E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe U.S. Supreme Court is considering a case involving the University of Texas at Austin, a school that said it based its admissions policy on an earlier ruling about racial diversity in higher education. NBC's Pete Williams reports.
Updated at 1:04 p.m. ET: WASHINGTON -- In a potentially momentous case, the Supreme Court will once again confront the issue of race in university admissions in an appeal brought by a white student denied a spot at the flagship campus of the University of Texas.
The court said Tuesday it will return to the issue of affirmative action in higher education for the first time since its 2003 decision endorsing the use of race as a factor in freshmen admissions. This time around, a more conservative court is being asked to jettison that ruling and outlaw affirmative action in the university setting.
A broad ruling in favor of the student, Abigail Fisher, could threaten affirmative action programs at many of the nation's public and private universities, said Vanderbilt University law professor Brian Fitzpatrick.
The high court agreed to hear an appeal by Fisher, who was a high school senior when she applied but was rejected for admission in 2008 to the University of Texas at Austin.
Fisher filed a lawsuit with another woman who was also denied admission. They contended the university's race-conscious policy violated their civil and constitutional rights. By then, the two had enrolled elsewhere.
Live Poll
Should colleges be allowed to consider race in deciding whether to admit a student?
The other woman has since dropped out of the case and the state has said that Fisher is a senior at Louisiana State University whose impending graduation should bring an end to the lawsuit. But the Supreme Court appeared not to buy that argument Tuesday.
Most entering freshmen at Texas are admitted because they are among the top 10 percent in their high school class. The Texas policy applies to the remaining spots and allows for the consideration of race along with other factors.
Texas had dropped affirmative action policies after a 1996 appeals court ruling. But following the high court ruling in 2003, the university resumed considering race starting with its 2005 entering class.
Texas said its updated policy does not use quotas, which the high court has previously rejected. Instead, it said it takes a Supreme Court-endorsed holistic approach to enrollment, with an eye toward increasing the diversity of the student body.
Before adding race back into the mix, Texas' student body was 21 percent African-American and Hispanic, according to court papers.
By 2007, the year before Fisher filed her lawsuit, African-Americans and Hispanics accounted for more than a quarter of the entering freshman class.
Fisher contends the university's admissions policies discriminated against her on the basis of race in violation of her constitutional rights and the federal civil rights laws. She says many minority students who were admitted had lower grades and test scores than she did.
Her attorney urged the Supreme Court to reconsider its last ruling on the issue in 2003, when it reaffirmed that a diverse student population can justify use of race as one factor to help minorities gain admission to public universities and colleges.
But the makeup of the high court has changed since then. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who approved of the concept, has been replaced by the generally more conservative Samuel Alito.
Also, Justice Elena Kagan has taken herself off this case, because she worked on the issue while still at the Justice Department as a solicitor general. That takes a potential vote in favor of affirmative action off the court.
In its 2003 ruling, the Supreme Court upheld a University of Michigan Law School's use of race to favor minority applicants in the admissions process. In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled that the government has a compelling interest in diversity in public universities. That case was Grutter v. Bollinger.
At issue in both cases is whether and to what extent the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of “equal protection of the laws” permits race to be used as a factor in efforts to achieve greater diversity in higher education. For more than three decades, the Supreme Court has said that although race may be one of numerous factors taken into account, it cannot be the predominant consideration in an admissions process.
Erwin Chemerinsky, a constitutional law scholar and dean of the University of California Irvine's law school, has called the Fisher case "potentially momentous." He says there are almost surely four votes -- John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Alito -- to overrule Grutter. That means the outcome could rest with Justice Anthony Kennedy's vote.
Fitzpatrick said two other states, California and Florida, use "top 10" plans similar to Texas' plan, although California law explicitly prohibits the consideration of race.
"But the vast majority of schools that are selective are using affirmative action, though they don't like to advertise it for fear of being sued," he said.
A three-judge federal appeals panel of the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit upheld the Texas program at issue in a January 2011 decision, saying it did not violate the 14th Amendment's equal-protection clause.
The Supreme Court could hear the case in October or the first week of November, in the final days of the presidential campaign.
Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative law group that filed a friend-of-the-court brief urging the Supreme Court to take the case, applauded Tuesday’s announcement as "good news for everyone who believes in equal rights and equal opportunities.”
“Using race in admissions decisions, to achieve diversity, amounts to stereotyping people by their race,” PLF attorney Joshua P. Thompson said in a statement. “In the real world, shared skin color does not automatically translate into shared backgrounds or beliefs. Racial diversity in a student body does not guarantee a diversity of experience and perspectives. It is unrealistic and wrong to try to pigeon-hole people by their race."
The case is Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, 11-345.
The Associated Press, Reuters and NBC News Chief Justice Correspondent Pete Williams contributed to this report.
- Red Tape: Online coupons not always honored by merchants
- Santorum defends 'theology' remark, Hitler inference, blames media
- Survivor of deadly avalanche: It was like a 'washing machine'
- Girl, 12, found naked and rummaging in trash in Calif.
Leave a Comment:
Now that Obama's President, racism is over. So I guess the white girl will win. Or not. Who knows. I don't.
How about not asking a persons race when they apply? Then everybody is judged equally on their merits.
That's be one step. But if you had a really unusual name it might give you away.
I wish people would just grow up and look past skin color.
Didn't the California public university system apply this concept, and now half the students are Asian.
It isn't about racism. With the internet now out there, state schools can really go to hell. Not to mention, if this is a black-white issue, HBCU's are still there as back up.
But if it's white-Hispanic, then there may be a problem as on 9% of Hispanics have degrees and there is no HHCU system as back up.
I would think most post-secondary schools want the best and brightest so they can claim dominance in a highly competitive environment. This means the top guys can be as picky as they want and the bottom schools (county colleges, etc.) take what they can get. It's no different than any other part of life (the strong survive).
It really comes down to the individual. One white guy can be a person of class and the next one be nothing more than white trash. Same with all races - there's good and bad woven throughout them all. The challenge is how to navigate massive amounts of people without actually having to talk to each one. I can see how a college that gets tens of thousands of applicants per year has to make decisions based on paper and not actual interviews.
The question is how to weed through them all without having to interview them all and make it fair.
Ruken,
I think we might have finally found something on which to agree if I read you right. AA is an abomination and needs to be completely dismantled. Does anyone, really ANYONE, think that Texas or other states still have lingering effects of governmental racism? There probably isn't much we can do about individual racism except to stop validating it with more governmental racism, and let it die an ignoble death.
No more race norming. No more "extra points" for being the right race. No more racial coddling. When UT Law eliminated the racial preferences that gave to blacks the equivalent of one grade, or more, higher than they actually earned guess what happened? Blacks at UT Law worked harder and got better grades on their own. All we are now doing, no matter what you think the past was worth, is to help minorities underperform so they can be castigated for the rest of their lives. And that IS governmental racism at work.
This is a prime opportunity to rid our system of institutional racism. Some people are always screaming about how we are not yet a "color blind" society, then those same people WANT race-based admissions, special considerations hand-outs and other freebies.
You can't have it both ways. If you're going to maintain that races are equal, start treating them that way.
She probably should try to go some where else, who would want to go to Texas anyway?.
Merit should get you into a university, not race. All things being equal between 2 candidates or multiple candidates, either exclude or include all of them. The deciding factor shouldnt be anything more or less than merit. If a certain race is feeling slighted by their lack of representation at a university, then maybe they should use their energies and resources to hike up high school education in their districts and states that helps the particular race prove their merit, rather than using resources to force a university to take a student of lesser merit to equal out a race imbalance.
You know when you take your ACT, you can choose to send it to more than just one school. I didn't know the Univ. of Texas was the only good college in Texas. When your a minority, somtimes you get used to things like making second choices. Not saying it's right, because it isn't but it happens, seems like when the shoes on the other foot...
tt,
Race is still asked, and our university population is not half asian. Race cannot legally be used as a determinant in admissions, which is a good thing.
Ghost,
Well, UT is an excellent system, so maybe she wants to go to an excellent school. Maybe Texas is her home state and she wants to remain close to home? Maybe UT has the best program in her field of choice? I'm not sure what makes you a better judge of where she should go to school than she is, but maybe you know better for most people how they should live their lives. But, if she was excluded in part because she is white then the law should be changed. It's really that simple.
The state of Texas could always equalize school spending so districts of the privileged don't have an unfair advantage. Nah.
There are plenty of other colleges, but perhaps this was her dream college or closest to home, whatever. If something is unjust or wrong, then I guess I should just ignore or accept it because I have other options. Restaurants can say "Whites only" since there are plenty of other places to eat, right? <sarcasm>
Fatcat,
I would love to see a source for your claim. I can't speak to Texas directly on that issue, but I do know that we have such a financing scheme here in California. And, can you believe it, people, perhaps people like you, still complain. I'm lying a little here...in California we actually spend MORE per student per year in low income areas or schools with disproportionate minority populations relative to the average. But people still complain.
Sandra Sotomayor has a history of rulings and remarks that reveal her to be biased against non-Hispanic whites. She should recuse herself from the case. She won't, because she'll want to vote in favor of policies that exclude qualified whites in favor of quota clowns.
There's an odd assumption that she was qualified and someone else (a minority) was not. It fails to allow for other things like the number of more qualified applicants (total) who where even more qualified then her who did not get in or the hook up factor that takes up 10% or so of a class.
President Obama has discriminated against all hard working Americans since he was sworn into office.
I wish there was more to this story in this article. It makes me think just looking at some of these comments that we are all assuming that she was denied because she was white. Perhaps her ACT/SAT scores were mediocre, lack of civic and school activities, maybe her application letter was lacking, there are so many things that could of been the cause of her rejection. It seems like people are looking at this as if she was a Rhodes Scholar perfect in every way and was rejected solely due to race. How do we know she is? She isn't? I can look at this and say spoiled over privileged perhaps. Did she not pick any backup schools? Was she rejected from them too? If I applied today for graduate degree at Harvard and was rejected could I sue? I mean unless she was able to gain counsel from UT and they disclosed why she was rejected and it was due to race then sure she has a case but going on the assumption it was I don't think she will get far in court. Courts need facts, solids, concrete evidence, absolutes, not a gut feeling. That's just my take on it. I really wish there was more disclosed in this story.
Just imagine if a school used race to get a "more white" student population.
They could say something like: "Race isn't the primary factor".
Would that be OK?
Or does that sound like "Discrimination on the Basis of Race"?
Can you imagine scholarships for whites only? Wait, we have scholarships for Native Americans only, Blacks only, and Hispanics only.
How is that not discriminating on the basis of race?
Equal protection under the law?
By treating different races differently? I thought that was what we are AGAINST.
People don't seem to understand 1) what affirmative action is and 2) why the university would have admitted a person from one group ove others.
"Affirmative action" actually came from an LBJ executive order which required government contractors to hire without discrimination in race, religion, or national origin. Gender was added later. This is exactly the opposite of what most people think it is. This is not about quotas. No public institution, such as a university, or business can hire or admit based on a set number for each race or group.
In this case, the issue is diversity. Universities seek to have a student environment that exposes the students to, not only new cultures and viewpoints, but a mix of cultures and viewpoints that is more representative of the "real world." This is the main reason why universities recruit overseas and they try to boost under-represented groups such as African-Americans and Latinos. The idea of providing the student with the widest variety or viewpoints possible is a key part of teaching critical thinking. Most universities, for example, are trying to admit more women in math and the hard sciences and more men in social science and nursing where those genders have been under-represented in the past.
If we went to a strictly competitive admissions policy, a lot of things would change. For example, people like G.W. Bush would not have been admitted as a legacy appointee and could not have been admitted based on his own merit. The children of immigrants --- especially Asians and Sub-Asians --- would predominate. Both inner city and rural students would again be grossly under-represented. Women would find it far more difficult to enter the hard sciences and theoretical sciences.
I am reminded of the Bowling Green State University's video ad where they celebrate their "diversity" and mack it up by zooming in on a lone Black guy sitting by himself in a cafeterial This is pretty much how White America sees proper diversity --- as a bizarre and extreme form of tokenism. Here is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FXheNV5oIY
people s/b judged on Character Only..skin color, I/Q & net worth should have nothing to do with it..a good attitude with DREAMS s/b the only pathway to ONE's foreseeable DESTINY .............
We only know what Ms. Fischer says. The UT Board of Regents probably cannot give any reason for her not being admitted to UT Austin due to confidentiality laws. I think it's interesting she ended up going to LSU which is a second tier public university. Texas A&M is a top 50 public university and Baylor and Rice are top tier private schools. She probably didn't get in to UT Austin because other people who applied when she did had better test scores, grades, and other qualifications than she did. She didn't get rejected because she was white - her application package wasn't enough for UT Austin.
Yep Obama has been discriminating against all the 1% billionaires that working so hard to cut their own taxes and its got to stop by putting in a multi billionaire as president
I remember when that was changed. The argument was that none white students got an inferior education, so the brighter none whites had to be given a chance at a higher education. That in effect was prejudiced against whites. kind of.
A fix to this issue would be the people who determine admission are given information about applicants that does not give evidence of "race." For instance, student number 12345 received a 4.0 gpa in school, worked for the boys and girls club, played a varsity sport, and received X academic awards. They would have no way of knowing if this person is black white purple green or blue.
The fact is, race doesn't exist. Until this government accepts that as a fact, we will still have these sort of racist policies. We have ancestral groups, and we have cultural groups. But there is no such thing as a race. My sister in-law is perfect proof of this. In this country she is one race, in her home country she is another, and her brother who comes from the same father and mother is considered a different race than her. Race is such a garbage term that even our president falls prey to it. We say he is "black" but it is just as true to say he is a white guy. His mother is what we would call white. His father is what we call black. He may be our first "Black" president, but he is also continuing the tradition of this country always having a "White" male president too.
So like I said, race is junk and needs to be tossed. Last I recall we all bleed the same color, look the same in the dark, and can breed without issues.
You guys are all hilarious...
this has less to do with AA and more to do with tons of uneducated talented athletes taking spots from truly deserving SMART students...
and then you add in the out of state students, that take spots from the in-state students simply because they can and will pay more...
