What Stand do Interest Groups Take on Affirmative Action?

There are numerous interest groups and organizations in America. However, I found a few, in my opinion, that could easily be called the main groups on affirmative action. All of these groups work to promote affirmative action in the United States. Each one of them have called on the Congress to reject anti-affirmative action bills. They are listed as the following: 

• ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union)

"Affirmative action programs – including targeted outreach and recruitment efforts, the use of non-traditional criteria for hiring and admissions, after-school and mentorship programs, and training and apprenticeship opportunities – are tailored to fit specific instances where race and gender must be taken into account in order to provide fair and equal access to minorities and women. These programs recognize and strive to correct the barriers that continue to block the paths of many individual Americans, including women, Native Americans, Arab Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, and African Americans. Affirmative action helps ensure equal access to opportunities and brings our nation closer to the ideal of giving everyone a fair chance. We support affirmative action and other race- and gender-conscious policies as vital tools in the struggle to provide all Americans with equal opportunity, to promote diversity in academic and professional settings, and to give each and every one of us a fair chance to compete." ( "Striving for Equal Opportunity: Why the ACLU Supports Affirmative Action," March 2008) 

• CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations)
• NOW (National Organization for Women)

"Despite the enormous gains made by the civil rights and women's rights movements, women and people of color still face unfair obstacles in business and education. An astonishing 70% of schools are not in compliance with Title IX, the federal equal education opportunity law...
Affirmative Action programs merely acknowledge that hundreds of years of discrimination cannot be erased in a few decades and still hold women and people of color back. Affirmative Action is the bridge between changing the laws and changing the culture.
The radical right wing would have us believe that women and people of color earn less because we don't work as hard or we're not as smart. That simply isn't the case. Laws have changed, but discrimination persists. Affirmative Action only opens doors, women and people of color have to walk through those doors by themselves." ("Talking About Affirmative Action," November 2009)

• LULAC (League of United Latin American Citizens)
• NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People)

These next interest groups are only based on working for civil rights and affirmative action.

• LCCR (Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights)
• AAAA (American Association on Affirmative Action)
• BAMN (Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary) 

Who Does the Affirmative Action Benefit and Harm?

Affirmative Action is a benefit to not only minorities and women but to the whole society. It supports equality, equal opportunity, and racial diversity. Did you know women and minorities do not have the same rights as white men?


- For every 1 dollar a man makes, a woman earns 0.70 cents.
-56 companies out of 100 had no women or Black, Latino, Asian, or American Indian representation in the highest-paid executive positions.
-The America's Recovery Capital (ARC) Loan Program provides loans of up to $35,000 to help small businesses make it through the recession. Of the nearly 4,500 loans handed out this year, 3 percent went to Hispanic-owned businesses, 3 percent went to Asian-owned businesses, and only 1.5 percent went to Black-owned businesses. More than 91 percent of these loans went to White-owned businesses. (The Leadership Conference 2010)


This shows that although affirmative action exists in majority of states, it still needs to go a long way to achieve its goal. If we ban this policy, then many dreams of minorities and  women will be shattered.  Studies show that companies have seen an increase in minority representation including Microsoft Corporation, whose minority workforce has increased from 16.8% to 25.6% in February 2003.  (Brief for Amici Curiae, 65 Leading American Businesses in Support of Respondents, Americans for a Fair Chance, 2003)


While researching, you will find statistics on both sides of the debate. There are many websites that will say affirmative action hurts white men. This can be true. I am not denying it. However, the positives outweigh the negatives. For example, in University of California, San Diego (UCSD), whites students that made up the college dropped from 40 % in 1998 to 29% in 2009. This shows that banning affirmative action does not help white students. Therefore, all in all, affirmative action is a win-win situation.

