You just have to ask that question when you read this article from Seattle.

It seems that people are questioning the effectiveness and procedures of the Seattle Office for Civil Rights because so few claims are resulting in the issuance of findings of discrimination.

The city agency charged with enforcing civil rights takes months to investigate a case. And when the inquiry by the office is over, chances are that not much will come of it.

Last year, the office discovered discrimination in about 1 percent of more than 200 complaints it handled. Some critics say that isn't impressive for an office that has a $1.8 million budget and 22 full-time employees, including six investigators.
The lack of actions has led to nothing but frustration for people like Don Ross, a psychoanalyst, who filed a complaint with the office two years ago. His son, Eli, then 14, was in an Albertsons store in Magnolia when an employee ordered him out.

The employee and co-workers confused the teenager, who is Latino, with another young man, also Latino, who had stolen wine from the supermarket. The employees weren't Hispanic. Don Ross says it was clearly discrimination. The store said it was a simple case of mistaken identity.

He complained to the civil rights office. Two years and two appeals later, Don Ross and his son have yet to get a ruling that the store discriminated.

But wait – I thought that is how it is supposed to work. There is supposed to be an investigation to determine IF there was discrimination, not an investigation UNTIL there is a finding of discrimination. Many times an incident involves no discrimination, and so there should be no finding of discrimination. There should not be an endless round of investigation and appeals until the “right” result is reached.

But that isnÂ’t how the minds of the Left work. Instead, they want a process that tilts towards the accuser. They want the Seattle human Rights Commission to be able to reverse a decision of the Office of Civil Rights, not simply send a case back for further investigation.

It's rare that the commission referred cases back to the civil rights office. Last year, 25 appeals were filed. Only one or two were sent back to the civil rights office.

John Denooyer served on the Human Rights Commission for four years. His term ended in July.

"It does seem that most of the cases that made it to the appeals process were pretty weak," Denooyer said. "Indeed, of the half-dozen or so cases I sat in on, I recall only one we sent back to (the civil rights office) for review."

But commission member Ahoua Kone said the group plans to meet with the City Council about expanding its powers.

"Some of us wonder if we should be able to reverse a decision if it feels like justice wasn't done in the decision that was reached by the investigators," Kone said.

So rather than allow those most familiar with the case to make a final determination, they want a political body to decide instead. That is a recipe for corruption and favoritism.

But they have to do something – after all, the agency spends $1.8 million in taxpayer funds and employs 22 people. If there aren’t more findings of discrimination, people might start questioning the necessity of the agency. What's more, they might start questioning the rhetoric of victimhood that liberals have foisted on the American people for decades.

And we can't have that, can we?

Posted by: Greg at 12:17 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 604 words, total size 4 kb.