CATHY JUN USAC Internal Vice President Elias
Enciso listens to Anica McKesey speak
during a debate on affirmative action in Sproul Hall on Monday.
By Lily Jamali
Daily Bruin Contributor
Students who debated the issue of affirmative action in Sproul
Hall Monday agreed UCLA has not fulfilled its mission of
diversity.
The event, titled “Is Access Really Denied?”
provided a forum for discussion on race in the university
admissions process and on racial equality at all levels of
education.
“Dialogue is always good, especially with affirmative
action,” said Anouh Vang, a third-year Asian American studies
student. “To hear both sides is important, even if you have
one side that you’ve already chosen.”
The debate, organized by the Undergraduate Students Association
Council, Affirmative Action Coalition and Sproul Hall, drew about
50 students and one professor, Jules Zentner from the Germanic
languages department.
Four undergraduates ““ two supporting and two opposing
affirmative action ““ gave statements before fielding
questions from the audience.
Though participants disagreed on affirmative action as a
solution to educational inequalities, both sides were discontented
with the current educational system.
“I think the university has completely failed its
mission,” said Thomas Soteros-McNamara, a third-year
political science student and one of the anti-affirmative action
panelists.
“It’s not how many people of different backgrounds
you have,” he said. “It’s about providing an
environment in which people can learn from each other. I think
it’s very clear that the university doesn’t provide
that.”
Pro-affirmative action panelists echoed this sentiment of
dissatisfaction with the university.
“Our university is not representative of the community in
which we live,” said second-year political student Anica
McKesey, a pro-affirmative action panelist. “We don’t
represent the state of California. You can see that in the
admissions numbers.”
According to the UCLA Office of Academic Planning and Budget Web
page, the number of entering African American students dropped from
269 in 1995 to 157 in the 2000-01 school year. Chicano and Latino
numbers have dropped from 800 to 525. and American Indian
enrollment has fallen from 48 to 16 during these same years.
Panelists agreed that to remedy these falling enrollment
numbers, more efforts should be made to improve the quality of K-12
education in the United States.
“At the 13th grade, I think it’s a little too late
to try to make up for all the inequalities that have been piled on
in the K-12 system,” said Andy Jones, an anti-affirmative
action panelist and second-year political science student.
“You need to start from the ground up and put tax dollars
into these crummy schools.
“My main objection to racial preference is that it is
unenforceable and illogical,” said Jones, who left the event
early. “You need to focus on the educational system more than
last-second advantages.”
USAC Internal Vice President Elias Enciso, who supports
affirmative action, said though affirmative action was created
under President John F. Kennedy only as a temporary solution to
educational inequality in schools, it must continue at the
university level.
“Affirmative action is a proactive step that has started
to rectify and repair a lot of communities,” said Enciso, a
fourth-year political science and Chicana/o studies student who sat
on the panel.
According to McKesey, a member of the African Student Union,
affirmative action is the most immediate solution to racial
inequality in schools. But she proposed that open admissions to the
university should be considered a long term goal.
Although audience members were given opportunity to ask
questions and debate with panelists, some were disappointed at the
event’s one-sided turnout.
“I wish more anti-affirmative action could have been here
so that viewpoint could have been represented,” said Diane
Fields, a fourth-year sociology and Spanish student.
Erica Ramirez, a fifth-year Chicana/o studies and American
literature and culture student who helped organize the event, said
the fact that few opponents of affirmative action showed up was not
reflective of the dialogue which could have taken place.
“Most people that came out have a strong stance for
affirmative action,” Ramirez said. “Still, I feel good
about the turnout because it reflects concern for the
issue.”