Liliana Garces Affirmative Action Research

On a beautiful day in 1965, June 4th, President Lyndon B Johnson spoke at the commencement at the prestigious Howard University commencement. He can be quoted saying “ You do not take a man who for years has been hobbled by chains, liberate him, bring him to the starting line of a race saying ‘ you are free to compete with all the others,’ and still justly believe you have been completely fair.”(ECS1) Shortly after giving this address President Johnson, “Put his money where his mouth was” and signed executive orders mandating that all government contractors take “affirmative action” to hire minority groups (Brunner 2002). In responses to this many professional schools, colleges and university’s followed the governments

In his commencement address at Howard University one year after signing into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson raised a question regarding the growing inequality between white and black Americans after World War II despite the country’s prosperity. Ira Katznelson’s When Affirmative Action Was White posits that the vast programs such as the New Deal and G.I. Bill of Rights of the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration, seen as progressive, were inherently racist. Katznelson discusses these programs and how they affected black Americans in their various political, economic, and social spheres. He examines these problematic and discriminatory areas under four scopes: welfare, the workplace, military service, and education.

The Bakke Vs. The Regents of University of California case is one of the most well known supreme court cases in America dealing with the topic of affirmative action. Stated by Eastland, “affirmative action policies are those in which an institution or organization actively engages in efforts to improve opportunities for historically excluded groups in American society” (10). In 1978, the plaintiff Bakke filed a suit against the University of California, claiming that his rejection from the school was a result of racial discrimination and that it violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the equal protection clause of the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment, and the California Constitution (Posner 171). The U.S Supreme court ruled that affirmative action was constitutional, but not the use of racial quotas. The significance of this case is that it dealt directly with two major theories prevalent to minorities and race: Their assimilation into the university setting using affirmative action, and also the systemic racism that these groups faced as well. More specifically however, the Bakke Vs. the Regents of University of California case can be explained by systemic racism more so than assimilation, because systemic racism was and still is in effect in these educational institutions. Even with the inclusion of programs such as affirmative action that are supposed to combat systemic racism and simplify assimilation, American institutions were built upon ideological processes that

The questionable existence of affirmative action continues to create a pervasive tug of war between proponents and opponents of affirmative action. The cornerstone of affirmative action policies initiated from the U.S. Supreme Court case of Brown v. Board of Education, in which the Supreme Court ruled that segregation was unequal—ultimately forever changing the system of education in America. This groundbreaking decision served as a gateway, with the goal of “leveling the playing field” and remedying the grotesque American past rooted in harsh racial discrimination against non-white individuals, primarily of African American descent. As a result of swift implementation of affirmative action policies, cultural and racial diversity quickly diversified

Companies and educational institutions greatly benefit from the guidelines of affirmative action because they profit from the different ideas, work styles, and contributions unique to each diverse individual. As quoted in Paul Connors’s compilation, Affirmative Action, President of Columbia University, Lee Bollinger, addresses the importance of a diverse educational system by stating, “The experience of arriving on a campus to live and study with classmates from a diverse range of backgrounds is essential to students' training for this new world, nurturing in them an instinct to reach out instead of clinging to the comforts of what seems natural or familiar” (12-13). A statement by Southeastern Oklahoma State University further supports the idea that success in modern day society stems from diversity saying, “Our country is strong because of the rich diversity of our culture, not in spite of it” (Affirmative Action).

As a minority Roberto Santiago’s essay Black and Latino reveals that even though he has been generally underrepresented by his ethnicity, he has led a successful life without affirmative action. Since Santiago was both African American and Hispanic he dealt with identity issues and stereotypes throughout his adolescent life. Even though affirmative action is supposed to make attempts to improve opportunities for groups that were historically excluded it is still a form of discrimination itself. The preference of one race over another is discrimination despite the fact if the group is gaining benefits. Contemporary society still takes on the controversial debate over affirmative action in educational institutions and employment. Institutions are still pressured to accept more minorities even if they do not meet the full requirements such as in education or in employment. Racial preferences stigmatize minority groups instead of finding better ways to make opportunities equal to minorities. Affirmative action also implies that all minority groups need more assistance in order to succeed, but according to Santiago he triumphed without needing compensation. In educational institutions such as universities they are influenced by affirmative action; since they admit students based on race instead of looking for their qualifications. Even though affirmative action is supposed to create diversity in schools it does not help if minority students are not prepared for a higher

Among the citizens of America affirmative action is a sensitive subject with some seeing it as a necessity to help those who have been repressed and others seeing it as reverse racism. Many Americans may also be conflicted about affirmative action, because it is such a complex issue. People fervently debate affirmative action, because it is a complex issue revolving around one’s own race, experiences, and desires.

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.

The utilization of race in affirmative action policies in higher education has been a topic of contention for several decades now. Since the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, we have seen some of the most heated debates over the fairness of affirmative action and the impacts on society the utilization of race creates. With such pending questions on fairness and of the constitutionality of affirmative action policies two major Supreme Court cases have arisen, University of California Regents v. Bakke and Grutter v. Bollinger, both impacting university admissions policies throughout the country and setting precedent in following rulings. Following the two rulings of these cases, I argue that affirmative action and the utilization of

Race-based affirmative action has been challenged by a great deal of objection during the course of it duration. According to its opponents, Affirmative action proves to be inconsistent. Affirmative action based on race increases race consciousness instead of supporting color-blind justice. By giving people special consideration to ensure equality, it contributes to inequality. The constitution of the United States calls for equal treatment, therefore, allowing racial consideration poses a contradiction.

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.

For over forty years the issue of affirmative action has been subject to a tremendous amount of debate and controversy. Affirmative action policies and programs seek to redress and eliminate past and present discrimination based on race, religion, gender, ethnicity, or sexuality; and therein lies the controversy, as much of the opposition to affirmative action argues that it creates reverse discrimination. Affirmative action is beneficial in assuring that women and minority groups don’t assume rolls of inferiority amongst society; and it encourages positive action to ensure that qualified candidates for employment positions and admissions to universities are given equal opportunity and consideration. The issue of affirmative action has become

An article written by Terence Chea explaining that, Campus Diversity Suffers under Race blind Policies, admission was “four times higher than their percentage in the state’s K-12 public schools” (Chea, Terence). Asian Americans students have a high acceptance rate into universities. Specifically to UC Berkeley, the freshman class consisting in the school of 30% of white and 46% percent of Asian Americans. As the result of affirmative action reverse discrimination is present as a large number of minorities Asian Americans have been accepted into UC

For most of this country’s history, the nations top universities and businesses practiced the most effective form of affirmative action ever; the quota was for 100 percent white male. However, ever with affirmative actions programs in place, still minority-group members face far more discrimination than their white male counterparts. They still receive less pay and job opportunities than white males. Therefore, the legal controversy of affirmative actions programs continues.

“The American Council on Education (ACE) has a longstanding record of commitment to access to higher education for all qualified Americans and to the advancement of equal educational opportunity” (The Importance of Diversity in Higher Education) This dedication is considered in ACE's positions open strategy, its automatic exercises, and its livelihood polishes. It has been communicated over and over in resolutions by the ACE Board of Directors with respect to governmental policy regarding minorities in society, nondiscrimination, value, meet open door, and induction guidelines. The ACE is only one of the numerous aggregations that accept assorted qualities in universities.