debate aff action

7/29/2019 debate aff action

1/30

Contents

Resolved: When making admissions decisions, public colleges and universities in the United States

ought to favor members of historically disadvantaged groups ............................................................ 2

Definitions ................................................................................................................................................. 4

Sample Affirmative Case ........................................................................................................................... 6

Negative Sample Case ........................................................................................................................... 9

Affirmative .............................................................................................................................................. 11

Lack of Policy Fuels Inequality ............................................................................................................ 12

Current policy proves that favoritism is needed................................................................................. 14

Policy in schools is absolutely essential for all sectors of society ....................................................... 15

Favoring groups that have been historically disadvantaged isnt discriminatory .............................. 16

Affirmative Action is absolutely necessary now ................................................................................. 17Affirmative Action doesnt stigmatize those that it favors ................................................................. 18

Affirmative Action helps create lasting changes in education ............................................................ 19

Rumors about Affirmative Action are NOT TRUE ............................................................................... 20

Negative .................................................................................................................................................. 21

Affirmative Action will not solve systemic problems .......................................................................... 22

Current Policy Ignores the Root Cause ............................................................................................... 23

Policies that privilege the historically disadvantaged fail ................................................................... 24

Preferring historically disadvantaged groups has horrific unintended consequences is bad for

society ................................................................................................................................................. 25

Affirmative Action for women is failing .............................................................................................. 26

Affirmative Action doesnt create real diversity................................................................................. 27

Collegiate interventions are too late .................................................................................................. 28

Affirmative Action Stigmatizes those it is supposed to help .............................................................. 29

Affirmative Action creates false diversity ........................................................................................... 30


2/30


3/30

their educational success. This stigma undermines the value of peoples success, and often times their

personhood, as it reifies stereotypes that certain groups are not able to achieve educational successes

on their own and are less competent than their peers


4/30

DefinitionsResolved: When making admissions decisions, public colleges and universities in the

United States ought to favor members of historically disadvantaged groups

Admission1. The act of allowing to enter; entrance granted by permission, by provision or existence of

pecuniary means, or by the removal of obstacles

Source: Dictionary.com

2. Right or permission to enterSource: Dictonary.com

3. Acceptance for a position, office, etc.Source: the Free Dictionary

4. Allowing to enterSource: American Heritage Dictionary5. To give entrance or accessSource: Merriam Webster

Discussion: This term shouldnt become too contentious; however, it is plausible that this term could

become important when it is paired with the definition of affirmative action that doesnt include a

component that stipulates that individuals from historically disadvantaged groups will be similarly

qualified. If qualifier is absent, the negative could make arguments that the policy the affirmative is

advocating sets up disadvantaged students for failure.

Public/Public College1. Public institutions are established either by state constitution or by statute, and they receive

funding from state appropriations as well as tuition and endowments.


2. Maintained at the expense of, serving, or for the use of a community:Source: Dictionary.com

3. Public colleges and universities have funding that comes directly from their stateSource: College to Career

4. Maintained for or used by the people or communitySource: American Heritage Dictionary

5. Relating to, or being in the service of the community or nationSource: Merriam Webster

Discussion: Public will only come into debates where the funding of an institution is called into practice,which is highly unlikely.

Ought

1. Used to indicate duty or correctnessSource: Oxford English Dictionary

2. Used to express justice, moral rightness, or the likeSource: Dictionary.com

3. Used to express obligation


5/30

Source: Merriam Webster

4. Used to indicate advisability or prudenceSource: American Heritage Dictionary

5. Used to indicate desirabilitySource: The Free Dictionary

6. ShouldSource: Dictonary.com

Discussion: Despite the fact that ought appears in many LD resolutions, it is still strategically important

to define this word. This resolution is largely framed by the way that ought is defined, as it characterizes

affirmative action as an action or as a concept. If you are running a traditional case, or a critical case,

choose a definition that casts the resolution as a moral dilemma; definitions such as 1, 2, 3 would be

most appropriate. For example, argument concerning the necessity of affirmative action to remedy

structural violence would be best supported by defining ought as an ethical question. If you intend to

run a plan, definitions 4, 5, 6 would be more effective, as they designate a course of action. Should

(definition 6) directly dictates a policy action, thus a plan would be justified if ought is defined this way.

Favor1. The state of being approved or held in regard


2. Support or advancement given as a sign of approval:Source: Oxford English Dictionary

3. A privilege or concessionSource: American Heritage Dictionary

Discussion: This term is important if a specific policy is mentioned. Otherwise, it would be most prudent

to describe the specific act of favoring in the definition of affirmative action, as that more directly

addresses what type of considerations each side is willing to defend.

Historically Disadvantaged1. Individuals as those who face challenges because of their race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status,

or other similar factors.

Source: Minority Medical Faculty Development Program,

2. Any person, category of persons or community, disadvantaged by unfair discrimination beforethe Constitution took effect;

Source: Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002

3. American Indian, Hispanic, Black individualsSources: The Urban Institute

Discussion: This term is really tricky to define. The federal government uses race and sex as the basis foraffirmative action policy; however, historically disadvantaged isnt defined. Most often, historically

disadvantaged is simply stated and no indication to which groups qualify as historically disadvantaged,

which makes this term tricky to define. The first two definitions come from affirmative action programs

that have been accepted as legal favoritism. The most important thing about this term is its propensity

to become the focus of the debate; depending on what categories are included, certain groups could be

added or ignored such as individuals with disabilities or individuals of lower socioeconomic status. Since

this is a term of art, it is important that the historically and disadvantaged be defined together.


6/30

Sample Affirmative CaseResolved: When making admissions decisions, public colleges and universities in the

United States ought to favor members of historically disadvantaged groupsDefinitionsAdmission: Right or permission to enter- Dictonary.com

Ought: Used to indicate obligation or duty- Dictonary.com

Historically: in the past - Merriam Webster

Disadvantaged: lacking in the basic resources or conditions- Merriam Webster

Affirmative Action any measure, beyond simple termination of a discriminatory practice, that permits

the consideration of race, national origin, sex, or disability, along with other criteria, and which is

adopted to provide opportunities to a class of qualified individuals who have historically or actually been

denied those opportunities and/or to prevent the recurrence of discrimination in the future.

Value:Maximizing Social Justice : Fair and proper administration of laws conforming to the naturallaw that all persons, irrespective of ethnic origin, gender, possessions, race, religion, etc., are to be

treated equally and without prejudice.( The business dictionary)

Criterion: Minimization of Structural ViolenceMichelle Maiese Associate Professor of Philosophy at Emanuel College 03Social and political institutions set the context for individual and group behavior and are meant to

provide the resources individuals need to survive. How people act and live is shaped in large part by the

social structures in which they find themselves. Social justice is, in part, a matter ofensuring that these

structures and institutions do in fact satisfy basic human needs. In some cases however, a society's

social institutions are characterized by exploitation, political exclusion, and unequal access toresources. These structural forces often create a system of winners and losers in which people become

trapped in a particular social situation. Structural violence often results, in the form ofpower inequity,

poverty, and the denial of basic human rights. Basic human needs go unmet, and groups suffer from

inadequate access to resources and exclusion from institutional patterns of decision-making.[ Unjust

structural forces and divisions also contribute to discrimination, lack of education, and inadequate

employment opportunities. An example of this sort of structural violence is the effect of

deindustrialization on minority and working-class communities in the United States

- Affirmative action is one way that unfair social structures can be broken down and social justicecan be promoted. Social justice is achieved when groups are emancipated from structural forces

that subordinate them; denying this policy ensures that the unfair social structures will continue

to abuse sectors of the population.


