Episode Five - In Media's Res

Hey everyone, this is Tycho.  Thank you for joining us in the second half of BLACK FRIDAY.

A quick announcement, our sister show KALILA STORMFIRE is about to begin its final season. Please consider supporting this endeavor on Seed&Spark. You can find a link in the show notes, on our website theblackfridaypodcast.com/episodes, or pinned on twitter @blackfridaycast. Without Kalila, there would be no BLACK FRIDAY, so let's send her off in style.

Thanks.

[EBC news theme]

SHEPHERD

Good evening, this is EBC news and I’m Rebecca Shepherd.

We begin with our top story from the United States, where the U.S. Supreme Court today upheld controversial new legislation that critics say will erode civil rights.

It began several months ago - the phenomenon that is popularly described as “Black Friday.” Every Friday for the last several months, a random number of people have woken up to discover that they literally transformed overnight into black people.

The very first incident involved a New Jersey man, Kevin Fields. His story only came to light after several other such incidents came to the media’s attention. Lawmakers, including the late Senator Bill Harris of Westyslvania, believed it is time to take action. Here is Harris speaking on the Senate floor earlier this year.

HARRIS (Sr.)

I believe it’s time for the federal government to take action and investigate this phenomenon. That is why I am proposing legislation to appropriate $10 billion over the next decade to study this phenomenon, and its long-term effects on the American people.

SHEPHERD (cont)

Critics, like Gloria Hopkins of the American Civil Rights Association questioned the necessity of this legislation.

HOPKINS

It’s not clear to me why the federal government needs to spend $10 billion to investigate something that, if we listen to the medical establishment, does not seem to have any negative effects on the individuals.

SHEPHERD

But it is causing some consternation in the general public, surely the government should do something?

HOPKINS

The government should be encouraging people to stay calm. What this legislation is doing is creating a $10 billion button that says to the American people, YOU SHOULD BE WORRIED.

SHEPHERD

Well, joining me in the studio today are Gloria Hopkins, national spokesperson for the American Civil Rights Association, and Senator Bill Harris the Second, son of the late Republicrat Senator from Westsylvania, and namesake of the Harris Act. Thank you both for joining us. Senator Harris, I’ll start with you. How did you arrive at the $10 billion figure?

HARRIS

First, I do want to say that the amounts are subject to final appropriation - the ten billion dollar price tag is only the projective cost. It would be $10 billion over ten years, so only a billion dollars a year, if that.

SHEPHERD

A billion dollars though? Isn’t that a bit too much?

HARRIS

No, I think it shows that we are taking this problem seriously.

SHEPHERD

So Senator Harris, can you articulate what the problem is, specifically?

HARRIS

The problem is that this phenomenon is not understood and currently defies our scientific understanding of race-

HOPKINS

Can I jump in?

SHEPHERD

Yes, Ms. Hopkins I was just about to turn to-

HOPKINS

First, there is no scientific understanding of race. Race, you will commonly hear is a social construct.

SHEPHERD

But the changes are happening to people, and they are physiological.

HOPKINS

Yes, but the changes aren’t all that unusual if you stop to think about it.

HARRIS

Now let me say-

SHEPHERD

Just a moment, Senator. How do you mean, “not that unusual”, Ms. Hopkins?

HOPKINS

Well, skin color is a function of the amount of melanin in your skin. We know that the amount of melanin you produce is controlled partially by your genes. So it would not be unusual for  … let’s say a mutation … that spontaneously generates a lot of melanin. Possibly even overnight. It has been known to happen to hair, so why not to skin?

SHEPHERD

Senator Harris, what do you think of this theory? Or hypothesis rather?

HARRIS

It’s one of the many theories we intend to investigate. I just want to say, though, that we are pursuing this in the interest of science.

HOPKINS

Yes, but that investigation will not cost $10 billion over ten years to resolve. Plus, there are other provisions of the legislation A.C.R.A. opposes.

