CATHERINE JUN/Daily Bruin Christina
Navoa, a fourth-year UC Riverside student, celebrates the
repeal of SP-1 and 2 at the Board of Regents meeting in San
Francisco.
By Shauna Mecartea and Kelly
Rayburn
Daily Bruin Reporters
After some 11th-hour revising, the UC Board of Regents
unanimously passed RE-28 and repealed SP-1 and SP-2 Wednesday at
its meeting at UC San Francisco.
Student Regent Justin Fong and Regent William Bagley, long-time
advocates of affirmative action, supported the measure, along with
Regent Ward Connerly, SP-1 and 2’s original proponent.
“(RE-28) says “˜Now, therefore, be it resolved that
SP-1 and SP-2 are rescinded by this resolution’ ““ those
are the words we were looking for,” said Assembly Speaker
Robert Hertzberg, a regent by virtue of his office. “The
welcome mat is back.”
Earlier in the week, Fong planned to propose an alternative item
to RE-28, because he said the measure was ambiguous.
But due to a last-minute alteration in the text of RE-28,
Fong’s alternate item was no longer necessary, he said after
the vote.
“I want to make this very, very clear to the students who
have fought against SP-1 that this is a huge victory,” Fong
said of RE-28.
In 1995, the board passed SP-1 and 2 by 14-10 and 15-10 votes,
respectively, ending the use of affirmative action in admissions,
hiring and contracting throughout the university.
A year later, California voters passed the Connerly-backed
Proposition 209, amending the state constitution to end affirmative
action in all state entities. Thus, the repeal of SP-1 and 2 is
mostly symbolic.
Earlier this month, the board announced that a repeal of SP-1
and 2 would be on the agenda for Wednesday’s meeting. RE-28,
in its original form, was subsequently released.
But whereas the original text said RE-28 “Superseded SP-1
and SP-2,” the final text of RE-28 called the item a
“Resolution Rescinding SP-1 and SP-2.”
Also, a clause stating that some students at the university
“have expressed pride in knowing that they were admitted on
the basis of their own accomplishment” since the
implementation of SP-1 ““ which many students found
inappropriate ““ was removed.
Fong said the clause implied that minority students admitted
under affirmative action were not admitted because of their own
accomplishments, and that this was “simply not
true.”
There is also language ending the “two-tiered”
admissions criteria mandated in SP-1, by which 50-75 percent of all
students must be admitted by academic criteria alone.
Along with Fong, Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, a regent by virtue of
his office, said he would not have voted for the item had changes
not been made. The item may or may not have had the necessary votes
to pass without any revisions, Bustamante said.
With the passage of RE-28, the systemwide Academic Council was
given full power to research admissions policies and bring forth
recommendations before the end of the year. Without the 50-75
percent clause, admissions policies have more flexibility.
The Academic Council is currently reviewing the
“two-tiered” system to see if the percentage could be
narrowed or completely eliminated to install a comprehensive
admissions policy, said Michael Cowan, chair of the Academic
Council.
According to Cowan, the measures undertaken by the Academic
Council will be thoroughly researched before brought to the board
for approval.
“The faculty always moves deliberately and
carefully,” Cowan said.
More than 100 protesters supporting the repeal, who were
skeptical about the original draft of RE-28, cheered the passing of
the item after learning of its text changes.
Many of the protesters journeyed from UCLA to San Francisco in
vans that left Tuesday night. Running on little or no sleep, the
protesters stood outside the meeting, chanting “SP-1 has got
to go,” and “This is what diversity looks
like.”
One of the students making that trip was Ingrid Gonzales, a UCLA
alumna now working in the Student Retention Center.As a Pilipina
immigrant, Gonzales said she understood the struggles
underrepresented students overcame to get into a UC school. Simple
cultural differences gave Gonzales’ classmates reason to
tease her for the way she dressed or the accent in her speech.
“Because I was the Asian student in the class, or in the
whole school,” she said.
Inside, Bagley said the passing of RE-28 will better the
UC’s reputation by eliminating the usage of the university as
a political vehicle.
Bagley asked future regents to “please reject all who
would use the university for or against political or ideological
advancements.”
Connerly also voiced support for the measure, but for slightly
different reasons. Connerly said he cast an affirmative vote so
that the regents could move on, leaving the use of race in
admissions and the negativity surrounding SP-1 in the past. But he
added that there was nothing wrong with SP-1 itself.
“We’re extending the olive branch,” he said,
on behalf of himself and those regents sharing his views on SP-1.
“Hell, we’re extending the whole damn olive
tree.”
The basic tenets of SP-1 remain in place because of Proposition
209, Connerly added.
“When some of those students sober up tomorrow,
they’ll probably realize California law still exists,”
he said.
Gov. Gray Davis, a regent by virtue of his position, was not
present at the meeting, but he said in a statement: “I
believe the university should reach out to all deserving students
regardless of their race or ethnicity. I commend all the regents
and the Academic Senate for their efforts to reach that
goal.”
Before the vote there was a period of time designated for public
comment, during which students, professors, and California
legislators voiced their concerns. Most of the students who spoke
demanded the repeal of SP-1 and many went so far as to say that
RE-28 was not enough, calling the item “half-stepping”
and “too timid.”
“To whoever presented RE-28: do you think we’re
ignorant? Do you think we cannot read between the lines?”
said UC Riverside student Martha Escobar. “The fact is that
you’re not repealing SP-1 at all.”
But Fong said many of these students who voiced disapproval of
RE-28 were probably unaware of the changes that had been made in
the item is text the night before.
Fong said amendments were made throughout the night as well as
the early morning.
UCLA alumnus Daniel Rego was one of the few speakers to offer
support for SP-1.
“Treat us as what we are ““ individuals,” Rego
said. “Don’t categorize us by race.”
California state legislators voiced their support for the
recently passed ARC-21, a legislative decision recommending that
the regents repeal SP-1 and 2. Many also commended the last minute
changes in RE-28’s text.
“I graduated from UC Berkeley in 1965,” said
Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg. “And this is the first time
I’ve been inside a regents meeting,” implying that she
had protested outside of regent meetings in the past.
“I will go right back outside if I need to ““ and
until last night, I thought I was going to have to.”
EVENTS LEADING TO THE REPEAL OF SP-1, 2
The regents’ policies have been a topic of controversy
since their enactment in 1995. SP-1, SP-2 passed by the
regents, ending the use of affirmative action in admissions and
hiring through-out the university of California California voters
approve Proposition 209, ending affirmative action in the state
SP-1,2 go into effect First class admitted without affirmative
action; the number of underrepresented minorities drops 89 UCLA
students arrested in a protest against the end of affirmative
action State Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, Assemblyman Marco
Firebaugh introduce ACR 21 asking the UC Regents to repeal SP-1 ACR
21 adopted as a resolution Text of RE-28 released, stating it will
"supersede" SP-1,2 The night before the meeting, the regents reword
RE-28 to "rescind" SP-1, 2 UC Board of Regents unanimously repeals
SP-1, SP-2; passes RE-28 SOURCE: Daily Bruin Archives Original
graphic by ADAM BROWN/Daily Bruin Web adaptation by MONICA
KWONG/Daily Bruin Senior Staff