7/30

Contention 1: Affirmative Action is necessary

Preferencing is essential and does NOT harm Students in the racial majority

William M. Chace, Professor of English at Stanford University and former President of Wesleyan and

Emory Universities, Winter 2011 Affirmative Inaction, The American Scholar,http://theamericanscholar.org/affirmative-inaction/

What happens ifthe handicapping is taken away? The same authors found that the outcome would bedramatic, with acceptance rates falling for African-American applicants from 31 percent to 13 percent

and for Hispanic applicants by as much as one-half to two-thirds; Asian-American applicants would

occupy four out of five of the seats created by fewer African-American and Hispanic acceptances. The

Asian-American acceptance rate would rise by one-third from nearly 18 percent to more than 23

percent. Most astonishingly, it turns out thatcontrary to the assumptions of those who contend that

affirmative action puts white students at a severe disadvantagewhite applicants would benefit very

little from the removal of racial and ethnic preferences; their acceptance rate would increase by less

than one percentage point. Given the probable results of eliminating affirmative actiona student

body consisting almost wholly of whites and Asian Americansno chief administrator of a respectable

college or university would happily oversee the erosion of the presence of black or Hispanic students.

-Affirmative actions primary goal is to minimize structural violence through narrowly tailored

preference of students, which opens up opportunities that in many cases would be denied to students.

Affirmative action policy maximizes social justice as it helps to decrease discrimination and help stop the

perpetuation of unequal social structures.

C2: Affirmative Action is Effective

Affirmative Action improves recruitment opportunities for minorities

Bill Maxwell, author for the Saint Petersburg Times and professor of journalism at Stillman College,

2000, St. Petersberg Times,http://www.sptimes.com/News/120300/Columns/A_good_argument_for_a.shtml

One positive result is that the universities now have greater reason to recruit minorities. Unlike in therecent past, when most institutions of higher education saw themselves as ivory towers of theory and

intellectuality, many now consider supplying specific companies with minority recruits to be one of

their key missions.

- Affirmative action generates opportunities for people that last after college, which challengesstructural violence within the educational system and beyond that point. Social justice is best

achieved when structural violence in minimized.


8/30

Policies are essential to lessening current inequalities and solving for future inequality

Boyce Watkins, Professor at Syracuse University, and Linda Chavez, chair, Center for Equal

Opportunity,2012, Affirmative Action: Is It Still Necessary?,NPR,http://www.npr.org/2012/02/27/147514069/affirmative-action-is-it-still-necessary

I think the question answers itself. I think anybody who thinks that we can solve a 400-year pattern of

systemic discrimination with 20 years of good behavior is absolutely delusional. I think that if you lookat our society, if you look at the human rights abuses that have been documented by the United

Nations, it's been made very clear, and it's known throughout the world, that the United States is still

a two-tiered society. If you look at quality-of-life factors such as education, economic equality, mass

incarceration, etc., you see that people of color still live a very different reality from people whose

ancestors were not subject to discrimination. You see, affirmative action is not just a matter of dealing

with what I've gone through as an African-American male, and the discrimination I've experienced. It's

a matter of dealing with the fact that there is inequality that was created in my life long before I was

born because of what my ancestors were not able to leave to me. They were not able to leave wealth

to me. They were not able to give me power to inherit.So ultimately, if you really want to make

America the country that we claim that we've always wanted it to be, you have to dig a little deeper

than to just have a couple policies that run for a couple decades.Structural violence and social justice are best upheld when public colleges and universities help

dismantle the structural violence that underpins many institutions, only then can structural violence be

dismantled.


9/30

Negative Sample CaseResolved: When making admissions decisions, public colleges and universities in the

United States ought to favor members of historically disadvantaged groups

Value: Responsibility- having a capacity for moral decisions and therefore accountable-Dictionary.com

Criteria: Minimization of Structural Violence

Michelle Maiese Associate Professor of Philosophy at Emanuel College 03Social and political institutions set the context for individual and group behavior and are meant to

provide the resources individuals need to survive. How people act and live is shaped in large part by the

social structures in which they find themselves. Social justice is, in part, a matter ofensuring that these

structures and institutions do in fact satisfy basic human needs. In some cases however, a society's

social institutions are characterized by exploitation, political exclusion, and unequal access to

resources. These structural forces often create a system of winners and losers in which people become

trapped in a particular social situation. Structural violence often results, in the form ofpower inequity,

poverty, and the denial of basic human rights. Basic human needs go unmet, and groups suffer from

inadequate access to resources and exclusion from institutional patterns of decision-making.[ Unjust

structural forces and divisions also contribute to discrimination, lack of education, and inadequate

employment opportunities. An example of this sort of structural violence is the effect of

deindustrialization on minority and working-class communities in the United States

- Affirmative action does nothing to change these structures; rather it simply allows some peopleto gain access to structures they wouldnt be able to. It is our responsibility to challenge these

structures and the policies that prop them up.

Contention 1: Affirmative Action is ineffective

Affirmative action ignores the real problems behind educational inequalityHugh B. Price,former president of the National Urban League and expert on criminal justice, equal

opportunity and civil rights, Robert L Woodson, is founder and president of the National Center for

Neighborhood Enterprise (NCNE), 2009, Race and Society, Black America Today,http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.html

I disagree with affirmative action because it is trying to apply a downstream solution to an upstream

problem. I agree with Hugh that there must be increased emphasis on boosting achievement levels of

K-12 children of color. If we put the energy that has gone into arguing affirmative action into

improving our education system, we would not have to be arguing about affirmative action.

- The responsibility to minimize structural violence cannot be fulfilled when the education systemserves as a glaring beacon of inequality. Affirmative action only affects a minimal amount ofstudents, compared to the multitude of students who are being subjected to inequality in the

education system.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.htmlhttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.html


10/30

Affirmative Actions will not undue institutional racism

William M. Chace, Professor of English at Stanford University and former President of Wesleyan and


IfAfrican-American males are underrepresented in colleges or universities, they are overrepresented infederal, state, and county prisons, jails, and juvenile detention facilities. About one in three black men

will go to prison in his lifetime, compared to one in 17 white males. One in three black men between

the ages of 20 and 29 already lives under some form of correctional supervision or control. The Bureau

of Justice Statistics reports that some 186,000 black males between the ages of 18 and 24 were behind

bars in federal and state prisons and local jails in 2005.No amount of affirmative action, at either

private or public colleges and universities, will free these men from jail. Nor will affirmative action be

able to reach into the homes, neighborhoods, and schools to rectify the distressing situations

poverty, drugs, families customarily without either husband or fatherthat once served such men, and

will now serve others, so badly. Nothing that colleges and universities can do will be enough to rewrite

the history of racial inequality that has, for decade after decade, poisoned this nations history. Black

men in prison are a function of that poisonous history, and affirmative action is a societal antidote tothis and other existing effects of racism. We must not forget

- History has shown that affirmative action still allows for discriminatory educationalenvironments. It is irresponsible to intervene at the collegiate level with a selective policy which

only helps a few at the expense of many. Justifications for affirmative action only legitimizes

these abuses and claims to solve them later, while excusing the structural violence it causes in

the mean time

Sub Point B: Affirmative Action causes stigma the root cause of discrimination

Even the mention of affirmative action causes stigma

Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Division 14 of the APA,2012, ,http://www.siop.org/AfirmAct/siopsaarnontarg.aspx

Majority members typically view women and minorities selected through AAPs to be less competentthan those selected without affirmative action, and this effect may generalize to evaluations of the

target group as a whole. Such findings occur when affirmative action is operationalized as strong

preferential treatment and when affirmative action is not defined procedurally, that is, when

affirmative action is simply mentioned. This stigmatization may be eliminated by providing clear and

compelling evidence of the woman or minority member's competence. A frequent criticism of

affirmative action is that non-target group members will stigmatize target groups members, as found in

this research.

