A Case Against Affirmative Action

The fact that, in most cases, a minority student will get accepted over a white student with the same or almost the same qualifications is causing controversy all over the nation. This is precisely the definition of affirmative action. In an excerpt titled Affirmative Action and the College Admissions Process from the book, 8 Steps to Help Black Families Pay For College, by Thomas and Will LaVeist, it is stated that, “affirmative action is meant to level the playing field and ensure that schools and businesses are not intentionally discriminating against minority groups.” This leveling of the playing field leads to the very broad generalization and misperception that the policy is allowing less-qualified minorities to take the place of the more-qualified whites.

Politically speaking, the United States is a country founded on the principles of equality, one that strives to ensure that all its citizens are treated equally and have equal opportunities. Despite all of this, the United States is not predicated on equal outcomes and, as such, some people will naturally rise while others fall. To some, this may seem unfair, but the truth is that, guaranteeing equal outcomes for all people, would severely undermine the foundation on which the United States was built while also threatening its democracy since, to guarantee equal outcomes, some overriding governmental body would have to take the necessary steps to do so. Since affirmative action is a step toward guaranteeing equal outcomes – even when these outcomes should not be equal – it should be prohibited from having any place in the college admissions process. Instead, there should be more emphasis on guaranteeing equal opportunity, and this can be done by “strengthening public education…we must make certain that every child in public school can learn as much and go as far as his or her talents permit” (Summer, 2012, p. 3). Strengthening public education so that the standards are higher and there is a more rigorous curriculum would lift everybody up equally, and would therefore be more in step with American’s democratic ideals than admitting students into college simply based on

Affirmative Action is one of the many social issues facing America today. Affirmative action was signed into place in 1961 by President Kennedy and allows minority groups or people who face discrimination to become employed or get an education that is equal to that of a white male. Groups that Affirmative Action aims to help are women, blacks, Latinos, and people with disabilities. While these policies were signed to slowly rid the workforce and schools from discrimination, it hurts people who do not face discrimination, specifically whites. Many white men and women lose special opportunities to work or go to college because of certain standards that the Affirmative Action laws require. Universities and the military require a certain number of minorities in order to meet the standards and have a more diverse atmosphere. An example of this is the California V. Bakke supreme court case of 1978.

Additionally, not taking race into account allows universities to enhance their selection system. Not only does this dismiss the possibility of being influenced by ethnicity, but it rewards excellency in more qualified students. Since in society, people choose to award high-skilled positions to highly qualified people, it certainly makes sense to admit the most capable individuals. Louis P. Pojman, in his article “The Case Against Affirmative Action,” states that,

July 6, 1964: President Lyndon B. Johnson signs The Civil Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination and mentions the use of “affirmative action to overcome the effects of prior discrimination.”

There is an examination of the admission rates that demonstrates the mechanism by which the freshman pool of African American and Latino students has shrunk so dramatically” (Patricia Gandara). In California, these supposed benefits of affirmative action are not being seen. A study run by Liliana Garces “documented a 5% decline (from 2,010 to 1,906 students) from 1995 to 1996” of the minority group that was attending “five selective public law schools in California, Texas, and Washington” (Garces). These statistics help notify the public that affirmative action in these few states is actually having a reverse effect on these people, and in this situation affirmative action is creating no benefits for minorities. A similar study performed at UC Berkeley stated that “even as Chicano/Latinos increased their representation in the applicant pool at UC Berkeley from approximately 13 percent in 1995 to 19 percent in 2010, they experienced… nearly [a] 75 percent decline in the rate of admissions compared to just over 40 percent decline for whites” (Gandara). The facts prove that affirmative action at prestigious colleges is not helping minorities become accepted. It is a useless effort that the government is wasting their time on. Therefore concluding that affirmative action within this area is useless and leads many to wonder if we should even waste time on the

The various alternative forms of Affirmative Action all have received national attention. Yet, the country is divided on all of these issues, specifically how university admissions should assess issues of merit and diversity against national fundamental issues of diversity and fairness.

