I checked to see if Ethics Alarms has ever had a post about the Congressional Black Caucus, and there have been many, that didn’t indicate an an unethical culture embedded in the group like a tic.
No.
So I suppose the recent example shows that at very least, the CBC is consistent.
For over six years now, the NCAA and other collegiate sports organizations have been asking for Congress to reform college sports, which has been confused and chaotic since schools were told that they had to treat college athletes like mercenaries rather than students. The SCORE ACT is sorta kinda such legislation, and was was supposed to come up for a vote in the House of Representatives this week but was pulled from the floor at the last minute.
A few hours before the vote was again postponed indefinitely, the bill slammed into a roadblock when the Congressional Black Caucus and its 54 voting members in the House announced unanimous opposition to the SCORE Act, not because of anything the bill contained or ignored. The CBC announced that it would oppose the law until the SEC, ACC, and NCAA started protesting state gerrymandering and redistricting that didn’t benefit black Democrats. In other words, the CDC is practicing extortion. It is telling sports organizations that they must endorse the “good discrimination” against whites that the Supreme Court just declared illegal and unconstitutional (because, you know, it is), and if they don’t, well, the CBC will just refuse to vote for laws that have nothing to do with race, redistricting, sports or college. Neener neener!
Ethics Alarms 
When does the Center for Disease Control cast votes in congress? (Just poking fun at Jack’s typos)
Ha-ha. Fixed. %$#@#%!
So people who can’t win elections with a reasonable district want the NCAA to get involved and are holding up legislation that would actually fix some of the issues in college football until they can go back to rigging districts to benefit themselves.
“Ironically, the CBC’s unethical, self-indicting conduct today explains what racial gerrymandering has wrought. These are bad, unqualified, self-interested, arrogant and unethical members of Congress, too many of whom behave and speak in ways so narrowly focused on perpetuating racial bias that they constitute a blight on American values and ideals.”
Exactly. The jokes literally write themselves.
Is there any evidence any black politicians do anything for anyone other than themselves? William J. “Freezer Cash” Jefferson certainly stands out.
Tim Scott in South Carolina is a good example. It’s not really a race thing to me. Neither party should be playing games with districts.
I think Jack has repeatedly mentioned Branch Rickey having a talk with Jackie Robinson about being a pioneer for desegregating Major League Baseball meant Robinson would have to be impeccable in every aspect of his being and behavior. It is part of being a groundbreaker. I doubt such a conversation has been had with any of the members of the CBC. Which is unfortunate.
Silly me, as I began reading the post, I was thinking the CBC was holding up the legislation because it would benefit the athletic directors, coaches, schools, conferences and the NCAA to the detriment of the almost exclusively black athletes!
Will they support colleges limiting blacks on their teams to 13-14% of their roster for each sport? Non-Hispanic whites would get 58% of the slots. That would be fair representation, right?
If the U.S. still needs a CBC and NAACP to protect “voting rights” in May, 2026, then it means that absolutely no progress has been made in over 60 years, notwithstanding that minorities sit in positions of authority across local, state, and federal government branches (judges, members of city and county councils, state and federal legislatures and executive branches, President of the U.S., captains of industry, etc.). If that is the case, then maybe we should look really hard at the effectiveness of these organizations to determine what, if any, benefit they serve society. If they are merely sources of power, then maybe we should jettison them to ashheap of history and do something else.
jvb
I am unfamiliar with the legislation so this may be a foolish comment, but I would think that if it is something the Republicans favor wouldn’t the CBC holding back on their support just make the bill easier to pass? The CBC is a minority group within the (current) minority party in the HoR (no puns intended), so their abstinence is either a hollow gesture (the Rs will pass the bill regardless) or it is the CBC breaking with party leadership, which is the worst thing, according to Democrat orthodoxy.
I think it was Thomas Sowell who made comment about people who are used to being given deferential treatment find being treated equally to be discrimination.
I would like to make the following proposal to the Congressional Black Caucus?
Instead of gerrymandering districts with a black majority vote in a state, why not do away with districts at all? Instead both political parties have a ranked slate of candidates for Representatives in Congress. In a state with 25 electoral votes, a party with 60% of the vote will send about 60% of the Representatives to Congress, and the other party will send about 40% to Congress. Both parties will send the top ranked candidates from their slate to Congress, unless one candidate has enough preferential votes to be elected all by themselves. This seems to me to be a very fair system, where it is obvious that no votes are wasted.
Given the observation that voters today vote on national issues instead of regional issues (e.g. pork that favors their district) there is little justification for having voting districts. The districts have very little cohesion due to gerrymandering. This was different in the past when voters identified string with their region and state than with the United States of America (prior to the Civil War).
Well, aside from tradition, the CBC wouldn’t go for that because it would put Democrats at a further disadvantage. If you allocated Representatives by percentage of votes, the Republicans would have somewhere around 230-235 seats rather than the 219 they actually got.
To a fair degree, that is a measure of the success the Democrats have enjoyed for their gerrymandering efforts. Of course, now they are blasting the Republicans for trying to catch up to them.
Also, while it is somewhat of a tangent to your proposal, both sides are staring down the barrel of the upcoming census in 2030, which is generally expected to shift a decent number of seats from blue states like California and New York to red states like Texas, Florida, etc. I am sure the Democrats (well the tiny minority who actually look at future events past next week) are preemptively trying the stem the upcoming tide.
On the gripping hand, many people have forecast permanent majority/minority status for various parties over the last century and somehow it never comes to pass. While some majorities last longer than others, so far none have been locked in.
The SEC schools should join the affirmatively join the boycott and say they will accept no applications from Black students during the boycott.
If you can’t beat em join em and watch the heads explode.
There seems to be an editing issue. I replaced “join the” with affirmatively join but it just added the replacement and appended it to what I thought I had erased.
Welcome to my world…