The fact that it’s 2007 and we’re still debating the issue of race in schools and other governmental institutions seems incredulous. Race shouldn’t even be taken into account when dealing with student admission to an institution of higher learning.
Last week’s Supreme Court decision to overturn policies that use race as a way to diversify student enrollment in the Jefferson County, Ky., and Seattle school districts sparked discussions about affirmative action and how the decision makes a mockery out of Brown v. Board of Education.
According to the Pacific Legal Foundation’s attorney, Sharon Browne, the decision will eliminate race-based admission policy meant to “diversify” the campus. The law firm has been part of both cases, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District and Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education, from the outset.
“It is very unfortunate that the court had to come to that decision,” director of Equity and Diversity and CSULB affirmative action officer Perrin Reid told the Summer Forty-Niner. “It’s a setback and a step in the wrong direction.” CSULB’s policy relies on California’s Proposition 209, which bans the use of race in admissions practices.
Talk of affirmative action is usually accompanied by talk of “reverse discrimination.” Opponents say affirmative action sends us back in time and doesn’t help minorities. They claim the reverse effect gives an unfair advantage by “awarding” a job to someone who might not necessarily be qualified, or admission to a top university because of skin color.
Some conservatives who wanted to reopen discussion on race-based admissions weren’t happy with the outcome. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Chairman Julian Bond was quoted as saying the decision “condemned minority children to a back seat in the race for life’s chances.”
Determining a person’s worth for an open position shouldn’t include skin tone. Adding a black student here or a Latino student there can’t solve the problems of equity.
There are some arguments that affirmative action only benefits black middle-class males, leaving other minorities on the socio-economic ladder behind. Instead of trying to use affirmative action as a Band-Aid, the government should focus on how minority youths can be better assisted.
Orange County Register columnist Yvette Cabrera gave a good example of how government dodges real problems and creates animosity between constituents. In her July 10 column, Cabrera recalled the time Gov. Arnold Schwarze-negger spoke at the National Association of Hispanic Journalists convention and blamed Spanish-language television for the lack of assimilation among the Latino community.
She mentions that instead of focusing on core problems, such as “the lack of resources for teachers, high student-to-teacher ratios, the lack of academic counselors to guide students, or the dearth of Advanced Placement courses in schools serving low-income and minority students,” the governor went for the easier “blame game.”
Unless we get to the core of the problem and engage in real conversation about race, there will never be real solutions to the inequalities that exist in our society.
