Black, Latino Admissions to UC Fall

Why can’t Ronald Takaki (“Set Up a Lottery for UC’s Top Applicants,” Commentary, April 2) get it through his head that Californians want UC students to be admitted on merit alone, and not because of race, luck or any other method he may devise. Naturally, students of wealthier, suburban school districts enjoy advantages, but why begrudge them? The voters have spoken, Mr. Takaki. When will you begin listening?

MARTIN MULVIHILL

Costa Mesa

*

The sociopolitical ideology currently controlling college campuses is very clearly identified by statements made in “Acceptance of Blacks, Latinos to UC Plunges” (April 1). When admissions officers say they “have no explanation why whites and Asians are more inclined to opt out of stating their race” on admission applications and they “believe the increase (in students not stating their race) had to do primarily with a change in the format of the application,” they are either lying or they should go back to school themselves. You don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure this one out.

I can’t wait for honesty to become fashionable again. And, by the way, I’m a Democrat.

JOEL ANDERSON

Sherman Oaks

*

I hope Uncle Tom Ward Connerly’s rules include the UCLA men’s basketball and football teams; whereas the money the blacks make for the university is not too substantial, it could be a windfall for schools like Grambling, Southern or even Howard--you know, schools where we black folks belong. Then maybe these stupid blacks will stop rooting for these schools that want nothing to do with them.

Isn’t it preferential treatment based on athletic ability for these blacks to be on UCLA’s teams and isn’t that against NCAA’s rules? If no other blacks without athletic ability can come to the school, then why should blacks with athletic ability be able to come?

REGINALD W. HOWARD

Carson

*

I think Prop. 209 has handed blacks and Latinos the biggest April Fools’ Day joke. In its purported mandate for “fairness” it hands Latinos and blacks their lowest number of admissions in decades. What upside-down definition of fairness does 209 intend to impose on UC?

Connerly and other 209 proponents co-opted the language of the civil rights movement and played Californians for the biggest fools by promising fairness through race-blind procedures. How can any voter, applicant or Californian view such dramatic plunges as fair? How do Californians expect to attend to racial injustice without taking into account race? Even if 209 is assumed to be a temporary means of moving toward racial equality, why must Latinos and blacks solely feel the effects?

RICHARD VILLEGAS JR.

Graduating Senior, UCLA