Affirmative Action simply perpetuates stigmas associate with minority and education and allow for these

stigmas to be applied to entire minority groups. Stereotypes and stigmas have been habitually used as a

justification for denying individuals adequate access to education due to their group membership.

Affirmative action policy directly undermines its goals and serves as the justification for dehumanizing

groups of people through racism and sexism. It is our responsibility to take a stand against this structural

violence. The ballot functions as an action of micro political action, voting negative is a vote against the

systematic violence directed against minority groups caused by affirmative action and an endorsement

of the responsibility that we all have to fight policy that reifies discrimination and stereotyping,


11/30

Affirmative


12/30

Lack of Policy Fuels InequalityPreferential treatment is necessary to help racial minorities gain access to higher

education.

William M. Chace, Professor of English at Stanford University and former President of Weslean and

Emory Universities, Winter 2011 Affirmative Inaction, The American Scholar,http://theamericanscholar.org/affirmative-inaction/The history of affirmative action includes the

graduation of thousands of young men and women who otherwise would not have passed within the

gates of a college or university. Many of those graduates have gone on to professional careers where

their success has helped to reinvigorate the American dream. They have become physicians, diplomats,

lawyers, Army officers, stockbrokers, journalists, high government officials, scientists, and business

leaders. Why, advocates of affirmative action now ask, should their number not be augmented?But

before all else, its worth asking whether affirmative action is really needed. For all their differences,

both critics and advocates acknowledge that some classes of students, particularly African-American

and Hispanic, cannot gain admission to many colleges and universities solely on the basis of their

academic preparation. They need preferential treatment to enter the model commonwealth. The

College Board last measured mean Scholastic Aptitude Scores by Ethnicity in 2008; the results aresobering:In critical reading, African-American students scored, on average, 83 points below Asian-

American students, who in turn scored less well, by 15 points, than white students. But in mathematics,

Asian-American students trumped both whites and African Americans, by 44 points and 155 points

respectively. In writing, whites did just about as well as Asian Americans (two points higher) and

considerably better than African Americans (94 points higher). And in every category, Mexican

Americans did less well than whites and Asian Americans but better than African Americans. With such

dissimilar scores facing them over the years (the year 2008 being little different from the previous five

years), admissions officers at colleges or universities have introduced handicapping measures in order

to admit applicants with weaker scores. Those measures have hardly been trivial.One important set of

studies, by Thomas Espenshade of Princeton University and his colleagues, examined the records of

more than 100,000 applicants to three highly selective private universities. They found that being anAfrican-American candidate was worth, on average, an additional 230 SAT points on the 1600-point

scale and that being Hispanic was worth an additional 185 points, but that being an Asian-American

candidate warranted the loss, on average, of 50 SAT points.
http://theamericanscholar.org/affirmative-inaction/http://theamericanscholar.org/affirmative-inaction/


13/30

Preferencing is essential and does NOT harm Students in the racial majority


Emory Universities, Winter 2011 Affirmative Inaction, The American Scholar,http://theamericanscholar.org/affirmative-inaction/What happens if the handicapping is taken away?

The same authors found that the outcome would be dramatic, with acceptance rates falling for

African-American applicants from 31 percent to 13 percent and for Hispanic applicants by as much asone-half to two-thirds; Asian-American applicants would occupy four out of five of the seats created by

fewer African-American and Hispanic acceptances. The Asian-American acceptance rate would rise by

one-third from nearly 18 percent to more than 23 percent. Most astonishingly, it turns out that

contrary to the assumptions of those who contend that affirmative action puts white students at a

severe disadvantagewhite applicants would benefit very little from the removal of racial and ethnic

preferences; their acceptance rate would increase by less than one percentage point. Given the

probable results of eliminating affirmative actiona student body consisting almost wholly of whites

and Asian Americansno chief administrator of a respectable college or university would happily

oversee the erosion of the presence of black or Hispanic students. That is why no such institution has

volunteered to be first to proclaim that it will formally jettison affirmative action. In order to protect

what they see as the positive results of the practice and also to protect themselves against litigation bya white plaintiff arguing that his or her chance of admission has been jeopardized, colleges and

universities have increasingly relied on admissions standards that depend less on SAT scores and more

on intangible and personal attributes: having leadership skills, having the strength to overcome social

and economic circumstances, or being the first in the family to seek higher education. With such

careful consideration, the candidates can then be admitted (or rejected) one by one.

The Supreme Court has already supported narrowly tailored preferencing and rejected

admission solely on race


Emory Universities, Winter 2011 Affirmative Inaction, The American Scholar,

http://theamericanscholar.org/affirmative-inaction/

The two celebrated cases emerging from the University of Michigan, about which Justice OConnor

made her memorable remark, illustrate the situation faced by a leading public institution practicing

affirmative action. The Supreme Court employed strict scrutiny in reaching its decisions. And, as the

Court saw, when the university itself employed careful scrutiny in its admissions procedures, it was

entitled to an important victory.One case addressed the admissions policies of Michigans law school

(Grutter v. Bollinger et al.); the other addressed undergraduate admissions in its college (Gratz et al. v.

Bollinger et al.). The former found for the university, declaring, The narrowly tailored use of race in

admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow

from a diverse student body is not prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause. The latter decision

found against the university, noting that its current policy, which automatically distributes 20 points,or one-fifth of the points needed to guarantee admission, to every single underrepresented minority

applicant solely because of race, is not narrowly tailored to achieve educational diversity.


14/30

Current policy proves that favoritism is neededSchools that have removed policies are already seeing negative effects

Hugh B. Price,former president of the National Urban League and expert on criminal justice, equal


Neighborhood Enterprise (NCNE),2009, Race and Society, Black America Today,http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.html

We've already seen the damage that ending affirmative action has done at highly selective public

colleges and universities like the University of California at Berkeley and the University of Texas at

Austin. Heightened reliance on quantifiable measure of merit, like SAT and ACT scores, overwhelms

consideration of valid qualitative indices of talent, merit and potential, like drive, determination,

leadership and communications skills. This trend has placed black and Latino youngstersat a decided

disadvantage in the admissions process at highly selective public institutions. All of that said, there

must be increased emphasis on boosting the achievement levels of K-12 children of color.

Affirmative action is still needed to help undue the current discrimination

National Organization for Women (NOW), 2012,Talking About Affirmative Action,http://www.now.org/issues/affirm/talking.html.

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. For every dollar earned

by men, women on a whole earn 74 cents, African American women earn 63 cents and Latina women

earn 57 cents. According to the Census Bureau, only 25% of all doctors and lawyers are women. Less

than 1% of auto mechanics are women. And women are only 8.4% of engineers.

