by La Mont Chappell II
Daily Lobo columnist
Thurgood Marshall felt affirmative action was a good policy for American institutions because it helped to balance the effects of past discrimination. When affirmative action first came into existence, Marshall was a Supreme Court justice. We are 30 years removed from the first case of affirmative action brought before the Supreme Court. Affirmative action was meant as a temporary measure to even the playing field among different groups that were unfairly discriminated against. The policy is no longer useful because institutional racism is an issue of the past, and there are better policies that allow for different groups to attain equality.
The policy continues to show inefficiencies. By developing racial quotas, the university admission process became a competition not among peers, but among members of racial groups. Some universities tried to explain their policy by stating that diversity is needed on campus. The goal of affirmative action was never meant to ensure diversity.
Affirmative action has done just as much harm as it has good. It unequivocally causes a different level of standards between different groups. These differences are exposed once all students are forced into the same curriculum. Students with poor grades and poor SAT scores admitted due to affirmative action invariably fail because they can't compete at the same level as their peers. There are few supplementary programs to help such students.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
At UNM, there is no program directed at helping students who are accepted due to affirmative action. It is important to realize that if these students needed extra factors to help them gain admission to school, they will also probably need extra factors to help them compete with their peers.
When affirmative action was terminated in 1997 in my state of California, I felt it had served its purpose. As a middle-class private school student, I knew affirmative action was not meant for people like me who were born with the same privileges as my white peers. I was a good student who attended good schools with excellent teachers. There were whites, African-Americans, Hispanics, American Indians, Asians and many other groups that excelled at my private high school. I felt it would be unfair for me to get into a good school over my neighbor, who was just as qualified, on account of my race.
I propose that students in dire situations deserve to have the right to attend good schools. Middle-class African-American students and other middle-class minorities are not in need of affirmative action. I propose a policy that weights acceptance on household income. A policy based on income would better serve the disadvantaged than programs based solely on race.
I base this on research of high schools in California. There was a great difference between the school I attended in San Jose and poorer high schools in the Oakland school district. Students at the poorer schools were happy just to graduate. Private school students in Oakland were just as successful as the best students in the state. The students who attended the poorer public schools were clearly disadvantaged, regardless of race. With a policy directed at helping students who come from poor high schools, the students who are truly disadvantaged would be able to get a chance to attend college regardless of privilege.
I am certain my admission to UNM was due to affirmative action, and though I was happy to be accepted, I felt sick to my stomach because I knew I may not truly deserve to be accepted on merit. Anyone who gets accepted into UNM has the right to feel wanted and not feel they were accepted to fulfill a quota.
People across America deserve to have the playing field evened because those with fewer privileges are going to be at a disadvantage in almost every facet of life. It is important to realize that eliminating affirmative action doesn't mean equality is not a goal. Affirmative action is a policy that was meant to be temporary, and there is no better time than now to find a new policy to better represent the interests of all Americans.
La Mont Chappell II is majoring in history with a minor in political science.
