Monday, November 18, 1996
REGENTS:
Eagerness to implement 209 endangers academic future of
underrepresented studentsDo not accept the UC Regents’ doublespeak
they they can maintain diversity here at UCLA after they delete
their affirmative action policies. Despite their mollifying remarks
(most likely fabricated by public-relations consultants and spin
doctors) the regents are going to homogenize the UC system.
Immediate and aggressive legal campaigns were launched against
Proposition 209 the day it passed. Groups like the Coalition for
Economic Equity are seeking a court order to block Proposition
209’s implementation. As a result, the future of the measure is
uncertain. Meanwhile, Proposition 209 has posed a more immediate
threat to the policies of the UC system. The UC Board of Regents
used the passage of Proposition 209 as an excuse to immediately
implement their July 1995 decision to eliminate UC affirmative
action policies.
The most disturbing thing about the regents’ hasty repeal of
affirmative action is that no new criteria have been created to
ensure ethnic and gender diversity on campus. UC administrators
admit that the criteria must be first determined, then refined over
a period of time. Meanwhile, the academic future of an entire body
of applicants is threatened. UC President Richard Atkinson himself
stated that if the acknowledgment of race and gender is eliminated
from UC admissions policies and not replaced by any other
mechanisms, the number of underrepresented minorities attending UC
will be greatly reduced. Here at UCLA, this reduction could mean a
50 percent to 70 percent cut in the admission of underrepresented
students.
So, how can UC officials maintain that ethnic and gender
diversity is a top priority? By jumping the gun, they are
destroying the possibility of such diversity. This is gross
irresponsibility, pure and simple. Because of the regents’
shortsightedness, the following is a likely scenario: The UC
Regents’ outreach "task force" will report in February 1997. After
that, UC officials will concoct some anemic admissions criteria
which cannot offer the diversity of affirmative action policies.
Then, as they fumble around trying to develop something better,
underrepresented applicants will be shoved aside.
This careless, hurried approach by the regents seems to be
politically driven. After all, they have as their chief a governor
who would be king. Gov. Pete Wilson’s staunch opposition to
affirmative action has provided him with the hot-button issue from
which presidential campaign platforms are constructed. He has
tapped into the current racial climate in California and bolstered
national media attention for himself and the anti-affirmative
action cause. One argument against Proposition 209 is that it
scapegoats ethnic and gender groups which serve to enrich the state
of California. The UC system should be seen as a microcosm of
California, and the impetuous actions of the regents assails the
richness and diversity of our academic experience. Proposition 209
is a tremendous concern. Certainly, it warrants the current media
firestorm. However, do not get so caught up in that firestorm that
you forget that our own school system voted to eliminate
affirmative action before Proposition 209 had even gained enough
signatures to make the November ballot.
The Daily Bruin lacks confidence in the Board’s ability to
maintain diversity here at UCLA. The regents are disturbingly
over-anxious to take Proposition 209 out for a test spin. By not
allowing time for the development of effective admissions criteria,
they are taking a characteristic half-hearted approach to providing
a sound academic future for all applicants.