Democrats and Republicans on Affirmative Action

What do the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have to say about affirmative action? Well, in general, majority of the Democrats support affirmative action, while Republicans tend to oppose it. The Democratic Party is in favor of reaching racial diversity and promoting equal opportunities for women and minorities. The Republican Party, on the other hand, believes that everyone should work for their success and that affirmative action goes against meritocracy, progress based on ability and talent rather than on class privilege or wealth. However, they support economic-based affirmative action. Then again, there are always some shades of gray. One will find a Democrat following Republican ideals and vice versa.



On April 19, 2011, this is what Ron Paul had to say about affirmative action,

"Governments have notoriously written laws that segregated people whether by race, gender or sexual orientation. This practice was common from the time of slavery until the policy was replaced with affirmative action and forced association in private affairs, thus substituting one set of violations of individual rights with another. Voluntary associations are better. Quotas and affirmative action programs are based on certain groups qualifying for special privileges. Reversing the discrimination hasn't brought people together. Resentment remains in many areas but not where character and talent are the tests of one's ability. Even more appalling is the presumption that wherever blacks and whites and others associate freely, it is due solely to government laws that have forced the issue. The idea here is that if people are left to their own devices, they will always and everywhere choose homogeneity in their social associations. I can't imagine a stranger view of the human condition."

In 2009, Barack Obama supported affirmative action by saying, 

"I support affirmative action. When there is strong evidence of prolonged and systemic discrimination by organizations, affirmative action may be the only meaningful remedy available. Given the dearth of black and Latino Ph.D. candidates in mathematics and the sciences, for example, a scholarship program for minorities interested in getting advanced degrees in these fields won't keep white students out of such programs, but can broaden the pool of talent that we need to prosper in the new economy. We shouldn't ignore that race continues to matter: To suggest that our racial attitudes play no part in the socio-economic disparities that we often observe turns a blind eye to both our history and our experience - and relieves us of the responsibility to make things right."

Statistics show, according to Pew Research Center, Among self-described Democrats and independents who "lean" Democratic, majorities of African Americans (60%) and Hispanics (57%) say every effort should be made to improve the position of minorities, even if it means giving them preferential treatment. By contrast, just 31% of white Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents favor blacks and other minorities getting preferential treatment, while 66% are opposed.

The opinions of white Democrats on this issue are closer to those of white Republicans than they are to those of non-white Democrats. Just 12% of white Republicans favor giving minorities preferential treatment to improve their condition.

Sally Kern's words on blacks and women created a great stir in Oklahoma. In less than 24 hours, she made a formal apology to the public. The Republican Party refused to reprimand Kern. Republican Paul Wesselhoft was harshly critical of the reprimand. He said that it " flies in the face of every Sunday school lesson I've ever had. Kern issued a sincere apology. My faith teaches me that I'm to forgive." 

On the other hand, the Democratic Party was not too willing to let Kern of the hook easily. The party took the opportunity to condemn the Republican Party by saying, "Rep. Sally Kern's comments on the House Floor this evening in regards to SJR 15 shows that discrimination is far from dead and affirmative action is still necessary in our great state."

The Manual for the Affirmative Action Program in Oklahoma

While researching about affirmative action, I found this wonderful site which explains the manual of the Affirmative Action Program here in Oklahoma. The manual was designed to help agencies in the development of the system of affirmative action and provide guidelines on what actually affirmative action should accomplish. It includes methods, procedures, and directions for the Affirmative Action Program to supervise, assess, and implement the work of this policy. This manual is the legit instruction on how to execute the affirmative action policy.

*Manual for Affirmative Action Plans in Oklahoma State Government*

Then, this next link also includes signatures of the director, Howard H. Hendrick, of DHS, Department of Human Services, on the policy statement on affirmative action. 

*Affirmative Action Plan: OKDHS*

Sally Kern Undermines Women and Black People.

Why is it that our society does not live harmoniously? Let me tell you. It is because people of each race and gender are ignorant of one another and believe that they are superior to them. If you want proof, then let me provide you with one. Read it and Weep!


