Affirmative Action

Remember spring of your senior year of high school. Exciting wasn't it; especially April 15^th (no not tax day, I dread that). Remember, that was the day that your fate was decided, the day that you'd been waiting for ever since you got that first Penn State sticker. Or in my case, that first NYU sticker. On April 15^th, 2002 I was denied from NYU. "We regret to inform you that... blah, blah, blah." It was a shocker, because a few days earlier my friend Maria got her acceptance letter to NYU.

We had the exact same test scores, GPA; we were even in the same clubs. So where did she have the edge? She was Hispanic. I soon realized this and began to understand why some people are firmly against affirmative action. In doing some research on the subject, this is what I found: Affirmative Action is morally and politically wrong in today's college admissions process because it works against equality, promotes reverse racism, and challenges previously approved legislation.

One reason why affirmative action is so unfair is because it violates the basic principle it was founded on, equal opportunity. "If the law should be color-blind, then any consideration- whether against or in favor of minorities- should not be accepted under the law," argued Lynne Eisaguirre, author of the 1999 book Affirmative Action. The point that this author stresses, is that by favoring minorities we are not doing them any favors. How can we send these students off to college, unprepared, and expect them to do well if they have been given special treatment? It is as if we are setting them up for failure.

The struggle to achieve at a higher level then they are capable of perpetuates societies stereotypes of minorities. In fact, affirmative action makes some minority students feel like they have been predisposed to mediocrity because of the color of their skin. Have we have forgotten that there are many bright minority students out there who could very well gain college admittance without affirmative action? To illustrate this take the study conducted by The University of Berkley in Michigan in 1995 on admissions in relationship to ethnicity.

The study stated that if the University admitted students solely based on grades and test scores Asian-American enrollment would go from 42% to 55%, Caucasian would go from 30% to 37%, Hispanic would go down from 15% to as low as 3%, and African-American enrollment go down from 6% to as low as .5%. As you can see from this data, in addition affirmative action crippling effect on Hispanics and African-Americans, the policy also serves as a grave injustice to Asian students. Using quotas as a means to diversify has cut them short and done the opposite of what affirmative action is supposed to do; provide opportunities to minorities.

Furthermore, affirmative action is reverse racism. "Racial preferences are by definition racial discrimination," said the Governor of California, Pete Wilson, in a 1996 editorial. By this, the Governor meant that by trying to include minorities, we purposely exclude the general population, which happens to be Caucasian. Therefore, while affirmative action boosts minority students, Caucasian students are the victims of racial discrimination, and they know it. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education, Caucasian students who would otherwise be sympathetic towards the plight of minority students, have become tired and aggravated by the special treatment given to minority students.

Nathan Glazer, writer for the 2000 book Affirmative Action, concurs. He predicts that if SAT scores were the only measure used by colleges to admit students, the African- American community would make up 2% of the college population as opposed to today's 6% under Affirmative Action. That would be another 4% of Caucasian or Asian students that could have realized their dream of going to college, if it were not for affirmative action. In addition, a press release dated January 2003 by the U.S. Secretary of Education Ron Paige states, "Admissions quotas and double standards are not the answer... It is not right to fight discrimination with discrimination.

Our goal is diversity." This statement made possibly in response to the most recent affirmative action scandal which occurred at the University of Michigan. Barbra Grutter sued the school after finding out that she had been denied from the university's law school, while minority students with lower GPAs and test scores were admitted. The final ruling in this case was that since the university did not use "quotas", but only gave 20 more admissions points, their practices were justified. The defense explained that the preferential treatment was granted because the university values diversity. In an environment so concerned with diversity and equality, we have let an idea that is good in theory, become a horrible unjust reality for many bright students like Barbra Grutter?

Moreover, Affirmative Action goes against previously passed and recognized legislation. I find it odd that the same people that emphasize racial equality under the law, do not actually know what the law says about this issue. Darien A. McWhirter pointed out in his book, Equal Protection, that in Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, all schools receiving federal aid may not racially discriminate against any group. Later on in Equal Protection, it is proposed that Affirmative Action violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees civil liberties to all citizens.

Proposition 209 of the California State Constitution states, "The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting." This and the other laws apply to my line of reasoning because Affirmative Action racially discriminates against Caucasians. So how could Berkley's findings, which I mentioned earlier, be true? How can the law say one thing, and the admissions councilors say another? This is just one of the many hierocracies behind affirmative action. So I am left with one question for you: How can we propose the addition of more regulations on college admissions, when we cannot even abide by those that are now in place?

Here is where I want to urge you to be proactive. Write your congressional representatives, assembly members, and lawmakers and let them know that no matter who you are, you do not want to be discriminated against for your ethnicity, whether it be Hispanic or Caucasian. Also, tell them that leveling the playing field should be done far before a student's admission to college. If they want to achieve fairness, they must make sure that all school districts have equal education standards, according to U.S. Secretary of Education Ron Paige. Finally, tell them that if they need affirmative action to create equality, it should be based on income, because income is one of the only determinant of whether an individual received a better education.