Letter to the Editor on Affirmative Action

Dear Editor,


Oklahoma is getting ready for a fight over over affirmative action. State Question 759, which aims to ban affirmative action, will appear on 2012's ballot. Are we seriously going to let such a wonderful policy slip out of our hands? 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.


We need to urge our citizens to vote "NO" to this destructive legislation. Minorities and women are already discriminated against and have a low representation in jobs and schools. If we snatch this policy away from them, then surely, we will see a further decline in them, as statistics show. 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!


Thanks, 
Nida Safdar

My Stance on Affirmative Action

Based on all my research and findings, I can finally form an opinion on affirmative action. By all means, I support this policy. I truly believe that this is the one of the steps in the right direction. As statistics show, only a few percentage of minorities are found in colleges and workforce, and if the government bans this police, then it will only cause the percentage to further decline. Think about it. White men already had all their rights, opportunities, and freedoms from the beginning. It was blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, Asians, and women who had to struggle to get what they deserved. If racism and discrimination still exist in the US, then why can't affirmative action? 

Personally, affirmative action benefits me. Since I am part of the minorities in America and also a woman, affirmative action will only increase my chances in getting into a great college or working in a field that I hope to join one day. Therefore, for people like me, policies like affirmative action are a huge advantage to us. For us, it  is a way to be accepted and appreciated within the society. For us, it guarantees equal representation. For us, it makes America the ideal nation, a "melting pot".

Media's Influence on Affirmative Action.

What exactly is media? It is the means to communication, like radios, televisions, newspapers, and magazines, that reach people widely. Media provides us with information, entertainment, and relief. As technology has become a crucial part of our every day lives, we are continuously exposed to media, such as the World Wide Web. While we all have the freedom and ability to make our own decisions, how much does the media influence our decisions? I believe a lot. This is why when people are asked about their stand on affirmative action, their decisions are not entirely their own.


The University of Houston wrote an article called Affirmative Action and the Media: A Mixed Method Analysis of News Coverage of U.S. Supreme Court Cases that lists ways the media misleads the public on affirmative action. For example, it used the "politics of fear" which scared people on the negative effects of affirmative action, including increased terrorism. Media also portrays affirmative action a war between blacks and whites. Most of the time Hispanics, Native Americans, and women do not even come into the picture. The media puts out facts and statistics valuable to convincing the audience what it supports. That is why you see several different standpoints on any matter put forward to the public.


There is always a blind spot in whatever the media puts out. Therefore, before you go on making a decision on an issue, be sure to do your research. Do not just believe in what you see or hear. The media tries to trick you; your safest bet is to analyze the situation yourself.

Dedication to Affirmative Action

Numerous websites and blogs exist that present their point of views on affirmative action.

Blogs: These are some of my friends' blogs that give additional information on affirmative action along with other personal blogs.

- tmariam.blogspot.com

- seeuzmarant.blogspot.com

- rantingaboutgovernment.blogspot.com

- layansalous.blogspot.com

- sanasandhu786.blogspot.com

- maryamsalus.blogspot.com

- amina-elbaz.blogspot.com

- amptoons.com/blog/category/affirmative-action/

- affirmact.blogspot.com

- affirmativeactionnews.blogspot.com/

- ofccp.blogspot.com/

Websites: Below is a list of websites that have been created due to the current uproar on affirmative action:
- http://usa.usembassy.de/classroom/affirmativeaction.htm

- Affirmative Action News

- AAAA (American Association for Affirmative Action) (affirmativeaction.org)

- The National Leadership Network of Black Conservatives (nationalcenter.org/AA.html)

- Americans United for Affirmative Action (auaa.org)
- Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (civilrights.org)
- Ethnic Majority (ethnicmajority.com/affirmative_action.htm)
- BAMN (Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, and Immigrant Rights and Fight for 
  Equality By Any Means Necessary) (bamn.org)

Media/News Coverage on Affirmative Action

Below are some clips that show various news networks addressing affirmative action.

                                                                                        The Five on Fox News:This segment of the show addresses the policies of affirmative action and "social injustice", and how the modern education system uses these ideas to instruct American students. It also talks about about a book, "The Cultural Proficiency Journey: Moving Beyond Ethical Barriers Toward Profound School Change" by F C Jones - a book based on the concept of "white privilege".

                                                                               Scholarships for whites only on CNN: This segment starts out by discussing a new non-profit organization, the Former Majority Association for Equality, initiated in Texas that grants scholarships to only white males who maintain an average of a 3.0 grade point average (GPA).  Erick Erickson, a CNN contributor, and April D. Ryan, White House correspondent for the America Urban Radio Network, go head in head to debate over affirmative action.

                                                                             

Immigration, Affirmative Action on New High Court Docket; Health Reform Awaited on: PBS: This news bulletin talks about various controversial issues in America today. Immigration and affirmative action are two of its topics, so this video can also be used for my information on the Great Immigration War. Listen to what people have to say on these two topics. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now next are some articles on affirmative action: supporting it and opposing it. 
This first article is by Ward Connerly, founder and President of the American Civil Rights Institute and an advocate against affirmative action. His quote, "Race has no place in American life or law," expresses his belief that affirmative action is a form of racism, and preferential treatment should not be used against whites or be in favor for women and minorities. Read ahead as Connerly expresses his views.