Rep. Sally Kern, R-Oklahoma City, said minorities earn less than white people because they don't work as hard and lack ambition.


"We have a high percentage of blacks in prison, and that’s tragic, but are they in prison just because they are black or because they don’t want to study as hard in school? I've taught school, and I saw a lot of people of color who didn't study hard because they said the government would take care of them.”


Kern then said that women earned less than men because "they tend to spend more time at home with their families."


Kern's comment proved why it is necessary for not just Oklahoma, but the entire United States to have affirmative action. Naturally, if someone was targeted, he or she would feel the need to protect him/herself. Then, why is it the people wonder whether affirmative action is for the betterment of the society? Unfortunately, there are numerous people who support Kern's distorted ideology: the association of minorities with poverty and the lack of education. Everyone has the right to defend themselves. It is not right to take away an important part of the minority's society when they already have so little. 

A Closer Look At SQ 759!

Banning affirmative action in Oklahoma is an indirect way of saying, "Watch out minorities and women! You will be targeted!" Over the summer, the Oklahoma State Legislature passed the State Question 759, which if the majority approves in 2012, will prohibit the implementation of affirmative action. Here is how SQ 759 will appear on next year's ballot:


"This measure amends the Oklahoma Constitution. It adds a new section 36 to Article II. It will not allow special treatment or discrimination based on race or sex in public employment, education or contracts. It gives exceptions for some situations. It sets out remedies for violations.” 


Do not be fooled by what it promises because this will only result in Oklahoma's loss. States that have banned affirmative action have seen a decrease in the population of minorities and women in colleges, universities, and jobs. For example, in California, at UC Davis, the percentage of new faculty hires dramatically dropped from 52% of women to 13%. Similarly, in Washington State, after affirmative action was restricted, the share of Seattle public works contracts awarded to women or minority owned firms dropped by 25%. In fact, the numbers of black and Latino students drop 16 to 17 percent at schools with affirmative action bans.


Personally, I believe, considering the time the whole United States is in, any loss will be destructive. As these statistics show, SQ 759 is a terrible trap that we might get caught in if we do not vote against it on 2012's ballot!

SQ 759 WILL APPEAR ON 2012'S BALLOT: The House of Representative Has Passed It!

OKLAHOMA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-Third Legislature

First Regular Session

SENATE JOINT RES 15 Constitutional Amendment:

Prohibiting discrimination based on race or sex in public

YEAS:   59

    Armes              Grau               McNiel             Sanders           

    Billy              Hardin             Moore              Schwartz           

    Blackwell          Hickman            Mulready           Sears             

    Brumbaugh          Holland            Murphey            Shannon           

    Casey              Jackson            Nelson             Shoemake          

    Cockroft           Johnson            Newell             Sullivan          

    Condit             Jordan             Nollan             Terrill           

    Coody              Joyner             Ortega             Thomsen           

    Cooksey            Kern               Peterson           Tibbs             

    Dank               Kirby              Proctor            Trebilcock        

    Derby              Lockhart           Quinn              Vaughan           

    DeWitt             Martin,Sc.         Richardson         Wesselhoft        

    Dorman             Martin,Sc.         Roberts,D.         Wright            

    Farley             McCullough         Roberts,S.         Mr.Speaker        

    Faught             McDaniel,R.        Russ              

    

NAYS:   14

    Cannaday           Hoskin             Pruett             Virgin            

    Denney             McDaniel,J.        Rousselot          Williams          

    Fourkiller         Morrissette        Scott             

    Hamilton           Pittman            Sherrer           

    

EXCUSED:   28

    Banz               Hall               McPeak             Ritze             

    Bennett            Hilliard           Morgan             Roan               

    Brown              Inman              Osborn             Shelton           

    Christian          Key                Ownbey             Shumate           

    Cox                Kouplen            Peters             Stiles             

    Enns               Liebmann           Renegar            Walker            

    Glenn              McAffrey           Reynolds           Watson

 

