In U.S. Reversal, Minority-Based Scholarships OK

Reversing a controversial George Bush Administration policy, Education Secretary Richard W. Riley announced Thursday that colleges and universities can offer scholarships made available only to members of minority groups.

The new policy will encourage institutions to offer scholarships based on race or national origin to remedy past discrimination by the institutions or to achieve diversity, officials said.

“We want the doors to post-secondary education to remain open for minority students,” Riley said. “This policy helps to achieve that goal in a manner that is consistent with the law.”

The policy is based on the Clinton Administration’s interpretation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits recipients of federal funds from discriminating on the basis of race, color or national origin.

Aware of the legal complexities involved, however, the policy said that the awards must be “narrowly tailored.” For example, colleges should demonstrate that they have considered other methods of diversifying their campus before turning to minority scholarships.

The latest controversy over race-specific scholarships erupted in late 1990 when the head of the Education Department’s civil rights office advised officials of the Fiesta Bowl--a post-season college football game--that it should not earmark scholarship money for African American players on the two teams.

The education department official, Michael Williams, argued that the restriction would violate the civil rights law by discriminating based on race.

The decision catapulted Williams--a relatively obscure Bush appointee--into the limelight and made the White House nervous. Williams, who still stands by his interpretation of the law, said the issue made such a big splash “because I’m black, because I’m Republican and because the White House got scared.”

To avoid further negative publicity, the Bush Administration decided not to issue further rulings until the Government Accounting Office issued a report on the subject.

The report, issued last month, found that scholarships restricted to applicants based on race, sex, religion, disability or national origin amounted to only a small portion of all scholarships--5% in undergraduate schools, 3% in graduate schools and 10% in professional schools. Of those, at least three-fourths were granted on the basis of racial or ethnic background.

School officials believe minority-targeted scholarships help them attract students who might otherwise not be interested because of financial limitations or a perception that they would be culturally isolated.

“By increasing diversity within their student bodies, schools can promote equal access to educational opportunities and provide a broader and more enriched educational experience,” the report states.

Williams challenged the assumption that it will give more minority students access to higher education.

“It will not increase the total number of minority kids going to college,” said Williams, who now works as a civil rights attorney in Ft. Worth. “What these scholarships do is decide what school they go to--they’re recruiting tools.”

The only way to increase the total number of minority students going to college, he argued, is by offering better elementary and secondary education so more students are prepared for college.

More important, the new policy “allows for discrimination,” he argued. “Any time it’s advantageous to one group of people, by definition, it’s disadvantageous to another.”

In November, a federal judge ruled that a four-year, all-expenses-paid scholarship program at the University of Maryland that is exclusively for black students is constitutional because it is aimed at correcting past discrimination at the school.

The Latino student who filed a lawsuit challenging the scholarship requirements has filed an appeal and the case is now under review by the court of appeals. The student’s attorney said Thursday he is confident that the lower court’s decision will be overturned, making the new education department policy obsolete.

“It is ultimately the courts that will decide this question,” said Richard A. Samp, chief counsel at the Washington Legal Foundation, a conservative public interest group. “The department of education does not interpret the Constitution, the courts do.”

Samp argues that the department is “misinterpreting the law.”

“Title VI clearly states that any recipient of federal funds may not discriminate based on race,” he said.

But Robert Atwell, the president of the American Council on Education, called the “reverse discrimination” argument “bogus” and said the department’s action will increase the opportunities for minority students by encouraging post-secondary institutions to establish special scholarships for minority students.