Full Version: Anti-affirmative action initiative on ballot
In response to the recent decision in Groetz v. Bollinger which held that the Univ of Michigan's affirmative action admission's policy was constitutional an initiative will be placed on the ballot in Michigan in 2006, which would make it illegal to consider race as a factor in college admissions.
http://www.civilrights.org/issues/affirmat...ls.cfm?id=27222
The Supreme Court held in 2003 that the U-Mich's policy of considering race in its admission was constitutional. The decision was based on the court's finding that "diversity" was a compelling enough state interest to justify using race as a factor in its admissions decisions.
Ward Connerly and his civilrights.org group have succeeded in getting the requisite number of signatures to place an initiative on the Michigan ballot in 2006 which would make it illegal for a university to consider race as a factor in its admissions decisions.
Questions for Debate:
(1) Should this initiative be placed on the ballot in Michigan? why or why not?
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
http://www.civilrights.org/issues/affirmat...ls.cfm?id=27222
The Supreme Court held in 2003 that the U-Mich's policy of considering race in its admission was constitutional. The decision was based on the court's finding that "diversity" was a compelling enough state interest to justify using race as a factor in its admissions decisions.
Ward Connerly and his civilrights.org group have succeeded in getting the requisite number of signatures to place an initiative on the Michigan ballot in 2006 which would make it illegal for a university to consider race as a factor in its admissions decisions.
Questions for Debate:
(1) Should this initiative be placed on the ballot in Michigan? why or why not?
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
1) Should this initiative be placed on the ballot in Michigan? why or why not?
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
Yes, it should. And if the end result is anything like initiatives we have had here in Arizona, and the public shows they want it, the courts and the legislature will do their level best to undermine it, or kill it. End result, the public will have learned yet another lesson in politics.
I can agree with the Supreme Court that diversity is a compelling issue, but disagree that one group of persons should suffer or become less advantaged at the expense of another. That is what minorities had in the past, and at some level still do, but why should we now restrict the opportunities of any one group to help out another?
I recently left the work force, early retirement, but keep in touch with former co-workers who keep me informed as to what is going on there. It is amazing to me that the most blatant non-performers are still employed there. Only one is a minority by color, another is over 55, and the 3rd has no status that we can think of, except possibly being related to someone who is protecting him.
Life isn't fair, never will be, but legislating more unfairness is not the answer.
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
Yes, it should. And if the end result is anything like initiatives we have had here in Arizona, and the public shows they want it, the courts and the legislature will do their level best to undermine it, or kill it. End result, the public will have learned yet another lesson in politics.
I can agree with the Supreme Court that diversity is a compelling issue, but disagree that one group of persons should suffer or become less advantaged at the expense of another. That is what minorities had in the past, and at some level still do, but why should we now restrict the opportunities of any one group to help out another?
I recently left the work force, early retirement, but keep in touch with former co-workers who keep me informed as to what is going on there. It is amazing to me that the most blatant non-performers are still employed there. Only one is a minority by color, another is over 55, and the 3rd has no status that we can think of, except possibly being related to someone who is protecting him.
Life isn't fair, never will be, but legislating more unfairness is not the answer.
Questions for Debate:
(1) Should this initiative be placed on the ballot in Michigan? why or why not?
I do believe the initiative should be on the ballot because just at the very least to hear the voice and opinion of the people
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
I do not agree with the courts ruling. While I do believe that race should play some factor, I do not think it should be more important than the environment where people grew up in. The Michigan University rule placed twice as much emphasis on race than environment and that is wrong. If you consider the environment someone has grown up in and the risks they have had to face then you are helping those who truly need it. I am a black hispanic but I am not somehow in need of a helping hand or not as bright as others because of my skin color. I grew up in the inner city and seen the hardships that people of all colors have had to go through and it is because of the environment that kids grow up in where they need a helping hand and when you put emphasis on environment you help those in the inner city as well as those in poor rural areas and that is true diversity
[/quote]
(1) Should this initiative be placed on the ballot in Michigan? why or why not?
I do believe the initiative should be on the ballot because just at the very least to hear the voice and opinion of the people
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
I do not agree with the courts ruling. While I do believe that race should play some factor, I do not think it should be more important than the environment where people grew up in. The Michigan University rule placed twice as much emphasis on race than environment and that is wrong. If you consider the environment someone has grown up in and the risks they have had to face then you are helping those who truly need it. I am a black hispanic but I am not somehow in need of a helping hand or not as bright as others because of my skin color. I grew up in the inner city and seen the hardships that people of all colors have had to go through and it is because of the environment that kids grow up in where they need a helping hand and when you put emphasis on environment you help those in the inner city as well as those in poor rural areas and that is true diversity
[/quote]
This initiative must be placed on the ballot in michigan. Affirmative action achieved its goals during its glory days. however we are in a new time in which its objectives are no longer necessary. Instead we are denying jobs to caucasian males, and overseeing caucasian youths for those who are not solely based on the color of their skin and those of their ancestors. diversity is very imporant in a young academic, and professional life. however, it shold be natural not enforced.
Well, should not the purpose of an admissions policy to be to obtain students most likely to excel in college?
From:
Challenging 'The Bell Curve': College education halves black, white IQ score gap
Later in the same article:
When you also take into account that there is something about the black experience that leads blacks to score lower on tests than whites with equal income the only sensible thing is to give points based on race. Let me requote Myerson "(The more important point) is that the level of ability black students exhibit at the end of college would have been greatly underestimated based on how they tested when they took college entrance exams in high school."
What is clear is that SAT tests underestimate the potential of many prospective black students. The USSC was right for all the wrong reasons. AA is needed so that blacks and whites will be admitted based on their potential for success, not their SAT score.