Policy is necessary to equalize education against racism and sexism

Boyce Watkins, Professor at Syracuse University, and Linda Chavez, chair, Center for EqualOpportunity,2012, Affirmative Action: Is It Still Necessary?,NPR,http://www.npr.org/2012/02/27/147514069/affirmative-action-is-it-still-necessary

I think it's interesting that we have this big problem with preferences in that context, but white kids

were getting affirmative action long before the program was ever created. I see, in many cases, where

there are legacies of individuals that are admitted to universities because their parents went to school

here, or their parents had money to give to the school, or some other sort of benefit that comes from

the fact that the campus, or that the institution, was built with social norms, systems, and an

infrastructure that benefits white males over other people.For example, it's much easier to get

mentorship from white males if you are a white male. So the bottom line is that if we don't start to

honestly reflect on some of this, then we're never really going to make things right. And this idea that

somehow helping minorities is taking something away from other people is incredibly problematic,

because we didn't have a problem taking things away from minorities, but we certainly have a

problem giving anything back.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.htmlhttp://www.now.org/issues/affirm/talking.htmlhttp://www.now.org/issues/affirm/talking.htmlhttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.html


15/30

Policy in schools is absolutely essential for all sectors of society

Benefits of policy in schools spills over

Hugh B. Price,former president of the National Urban League and expert on criminal justice, equal

opportunity and civil rights, Robert L Woodson, is founder and president of the National Center forNeighborhood Enterprise (NCNE),2009,Race and Society: Diversity in Schools, Black America Today,http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.html

I firmly believe that integrated education is good for African Americans and good for all Americans. The

evidence substantiates this. Plus, in an increasingly diverse society, school is one of the best places

where we can begin to learn to live and work together, share space and opportunity together. That's

essential if our society is going to work. The reality, though, is that many school systems are

demographically land-locked, if you will. Since the federal courts are less and less inclined to force

busing across district boundaries, there is less political will and legal muscle to engineer integration. If

the government gave low-income housing vouchers or housing tax credits that enabled them to move to

other communities, chances are more children would experience integration. The difficulty of realizing

school integration in this day and age is the reason for the heightened focus on making certain allchildren receive a first-class education wherever they go to school. For children educated in racially

isolated settings, learning to live and work together may have to wait until they enter college or the

workplace.

Students benefit form current policy

Hugh B. Price, former president of the National Urban League and expert on criminal justice, equalopportunity and civil rights, Robert L Woodson, is founder and president of the National Center for

Neighborhood Enterprise (NCNE),2009, Race and Society: Diversity in Schools, Black America Today,http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.html

Proximity enables people to practice and learn tolerance. I'm convinced that America has made so

much progress in race relations because college campuses, public agencies, corporate workplaces andpublic accommodations are vastly more open and integrated than they were a generation ago. Racial

tensions often arise these days in workplace settings where employees of all races who have high school

degrees or less encounter one another for the first time. K-12 education in this country is very

segregated. Young people emerging from high school often have had little exposure to peers of other

races, much less much practice learning to work together. So I'd argue that the interracial interaction

that comes with integration is educationally sound and promotes economic productivity.

Affirmative action creates a network of opportunities for disadvantaged groups

Boyce Watson, Professor at Syracuse University, and Linda Chavez, chair, Center for Equal

Opportunity,

2012, Affirmative Action: Is It Still Necessary?,

NPR,http://www.npr.org/2012/02/27/147514069/affirmative-action-is-it-still-necessary

Well, first of all, you have to remember it was a half-century ago that affirmative action first began, and

it began at a time in which discrimination, not just private discrimination but state-sponsored

discrimination, was pervasive. The goal of affirmative action was not just to eliminate discrimination,

but to try to cast a wider net, and to provide opportunities for those who had suffered past

discrimination to be able to get the skills and training necessary to be able to compete on an equal

footing.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.htmlhttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.html


16/30

Favoring groups that have been historically disadvantaged isnt

discriminatory

Affirmative action isnt reverse discrimination

National Organization for Women(NOW), 2012,Talking About Affirmative Action,http://www.now.org/issues/affirm/talking.html.

Affirmative Action levels the playing field so people of color and all women have the chance to

compete in education and in business. White men hold 95% to 97% of the high-level corporate jobs.

And that's with affirmative action programs in place. Imagine how low figures would be without

affirmative action. Of 3000 federal court decisions in discrimination cases between 1990 and 1994,

only 100 involved claims of reverse discrimination; only 6 of those claims were found to be valid.

Affirmative Action is still necessary to stop discrimination

Boyce Watson, Professor at Syracuse University, and Linda Chavez, chair, Center for Equal


Well, I think the mission is interpreted in different ways by different people. But I would say thatthe

goal of affirmative action was to make things right - to make America a country that is more

consistent with its value systems; to try to make America into the country that it would have been

had we not had a 400-year period in which one group was subjugated to the mercy of another.

I think that the broader objective is not just to eliminate discrimination but to actually eliminate racial

inequality - which is a product of discrimination, you see, because you can have racial inequality even

when there are no racists in the building. When you look at American institutions, and you look at the

divergent power structures, you see that there are many corporations, organizations, universities, etc.,

to this day, that haven't hired or promoted a person of color...

Affirmative action doesnt crowd out opportunities for white men

National Organization for Women(NOW), 2012,Talking About Affirmative Action,http://www.now.org/issues/affirm/talking.html.

If half of the people of color who are admitted to schools under affirmative action programs were cut,

the acceptance rates of white men would only increase by 2%.

Women still face barriers in schools. In Washington, women receive only 12% of doctorates in

engineering, and women are substantially under-represented in computer science nationwide.
http://www.now.org/issues/affirm/talking.htmlhttp://www.now.org/issues/affirm/talking.htmlhttp://www.now.org/issues/affirm/talking.htmlhttp://www.now.org/issues/affirm/talking.html


17/30

Affirmative Action is absolutely necessary now

Obama being elected DOES NOT undermine the need for affirmative action America is

still Racist

Reginald T Shuford, Senior Staff Attorney, Racial Justice Program, American Civil Liberties Union

Foundation,2009, Campbell Law Review pgs 503-533,http://law.campbell.edu/lawreview/articles/31-3-503.pdf

With the election of Barack Obama to the most powerful position in the world, the presidency of the

United States of America, many opined that America finally conquered her racial demons, some

trumpeting the term post-racial as though it were a fait accompli. That an African-American man

much less one with such a nontraditional name could ascend to the highest office in the land, they

argue, clearly signals that Americas racist history is a thing of the past. Gone. Over. Kaput. Slate

wiped clean. Concomitant with their notion of a post-racial America is the strong belief that complaints

of racism lack merit, and measures to remedy past and current exclusionary practices are no longer

necessary. But saying it is so does not make it so. There can be no doubt that Obamas election

represents a singular moment in American history and demonstrates significant and welcomeprogress in Americas notoriously fraught racial relations. That said, claims that America is truly post-

racial are decidedly. Premature. Indeed, during this very election season, some voters conceded that

Obamas race was an issue impacting whether they would vote for him.

Inequality is alive and well today


Foundation,2009, Campbell Law Review pgs 503-533,http://law.campbell.edu/lawreview/articles/31-3-503.pdf

It is more than a little ironic that many of those proclaiming a post-racial America actually opposed

Barack Obamas candidacy and, indeed, accorded America that status well before his election as

Americas forty-fourth President. Post-racialists whatever their nomenclature over the years have

for decades argued that the playing field is level for all Americans, and that race-conscious policies are

no longer necessary as there are no racial inequities left to remedy.It is not so much that they have

been equal opportunity warriors, who can now pack up and go home after having waged and procured

equal opportunity for all after an extended but successful battle. Rather, post-racialists fail to recognize

and even deny the existence of racial inequality in the first place. Despite their vehement denials,

inequality remains a fact of life for many Americans, greatly undermining their ability to be fully

included in society and depriving them of the myriad opportunities that such inclusion permits.

Racism is Alive and Well in Education

Reginald T Shuford, Senior Staff Attorney, Racial Justice Program, American Civil Liberties UnionFoundation,2009, Campbell Law Review pgs 503-533,http://law.campbell.edu/lawreview/articles/31-3-In education, the No Child Left Behind Act has clearly failed in its goal of ending the racial and ethnic

achievement gap in test scores. Its provisions that were supposed to alleviate the nations massive

dropout crisis have been almost completely ignored. The gap in college completion, which is the key

to secure middle class status in the contemporary U.S., remains massive. In 2006, 28.4% of white

adults reported graduating from college, compared to 18.5% of blacks and just 12.4% of Latinos ,

including only 8.5% of Mexican-Americans, by far the largest Latino population.