BUT EVEN STILL - HOW DO WE KNOW THIS WHITE GIRL WAS REJECTED, WHILE SOMEONE LESS DESERVING WAS ACCEPTED JUST BECAUSE THEY ARENT WHITE (and for no other reason, like athletics or being from out of state, or their dad is a famous alumni)
just because she's white, thats how we know she got screwed?
yeah, racism ISNT alive an well...*rolls eyes
The more destructive racism we have now is how AA lets us dismiss those minority who DO succeed on their own merits and thus deny the rest a positive role model. You still end up with "nobody" to point to as a merit-based success.
Great post Chris-749391. I agree with you completely. Diversity is the key.
Sure they do. Now they bottle it up and sell it as congressional redistricting. Racism is huge in Texas and the leading purveyor is the state government. You're lying to yourself if you are ignoring what is going on there.
Richard - how do you think whites would react if we went to a system where race/name were not connected to an application, and it ended up being that whites became the minority at nearly all schools?
do you think white people would accept that form of "equality"?
because as a white person, i hear white people bitch about the pettiest of "slights" against white people...as if their brother was just hung from the highest tree in the center of town...
and it's laughable really...it's not even comparable to the kind of racism that non-whites have experienced in this country...even still today, and yet, it's enough for white men especially to bitch and moan about ENDLESLLY.
so, something tells me the only kind of "equality" a white person understands, is when white people are getting all the jobs, have all the upper hands, and have all the money...anything less is "free-bies" to non-white people, handouts, giveaways...no non-white person has every really earned anything, nope...they've just all been given a leg up that white people arent getting.
Never mind the fact that non-whites are outperforming whites in universities all across the nation, despite having been "given" those slots unfairly.
something just isnt adding up.
Giving up Affirmative Action is long overdue!! Affirmative Action, in itself is discriminating. Jobs and college entrance should be based on skills, experiences, and performance; but never the skin color. All applications should not require a response to race or a religious questions to avoid discrimination.
TDub-1174706
"There's an odd assumption that she was qualified and someone else (a minority) was not. It fails to allow for other things like the number of more qualified applicants (total) who where even more qualified then her who did not get in or the hook up factor that takes up 10% or so of a class."
I agree with you here. Big colleges receive tens of thousands of apps each year and they look at many things to "round out" their student population. They could admit a 3.5gpa student over a 4.0 student for many reasons that don't have to do with race. Maybe the 3.5 student has more community service, or maybe the 3.5 student took a more challenging course load in high school. Maybe the 3.5 student is in the top 5% of her class while the 4.0 student is in the top 20% of her class. Maybe the 3.5 student worked 32 hours per week, had a more challenging class load, performed community service, had great recommendations, and was applying to a completely different major than the 4.0 student; and one major had 500 openings while the other only had 300. Maye the 3.5 student was from Ohio and the 4.0 student was from Texas and the school is focusing on expanding it's out of state population (ie. get more tuition).
Colleges look to have a diverse population both academically and culturally. Unless she had documentation from Texas that she didn't get in solely due to her race, I'm not quite sure how she could prove her claim let alone prove that Texas is using race as a factor in admittance.
You know, this is 1 thing I can agree with some librals on surprisingly.... Race discremination is a problem in this country. It used to be the whites only thing, but now its everyone. I have met some realy racist blacks that justify it by pointing out that there ancestors where slaves. Then I met a spanish american who was racist. He thought he deserved to pass basaed on his being a minority. How do we know that whoever revewed here application didn't have that same mindset. The fact that the jugdes(not sure how to spell it :P) keep alowing it to be repealed has to say something for her merits. She could probablyget in that school easily.
I do however think that diversity for the sake of diversity is wrong. I think that colleges should be 100% compitition based(not the sport kind). They should try to get the best and brightest.
Maybe she could apply to UCLA and not have to pay out-of-state tuition... oh wait, she have to be non-white and NON-AMERICAN to get that benefit.
Thanks Democrats.
swooshz -
She doesn't have to prove that the University discriminates on the basis of race: they admit that they do.
In fact, this case is them trying to defend that racist policy.
Oh NO.....another case the DOJ has to defend and help the University of Texas. Where, oh where, will Holder get those "extra" lawyers?
Couldn't have said it better, Swooshz. Grades are one factor in many - this young woman has no idea why she wasn't accepted, so I guess it's easier for her to blame the black guy than it is to consider that she may not have measured up. It's about time she removed the mote from her own eye...
Chris, while you are mocking Bush for a legacy admission, please understand that your heroes John Kerry, Al Gore, and the entire Kennedy clan could not qualify for elite college admission today using merit based criteria.
My belief is that "elite" colleges are media driven and my guess is the kids from UT Austin and UCLA don't learn any more than kids from Texas A&M and San Diego State. This young lady will do just fine with her degree from LSU and she had the added benefit of enjoying a really great football team!
What is lost in the hype of ADMISSIONS is we forget to look at GRADUATION RATES. When California changed their rules a few years back, fewer minorities were accepted by the elite " University " system ( UCLA, Berkeley) and were pushed into the less chi chi " State" system ( San Diego State, Fresno State, etc). There was much howling and nashing of teeth. Turns out, the GRADUATE RATES OF MINORITIES INCREASED. Dropping out of University of Michigan as a junior is far worse than graduating from Western Michigan University with a degree in accounting.
The other issue that is often forgotten is the woeful lack of preparation many minorities ( and many others as well) receive in high school. Sending an unprepared kid to UT Austin does not do anybody any good. The top third or half of kids need to be sent off to college with a foundation in English, Math, Science so they can handle the workload to receive a degree in 4 years. Too many colleges spend too much time on remedial classes. The kids get discouraged an drop out, after having run up $20,000 in student loans.
http://www.utexas.edu/news/2010/09/14/student_enrollment2010/
For those of you interested in how the racial makeup of UT breaks down, here's a nice link.
You'll note, it's Latino's making most of the gains, along with asians...and not so many black people.
I would think, if there was "quota" that Texas (and other colleges) are trying to meet, dont you think they'd just meet the quota and not rise above it?
and yet the # of white people keeps going down as far as the entering freshman class goes.
Perhaps, a lot of white texans are looking up to Sarah Palin and the bumbling "non-elite" idiots like them, and starting to fall behind everyone else as a result.
I just heard Santorum on the campaign trail rail on about "smart elitest democrat snobs"...perhaps those latino's are wanting to be elite in their studies...and white people are just trying to "keep it real" as americanly as they can muster.
Dont blame AA for the fact that white men think being dumb is better than being "elite and smart".
What a concept! Let's teach people how to not be racist by selecting applicants by race over merit.
Jessica..."because as a white person, i hear white people bitch about the pettiest of "slights" against white people...as if their brother was just hung from the highest tree in the center of town..."
Pettiest of slights? Since you obviously have a very narrow understanding of the history of slavery, let me educate you. Northern Africans made more slaves of Southern Europeans than Europeans ever made of Africans. The Romans made slaves of millions of white Europeans for nearly two centuries. American Indian tribes made slaves of each other. The Aztecs not only made slaves of their neighbors, but murdered them in human sacrifice. Where did the Europeans get the slaves from in Africa? They bought them from Africans who made slaves of them and sold or traded them to the Europeans. Slavery is still practiced in Africa to this day.
The problem is that we've been taught growing up that all slavery in the history of mankind was committed by white men. As if all our forefathers were the right-hand-man of satan himself. The majority of whites never owned a slave.
It seems like what everbody, including the Court, is overlooking is the factor of a University being "finite" in its being while trying to make an "infinate" dynamic be its existence, instead. Any way you slice and dice it, there are a "finite" number of slots; like 7-Eleven, "when they're out of hot dog buns, they're out of hot dog buns"; even if it happens to be The Fourth of July! Race [shall not?] be the predominant determining factor as upheld for over 3 decades because "Diversity", as in this instance should also include, at least with an eye toward, applied consideration of more than just "Race" factors, such as co-ed populace mix, American's with Disabilities, and in this day and age, especially, Military Veterans on the GI Bill?, etc... mindful to not be "profiling", per se or purposefully creating "tokens"; but it is a mathmatical impossibility to not have to rely on some kind of formula to acheive applying infinate to finite; but that doesn't mean the formulation has to be rigid and unable to adjust to the circumstances at hand. And, "Affirmative Action", as defined to be solely as regarding "Race" is just one factor as "Diversity" as comprehensively infinate needing to be applied to finite.
I was happy to see that the Court was not too interested in hearing about how, since the time was/has run out on her, and she is a Senior and will be graduating, she should have no qualms or questioning left and nothing that happened to her should even be considered. Statutes of Limitations are UNconstitutional. (I believe)
What a load of bull.... Show me the speech. Also, "Elits" are generally the poeple that the mainsteam(msnbc, abc, and pbs to name a few) media adores.
@rhee I could not understand your entire first paragraph....please do some proff reading next time...
jeez it amazes me that this is still an issue, its simple, if u make a decision based on race, its racist, period. Race is nothing more than a physical descriptor and has no bearing on anything. "that person is tall, that one is a redhead, that one is black" "there will always be racism as long as u see me as a black man and not a man" <- movie quote, cant rememeber where from, but it fits.
Bingo.
Hey Chris,
Your claim that affirmative action is not the same as quotas is definitionally true, but in practice false. In order to judge whether any AA program has had its desired effect the results must be quantified, and they must be measured against a desired outcome. This in every case results in something AA programs refer to as a time table, a goal to reach a certain outcome by a specific date. The vast majority of AA programs have failed at their stated goal, so our government figured something else must be afoot, and they allowed persons who could make a case against, as in this case a school, the institution that discimination still exists. People could sue for money simply because the AA program goal was not met--how else but for continued racism could it have failed?
So when you couple goals and time tables together with the ability to sue and to merely need as proof you were wronged that a disparity exists over a factor you cannot control, like your color for instance, then quotas became the de facto program in force. In any case, continue on with your delusion.
this is the Constitutional question; to give extra credit because of a persons Race, Religious or ethnic background, is a admission that certain persons are so inferior, that a government must step in and give that inferior person extra benefits based on certain criteria of Race, Religion or ethnic background., If that is up-held than the Constitution is nothing but a social engineering document, that can be changed at whim; very dangerous ground.
Oh, and because this is taking place regarding a Texas University, UNconstitutional Discrimination exists and was created in Texas based on the actual making of a Law "for" Illegal Aliens regarding University Schooling in Texas. That, in itself, is Manufactured (Reverse) Discrimination against Legal American Citizens, more than this other particular case even questions.
Until we "really" have equality, we have to continue "affirmative Action". It's not money, but peoples attitudes that are the key to equal opportunity...
Trent...Santorum has made numerous comments about elitist snobs, but a google search didn't come up with any where he qualified them as smart.
There is nothing wrong with being elite and smart and I'm certain the majority of men of any color agree. But being elite and/or smart and a snob, that's a different story.
So Jessica, had you written, "Dont blame AA for the fact that white men think being dumb is better than being "elite and smart and snob", you might have been accurate.
The present Supreme Court is a joke. Everyone knows how the vote will turn out on every political issue before it's presented. It seems like every decision is a 5-4 vote so they could save the country a lot of money by eliminating everyone but Anthony Kennedy since his is the deciding vote anyway.
And how many times we see this ? Just not with schools, but Job fields like police work, fire fighters, Federal Jobs. They have to fill their quota so they dont look racist. And yet they lower the standards to suit those minorities who dont have the high scores. This is dangerous to the work place, fellow employees, community.
If a certain standard is set, there should be no exceptions what so ever .
And supposin, that the admissions criteria would be based on statewide demographics. That would make all the Affirmative Action folks happy. No more, no less. Then maybe it should be the standard for everything?
after a little research, Texas has a "top 10% guarantee"...she would have been automatically accepted if she had been in the top 10% of her class.
you COULD argue that she was from a more affluent/better performing school...and she might have been a better candidate than someone in the top 10% of a less affluent/less performing school...
but to me, that only highlights that we dont give poor kids good educations...
otherwise, the top 10% at one school should be JUST AS GOOD as the top 10% at another school, if we are to believe all things being equal...an education is just an education, and we arent short changing our poor students simply because their parents sucked at life (or werent well connected).
even THEN, the statistics bear out that the majority of students from texas - ALL APPLY TO UT, and MOST OF THEM are the creme of the crop...
so she still didnt outbest the best in the state.
bottom line...this story just pulled out all the racists who think her whiteness automatically made her the better candidate who, naturally got screwed by some underperforming latino.
Jessica,
"how do you think whites would react if we went to a system where race/name were not connected to an application, and it ended up being that whites became the minority at nearly all schools?"
Well because the state driven by the courts have forced teaching systems on many states like TAKS in Texas (Texas Assesment of Knowledge and Skills) on the educations systems. They have changed the test many times to artificially change the out comes. It is also given in Spanish or verbally if needed. Every single time, the white kids outscore the Hispanic kids and the black kids come in last. No matter how you change the test or how it is given. Been watching it through my own kids for 11 years. They also show how each group scores nationally as well. Since that is not working they are implementing the STARR system next year. This test is even harder so you tell me how that one is going to work out.
So since I actually live here and have seen this unfold in person for 11 years I can tell you that your "theory" doesn't hold water and that your personal "racism" is showing!!
pinkfloyd111 "How about not asking a persons race when they apply? Then everybody is judged equally on their merits."
Obviously, that would be the only way to enforce the true intent of the 'Equal Protection' clause of the Constitution, but that would not satisfy the PC crowd, and it would result in few Black and Hispanic students being admitted to our top colleges.
I wonder if a similar 'Affirmative Action' standard should be applied to limit the over-representation of Asian students to our top schools? Answer - NO - That would be discriminatory, and it's only permissible to discriminate against White students.
This is TOO FUNNY as society continually tries to find ways around the obvious intent of the 'Equal Protection' clause of the Constitution. That's the reason that it keeps cropping up - Affirmative Action is just not morally defensible because it discriminates based on race. Nothing being advanced as an 'excuse' can obviate this basic truth.
The Affirmative Action 'experiment' has resulted in thousands of better qualified students being denied admissions to our top colleges, and it's time to bring this patently discriminatory practice to an end.
