Proposition 209 rightly makes racial preference unequal to merit

Monday, April 20, 1998

Proposition 209 rightly makes racial preference unequal to
merit

Measure guarantees ethnic groups civil rights, not crutches

By David Miller

Before April 7, 1998, I was unsure about California’s civil
rights initiative, Proposition 209. And I was especially unsure
about what types of repercussions it might have on UCLA. First, I
thought it might allow the admissions office to simply choose the
best students without worrying about how many points ethnicity
should add to (or subtract from) an SAT score. Then I got the
opinion, from numerable didactic teaching assistants, that
Proposition 209 might be a horrible thing for UCLA and that it is a
blatant form of discrimination.

Then I walked up Bruin Walk on Tuesday, between Ackerman Union
and Moore Hall. I saw my beautiful North Campus vandalized with
pastel chalk, and I became convinced that Proposition 209 would
bring down UCLA. The writing was on the side of Powell. How can you
argue with such wonderful reasoning and beautiful poetry as, "We’re
on our way back to the plantation / Where blacks can’t get an
education?" Then I walked further and saw the tremendous reasoning
behind the lyrics, "209 = no diversity," "No diversity = No
education." Now, I was sure. Since diversity is equal to education,
and since 209 is equal to no diversity, there will be no education
for the incoming class of the 1998-1999 academic year, because they
will be the first to feel the effects of the anti-education
Proposition 209.

Now that I know that diversity is equal to education, I would
like to offer a very modest proposal: The admissions department
should do away with academic standards altogether in admission
decisions. In the academic world, as well as the business world, no
one really cares about the intelligence of a student, her
commitment to excellence, or her determination. What really matters
is how much diversity you can offer to an institute of higher
education or a place of business. When I buy a product from a
company or retail store, seldom do I look at the quality of the
product; instead I look at the diversity of the company that
produced the item and the diversity of the retail outlet.

On this note, I suggest that UCLA begin admitting the most
diverse student population to UCLA. Now I know that some students
might have a little trouble on the SAT, and their grades in high
school might not be that great, but just think of the diversity
they can offer UCLA. It makes me tingle to think of the education I
would get if UCLA abandoned all academic standards and let the most
diverse students into UCLA, since diversity equals education.

Wait a minute, don’t call Albert Carnesale or Rae Lee Siporin
just yet, maybe we should actually read Proposition 209 and see
what it says. It says that:

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.

Now maybe I’m not reading this right, but I don’t see where it
says that UCLA can’t have diversity. It just says that no one
should get preferential treatment based on their race or any other
physical or cultural characteristic. That sounds to me like the end
of racism and discrimination in admissions – hey, two birds with
one stone.

I remember hearing about the issue of race in the first 190
years of the United States. I remember that whites got preferential
treatment in the form of hiring practices, bus rides and good water
fountains. A few years ago, African Americans and Latin Americans
got preferential treatment in college admissions. Webster’s
Dictionary defines discrimination as, "To make a difference in
treatment or favor on a basis other than individual merit." Both of
the above cases sure sound like discrimination to me. One class
being treated better than another group of people because of their
ethnicity or sex is discrimination in its most obvious form.

Well, maybe Proposition 209 is still not a good thing. Let’s
look at the purpose of UCLA, one of the most selective universities
in the country. According to James Q. Wilson (a professor in the
political science program here at UCLA), the purpose of selective
universities is "To bring very good students into contact with
professors who are doing the most important research." Now that I
think about it, Proposition 209 would actually help UCLA achieve
this goal. By ignoring all qualities other than individual academic
and personal merit, UCLA could admit the very best students from
its applicant pool. And this would not hurt diversity at all. In
fact, it would encourage the diversity of ideas. And this is the
type of diversity we should look for here at UCLA. As Wilson says,
"Real diversity is the diversity of ideas and beliefs that produce
challenging discussions, new theories, and revised explanations."
If people want diversity on this campus, they should ask that all
applicants submit their opinions on politics and religion.
Actually, with Proposition 209 this is not necessary, since
differences of opinion will arise naturally when you admit the best
10,000 students from the applicant pool.

Now, there is still the suggestion that members of some cultures
have more to offer this school than members of other cultures have
to offer. That’s racism if I’ve ever seen it, suggesting that race
determines an area of superiority, in this case, the ability to
offer more to UCLA than another race. This is not at all true, as
the German American has just as much to offer as the African
American, and the Latin American has just as much to offer as the
Asian American. In the end, there is only one way to tell which
person (German American, African American, Latin American, or Asian
American) should be given admission to UCLA. The only way to
distinguish which person should be given admission is to give it to
the person with the best grades in high school, highest SAT score,
and best mixture of activities and personal statement. In the end,
Proposition 209 is not at fault if not many African Americans or
Latin Americans get into UCLA. African-Americans and Latin
Americans are at fault for not getting into UCLA because they tend
to not do as well on the SAT test and in their high school core
curriculum as whites and Asian Americans do.

I say let in the smartest and best students. If they are all
African American, or Asian American, then so be it. I just want
this school to have the smartest, most motivated students, thus
naturally creating a diversity of opinions and excellence in
education.

Now, in closing, I suggest we thank whoever chaired the campaign
for California Civil Rights Initiative 209. Ward Connerly, an
African American and UC Regent is to thank for this great
initiative. Some may be surprised that Ward is a member of a racial
group that some think Proposition 209 is intended to hurt. Maybe he
is tired of hearing people say that his ethnic group needs a crutch
in order to get into UCLA, that they need easier requirements in
order to get into UCLA. After all, that is what affirmative action
was intended to do: suggest that some members of some groups are
not smart enough to get in on their own, so they should be given
easier requirements than members of groups that do not have as much
trouble getting in based on their individual merit. Let’s look at
the math SAT scores of Berkeley’s freshman class in 1995, an
affirmative-action year. African Americans averaged 510, Latinos
560, whites 690 and Asians 750. The verbal scores were very
similar. So basically what happened was that Berkeley admitted
African Americans and Latinos who managed to make it into the 25th
percentile while they admitted whites and Asians who scored in the
75th percentile on the SAT scores. When seen in this light,
affirmative action looks like a lot like racism. Also, remember
that the UC system is not intended to be a measure of the college
opportunities open to people. If people do not do very well
academically in high school, they can still go to a state school,
or a junior college and transfer to a UC if they meet the
requirements.

Proposition 209 has the chance to end racism in the UCLA
admission process. Proposition 209 has the chance to reach the
goals of the original Civil Rights movement of the 1960s when
people fought for rights, rather than handouts.

Most of all, I wish that people would see that Proposition 209
is the first piece of legislation since the twenty-fourth Amendment
to achieve the goals of equality. And, maybe Proposition 209 would
gain a little popularity among its adversary groups if they would
see that Proposition 209 is the ultimate goal of Martin Luther
King. In his famous "I have a Dream" speech, King said, "I have a
dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where
they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the
content of their character."

Well, that day has finally come, as King’s children could apply
to UCLA for the 1999-2000 academic year, and Rae Lee Siporin could
not give a damn as to the color of their skin. "Free at last! Free
at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!" Thanks to
Proposition 209.