18/30

Affirmative Action doesnt stigmatize those that it favors

Stigma is often projected upon groups rather than felt

The University of Iowa News Services, 2008, UI study: minorities do not feel stigmatized byaffirmative action, University of Iowa News Release, http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2008/october/100708affirmative_action.htm

Evidence that calls the powerful stigma argument into question is important at a time when California,

Michigan and Washington recently passed legislation to end affirmative action in public institutions, and

similar measures are on the ballot this November in Colorado and Nebraska, said UI Law Professor

Angela Onwuachi-Willig. She conducted the study with sociologist Mary Campbell ofthe UI College of

Liberal Arts and Sciences and Emily Houh, a University of Cincinnati law professor."Anti-affirmative-

action activists bring forth lots of arguments against the program, but stigma gets a lot of play

because high-profile individuals like Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas make the argument,"

Onwuachi-Willig said."Well-meaning people who value diversity can be influenced by the argument if

they buy the idea that affirmative action hurts the people it was designed to help. Our study suggests

it doesn't, and we think it's important to share this evidence so people can use it to continue tosupport diversity in education."Campbell noted that arguments against affirmative action are often

based on anecdotal experiences of a few prominent individuals like Thomas, not on data."We felt it

was important to collect something more systematic and think about how the average person

experiences the policy, instead of just one individual," Campbell said. "We can't rule out the possibility

of one person feeling stigmatized by affirmative action, but that's not what most people

experience."On average, minority students at both types of schools disagreed or strongly disagreed

with statements such as "I do not deserve to be a student at my school," "Classmates/teachers act as

if I was admitted based only on Affirmative action," and "I feel stigmatized by affirmative action."

Other factors cause the stigma NOT affirmative action

African American Policy Forum,2011, Myth: Affirmative action stigmatizes itsbeneficiaries,http://aapf.org/tool_to_speak_out-2/focus-2/myth-7-affirmative-action-stigmatizes-its-

beneficiaries/

. One of the most common anti-affirmative action arguments is that it harms the very people it is

intended to help. This argument relies on two false presumptions: First, that affirmative action

conflicts with a genuine American meritocracy, so that people (including its beneficiaries) will always

question the qualifications of those who participate in such programs. And, secondly, that the stigma

associated with these programs is so pervasive that it even damages those women and people of

color who have not benefited from affirmative action. In this sense, these policies are said to cause

the members of marginalized groups to question their accomplishments, and to prevent anyone from

ever knowing whether they actually deserve the positions that they occupy in American society.In

reality, the stigma associated with affirmative action derives from misunderstandings about itsnature. These misunderstandings are rooted in the idea that merit can be easily quantified and

measured objectively through the use of standardized criteria. Because affirmative action requires

that we depart from the use of such criteria, they are thought to unfairly favor the beneficiaries of

affirmative action; and, in so doing, to promote reverse discrimination. However, thinking about these

programs as a form of preferential treatment for the less qualified is impossible ifwe remember

that they function only to level a playing field that is already biased against women and minorities.
http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2008/october/100708affirmative_action.htmhttp://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2008/october/100708affirmative_action.htmhttp://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2008/october/100708affirmative_action.htmhttp://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2008/october/100708affirmative_action.htm


19/30

Affirmative Action helps create lasting changes in educationAffirmative Action creates opportunities for admitted students


2000, St. Petersberg Times,http://www.sptimes.com/News/120300/Columns/A_good_argument_for_a.shtmlMany small to large non-profit groups, such as Inroads, the Consortium for Graduate Study in

Management and the National Consortium for Graduate Degees for Minorities in Engineering and

Science, have made a science of matching industry with institutions of higher education that provide

recruits. Most of these organizations offer minority students -- with 3.0 grade-point averages --

fellowships and match them with companies that will give them paid internships, mentoring and

offers of permanent employment.The Chronicle states that Inroads, for example, with a budget of

$30-million and 50 branches in the United States, recruits "at about 600 colleges and has more than

7,000 interns paired with about 900 corporate clients, who pay the organization an annual

sponsorship fee for every intern it provides.

Policies are essential to lessening current inequalities and solving for future inequalityBoyce Watkins, Professor at Syracuse University, and Linda Chavez, chair, Center for Equal

Opportunity,2012, Affirmative Action: Is It Still Necessary?,NPR,http://www.npr.org/2012/02/27/147514069/affirmative-action-is-it-still-necessaryI think the question answers itself. I think anybody who thinks that we can solve a 400-year pattern of

systemic discrimination with 20 years of good behavior is absolutely delusional. I think that if you look

at our society, if you look at the human rights abuses that have been documented by the United

Nations, it's been made very clear, and it's known throughout the world, that the United States is still

a two-tiered society. If you look at quality-of-life factors such as education, economic equality, mass

incarceration, etc., you see that people of color still live a very different reality from people whose

ancestors were not subject to discrimination. You see, affirmative action is not just a matter of dealing

with what I've gone through as an African-American male, and the discrimination I've experienced. It'sa matter of dealing with the fact that there is inequality that was created in my life long before I was

born because of what my ancestors were not able to leave to me. They were not able to leave wealth

to me. They were not able to give me power to inherit.So ultimately, if you really want to make

America the country that we claim that we've always wanted it to be, you have to dig a little deeper

than to just have a couple policies that run for a couple decades

Affirmative Action improves retention rates for the historically disadvantaged and

helps these groups foster professional connections


2000, St. Petersberg Times,http://www.sptimes.com/News/120300/Columns/A_good_argument_for_a.shtmlIn addition to money, the universities get an added benefit for pairing minorities and corporations:

The minorities in the programs become highly motivated and stay in school. Hewlett-Packard reports

that 80 percent of its scholarship recipients remain in college as of their junior year. The Chronicle

states that this is a retention rate "more than double that of black and Hispanic students

overall."Other firms that give such scholarships also report exceptionally high retention rates among

minority student recipients.


20/30

Rumors about Affirmative Action are NOT TRUEAffirmative Action helps several groups


Foundation,2009, Campbell Law Review pgs 503-533,http://law.campbell.edu/lawreview/articles/31-3-

One of the myths associated with affirmative action is that it is an entitlement program for African-Americans who are its sole beneficiaries. So pervasive is this notion that, for many people, the

meremention of the term affirmative action reflexively conjures up an image of an African-

American with hand held out. Thisidea is perpetuated by the erroneous notion that affirmative action

is no longer necessary because of the election of a black man to the presidency. The media aids and

abets this stereotype with its use of certain terminology and imagery, and with its general exclusion of

white men, women,and other minorities from its coverage of affirmativeaction. The truth of the

matter is that, in addition to other minoritiesAsians, Hispanics, and Native Americans, for example

white men, and women also benefit from affirmative action. As discussed herein, legacy and veteran

programs constitute just two of many examples of affirmative action policies that transcend coverage

of only African Americans.

Minorities dont feel stigmatized by preferential treatment

The University of Iowa News Services, 2008, UI study: minorities do not feel stigmatized byaffirmative action, University of Iowa News Release,http://news-

releases.uiowa.edu/2008/october/100708affirmative_action.htm

Opponents of affirmative action point to stigma as a reason for dismantling the policy, but a new

University of Iowa study counters that argument. Challengers of the policy argue that minorities who

benefit from it could doubt their own credentials or feel the burden of being treated as if they're

employed or enrolled only because of race -- not because they earned it.But researchers surveyed 610

students at seven public law schools, and results indicate that minorities at affirmative action schools

feel just as good about their qualifications and about how others treat them as minorities at non-

affirmative-action schools do.

Promising not to be discriminatory isnt enough, policy is needed to create change



I've never sought out a perfect, utopian society. But we can't settle for a vastly and undeniably

imperfect society, either. We can't look at a society where there are remnants everywhere of this

historical discrimination and just sort of say oh, well, we know we've been beating on you and

battering you for 400 years, but now we're just not going to - we're not going to harm anyone anymore,

and everyone should treat everyone the same.And if you somehow ask for some sort of - of any form of

reparation for what's happened to your descendants, and what created the society we live in today,then somehow you're being a racist. You're being just as bad as we were when we did this thing to you.