Here's an interesting question - What is the 'dropout' rate of those admitted under Affirmative Action' programs vs those admitted based on merit? I suspect that society has been shortchanged because 'Affirmative Action' students that dropped out of college likely replaced other more qualified students that WOULD have graduated.
larry-2260635, # 1.52 LLLLLLLMMMMMAAAAAAAOOOOOOO!!!!(f-)!!!!!! Science is observation!
trent - here's the link to Santorum referring to democrats as elite snobs.
You'll notice, all of his parrots in the comments sections...seem to think the same way.
Apparently, according to Santorum democrats are ELITES
Here's the definition - and I absolutely agree:
a. A group or class of persons or a member of such a group or class, enjoying superior intellectual, social, or economic status: "In addition to notions of social equality there was much emphasis on the role of elites and of heroes within them" (Times Literary Supplement).
b. The best or most skilled members of a group:
http://www.therightscoop.com/santorum-on-the-elite-snobs-that-want-to-control-you/
you can explain why conservatives dont like people having superior intelluctuality. I guess we all just need to be inferior and dumb right?
who needs the most skilled, lets all just be average and crappy?
I wonder if this means only the top students will be admitted into the athletic programs too? Certainly there are no exceptions made there... There certainly is a lot of money being made... Hmmmm.
1sloPR5 "I wish there was more to this story in this article. It makes me think just looking at some of these comments that we are all assuming that she was denied because she was white. Perhaps her ACT/SAT scores were mediocre, lack of civic and school activities, maybe her application letter was lacking, there are so many things that could of been the cause of her rejection."
She probably had to prove that as part of her lawsuit, or it would have been thrown out up front.
hs321,
whatever helps you sleep at night, lol
jessica, your comments are about as demented and wrong as possible. Seriously, the majority of the posts on here are pretty tame, with the exception of YOU. Calling people out, assuming you know more than others. Your bottom line in #1.55 shows your ignorance.
Questioning this doesn't make someone a RACIST and you show your ignorance by suggesting that.
Do you truly know what Racism is? You do understand that it didn't START in America, nor is it isolated to caucasians, right? People like YOU are really bad for logical thinking and values.
Tell you what...By yourself, or heck with a caucasian friend, GO spend time in India, Taiwan, a small village in Mexico...You'll learn real quick that racism exist outside of whites. Then travel to parts of Africa, you'll learn it's not only against blacks. AND it's NOT reverse-racism as some attempt to portray it, it's racism, period. I say these things as you scream this has something to do with racism, which is just plain ignorant, as it doesn't.
The story is questioning IF the person was denied admission fairly...your bizarre views and opinion don't change that. Educate yourself....
You mean like Theotis Hamasaki? I went to middle school with that guy.
This young woman seems to be saying that, having failed the 'merit' test, she now wants to be accepted based on a set of lesser criteria for people had to overcome special hardhsips or were shunted into schools where fewer resources were available or who have been historically discriminated against. I don't have much sympathy for her.
Top tier schools like the University of Texas should have a little leeway in deciding for themselves what constitutes "merit". In this case, the young woman was not even in the top ten percent of her class, which would have guaranteed her admission.
ghostdog-2741697
"She probably should try to go some where else, who would want to go to Texas anyway?."
Tons of businesses, escaping the crushing regulatory and tax environments in states like California and New York, for starters. . .. which in turn means jobs, something that college graduates are keen to land.
"This young woman seems to be saying that, having failed the 'merit' test, she now wants to be accepted based on a set of lesser criteria for people had to overcome special hardhsips or were shunted into schools where fewer resources were available or who have been historically discriminated against." - commonsense
The article seems to read the exact opposite of what you're saying, in that many of the minority students accepted at the university the year she enrolled, had lower grades than she did.
"yeah, racism ISNT alive an well...*rolls eyes"
Its quite alive, look in the mirror Jessica and you will a good portrait of someone that still holds true to the values of racism. Hope that whatever wound was inflicted on you heals one day, and you can let go of the hate, i really do hope that things get better.
Its so unfortunate that the leader of the free world has racist tendencies. He really showed them early in his tenure, but has learned to hide them better now, and that is a good thing.
His open racism fueled the fires. It will take us years to undo the damage he has caused.
Affirmative action had its place just like the unions. It has run its course; its time for people to earn on their own, not on the color of their skin or their first language.
Paul, you are delusional!! The racism that has become apparent with Obama's rise to the presidency is the rampant racism of people who object to his election on the grounds of his skin color. The racists have crawled out of the woodwork like the cockroaches they are, and they have tried to deflect from their own attitudes by calling anyone who sees them for what they are "reverse racist." Well, here's a news flash. Most Americans see that ploy for exactly what it is ... an attempt to deflect blame for your own pathetic failings. Calling Obama racist is like blaming a victim of a crime for the criminal's actions. I challenge you to provide evidence of his so called racism based on HIS actions, NOT on other people's REACTIONS to him and his presidency...
What's really great about diversity is instead of having billions of people throughout the world who can't get along, we have millions of people in one area {America} who can't get along! Isn't diversity wonderful? This melting pot garbage isn't a solution for anything in America, it's one of our largest problems!
@Jessica-1170252 You said he called them smart, not snobs....You are showing your own stupidity by changing you mind. Grow up and stop thinking that your better and smarter than everyone else, because you aren't.
@spiritdance "Am I crazy or is everyone else?" fits PERFECTLY with your post. Explain how a very large portion of america is racist, simply because they dont agree with Obama. You are showing your ignorance of others and your own racism.
trent-2358408, #1.44- Getting back to you. Thanks for "comment" replying. I did a little post-reading instead of proofreading and discovered I must have insulted Chris-749391 of post #1.21, if he happened to read my post, by prefacing the beginning of my post with "everybody, including the Court, seems to be overlooking....." I hadn't even read Chris's post and had just come straight from the article to the first "reply" spot and was referring to "Everybody, including the Court" to mean [in the article], not in the comments that followed. In post-reading, I came across Chris's post and thought it was EXCELLENT in many ways and hoped Chris didn't think I had read his post and included him in "Everybody".
Thanks for the "heads-up" about proofreading. The paragraph makes perfect sense to me,(although I did find some grammatical errors); sorry not to you. I do the best I can to put it out there for whomever has ears to hear it, fully knowing that not everyone will even hear it; much less agree with it.
P.S. Speaking of Affirmative Action-NOT! I really think it to be VERY inappropriate and unfair that the collapsing of the first comment, like what has happened here, can take massive numbers of posts down and out of Public view along with it! I've spent enough time buried in the trench, as of late, NO THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
@rhee ok, thank you for your time....I agree with your p.s....
Progressives aren't going to want to hear it, but any race based policy by the government, whether to help or hurt people of a particular race or ethnicity is a violation of the 14th amendments equal protection clause. By seeking to elevate people of one race, even to attempt to counter years of previous, and continued private institutional racism, is in and of itself a racist act. The government must as a matter of justice remain neutral and protect all races equally. If the University of Texas is a government funded State school, then as a matter of complying with the Constitution, and the very spirit of the Civil Rights movement - a move towards equality before the law for men and women of all races - this suit must overturn the States ability to enact race based, and therefore by definition racist policies in admissions.
A similar thing has happened with the Sacramento Fire Department. With the large number of applicants, they had high examination cutoff scores to determine who was a good candidate and who was not. A government board decided that they didn't have enough minorities (no quota, just boards that decide whether or not there are "enough," meaning that there could never be enough). Because of this, the tests were made easier and the cutoff was lowered, then the people who are accepted are pulled randomly from the pot of "elegible persons." Thus, the fire department has more minorities, but fewer people who actually know what they are doing in an emergency situation.
This kind of policy is being implemented all over the country in all public agencies, not just in California. Soon, universities will not be able to look at merit at all in the name of "fairness and equality," and there will be no point in succeeding in high school, or ever. Soon, every fire and police department, all teachers, wildlife biologists, anything that is government funded (including public universities) will have a similar or worse policy. Is this really what we want? America, look forward to a future where the people who are supposed to protect and serve you only protect and serve themselves, where you can no longer rely on people who are paid by your tax dollars to do what is in your best interest. Open your doors to communism, but make sure to take a deep breath before you run to embrace it - it stinks more than you can imagine.
"Now that Obama is president, racism is over"
What kind of rock have you been living under, it's worse than ever now because the racist come to these posts and any post about the president and make dumb a$$ statements...such as that.
Don't try to fool yourself, or maybe if you keep saying it, you'll believe it.
Jessica-1170252: "...a lot of white texans are looking up to Sarah Palin and the bumbling "non-elite" idiots like them, and starting to fall behind everyone else as a result."
Um...what?!?
Doug:
"Now that Obama's President, racism is over"
You are highly confused, ignorant, or just plain blind. Racism is far from over in any sense. I dont think it will ever be over.
I agree with Pinkfloyd, race should simply not be information on the application at all and when transcripts are sent from the high school, that information should be blacked out and not included. This would keep it fair for everyone. If one student has better grades, higher GPA, more activities and a better overall record than they will get in, if not then they wont. Color should never be a factor as to whether or not a person is accepted to a college or university. And I would never want to be part of a university that thinks it should be.
You are absolutely correct, my friend.
Interesting story: my wife sells cosmetics in a large department store (no names). One day, a well-dressed black woman came in and got upset with my wife (who doesn't have a prejudiced bone in her body, btw) As I recall, my wife had been serving a customer and this lady became insulted when my wife directed her to another counter where they weren't busy. Woman goes to store manager to complain. Insinuates my wife is acting "racist". The store manager called my wife in. Manager says to wifey: "Don't you know who this woman is? She's on the county commision! (or some such elected body)" Wife replies: "So what? Aren't we supposed to treat every customer equally?"
....end of meeting
Comment # 1 restored for clarity.
forgetting about injustices towards whites for a moment, does anyone else think the whole concept of affirmative action is extremely offensive to minorities? It makes the assumption that they are less capable human beings and need a special advantage. I would be much more okay with assisting people from rough areas/family situations who may not have had equal opportunities REGARDLESS of race. Affirmative action is racist on both sides of the spectrum, it boggles my mind that any race would support it.
you offer a unique perspective. If you discount the fact that the united states government condoned, encouraged, exploited an entire class of citizens, for hundreds of years. Many of the slaves were educated, trained as craftsmen before ever setting foot in this country - they could easily have established businesses, estates, farms based on their natives skills - many did. but their property was appropriated under unfair laws forcing them to enrich others at the cost of their own liberty while their industry and enterprise was preempted and sold to the highest bidder.
Originally the promise of universal suffrage for males was honored regardless of home of origin. something changed and because of it... an underclass was created, then perpetuated across generations where children inherited the class of their parents.
the question of whether the United States has a debt it never repaid is inescapable - it does. By becoming an American citizen, regardless of your country of origin - you assume the responsibilities of that debt, as well as its rights. Until this country clears that debt...honorably - it will remain responsible for all that it did to and did against its most maligned citizens.
It recognized in a half hearted way, it debt by attempting to export the problem to Liberia. Pitting returnees against native peoples who welcomed their brothers home - but resisted any obligation to give up there land and home for people who they did not know, as far as the existing people of the region were concerned - the returning blacks were American interlopers, invaders.. so obviously - that was no solution - after all, if some asked you to pick up and return to the home of your immigrant parents after your parent start a new life here, would you be inclined to go? Obviously, they left for a reason - why return?
Jammieshuffle... you are a carrier of the worst kind of ignorance, not only are you ignorant, by choice - you revel in it, are a carrier of it, export it and infect others bases on the idea that if everyone is as sick as you - then you are somehow normal.
White slaves were not encumbered by these exclusionary laws. o, the presedent was set, not by blacks forcing guilt on their slave masters.. the crime was invented the state to recieve free labor by extending a temporary situation into a perpetual indenture for generations unborn.
Of all the EU nations, Germany seems to have gotten it right.
College is not a free ride to a corner office. Its nothing but education - there is no magic to it. Trade schools are just as viable an education as is Accountant.
You don't have to change careers to have a respectable, fulfilling occupation. A really good machinist, mechanic, engineer is valued for his skills as much as a good executive. even more important... the executive understands that when it comes to getting the work done, the craftsman's abilities are much closer to reality than any marketing promises he made to close a deal. if it takes 6 months to do the job right - it takes 6 months. If the product is not ready - then its not ready. Seldom does an engineer get forced to compromise quality to reach an arbitrary deadline without consultation on whether it is actually possible..
It's pretty funny how SOME white people can sit and write about AA, and the need to abolish it. There would not have been a need for Afirmitive Action, if there was not a negitive action. Look in your boardrooms, in your meetings, look at fortune 500 ceo's see how many people of color that are in YOUR workplace, and what positions they hold. White can attend a meeting with 20 white people, and no people of color and not think nothing of it. This law was past because without a mandate, people of color were systematicly denied opportunity in America.
It's amazing how the white culture has treated people of color so bad for HUNDREDS of years, all the way up to MURDER, based on skin color, but then cry like babies, when they feel the least bit of discrimination put in their path.
Personally I think affirmative action is just reverse racism.
But it is kinda necessary since some people can't seem to see past race anyway.
There is no such thing as reverse racism. If you discriminate against someone because of their race, it is racism. Racism in government institutions is illegal, so why is it still taking place?
Chuck...because the squeakiest wheels still get the grease...Don't you know ALL white people are rich and intelligent and can afford college.
The bottom line is it's okay to discriminate against white people and has been for about 50 years now. As long as universities and businesses have quotas to meet, this government mandated discrimination will continue. At least this person had one thing going for her, she's at least female. White males in our society automatically drop to the bottom of the list and are negatively effected the most by our current system. That's just the way it is.
Sorry I guess reverse wasn't exactly specific. It is racism.
It's reverse in the sense of the races being discriminated.
David - if there are quota's, and white peopl are still getting the most spots...isnt it possible that white males are dropping to the bottom of the list, merely because it's being proven that white males BELONG at the bottom of the list?
My brother in law didnt get into the top michigan university, UofM - and he too claimed he was a victim of racism. Turns out, he just really sucks at life - smart guy, gets decent grades...but he cant manage to see anything through, he cant manage to find "what makes him happy" and i guarantee you, University of Michigan got it hands down RIGHT when they passed him over.
My cousin, she got into UofM - has been busting her butt every day since she's been there and she's flying through their program with flying colors...she's on her way to a very promising career.
