Affirmitive Action: Reverse Discrimination

Baker 1 Jennifer Baker Reverse Discrimination nevertheless though slavery has not been a part of America for every(prenominal) over a century now, racial discrimination still exists in conf apply parts of our culture. A controversial polity shaftn as approving do was introduced in the 1960s to try and promote racial equation in society. approbatory proceeding is supposed to give minorities an equal hap in life by requiring minority utilisation, promotions, college acceptance, etc. At starting cadence this earphones bid a perfect solution to racial discrimination, but in reality it is discrimination in reverse.The term assentient perform was for the archetypical time employ back in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy in an executive order designed to encourage raci entirelyy mixed bailiwick forces. He stated that contractors should take favorable action to ensure that appli offerts ar employed with stunned regard to expedite, creed, color, or national origin. ( assentient turnion) Then in 1964 the genteel Rights Act was passed which prohibited employment discrimination found on race or sex. The gracious Rights activists continued to argue that minorities werent spill to be able to compete with the more than fitted applicants after having suffered discrimination for so long.So in 1969 President Nixon made it a federal policy that a certain percentage of minorities must be engage in the workplace. speedily affirmatory Baker 2 action changed from being a policy that ensured equal opportunity to being virtuoso that gave un handsome advantages to minorities. Affirmative action has remained controversial throughout the years, finding itself in and out of the courts. One of the to the mettlesomeest degree famous cases was Fullilove vs. Klutznick, which took place in 1980. The ruling stated that fit outting aside 10 percent of the hiring for minorities was constitutional. fortunately in 1996 proposition 209 was passed in Californi a which cease affirmative action throughout the state. This was definitely a breakthrough, but the personal effects of affirmative action still linger. Many businesses and corporations still give predilection to minorities even if they are less qualified. Employers fear that groundss will be filed stating that applicants were false down because of their race. Renowned author and political activist Nathan Glazer, has been against affirmative action since its beginning. Glazer believes that the olicy became controversial when it went beyond the thoughts of the Civil Rights Act and started requiring employers to hire or promote a certain number of minority applicants or employees. In order to comprise sure that affirmative action was taking place, federal courts started enforcing quotas or goals for specific numbers of minority hiring. If these were met, lawsuits ground on racial discrimination would be less valid. Says Glazer, Affirmative action has become a matter of setting statistical goals or quotas by race for employment the expectations of color blindness that wasBaker 3 paramount in the 1960s has been replaced by a rigid frame of numerical requirements. (Glazer, 6) Those who oppose quotas and goals are express to be opposers of the Civil Rights Act, even though the affirmative action of like a s keen is not what the Civil Rights Act embodied. Glazer compares the misinterpretation of the Civil Rights Act to the desegregation of conditions. In 1954, the Supreme butterfly ruled that segregated instructs were unconstitutional. The belief of racially integrated schools, like racially integrated workplaces, is an excellent one.However, the desegregation of schools has made busing a necessity. Busing, although not in use at once, is when students are transferred to other school for purposes of racial integration. It is costly to run all the buses and the commuting is challenging on the students. Those opposing busing are said to agree with the segregation of schools. (Glazer, 10) The desegregation of schools was also mentioned in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Initially this seemed a fair proposal, but however as affirmative action became detrimental in the workplaces, integrating minorities in schools turned into numerical requirements.Can you imagine busing programs being used across the United States today? The scary truth is that once one of these images is adopted in one city, any other city can then follow suit. For pillowcase, if Santa Cruz County were granted the right to require a 15 percent Latino student enrollment in all heights schools within the county lines, any other city could also put this idea into practice based on precedent. The assignment of students Baker 4 based on race would cause an endless stream of angry parents. Fortunately busing is in the past, but affirmative action still has its claws in the school system.A few weeks ago I was watching a 60 transactions segment about a white girl wh o had filed a lawsuit against the University of Michigan claiming that they did not accept her because of her race. She had graduated from high school with a high grade point average and had do everything in her power to become qualified for acceptance, yet she was denied admission. Further research showed that the University of Michigan does in fact declare students based on race. When reading applications, they award points according to criteria. For example, if one writes a good essay he is awarded 1 point and if he is a minority he is awarded 20 points.Something is askew. Is being a minority is 20 times more important than ones scholarly achievements? The Universitys argument is that students learn better in a racially several(a) environment. UC Davis is another example. In 1988 unaccompanied 40 percent of Davis freshman path had been accepted solely on the basis of merit. While whites or Asian-Americans ask at least a 3. 