And so I think that to somehow say that we're going to eliminate 400 years of undeniable racial

inequality by simply saying we're not going to allow for discrimination anymore, that's like me saying

that the milk I spilled on the floor is going to clean itself up because I promise not to spill any more

milk.
http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2008/october/100708affirmative_action.htmhttp://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2008/october/100708affirmative_action.htmhttp://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2008/october/100708affirmative_action.htmhttp://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2008/october/100708affirmative_action.htmhttp://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2008/october/100708affirmative_action.htm


21/30

Negative


22/30

Affirmative Action will not solve systemic problems

Affirmative Actions will not undue institutional racism



IfAfrican-American males are underrepresented in colleges or universities, they are overrepresented in

federal, state, and county prisons, jails, and juvenile detention facilities. About one in three black men

will go to prison in his lifetime, compared to one in 17 white males. One in three black men between

the ages of 20 and 29 already lives under some form of correctional supervision or control. The Bureau

of Justice Statistics reports that some 186,000 black males between the ages of 18 and 24 were behind

bars in federal and state prisons and local jails in 2005.No amount of affirmative action, at either

private or public colleges and universities, will free these men from jail. Nor will affirmative action be

able to reach into the homes, neighborhoods, and schools to rectify the distressing situations

poverty, drugs, families customarily without either husband or fatherthat once served such men, andwill now serve others, so badly. Nothing that colleges and universities can do will be enough to rewrite

the history of racial inequality that has, for decade after decade, poisoned this nations history. Black

men in prison are a function of that poisonous history, and affirmative action is a societal antidote to

this and other existing effects of racism. We must not forget that history. History matters.

Schools are a primary reason why students are unprepared for college


Foundation,2009, Campbell Law Review pgs 503-533,http://law.campbell.edu/lawreview/articles/31-3-Minority children who attend segregated schools are severely disadvantaged in their quest for the full

enjoyment of their citizenship. Segregated schools are more likely than non-segregated schools to

have students from low-income families and to lack adequate resources. They are more likely to havetrouble attracting and keeping high-quality teachers. Segregated schools have a greater likelihood of

having higher turnover rates among staff, larger class size, fewer advanced placement courses,

poorer infrastructure, and fewer basic educational supplies. The graduation rates at these schools

frequently hover below fifty percent, and students who actually stay to graduate are usually

unprepared for the rigors of college. As a result of this ever-worsening problem, not just individuals but

entire communities are at risk.

Preferencing students wont undo social wrongs and furthers class distinctions

Roger Clegg, CEO of Center for Equal Opportunity, 2012, Roger Clegg: What do you think ofaffirmative action? The Civil Rights Institute.http://www.acri.org/blog/2012/01/30/roger-clegg-what-

do-you-think-of-affirmative-action

Americans should not be treated differently because of their skin color or what country their

ancestors came from. Period. We should all agree on that, because were all Americans. No

discrimination, no preferences, no quotas, no goals based on race or ethnicity. Unfortunately, many

so-called affirmative-action programs do just that, and they need to be changed. Unfortunately, many

so-called affirmative-action programs do just that, and they need to be changed. President Obama has

acknowledged that theres something wrong when well-to-do students


23/30

Current Policy Ignores the Root CauseAffirmative Action Ignores Structural Inequality

Stephen Ohlemacher, author for the Associated Press, 2007, Census Study Eyes Blacks in Prison,http://www.sheldensays.com/census_study_of_blacks_in_prison.htm.Nevertheless, civil rights

advocates said it is startling that blacks and Hispanics are more likely to live in prison cells than incollege dorms."It's one of the great social and economic tragedies of our time," said Marc Morial,

president and CEO of the Urban League. "It points to the signature failure in our education system and

how we've been raising our children."The Census Bureau released 2006 data Thursday on the social,

racial and economic characteristics of people living in adult correctional facilities, college housing and

nursing homes. It is the first in-depth look at people living in "group quarters" since the 1980 census...In

addition to not including commuter students, it does not provide racial breakdowns by gender or age,

though it does show that males make up 90 percent of prison inmates.Also, most prison inmates are 25

or older while 96 percent of people in college housing are age 18 to 24.The data show that big increases

in black and Hispanic inmates occurred since 1980. In 1980, the number of blacks living in college dorms

was roughly equal to the number in prison. Among Hispanics, those in college dorms outnumbered

those in prison in 1980.There are a lot of reasons why black students do not reach college at the samerate as whites, said Amy Stuart Wells, a professor of sociology and education at Columbia University's

Teachers College.Black students are more likely to attend segregated schools with high concentrations

of poverty, less qualified teachers, lower expectations and a less demanding curriculum, she said."And

they are perceived by society as terrible schools, so it is hard to get accepted into college,"

Affirmative action ignores class differences

Hugh B. Price,former president of the National Urban League and expert on criminal justice, equalopportunity and civil rights, Robert L Woodson, is founder and president of the National Center for

Neighborhood Enterprise (NCNE), 2009, Race and Society, Black America Today,http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.htmlAffirmative action was an ambulance service

that has become a transportation system. It was to be the temporary solution for a problem over theshort period to level the playing field. We can no longer generalize about black America, but we can

generalize about the poor. We need to look now at how to assist the economically disadvantaged of all

races who are at the bottom of the economic ladder.

Minority groups are more concerned with problems not addressed by affirmative

actionHugh B. Price,former president of the National Urban League and expert on criminal justice, equal


Neighborhood Enterprise (NCNE), 2009, Race and Society, Black America Today,While racial discrimination continues to be a problem in America's 21st century, it is not the most

crucial problem facing the black community. In fact, in 2000, a poll taken by the Center for Political

and Economic Studies showed that blacks ranked race eighth on a list of their major concerns--well

after such things as education, crime and violence, prescription drugs and health care. Those who

would keep us focused solely on race divert attention and keep us from finding solutions to the

problems plaguing our inner cities and devastating our young people. At the present time, an 18-year

old black male who steps off a bus at any of our urban centers has a lower chance of survival than one

who stepped off a landing barge at Normandy during World War II. Our biggest problems are in black-

on-black crime and violence, not black and white relations.
http://www.sheldensays.com/census_study_of_blacks_in_prison.htmhttp://www.sheldensays.com/census_study_of_blacks_in_prison.htm


24/30

Policies that privilege the historically disadvantaged fail

Discrimination will exist regardless of privileging historically disadvantaged people

Roger Clegg, CEO of Center for Equal Opportunity, 2012, Roger Clegg: What do you think ofaffirmative action? The Civil Rights Institute.http://www.acri.org/blog/2012/01/30/roger-clegg-what-do-you-think-of-affirmative-action

Q: But doesnt discrimination still exist? A. Yes, unfortunately and, unfortunately, there will always

be some discrimination, even though weve made enormous progress. But the way to fight

discrimination is not through more discrimination. As Chief Justice Roberts wrote, The way to stop

discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race. We have plenty of laws

that ban racial discrimination, and they should be enforced. Thats the way to fight discrimination not

by piling politically correct discrimination on top of politically incorrect discrimination.I dont deny that

bias exists. But as Clegg said, the solution isnt outright bias in the other direction. We must combat

personal bias through enforcementand reinforcementof our laws, which are more than

sufficient.Admitting/hiring/promoting an individual on the basis of race is wrong; denying admission,

employment, and promotions on the basis of race is equally wrong.