But I bet she just got that slot because she's female right? Some poor white man got screwed by her huh?
*face palm
you cant fix stupid, white males apparently.
Ruken: Actually it needs to be kinda unnecessary....two wrongs don't make a right. Affirmative action always was an affront to everyone...to the minority because it said they weren't good enough, and to the majority because it said good enough wansn't good enough unless you were the 'right' color or gender or whatever. In retrospect, it will be judged to have been a monstrous exercise in intellectual dishonesty supportable only if you accept the "ends justifies the means" approach to life.....
Nice try, Jessica, but not everyone is a lazy idiot like your brother-in-law, and yes, some people get a slot at the expense of better qualified candidates. That's the world we live in today.
I've worked for Fortune 100 companies that were compelled to hire and promote lesser quality job candidates simply to meet Federal guidelines, with predictably terrible results. Tell me what good it does to select a candidate for a job or a college based on race or gender and pushing aside better qualified people? How about taking a novel approach and hiring or accepting the best person regardless of race or gender? All you're doing is setting the lesser individual up for failure because they're in over their head. I've watched this play out many a time. You either lower your standards, lower the bar, or you get rid of the individual because they've washed out. How does that benefit anyone in the long run?
We've put that line of thinking into action in our public schools. As this article points out, lower the bar and graduate as many as you can. Then wonder why they don't have the basic skills that a Freshman in college needs. We are doing society a disservice by rewarding mediocrity, or even failure. Some public schools have even eliminated honor rolls and valedictorians so the dumb students won't be offended. What a system. A system that doesn't reward excellence and doesn't encourage competition for that drive to get to the top. Lowering the bar and removing the measurement metrics that acknowledge success and accomplishment has destroyed this country. Now everyone is content to strive for mediocrity because going the extra distance gets you nothing except scorn.
Atta girl Jessica. You're going to go far in life with your attitude. You sound like a perfect match for your brother-in-law. Your trolling comments put you in the same category. It only takes one example for you to make a determination for ALL members of that group.
You should work on your screening program and you wouldn't have ended up with a sucky bro-in-law.
Jessica...in the '70's, my brother graduated from college with honors and scored much higher on the MCAT than a lot of minorities and women who basically walked over him into medical school. We have a little American Indian in our heritage, but not enough for him to be claimed to be minority. Otherwise getting into medical school would have been a walk in the park for him.
It's obvious from your comments you have chip on your shoulder, but I'm just curious if you could explain how it was fair or just to my brother, who never discriminated against minorities or women, yet had to take a back seat them on the sole premise that he was a white male.
Maybe Ms. Fisher should have worked harder, gotten in the top 10% of her class, and then she would have been automatically accepted. Then she would not have to worry about anybody else and what they did to get in.
Entitlement is the only thing worse than affirmative action.
Actually, our African-American cousins are more racist as they have "black" divided into fourteen different tints or categories. Each, their own position in the pecking order. There is on equivalency in any other race? Go Figger?
Jessica, sounds like a white jock dumped you....or maybe didn't want to date you in the first place. Maybe your negative attitude and all that anger you have bottled up inside was a turnoff. What's it like to go through life so narrowminded and judgmental? Maybe you should be more tolerant, or is tolerance not in your vocabulary?
By the way, while you're arguing with people about whether this girl has a legitimate gripe, perhaps the fact that her case had enough merit to make to the Supreme Court should register with you. There is also some precedence in reverse discrimination lawsuits. Twenty New Haven, Connecticut firefighters sued the city because they had their test scores thrown out for promotion to management positions. The reason? None of those who scored high enough to pass the test were black. The twenty firefighters argued they were passed over because of their race. Nineteen were white, one was Hispanic. The Supreme Court agreed in a 5-4 decision that the City's decision to ignore the passing scores was a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. So, you see Jessica, despite your overwhelming bias on this subject, white people can be the victims of discrimination.
Depends on the entitlement. I think she is entitled to equal treatment under the law.
weaselyone, you do realize that the whole point of this going to the supreme court is that "under the law" as it is now, and as has been interpreted previously by the supreme court previosly (so why again?) that the practice is not incongruent with the Constitution, right? So as of now, she is being treated equally "under the law"
If you cut off the "under the law" part, you have a point.
But think about it this way, how does she know that only minority students that had lower grades than her got in? And if say another white female with lower grades got in over her, what is Ms. Fisher's excuse for not getting in? Probably "its not fair!". but no grounds for a lawsuit.
Maybe its not fair, but neither is life, so get over it.
I never said white men COULDNT be on the receiving end of discrimination.
maybe I should put it this way:
as a woman who heard all my life "you cant do that, you're a girl" - there's a bit of fresh air when I hear white men especially bitch about all the discrimination they are getting.
which again, pales in comparison to the discrimination women and non-whites have received at the hands of white men.
just talking historically - from an american perspective.
I mean it's been all of what 20 years maybe that white men have really gotten screwed, and even then...it's just a small percentage of white men...not all of them.
BetterRightThanWrong - yes, so much anger bottled up...and thankfully, it's turning off every man in the land...cuz this lesbian could give a @!$%#! no, but seriously...not anger really, I just find it hilarious.
you clearly dont understand what it's like to be discriminated against (routinely) otherwise you wouldnt have needed to point out OTHER PEOPLES cases of discrimination...
I got a handfull of stories to share with you...about real discrimination, and most of the men in my life wouldnt even remotely catergorize me as ANGRY. Passionate, yes...angry no.
Only a woman hater would think im angry. Do you hate women? especially opinionated ones?
The likelihood of people remaining poor, after being born into poverty is ballistically high. I am one of those die hard Liberals that feel that we have a debt to Native Americans that we committed genocide against and blacks that we held as slaves. We do have to pay for the transgressions of our fathers, just as our children and grandchildren will be stuck with $16T, and growing in debt.
We whites have had the entire system working for us since the birth of our nation. I'm sorry that this person didn't get into UT. It's a good school--but, someone was owed a debt. That debt was incurred when we held their ancestors as slaves and denied them 1st class citizenship for a couple centuries.
pinkfloyd111 "How about not asking a persons race when they apply? Then everybody is judged equally on their merits."
Obviously, that would be the only way to enforce the true intent of the 'Equal Protection' clause of the Constitution, but that would not satisfy the PC crowd, and it would result in few Black and Hispanic students being admitted to our top colleges.
I wonder if a similar 'Affirmative Action' standard should be applied to limit the over-representation of Asian students to our top schools? Answer - NO - That would be discriminatory, and it's only permissible to discriminate against White students.
This is TOO FUNNY as society continually tries to find ways around the obvious intent of the 'Equal Protection' clause of the Constitution. That's the reason that it keeps cropping up - Affirmative Action is just not morally defensible because it discriminates based on race. Nothing being advanced as an 'excuse' can obviate this basic truth.
The Affirmative Action 'experiment' has resulted in thousands of better qualified students being denied admissions to our top colleges, and it's time to bring this patently discriminatory practice to an end.
Here's an interesting question - What is the 'dropout' rate of those admitted under Affirmative Action' programs vs those admitted based on merit? I suspect that society has been shortchanged because 'Affirmative Action' students that dropped out of college likely replaced other more qualified students that WOULD have graduated.
Just imagine if a school used race to get a "more white" student population.
They could say something like: "Race isn't the primary factor".
Would that be OK?
Or does that sound like "Discrimination on the Basis of Race"?
Can you imagine scholarships for whites only? Wait, we have scholarships for Native Americans only, Blacks only, and Hispanics only.
How is that not discriminating on the basis of race?
Equal protection under the law?
By treating different races differently? I thought that was what we are AGAINST.
As for any argument that she doesn't know if they use race in their decisions, THE UNIVERSITY ADMITS IT USES RACE - AND IS TRYING TO DEFEND IT"S ABILITY TO USE DISCRIMINATION IN ADMITTANCE.
They freely admit that they use race to allow less qualified applicants to get in if they are in a favored race.
White have NO RIGHTS!! And if you are a WHITE MAN you are totally up the creek without a paddle!
Jessica, you're joking, right? It's clear from all of your posts you're an angry person......and no surprise you're a man hater. That came through loud and clear. Apparently you're okay with discrimination as long as a white male is the victim. Kinda like that idiot Eric Holder not prosecuting Black Panthers that were intimidating white voters and preventing them from voting back in 2008. It's okay to look the other way when the victims are white...or in your case, male. Gotta love hypocrites. Preach tolerance but refuse to practice it.
hs321 - fair to your brother? maybe not so much.
want to explain to me how it's fair that my coworker is the boss' daugther, she barely does any work, shows up at 8;30, takes an extra long lunch, and leaves at 4:30 and nothing bad happens to her...and im pretty certain she makes MORE than myself and another coworker do...and we do all the work, not her?
the answer: LIFE ISNT FAIR
perhaps your brother should have worked a little harder to make certain the medical school he was applying to had no other choice but to take him on pure merrit alone. Clearly, they found him to be expendable...and thats the true bottom line. I guarantee, there were other white kids who were better than him that "didnt get screwed"...
Know what, you guys are arguing the wrong subject when it comes to colleges and AA. It is about the sports culture, if there was no AA in place, half the football and basket ball players wouldn't even be in college sports let alone be in a college. Sorry to say but thats the truth, and college sports is big money.
AA in now adays is just an excuse to bring in big time football and basket ball players, that wouldn't even past the ACT.
david - I never said it was ok.
I just said its hilarious listening to the bitching.
you have reading comprehension issues...
ok, I give in...I hate men, every last one of them. including my father, brothers, grandpa, and all my male friends. I HATE EM I HATE I HATE EM!
jeez, you're like a man-hating whisperer or something!
So what do you think the percentage is of black athletes versus white that get athletic scholarships?
AND based upon what? If you say "ability" and I suspect you will, then how is it different when the "ability" is intelligence?
Jessica
It seems a little unfair that I should be discriminated against for the actions of my ancestors. I'm 18 years old. Why should I be punished? I'm not rich. I'm not that smart. I still had to take out a 5 grand loan for college because my parents made 3 grand over the limit to qualify for federal aid. Which should be raised by the way. My parents don't have the money to pay for my college. I'm working 2 jobs and balancing out that with college.
You yourself acknowledge that white men, in the last 20 years or so, have started getting screwed. Instead of laughing about it, couldn't you show a sense of empathy? If you've been discriminated against that much, why would you want anyone to endure that? To WANT someone to endure that just makes you look like an angry person. Whether you say you are or not. Seeing it as a form of revenge.
Jessica, me a woman hater? Hardly. I like strong, intelligent women that can fend for themselves. The kind with an abundance of common sense. Dumb and helpless just isn't attractive, and whiny is definitely out.
David is right about one thing, you're a hypocrite. It's okay for you to tell someone LIFE ISN'T FAIR, but that answer doesn't suffice for some of the whiners screaming "discrimination"? Sounds like double standards to me.
Too many people waste their time with higher education anyway. We should have a method to divide students between hands on and book education around the age of eleven. Some would get far more benefit, being trained in a trade. Those are the jobs available today and tomorrow.
Mike, Jessica isn't going to waste her time on empathy for you. As you pointed out, she's clearly out for vengeance. She apparently enjoys seeing guys like you get punished for things you didn't even do. She can be unfair to you, but you can't be unfair to anyone without getting an earful from intolerant, hypocritical people like her.
TX: if an Atheletic Director wants to keep his job, athletic scholarships are given to athletes based on their perceived athletic abilities. THAT is why you don't find very many basketball scholarships given to 5'2'' white guys who can't jump, not because they are white, but because they don't have the same probable athleticism as the 6'11'' black guys who can jump (and dunk.)
IMO, the time to use race as a factor in making admission decisions is past. 40+ years have past since Dr. King said that we should be judging people by the content of their character instead of the color of their skin. Its long past time that we are doing that. Two generations have been born since the passage of the civil rights act, it is time to live up to its ideals.
Dirp, You did a politicians two step and completely avoided answering my question except that you said athletes should be judged by "ability" which is my point.
When all things are equal in every way, race should not be a deciding factor for anything.
Considering race in college admissions is NOT a form of racism. FACTS: In the 50's and 60's, soldiers of color were denied the same financial assistance of the G.I. Bill that were given to white soldiers. As a result, these colored families were forced into poorer neighborhoods (or when they were able to live in a good "white" neighborhood, the property values significantly decreased). These poor, colored neighborhoods then were unable to provide the taxes to fund educational programs in high schools (such as Advanced Placement (AP) courses or Honors courses) to increase those colored childrens education and therefore chances in college admissions. Extra points in college admissions are added to students scores when they have taken AP and Honors courses (primarily offered in wealthy, white communities). How then, are colored students ever supposed to compare to the students who have taken the AP and Honors courses? They cannot which is why race is still considered in college admissions.
Jessica, I don't hate opinionated women or men, I just think their rather useless and a determent to society.
Definition of OPINIONATED
: unduly adhering to one's own opinion or to preconceived notions
I agree Idmar, in the 50's, 60's and probably the 70's as well.
It is now 2012!
Lol! You guys need to leave Snookie, I mean jessica alone. She can't help it.
Racism goes both ways. In the 80=s, I had a year end review which was outstanding in all ways, to the point that my boss told me that there would be a significant promotion for me later in the year, when the slot I was working towards opened up. I continued to work hard, awaiting the opening and the promised promotion. Well it came, and I didn't get it. I asked him what happened to the promotion I was promised. He apologized and told me that he was told that a minority needed to go in the slot. I was furious, but continued with the company and worked for the guy that got the position I worked for. Not long after, the entire company was sold, and everyone from my position and below were let go.
So, please never tell me that reverse racism, or preferences that should not enter into the equation does not exist. From my experience, it is alive and well. And, don't even get me started about age discrimination. I've seen so much of that, that it makes me sick.
Are we really doing minorities any favors by lowering the standards for them? If society is aware that this is happening, then won't people always be a little bit suspicious of every minority who graduates? Employers will wonder if a candidate achieved their success fair and square, or if they were given special treatment because of their race. If I was a minority, I would not want someone second-guessing me because of my race. I would not want that baggage if I was in fact a legitimate competitor for my spot at a particular school. I would want the same benefit of the doubt that everyone at my level of achievement gets.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Jessica is loving the fact that white males are getting the shaft now, because supposedly things were reversed 20 to 30 years ago? So, white males should be punished now for something that is entirely not their fault? Way to go, man hater!
