Gavin Newsom’s Divisive Politics on Reparations
Political leaders have a responsibility to bring people together. However, California Governor Gavin Newsom, who is likely eyeing the 2028 presidential election, seems to be doing quite the opposite. It feels like he’s creating divisions among voters, based on race, gender, or sexual orientation, and drawing a line between those who receive certain benefits and those who need substantial funding.
He has been against race-neutral admissions for the California State University system, which has already faced pushback from Californians—not once, but twice. Additionally, he pushed for gender and race requirements on corporate boards, a move that was deemed unconstitutional on two occasions. Newsom also mandated ethnic studies and made questionable adjustments to K-12 math curricula. On top of that, he’s strategizing a massive reparations plan, potentially costing billions, for Black residents in California.
There’s a perspective that, whether it’s due to a deep-seated self-loathing or perhaps an attempt to appease radical leftists, Newsom’s support for reparations could be viewed as a form of racial pandering.
His initiative began back in 2020, when he signed a bill—AB3121—that instructed the state to develop a reparations plan specifically for Black Californians, focusing on descendants of slaves. In 2022, he established a commission aimed at crafting policies to address racial equity and disparities. The following year, recommendations included payments exceeding $1 million per descendant of slaves, various housing subsidies, guaranteed wages, and the reinstatement of affirmative action in college admissions.
Recently, Newsom set up a new agency tasked with implementing the commission’s recommendations. It sounds like a good idea, but it’s expanding its scope to address issues like disenfranchisement and segregation. Notably, this agency has the power to gather personal and genetic information to identify individuals who could benefit from these plans.
Interestingly, Newsom vetoed certain laws that would give admission preferences to descendants of slaves, suggesting that universities can already do that. He acknowledged that investigating biased property taxes is also already within the mandate of the new department. In fact, it even allocates 10% of state loans to descendants of slaves—quite the controversial move that raises constitutional questions. Balancing these viewpoints is tricky, especially as he navigates the early presidential race.
Still, one might argue that the reparations agenda could stem from either misguided goodwill or political opportunism.
Compensation discussions become even muddier when considering California’s history, as it entered the Union in 1850 as a free state—slavery was prohibited. Now, the state’s demographics show approximately 37% identifying as non-Hispanic white, 39% Hispanic, 16% Asian, and only about 6% Black. More than a quarter of the population consists of foreign-born residents.
In the U.S., there’s no legal principle that holds children accountable for the actions of previous generations. Children certainly don’t inherit debts from distant ancestors. Back in 1860, only 395,216 households in the 15 states recognizing slavery owned enslaved people, which means just around 5-6% of American households were slave owners.
Presently, a significant portion of Black Americans can be found among the middle class, living in diverse suburbs and holding professional positions such as doctors, lawyers, and executives. They make up about 12.5% of the population and hold several prominent roles, including in Congress and on the Supreme Court.
In a Gallup poll from 2002, only 14% of Americans supported cash reparations for the descendants of slaves. By 2019, that number grew to 29%, and recent polls show varying degrees of support for reparations, though some studies suggest around a quarter of Black individuals oppose them.
In fact, at least 23 cities and states, including major ones like New York City and Boston, are contemplating compensation plans. Many proposals estimate costs ranging from $12 trillion to $20 trillion. While polling often focuses on reparations for descendants of slaves, many committees also consider assistance for broader groups of Black Americans, sometimes using wealth disparities to justify such actions.
However, the Fourteenth Amendment complicates matters by prohibiting the government from granting benefits based on race. The Supreme Court has emphasized that equal protection under the law cannot vary based on skin color. Considerable financial aid has already been directed toward Black Americans through various government programs, which raises questions about dependency versus empowerment.
Ultimately, I can’t help but feel that Newsom is aware of these issues yet chooses to disregard them.