Disadvantaged groups are still being overshadowed by current policy

Rob Mank, author for the Daily Beast and CBS News, 2011, Men far more likely to benefit fromaffirmative action in college admissions, CBS NEWs Political Hotsheet. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-

503544_162-20111646-503544.html

But if Bakke were an applicant today his story might be very different. A survey of admissions directors

released last week found that male applicants of all races are far more likely to benefit from

affirmative action-like policies than female applicants."Men are being admitted with lower grades and

test scores," said Scott Jaschik, editor of Inside Higher Ed, which conducted the survey. "While a lot of

people don't like to talk about it, a lot of colleges are basically doing affirmative action for

men."What's behind the aggressive push for male students is the decades-long trend of more womenon campus. Women have comprised a majority of students in higher education since 1979, one year

after the Bakke decision. And that trend is accelerating. The National Center for Education Statistics

projects that women's enrollment will increase 16 percent by 2020, compared to 8 percent for men. At

that point women will comprise 59 percent of post-secondary students, men just 41 percent. In 2009,

the most recent year for which data are available, the gender split was 57 percent women, 43 percent

men.

Disadvantaged groups are being hurt by schools compensating for current policy

Rob Mank, author for the Daily Beast and CBS News, 2011, Men far more likely to benefit fromaffirmative action in college admissions, CBS NEWs Political Hotsheet. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-

503544_162-20111646-503544.htmlMany colleges have sought to remedy that imbalance by admitting more men, especially among

undergraduates, forcing schools to reach deeper into the applicant pool. In the surveyreleased last

week by Inside Higher Ed, a web site that focuses on education news, 11 percent of admissions

directors said they admit male applicants with below average test scores and grades. Only 3 percent

of the 462 surveyed said they admit female applicants with below average credentials.At public 4-year

colleges the number is even higher. Almost one-in-five 18 percent - are so hungry for male students

admissions directors report admitting men with lower academic credentials, according to the survey.


25/30

Preferring historically disadvantaged groups has horrific unintended

consequences is bad for societyCurrent policy promotes isolation rather than integrationHugh B. Price,former president of the National Urban League and expert on criminal justice, equal


Neighborhood Enterprise (NCNE), 2009, Race and Society, Black America Today,http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/society/debate1.html

Proximity to those of other races does not determine whether a person will or will not be fair-minded.

I find it interesting that at the very institutions where professors decry the separation of races

encourage it through black studies programs, black dorms, etc., in which the students become

increasingly isolated.

Policy that referencing people on the basis of ethnicity creates class divides and

quotas

Roger Clegg, CEO of Center for Equal Opportunity, 2012, Roger Clegg: What do you think ofaffirmative action? The Civil Rights Institute.http://www.acri.org/blog/2012/01/30/roger-clegg-what-

do-you-think-of-affirmative-action

President Obama has acknowledged that theres something wrong when well-to-do students (he gave

the example of his own daughters) who apply to college are given a preference over students from

poverty-stricken homes just because the rich kids may have skin thats a little darker than the poor

kids, who happen to be white.Thats not what affirmative action or civil rights was originally

supposed to be about.Now, if a program is designed to stop discrimination, thats great and it should

stop it for everyone. If a program reaches out beyond an old-boy network, thats great, too but it

should reach out to everyone. If a program is designed to help poor people, or small companies, or

people who are the first in their families to go to college again, fine, but that can describe people of

any color and all ethnic groupsDiamonds in the rough come in all colors, you know. iamonds in therough come in all colors, you know.Q. Isnt there a difference between quotas and goals?

Goals inevitably become quotas, so, no, I dont think there really is a difference. If the boss gives

someone a goal, then they are going to try to meet that goal, and if the goal involves hiring more

people of a certain skin color, then there is going to be racial discrimination. The goal should be to

treat everyone without regard to skin color, not to hire a certain number of people of this or that skin

color.

The goal of affirmative action can only be achieved by authoritarianism and

oppression



It isn't realistic because in fact, there is inequality in every aspect of life. People are not all endowed

equally with the same talents, with the same interests, with the same desires and motivations. So,

you know, this idea that you're somehow going to achieve a world in which you've got, you know,

perfect representation of every ethnic, racial and gender group across the board, at all levels of

society - the only way you could do that would be through a kind of authoritarian regime in which you

squelched liberty.


26/30

Affirmative Action for women is failing

The Gender Gap is causing affirmative action to work in a way opposite than it was

intended

Scott Jaschik, Editor of Inside Higher Education and former editor of The Chronicle of Higher Education,

2006, http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2006/03/27/admitThe gender gap in undergraduate enrollments is, of course, no secret in academe. Women are solidly

in the majority (about 57 percent nationally) and their percentages are only expected to increase in

the years ahead. The gender gap first started to show up -- more than a decade ago -- at liberal arts

colleges, with educators guessing that men preferred larger institutions or the engineering and business

programs more prevalent at universities. But recently, the gap has started to show up at flagship public

universities, too: Some board members at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill were so

stunned in May to learn that this year's freshman class would be 58 percent female that they asked if

it was time to institute affirmative action for men.

Affirmative action undermines accomplishments of minorities

Trey Tepichin, author for the Chronicle at Duke University,2001,http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/affirmative-action-undermines-minority-success

Affirmative action serves not to elevate minorities but instead functions as a tool to undermine their

accomplishments. To set the record straight, I was born and raised in Mexico City--I am not white.

When I got into Duke I remember comments directed to me such as, "I bet affirmative action helped

you get into Duke," or "Duke needed to fulfill their Hispanic quota." Simply because I am Hispanic and

affirmative action is practiced, the value of my accomplishments were lessened in the eyes of many.

Admissions directors are Troubled by the gender gap propped but by favoritism

Scott Jaschik, Editor of Inside Higher Education and former editor of The Chronicle of Higher Education,2006, http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2006/03/27/admitBarmak Nassirian, associate executive director of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars

and Admissions Officers, said that he definitely sees "consciousness within the profession" about the

gender gap in applications, and that the gap has grown large enough at some institutions to cause real

concern. But he questioned whether there is really as much unfairness as many people assume because

of the Kenyon article. If colleges were so willing to favor men, Nassirian said, there are still enough

men applying to college that institutions would be 50-50 on enrollment, and they're not.

More broadly, he said that the discussion is reinforcing a false sense about college admissions -- a sense

that is always more of a problem in this time of year, as students await answers from colleges. People

have an "idealized image of admissions" in which all the applicants are lined up in some kind of

precise, merit-based order and when an admissions dean has lined up her class, she figures out how

many slots she has, walks down the line to the appropriate place, and admits everyone on one side

and rejects the rest.
http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/affirmative-action-undermines-minority-successhttp://www.dukechronicle.com/article/affirmative-action-undermines-minority-success


27/30

Affirmative Action doesnt create real diversity

Diversity will not be meaningful despite affirmative action

Alex Sherbany, Former Managing Editor for the Harvard Political Review, 2011, Harvard PoliticalReview, http://hpronline.org/united-states/education-policy/the-false-diversity-of-elite-universities/Diversity has been the favorite buzzword of universities for the past two decades, and the official

rationale for race-based preference in admissions continues to be the educational benefits of

diversity. Whatever the overall merits of the policy, the irony is that an elite university is not a very

good place for an elite student to meet people who are genuinely not like him. There are many

excellent reasons to come to a place like Harvard. To encounter real diversity is not one of them.

Affirmative Action doesnt break down stereotypes or create diversity

Alex Sherbany, Former Managing Editor for the Harvard Political Review, 2011, Harvard PoliticalReview, http://hpronline.org/united-states/education-policy/the-false-diversity-of-elite-universities/

The problem is that we still pretend that our campus exemplifies diversity. This is misleading.

The charge of hypocrisy will continue to embarrass universities as long as they claim to be capable of

fulfilling the high pedagogic goal of eliminating stereotypes through various kinds of affirmative

action. More often than not, they are only replacing old stereotypes with new ones.