Pal---as a white guy I know that I've always had it my way. I've always been less prone to profiling, better service in establishments, (as a child, we even had our own "white only" restrooms, water fountains, etc). After all the genocide, slavery, and grabbing, depriving women the right to own property or vote---don't you think that it's time that we feel the wrath. Maybe we can invade another country and you can live under the Taliban--they'll cover your back.
@Jessica you know, when poeple say that we(white males) had slaves, I say that LINCOLN WAS A WHITE GUY!!!!!!!!! I also say GROW UP AND STOP WHINING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT HAPPEND MORE THEN 50/100 YEARS AGO!!!!!
@sand realy? It was a WHITE congress, presidents, and predomintly WHITE states that passed the civil rights act.....
Sandrich,
---don't you think that it's time that we feel the wrath?
Racism is okay if someone has been a victim of racism? My family is from Canada so why do my children need to "Feel the Wrath?"
As a Texan the only thing I see of of import is are Fisher's parents tax dollars worth less the the other students. Not in quantity because I don't care which parent paid more. But we treat some people as if the quality of their money is worth less. A texan is a texan and should enter UT based on grades then if no Texan wants a spot let in people of other states. That goes for the entire UT system, the A&M system and the Texas State college system They need to serve Texans first regardless of race before anybody else.
As a Texan the only thing I see of of import is are Fisher's parents tax dollars worth less the the other students. Not in quantity because I don't care which parent paid more. But we treat some people as if the quality of their money is worth less. A texan is a texan and should enter UT based on grades then if no Texan wants a spot let in people of other states. That goes for the entire UT system, the A&M system and the Texas State college system They need to serve Texans first regardless of race before anybody else.
trent-2358408 "@sand realy? It was a WHITE congress, presidents, and predomintly WHITE states that passed the civil rights act....."
Interestingly, it was Republicans in Congress that voted for it in far higher percentages than Democrats as well, and MLK was a Republican, as was Abraham Lincoln. So I find it interesting that Black voters still vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, who take their votes for granted.
Forgot about that part.
Discrimination is discrimination, no matter who you are discriminating against. If minorities truly want to be treated as equals, they have to stop looking for special preference in everything. People should be selected for college, jobs, etc. based solely on their abilities and qualifications, not the color of their skin. Using race as any component of the decision should be illegal. Only when we drop all of this nonsense of preferences, quotas, and diversity will we truly have equality. Skin color does not guarantee diversity anyway. Life experience is what makes people diverse in their views and attitudes, not skin color. Just because someone is black does not mean they are "from the 'hood" or anything else. They could just as easily grown up in a nice suburban neighborhood with a typical family life as a white or hispanic could. By the same token a white could have grown up poor in the inner city in a one parent household the same as any black or hispanic. If colleges truly wanted diversity they would look at background, not skin color.
We can't forget that not so long ago, minorities and women couldn't get into many colleges or get hired just because of their race or sex - regardless of qualifications. And it was white men who made it this way. Affirmative Action was a necessary evil, in order to open doors for minorities and women. If white men hadn't discriminated against women and minorities, there were never have been a need for Affirmative Action.
But we're in a different time now...sort of. It's unfair to choose who gets into college based on race, especially if a minority is less qualified and bumps a more qualified person. But the problem needs to be solved well before college. It needs to be solved in our education system. Minorities are often in underfunded school districts. The playing field needs to be leveled at K-12. If the educational opportunities are equal at that level, there should never be the need to have Affirmative Action at the college level.
Why? None of us were even born when slavery was going on, let alone participating in it. Why punish a group for someting they didn't do? Likewise, modern blacks have never experienced slavery. How does having more pigment entitle them to have special treatment?
That's not the world I want for my kids, nor their peers of any race. "Sorry, but you don't get to go to this college, because people who are long dead and buried were unfair to each other and we want to pretend we are them."
David--you do realize that when you immediately say that people are hiring "lesser qualified" candidates because they are not hiring white candidates, that you are being racist--right? Roy Wilson--same thing:
The issue here is that people of color--regardless of the fact that they are eminently qualified--are not admitted or hired based on what are racist measures: the school that you went to, how well you scored on an openly skewed national testing instrument, the grades you received from teachers (who in some disciplines, are racist). It is pretty easy to exclude people of color based on "objective" standards which just happen to favor people who are European American.
For example, women and people of color were excluded from being astronauts because of the "objective" standard that they had to have been combat pilots. Combat pilots were (with very few exceptions) white males.
The one person of color who was admitted to the astronaut training program ran into a few David's, and his life was made utterly miserable by the continuous pick-pick-picking at him (while the European-American candidates all covered one another's backs).
There are plenty of fine and well educated people of color--when they don't tend to want to work at this or that business, it is usually because it is well know that the given business is, like NASA back in the day, virulently racist in its constituents. The same thing happens with women--when people of color and women do not want to work at an institution, and only the few who aren't able to get good positions on their own merits will apply, then they are picked to death by the racists/gender bashers. No, they don't tend to do well.
When there is insitutionalized racism and sexism, it is very hard to evaluate people on their own merits. Such people have to be--as the astronaut who finally gave up put it--Super-N**gers, or Super Women. They cannot be just as good as everyone else--they have to have a skin of titanium, twice the skills, and the patience of Job.
At a racist institution like, oh, any college in Texas that isn't predominantly black--you aren't going to get a heck of a lot of people of color applying because they just don't want to mess with the racists. Why not just go somewhere else. The remaining people who will apply are the second-level people--but they, too, can do quite well.
What amuses me is that there are still people who think that European Americans are discriminated against in cases like this--when they don't realize that if all the non-European students go where they won't be discriminated against, those European Americans who graduate from the lily-white institution are going to have fun getting jobs in Fortune 500 companies that don't want people who have never had to deal with minority colleagues (they don't want the lawsuits due to people like David).
A small amount of people of color in the institution helps that institution get grants from private industry (which will not give grants to colleges that are lily-white, as it alienates their customers) and to get high-quality teachers (who won't work at colleges which are lily-white as it damages their rep) and to apply for grants from private institutes. It benefits the majority of European Americans that all these things are in place.
Remember that private industry and institutes do not have to give their money and professors do not have to teach at places--it's a capitalist system. Figure out that a lily-white institution is something that looks bad on one's resume, and the students shouldn't want to go there either. Have a great day.
Everyone here needs to remember that this is 2012 not the 50's 60's or 70's. Black people need to forget all that crap and start being human instead of Black. The only racist left are the back ones that want to use it to be noticed . Get off it and join the human race.
TXHorseman
Sandrich,
---don't you think that it's time that we feel the wrath?
Canada---who occupied that land before it was settled? European white are the most aggressive and violent humans society has known, (see The Crusades, Roman Empire, the genocide to capture the lands of North America, etc). And, Tex--that land, Tejas, belonged the the people of Mexico.
Point is--we owe the world more than the world owes us and I never said racism is alright if someone has been oppressed. It's wrong and it's a sickness.
Halalulah, but with Obama appointees on this SCOTUS it is going to be close. This descrimination against white people has been forced on everyone by the government for over 50 years, yet those that whine they don't get a fair chance have done no better and those who would have succeeded anyway have gone on to do so. This affirmative action crap has ruined our education system, lowered the standards in our working invironments and generally denigrated our country. Those of any race who are qualified have been embarrassed by being included in with the "quota folks" who businesses were forced to hire and/or promote. My son had to start at a local college and wait a year to transfer to the University of his choice. As the Dean of the University told him when he was denied admission, we have to meet the affirmative action guildelines but just go somewhere else and wait for these people to flunk out and there will be plenty of room for you to transfer in. That is precisely what happened. Nothing has changed in the last 50 years but it is high time we went to REAL EQUALITY and let everyone of every race be judged and treated according to their own abilities. If it is wrong to put a person down because they are black it sure as heck is wrong to give them a job or place in college they really don't deserve just because they are black or latino or whatever especially since it costs a while person that job or place in school. Often a white person who would be more qualified. Those black people who are going to be successful don't need a hand out or an extra shove up, they can make it just fine on thier own capabilities and I'm sure they would be glad to have it recognised that they were successful that way and not through a hand out. It is high time self respect and price in ones self come back into vogue in this country.
Renee-252019 "It's unfair to choose who gets into college based on race, especially if a minority is less qualified and bumps a more qualified person. But the problem needs to be solved well before college. It needs to be solved in our education system. Minorities are often in underfunded school districts. The playing field needs to be leveled at K-12. If the educational opportunities are equal at that level, there should never be the need to have Affirmative Action at the college level."
Excellent comments, and very perceptive. It has to be addressed at the K-12 grade levels. We need to find ways to 'bridge the gap' with innovating education techniques, but unfortunately, certain education 'professionals' resist changing the 'status quo', so change is painstakingly slow, as every Education Secretary has found. By the time the students reach college level, any preference based on Race is bound to be unjust and unfairly affects people entire lives.
beanathome "David--you do realize that when you immediately say that people are hiring "lesser qualified" candidates because they are not hiring white candidates, that you are being racist--right? Roy Wilson--same thing: it would result in few Black and Hispanic students being admitted to our top colleges."
Maybe you consider that 'Racist', but it's actually what happened in California universities when admission policies based on Race were eliminated several years ago. Below is a link to prove my point;
https://files.nyu.edu/fmh1/public/classes/sociology_of_higher_ed/calenrollment.html
As Renee pointed out above, we need to attack the problem at its core - in the K-12 grade levels.
PS - It's not a 'Black/Hispanic/White' issue, since eliminating Race in the criteria resulted in a dramatic increase in the percentage of Asians getting into the top universities - because they do better scholastically than other Races, probably because they place a high priority on the value of education.
Two points in reply to various comments on these issues:
1. She did go to another school, LSU, where she is about to graduate. UT tried to argue that once she graduates the suit should be dismissed, since it will be moot. The SCOTUS rejected this argument, based on the same reasoning that they used to reject the argument in Roe v. Wade that there would never be a valid case, since it takes over 9 months to even get to the SCOTUS. In this case, they observed that it usually takes over 4 years also, so the same rule applies.
2. The fact that she was denied because of race, and not some lack of qualification on her part, is not an assumption, it is an allegation. Since her case has been to court (at least) twice and not thrown out on that basis, it is safe to assume that she proved this allegation. If she had not, the case would not be going to the SCOTUS, who get to choose what cases they want to hear and only choose "good" cases to establish important rules like this.
jessica
thbthbthbthbhthbthhhbthbhtthhhbttthhhhhhbttthhhhb!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I support Universities who wish to garner a more diverse student body. But - this shouldn't be accomplished through artificial preferences based on race in the admissions process. Diversity should be gained through promotion and a campus known for its open and friendly atmosphere. It should draw in a diverse population through natural means, not forced, that serves to accomplish nothing but resentment in the long run. It does minority groups more harm than good in the struggle for equality.
Someone earlier made the point that 'we owe it to them' due to the history of genocide and slavery that blots our past. It's a good point, especially given that those born into poverty will likely never get out of poverty - and that affording those who are there largely because of past policies do deserve help. But this isn't the way to do it. This only creates more problems in the long run and ultimately will harm minorities by lowering standards just for minorities. How, exactly, does this help anyone?
The ol' 'teach a man to fish' parable applies. Standards can be lowered to favor particular races over whites, a freebie - or they can be afforded equality. What's more valuable in the long run? What's more authentic?
In the end, admitting a minority with lower grades over a white person simply because of race isn't any sort of better treatment... it's not. It's charity. It's saying 'you are still inferior, so we have to do this to help you.' And frankly, that sort of charity is insulting.
Admissions should not be about rich, poor, ethnicity, or whatever. It should be about a person's academic aptitude, and that is something in which we all can succeed. I used to teach in some rough schools, and I tell you what - it's not public schools that are the problem, or the faculty. Hell, we had one of the nicest schools around.
Do you know what the problem was? Meth addled parents. Parents that come to the meetings blasted out of their minds. Parents who could barely speak a complete sentence of English, not that they spoke another language fluently... no... English is their first language and they can barely speak it. Kids who can't read, parents who don't care, and a culture which puts very little value on intelligence and academia.
I never did any of those things, and I don't associate with the historical figures who did. I was born with light skin, and no control over that or what similar-looking people did in the past. I'm about as responsible for global conquests and slavery as someone who was born black. Quit assigning people to groups they didn't join, or to punishments they didn't earn. No one controls their skin color, and it's none of your business what they look like. If you want to feel guilty about the actions of someone long dead and buried, then go ahead and associate with them. But don't assume anyone else does, just because they look like you.
Jessica-1170252, please stop with the racially offensive remarks. You are suspended for a week for violating rule # 5 of the Code of Honor.
I hate the term "reverse racism." Racism is racism.
I don't get it. Is this school, U of T at A, for black or minority students only? Can she not apply to another undergrad program with the same merit as the one in Austin? There seems to be a butt load of issues regarding race in Texas!!! hhhmmm................
The point is she shouldn't have to apply at another school if she was more qualified than someone else who was admitted at Austin.
John, black students are overwhelmingly at For Profit, Online, and HBCU's. Really, what black person in their right mind wants to end up in some dorm with confederate flags flying everywhere? They can keep their education, whatever is so great about it. And who wants to attend a school run by a state whose governor goes shooting weapons at a place called
@!$%#headranch?Sorry to tell you this, but she may actually have been denied because of Asians (Oriental and Indian) and Hispanics. It's also possible she didn't qualify. While white people are so focused on blacks, they're literally giving their country away to Asia and Latin America, go to Walmart and tell me it isn't so. Go to the Louisiana and South Carolina state houses and tell me it isn't so.
The key word is "If"
Hate to break it to you John, but people in Texas are not focused on blacks.
TU happens to be one of the top universities in the country on several levels.
Obviously she thought she was qualified and so did an attorney.
