Statistics crucial for UC diversity, accountability

EDITORIAL BOARD Christine Byrd
 Editor in Chief

Michael Litschi
 Managing Editor

Jonah Lalas
 Viewpoint Editor

Barbara Ortutay
 News Editor

Amy Golod
 Staff Representative

Timothy Kudo
 Staff Representative

Brian O’Camb
 Staff Representative

  Unsigned editorials represent a majority opinion of
the Daily Bruin Editorial Board. All other columns, letters and
artwork represent the opinions of their authors.   All
submitted material must bear the author’s name, address, telephone
number, registration number, or affiliation with UCLA. Names will
not be withheld except in extreme cases.   The Bruin
complies with the Communication Board’s policy prohibiting the
publication of articles that perpetuate derogatory cultural or
ethnic stereotypes.   When multiple authors submit
material, some names may be kept on file rather than published with
the material. The Bruin reserves the right to edit submitted
material and to determine its placement in the paper. All
submissions become the property of The Bruin. The Communications
Board has a media grievance procedure for resolving complaints
against any of its publications. For a copy of the complete
procedure, contact the Publications office at 118 Kerckhoff Hall.
Daily Bruin 118 Kerckhoff Hall 308 Westwood Plaza Los Angeles, CA
90024 (310) 825-9898

Ward Connerly is on the rampage once again.

Connerly is the University of California regent who proposed
SP-1 and SP-2, the measures ending the use of affirmative action at
the UC, and was a leading advocate of Proposition 209, which ended
the use of affirmative action statewide. Now he has yet another
idea for the 2002 ballot.

With the Racial Privacy Initiative, Connerly proposes making it
illegal to collect any information regarding race. In other words,
questions about ethnicity for contracting, employment and public
education ““ including UC applications ““ would be
omitted.

This proposal would debilitate efforts to monitor diversity
within the UC system. Even more ridiculous than the proposal itself
is Connerly’s justification for it.

Connerly and his American Civil Rights Coalition stated that
when given data on race, the government can misuse it. To support
this claim they point to the government’s use of census data
to track down and incarcerate Japanese Americans during World War
II. But this is an extreme example which Connerly uses to make
broad generalizations. If the government wanted to do so, they
could have located Japanese Americans during the internment without
the aid of census statistics.

Connerly needs to come to the realization that collecting racial
information is harmless. Disclosure of such information is also
optional; if Connerly actually read a UC application, he’d
notice the note, “Providing this information is
voluntary,” which gives students the choice to identify their
race or ethnicity.

By collecting racial information about UC students, we can
assess whether or not we’re progressing toward racial
equality and achieving the diversity that reflects our state. If
the numbers do not mirror the state’s diversity, we need to
know about it, and we need to fix it.

Not having information regarding race would seriously hinder the
activity of student advocacy groups that lobby for underrepresented
communities on campus. Outreach and retention programs sponsored by
on-campus student organizations would also be affected. These
programs are largely intended for students from underprivileged
backgrounds and strive to increase racial diversity on campus.

But Connerly would rather brush inequalities under the
carpet.

Connerly, who was appointed by former Gov. Pete Wilson, ought to
abandon his belief that society is a perfect melting-pot and
understand that culture is important ““ and with culture comes
color and race. Learning about other cultures comprises a large
part of our education during college, given that we live in a
multicultural society.

Still, the importance of knowing racial figures at the UC
extends beyond students.

For example, the state constitution requires that the UC Board
of Regents be “reflective of the economic, cultural and
social diversity of the state.” Apparently, Connerly failed
to notice at his last regent meeting that there is one Latina on
the 26-member board even though Latinos make up nearly half the
state’s population. And Connerly still thinks that race is no
longer a real issue?

In order to hold the regents accountable for representing the
diversity of the state and of the UC, we need to have information
about the racial composition of the board and the students.

Race is not an “anachronistic” concept as Connerly
states; it’s still a real issue today.

It has only been 35 years since the passage of the Civil Rights
Act, and it’s absurd to think that within this short period
of time our society has balanced the racial inequality of more than
200 years of institutionalized slavery, Jim Crow laws, exploitation
and discrimination.

Connerly must remind himself of the Rampart scandal, the issue
of racial profiling and Proposition 187, which banned illegal
immigrants from public services. These serve as stark reminders
that racial equality does not yet exist in today’s
society.

It’s entirely hypocritical that Connerly’s group,
named the American Civil Rights Coalition, supports this measure;
it both hinders the progress of civil rights and is grossly
“un-American” in its disregard for the multiculturalism
that defines this country.

We would truly live in a better society if race were not an
issue. But given the history of injustices committed against
certain groups of people on the basis of their skin color, we
cannot afford to ignore race until equal playing fields are
established. Unfortunately, regressive people like Connerly hold us
back.