SHEPHERD

We were just getting to that. Senator Harris, section five of this legislation proposes a controversial national identity card requirement. Can you elaborate on this?

HARRIS

This provision was inspired by the life and death of Kevin Fields, who suffered immensely because this phenomenon was not well known when it came about. Because of his condition, his home state wasn’t able to update his identity documents. This provision would simply require states to issue driver’s licenses to affected individuals, and include both a before and after picture on the license.

SHEPHERD

Ms. Hopkins, this seems like an eminently reasonable requirement?

HOPKINS

This requirement essentially forces Americans to carry around a badge that says “look at me, I’m suspicious!”

HARRIS

Now just a moment-

SHEPHERD

I’ll give you an opportunity to respond, Senator.

HOPKINS

What possible reason does the state have for this requirement? It is effectively a badge of inferiority issued on the basis of an individual’s perceived race.

 SHEPHERD

Senator Harris, your response?

HARRIS

First of all, it is patently absurd to characterize section five - or the Kevin Fields Identity Protection Act - as a badge of inferiority. It ensures that honest hard-working Americans can get the documents they need for day to day life.

Second, we have had law enforcement officials call for this to make sure that individuals who share names and certain physical characteristics are not confused with one another. This provision was inspired by the life of Mr. Fields and will save lives.

HOPKINS

Senator Harris has essentially explained why A.C.R.A. opposes this legislation. This is another tool that law enforcement will use to profile innocent Americans!

HARRIS

Now that’s not true. Just last week, police in my home state arrested a man affected by the phenomenon. We were only able to identify him because of fingerprints and DNA evidence at great public expense. If we had pictures of him both before and after, we would have saved taxpayers time and money.

HOPKINS

Senator Harris is complaining that the police had to do some real police work to positively identify a suspect. We all heard that, right?

HARRIS

I don’t need to sit here and-

SHEPHERD

Senator Harris, Ms. Hopkins raises a valid point. The burden on the state is to prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. I think we’re all in favor of being good stewards of the public purse, but-

HARRIS

All I’m saying is that we give law enforcement more tools to protect innocent Americans. That’s all. Plus, more police departments are starting to use artificial intelligence to identify suspects and-

HOPKINS

Oh here we go.

HARRIS

Let me finish. We know that A.I. is not as accurate when it comes to people of color. It is even less accurate when it comes to people affected by the Black Friday phenomenon. Before and after pictures will help train the A.I. algorithms to do a better job.

HOPKINS

I am not a computer scientist, but I am also not fooled by these claims. The Black Friday phenomenon, for all the press it has gotten, has affected about five thousand people over the last ten months. This is certainly not a “problem”. It is not a problem that needs a multi-billion dollar solution. Nor is it a problem that law enforcement needs vast computing resources to solve. The individuals affected are more likely to be the victims of crime, rather than commit crimes themselves. 

HARRIS

We don’t know for how long it will last or how far it will spread.

SHEPHERD

Your point is taken, Senator - still you have to admit that ten billion dollars is a lot of money and, as far as I can tell, you haven’t defined a problem it is going to solve.

HARRIS

The amounts, as I said earlier, are always open to revision.

HOPKINS

Can I just point out one other thing? The federal government here is willing to pour a lot of resources to study an issue that affects only a tiny percentage of the white population. These federal dollars could go a long way in solving actual problems for all Americans - like access to healthcare, or affordable housing.

HARRIS

Well, everyone can always point to something the federal government could be spending its money on!

HOPKINS

I’d like to see the same zeal you have for this proposal get behind something that actually helps the American people. This … this is a ten billion dollar giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry who want to pathologize this phenomenon!

  HARRIS

 I’m an elected Senator, so I think my constituents know full well that I fight every day for the American people. From what I’ve seen, the American people are concerned about this and they want Congress to finally get something done.