@John-1244239 All schools are not the same. Some are better than others. But that is really besides the point. She is upset that someone who does not have as good of a record as her is being admitted above her just because of their skin color. It is indeed reverse racism and is in no way needed. Either you meet the schools standard for admission or you don't. More people apply each year than the school can accept. The school therefore has to judge people on something so they look at who has the best record. SAT scores, how well they did in school and other academic records and take the most qualified people. It is as simple as that. For someone to be admitted above her based on skin color is just wrong. I couldn't get into plenty of universities. Is it because I'm white? No! It's because I'm not good enough. Could I still go to college? Yes! Should one of these colleges that I don't qualify for just let me in over some genius out there just because I'm white? Believe me....there are countless black people who are way smarter than me and should be admitted above me because of that fact. We as a country want are BEST people to get the BEST education they can.
Afirmative action also hurts minorities.
Why hire someone that can sue you on a whim for racism? You may as well just hire the white guy and not worry about sexism, racism etc.
Who knows? Maybe she was denied not based on grades but because she can't interview or can't write or can't (fill in the blank). She cries racism, so it MUST be racism. The problem with today's young kids is that they have no ability for self-reflection. We all get rejected from something somewhere along the line. We don't get the job we applied for. We don't get the promotion we wanted. Let's cry about it, scream about it and then sue. It must be someone else's fault that she didn't get what she "deserved". Oh, well. That's life.
Steve-o-728608
There is no such thing as "reverse racism". It was a term coined by white people who felt that racism directed towards them is wrong (it's supposed to go the other way). I'm not saying that you feel that way, just wanted to give you some background on the term. Racism is racism plain and simple.
I appreciate the rest of your comment. However, let's not forget that colleges look more than just at test scores and grades. They want a diverse population and that doesn't always mean they look at race. Why did they admit a 3.5gpa over a 4.0gpa? Maybe the 3.5 had a tougher course load, scored 33 on the ACT, is in the top 5% of her class, worked 32 hours, did community service, had great recommendations, is majoring in History, and is from Ohio. On the other hand, the 4.0 student never took advanced classes, scored a 30 on the ACT, has no work experience, only did a few hours of community service, had mediocre recommendations, is majoring in Engineering, and is from Texas.
Colleges, unless they used computerized admissions, look at each application on its own merits outside of academics. I agree, we are a country that wants the BEST people to get the BEST education they can, but sometimes the BEST isn't defined by academics alone.
She could always wait for the politicians to do the political thing but she can always grow old waiting. Nothing gets attention like a big dollar settlement.
Road Warrior, are we to just believe that she was more qualified? What makes one 'qualified' for admission to this school? I think we would have to know the definition of qualified before we deem her as such. And what in Ms. Fisher's mind makes the accepted individuals unqualified other than the color of their skin? Did other white students get in that had lower grades but were more well rounded? Who knows, but leave it to a white texas girl to boil it down to race.
Road Warrior, are we to just believe that she was more qualified? What makes one 'qualified' for admission to this school? I think we would have to know the definition of qualified before we deem her as such. And what in Ms. Fisher's mind makes the accepted individuals unqualified other than the color of their skin? Did other white students get in that had lower grades but were more well rounded? Who knows, but leave it to a white texas girl to boil it down to race.
And race should not be used at all in the determination.
Weaselyone,
And 87% of the people voting on the subject agree with you. Guess they are all white by some of the comments I am reading.
My bother has a daughter. My niece is 1/2 hispanic/ 1/2 white. I will let you guess how they have her registered in school. And given you know the answer, then he must be aware of a known bias in a given direction towards freshmen admissions.
Swooz,
I am certain that her attorney with a JD "never" thought of ANY of those things. Are you kidding?
Now if you take the Ohio out and insert India, Pakistan or Mexico, you might be on to something.
Ronald Reagan was an azzhole! When I graduated in the top third of my class from college in 1984, practically the only ones hired were minorities and females no matter what GPA they had. I have been rejected for numerous jobs over the past 25 yrs because I'm a white male. I didn't sue anybody, but I did confirm this by some following up investigations with the interviewing companies asking about the new person they hired. Also, I sent out resumes with a female name on it and got overwhelming interest from hiring managers. The cause of this recession is definitely affirmative action. The companies/ institutions hired and promoted the less qualified and now those beneficiaries are making stupid decisions.
Brad, and now many of those people are in management positions and who do they hire?
@ JohnSixty, so how exactly are minorities especially asians and latinos in your post hurting or taking over America? If you can get past your racist self, you may notice that no one outside of the US is taking over America, its only Americans taking over America you fool. Tell me it ain't so that your that dumb.
@johnsixty - thats a laugh. do you know that at one point in time, it was actually HARDER to get into a university or college if you were asian american or of asian descent than if you were of a "white" decent (and the good lord knows what "white" descent actually means). the affirmative action in california actually had a cap and higher standard for the asian students because their merit was higher than everyone else, including that of whites. forget the fact that asians were still a minority group or the fact that they were qualified for it over non-asians. but hey, i think asians were ok with it because they just worked harder to get to the schools they wanted.
TXHorseman, I hate to say it, but your neice will be better off for that registration. In the 90's my mother thought it was better to register me white instead of asian, based on the colleges I was applying to, I mixed it based on their admission history with race.
Swooshz, I had a 3.8gpa, a 1350 SAT (when the max was 1600 and the nat ave was 960), started and was president for multiple clubs, worked full time, took AP courses (had 12 credits going into my freshmen year), was in the top 1% on my ACT's for my state (don't remember the number) and in the top 7% for my class. Of four (4) public universities I applied to, I was rejected from all of them. Upon researching, i found out why these were rejected: one (1) was because I filed as white in the Business school and they had too many white applications, two (2) were because I was asian and applied under the general admission, same issue. One was rejected because one of my classes out of all four years was a "D".
I'm sure that there was only merit reviewed for my applications (yeah right)! What did I do? I went to a community college and moved to one of the schools my Sophmore year without a hitch. Race definitely has a play in Freshman acceptance
@brad what???? Ronald Reagen???? How does that make any sense???? I mean realy??? Your an idiot....
John please don't confuse people Austin is just UT. UT at A would be Arlington by Dallas. Same as Wisconsin Madison is UW UW-M is Milwaukee. All Texans should be judged only on the basis of grades and entrance exams. No Texan is more equal than another.
Giving up Affirmative Action is long overdue!! Affirmative Action, in itself is discriminating. Jobs and college entrance should be based on skills, experiences, and performance; but never the skin color. All applications should not require a response to race or a religious questions to avoid discrimination.
@ mdubbs -
Based on the info in the article, the school doesn't seem to be arguing the point that she was more academically qualified than some of the students the let in but only that they felt a need to use race as one of the points of qualification.
One thing I will point out. Racism will never end until race isn't considered at all. Affirmative actions will not cure racism.
Please note, everyone who missed this in your education; 'your' is a possessive, meaning the word following 'your' belongs to you. i.e. 'your school', 'your book'. You're is a contraction meaning 'you are'; i.e. 'you're wrong'. 'Their' is also possessive. i.e their house, their education. 'There' is generally a place. 'They're' is a contraction for 'they are'. Please remember this. It is not that hard, but it does help language be meaningful AND accurate. It also reveals clues about YOUR own education and/or how much you're interested in details and learning.
Preferential treatment was never right before, and it isn't right now. Time to treat everyone EQUALLY. If you don't have what it takes, you shouldn't be admitted.
Like veteran's preference?
Yeah?:
For someone who was willing to take a bullet for you, he or she should be given preferential treatment. You have a problem with that? That is a little different from someonw who just happens to be born a little darker than others.
Veterans get preferences because they're recognized to have better disipline and leadership skills than your average civilian. They've already been filtered through "work experience." These are attributes that can be changed and thus are ok to be judged.
Stupid analogy. Veterans have performed a service to their country and have earned preferential treatment. The color of your skin or ethnicity isn't earned and no one has a choice of that.
This should prove to be Interesting. When Sotomayer was on the State Court she presided over an appeal of a # of white Firemen who were contesting a decision. Seems they and their minority co-workers all took a test for advancement. None of the minority firemen passed the test so the state declared the test void. When the White firemen who passed brought it up to the state courts Sotamayer denied their claim, saying that it wasn't reverse discrimination.
It wasn't?
I never heard about that. Oh well, it happend.....I dislike her guts now.....all of you know why I didn't say the ha word :P
I believe the original statement was about preferential treatment. Yeah brings up a good point. Being admitted because of veteran status is in fact applying a preference for a particular group. This is what happens when people think in absolutes.
So I ask you, as a veteran, what would former military members add to the student body?
MarineDoc- as a vet my self, we offer many things Ted or Summer right out of mom and dads house. Leadership, dedication, quick problem solving, etc.... list goes on....
Oh and cash up front for school. ;)
Marine, if you are truely a Marine, you would know the answer to that question. The issue of veterans preferance is actually based on the fact that time served and rank aquired attributes to curriculum hrs (transferable to most universities) in the field of duties performed. Therefore, the veteran not only has a previous GPA and acceptance test scores to contribute towards his entrance, but curriculum hours already attained through service.
Your post only confimes the old saying, "You can always tell a marine...you just can't tell them much."
I am a veteran as well so I know what the preference is. The veteran's preference isn't just for schools it's also for jobs. I get five points for my service. I get those points whether or not my service has anything to do with the job I'm applying for. My service and experience comes out in my resume and interview so why do employers have to give me extra special treatment?
I'm not against it, I'm just saying that the points are because I'm assumed to have something to add a non veteran can't. It's the same for UT and the use of race as a means to add diversity. I don't know how UT does it, but in Grutter, the U of M law school used minority status as a plus factor because it was assumed a minority candidate would have something to add. I don't really see a difference. I do with the Gratz case.
Veteran is a gimme the state gives to those who have PAID a little more already. It is race neutral and doesn't judge Texans on the basis of something they had no control over and didn't work for. If we quit this then the best and brightest will benefit no matter what race and so will the state.
Janine You forget to mention in that Ct firefighters lawsuit went to the supreme court where Sotomeyer's decision was overturn and the firefighters won their lawsuit! How convenience that you only told half the story.
Sotomayor has not demonstrated the ability e to vote on this appropriately because of her minority status which used this affirmative action to get her through elite colleges with little to nothing to pay for it (which she did do). Yes, she is smart enough and able to make good choices, except in the discrimination areas where her prejudice appear to come out (as pointed out with Janine 's post # 4.5. Being smart enough does not mean that one will do what is morally right, and Sotomayor has demonstrated that already. Jamie’s comment above in post # 4.5 says it well about Sotomayor’s flip- flopping decisions that actually does in deed discriminate, esp. in firemen's case . I think Sotomayor was a very poor selection and handed the job because she comes from a minority group (Latino background that might possibly receive more Latino's support later on. Obama seems to have a problem dealing with his selections with reverse discrimination as well, which is just as bad, esp. from a leader. He appears to fill the positions with way too many minorities when others with more experience and skills could possibly be a more appropriate choice for nomination for this time around. Maybe later after far more experience, Sotomayor could possibly be a better potential nominee. Go through Obama's list and take a closer look at his selections in regards to racial backgrounds.
To gideb114 (post # #4.12):
To quote you:
And just how did Sotomeyer's vote in regards to that decision??? I was under that she did not vote in favor of the Firemen's test where none of the black population passed the test . Or did she recuse herself?
@AK,
I don't know why you seem to be taking such a confrontational attitude. I'm merely asking a question (and yes, I am truly a U.S. Marine).
That's absolute horse@!$%#. Unless when you say "most universities" you mean for profit votech schools or diploma mills.
Not even close. Have you actually been to University?
I don't know anything about that saying...but you completely missed the point of my original post. Veterans, like students who may gain acceptance to university through affirmative action bring a wide range experiences to the student body, which in turn often adds to and enhances the overall experience.
@GimDan, yes very many bring those things to University...but not every veteran is a leader.
If she has the qualification,money,and ability to go to college she should be allowed..Shouldn't matter if she's white,yellow,or what is now known as afro american..American is american period.
G White, 100% correct. I will just reiterate it, AMERICAN IS AMERICAN. That is what should determine if a person gets priority in colllege applications. We are giving preference to all NATIONALITIES now, as opposed to race, and because of this, a lot of FOREIGN nationals are getting preference to our own students, as they have more money, and our politicians are insisting we need to support so many underpriviledged students, from third world countries, all in the name of diversity. And they are using Affirmative Action to get this accomplished. As if we don't have enough underpriviledged students in our own country, of ALL races.
People: take the word "race" off all applications, and start considering the persons academic excellence, as it once was. There are many black, white, red, and yellow students in this country that are being given an unfair advantage over their peers, not because of their academic standards, but because of the color of their skin. It is time for this nation to get back to the excellent standards we used to have, when a student had to have outstanding marks in their formative years, to even consider college.
The key is judging based on accomplishments, not race, gender, etc. Its ok to judge based on what you've made of yourself but not on how you started. Personally, if I was awarding scholarship money to which students I think will do the most with my "investment", I'd be more impressed by somebody who moderately passed "the test" who started in a toilet school than somebody who started in an elite school and still only did marginally better. Its more than the breaks you got. Its what you did with them.
I once got invited based on SAT scores to stanford(for a tour). My grades SUCKED!!! I was in the top 20% of the school and I was a freshman. I personally think we need education reform. My grades sucked because I was bored, and many poeple droped out for the same reason....
What's being implied by the student in the suit is that those admitted were not qualified to be there. Every school in the nation including Stanford, Northwestern, UCLA, Harvard, etc. admit students with a range of GPA's and SAT scores. She whines that minority students admitted had lower GPA's than she did. I'm sure there were quite a few who had higher GPA's, and there were a number of what she considers non-minority students who had lower GPA's. She's making an assumption that the reason she wasn't admitted was based on the color of her skin.
She was eventually admitted to LSU--apologies to any alumni, I'm sure it's a fine school, but that's not exactly one of the academically elite schools in the U.S.--despite what those NCAA promo's say at half-time.
But let's discuss GPA for a moment. During my senior year, my high school was one of the top 20 public schools in the country, my graduating class had 6 students who had perfect SAT scores (yes...perfect--no I was not one of them). Getting a B in some courses at my school would have earned a student an A at a school two towns over. Universities weight GPA's based on school and course difficulty (which kid has the better GPA, the kid who took 4 years of science, math and advanced humanities and got A's and B's--or the kid who padded his GPA with woodshop, and cooking who got all A's?). Comparing GPA's would be more relavent if all the schools in the country worked on a national standard.
