Stop Using Affirmative Action As Whipping Boy for Society’s Woes

California is frequently looked to as the leader of change in fashion, food, recreation, technology and politics. Thus, Gov. Pete Wilson’s pointing a finger at affirmative action as a major problem confronting the state and nation is being closely watched. It’s a “hot button” campaign issue, one that is emotionally seductive and potentially explosive.

The fact is that even if all affirmative action programs were eliminated today, no major political, social or economic problem would be solved. The federal budget would still be unbalanced, gang wars would continue to occur, children would still be having children, corporate layoffs would persist, decaying roads and bridges would remain in need of repair, and environmental pollution would still be with us.

So why the great concern about affirmative action?

One reason is that we no longer have an outside enemy, so the enemy must be within. It’s “them,” those women and people of color who are taking our jobs and classroom seats.

The claim that some white males have not received a contract they felt entitled to nor admitted to a campus of their choice has been largely based on numbers--the lowest bid, a grade point average or test scores. Yet how often is the low bidder among white male bidders passed over due to concerns other than cost? Frequently. How many times does someone who scores the highest on a test fail in a job because he or she has no interpersonal skills? Many.

Clearly test scores and low bids are not--and should not be--the only category used to determine qualifications. Yet frequently they are. Likewise, sex and skin color should not be the only criteria in determining merit, although given the ongoing gender and color disparity in opportunities for education and jobs, they could be.

Affirmative action is not--and has never been--about granting government contracts to unqualified bidders, allowing unqualified students into the University of California, or promoting women and people of color who are less competent than their white male peers.

Rather, it is about making sure that those who historically have been excluded are included when it comes to work and educational opportunities previously available primarily to white males. There is plenty of evidence that white male contractors fail just like those who happen to be women and people of color, that white male students flunk out of college just like women and people of color, and that not all white male corporate executives are competent in the jobs they hold.

Yet the myth continues--that affirmative action fosters unfairness and the lowering of standards. If this is so, it is incumbent on those who say so to demonstrate how corporations and educational institutions have suffered because they have become more diverse. The UC system continues to rank in the top 10 in the country although it has used affirmative action in admissions. The Department of Transportation was not disgraced when Elizabeth Dole was at its helm. The military was not discredited because Colin Powell was made a four star general in part because of affirmative action.

*

Of most concern, however, is the fact that the debate over affirmative action distracts citizens from the real problems in our society--the breakdown of the family, job dislocations, drug use, a deteriorated public education system and the inability of our institutions to restore a sense of civility and trust.

Using affirmative action as a whipping boy is both dishonest and divisive. Admittedly, there may have been cases in college admissions where skin color and gender have been given too much weight, but fitting in and who you know often leads to preferential treatment in the corporate world.

So let’s be honest.

Affirmative action is neither the angel nor the devil described by its proponents and critics. Its elimination will not by itself improve the bottom line of business or solve major societal problems. Nor will great universities become greater because they can no longer use sex and color as criteria for admissions.

On the other hand, using affirmative action as a political “hot button” is creating heat where there should be light. More important, it postpones the inevitable--the need to correct opportunity inequities based on sex and color, inequities that result in a terrible waste of human capital.

Judy B. Rosener can be reached via e-mail at jbrosene@uci.edu