Affirmative Action : The United States Of America

The Founding Fathers wanted all men to be treated equal. The Declaration of Independence states, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (Jefferson, 1776). Unfortunately, equality for everyone has not been truly realized. The main issues affected were people’s skin color and gender. Women and people of color were not considered to be equal for many years. To correct this issue Affirmative Action was implemented. Affirmative Action helped people of color and women to be considered for jobs and accepted into colleges equally among other candidates. Today, equality between races and genders has improved, although Affirmative Action should be modified to meet the needs of today’s society.

Affirmative action in college admissions continues to be heatedly debated. In 2003, the Supreme Court had ruled in Grutter v. Bollinger that diversity was a compelling interest for colleges to use race in admissions. In the amicus brief that the American Sociological Association et al. provided to the Supreme Court, sociological evidence was presented to elucidate the value of affirmative action. Yet in 2006, Proposal 2 was passed in Michigan to ban affirmative action in public education (Levitsky). Based on the information in the amicus brief, the correlation between race and socioeconomic status of the minorities, and the negative effects of banning affirmative action, admissions officers at the University of Michigan should consider

Generations of families have suffered due unequal laws or prejudices set in place to prevent minorities from growing. Slavery, segregation, separate but equal laws, the trail of tears, failing ESOL classes, unequal pay and so much more effect today's youth and causing history to change slowly if at all. Affirmative action has good intentions and is very much needed in today's world however it sometimes fails doing what it was created to do.

Holzer and Neumark have gone one step forward in their study and have tried to analyze the fate of women and minority employees who had been hired by firms in order to fulfill their obligations under the affirmative action order. They found that women and minority employees performed as well as their white male counterparts if all of them had the same educational qualifications. They also concluded in their study that firms which had objective methods of analyzing employee’s performance saw more number of women high performers than those who simply depended on the rating given by superiors. Thus this study proves that if objective HR practices are followed and personal biases of the reporting managers are removed; women and minority employees perform as well as male counterparts. Their study also suggests that following affirmative action consistently makes a firm more impartial and the bias is more or less removed after the initial reluctance. One of the major points of argument lately has been the glass ceiling which women employees have to face in Corporate America. People have claimed that there is a barrier which prevents women from reaching the upper echelons. Unfortunately

Affirmative action legislation in the United States has its basic framework in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which mandates that firms with more than 15 employees are subject to a variety of anti-discrimination policies, more of which were passed in subsequent years. In some cases, the concept of affirmative action was taken to be a voluntary act to attain diversity. For the most part, however, courts have interpreted affirmative action laws as having little teeth under the Constitution. It has been suggested that "racial preferences in federal law or policy are a remedy of last resort" (Dale, 2005)

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.

California's decision in 1996 to outlaw the use of race in public college admissions was widely viewed as the beginning of the end for affirmative action at public universities all over the United States. But in the four years since Californians passed Proposition 209, most states have agreed that killing affirmative action outright would deepen social inequality by denying minority citizens access to higher education. The half-dozen states that are actually thinking about abandoning race-sensitive

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

Discrimination and segregation have been inbred into America’s history from day one. Therefore, there have been many laws and bills passed to break down barriers between privileged whites and unfortunate minorities. Among these government actions are the 14th Amendment, Equal Pay Act, and the Civil Rights Acts. John F. Kennedy perhaps created one of the most heavily debated policies today, his Affirmative Action Policy. 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.” (“Definition of AFFIRMATIVE” 1). The definition itself is vague and open for a good deal of interpretation which causes much of today’s debates. The most recent interpretation of Affirmative Action came from the Fisher vs. University of Texas at Austin (UT of Austin). Fisher was a white individual who was denied acceptance into the university, and then filed a lawsuit against them. Fisher lost the case at the Supreme Court level in 2013, but the case returned in 2016 again with a much closer vote, so affirmative action is losing some of its power and will continue to be challenged for years to come, but is it worth the challenge (Kut.org 1)? Affirmative Action has served a vital role in the integration of race into universities and the workforce, but now it is outdated and an unnecessary requirement for schools and businesses.

Historically, people of color have had little to no success when applying to universities until recently. The first-time minorities became a part of the American social system was after President Kennedy passed the executive order of Affirmative Action, which first barred government employers from discriminating based on “race, creed, color, or national origin” (Kennedy, 1961). Overtime the use of affirmative action moved from jobs to the education system. Affirmative action in schools truly gained momentum following the Brown v. Board of Education as educational institutions began to comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling to integrate schools. When the Supreme Court ruled on education President Johnson affirmed his education commitment to

On March 6, 1961 President John F. Kennedy issued Executive Order 10925, which included a provision that government contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.” Affirmative Action policies have always been controversial, largely because of the allegation that they cause employers to give preference in hiring to less-qualified minorities or females over more-qualified white males.

Perhaps one of the most divisive issues in the United States is race. While most Americans would rather not talk about it, there are still issues surrounding race that will strike the interest of most citizens. This is perhaps nowhere more true than the debate over affirmative action. Although the United States has made great strides in improving race relations over the past forty years, affirmative action continues to be one of the most controversial policies in America. It has rattle the halls of higher education. It has appeared on the steps of the Supreme Court. And it has divided not only different racial groups, but even members of a single racial group. In fact, I’ve heard some of the most heated conversation over affirmative action between two African Americans. Like myself, many other African Americans believe this policy is one the most effective strategies for leveling what has long been an uneven playing field. However, critics of affirmative action believe this kind of reform does an injustice to the idea of merit. Though no one can deny that minorities and women have made significant steps towards autonomy and equality in American society, there are still wide economic disparities between these groups and white males. While theses issues and controversies surrounding affirmative action can not be resolved easily, the question remains: do we still need affirmative action in America? I say yes, affirmative action was and is needed to achieve full gender and

As a testament to the next discussion point of opportunities, especially within the realm of college admission, I have experienced firsthand the opportunities presented by affirmative action. As a low-income, first-generation college student, Virginia Tech had offered me a full scholarship based solely on merit and financial need. As a “minority” according to Virginia Tech, I had an

On the contrary, supports of affirmative action feel that this law is still needed in America to help places of higher education have more diversity which will benefit companies in the long run and it also helps companies be more diverse and it helps them thrive. In the past few decades the number of minorities and females in places of higher education and companies have been rising at a slow rate. During 2012, the health care industry was suffering from lack of medical personal in the medical field; however, “16% of the U.S. population is Latino and 14% is African American, these groups constituted only 9% and 7%, respectively, of the total U.S. medical school enrollment in 2012 “(Graces, paragraph 2). The rate of minorities enrolled in medical school has been slowly rising over the years. Having minorities and females in a company helps the company be more diverse while also giving the company employees that can help the company thrive and be successful. Supporters feel that this law benefits people who usually would not have a chance of attending a place of higher education or be a part of a company an equal and fair chance. Supporters of affirmative action feel that it is positive discrimination and that it benefits places of higher education and companies not discriminate against females and minorities.