The very wealthy and famous use nepotism to get their offspring into whatever schools they choose. We have at least one recent former U.S. President who benefitted...and you know, I think he lives in Texas now.
Who?
Frosty that would be the real start to ending race as a consideration in anything. How many different classifications are there now on the census form 6 maybe 8? A lot of my friends don't know what to put now their fathers race, their mothers race and I just love non hispanic white as a race. What would the government and all the groups whose only existence depends on dividing us do if next time we all chose the last one "other"
When you are a teen - everything sucks, because you essentially have nothing to do, except go to school, stay out of trouble and let Mom 'n Dad take care of the clean up.
Surprise, surprise ... about the time you actually have to start take responsibly for your future. All that Suckage starts bouncing back in your face. Colleges start asking what you did for 12 years... other than complain that Everything sucked.
Been there, done that. Go the program and the T-shirt... I was there Dude! Screw it, I'm gonna turn Pro doing extreme sports. Wait, I can't afford the medical care...
But, I'm white - I'm supposed to go to college. Just because I didn't take things serirously for 12 years is not a good reason to punish me for that now.
Damn those minorities ... they's taking our jobs...
Didn't I see that on South Park?
Can't even get a job flipping burgers, Johnny can't read the manual which tells you how to start the grill, program the temperatures as it goes through the conveyor belt. Its,'s not your fault that you are a hands on, OJT kind'a guy ... if someone could show me how to do it - I can do the job.
So what if I don't read so well, spell so well or talk so fancy...
Damn, minorities - they get all the breaks.
I thought the problem had been addressed some time ago with the Bakke case but maybe that reverse discrimination with regard to admission to a professional school (Cal Davis Medical School) differs from undergraduate reverse discrimination.
It was also settled in the Michigan case, but university officials said they would defy the ruling and continue to do as they please. It is up to the Attorney General to enforce the law, but Eric Holder is a Democrat.
The Bakke case goes with the Grutter v. Bollinger case. The other affirmative action case was Gratz v. Bollinger. Both Grutter and Gratz were about entrance preferences at the University of Michigan (Grutter was law school and Gratz was undergrad).
In Grutter, the law school admissions dean reviewed every single application and used race as a plus factor when considering applicants. The plus was for diversity of the student population. It was held constitutional because it wasn't weighted heavily. Just like me, I got a plus on my law school application because I was ex-military. I know, because I took Constitutional Law II from the admissions dean who did it. The point is that if you have two people, perfectly equal, except one is racially different then most of your class you can use that as a factor, because diversity in the student population is a compelling educational interest (that's a compacted statement read the opinion for a full discussion).
In Gratz, the University of Michigan undergrad admissions had a formula for admittance. You needed something like 130 points and you were in. It's been awhile since I read the case so I don't remember the specifics of the ranking system, but the outcome was that a diversity student, simply for being non-white, received 20 points on the scale. Which, due to the way the system was weighted, was considered to be almost an auto-admit. It wasn't a plus factor, it was determinative.
The difference is one system checked every application and hand selected applicants to create the best student body they could. The other system weighted race so heavily it was a primary factor. Grutter was held constitutional. Gratz was held unconstitutional.
From the article, which is pretty bad, it looks like they are challenging Grutter on the grounds that the racial makeup of schools has changed and that using race as a plus factor to achieve diversity is no longer a compelling educational interest (all race based laws get strict scrutiny). I don't know how UT does their admissions, but I would have rather gone under Gratz. As it stands, their case is based upon convincing a court the school doesn't know what type of student population it wants.
Both of these cases were decided in 2003 so I don't know what Eric Holder has to do with it.
The Bakke decision settled the question of numerical QUOTAS, which are now illegal. Affirmative action, as long as there are no numbers stated is legal.
Diversity yeah riiiight=Politically Correct BULL$H*T!
Another random thought: I guess some people are more equal than others.
Cal - Davis...
Ain't that full of Asian... with 5.0 grade averages? How are you gonna get in Cal Davis or Cal Berkely?
Damn minorities!
Reverse Racism is an oxymoron. There is no such thing. Racism is racism whether it is used to favor one or discriminate against one. Our constituion forbids it and the 2003 Supreme Court Decision violated our constitutional principles. Race and gender shopuld not be an issue for Admissions boards. The best performance should be the only issue.
"The best performance should be the only issue"
Oh, and legacy, athletic ability, ability to pay (yes, money still talks), etc., etc. It also helps if you attended a private prep school rather than a public high school, no matter how excellent the school, and regardless of your scores. There are so many factors that go into these application decisions and most of them are not "fair".
For a private university that could be Okay. For a state supported university to offer extra admission points for anything other than military service in choosing between citizens of the same state is wrong. First if Texans support the school then Texans are who the school should service. People from other countries are welcome to slots not taken by Texans. No scholarships or grants funded by the people of Texas should be given to anyone from outside of Texas.
Hey Trent - FYI Ronald Reagan was the president that signed AA into law. Who's the idiot now?
Why should Military get a break... they are all retards anyway. Going to fight a war in some Jacked up country for freedom some place else. They had it easy..
Damned soldiers - they got it so easy. Get out with GI bill II benefits... I coulda' gone too, if it weren't for a few warrants and being busted for drugs... they need to legalize drugs - everyone is doing it, no need to pretend they ain't.
Ruken
Its necessary to those that advocate allowing less academically qualified citizens to attend our more challenging universities and sending more academically qualified citizens to universities with less of an academically challenging program.
"The notion of a special month for black history may be hurting rather than helping efforts for racial equality, Freeman believes. When Wallace wonders whether racist attitudes may be harder to eradicate without the education that Black History Month provides, Freeman retorts: “How are we going to get rid of racism? Stop talking about it!”...Morgan Freeman
Couldn't of said it better myself, enough with the special treatment already aren't we all "equal"?
exactly, well said
My fear is that our right wing SCOTUS will take this as an opportunity to reinstate racial segregation. If so the aftermath probably won't be a pretty sight.
realy....on an isue that blurs party lines, you bring up that.....and considering that Clarence Thomass is a black conservative..... stereo typers.....
Well I can understand why Texans south of the Nueces river where I live have a problem with percentages in school When they have been conditioned to think 80% of the population of some towns is a minority and 20% is a majority how can you expect them to understand?
You ' da man... Homey. Preach it - Brother!
Good to see that a few of you folks can see the light. "dat's da reel Shizzle"
Well said Rob! I also think this applies to the Law in CA to study contributions made to society by homosexuals....really? Why can't they just study great contributions made to society! Kids don' study their President's based on their sex life or ecology on how things mate (but probably will in the future in the direction this country is going). Instead I think they need to bring a stronger social studies to turn this feeling around in this country that the "government" will provide/do for me & a stronger sense of country's patriotism instead of individualizm. February should celebrate all races - it's what our country is made up of. We could call it History Month. We all have a history/heritage that remind us of how far we've come.
@ Rob - I love Morgan Freeman. He's a great actor and I really like the science shows he narrates. I think he's spot on here. Racism will only disappear when people quit bringing it up.
To quote "The point is she shouldn't have to apply at another school if she was more qualified than someone else who was admitted at Austin." Thank you Road Warrior
Agreed and isn't that the whole point? It's who is most qualified - plain and simple. But no, we have to suffer through affirmative action where minorites are "given" the position/appointment, etc, based on conditions other than most qualified. "Treat everyone equally"
No more RACISM! This is 2012, wake up! This should be a non-issue. Once again the courts time will be taken up for a non-issue. What a waste of time.
It seems most everyone is agreement here. Racism and bigotry will probably always exist in America. But when a person of color is elected to the highest office in the country, I say it's time to stop giving preferential treatment to any race. It shows that generally, with hard work and discipline a person in this country can attain any goal they put their minds to, regardless of race.
We can't change what's in people's hearts, but we can remove institutionalized racism and make it illegal for any government entity, or anyone receiving federal dollars to use race in consideration for placement in schools and jobs. Time to end affirmative action and preferential treatment based on race. There is no race that is inferior or superior to another. People of one race don't need a little extra help to attain the same level of success as another race. We are all equals in potential, and it's time we were treated as equals.
Mitty, racism is alive and well in the US. The election of a black president hasn't done a thing for race relations. If anything, we are more divided now by race and status than we've been in many years.
Considering that whoever didn't like Obama was called a racist....witch in itself proved that many poeple voted for him based on race......
Janine,
I realise all that. It's really not our government's position to make sure everyone is nice to everyone else though. What they can do is make sure that there is no discrimination in job and school placement wherever federal money is spent. They need to stop deciding who needs to be put at the back of the line, because their race, gender, or nation of origin makes them privileged.
Trent,
Good point. And you still see it in political commentary, even political debate. People are labeled as racist because they disagree with Obama's political idealogy and/or policies.
How about in 2016 we blur out the presidentail candidate if they are all not the same color. It would fix that problem right up.
Take all the boxes off all federal and state forms that designate race and racism will end of its own accord. As it is my friends get to choose between mother's race and father's race. They always choose the minority because that gives them a better shot at whatever they are after. Nobody is stupid after all.
A compartmentalized application process should be used. A person should send an application to a desk jockey with their name and race only present on the cover and possibly in their accolades. The desk jockey should then remove any identifying materials from the application (affirming all the accolades to be legitimate and making a copy with name absent) and assign it a serial number. That serial number should then be scrutinized by a different person who has no idea what race or even gender the applicant is. That way persons are chosen simply on their merit as a person and the potential they bring to the college. No race. No gender. No discrimination. After all, how can the admissions commission possibly discriminate against applicant E3772H49IJ4? People should be admitted based on their accomplishment. Period.
Terror,
I think you are right. When I was in college not long ago one professor of mine was part of a selection committee looking at possible new hires to the School of Finance. All the relevant identifying data was redacted. They made their rankings on merit. According to my professor, when the documents had name, race, and sex put back onto the CVs by the university admin it became obvious they got it wrong. He, my professor, said they essentially inverted the rankings so that #43 became #1, and so on, so that two women, one of which was a racial minority, and one racial minority male, could be offered positions.
And you know what was so funny about the story, anecdotal and second hand as it is? The three offered positions refused them because they had far better option at better schools. One went to Stanford, one to Berkeley, the other I can't remember. They were not in the top 40 out of 43 applicants to my state school, but because of their minority status (one fairly presumes) they got to teach at an even better place.
Now, to bring this full circle, most people understand that the caliber of college graduates has been on the decline, on average anyhow, for many years. Could it be that our race towards mediocrity is a consequence of our desire in the academy to seek "proper" outcomes?
Why should race even be anywhere on the application in the first place?
The plantiff assumes that
a) she wasn't admitted in favor of a minority
b) said minority had lower grades/scores than she
What proof does she had that she would've been admitted in the first place? Further, what proof does she have that a minority was admitted in her stead?
argue - Demographics in 50 years will be that most Americans will be "some shade of brown". Be careful what you wish for.
Arguesforsport,
Court mandated demographic percentages for state run schools. It has been that way for many years. I first remember hearing about it in medical schools.
I'm 64 and it was already part of admissions when I graduated from school.
Yes, and where is this proof since grades and test scores are confidential? Did she interview the incoming freshman class? Did she implement a survey? Or did she know someone on the admission committee who informed her of this? I myself would sue if my academic information was used without my knowledge to prove a self manufactured point.
Having been a "victim" of affirmative action myself, I too say the practice has served its purpose and is time to abolish the use of it. Use of such things as affirmative action only serve to perpetuate racism. By its design it favors some races over others. Race, religion, gender, and age should have no bearing on admissions, promotions, or hiring unless the job or position has specific needs or requirements. I once got passed over 14 times in one year for promotion because I was a white male. Some may say it could have been because others were more qualified. To them I say, the person responsible for making the decisions told me a few months after I left the company that I was passed due to the companies need to fulfill requirements of an affirmative action program. I was told the company never even looked at my applications because they knew I was a white male. Merit should be the guideline for acceptance to any higher learning institution.
Maybe it was ok for one generation to jumpstart the equality movement. But these are the children of the people who got the break the first time if they still need help it didn't work and never will.
Having been the victim of discrimination, I say it's time to abolish the practice.
When you still have racism in public schools in Texas, with funding issues being fought over in court all the time (Texas is under several injunctions for not supporting minority schools equally), then how do you treat people equally who come out of unequal schools because of government decisions?
If you give bonuses, which UT does, for exxtracurricular activities, then how do graduates from underfunded schools fare when there is no money to support those extracurricular activities? If some local schools offer foreign languages, but schools in poor districts do not, how is giving exgtra credit for foreign languages a fair thing to those who come out of underfunded schools?
I have concerns over any system if it consistently knocks out one race, which the UT admisisons system did before the courts insisted on affirmative action policies to remedy that. Maybe it is time to do away with it to see if things have changed, but UT consistently has to use affirmative action, because their routine admissions policies highly skew the results to white applicants from affluent school districts.
funding issues being fought over in court all the time (Texas is under several injunctions for not supporting minority schools equally)
the problem in Texas (where I live) is that property taxes are primarily used to fund education. Now your middle and upper class neighborhoods tend to have 1) more expensive homes = higher property taxes and 2) smaller families. Know any middle class families with 8 kids? However, in Texas, we have a large population of poor Hispanics, they live in lower priced homes and accordingly pay smaller property taxes -- but poor Hispanics (not all, but many many) tend to have large families. So you've got fewer property taxes going to fund education in those districts, and more students being enrolled. It's a recipe for disaster. A friend is a principal in a 99% poor Hispanic school district - all the kids (yes, 100%) of the student body is on free breakfast/lunch - and most all of them come from large families (4, 6, 8 kids).
texas needs to change how they fund education and not make it based on property taxes. Perhaps charging the foreign nationals illegally in our state (primarily from Mexico) for the tuition costs of their kids would be a great place to start. You're a foreigner in this country - pay tuition just like at a private school.
Well my (rich) school where 80% of the population is hispanic has to fund another (poor) school where the population is 90% hispanic. I don't think race has much to do with it. Who originally paid the taxes for Texas 48 has more to do with it? And yes all the kids in both districts are on free lunch. The hotels and nightclubs don't have kids to send to school.
