Affirmative Action Should Be Changed or Ended All Together

Instead, the opposite appears to have happened. When the emphasis is placed on aiding people with certain skin colors or ethnic backgrounds, affirmative action sets the races further apart than before. Could this be just another form of segregation? The attempts at boosting minorities to the level of the others have grotesquely failed. To raise minorities the government has pushed down the majority group, fueling racial conflicts. In addition, lowering the bar for minorities for admission into jobs or schools has created a harmful atmosphere for them. Because some of them could not originally qualify on merit and skills, many face failure or extra hardship when they get ushered into their job or school. As Charles T. Canady said in his speech at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D. C., "Preferences do nothing to help develop the skills necessary for the economic and social advancement of the disadvantaged" (43). Meanwhile the majorities receive punishment because of their lack of a specific skin tone or origin. "Entitlements by race, sex, ethnicity and sexual orientation-categories that in no way reflect merit-" Shelby Steele described, "are at the root of the great social evils in American life" (175). It is unfair to reward or turn away applicants because of something that is only theirs by ascribed means. When prospective college students or job applicants are considered, the competition should be solely based

The revered civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” In other words, don’t discriminate people because of their race. This should hold true in all aspects of life. Every American deserves an equal opportunity to succeed, which is why affirmative action is inherently racist. Affirmative action refers to various government policies that aim to increase the proportion of minorities and women in jobs and educational institutions historically dominated by white men. The policies usually require employers and institutions to set goals for hiring or admitting minorities. It is responsible for colleges discriminating against Eastern Asians and whites and for employers hiring workers based off of skin color rather than skills or experience. People can’t change their race (except for former president of the Spokane N.A.A.C.P. chapter, Rachel Dolezal, apparently), yet many colleges and employers favor certain races over others by using quotas, or a fixed number of people of each race.

     Affirmative action is also taking the focus off the individual. That is why Florida governor, Jeb Bush, has banned race and gender preference with his “One Florida” plan which will end affirmative action. The plan also guarantees that every student within the top 20% is guaranteed admission into college.

Affirmative action has been around for decades. Some believe it isn’t fair but others do. Those who believe and agree with affirmative action tend to say, “The principle of affirmative action is to promote societal equality through the preferential treatment of socioeconomically disadvantaged people” (Bidmead, Andrew pg 3). Others that disagree with it and find it unfair simply see it as another form of discrimination, giving one group extra advantages based upon nothing but their skin color (Cline, Austin pg 1). I believe that affirmative action is indeed fair because it gives minorities a better chance at having a successful career in their near future.

Social issues have plagued the women and minorities of our country for decades upon decades, degrading them as if emotions and morals were not evident amongst them. The article entitled "Affirmative Action" states that as representation of minorities and women became more and more necessary, a movement called "affirmative action" became an important issue. Affirmative action is not limited to the uplifting of certain genders and races, but it focuses on establishing standards of certain ethical codes. Affirmative action concentrates on a broad array of issues including equal opportunity, systematic exclusion, and diversity.

Throughout America there are many different views on the effects of affirmative action. Many see it as a negative policy which gives an unnecessary advantage to minorities in America. In a 2009 Pew Poll, “58% of African Americans agree” and only “22% whites agree” that there should be “preferential treatment to improve the position of blacks and other minorities” ("Public Backs Affirmative Action”).

In the United States justice is defined as equal treatment of all its citizens under the law. When one citizen is mistreated an injustice has been committed against all people. Affirmative Action is a program whose purpose is to make sure that citizens are treated equally by enforcing a set of policies which are designed to promote the inclusion of all individuals regardless of race, disability, sex, or religion. In the United States democracy we are all equal, but some groups have been enjoying more advantages in society than others for centuries. Current statistics show the depth of modern day racial gaps, which are rooted in historical discrimination and modern-day structural racism. Generations of nominal disadvantages have created

Though, on the flip side, the American dream would not be available to all with affirmative action. This program diminishes the opportunities for whites to achieve their dreams. From education to the workforce, affirmative action holds bias towards minorities over Caucasians. Despite being “more qualified,” the whites are not placed into certain colleges or workplaces because of race. Even if a Caucasian student receives a near perfect score on the SAT, a student being of color would be the same equivalence. In addition to this, the affirmative action’s policies give minority applicants a minor self-confidence that they do not need to perform better than their white counterparts, just racially distinguishable. This shows that affirmative action does not focus on abilities but rather demographics, thus, showing the controversy with this program today. Above all, affirmative action violates the Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment forbids the states to restrict the basic rights of citizens to equal opportunities. However, accepting certain groups of applicants over others due to race proves that affirmative action endorses racism. Therefore, how is the program equal if only race is the factor? How can this program be equality for all, if the whites are being discriminated against?