What Happened to Post-Racial America?

Few government policies have had the reach, immortality and consequences of affirmative action. A policy that could be justified at its start, affirmative action has now become yesterday's solution to yesterday's problem. Yet it endures as if nothing has happened in the past 50 years.

There is an interracial man—although self-identified "African-American"—occupying the White House, blacks are on our courts, including the highest court in the land, blacks are mayors of major cities and heads of American corporations.

Notwithstanding all this, President Barack Obama, who was elected largely because Americans thought he would lead the nation to a Promised Land of post-racialism, recently signed Executive Order 13583 "to promote Diversity and Inclusion in the Federal Workforce." The irony is that few institutions in America are more "diverse" and "inclusive" than the federal government, where the workforce is 17% black while blacks are roughly 13% of the U.S. population.

In addition to the president's executive order, the Dodd-Frank financial-reform law included Section 342, promoted by Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Calif.), which should be called the "White Male Exclusion Act." It establishes in all federal financial regulatory agencies an "Office of Minority and Women Inclusion" with responsibility for "diversity in management, employment and business activities."

It is doubtful that anyone can name a government agency that does not include an affirmative-action office or "diversity" department in its structure. The infrastructure of the diversity network is vast.

More than anything else, the pursuit of diversity overshadows and subordinates excellence and competence and often makes us content with mediocrity. The late economist Milton Friedman once told me that "Freedom to compete fairly for university admissions, jobs and contracts is central to all that America professes to be."

In a recent column on these pages, Stanford's Shelby Steele observed that "the values that made us exceptional have been smeared with derision. . . . Talk of 'merit' or 'a competition of excellence' in the admissions office of any Ivy League university today and then stand by for the howls of academic laughter." As a former regent of the University of California, I can confirm that these howls, and worse, are not confined to the Ivy League.

When former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor ruled in the 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger decision that the use of race preferences was constitutional while in the pursuit of diversity, she offered the hope that such preferences would no longer be necessary by 2028. Eight years later, the federal government is moving further away from Justice O'Connor's goal, not closer.

The longer we allow preferences to endure in the guise of diversity, the more damage will be done to the nation. If the president is serious about America rededicating itself to our ideals—which are liberty, economic opportunity for all, individual merit and the principle of equality—then he should begin with rescinding his executive order on affirmative action, calling on Congress to repeal Section 342 of Dodd-Frank, and paring back the burdensome and redundant diversity network that exists within the federal government.

Finally, he should urge Americans to embrace the color-blind vision of John F. Kennedy, who said that "race has no place in American life or law, and of Martin Luther King Jr., who dreamed of the day when the color of his children's skin would be subordinate to the content of their character.
This next article was written in response to Ward Connerly's by different interest groups. 

Affirmative Action Is Still Needed for Racial Equality

Regarding Ward Connerly's "What Happened to Post-Racial America?" (op-ed, Oct. 4): Having a black man as the president of the U.S. or the head of a corporation doesn't prove there's a level playing field in American society. If there were, the unemployment rate for blacks and Hispanics wouldn't be significantly higher than for whites, and women wouldn't be paid significantly less than their male counterparts.

To Mr. Connerly, the federal government's equal opportunity programs apparently work a little too well. Otherwise, how could blacks be overrepresented in the federal work force—by a modest 4% above their share of the population? That's nothing, however, compared to the number of industries where women and minorities are severely underrepresented, like on Wall Street. Studies by the Government Accountability Office show that a lack of sustained commitment on the part of Wall Street has resulted in limited diversity in senior management positions, which is why Rep. Maxine Waters's legislation aimed at ensuring everyone has access to opportunities while improving diversity is so necessary.

Finally, Mr. Connerly also offers no proof for his assertion that equal opportunity initiatives and a focus on diversity lead inexorably to a mediocrity that is damaging the nation. He continues to misconstrue the Grutter v. Bollinger decision regarding diversity in education. To quote the Supreme Court, "In order to cultivate a set of leaders with legitimacy in the eyes of the citizenry, it is necessary that the path to leadership be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity."

Wade Henderson

President and CEO

The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights

Washington

Ward Connerly conveniently ignores evidence that discrimination and inequality continue to block access to even the most basic opportunities that every American should be able to expect. Considering race by itself is not the cure-all for the inequalities that persist in America today. But the fact remains that programs considering race have been successful in improving prospects for people of color, women and others who have been denied opportunity historically and even today.

The true state of bias and inequality in America is told in the numerous studies and statistics showing that African-Americans and Latinos are almost a third more likely to get a high-priced loan than white borrowers with the same credit scores, or that African-Americans with no criminal record are less likely to be called back for a job interview than similarly qualified whites with a felony conviction. The current median wealth of white households is now 20 times that of black households and 18 times that of Hispanics—the most lopsided it has been since the government began publishing data a quarter-century ago. Black and Hispanic unemployment is twice that of whites, and blacks are 70% more likely to lose their homes to foreclosures.

All of these are stark reminders that even if the disease of discrimination and inequality is in some ways less virulent than it has been in the past, it is premature to pronounce it cured. Eliminating affirmative action would be a tragedy which would only move us further from the goals of fairness and excellence that Mr. Connerly claims to support.

Dennis Parker

American Civil Liberties Union

New York
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.