuse Act authorized public housing authorities to evict any tenant who allowed any form of drug-related criminal activity to occur on or near public housing premises, and the law eliminated many federal benefits, including student loans, for anyone convicted of a drug offense.” (53). Drug offenders were no longer given civil liberties. They were rejected from public housing, social welfare programs, student loans, voting rights and any other government assistance programs. These policies were purposely directed at Blacks in America to lose the liberties they gained two decades ago.
The civil liberties of African-Americans were destroyed by the Reagan administration, and the white public allowed these policies to be implemented into law. The perception against Blacks was tarnished by the Reagan administration and it was now a top priority to destroy the livelihood of the Black Americans. “The Ku Klux Klan announced in 1990 that it intended to join the battle against illegal drugs by becoming the eyes and ears of the police.” (Alexander, 55). The most racist group in America was now on board to help authorities capture Blacks selling drugs. The perception of Blacks being the only drug dealers was perpetuated by the government and the media. Whether Caucasians were racist or not, majority believed Blacks were the only drug dealers in America. Ninety-five percent of respondents pictured a black drug user, while five percent imagined other racial groups. These results contrasts with the reality of drug crimes in America. African Americans constituted only 15% of drug users in 1995. Whites constituted the vast majority of drug users, but almost no one pictured a white person when asked to imagine what a drug user looked like. (Alexander, 106). Almost all respondents believed Blacks were the drug users and dealers in America; on the contrary, whites were the main drug users and dealers in the United States.
Propaganda misguided the American public and African-Americans, as well as the incoming Hispanic population, were criminalized by national media outlets. The majority of those charged with crimes involving crack at that time were black (approximately 93 percent of convicted crack offenders were black, 5 percent were white), whereas powder cocaine were predominantly Caucasian.” (112). Drug offenders were robbed of their civil liberties and their reputation. By the end of the ‘80s, incarceration rates in the United States were unprecedented to the rest of the developed world.
The results of the War on Drugs policy during the Reagan Era were unfathomable. The amount of drug arrest in the United States increased drastically and incarceration rates set records worldwide. According to the Justice Policy Institute, the population of the United States prison system increased by 119,000 prisoners from 1970-1980. The prison population during the Reagan Era (1981-1989) increased by more than 420,000. (JPI, 2000). This was the first decade the United States prison population increased over 200,000 inmates in a decade; most arrests during this time were attributed to drug offenses and 93 percent of crack-cocaine arrest were black, while over 80 percent of marajuana arrest were black or brown (Alexander, 58). Ninety percent of those admitted to prison for drug offenses in many states were Black and Latino.” (58). Although, whites used drugs at the same rate, if not more, they were not arrested at the same rate as Blacks for drug offenses. These drug charges stripped away the civil liberties of minorities and they were no longer able to gain liberties granted to them by the Civil Rights Act in 1965. Drug offenders were legally denied public housing, student loans, social welfare, and voting rights.
Today, the War on Drugs initiative presents disparity among incarceration rates by race. Although, majority of drug users are white, Blacks are arrested at a disproportionate rate. According to American Progress, “African Americans comprise of only 14 percent of regular drug users, but are 37 percent of those arrested for drug offenses. From 1980 to 2007 about one in three of the 25.4 million adults arrested for drugs was African American.” (AP, 2012). Approximately, 8 million blacks have been restricted from their civil liberties because of non-violent drug offenses. African Americans with a drug charge are no longer credible in expressing their political rights. The drug policies denied a large portion of drug offenders the right to vote. Felony disenfranchisement is exaggerated by racial disparities in the criminal-justice system, which ultimately, denies 13 percent of African American men the right to vote. Felony-disenfranchisement policies have led to 11 states denying the right to vote to more than 10 percent of their African American population (AP). It has been documented numerous times for Blacks to take interest in the Democratic party and vote Democratic since the Civil Rights Era. These drug policies were lead by a Republican administration and prolonged by succeeding president, George H. W. Bush, another Republican.
