Vantage Point Vignette
Comments and Commentary by Dr. Ron Daniels
I hold Governor Wes Moore in high regard as a capable public servant committed to addressing the issues negatively affecting working families, poor people and the racial inequities impacting African Americans. Therefore, I was shocked to learn that he vetoed the bill that would have created a state commission to study enslavement and recommend proposals for reparations.
Governor Moore offered a curious rationale for what he characterized as a “difficult decision.” He suggested that there had already been enough studies by various commissions on slavery, lynching and racial discrimination in Maryland and it was time to do the work. He said: “I strongly believe now is not the time for another study. Now is the time for continued action that delivers results for the people we serve.” In addition, Mr. Moore seemed to suggest that his election as the first Black Governor along with the first Black Senator and Blacks who have been elected to high offices is a form of reparations.
I am willing to give the Governor the benefit of the doubt and that his decision is well-intended, but in my opinion, it is ill-advised and highly problematic. First, current public policy proposals to end racial discrimination and erase the wealth gap are commendable but will not repair the race-specific injuries and damages suffered by African Americans during enslavement and its post-emancipation legacies up to the present. Equity and ordinary or current public policy are critically important, but they do not constitute reparatory justice for African Americans. Moreover, Black elected officials should not adopt the position of rightwing conservatives by suggesting that electing Blacks to high public offices like President, Senate, Congress and Governor is a form of reparations.
Finally, Governor Moore’s rejection of the reparations bill is highly problematic because Governors and state legislators from other states can point to a Black Governor’s veto of a reparations commission and the rationale provided as an excuse to reject similar legislation. Indeed, it is ironic that the White Governors of California and New York signed legislation to create reparations commission while the Black Governor of Maryland vetoed a reparations bill that passed the state legislature with overwhelming support.
New Jersey is an example of a state where Governor Moore’s veto could have an adverse impact on efforts to create a State Reparations Commission. For the past few years, the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice in collaboration with reparations advocates and the Legislative Black Caucus have been pushing a bill to establish a state reparations commission. Their efforts have been thwarted by the Governor and leaders of both houses of the Assembly who have refused to sign off on any bill that includes reparations in the language. Now these rejectionists can conveniently hide behind Governor Moore’s veto in Maryland to bolster their case.
It is extremely disappointing that Governor Moore decided to veto the reparations bill. Hard to explain. Perhaps, it was the “Obama effect.” He may be interested in running for President in 2028 and has decided to follow in the footsteps of the first Black President who embraced reparations until he decided to run for President. Then he had a sudden change of mind. Whatever the reason, Governor Moore vetoed the reparations bill. Hopefully the Maryland State legislature will unite to override his veto once they reconvene. This would mitigate the damage and embolden state legislatures across the country to establish reparations commissions with sufficient support to override Gubernatorial vetoes if necessary.