Its not so much that Ivy League university presidents view their institutions as cogs in a nationwide

social engineering apparatus, as conservatives complain, as that the engineering is faulty. Trumpeting

our diversity is counterproductive if it makes us feel more worldly wise, tolerant, and pluralistic than

we really are. If you took all the boasts from the admissions office seriously, youd be overflowing with

hubris about how diverse and open-minded you had become after four years in the ivory tower. But a

tower is still a tower, even if its rainbow-colored.

False diversity doesnt help students

Alex Sherbany, Former Managing Editor for the Harvard Political Review, 2011, Harvard PoliticalReview, http://hpronline.org/united-states/education-policy/the-false-diversity-of-elite-universities/

First, everyone knows that geographic diversity is more about burnishing the admissions brochure

than education. While its possible that Ive benefited immensely from the inclusion of at least one

Wyominger in each admitted class, I suspect that Harvard benefits far more from being able to say that

it took students from all 50 states! Naturally, for Wyomingers and other students from exotic locales,

this leads to self-doubt and stigmatization. By my calculations this afflicts at least two dozen students

from geographically underrepresented areas every year. No one should have to go through that,

especially if you already have to live in a state in which the antelope population exceeds the human

population.
http://hpronline.org/united-states/education-policy/the-false-diversity-of-elite-universities/http://hpronline.org/united-states/education-policy/the-false-diversity-of-elite-universities/http://hpronline.org/united-states/education-policy/the-false-diversity-of-elite-universities/http://hpronline.org/united-states/education-policy/the-false-diversity-of-elite-universities/http://hpronline.org/united-states/education-policy/the-false-diversity-of-elite-universities/http://hpronline.org/united-states/education-policy/the-false-diversity-of-elite-universities/


28/30

Collegiate interventions are too late

A flurry of problems caused by poor schooling are not addressed by affirmative action


Foundation,2009, Campbell Law Review pgs 503-533,http://law.campbell.edu/lawreview/articles/31-3-In addition to the far-reaching and often devastating effects of segregation and low graduation rates,

educational opportunities for minority children are severely compromised by the school-to-prison

pipeline, a nationwide phenomenon in which students, largely those of color, are funneled out of

public schools and into the juvenile and criminal justice systems. Whether meted out discipline at a

disproportionate rate, assigned to failing schools, banished to disciplinary alternative schools, over-

identified as special needs, denied educational ser vices when accurately identified as special needs,

subjected to high-stakes testing, or placed under zero-tolerance policies that criminalize minor

infractions, students of color are pushed out of public schools and into the eagerly awaiting arms of

the juvenile and criminal justice system at an alarming rate.

Polices create the wrong type of interventionsBoyce Watkins, Professor at Syracuse University, and Linda Chavez, chair, Center for Equal


Well, that's right, and let me be clear about this. I am not saying that we have actually reached the

Promised Land yet. We haven't. I mean, there is still discrimination. There's still prejudice in our

society. We haven't totally eliminated it. But the way to get about solving that - there is, you know, as

Boyce talks about, there is a skills gap in America. There is an education gap. There - it is an

unfortunate fact that a lot of black and Latino - and by the way, poor white kids - go to schools that do

not prepare them sufficiently to be able to succeed in the world. But granting preference on the basis

of skin color, regardless of whether that individual child has suffered from the effects of that

discrimination, makes no sense to me. Why is it you would prefer a black child who might be the son ordaughter of - you know, a lawyer and a doctor, over a white child who may be the child of an out-of-

work mine worker?

Policy masks the real issues and serves as a false solution



So it's going to take a long time to try to create anything that looks like that world. I know that - it's easy

to sort of talk about, you know, discrimination and to sort of say look, the elimination of

discrimination is the objective of affirmative action. But the truth is that one of the biggest mistakes, I

think, that we make when we talk about affirmative action is, we think that it all stops withdiscrimination - or the creation of equal opportunity.And actually, the real culprit is the actual

inequality, which is a product of discrimination. So it's not a matter of pointing fingers at people and

saying ha, you're a racist, that's - you're bad. It's a matter of saying no, you can have inequality when

there is not a racist person anywhere in sight.


29/30

Affirmative Action Stigmatizes those it is supposed to help

Affirmative Action is stigmatizing

Michelle Wu, author at the Daily Princetonian Princetons newspaper,2009,http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/04/02/23248/Affirmative action may increase academic pressure and stigmatize minority students, according to a

study conducted by sociology professor Douglas MasseyGS 78.If white students believe that many

of their black peers would not be at a college were it not for affirmative action and, more important, if

black students perceive whites to believe that, then affirmation action may indeed undermine

minority-group members academic performance by heightening the social stigma they already

experience because of race or ethnicity, Massey and his three collaborators wrote in The Chronicle of

Higher Education on March 27.The researchers also presented another detriment of the controversial

policy: that affirmative action exacerbates the psychological burdens that minority students must

carry on campuses.Those who feel they are representing their race every time they are called on to

perform academically will have a heightened sense of responsibility, they wrote.

Policy perpetuates stereotypes

Michelle Wu, author at the Daily Princetonian Princetons newspaper,2009,http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/04/02/23248/

In the study, the researchers examined affirmative action at 28 universities across the country,

comparing the SAT scores and current GPAs of a broad range of students as indicators of academic

success.We have used SAT scores to measure the impact of affirmative action not because they are

ideal, but because they offer a practical method that can be applied across groups and institutions,

they wrote.The study, which focused on the academic performance of roughly 4,000 individuals, found

that 84 percent of black students had test scores below their institutions averages, compared with

roughly 66 percent of Hispanics.In places where theres a large difference between the minority

average and the institutional average, it seems to create a climate that makes it difficult for minoritystudents to perform because ... it exacerbates stereotypes, Massey explained in an interview.To

measure affirmative action at a given institution, the researchers used the difference between the mean

SAT score earned by blacks or Hispanics and the mean score earned by all students at that institution.

Affirmative Action Stigmatizes Women

Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Division 14 of the APA,2012,http://www.siop.org/AfirmAct/siopsaarnontarg.aspx

Studies by Heilman and her colleagues show that both males and females tend to assume that

females hired under affirmative action programs are relatively less competent. Heilman, Block, and

Lucas (1992; Study 2) asked 184 White male employees of various companies to evaluate the

competence of a specific female or minority co-worker, and to indicate the extent to which affirmativeaction was responsible for the co-worker's selection. Judgments of competence were inversely related

to the perceived importance of affirmative action in selection. Heilman et al. (1992; Study 1) asked 129

male and female undergraduates to review application materials of someone recently hired and to make

predictions about their job performance. The job was said to be either highly or moderately gender-

typed to be masculine. The applicants were either male or female, and if female, either were or were

not associated with an AAP. Affirmative action was manipulated by placing a statement at the bottom of

the applications that said either hire or hire (affirmative action hire).
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/04/02/23248/http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/04/02/23248/


30/30

Affirmative Action creates false diversity

Policies Intended to Help Disadvantaged Groups Fail

Scott Jaschik, Editor of Inside Higher Education and former editor of The Chronicle of Higher Education,

2006, http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2006/03/27/admitWhen admissions officers gather to create a freshman class, there is a large elephant in the room,

wrote Jennifer Delahunty Britz, in The New York Times last week: the desire to minimize gender

imbalance in their classes.Britz, the admissions dean at Kenyon College, wrote that her institution

gets far more applications from women than from men and that, as a result, men are "more valued

applicants."Britz discussed a female candidate who was considered borderline by the Kenyon team

but who -- had she been a he -- would have been admitted without hesitation.

The government der

Date post:	14-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	luke-roy
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

debate aff action

Documents