CONSTITUTIONAL PRIVILEGE:  0

 

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf/2011-12%20SUPPORT%20DOCUMENTS/votes/House/SJR15_VOTES.HTM#RCS0837

 

 

SQ 759 Passed in the Senate

OKLAHOMA STATE SENATE

                     53rd LEGISLATURE

        1st Regular Session

SENATE JOINT RES 15 Constitutional Amendment:

Prohibiting discrimination based on race or sex

YEAS:   31

Aldridge       Brown         Johnson, R.       Reynolds

Allen          Coates        Jolley            Russell

Anderson       Crain         Justice           Schulz

Barrington     David         Marlatt           Shortey

Bingman        Fields        Mazzei            Stanislawski

Branan         Ford          Myers             Sykes

Brecheen       Halligan      Newberry          Treat

Brinkley       Holt          Nichols   

NAYS:   15

    

Ballenger      Ellis         Laster           Sparks

Bass           Garrison      Lerblance        Wilson

Burrage        Ivester       Paddack          Wyrick

Eason Mc       Johnson, C.   Rice

EXCUSED: 2

Adelson        Simpson

NOT VOTING: 0

THE DEBATE OVER AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

Because Freedom Can't Protect Itself- ACLU

The United States has had a long history of recorded battles, struggles, and hardships. Although it was founded on the basis of life, liberty, and justice for all, the laws implemented refused giving the citizens rights that they were owners of. Sexism, discrimination, and slavery were some of the issues that plagued the society at different points in the past. Eventually, the government sought to reform these problems. It established additional laws to counter them. To reduce prejudice and discrimination, the Executive Order 10925 was passed. Over the years, it was altered to best fit the people. Today, this law is known as affirmative action, a policy that increases representation of women and minorities in race. Basically it ensures the right of equal opportunity for all races and genders in education, employment, and government.

A few states, Michigan, California, Washington, and Texas, have banned affirmative action. In Oklahoma, the debate has begun once again on whether affirmative action should be implemented. State Question 759, prohibiting equal opportunities for women and minorities, will appear on 2012’s ballot. Why is it that an increasing number of the population has become against affirmative action? This is because there is more to it than what meets the eye.

Following are some of the arguments against affirmative action.


1. It is unfair for a person to be judged on their race. Who a person is cannot be controlled. Colleges and the government should look at an applicant’s scores, integrity, and competency instead of his or her gender or race. It is inappropriate for a certain race to have advantages that the other does not.


2. Affirmative action leads to reverse discrimination. White males are not being given their right of equal opportunity. For example, a white, hard-working student and a black, lethargic student both apply for college. The college will most likely choose the black student in order to follow the policy and to promote diversity in the college. How is this fair for the white student?


3. Minorities and women are only chosen to complete the policy of affirmative action, not based on their merits. Affirmative action angers a large number of people because it makes them feel that they were accepted to college or in government just because of who they were. They do not want to seem undermined or inferior to the whites.  

Although the number of people against affirmative action continues to grow, the larger population continues to support it. These are their reasons:


1. Diversity is needed to counter discrimination. If students learn in a multi-cultural society, then it will reduce discrimination. Opinions about minorities are often stereotypical. Affirmative action will help students learn about other races and understand that all the races are like each other.


2. Students that are at a disadvantage are given a boost.  Minority students often come from a low class society and usually are not given opportunities that other students have. Affirmative action ensures the right of equal opportunity. It guarantees that no child is left behind.


3. Affirmative action brings people to areas of study that they might never have and increases representation in government. In the past, women did not have the right to work as doctors, engineers, scientists, and more. Now a growing number of fields are becoming filled with women. In fact, in 2009, a Hispanic woman, Sonia Sotomayor, became the Supreme Court’s first Hispanic Justice.


These were the arguments on the debate over affirmative action. Both sides have valid points to contribute. It just depends on which side has a stronger effect on the people.