Affirmative action, and race-based admissions standards, are the best way to increase (or maintain) diversity at institutions of higher learning. In spite of its perceived flaws, it has increased the diversity at previously all-white institutions of higher learning, such as the University of Texas at Austin, and that diversity has allowed friendships to be formed that otherwise would not have been, has allowed students to learn from professors they otherwise would never have and allowed professors to learn from students from a wide variety of

The concept of race based admission policy is used in colleges to create diversity in campuses, but to some it is another kind of discrimination. According to Stacy Teicher Khadaroo staff writer of “A sticky week for college admissions as affirmative action debate heats up; After a leaked Justice Department document, tensions roil over the use of race at top universities such as Harvard. But many other selective schools may be quietly shifting away from the practice,” top colleges uphold the same commitment to create diversity and using race in admission to accomplish it instead of merit or income. Nonetheless, Department of Justice spokeswomen, Sarah Isgur Flores, is willing to investigate the effects of affirmative action, "The posting

A person has just obtained their dream ACT score, 34, while maintaining outstanding extracurricular activities throughout high school. After applying to the university of their choice, they are informed that they have not been admitted. Crushed and confused, they go on the university’s website only to discover that the university is looking for people with a more diverse racial background. Standing in the way of their acceptance is a defective policy formally known as race-based affirmative action. Informally called affirmative action, it is a combination of adopted policies that construct an advantage to minority groups, giving them more possibilities to succeed in jobs, education, and other aspects of daily life. The whole concept came

The equal opportunity that affirmative action provides has also increased the amount of minority applicants applying to each school. It has “resulted in doubling or tripling the number of minority applications to colleges or universities, and have made colleges and universities more representative of their surrounding community” (Messerli). Since the playing field has been evened, it has encouraged more of those who are disadvantaged because of their ethnicity to apply for and get admitted into college. However, the quotas cause schools to admit under qualified students of minor races who don’t meet the limit over highly qualified students who’s race has reached the limit.

One of the controversial topics and philosophical questions that really sparked my interest was affirmative action. The author of text that I will be drawing connections from is Tom L. Beauchamp and his publication is titled “In Defense of Affirmative Action”. The theme behind his work is self-explanatory from the title. Beauchamp states the strong arguments as to why people want to abandon affirmative action, but also gives his own insight and support to defend its existence and continued implementation. He understands that there is flaws with affirmative action, but the policy does more good than bad, thus it should be continued.

College is for people with the intellectual capacity for a higher education, not for equal representation among races to better the college experience. According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, a quota is an official limit on the number or amount of people or things that are allowed. They were put in place to prevent discrimination and bias within the selection process for college applications. However, the supreme court illegalized quotas in 1789. Now, we have affirmative action: the practice of improving the educational and job opportunities of members of groups that have not been treated fairly in the past because of their race, sex, religion, etc. However, affirmative action causes minorities to compete against each for success, rather than against majorities. The ruling in the case of Regents of the University

& Martinez, 2003). The Supreme Court ruled that the University of California was wrong in the way they approached a special admissions program that was open only to minority applicants (Aguirre Jr. & Martinez, 2003). The ruling argued that the special admissions program violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (Aguirre Jr. & Martinez, 2003). Justice Lewis Powell, Jr. stated in his opinion on the Bakke case that quotas “would hinder rather than further attainment of genuine diversity” (Aguirre Jr. & Martinez, 2003, p. 141). Justice Powell, Jr. also wrote that race is only one part of many factors that an institution can consider in truly achieving a heterogeneous student population (Aguirre Jr. & Martinez, 2003). By siding with Bakke in this case, the Supreme Court essentially outlawed the use of racial quotas in admissions processes in higher education, yet universities took this as it is okay to use race as a selective factor as long as there are no quotas (Aguirre Jr. & Martinez, 2003).

Affirmative action, what is it? If you’ve listened to the news recently it’s been a hot topic. But does everyone fully understand what it is? Affirmative action refers to the favoring of minorities in certain areas, in this case college admissions. Most schools require an applying student to fill out their race on their application. No big deal right? It’s what they do with that information that causes the real issue. The admissions office at a school looks over these applications and determines which are accepted or rejected. However, if you’re a student at the lower end for test scores or GPA and are a minority, you have a much greater chance of getting accepted than a caucasian person in the same situation. If we continue to enforce affirmative action within the admissions process of colleges and universities, then the success rates of students will continue to decrease.