The Pros And Cons Of Affirmative Action

Proponents of affirmative action believe that it is a necessary step toward racial equality. Opponents argue on the basis of “reverse racism,” which claims that affirmative action keeps certain members of the majority ethnic group out of jobs or other positions that they deserve solely because of quotas that must be filled. The positive effects of affirmative action are the basis behind the arguments of those who support considering ethnicity and race as a part of admissions.

In eight University of California campuses where affirmative action is no longer implemented the enrollment of black students only declined by 17% and the enrollment of Hispanics declined only by 6.9%. Even without the use of it, minorities are still getting into colleges. There is no need for discriminatory programs like affirmative action because there is not a big difference between minority groups and whites anymore. If some person has the potential and desire to succeed they can succeed. Everyone can do anything they want to do if they have what is takes to enter the university or job.

Not only does Affirmative action prevent discrimination, but also this legislation implemented by the national government can diversify and improve the overall well being of businesses and schools. Sometimes individuals of a minority group are rejected for a position or declined acceptance to a university not because they are inept, but due to outdated stereotypical assumptions that cause an employer or official to reconsider that person. The ideas behind affirmative action prevent unfair labeling from those whose

This case shows how men and women of all races can be affected by the two headed monster called affirmative action. Affirmative action was established so that members of society such women, minorities or those with handicaps would be guaranteed an honest opportunity to achieve goals, professions or pursue higher education without discrimination. However, when a person’s sex, nationality, social settings and race compete against one another even those the act is intended to protect become

Affirmative action was created to help end discrimination in the work place and in educational opportunities, but has given an unfair advantage to minority groups at the expense of more qualified individuals. Because employers and colleges must show that they are accepting a proportional amount of minorities in their application acceptance process, highly qualified

Proponents of affirmative action believe that because, historically, many minority groups were denied jobs and mistreated, they have been unable to recover from their impoverished state and are thus, at a disadvantage. They believe that because they generally live in poorer areas, they face more struggles than their white counterparts. They believe that such struggles make it more difficult for blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities to succeed and therefore, should increase their acceptance rates into universities to try to level the playing field for the

So said one of the world’s most renown orators in his fight for racial equality. Eighty-five years later humanity continues to fight this battle in the attempt to end discrimination and its effects once and for all. Through affirmative action, America assumes it is progressing towards this ideal world; however, what many proponents fail to realize is that the policy ineffective and even flawed in its basic reasoning. While created for an admirable cause, ending racism and its long-lasting effects, affirmative action has actually harmed the minorities it was made to help, worsening the nation’s workforce simultaneously.

In the case of Bakke, affirmative action does not actually provide equal opportunity; it helps minorities at the cost of others. “…eliminating racial preferences would have increased the likelihood of admission for white undergraduate applicants from 25 percent to only 26.5 percent.” (Liu, 2002) For Bakke, the chances of being admitted are increased if affirmative action was not in place. For example, 60 percent black applicants who scored 1200-1249 on the SAT were accepted, compared to 19 percent of white applicants. For those who scored 1250-1299 on the SAT, 74 percent of blacks were accepted contrasting the 23 percent of white applicants accepted. Bakke was only allowed to be chosen from 84 spots versus a minority student who had all 100 spaces available to them. For many, that difference may not mean much at all, but those slim chances could have

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

In 1998, when California banned its affirmative actions program, it had a huge impact in the number of minority admissions at UC Berkeley and UCLA, dropping the number of admissions to 61 percent and 36 percent respectively. It was the same case in Texas at Rice University, when the program was eliminated the number of students reduced to 46 percent less African-Americans and 22 percent less Hispanics students (NCSL, 2014). This shows that the program benefitted a lots of minority students to getting admissions, get education and graduate helping them get better job opportunities, and eventually better

Court cases that have involved Affirmative Action are not rare, such as Regents of University of California v. Bakke, Wessman v.Gittens (Russo and Mawdsley 263,266), and Grutter v. Bollinger (Kim 17). In these cases students of the non-minority category, were denied admissions into the school, even though they were more qualified. These court cases show how affirmative action has hurt majorities and benefited minorities. “Affirmative Action is calling into question the values of our society, such as equality, fairness, and justice” (Kim 12). Affirmative action is a form of reverse racism and it is in direct violation of the equal protection clause of Civil Rights Act of 1964. Giving out points based on race is unequal and if the majority gave points to Caucasians or Asian Americans, would receive serious back lash. People that gave these points to the whites or Asians will be viewed as a racist. Everyone should be held to the same standards and the same

They are not meant to guarantee equal results -- but instead proceed on the common-sense notion that if equality of opportunity were a reality, African Americans, women, people with disabilities and other groups facing discrimination would be fairly represented in the nation 's work force and educational institutions. With affirmative action in position, policies are needed for guidance and fairness.

Affirmative Action policies have shown effectiveness in increasing the number of minority applicants and graduates who benefitted from these programs receive better jobs, earn more money, and essentially live better lives because of the opportunities they received. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (2018), “statistics show that after California abolished its affirmative action programs in 1998, the minority student admissions at UC Berkeley fell 61 percent, and minority admissions at UCLA fell 36 percent”. The reality is not everybody is born into a high socioeconomic status family, and individuals with a higher socioeconomic status have more opportunities than those with low socioeconomic status. Affirmative action polices compensate for this social and economic oppression. I do believe that certain racial and ethnic groups are disadvantaged because they are frequently in lower income brackets consequently not exposed to the same resources than those in higher income brackets. The notion of competition between students based on merit is still supported, but affirmative Action does help compensate for economic

Instead, affirmative action is just a blunt weapon where a scalpel is needed. This paper is going to address whether affirmative action is accomplishing what it was intended to accomplish, as well as if places of higher education should continue to use it. The topics that are going to be addressed are the qualification of applicants, direct discrimination due to the policy, and the desire to diversify the fields that different races engage in. These will be presented with each of their respective pros, cons, and a rebuttal to prove that affirmative action is discriminatory and should be removed nationally to be replaced with policies based around socio-economic factors.

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.