Opinion
Affirmative Action: Producing Equality or Reverse Discrimination?
March 01, 2004
By Kerry Hancock
Affirmative action is promoting equality, achieving diversity, and enhancing the American economy. Or is it? Is this the solution to bringing about the “dream” of Martin Luther King, or is it aimed at equality of result rather than equality of opportunity? Is affirmative action helping us look beyond race and gender or is it simply a pendulum swinging in the opposite direction of the past and breeding a new form of discrimination? Are the quotas and set-asides encouraged by this program Constitutional or do they obscure the line of justice? More and more people are questioning the principles behind affirmative action and wondering if perhaps there is a better way to secure the “right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” to “all men created equal.”
This issue is raised primarily on two fronts: the workplace and college admissions. Proponents of affirmative action argue that without it, diversity will be obliterated, discrimination will inevitably result, and minorities and women will not secure quality education and jobs. If affirmative action is banned, seventy-five percent of the African-Americans who would currently be admitted to accredited law schools may not be accepted; and their entrance to medical schools might be reduced by seventy-one percent (Shea 46). Supporters note that the past treatment of minorities and women place them at an inevitable disadvantage. President Johnson justified preferential treatment, stating as he signed the 1964 Voting Rights Act, “You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race, and then say, ‘You are free to compete...’ and still justly believe that you have been completely fair” (qtd. in Schulman).
Yet, as logical as this assessment seems, does Johnson’s thinking promote equality under the law and does it truly affirm minorities? White males and Asians in particular are being discriminated against due to the advantages offered minorities. Too often, more highly qualified applicants are turned away from universities and professional positions simply because they do not help fulfill the necessary quota needed to obtain federal funding. Such an approach creates frustration and discourages work-incentive to those on both ends of this spectrum. Minorities are recognizing that they do not have to “out-perform” others to qualify for various awards and positions, while the “majorities” find that even with their best effort, they may be unable to achieve their goals because of their race or gender. How long will we punish those who had no part in past wrongs? Will this “retroactive justice” ever be achieved?
Furthermore, while affirmative action is directed toward helping those who supposedly continue to reap the consequences of past discrimination in the form of poverty, racial preference often affects a very different economic level of such minorities. Contrary to common assumption, only one in every five black persons lives in inner city poverty. Mr. McWhorter, a professor at the University of California-Berkeley, observed that the black students populating his classes were from the middle class, not from the “poor class,” whose conditions are cited in support of affirmative action (Shrewsbury). Prisca Shrewsbury, an African-American senior at Harvard University, notes, “As poverty and racism become less and less viable as explanations for black performance, the existence of affirmative action comes closer and closer to implying that black people as a group are inferior.” She asks, “Indeed, how can any policy based on an assumption of inferiority be considered affirming at all?
In addition to the dissatisfaction surfacing among men, women, and minorities, the Constitutionality of affirmative action is being called into question. A case concerning racial preference at the University of Michigan is on its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The plaintiffs assert that Michigan’s admissions policies violate the equal-protection clause of the 14th Amendment and Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits federally funded institutions from discriminating on the basis of race (Shea 47). Perhaps equality and diversity could better be encouraged by establishing plans like those in Texas and California, who have recently done away with affirmative action in regard to college admissions and instead guarantee admission to the top percentage of each high school’s graduates. Although these colleges and universities saw an initial drop in minority percentages, these levels were quickly regained and even surpassed in most of the schools. Of course, this practice must still be evaluated to perceive whether it is simply an attempt to sidestep court rulings and retain a “race-based” process (Ewers 48).
Realistically, could a business or a university survive with the critical press coverage and the social outrage that would result due to its refusal to offer services and opportunities to minorities? We must begin to trust the people of our country and rely on our government to protect, not provide, the rights of its citizens. To supply a climate of liberty, we must support a system that gives to each his just reward for his labor and places faith in the ability of each and every American. Affirmative action does not fit this description. It is time to investigate other alternatives that promote equality for all. Such action would be truly affirming to the American people.
Sources:
Ewers, Justin. “A Glimpse of life without Affirmative Action.” World 31 March 2003: 48.
Schulman, Miriam. “Affirmative Action or Negative Action: Is there a Different Way to Frame the Debate Over Race-Based Preference?” Issues in Ethics (on the web in association with the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics and Santa Clara University) 7.3 (1996). 17 March 2003.
Shea, Rachel Hartigan. “What’s the Place of Race?” World 31 March 2003: 46-50.
Shrewsbury, Prisca. “No Qualifiers Needed: Turning down the Ironic Insult of Racial Preference.” World on the Web. 1 Feb. 2003. 17 March 2003.
Kerry Hancock finished high school in spring 2003 and hopes to major in Spanish Secondary Education in college. This essay was written in Dr. John Han’s College Composition II course in the spring of 2003.
# # #