Sen. Barack Obama?s campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination has succeeded in transcending race. Evidence of this is abundant at the polls ? the Illinois senator has attracted large swaths of white voters ? as well as in the anatomy of his campaign. He?s a nonracial candidate, one who doesn?t let the politics of victimization detract from his message of ?hope? and ?change.?

Mr. Obama deserves a great deal of credit for building a platform that has resonated with a broad spectrum of citizens. Certainly, no one can deny that Mr. Obama talks the talk, on race or any other subject.

Less clear is the senator?s ability to deliver on his lofty rhetoric. On the issue of race, there is reason to temper the enthusiasm. Mr. Obama is no latter-day Jesse Jackson, but his record isn?t necessarily, well, transcendent either.

Much has been made of Mr. Obama?s membership in the Trinity United Church of Christ, which claims on its website to be an ?unashamedly Black? congregation that offers ?a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.? It?s hardly a model of inclusiveness, though at least, Mr. Obama has said he does not necessarily agree with all the views of the congregation?s bombastic pastor.

Far less attention has been paid to another ? and far more public ? group that counts Mr. Obama among its members: the Congressional Black Caucus.

At first blush, Mr. Obama?s membership in the caucus seems wholly unexceptional. Nearly every black representative and senator has joined the group since it was founded in 1969.

And so what if a group of legislators want to band together to work toward the betterment of black America? That?s a noble goal, right? There are well over 200 caucuses in the 110th Congress. No one would complain that the Appalachian Caucus isn?t looking out for people in the Rockies, or that the Shellfish Caucus doesn?t adequately speak to the interests of the nation?s salmon lovers.

Thing is, race is a different animal. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly reminded us that classifications based upon it are inherently suspect. Yet the lesson seems to be lost on the Congressional Black Caucus. A group supposedly dedicated to equality in America, the caucus engages in the very discriminatory practices its members purport to be trying to erase ? in fact, far worse.

The Congressional Black Caucus does not allow non-blacks to join. An officially sanctioned congressional organization allowed to use some public resources has a racial test for admission.

Rep. Stephen Cohen, D-Tenn. ? who was in the news last week as the victim of a racially charged smear campaign in his home state ? tried to join in 2007. The first-term liberal represents a majority black district in the Memphis area, so he believed he had a common interest with the caucus.

But Mr. Cohen is white, and the caucus wasn?t having any of it.

“[T]here has been an unofficial Congressional White Caucus for over 200 years, and now it’s our turn to say who can join ?the club,?? member Rep. William Lacy Clay, Jr., D-Mo., said in the statement at the time. ?[Mr. Cohen] does not, and cannot, meet the membership criteria, unless he can change his skin color. Primarily, we are concerned with the needs and concerns of the black population, and we will not allow white America to infringe on those objectives.?

Apparently in Mr. Clay?s world, the antidote to historical prejudice is a healthy dose of modern-day discrimination. The cure to past segregation is more segregation. And the way to foster a healthy and productive dialogue is by insisting that every white politician ? even those elected by a majority black district ? is engaged in a nefarious campaign to bring down the black community.

Surely Mr. Obama denounced Mr. Clay?s comments, right?

Right?

No. He said nothing. Not a word. Zippo.

Of course, his peers in the caucus were every bit as complicit in their silence. But they?re not running for president. He is, and he?s doing so as a sort of grand uniting leader of a post-partisan, post-racial age. He deserves the scrutiny.

Contrast the Congressional Black Caucus with the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. Replace ?African-American? with ?Asian American? and the two groups? mission statements are essentially the same. Yet, their membership rolls are worlds apart. The caucus?s 12-member executive board alone features two blacks, two whites and one Latino. The rest of the caucus is similarly diverse.

Of course, a truly colorblind Congress would not include any groups with a racial raison d?etre, including the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. Let us hope that day comes sooner rather than later. Until then, Mr. Obama should explain his views on the Congressional Black Caucus?s membership criteria. Better yet, if he truly wants to be an agent of change and unity, he should just leave the group.

Ryan Masse ([email protected])is a first-year law student.