Ricci vs. DeStefano and race bias

 This week the US Supreme Court heard arguments in the case of Ricci vs.DeStefano.  The case is a lawsuit filed by the cities firemen who took a civil service promotion exam only to have the city throw out the results because no black applicant came within the top 15.  The city reasoned since no blacks scored well that meant the test was racially biased.  So in order to avoid a possible civil rights law suit the city decided to not hire anyone.  

 Lets get the obvious out of the way.  It is impossible for a test on firefighting to be racially biased.  Does this really have to be said?  No one can cite just where racial bias is evident in the test, the thinking is since whites did better then blacks no one has to, the numerical results are enough

 But they're not.  In looking at the numbers of those who took the test, that blacks did not pass, has nothing to do with race.  118 took the test, 27 were black.  If in 118 there were 27 whites and the rest black, there is no reason to think the 27 whites would fail.  After all 76 whites did fail the test along with the 27 blacks.  It is entirely possible that out of all that failed there could be an ethnic, religious or national trait in which none passed.

 Opinions in favor of New Haven or at least those who buy into the idea of a racist test distort the mathematical reality of the case.  Writing for the Hartford Courant Frank Harris III says  "The results showed that whites performed well, while blacks performed poorly." then later on "it is not a stretch to say that a test is biased against one group vs. another."   Harris would have a point only if the testers made up 59 whites and 59 blacks and all 59 blacks failed.  Harris gives an inaccurate picture when he simply says whites-pass, blacks-fail, therefore racist test.  This is a distortion in order to fit a proof that doesn't exist.

 David N. Rosen writing in the same Hartford Courant plays the same game:

 "Here is what happened. In 2003, the city gave exams for fire lieutenants and captains. The test results were so skewed in favor of the white candidates that no minorities would be promoted if the outcome was used."  Again it is a distortion of the numbers in order to prove this.  Rosen like Harris doesn't cite the test itself to show actual bias.   Like Harris, Rosen condenses the argument to white vs black where whites win.  As long as you don't know that only 23% of the testers were black you may accept the premise.  It so happens that Rosen isn't fully correct here, he fails to mention that there is an Hispanic who past the test and is part of the suit against the city.    If this were an actual contest of white vs black, that only 23% of blacks could participate, surely it would be an unfair contest of the races since whites have an advantage just from the numbers.

 Aside from the charges of a biased test or ignoring common sense there is more at play here.  The defenders of the city are giving the impression that blacks are different in certain ways that excluded them from passing a civil service test.   In this space it has been argued that the liberal mindset, although good intentioned, have a latent message of not "yes we can", but "no you can't, you need us" and instead of giving everyone a level playing field want to alter the game in favor of minorities since they just can't do it on their own.  This isn't overt. instead it is cloaked as a movement of eradicating discrimination and racism no matter how tenuous the charge whenever they think they see it.  The firefighter test is an example.
 
  When the New Haven civil service commission met to decide whether or not to throw out the test, fire commissioner Rev. Boise Kimber argued that since the commission had no blacks on the board it was not qualified to decide on whether the test was racist.  The implication here is that since blacks are the only race that are the recipients of racial prejudice, that leaves whites as the only race that is racist.  This has got to end.