Ronald Reagan was detrimental to the progression of African Americans and their civil rights. His policies restrained the progression of Blacks in America. The eradication of Executive Order 11246 allowed employers to discriminate against blacks and other disadvantaged groups. The use of statistical evidence to sustain proportional employment was no longer a requirement for public institutions, causing racially imbalanced faculty and staff. This attributed to one of the reasons Black Americans suffered from peculiar unemployment rates in the ‘80s. Records show almost one in six Blacks were unemployed when Reagan was in office, which surely contributed to the preemption of Blacks willing to sell and purchase drugs for cash.
The United States economic system subject citizens to earn money to support themselves and their families. The War on Drugs posed economic repercussions for Blacks similar to the Jim Crow Era. Michelle Alexander claims, “I have came to see that mass incarceration in the United States had, in fact, emerged as a stunningly comprehensive and well-disguised system of racial, social control that functions in a manner strikingly similar to Jim Crow.” (4). Drug offenders are not permitted to receive student loans. With over 8 million Blacks affected by drug charges, it would be difficult for them to receive financial support to pay for their education. As a Black man in America, I would have never been able to achieve a college degree in today’s economy without student loans. But 8 million Blacks do not have a clean record as I do. Reagan’s policies discontinued the progression of Blacks, who could have potentially received credible education and a sustainable job.
As a Black man in America, I would have never been able to achieve a college degree in today’s economy without student loans. But 8 million Blacks do not have a legal record as I do. And many of them do not have a strong Black father consistently in their lives as I do. Today, Black millennials suffer from fatherless homes due to the prison-industrial complex. The lack of enforcement with affirmative action and busing demoted African-Americans to stay in dysfunctional and discouraging conditions similar to Jim Crow. The improvement of the Black race in America must start with the implementation of affirmative action plans and community solidarity.
1. Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow. The New Press. New York. 2011.
2. Austin, Algernon. For 50 Years, High Unemployment for African Americans. Economic Policy Institute. 2012. http://www.epi.org/publication/african-americans-50-years-high-unemployment/
3. Detlefsen, Robert. Civil Rights Under Reagan. ICS Press. New York. 1990
4. Kerby, Sophia. Top 10 Most Startling Facts about People of Color and Criminal Justice in the United States. Center For American Progress. 2013. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/news/2012/03/13/11351/the-top-10-most-startling-facts-about-people-of-color-and-criminal-justice-in-the-united-states/
5. Race and Prison. DrugWarFacts.org. 2013. http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Race_and_Prison#sthash.hRpX1VXH.PNfDxPuv.dpbs
6. The Learning Center. April 20, 1971 | Supreme Court Rules That Busing Can Be Used to Integrate Schools. The New York Times. 2012. http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/20/april-20-1971-supreme-court-rules-that-busing-can-be-used-to-integrate-schools/?_r=1
7. FBI Records, The Vault. Black Extremist. Federal Bureau of Investigation. 1969. https://vault.fbi.gov/cointel-pro/cointel-pro-black-extremists
8. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Mission Statement. USCCR. 2017. http://www.usccr.gov/about/index.php
9. Pear, Robert. Reagan Oust 3 from Civil Rights Panel. NYTimes. 1983. http://www.nytimes.com/1983/10/26/us/reagan-ousts-3-from-civil-rights-panel.html
10. Raines, Howell. Reagan Dismisses Civil Rights Chief, Busing Supporter. NYTimes. 1981. http://www.nytimes.com/1981/11/17/us/reagan-dismisses-civil-rights-chief-busing-supporter.html
11. United States Population, Census Bureau, 1990. United States, General Characteristics. U.S. Census Bureau. 1990. https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1990/cp-1/cp-1-1.pdf
12. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Prisoners in 1994. U.S. Department of Justice. 1994. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/Pi94.pdf