EDITORIAL BOARD Christine Byrd
 Editor in Chief
Michael Litschi
 Managing Editor
Jonah Lalas
 Viewpoint Editor
Barbara Ortutay
 News Editor
Amy Golod
 Staff Representative
Timothy Kudo
 Staff Representative
Brian O’Camb
 Staff Representative
  Unsigned editorials represent a majority opinion of
the Daily Bruin Editorial Board. All other columns, letters and
artwork represent the opinions of their authors. Â Â All
submitted material must bear the author’s name, address, telephone
number, registration number, or affiliation with UCLA. Names will
not be withheld except in extreme cases. Â Â The Bruin
complies with the Communication Board’s policy prohibiting the
publication of articles that perpetuate derogatory cultural or
ethnic stereotypes. Â Â When multiple authors submit
material, some names may be kept on file rather than published with
the material. The Bruin reserves the right to edit submitted
material and to determine its placement in the paper. All
submissions become the property of The Bruin. The Communications
Board has a media grievance procedure for resolving complaints
against any of its publications. For a copy of the complete
procedure, contact the Publications office at 118 Kerckhoff Hall.
Daily Bruin 118 Kerckhoff Hall 308 Westwood Plaza Los Angeles, CA
90024 (310) 825-9898
Fact: A student from an affluent neighborhood who bought an SAT
I prep course and was born a U.S. citizen has a pretty decent
chance of attending a UC.
Fact: For a student from a poor neighborhood who worked
afterschool instead of preparing for the SAT I and is a legal
non-resident, the chances of attending a UC are slim.
The UC is a bastion of unequal opportunity. The result of this
is a student body that is increasingly wealthy and increasingly
exclusive.
The UC Board of Regents needs to stop wavering, get its act
together and repeal SP-1. Despite pro-repeal announcements by
regents such as Justin Fong, Cruz Bustamante and William Bagley, a
discussion of SP-1 is not on the agenda for this week’s
regents’ meeting.
Maybe in May, they say.
Even Chancellor Albert Carnesale plays a transparent semantic
game in saying that he “wishes” SP-1 and 2 and
Proposition 209 were not on the books, but since they are, he
wouldn’t want to repeal them. Students see right through that
kind of rhetoric and no one can respect such lame attempts to sit
on the fence.
Those who argue that a repeal of SP-1 and 2 would be largely
symbolic because affirmative action would still be illegal under
Proposition 209, largely underestimate the power of symbolism. If
nothing else, repealing SP-1 and 2 would show minorities that the
UC values the diversity they offer.
But SP-1 and 2 are only symptoms of a wider unequal access
problem at the UC.
While a repeal would be a positive step toward breaking down one
of the many institutional barriers that prevent people from
attaining a university education, it’s not enough.
The inequalities in the K-12 system continue to be ignored.
Schools in low-income neighborhoods have inadequate resources and
fewer AP classes than their more affluent counterparts. Students
from schools with limited honors and AP classes can never have a
weighted GPA as high as students who attend schools with more
funding and better programs.
Putting these students at a further disadvantage, their wealthy
counterparts can afford extensive SAT prep courses.
The SATs are not just unfair socio-economically, but racially.
Underrepresented minority students tend to score lower on the test
than white and Asian students.
Since so much weight is given to AP classes and SAT scores in
considering a student’s application, minorities and students
from low-income areas face an uphill battle in gaining admission to
the UC. We’re glad UC President Richard Atkinson proposed
eliminating the test. But it’s not enough.
The university’s non-resident fees block access to
numerous immigrants who live in California. The non-resident fee,
which is three times more than the in-state fee, applies to not
just to non-residents, but to immigrants with a visa to live in
California. Though they may have lived here nearly their entire
lives, and their families pay state taxes, these students still get
charged non-resident fees.
This fee is a financial barrier between legal immigrants and the
UC. It needs to go. But that’s still not enough.
The UC must be affordable, accessible and welcoming to everyone.
As a public institution, this university belongs to the people
““ students ““ not just the elite. If the inequalities in
our society are ever going to be resolved, we need to start
here.
It’s disheartening to realize that the university has
become less ““ not more ““ accessible in recent years.
Once upon a time, students were not charged registration fees. Once
upon a time, diversity counted for something. Once upon a time
there was no SAT and students did not buy test prep programs.
It’s time for us to stop the gradual build-up of
restricted access to the UC.
Educational opportunities in California need to be equal
starting in kindergarten. Classist, racist tests must be
eliminated. Diversity is valuable and cannot be ignored in the
admissions process. And anyone who has earned admission to the UC
should not be shut out for financial reasons.
On Wednesday, when the regents descend on UCLA, we must demand
that they give everyone an equal opportunity to attend UC, get a
quality education and then ensure the same thing for the next
generation.
Why save until May what can be started in March?