Tyranny of the Majority

Assemblymember Hector De La Torre from Los Angeles introduced a bill that would expunge a despicable ghost from California's past. While his intention is commendable, I don't think we should eliminate a piece of our history serving as a vivid reminder to future generations of just how wrong popular opinion can be sometimes.

First a little background on the origins of De La Torre's bill:

During the first half of the 20th century, housing developers inserted covenants in deeds to their new homes which, in effect, created legally enforceable "whites only" neighborhoods. While in the title business, I saw many of these covenants. From my recollection, the offensive language typically begin: "Only members of the Caucasian race may hold title to this real property."

The Supreme Court struck down these clauses in 1948 (That's according to an AP story. I Googled for the opinion but came up empty.) While these racist clauses are now legally unenforceable, they remain on title deeds as part of the property's legal description.

De La Torre's bill would require someone (title companies or county record keepers) to erase the language from all title deeds carrying it. I saw thousands of these deeds containing that language while working in Santa Cruz and Sacramento Counties. My guess is there are millions of deeds in California containing that language. Not surprisingly, title companies and county recorders oppose De La Torre's bill because of the extra costs they'd incur implementing the new law.

While I agree the financial aspect might be onerous, my opposition to the bill is more philosophical. (A surprising plot twist from a guy who goes by Thinktank to be sure.)

According to popular opinion in California at the time, it was fine and dandy for developers to include racist clauses in deeds. The thinking probably was creating "whites only neighborhoods" would keep property values high. While popular opinion has since changed dramatically, the fact remains a majority of Californians once believed segregated housing was something the government should enforce.

As every 9th grader learns, our Founding Fathers created a system of checks and balance to protect US citizens from tyranny of the majority. Yet, popular opinion still has the ability to drive policymakers into positions that clearly hurt a minority. Government enforcement of racist housing clauses are a case in point.

Just because something is popular doesn't make it right. Going with the flow is comfortable to be sure. But progress is hard fought. It was easy being nice to popular people in school and thereby becoming popular yourself. But the kid who had his or her nose in a book probably gained the most in the long run.

So when we go about trying to erase from the past instances when government followed what was popular, we rob future generations the opportunity to remember just how fallible popular opinion can be.