Affirmative Action Spotlight Turns to UC Regents Meeting : Education: Politicians, protesters and media representatives converge on San Francisco. Board will consider far-reaching rollback of race- and gender-based preferences.

In the wake of President Clinton’s speech endorsing affirmative action, the national spotlight today turns to California, where the University of California Board of Regents is poised to consider the most far-reaching rollback of race- and gender-based preferences to date.

More than 1,000 students and other demonstrators and 100 elected officials, UC faculty members and community leaders have converged on this city to make their voices heard, as UC becomes the first college system in the country to formally consider scaling back its affirmative action programs. More than 300 media representatives arrived Wednesday from around the nation to chronicle the meeting. Hotels near the meeting site were booked solid.

The overwhelming turnout was just one indication that the impact of today’s meeting--at which regents will consider a proposal to end the use of race and gender as criteria in UC’s hiring, contracting and admissions decisions--extends beyond the UC system.

Because California is one of the country’s largest and most diverse states, what happens here today is likely to push the national debate over preferences and fairness to a new level.

Some politicians are counting on that.

Strategists working for Gov. Pete Wilson, who serves as president of the regents board, hope his fledgling presidential campaign will get a much-needed image boost when the nation’s media--including news crews from the three major television networks and CBS’s “60 Minutes”--aim their cameras in his direction. Opposition to affirmative action has been fundamental to the governor’s national political platform, and today Wilson plans to make an impassioned call for an end to such preferences.

Meanwhile, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who is also considering a presidential bid, will try to seize the day with his own plea. He will urge the board to continue affirmative action programs, and has promised to lead several Bay Area ministers in a nonviolent protest if the regents vote with Wilson. Jackson says he is prepared to be arrested for disrupting the meeting--a plan that Wilson dubs “a fascist tactic.”

Several other politicians have requested time to address the board--among them, Assemblyman Willie Brown (D-San Francisco) and state Sens. Tom Hayden (D-Santa Monica) and Tom Campbell (R-Stanford). Mario Savio, a former student leader of UC Berkeley’s Free Speech Movement in the 1960s, also hopes to speak, as do representatives of the National Organization for Women, the United Farm Workers and a group that calls itself the Prophetic Movement Against Affirmative Action.

The battle inside the conference room will be mirrored outside, in an atmosphere that has grown increasingly circus-like in the days leading up to the meeting.

On Wednesday, hundreds of students prepared to hold an overnight camp-out at UC San Francisco, where the regents meeting will be held, while law enforcement officials made plans to barricade the campus to prevent such a protest. Jackson attended an affirmative action “teach-in” at a local church, while a dozen regents and more than 100 students turned out at a forum held under a tent in a parking lot near campus.

Some observers are concerned that the intense media scrutiny will skew the outcome of the meeting, pressuring regents to render a decision today when it might be more prudent to deliberate further.

Others worry that, despite the importance of the issue to the future of California, the regents’ consideration of affirmative action will be clouded by the national political ambitions of leaders on both sides of the debate.

“It’s obvious that this [meeting] is going to degrade rather than elevate the debate,” said Jerome Karabel, a professor of sociology at UC Berkeley and an expert on higher education.

The regents are supposed to insulate the university from politics, but Karabel said he fears that today’s meeting will drag “the greatest public university in the country into the lower depths of presidential politics. This can only harm the long-term interests of the university.”

Earlier this month, Regent Ward Connerly proposed that UC no longer use “race, religion, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin” as criteria in its hiring and contracting practices as of Jan. 1, 1996. University admissions officials would be forbidden to consider those factors beginning the next year, unless applicants could prove that race or other factors had been barriers to success.

Connerly’s proposal would increase the percentage of students admitted to UC solely on the basis of academic achievement to between 50% and 75%.

Currently, the regents require the university’s nine campuses to enroll a student body that represents the cultural, racial, economic and social diversity of California. Between 40% and 60% of students are admitted based on academic criteria alone; the remainder are admitted on scholastic and supplemental factors, such as geographic location, ethnicity, gender and special talents or experience. No student is supposed to be admitted on the basis of race alone.

Connerly has also called for a marked increase in funding for outreach programs, which seek to boost the number of qualified minority applicants by better preparing junior and senior high school students to attend UC.

Regent Ralph C. Carmona, meanwhile, has proposed that the board postpone its vote indefinitely. A strong supporter of race- and gender-based preferences, Carmona believes it is premature for the regents to take an official position before November, 1996, when voters are expected to consider at least one initiative that would prohibit race-based preferences in public education and government practices.

The regents’ vote is expected to be close. Earlier this week, Wilson conceded that he was not sure he had the support of a majority of the 26-member board, which includes five Wilson appointees. University President Jack W. Peltason, who is on the board, has expressed his support for a continuation of affirmative action policies, as has student Regent Edward P. Gomez.

Of the 18 appointed regents, 17 were appointed by Republican governors. But there was some evidence Wednesday that the regents may not vote strictly along partisan lines. Regent Roy T. Brophy, who was appointed by Republican Gov. George Deukmejian, said he will not support Connerly’s proposals, though he agrees that some modifications may be needed in UC’s affirmative action programs.

“Affirmative action has to be fair,” he said. “But the way Connerly wants to bring it down does not suit my fancy. I am a ‘no’ [vote].”

UC officials said the meeting will open today with brief remarks by Wilson. A public comment period will follow, with legislators and other recognized guests speaking first. Faced with more requests to speak than time will allow--more than 100 had signed up by late Wednesday--officials said they will choose an undisclosed number of names out of a hat.

In May, angry students brought a regents’ meeting to a halt after three students were told that they could not address the board because of time constraints. Today’s overflow was expected to eclipse that number.

Campus police from around the UC system have been flown in to help maintain order inside the meeting room, while the San Francisco Police Department will attempt to keep the peace outside.

The political stakes are high because both Wilson and Jackson have sagging national images that could use the kind of boost today’s meeting may provide.

Wilson announced his interest in the presidential race last March and was quickly sidelined by throat surgery that forced him to remain nearly silent for two months. During that time, the governor faced a series of controversies, including his admission that he and his first wife probably employed an illegal immigrant as a maid about 15 years ago while he was mayor of San Diego.

Wilson’s forced absence from campaigning took a toll on his presidential bid, preventing him from establishing a foothold in key battleground states and leaving him on the sidelines while his chief GOP rivals increased their national profiles. Advisers said Wilson hopes to turn that around at today’s meeting.

“These kinds of things are defining opportunities for Pete Wilson, which will get attention not just in the state, but across the country,” said Craig Fuller, chairman of the governor’s presidential campaign. “You don’t get too many of those in campaigns, so we hope that it goes well.”

Jackson also no longer commands the national following that he did during presidential campaigns in 1984 and 1988. Some supporters have also complained that a Jackson candidacy in the upcoming election might pull votes away from Clinton and tip the race to a Republican.

If Jackson can demonstrate that he is a leading spokesman on an issue that other candidates are avoiding, then his campaign could gain credibility as a vehicle for disenfranchised voters. However, Clinton’s speech on Wednesday expressing firm support for affirmative action programs may have weakened the issue as a platform for Jackson.