Secondly, we agreed with much of what he said. Ridding our nation of racism will redeem America’s promise. The humility and hope of the phrase "to form a more perfect union" is the story of America. (This is a story Rev. Jackson has told many, many times, focusing on the struggle of the common people to make America better.) We must move from the Kerner Commission’s "two Americas, one White, one Black, separate but unequal"--not to many Americas, White, Black, Brown, Yellow, Red, separate and unequal; but to "one America" strong in its diversity. We must lift the burden of race from our children’s future. These we embrace.

To some extent, though, the entire concept of a "conversation on race" seemed self-limiting. Do we only need a conversation? When ¼ of our children are trapped in poverty as we speak, are words alone enough?

The preamble to this conversation is also too circumscribed, the thinking small. It reminded us of one of those political talk shows on TV, where the far right-wing pundits are supposedly offset by their moderately liberal opponents--with the continual result that this country’s political discussions are always skewed far to the conservative side.

What do we mean?

The President’s defense of affirmative action was correct, eloquent, too little, and too late. Had he made those arguments in San Diego last fall, he could have helped defeat Proposition 209--especially if the DNC had backed his words with serious funding, as the GOP did our opponents. And we must never forget that affirmative action was Richard Nixon’s conservative remedy to past discrimination; it is worth protecting, but it is not enough.

President Clinton attempted to limit the policy and budgetary implications of his goal of eliminating racism with the phrase: "money cannot buy it; power cannot compel it." This, however, is in large measure a false statement, and new proof is provided by the opening of the women’s professional basketball league this weekend. The passage of Title IX into law two decades ago forced universities to spend equal amounts of funding on women’s sports, giving female athletes the chance to grow and develop. Money and power are essential to erasing racism and sexism. After all, Dr. King’s legacy lives on, both in his eloquent words and in the Voting Rights Act, in open housing laws, in the public policy fight against poverty.

The President says he will consider extending an apology for slavery, but opposes compensating African Americans because "we’re so many generations removed." His quote: "What I think we ought to do instead of reparations is to be repairing."

How to begin repairing? We could start by honoring unkept promises.

Why not honor the broken treaties America is still ignoring with so many Native American tribes?

Why not honor the Hispanic land grants?

Why not honor the abolitionists’ unfulfilled idea of capital-- "40 acres and a mule"? This country does have a social obligation to African Americans, stemming from the ill-gotten gains of slavery and segregation--but we do not have to make restitution to individuals. This debt could--and should--be settled by providing capital, by making restitution in the form of public investments in schools, job training, rebuilding our cities, affordable housing--aimed directly at those on the bottom end of the widening gap between rich and poor.

According to Webster, "reparation refers to the making of amends, specifically the paying of compensation, for some wrong or injury." Even more to the point when apologizing for slavery, "restitution implies return to the rightful owner of something that has been taken away"--in this case, liberty, family, equal opportunity. Both apply in this case.

Mr. President, this conversation on race is the right thing to do--please don’t shrink it down to the size of conventional wisdom.

Slavery and segregation were wrong; they did lasting damage; their impact constricts the lives of African American children right now, leaving them poorer, hungrier, more likely to get sick, less likely to receive proper medical treatment, with first-class jails, second-class schools, and withering hopes.

A conversation on race is a good start. An apology is needed. But improving "life in the canyon" will require not just words, but also money and power.

If we can save Europe from hunger and despair after World War II by investing billions in rebuilding their infrastructure, why can we not seriously discuss reinvesting in America? Where is our "Thurgood Marshall Plan" for reconstructing our schools, saving our cities, and opening up opportunity?

History is instructive here. Think of Lincoln, the Roosevelts, Truman, Johnson. Their words were compelling; their public policy actions put them in the history books.

Reprint of Rainbow/PUSH FAX June 19, 1997.