Race-Based Left-Wing Bigotry
Longhorn Discrimination
By Edward Blum
January 22, 2004
The rivalry between the Lone Star State's flagship universities --
Texas A&M and the University of Texas -- is about to grow more
intense. And no, it's not football we're talking about here; it's
something far more important to our state and nation: It is the way we
want our children judged in their pursuit of a college education.
At issue is the use of race and ethnicity in the admissions process at
Texas A&M and the University of Texas. Last month, Texas A&M announced
it will not consider a student's skin color and ethnic heritage during
the admissions process, while UT announced its intention to do just
the opposite. For those of us who believe that one's race and
ethnicity should not be a factor in whether a student is admitted or
rejected to college, A&M's decision was the correct choice. On the
other hand, UT's decision to begin using racial and ethnic preferences
in 2005 after nearly a decade of colorblind admissions, is not only
morally wrong but will undoubtedly trigger more costly and polarizing
lawsuits.
The law in these matters is now settled. Although the U.S. Supreme
Court's recent decision in the Univeristy of Michigan cases allows
schools to use preferences for the next 25 years in order to achieve
racial "diversity," the Court specifically stated that admissions
preferences may not be used if race-neutral means have not been
considered first. Since the Texas legislature passed the Top
10-percent plan in 1998 -- a plan that is race-neutral, granting
automatic college admissions to any student graduating in the top-10
percent of his class -- UT has not only considered and employed such
race-neutral alternatives but, most importanty, have successfully
implemeneted them. Racial diversity at UT is higher today without
treating students differently by race than it was when they did.
In spite of this, University of Texas President Larry Faulkner and the
UT Board of Regents have decided to reintroduce racial and ethnic
preferences into the admissions process of the UT system. President
Faulkner claims that because the majority of UT classrooms are not
"diverse," it is necessary to re-introduce preferences for those
applicants not admitted through the Top10-percent plan.
This argument won't pass judgment in a court of law and is little more
than an attempt by UT to recklessly stretch the narrowly allowable use
of racial preferences by the high court. The Supreme Court opinion in
the Michigan cases did not sanction the attempt to achieve
proportional diversity in classrooms, dorms, laboratories, or sports
teams, but rather, "student bodies." Furthermore, social science data
consistently reveals that students admitted to a highly competitive
university like UT with lower grades and SAT scores than average avoid
enrolling in difficult science, engineering, and mathematics classes
-- the very ones that Dr. Faulkner infers are too white (or Asian) and
not racially "diverse" enough.
Nor should the Texas legislature allow this to take place. UT already
has a dismal legal record in civil rights matters, having lost the
1950 landmark Supreme Court case of Sweatt v. Painter, as well as
Hopwood v. Texas in 1996. In both of those cases, UT Law School denied
admission to applicants simply because they had the wrong skin color,
once to a black student and once to a white.
Texas A&M President Robert Gates wisely encouraged the A&M Board of
Regents to reject the use of race in admissions. President Gates said,
"Students at Texas A&M should be admitted as individuals, on personal
merit -- and on no other basis." His willingness to apply a
nondiscriminatory standard makes UT
's position even more untenable, especially in light of fact that A&M
last week dropped their legacy preferences, calling them inconsistent
with merit-based admissions.
It is also likely that the federal Department of Education's Office
for Civil Rights will challenge UT's decision. President Bush
personally strongly supported the use of race-neutral means to achieve
diversity, first as governor and as president. Indeed, the Bush
Administration has pointed to the system UT is now rejecting as a
model approach.
Even though the U.S. Supreme Court allowed universities to use
race-based affirmative action in the admission process for the time
being, they didn't mandate it. Indeed, by establishing a cut-off date
of 2028, the Court recognized these temporary discriminatory policies
to be an aberration to the timeless constitutional principles of equal
rights.
As Dr. Faulkner has publicly noted as far back as 2000, the various
colorblind admissions policies at UT are "functioning well." It would
be a grave moral -- to say nothing of a legal -- mistake for him and
the Board of Regents to abandon them now.
--
Left-wing liberals are EVERYTHING they accuse the right of being. They
are mean, vicious, hateful, greedy, cold-hearted, closed-minded,
selfish, intolerant, bigoted and racist.
.
|
