Ward Connerly’s term as a UC regent has finally come to an
end. While never timid, his aggressive initiatives have led to
decreased minority enrollment, to the detriment of both the state
and university.
During his 12-year term, he overtly politicized the UC Board of
Regents, sparking heated discussions on topics including the merit
of ethnic studies programs. And though minority enrollment
systemwide has rebounded slightly after his vocal and substantive
attacks on race-based admissions, the level is still considerably
lower than before his tenure.
The damage may be irreparable, at least for the foreseeable
future. To the UC’s misfortune, Connerly’s legacy will
be a lasting one.
After being appointed by Gov. Pete Wilson in 1993, his efforts
to ban the UC’s use of affirmative action succeeded in July
1995 when a majority of regents voted to stop using sex or race as
a factor when admitting students, hiring faculty or selecting
contractors. A year later, he helped pass Proposition 209 with 55
percent of the vote. The amendment outlawed the use of affirmative
action by governments statewide.
In 2003 he spearheaded the failed Prop. 54 campaign that would
have prohibited state agencies from collecting most race-based
data, such as college applications.
His efforts have led to sharp declines in the numbers of blacks,
American Indians, Chicanos and Latinos. UC-wide representation of
those groups has fallen from 16 percent in 1997, the year before
affirmative action was banned, to 12 percent in 2002. More dramatic
declines have occurred in graduate and professional programs. Now,
UCLA welcomed just 130 black freshmen on campus this fall ““
from a class of 4,000.
Connerly has said he opposes race-based preferences because
university admissions should be based on merit. He believes
underrepresented minority students should become fully competitive
with white and Asian students ““ and does not view affirmative
action as even a short-term solution.
At an on-campus debate in April 1995, he told students, “I
want to keep affirmative action. I also want to keep ethnicity and
race out of admissions practices. That’s a solution I’m
trying to find.”
But Connerly never pursued such a solution with nearly the vigor
he applied to eliminating race from the admission equation. He
accurately recognized reforming K-12 education and strengthening
outreach programs were crucial to narrowing the achievement gap,
but neither garnered much of his attention and have been the result
of cutbacks in recent years.
Additionally, though Connerly once advocated against fee
increases and even voted against them early in his tenure, he
approved a 2003 hike ““ further limiting the very
accessibility he attempted to protect.
Connerly spent his time finding new ways to publicize himself
while attacking and destroying the policies he so opposed ““
leaving a disturbing void where meaningful reform was needed.
Connerly is often credited, and even praised, with initiating
the race debate in higher education. But any positive dialogue is
overwhelmingly trumped by the destruction his policies have caused.
The UC should be relieved to see the departure of a man who set the
university back three decades.