Remember why affirmative action exists
By Daily Bruin Staff
Jan. 22, 1995 9:00 p.m.
Remember why affirmative action exists
At the University of California Regents meeting last Thursday,
the focus turned to affirmative action, a topic fast on its way to
becoming the hot button issue in 1995.
Regent Ward Connerly said he believes the university currently
weights race too heavily in admissions decisions, and that he plans
to propose a system by June 1995 that will end race-based hiring
and admissions within the UC system.
"Make no mistake  we would not be here today as basically
an integrated society if we had not embarked on affirmative action
in 1965," Connerly, an African American, was quoted in the Jan. 20
Los Angeles Times. "I can’t tell you the humiliation of drinking
from a fountain that says ‘Colored Only.’ But I tell you with every
fiber of my being that what we’re doing is inequitable to certain
people … I want something in its place that is fair."
Coming from a regent, this comment offers frightening
possibilities for the future of educational opportunities in the UC
system. The affirmative action debate is framed by the recent
passage of Proposition 187 and the state’s lingering economic
crisis, threatening to veil the original philosophy behind these
policies. The debate surrounding affirmative action reforms may
inevitably be clouded by politics and fear, rather than by a real
desire for positive change.
Because of economics and the post-Proposition 187 political
climate, thoughts of "don’t take my job" and "don’t take my
admissions spot at the university" may wash a responsible debate
about affirmative action in politics. In this current climate the
regents  the governor’s political appointees  have the
clout to set the tone for this discussion.
Like today, affirmative action programs first began in a time
that was highly charged, both emotionally and politically.
Coming out of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s,
affirmative action, through organized programs and policies, aimed
to provide more opportunities for people from historically
underrepresented backgrounds. In doing so, it formally acknowledged
the history of inequality that was and still is inherent in
American society.
This recognition of historical disadvantage was one of the most
positive aspects of affirmative action policies. Despite the
inroads made over the past three decades in improving the quality
of opportunities for all people, the quality of opportunity for
those from underrepresented backgrounds  based on race,
gender and socioeconomics  is still largely inconsistent.
Many Californians, however, and even regent Connerly, as
evidenced in his Thursday statement, seem to be in danger of
forgetting why affirmative action existed in the first place. Our
society is still not an equal playing field. And when discussing
the pros and cons of affirmative action reforms, especially
pertaining to educational opportunity, we must not forget this
fact.
