UC Affirmative Action Decision

*I have received three degrees from the University of California and have worked for the university for over 15 years, and until now, I have been proud of my affiliation. I consider the vote of the Regents to abolish affirmative action a disgrace.

There is a mean-spiritedness in the land, evidenced by the the passing of Proposition 187 and the rush in Washington and Sacramento to do away with those social and cultural programs that are vital to the spiritual health of this nation. I hoped and expected that the University of California, of all places, would take the high moral ground in support of the richness of cultural and ethnic diversity that affirmative action provides.

The regents’ vote demeans the university and, what is worse, sends a message to the rest of the nation that it is OK to disregard humanistic concerns in providing access to higher education.

GORDON THEIL

Van Nuys

* As a native of California, as a resident of the state for more than 25 years and as a high school English teacher, I was saddened but not surprised at the action of the UC regents yesterday to abolish affirmative action. I have seen over the last 25 years a consistent disregard by taxpayers to support things of long-term value, such as public education. The actions of the regents follow the pattern of shoring up the power of the white middle class at the expense of black, brown and other less enfranchised groups.

As a teacher, I have seen that students from low income [families] rarely have the same language and literary skills of those of more means. The tests often used to measure achievement often are themselves linguistically skewed to the benefit of white middle-class students. The notion that UC will suddenly begin an outreach program for elementary students (as just suggested by regent Ward Connerly) is ludicrous in the financial crunch of today.

GARY WEINSTEIN

Bakersfield

* This decision is long overdue. When a person is applying for admission into a public university, they should not have to fill out whether or not they are African American, Latino, Asian, Native American or whatever else. That is totally irrelevant.

Students should be admitted on the basis of their test scores and previous scholastic achievement. Period. End of discussion.

Ethnic designations are becoming increasingly irrelevant in our state. Studies have shown that up to 50% of second generation Latinos are intermarrying outside their ethnic group. Other ethnic groups such as Asians are intermingling with other racial groups.

No Californian or any other American should have to fill out any job application, contract, school admission application form in which they are required to fill out information regarding their ethnicity.

GEOFFREY C. CHURCH

Los Angeles

* I am an alumna of the UC Irvine, and I am sickened to hear of the UC regents’ action to abolish affirmative action. Gov. Wilson’s behind-the-scenes political maneuvering of his appointees is abhorrent and definitely not in the best interests of the university or of the State of California.

To think that institutional racism and sexism still do not exist and that somehow strong policies to counter this are not needed is simply naive and wrong. A University of California education has as its hallmark that research, facts and careful, reasoned debate should guide one’s decisions. The regents’ actions demonstrate none of these traits and are a disgrace.

Today is a sad day for California, a once proud and progressive state!

PAMELA BLACKWELL

Carlsbad

* The July 21 article on the abolishment of affirmative action at UC provides a textbook case of biased reporting. For example, the point is made that the regents have almost all been appointed by Republican governors, implying that the vote would have been otherwise had they all been Democrats. This is not supported by the evidence. The one Democratic appointee, Frank Clark appointed by Jerry Brown, also voted to abolish both race-based admissions and hiring. And all four of the non-student no-votes were by Republican appointees. Forty percent of Wilson’s appointees voted no on the measure, against their appointer.

I think the article demonstrates exactly the argument that the majority of regents were making: that people should be judged as individuals, not as part of some group. The article judged that the regents would reflect the writers’ preconceived Democratic/Republican party lines but five individuals took the steam out of this slant.

It is heartening to see that our democratic system has been able to make some last-minute corrections.

MIKE DORNHEIM

Los Angeles

* In Jesse Jackson’s article “Fighting the Politics of Race-Baiting,” (Column Left, July 23), he wrote “[Pete Wilson] is the Susan Smith of national politics, reaching for a racial scapegoat whenever he finds himself in a corner.” How ironic it id that the defenders of affirmative action are using the Asian community as their racial scapegoat.

An editorial the same day (“Swatting Away Those Pesky Facts on Affirmative Action”) poses the question: “Who will get those seats? White students may pick up an additional 5%. Asian American enrollment is expected to surge as high as 58% across the UC system.”

Should this “pesky fact” alarm us? Should we support affirmative action out of a fear of Asian success? Apparently, the supporters of affirmative action are employing the politics of racial division for their own ends.

SETH M. GERBER

Los Angeles