Biden’s big infrastructure bill is packed with anti-white racism

Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE


CHECK OUT WeThePeople.store for best SWAG!

The so-called “bipartisan” infrastructure bill that 19 “weak” Republicans helped their Democrat colleagues pass through the Senate on Tuesday is chockablock with racial essentialist dogma that treats white Americans as second-class citizens.

According to conservative commentator Betsy McCaughey, many of the infrastructure-related grants and programs established by the bill come with stipulations mandating that eligible white recipients be deprioritized under their minority counterparts.

“The bill includes grants to install solar or wind technologies and generate jobs in areas decimated by closing coal mines or coal-fired electric plants,” she wrote Wednesday for the New York Post, describing one such grant.

The catch, she added, is that when contractors bid for the grant, “minority-owned businesses will get selected first.”

This is essentially government-sanctioned affirmative action, which is racist.

It’s not necessarily surprising that Democrats would devise such racist stipulations.

McCaughey goes on to describe another stipulation mandating that minorities and women receive priority treatment over “white male business owners” when bidding for projects “to improve traffic patterns in cities.”

“White male business owners can take a hike,” she writes.

This particular stipulation is both racist and sexist.

Dan Lennington of the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty spotted a couple of other blatantly bigoted provisions in the bill.

He noted, for instance, that the bill sets aside $2.75 billion for so-called “broadband inclusion” by establishing two grants via the so-called Digital Equity Act.

“Inclusion” is a fake left-wing term that ostensibly describes the act of treating everybody equally. However, that’s not how “inclusion” ever actually plays out in the real world.

Case in point: “Under the first grant, Congress will appropriate block grants to states based on a formula including how many racial minorities are in each particular state,” Lennington explained for National Review.

In other words, the bill mandates that eligibility for the state-level broadband grants be determined not by analyzing objective calibers such as economic need and broadband capacity, but by analyzing the state’s racial makeup.

The second grant is no better. It “offers tax dollars to entities owned or operated by ‘socially disadvantaged’ individuals,” according to Lennington.

“Socially disadvantaged” is another fake left-wing term that, despite appearances otherwise, just means anyone who’s not white (or, in some cases, a man). The proof, Lennington wrote, is in the Biden administration’s previous use of this same term.

“Following lawsuits brought earlier this year by the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL), where I serve as deputy counsel, two federal courts struck down similar race-based federal programs to benefit ‘socially disadvantaged’ farmers and restaurant owners,” he explained.

He was referencing the blatantly racist provision in the coronavirus relief bill signed by President Joe Biden in March that doled out $5 million to only non-white farmers.

That provision was, thankfully, halted in court.

“The injustice was obvious. White male farmers and restaurant owners sued, claiming the anti-white provisions are unconstitutional. So far, these challengers are winning. In every case, federal judges have halted the race-based programs in the American Rescue Plan Act until the challengers have their day in court,” according to McCaughey.

And according to reports, the Biden administration may ultimately “fold without a fight” because it recognizes that the law “isn’t” on its side.

McCaughey’s hopeful that the same will happen to the racist stipulations in the so-called “bipartisan” infrastructure bill that’s poised to make it to Biden’s desk by month’s end, at the latest, thanks to Republicans bending the knee.

“Chances are high the infrastructure bill’s hodge-podge of anti-white discrimination will be struck down by federal courts,” she wrote.

“In 1989, the Supreme Court ruled that the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution bars government from trying to even the score by discriminating against whites and in favor of minorities. The justices warned against creating ‘a patchwork of racial preferences based on statistical generalizations’ to correct past injustices. That’s precisely what this infrastructure bill does,” she added.

Until the provisions are struck down, however, the show must go on, and questions now remain over why Republicans, including even Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, would vote for such an outrageous bill.

“The Republicans’ willingness to play footsie with the equity agenda is surprising, if not politically foolish. … The push for equity is Marxism in theory and, when mixed with race, is reparations in practice. Inspired, if not mandated, by the newly vogue critical race theory, equity rejects equal treatment and opportunity in favor of special benefits based on race. In other words, equity calls for discrimination based on race,” Lennington noted in National Review.

“Republicans, even those dedicated to the ephemeral notion of ‘bipartisanship,’ should carefully consider whether such a gambit is worth it, even in a relatively small dose of $10 billion,” he added.

The post was published five days before 19 Republicans, including McConnell, apparently decided that embracing the racial essentialism of the contemporary left is indeed worth it

Vivek Saxena

Comments

Latest Articles