Wednesday, May 27, 1998
Carnesale should challenge Prop. 209
CHANCELLOR: Protect campus diversity through affirmative action
to curb waning minority numbers
A week ago, UCLA witnessed the real effect of Proposition 209:
decimation of people of color. The enrollment numbers for the
incoming 1998 freshman class were released Wednesday, reflecting an
outcome that is absolutely disturbing. The number of
underrepresented students fell drastically, sending a damaging
signal to not only the existing students of color on campus, but to
communities who are currently preparing their children for higher
education.
Many boast about how far America has come in regards to equal
accessibility – and equal opportunity – yet the numbers tell an
entirely different story.
Of the 4,267 incoming freshmen, only 604 are underrepresented
students, 158 fewer than this year. The actual breakdown shows the
following figures: 15 American Indians, 131 African Americans, 329
Chicanos and 129 Latinos. The dismantling of affirmative action by
Proposition 209 and the UC Regent-supported bills SP-1 and SP-2 can
be blamed for the endangered status of minority students.
As these results show, these policies unjustly attack
underrepresented minority students. As such, we call on Chancellor
Albert Carnesale to defy Proposition 209 in order to avoid this
year’s results from being reproduced in the future. In addition,
Carnesale and the university must support the Equal Educational
Opportunity Initiative, an initiative which would reverse the
effects of 209 for college admissions.
There are numerous reasons to support non-compliance with 209.
To demonstrate why it is unjust, we must examine the effects that
this law has not only on this university, but within the
underrepresented communities as well.
Students of color on campus face psychological, emotional and
educational effects that go largely unnoticed. The alienation,
loneliness and frustration that many students of color on campus
feel is neither healthy nor acceptable. To attend a school knowing
that a large portion of the campus is resentful of the very
presence of "minorities" is not right. Furthermore, the ease with
which students so easily forget the history of racism, still with
us today, is astonishing.
If we ignore what the numbers tell us and comply with this law,
we will undoubtedly witness a vicious pattern that will have
irreversible effects on higher education and on underrepresented
communities. Outreach efforts or a revamping of the public schools
could realistically take 20 years.
If we wait for the outreach efforts to work on a large-scale
level, we will be losing an entire generation of students of color.
More people of color will be denied an education thereby
restricting the types of jobs for which they qualify, leading to
more poverty. Their children will be raised in this environment,
and will already have less access to the materials and
opportunities that children of wealthier backgrounds have.
With fewer college-educated people of color, fewer lawyers and
policy makers will be produced. With less legal and political
representation, we return to the era which prompted the birth of
affirmative action as well as the civil rights movement. We say
these times are long past. Are they?
Racial diversity within any environment is important, not only
to underrepresented communities, but to the communities who are in
the majority as well. UCLA has historically been known for its
diverse student population, and many students deliberately chose
UCLA for this reason.
The elements that comprise a "world class" university are not
merely SAT scores and monetary support; the individual students who
bring their personal experiences and triumphs add more to the
success and greatness of a university than many acknowledge.
It is important to understand the history of affirmative action
to understand the current issue facing the university. Affirmative
action is a necessary step towards reaching an end.
Affirmative action was established in as a means of providing
educational opportunities to students historically excluded from
education by supposedly just laws which were upheld for
decades.
Affirmative action was instated in the hope that those who
received a college education would carry that legacy throughout
their family lines. Studies indicate that if one or both of your
parents received a college education, you are more likely to do the
same. The average income of those who graduate from college is also
substantially greater than those who only received a high school
diploma.
Affirmative action was used to render community empowerment,
accessibility and to create leaders for those communities who had
little, if any, representation. This worked well for women.
White women have been the primary beneficiaries of affirmative
action in terms of gaining representation in politics and corporate
America. Affirmative action was also a response to the history of
America’s racist political and educational systems.
Affirmative action is by no means the perfect solution to
inequality, however the aforementioned goals are far less
attainable without affirmative action. Outreach efforts should
continue, yet should be supplemented by affirmative action.
Chancellor Carnesale, if you are a principled person and you
indeed support racial diversity on campus, you should be willing to
challenge the regents; people have been willing to risk a lot more
than their jobs when standing up for important issues.
A press release issued by UC President Richard Atkinson focused
on the large size of the incoming class, relegating the effects of
209 to a secondary issue. If your commitment to diversity is real,
you must challenge this distortion of the issues.
Your compliance with 209 makes your statements about maintaining
diversity at UCLA seem shallow. Do you wonder what will happen to
California’s minority populations if your university denies them an
education? Do you question the future of California or the values
of the UC Regents?
Your nonchalant attitude about the effects of 209 insults the
severity of the issue and causes many people to question your
sincerity.
Actions speak louder than words in this case, and affirmative
action speaks louder than any other solution that has been
presented thus far.
This university has the opportunity to make history. If it
stands firm against 209; it will open the doors to higher education
once again. But, if it upholds 209, it will promulgate America’s
legacy of policies which prejudicially restrict access to
education.