Here's a thought - Why don't the poorer hispanic families have fewer children like the middle class families. I know I had two children because that's all I could afford. I didn't except the government to support be if I decided to have more children that I could afford to cloth and feed. Tried of supporting individuals who don't have any personal responsiblity. Don't have children you can't afford. May be if they didn't have so many children they could move to a nicer neighborehood. They made the choice to have a large family and I'm tired of supporting their bad choices.
I don't think it's a 'race' issue Lonereb, as much as it is an issue of poor people having lots of kids (and that applies to all races - i just used the example I'm personally acquainted with here in Texas). Property taxes funding education is just stupid - it certainly creates inequities in funding (although I believe the federal govt kicks in more money to 'underfunded' schools in property poor districts). My middle/upper middle class school district is probably 50% Hispanic and 50% anglo, and they are middle class families with most often 2-3 kids. Go to the west or south side of town, it's 95% poor Hispanic, and the average family size is 6 kids.
Time to end affirmative action!! Yeah!
Jeanine: Why so the system that was set up 125 years ago can come back into effect to keep blacks or anyone of a darker skin tone can be forced away from a good education so some spoil rich kid can have their way?
realy.... a black kid cant be rich and spoiled? that is racism, pure and simple(his comment).....
lol- right on Trent - course Hawk and those like him would say that you are the racist, bigotted one.
But dont you realize, its not racism - hawk is just pointing out the hate and bigotry of everyone else, hawk isnt at all though, nope - everyone is full of hate and bigotry, except ole Hawk there.
Discrimination is ugly in and of itself. There have been past inequities that would certainly have justified the implementation of affirmative action policies. The questions seem to be have we met our goals and is it time to end affirmative action?
It would seem that most institutions of higher education have reflected in their student population, as well as in faculty members, populations of minority groups that mirror numbers found within the general population. This is a positive and lends itself to diversity within the university setting. This is also nothing new and it is the result of affirmative action policies that have been in effect for decades.
It would seem that to continue affirmative action quotas in admissions is in effect a statement that such a process has been a failure. Certainly having minority members on staff as admissions officers is something that was rare in the past and can contribute to fair application of admissions policy.
I believe the time has come to base admissions in large part on merit and not on ethnicity. Additionally, factors such as community service, extracurricular activities, athletic talents, etc. could continue to be factored in. It would seem that essays and interviews that are now a factor at many universities might have to be modified or weighted differently as certainly race might be disclosed in such matters.
It is time that academia puts into practice that which it espouses and denounces racism in all forms.
Oh come on, you know it doesn't mean that, it means they're afraid racism will return if they stop affirmative action. Get real
Doug - Who is "they"? Minorities across the spectrum be they Black, Asian, Hispanic, Gay ... are represented in education, government, entertainment, sports, and other arenas integral to American culture. I am not saying that discrimination no longer takes place. I would assert that it certainly has been minimized and that there exists legal and civil actions to remedy such cases on an individual basis as opposed to a blanket policy that on its face value is discriminatory. You get real!
Schools are still under funded in poor school districts in most states - which is now even worse, with additional funding cuts.
Note that CA is one of the FEW states having a centralized funding mechanism for public schools. But even in CA, one of my kid's roommates - inner city - who made "A"s in high school math, when state tested - had to take remedial math in college. In CA, you can attend any community college, follow a 2 year program to earn basic credits - cheap - and transfer to the Cal State or Univ. of Cal college in your area.
Most states fund public schools with local property taxes - easy to see how a poor area will have less funds with that method. This is part of the problem with lower performing schools. Having lived in Texas, and noting in the article that the University in question only has 25% of incoming Hispanic freshman in a state that is like 50% Hispanic - well, sounds like TX needs "ethnic weighting" to diversify properly.
Cassandra...you might find this interesting:
PISA Scores Show Demography Is Destiny In Education Too—But Washington Doesn't Want You To Know
http://www.vdare.com/articles/pisa-scores-show-demography-is-destiny-in-education-too-but-washington-doesnt-want-you-to-k
the point of that entire thing was???
The problem when speaking about Texas is that what is true in Tarrant or Harris county is not true in Cameron, Hidalgo or Willacy counties. For example the Brownsville school district, the one with the shooting, people were up in arms about the racist cops shooting the minority kid. News Flash everybody at the scene was hispanic kids, teachers and cops because the city is 90% hispanic and always has been. Don't believe me read the custodial death report from the state it is on the Brownsville Herald web site. Every other city and town in the four county area also varies between 75% and up hispanic population except in January and Febrary .
I wonder how many "white" applicants didn't have better scores or grads than Ms. Fisher. It seems her entire argument is that her grades and scores were better than every "minority" candidate that was accepted by the University. What is she going to do when she gets rejected by an employer. Ms. Fisher, it's going to happen regardless how well you think you are qualified.
It's funny when we speak about affirmative action we forget about white women who are by far the most benificiaries to the policy. As white women benefited, so did white families because household income increased. If we have to speak about AA negatively, please remember a group of people who were apart of its use.
I wonder if she was competitive enough to be admitted in the first place? At highly selective institutions, it usually is not a question of whether someone is qualified to be admitted or not. Rather, those institutions, because they have too many qualified applicants to fill the spots that they have open, HAVE TO discriminate (I use the word knowing people will attack it) somehow. As long as legacy status, needs of athletic departments, state quotas and many other such measures are employed in admission, I think Affirmative Action is fine.
Did you read the story? She was competitive. Affirmative Action is wrong. It's just another liberal law. Why should someone with the same grades, test scores, extracurriculars, etc who just happens to be a minority get an extra bump over a non-minority? They shouldn't. Merit should be the only measure. Higher education is not a social justice tool though that is what is has become. It should exist to educate those who are qualified to be there. Period.
Clearly you've benefited or can benefit from A.A. otherwise you wouldn't be ok being discriminated against. You want equality but punish the most deserving because their race? The liberals want to punish those who have worked hard at succeeding and take away from them to spread to the masses. Why!?
I did read the story, did you? Where does it say that she was competitive enough to be admitted to UT Austin (a highly selective institution)?
Affirmative action is just as "right" as legacy, donor-status, athletic contributions etc. For highly selective institutions, a strict meritocracy does not work. The differences in high schools, grading scales, programs, offerings etc. make that methodology impossible to implement from a practicality standpoint.
Wrong Rob. I was admitted to a highly selective institution because I busted my butt in high school and did what I was supposed to do to make myself the most competitive applicant for admission. My school saw me as just another white applicant as far as my race went. Sorry to bust your bubble.
"many other such measures" Name some.
Sub-dude: I already mentioned legacy status, athletic departmental preferences and state quotas. Other areas are non-academic departmental needs (band, art, etc.) that have little to do with academic performance. Geographic consideration (a school say in Florida with one applicant from Wyoming, they will take a second look at that student if they're strong enough) major/area-specific admission (so for example, if someone applied to Engineering but has never had Calculus and got a D in Algebra II, should they be admitted because they had straight As in everything else? No because strength in math is essential for Engineering). Big donors can also weigh in on an applicant's chances.
My point is that schools look for a lot of different things from their students beyond academics. They want to find students that fit all parts of the school, so they have a preference towards students that meet those needs. Highly selective institutions have to tell people no, even when they're qualified because they simply do not have enough space. Only whining about affirmative action dismisses every other discriminatory behavior highly selective schools have to employ so that they don't admit more students than they can house/teach/feed/etc.
it got to the supreme court, enough proof for you?
First we need to get rid of the idea that white=rich it doesn't. There are many working class white students and these are the ones that suffer. The rich kids go to private universities and Ivy league colleges. The state universities were set up for those same working class kids under a land grant program from the government. That is why they all teach either agriculture or ROTC it is part of the payback for the land. They should not take into consideration whether one citizen is more equal than another.
Trent - She was applying to UT Austin, from Texas. They admit everyone that applies in the top 10% of their high school class. Obviously she wasn't competitive enough to be admitted. Just because something goes to the Supreme Court doesn't mean that it's true. Plessy v Ferguson did too.
Lonereb - I understand your point, public universities should focus on the state they're in. At the same time, for a highly selective school like UT Austin, they HAVE to turn people away, even if they're qualified. I don't understand why people do not get this point.
The Obamas attended American universities - as affirmative action students.
Now we have an Affirmative Action POTUS.
I suppose affirmative action took their exams and wrote their papers for them too? How do you function on a daily basis?
Sadly, he functions as best he can ... and in the case of the mutterings voiced above - He was actually exceeding, by a great margin, his upper limits. Speech doesn't necessarily indicate a level of higher consciousness. Mimicry provides a simulation of awareness and communication that maybe confusing.
Affirmitive Action has been a wonderful program for teaching minorities that they are inferior and cannot do anything on their own. It has also been a great program for dividing the country into manipulatable fations.
Amen.
yep Affirmative action has outlived itself. There was a time for this the 60's 70's and the 80's, but if people chose not to take advantage of the hand up and the leg up, then they let themselves down.
This is not an issue of the poor not getting a fair shake, this is an issue of dumbing down society to make those who can't keep up feel better about themselves. Sorry, but when I go to ER for emergency treatment I NEED to know that I am getting good quality care from someone who knows their stuff. I do not want care from the bottom of the barrel who just barely scraped by.
We are feeling the effects of that now with our sitting president. He was at the bottom of his class too. To bad he didn't major in economics.
Ronald Reagan majored in Economics - in NorCal, he got a "C" average. And it showed. He cut taxes but not spending, and caused a terrible deficit mess, second only to Bush 2. Hate to break it to you, but having to use an ER doc - you may just be getting a resident, or one who would rather not deal with an actual practice. They can of course initially dx you, order tests, and refer you to a specialist.
It appears some think that gang-bangers are getting dibs over some Caucasian ASB star?? These kids are all close in abilities, and our Cali top schools would be half Asian American kids if admission was strictly on test scores. But those with an Asian ethnic background are less than 25% of CA. The UC schools require a GPA of 3.8, as a rule of thumb - but other factors have to be considered.
Cassandra
The Democrats controlled the House during Reagan's Presidency. He made a deal with Tip O'Neil to raise taxes if the Democrats cut spending. He did,they didn't. Same with the Amnesty. He made a deal with Tip O'Neil he would grant Amnesty if the Border was Secured. He did,they didn't.
I would dare to say alot of you are out of touch. Just like someone stated white does not equal rich. Well, minority does not equal poor. When you apply for FAFSA, there isn't a section on race. However, there is a section on income. My parents made too much money for me to qualify for scholarships since most were need based. Now, I am helping my sister get into college and ALL of the scholarships are need based even merit scholarships. So I would say a white kid whose parents is making less than the threshold whose EOC is 0 will receive the most from PELL. On the otherhand, a minority child whose parents makes over the threshold gets loans. So stop whining. I have student loans like everyone else. Stop giving me this poor is me crap, and the one minority as well on top of 50 whites beat me.
frances-283318
We are feeling the effects of that now with our sitting president. He was at the bottom of his class too. To bad he didn't major in economics.
ARE YOU F'NG SERIOUS! You racists a$$ morons are EVERYWHERE you turn! good thing you use a fake name and NO picture. Soo sick of YOU PEOPLE!
Ya ... right. And still manages to clean up the messes left over from the former occupant. If he is an idiot, what label (low enough) can be used to characterize the mental midget and puppet master that preceded him.
Its not PC to call GW retarded... he wasn't clinically diagnosed. But it's what he was called, by the public - in muted tones - when ever he made yet another gaff, in public policy or response to yet another disaster which were made worse by his inaction or bumbling, stumbling "fixes".
Being born on the East coast ( Walker's Point, Maine )... I wondered why he affected a Texas accent. Best I could come up with - he used it as camouflage. You are allowed to appear slow talking, dim-witted and weak minded... if you talk with a Texas drawl. A perfect affectation for GW.
Well said.
That's what the Indians thought when they rescued the Pilgrims, taught them to fish, hunt, farm - survive in the New World. What they got in return were reservations, diseases and near annilation... then were discounted shamed with lables of disgust and deemed savages.
That broken record is classic Golden Oldie material.
Ok... a few Hispanic/Black students were admitted - with lower grade averages, etc. The next question is were there any white Student admissions where their grades were lower that hers?
I wonder why on sports teams (fully realizing some of you will not "get" this point...) who want bigger, stronger, faster, taller, quicker - athletes to maximize the chances of their team to have an advantage over the other team. Never the less still have players like Moses Malone who is (or was) one of the shortest Professional basket ball players on a major team?
I'm pretty sure some guy; possibly a foot taller than he, wonders why they couldn't get his position? So far, I haven't seen any sensible player bring up the suggestion that the Coach was discriminating against him by giving "his" spot to the short guy!
What I do see, is any number of second guessing - wanna be's who want to raise the specter of "reverse racism" as the reason they didn't make the cut, calling into question why a choice, made by the institution who is dedicated to finding the best selection according to nuances which the cry-baby can't or won't see ... to give the position to someone else.
The point is, you never can tell the abilities of a player on statistics alone. If you narrow the selection down to only those who, by the numbers, are expected to succeed - then you will miss a lot Steven Hawkings, Albert Einstein's ... 'cause by the numbers - they are not expected to lead.
She needs to accept that "cherry Picking" who made the cut, is not just about the numbers she wants to hold up, nor should she be allowed to point a finger at a whole class of students when the criteria was actually based on individual potential, aptitude - "How much did you do with what you had available". From what I know, someone blind, deaf, poor ... who never the less came to a university with a 3.99 average, may be a better student than someone who attended the best schools, College prep, enriched environment ... all their life. Coming to College with "Only" a 4.2 average. They could have, they had the potential to do much better... but didn't! Its as if they went only as far, expended just enough effort to make enough to feel entitled.
Hand made rug weavers, it is said, will purposely put a flaw in what may have been a flawless carpet... because in their traditions, only God creates perfection, and they feel that seeking to displace him is blasphemous.
Obviously... little miss perfect has another idea. A cheap shot at perfection, with out maximum effort is OK with her.
To support AA, is to support discrimination of someone else. It is wrong which ever direction it goes. Just because someone is Black, they should not be given the keys to the city for nothing. This is the same thing as Affirmative Action!