On March 6, 1961, President John F. Kennedy issued Executive Order 10925, introducing the phrase “affirmative action.” A few years later, President Lyndon B. Johnson issued Executive Order 11246, which prohibited discrimination based on race, color and religion. Although there were no specific policies that require colleges and universities to use affirmative action programs, they voluntarily gave advantages to minorities and women in the admission process. Affirmative action programs were first challenged in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), in which the Supreme Court ruled that racial quotas are unconstitutional and violated the 14th Amendment. However, schools could still use race as a factor in the admission process as long as it is not the only factor. As a result, colleges have adjusted their affirmative action programs to fit the guidelines outlined by the Court. Today, affirmative action is still a highly controversial issue. In modern day America, the majority of Americans support affirmative action, but there are still those who do not. Affirmative action benefits minorities by moving jobs towards minorities, but the shift is relatively small. Affirmative action also provides minorities with higher acceptance rates to colleges and universities. On the other hand, opponents of affirmative action often cite mismatch theory as one of their main reasons of opposition, but minorities who attend high tier colleges actually benefit from the the

Combat racism, with more racism. That is a strategy that seems so backward in thought that it should not be a program in modern American government and yet is still very active today. Affirmative action is defined as “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, etc” (Merriam-Webster). Affirmative action creates a blatantly unfair advantage in college and job applications to non-minority races and is ultimately a racist law. Affirmative action is most prominent in the College admission process, where its racial prioritizing is the most blatant. In 2005, it was found that the acceptance rates for African Americans at MIT were 98.7% higher than the acceptance rates for Whites or Asians (College Admission Officers). Affirmative Action was passed in 1961 by John Fitzgerald Kennedy to combat racial tensions in college admissions and the workforce. It gave an opportunity to minorities that may have been previously set back from racist laws and rules to have a chance at changing their lives for the better. This artificial raising of minority opportunities has lasted for more than two generations and has long outlived its purpose. Affirmative Action in its modern day use is racist at the expense of the non-minority race(s), and was meant for minority advancement in a world where it was almost impossible. Today, all races are equal in the eyes of all the

It is quite common to see people in all races study in the same classrooms nowadays, but back to history this kind of classroom was nearly impossible to exist. The reason behind this huge transformation is because of affirmative action. Although there is a heated debate on whether college admission should only be based on students’ merits or minority races. be racial conscious. This debatable topic leads to a question that affirmative action should be banned or not. Affirmative action is necessary during the college admission process, because affirmative action is beneficial for the colleges to become more cultural and racial diverse and minorities can gain greater power in the society and promoting the equality for minorities.

Knowledge doesn’t come from the color of your skin, it comes from your capability to learn and prosper in your learnings. Selecting students based on color is not morally right. Just because you have a different skin color does not make you more or less intelligent than other races. If you are just doing it for diverse enrollment, you need to rethink it. It is not fair to any students, especially those who have the knowledge and experience to have a spot in a class. Favoring those who are minorities and not doing much for those who are not is wrong. I do not see what sets them apart from non- minorities other than the color of their skin. You do not know their capabilities or anything.

March 6th, 1961 Affirmative Action policies in higher education were implemented (Infoplease). Affirmative Action was designed to provide equal access to universities for historically underrepresented minorities. The argument of whether Affirmative Action should be decimated is a simple one. Students who have the academic credentials and earn their way into college deserve to be accepted. For no reason should previously excluded minorities gain unfair leverage in an attempt to “right past wrongs”. But with Affirmative Action banned in only eight states, we are left with two questions; how exactly Affirmative Action affects the culture within universities to have it seen as an unjust policy, and can diversity continue to survive without this program.

Some experts have formed the opinion that affirmative action plans are no longer needed. Others have reached the opposite conclusion. Affirmative action is an action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer from discrimination, in relation to employment or education. Affirmative action plans are designed to facilitate workplace success for members of the groups they target (women, ethnic minorities), yet ma have ironic effect of stigmatizing AAP targets and, in turn decreasing their performance outcomes (Leslie, Mayer, & Kravitz, 2014). I lean towards those who still feel affirmative action is still needed. Affirmative action is needed because the policy balances the obstacles that minorities and women face in pursuing education and employment

Affirmative action supporters make one large assumption when defending the policy. They assume that minority groups want help. This, however, may not always be the case. They fought to attain equality, not special treatment. To some of them, the acceptance of special treatment is an admittance of inferiority. Some would include me. I believe I can become successful on my own. I don’t need laws to help me get a great job. I along with many others who are against affirmative action want to be treated as equals, not as incompetent. Although discrimination is not placed in a well-distant past, affirmative action is an unneeded and drastic remedy for today’s world (Farron, Steven, 2005)