7 GPA in high school to be accepted, most minority applicants were accepted even though they met much lower standards. Sixty-six percent of the whites graduated while lonesome(prenominal) twenty-seven percent of blacks did.Even as recently as 1997 one was more likely to get accepted into UCLA if he were black or Hispanic than if he were white. The minority students had both lower GPAs and examine scores. There were 5000 applicants for 200 seats which meant that some qualified students were rejected to accomplish way for less Baker 5 qualified minorities. (Chances of Admission) This does not sound like an equal society. In 1995 the University of California system voted to end all affirmative action in admissions. When the changes took effect in 1998, minority enrollment went down drastically.This seems prejudicial, but in reality it is fair and allows contestation mingled with the best, regardless of race. Everyone has an equal opportunity to receive an education. Public schools are lay off and it is mandatory that children at tend them. Any student can take large advantage of their first 12 years of education and earn the GPA that will gain them admission into a college. If a student is innate(p) into a poor family there are scholarships and student loans available. Malcom X is a perfect example of someone choosing to rise up and get an education.Early in his life he made very unwise choices and ended up a pimp. When he was caught and thrown in jail he firm to begin educating himself. All he had was a dictionary but he used that dictionary and copied down every page. He went from being an unlearned street pimp to a very influential political leader. Affirmative action wasnt around in Malcoms time, but today everybody get bys about it or has at least heard the term used. The first time I heard about affirmative action was when my associate first started working at Ralphs supermarket.There was a black char working there who was very slow and unproductive. One day my chum asked a fellow employee why t he lady didnt lose her calling and he said, Shes here for affirmative action reasons. It turned out that whenever the lady was scheduled for a shift, another Baker 6 proletarian was also scheduled just to make up for the inefficiency of the black lady. My familiars boss feared a lawsuit if he fired her. This is pathetic It is a costly arrangement and unfair to the lady leased just to take up slack for someone elses laziness.The policy of affirmative action basically states that in order to pretend an integrated society with equal opportunities for all races, minorities must be minded(p) an advantage to make up for their disadvantages. This means that less qualified applicants are getting hired and that students who do not meet the requirements for college admission are being accepted while qualified students are being turned away, all based on race. The Constitution bans the exclusion of minorities from anything based on color, therefore it is unconstitutional to exclude whi tes based on the resembling principles. The lesson of great decisions of the Supreme Court and the lesson of contemporary history have been the same for at least a generation discrimination on the basis of race is illegal, immoral, unconstitutional, inherently wrong, and detrimental of democratic society. (Gross, 1) Affirmative action is asking us to overlook all that weve learned and even fought for. Since affirmative action is such a hot topic and it affects our country as a whole, its important to know how the presidential candidates view this subject. Vice President Al Gore tends to elevate the policy while Governor George Bush disagrees with it.Gores idea is muddle it, dont end it. (Al Gore) He says that affirmative action has done a lot for women and minorities over the years and that to get rid of it would be a waste. He has yet Baker 7 to provide a way to fix it. Bush argues against quotas and goals and proposes an alternative to this policy, one he has used in Texas. He terms his system of ideas and policies affirmative access. (George Bush) His idea leans more towards the original thinking of the Civil Rights Act and promoting equal opportunity. An example is that the top 10 percent of each high schools graduates be automatically accepted into the college of their choice.Supposedly the idea has been effective over the past couple of years in Texas. Both candidates have good points. Affirmative action has helped reduce minorities and womens suffering prejudices in the workplace and in school, but on the other hand it has been taken to the extreme and the prejudices have been turned around. We need to get back to the heart of what the original affirmative action intended. Racial prejudices need to be eliminated completely. We are all the same on the inside. There is no reason to consider outward appearances.Employers and colleges only need to look at the applicants qualifications when determining who will be hired or accepted. Affirmative action co uld also use a face-lift, like the name change Bush suggested. When the term affirmative action is used, it is looked upon negatively and is associated with discrimination. A law that requires the acceptance of the most qualified would allow competition of the best and eliminate the come outs of minority prejudices. If no regard is given to race, as Kennedy intended, then only the most qualified applicant will be accepted. This is fair. Baker 8Affirmative action has, in a way, become unfair to minorities. What is going to make them strive to be the best by working straining to get that promotion or studying hard to get those grades if they know they have an easy in? It has become an insult to minorities. Affirmative action is basically saying that they are not as smart or as qualified to be in good schools or in good jobs. It is saying that they need special help to get jobs and into colleges. It is a mockery. I know so many smart minority population who will transfer into better colleges than I and Im as white as they comeI sat next to a girl this semester who was so intelligent and had the most amazing style of writing. She was a mix of Indian and black. We must not insult these people by suggesting that we must compensate for their inferiority to make everyone equal in the eyeball of the law. We were all created equal, and anyone, black, white, or any other race, can choose to set higher goals and achieve them just as Malcom X did. The old affirmative action is outdated. The premise that minorities should be given an advantage to make up for their disadvantages is ridiculous and irrelevant.Most of the minorities coming into the work force were born after the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964 and therefore have not suffered disadvantages in school or the workplace. If anything, they have reaped the benefits of affirmative action. California and Texas, as well as a few other states, have begun to take major steps in eliminating affirmative action. It i s a start but it needs to spread. We are all equal and absolutely no regard should be given to Baker 9 race in education or employment. It is time to end the old affirmative action. We need a policy that eliminates the issue of race completely.