Race should not be a factor for admittance

Published: Monday, August 26, 1996

Sunday, August 25, 1996

Affirmative action should not ignore levels of wealth

Here is a big shock another column on affirmative action. This is unofficially the one-billionth article on affirmative action. All right, look, I'm sorry to continue to pour it on I'm sure you all have heard every possible point of view on this topic. But, here is yet another one.

Affirmative action is a good thought, but there is major flaw in the idea. It is this major flaw that causes much of its opposition. The problem with it is that it is based on a very unclear and controversial issue race. Unfortunately, there is too much emphasis and attention being placed on the issue of race. There needs to be a shift of concentration from the race factor to a socioeconomic factor. Affirmative action should be principally based on the socioeconomic level of the recipient, not his or her race. Why should someone be admitted to a school based on their race?

Is the assumption here that certain races do not need to perform at high levels solely because of their race? Or even worse, is it assumed that certain races can't perform at high academic levels? As a minority myself, I don't see a relationship between academic performance and race. Justice Clarence Thomas expressed that programs such as preferential affirmative action "stamp minorities with a badge of inferiority."

I don't see race as the main issue regarding academic achievement or potential. However, one's socioeconomic position can greatly hinder academic performance, regardless of race. For example, lets take someone who is not considered a minority applying for college. Their household family income is low and as a result, the student is forced to work over 30 hours a week to contribute to the family income. As expected, their academic potential is not reached as far as grades are concerned, and he or she has a grade point average of 3.2. Now let's take a student who is considered a minority. This student attends a private high school and is part of an upper-middle class family. The circumstances don't require the student to work while in high school. Moreover, this particular student is not very motivated and has a 2.6 grade point average. This is obviously a hypothetical, but not unrealistic, situation. Should the minority be accepted into the same college that rejects the non-minority? Under affirmative action, this could happen. How fair would it be to accept someone because of their race, and then on the other side, reject someone, also because of their race. As Colin Powell expressed in his autobiography: "Discrimination 'for' one group means, inevitably, discrimination 'against' another." Affirmative action programs are directed towards improving employment and education opportunities for minorities and women. Unfortunately, special preferences do not appear to help the truly disadvantaged. William Wilson, a University of Chicago sociologist, points out that minority individuals from the most advantaged families benefit the most.

These are the types of scenarios that produce many critics of affirmative action. As a result of these situations, the race issue has become glorified and other fundamental issues are overlooked. Affirmative action is a good idea, and, in certain circumstances, such programs are needed to improve opportunities for certain groups. However, to determine the recipients of programs by race is not in the best interest of anyone. Affirmative action cannot assume that all minorities need assistance or that all non-minorities do not. As seen in the example above, the race issue does not need to be a prominent part of affirmative action. Socioeconomics should provide its foundation, not race. We don't need another program that uses race to separate people or students.

The California Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI), which qualified for the November ballot, may be a step toward eliminating the race factor. The CCRI 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." The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which was a triumph for minorities and women, made it unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of race, color, sex, religion, or national origin, and the CCRI uses this as its foundation. Preferences for certain minorities do not act to counter discrimination and should not be viewed as exempt from promoting discrimination. The CCRI will help eliminate some of the inconsistencies with the application of civil rights laws by rejecting all discrimination, whether it is for or against a group. This would give minorities and women the opportunity to prove that in a society without discrimination they can compete and succeed without preferential treatment. Let's not use race to judge potential and ability; rather, judge people based on their abilities and accomplishments.

Ben Mohandesi is a third-year history student.