Proposition 209 has nationwide domino effect

Wednesday, November 18, 1998

Proposition 209 has nationwide domino effect

TREND: Washington becomes latest state to pass anti-affirmative
action legislation

What began as an isolated proposition in California has evolved
into what may become a nationwide trend to stifle diversity at
universities. California’s Proposition 209 has spawned Initiative
200, which recently passed in Washington state, and similar
legislation is popping up in other states as well. Considering the
drops in minority enrollment at UCLA, in particular, it is
disturbing to see the beginning of what may be the end to an
essential and valued commodity within public learning
institutions.

UC Regent Ward Connerly, who spearheaded the campaign for
Proposition 209 in California, pushed for the passage of Initiative
200 in Washington; the ambiguous wording of Initiative 200 is
nearly identical to the ambiguous wording that Connerly authored in
Proposition 209.

Connerly plans to create similar anti-affirmative action
legislation in other states, namely Nebraska and Michigan. His
efforts are disconcerting to say the least; considering the effects
Proposition 209 has had on California, one can only fear for the
future of diversity in other, already less diverse states.

A diverse student body creates an environment where different
ideas can be voiced and exchanged, which is necessary at any
educational institution. Different perspectives are assets to
academic and cultural growth; students need to encounter opinions
which challenge their own if they are ever to grow, change or truly
expand their knowledge.

Diversity at a university is achieved when there are differences
in students’ geographic origin, socioeconomic status, and ethnic or
national origin. By abolishing race considerations in the
university admissions process, states considering initiatives like
Proposition 209 and Initiative 200 will restrict the means by which
a university can achieve such diversity. Consequently, such
measures limit the students’ abilities to interact with and learn
from people from other races and points of view.

Proposition 209 resulted in a devastating 42.6 percent drop in
African American students admitted to UCLA’s 1998 freshman class.
The number of Chicano and Latino students admitted decreased by 33
percent. Overall, there was a 10 percent decrease in the number of
minority students admitted UC-wide.

Although the University of California and UCLA may be content to
parade the fact that this year’s freshman class is academically the
strongest of any previous class, academically qualified students
cannot replace the benefits that a diverse student body
provides.

California universities are not the only schools to enact
anti-affirmative action legislation. At the University of Texas in
1997, the number of African American students entering the
university was less than half the number who entered in previous
years. The law school admissions for African American and Hispanic
students, for the same year, decreased by nearly 70 percent.

Considering such staggering decreases in the percentages of
minority admissions in California and Texas, it’s questionable
whether Washington state voters realized the consequences
Initiative 200 would bring. Washington state’s population is 86
percent white, and at the University of Washington, the
undergraduate and graduate population contains less than 8 percent
of Native American, African American and Hispanic students
combined. With such a small percentage of minorities enrolled at
the university and living in the state, the need to protect
diversity becomes all the more important.

Although affirmative action opponents claim our society should
be colorblind in order to "level the playing field," the
dismantling of affirmative action programs did nothing but diminish
the diversity of California schools. Efforts like Washington’s
Initiative 200 indicate that other states are soon to follow.

Comments, feedback, problems?

© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]