成人X站

A study by the Washington Community Alliance complains that local government officials are too male, white, and old. Ironically, if we used the study’s lazy logic, local government would still be too male, too white, and too old.

“Electoral Representation in Washington State” caught the attention of the race and equity beat reporter at The Seattle Times. Citing the , the report notes that elected officials don’t reflect a Washington population that’s becoming more racially diverse and much younger. Though Washington residents of color make up over 35% of the population, they won around 10% of the elections.

“Kamau Chege, executive director at the Washington Community Alliance, said descriptive representation is vital to cultivating a democracy that has the trust of voters. The findings 补谤别苍鈥檛 surprising, he said, but they offer a clear roadmap for where community advocates can work to boost diversity in local and state government,” The Seattle Times聽reported.

The underlying logic isn’t merely racist. It’s dangerous.

The study is based on a progressive blind spot

The report reads like a diversity 肠辞苍蝉耻濒迟补苍迟鈥檚 wish list鈥攁 multi-year deep dive into why not enough politicians look or sound like the 蝉迟补迟别鈥檚 latest Census snapshot. And as with most of these so-called equity studies, it completely misses the only question voters should care about: Are the people in charge actually doing the job well?

The report obsesses over numbers to complain about the 鈥�representation gap,” before effectively concluding that we must engineer government to mirror our 蝉迟补迟别鈥檚 shifting demographic spreadsheets. Never mind pesky details like merit, experience, or even whether anyone actually wants to run for city council in Pasco or serve on a water board in Omak.

The premise behind this entire report is that voters, left to their own devices, are failing. And, of course, society is failing racial minorities, women, and young people because of systemic –isms that we’ll pretend keep them from running.

Engineering democracy

Apparently, the fact that 91% of elected officials are white while the population is only 69% white is a sign that democracy is broken, not that maybe the candidate pool looks that way because 迟丑补迟鈥檚 who shows up, 飞丑辞鈥檚 interested, or who ultimately wins support.

The suggestion is to 鈥�invest鈥� in underrepresented groups until the spreadsheets match Census data. It’s a racist plan that identifies as a true representative democracy.

If the only 鈥�fair鈥� outcome is a government that matches the racial, gender, and age makeup of its population, 飞丑补迟鈥檚 the next step? Should we set quotas for lawmakers? Should we post a sign-up sheet at the Capitol: 鈥�White male lawmakers, 测辞耻鈥檝别 hit your quota for this session鈥攑lease step aside for a more diverse replacemen迟鈥�? 滨迟鈥檚 absurd.

The left’s logic at work

If black, Latino, or Asian politicians are inherently better at representing 鈥�their鈥� communities, should white officials be the only ones allowed to represent the 69% of the state 迟丑补迟鈥檚 white? Should we stop a Latina from representing a primarily white community? Should we reject a black man who was elected by a community that is majority Latino?

Of course not. 罢丑补迟鈥檚 segregationist thinking. 滨迟鈥檚 racist.

No one in their right mind wants to roll the clock back or push racial assignments for political representation鈥攅xcept, of course, progressive Democrats who view what they’re doing as somehow heroic and anti-racist.

Vote for the best candidate, not the one who looks like you

The implication that only people who 鈥�look like you鈥� can represent you is deeply cynical.

By this reasoning, should women only vote for women? Should I only vote for a good-looking, witty, intelligent, and humble Jew because he would look like me?聽Where does this all end?

We 诲辞苍鈥檛 (or 蝉丑辞耻濒诲苍鈥檛) choose leaders because of skin color, gender, or age. We must pick the people who, after making their case, seem best equipped for the job. Then, we should judge them for what they’ve done for the entire community they represent, not what community they look like.

The left’s obsession with identity has few winners

The identity-obsessed left wants you to believe our institutions are illegitimate if 迟丑别测鈥檙别 not perfectly diverse by every possible metric. But the ultimate test of legitimacy 颈蝉苍鈥檛 飞丑补迟鈥檚 on a 肠补苍诲颈诲补迟别鈥檚 birth certificate or what boxes they check on a demographic survey鈥�颈迟鈥檚 whether voters trust them to lead, and how they respond with the trust we give them.

Representation 颈蝉苍鈥檛 about skin color, gender, or any other immutable characteristic鈥�颈迟鈥檚 about competence, values, and results. And I’ll happily take a lawmaker of any background who best represents my views and principles. What matters is what legislation they’re creating or passing.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3 p.m. -7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the聽podcast here. Follow Jason Rantz on聽,听,听, and聽.