A Pragmatic Answer to the Race Dilemma : Justice: Bill Lee is a solid choice to be the country’s top civil rights enforcement officer.

President Clinton’s call for a national dialogue on race could not have come at a better time. Nor could his decision to nominate Bill Lann Lee as the nation’s top civil rights law enforcement officer.

Today, many Americans are still grappling with the issue of race. They are aware of the modern-day civil rights dilemmas, but are unsure of the pragmatic solutions that are needed. Thousands of complaints alleging hate crimes and police misconduct are received every year by the Justice Department. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is registering employment discrimination complaints at record rates. Enrollment figures for incoming African American students will drop to their lowest levels at California colleges and universities next semester. And Congress is attempting to duplicate California’s effort to disband programs ensuring equal opportunities in employment, contracting and education.

Of course we must keep talking about race. Unfortunately, those conversations on race are often accompanied by divisive rhetoric. And the very discussions intended to bridge differences frequently become dialogues of division. Complaints and accusations spiral out of control and turn into incidents that further divide. While strong civil rights law enforcement must continue, it needs to be carried out in a way that does not exacerbate the problem.

That’s why President Clinton chose wisely in selecting someone as skilled at consensus building as Bill Lee, the Western regional counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, to head up the Justice Department’s civil rights division.

Bill Lee is a soft-spoken, intelligent man who has devoted the past three decades to representing victims of discrimination and the poor. His agreeable style has won praise from allies and adversaries alike. He knows, through years of experience, that beating back adversaries in any given court case is a hollow victory if they don’t come to appreciate the civil rights laws and commit to abide by them.

In Los Angeles five years ago, Lee joined with hundreds of poor Californians to challenge the area’s bus services. While he could have engaged in flashy rhetoric and grandstanding, he did not. Instead, Lee worked cooperatively to bring all the sides together to reach a reasoned solution. In the end, he structured a plan that settled the case, saved taxpayers thousands of dollars in court costs and resulted in more equitable funding of the bus system.

As the son of a Chinese laundryman, Lee’s life has been shaped largely by his father’s faith in this nation. Lee grew up poor. Even though his father faced daily indignities, racist taunts and landlords refusing to rent to him, Lee came to appreciate his father’s unflinching patriotism and belief in the American dream.

From his squalid childhood, Lee did well enough in New York City’s public school system to go to Yale College on scholarship and later to Columbia University Law School.

Lee likes to say he is not a theorist. He devotes his time to finding pragmatic solutions under the law to real life problems of discrimination. And with hundreds of settlements under his belt, it is clear that he has found many pragmatic solutions.

In dealing with race, that’s just what this nation needs.