Affirmative action, Fisher v University of Texas, & early childhood ...

The topic of affirmative action is often brushed aside as an accepted part of society, without thorough examination of the benefits to minorities or the repercussions to those who are not.

As Milton Friedman once said,

?One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.?

During the Civil Rights era, and for the entire American existence, African-Americans and minorities were treated as second-class citizens without any concern for their value or livelihoods. It took until the 1960s for any action to be taken to address the sins of racism, hate, and slavery.

JFK began the concept of affirmative action in 1961 when he signed Executive Order 10925 , which ensured employers could not legally discriminate against any person because of ?race, creed, color, or national origin.? ?A few years later, affirmative action was amended again by Lyndon B. Johnson?s Administration who issued Executive Order 11246?with the specific purpose ?to correct the effects of past and present discrimination.?

Both Democrat (Kennedy, Johnson) and Republican (Nixon) administrations played significant roles in establishing affirmative action policies across the United States. And most of these policies focused on equal opportunity employment.

Affirmative action in employment eventually turned to the educational system. In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Regents of the University of California v Bakke,?that the UC Davis medical school violated the Fourteenth Amendment?s equal protection clause by instituting quotas for underrepresented minorities. However, Justice Lewis Powell wrote in the majority opinion that diversity in higher education is a ?compelling interest? and could be used as one of the factors in university admissions standards.?

Hopwood v Texas?and?Grutter v Bolinger?are two cases that have tugged back and forth at the issue of using race as a factor in university admissions policies. The?Hopwood case represented the 1st successful legal challenge to the?Bakke?ruling that allowed for racial preferences to be used in higher education admission standards. However, because the Supreme Court deferred to the ruling of the Circuit Court, the outcome meant that the?Hopwood?ruling only applied to states within the Fifth Circuit?s jurisdiction (Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas). This ruling had no national effect.

In?Grutter v Bolinger, the Supreme Court upheld the ruling in?Bakke?granting?that the University of Michigan law school had a compelling interest to use affirmative action to promote class diversity.

The Supreme Court, as I write this, is preparing to rule on?Fisher v University of Texas , a case that could effectively end affirmative action in public universities across America.

Is 34 years of legally-approved race-based admissions standards a long enough period of time to make a case for or against affirmative action? There is no doubt that affirmative action has helped many folks, within the African-American community, and within other minority groups, to better their lives.

But does affirmative action really solve the problem? Whether it?s a ?necessary evil or not?, affirmative action-driven policies drive a wedge between poor whites and minority groups. Any racial progress that has been made over the past few decades gets undermined with continued policies that discriminate against poor whites.

This issue has lost a lot of its luster?it doesn?t seem to appear in the news very often anymore. Race-based affirmative action has become an accepted part of society, a debt that must be paid to reconcile the past.

What is hard for me to reconcile, however, is that primary and secondary schools in minority areas around the United States are not performing as they should. We want to talk about fairness, and equal opportunity, but why not address it at an earlier age? We would see more African-Americans and minorities get their diploma and graduate from college with their own merits?not through legally sanctioned discrimination.

Failing schools in urban areas do not encourage students to live up to their potential. The ?nuclear family? is broken among many poor families, both white and black. Yet, our only answer is to offer race-based admissions? There is a major disconnect on this issue. Too many people are willing to accept the status quo, and not address the real issues.

Part of the argument from poor whites on the issue of race-based admissions, is that minorities who take ?their? spots aren?t as qualified. Well, this would not be an issue if we actually took the time to address the real problems of minority education. School choice should be an option for all students, not just middle-class or affluent white kids who can afford it.

Our only chance at overcoming racial inequality within the school system occurs if we recognize that the inequality starts with primary and secondary schools?not with higher education.

?It is a simple matter of justice that America, in dealing creatively with the task of raising the Negro from backwardness, should also be rescuing a large stratum of the forgotten white poor.? ? MLK

We have to have a better solution than race-based admissions. It?s great that some African-Americans and minorities have benefited from affirmative action. But sometimes I feel like we set our goals way too low.

Source: http://theconstitutioninc.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/affirmative-action-fisher-v-university-of-texas-early-childhood-education/

monkees songs danica patrick top chef texas rail gun harrisburg great pacific garbage patch ben affleck and jennifer garner