SHEPHERD

Let me break in here to add that this legislation met a fair amount of opposition. Section seven gives the states the ability to confine people affected by the phenomenon, a provision that the President invoked when she vetoed the bill. Here she is at her State of the Union Address earlier this year.

HENSLEY

It is my belief that this legislation would set a devastating precedent in American law that will take us back to the days when the government used the force of the law to enforce private prejudice.

The Black Friday phenomenon has caused concern among us. I share that concern. However, this concern should not drive us to fear and panic.

The legislation as written would give the government the expansive ability to mark citizens solely because random chance has changed their physical appearance. Without any evidence that the phenomenon is harmful, it will give the state governments the power to isolate and quarantine affected individuals indefinitely.

Supporters of this legislation say that those provisions are simply there in the event of an emergency. I disagree. It is why I vetoed the legislation when it was presented to me. I have said it before and I will repeat it now. There is no evidence that the Black Friday phenomenon is harmful. There is no evidence that it is contagious. There is no evidence that confining affected individuals is necessary or appropriate.

We don’t have to do this. I hope we don’t go down this road. We are better than our fears.

[Applause from Congresshumans]

SHEPHERD

Strong words from President Hensley there. Now, Senator Harris, you are on the record opposing much of the President’s agenda over the last six years-

HARRIS

I take issue with that, and I want to correct the record here. I largely agree with President Hensley’s agenda, I simply disagree that her use of Executive power follows our principle of separation of powers.

SHEPHERD

But what about the fact that she has run twice? And won handily each time? Surely the voters have decided that she has a mandate, perhaps even a broader one than any one elected legislator?

HARRIS

Well, I’m not going to get into a constitutional discussion here.

SHEPHERD

I’m not asking you to, Senator, I’m pointing out that the President vetoed this legislation and still enjoys a huge amount of popular support. Fifty-two percent of Americans approved of her veto, and sixty percent approve of her administration overall.

HARRIS

Yes but-

SHEPHERD

Even with a Congress held by the opposing party, you barely managed to override her veto. And, as a whole, nearly sixty percent of Americans disapprove of Congress. I suppose I’m just asking whether this legislation truly does have the support of the people?

HARRIS

Look, sometimes as a legislator you make tough decisions. I respect the President but disagree with her. Now that the Supreme Court has upheld the legislation, I think it’s time to get back to the business of governing.  

SHEPHERD

So you don’t think the veto, or the concern about confining people should have given the Court pause? The President is right that there is no evidence that the Black Friday phenomenon is harmful, isn't she?

HARRIS

Look, the Supreme Court gets its legitimacy from the fact that the American people follow its rulings. In this case, the Court would be risking a lot of its legitimacy by striking down a law passed by the people’s representatives. The Court is, you’ll remember, unelected.

        And also for whether the phenomenon is harmful, I will leave that to the scientists who will examine it in detail.

SHEPHERD

Ms. Hopkins, I want to ask you about section seven which bans people affected by the phenomenon from entering the United States. What is your take?

HOPKINS

I think the Supreme Court has gotten decisions wrong before. If we look at cases like Dred Scott, or Korematsu, or Plessy v. Ferguson. These are cases where the Court abdicated its moral judgment on the altar of political expediency.

SHEPHERD

The ruling was a unanimous one, so clearly they see a difference between the Harris Act and - say, Dredd Scott or Korematsu-

HARRIS

This was an expected victory for the legislation and I’m sure my father would be pleased. And look, the Supreme Court made the right call. The law, as written, clearly has no discriminatory intent. Why should we assume the states will enforce it in a discriminatory manner?  

HOPKINS

Why indeed, except for all of American history ever?

HARRIS

Look, I’ll be the first to stand up when I see states using this law unfairly. I won’t stand by and have my father’s legacy tarnished by those who have racist or prejudiced motives. You have my word on this.

SHEPHERD

We’ll just have to leave it there for now as we’re out of time for this program. A landmark day for the United States. Senator Harris, Gloria Hopkins, thanks for being here.