From:
Challenging 'The Bell Curve': College education halves black, white IQ score gap
QUOTE
Compare the average intelligence test scores of blacks and whites during their senior years in high school and whites tend to outscore blacks by as many as 15 IQ points. But send those students to college and the IQ scores of black students who graduate increase more than four times as much as those of their white college classmates, effectively cutting the black-white IQ gap in half by graduation
This is one of the key findings of Washington University research that holds important implications for the current debate over federal and state attempts to roll back affirmative action programs.
This is one of the key findings of Washington University research that holds important implications for the current debate over federal and state attempts to roll back affirmative action programs.
Later in the same article:
QUOTE
"The more important point," Myerson added, "is that the level of ability black students exhibit at the end of college would have been greatly underestimated based on how they tested when they took college entrance exams in high school. For at least some black high school students, the SAT and other common college entrance exams may not provide an accurate picture of their potential."
When you also take into account that there is something about the black experience that leads blacks to score lower on tests than whites with equal income the only sensible thing is to give points based on race. Let me requote Myerson "(The more important point) is that the level of ability black students exhibit at the end of college would have been greatly underestimated based on how they tested when they took college entrance exams in high school."
What is clear is that SAT tests underestimate the potential of many prospective black students. The USSC was right for all the wrong reasons. AA is needed so that blacks and whites will be admitted based on their potential for success, not their SAT score.
QUOTE(Hugo @ Jan 17 2005, 01:07 PM)
Well, should not the purpose of an admissions policy to be to obtain students most likely to excel in college?
From:
Challenging 'The Bell Curve': College education halves black, white IQ score gap
Later in the same article:
When you also take into account that there is something about the black experience that leads blacks to score lower on tests than whites with equal income the only sensible thing is to give points based on race. Let me requote Myerson "(The more important point) is that the level of ability black students exhibit at the end of college would have been greatly underestimated based on how they tested when they took college entrance exams in high school."
What is clear is that SAT tests underestimate the potential of many prospective black students. The USSC was right for all the wrong reasons. AA is needed so that blacks and whites will be admitted based on their potential for success, not their SAT score.
From:
Challenging 'The Bell Curve': College education halves black, white IQ score gap
QUOTE
Compare the average intelligence test scores of blacks and whites during their senior years in high school and whites tend to outscore blacks by as many as 15 IQ points. But send those students to college and the IQ scores of black students who graduate increase more than four times as much as those of their white college classmates, effectively cutting the black-white IQ gap in half by graduation
This is one of the key findings of Washington University research that holds important implications for the current debate over federal and state attempts to roll back affirmative action programs.
This is one of the key findings of Washington University research that holds important implications for the current debate over federal and state attempts to roll back affirmative action programs.
Later in the same article:
QUOTE
"The more important point," Myerson added, "is that the level of ability black students exhibit at the end of college would have been greatly underestimated based on how they tested when they took college entrance exams in high school. For at least some black high school students, the SAT and other common college entrance exams may not provide an accurate picture of their potential."
When you also take into account that there is something about the black experience that leads blacks to score lower on tests than whites with equal income the only sensible thing is to give points based on race. Let me requote Myerson "(The more important point) is that the level of ability black students exhibit at the end of college would have been greatly underestimated based on how they tested when they took college entrance exams in high school."
What is clear is that SAT tests underestimate the potential of many prospective black students. The USSC was right for all the wrong reasons. AA is needed so that blacks and whites will be admitted based on their potential for success, not their SAT score.
I think you make a good point Hugo. I agree with the findings of that study that these "tests" don't necessarily predict how someone will do in college. From personal experience I have seen this in my students. Those that scored highest on the standardized tests were not necessarily the ones doing the best in their courses.
I think we ought to rethink how much weight we place on the SAT and LSAT scores. But I am not sure that will ever happen. It is an industry in and of itself (standardized testing and all the prep materials etc). But giving a preference to someone based solely on skin color is not the answer. And I am not sure I believe that "diversity" on campus is a compelling interest. It may achieve some of its goals inside the classroom as some have pointed out-- but I don't think it does what it was originally intended to do to its fullest extent outside the classroom by promoting lasting relationships and friendships between minorities and the majority students.
(1) Should this initiative be placed on the ballot in Michigan? why or why not?
Yes, and I think it should pass. I believe that everyone should be judge by their performance NOT the color of their skin.
Who wants to be "One of the smartest BLACK guys to apply"?
Who wants to hear "You are pretty smart for a BLACK girl"?
I think it is an unintended slap in the face to minorities to apply affirmative action.
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
I think that the alternate decision by the court would resort to possible segregation.
Yes, and I think it should pass. I believe that everyone should be judge by their performance NOT the color of their skin.
Who wants to be "One of the smartest BLACK guys to apply"?
Who wants to hear "You are pretty smart for a BLACK girl"?
I think it is an unintended slap in the face to minorities to apply affirmative action.
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
I think that the alternate decision by the court would resort to possible segregation.
QUOTE(hayleyanne @ Jan 8 2005, 11:06 AM)
Questions for Debate:
(1) Should this initiative be placed on the ballot in Michigan? why or why not?
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
(1) Should this initiative be placed on the ballot in Michigan? why or why not?
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
1. I believe that any controversial issue such as this should be placed to public vote. Here in TX, this applies to alcohol licenses, for instance. Communities get to decide whether they want liquor stores in their communities. The people of Michigan should not be asked to help fund a blatently race based issue, when people in their cities/towns are not affected at all. Tax payers should have a voice in situations such as these.
2. I believe that diversity should be a compelling interest on college campuses. With that in mind, why does that have anything to do with skin color??? We all know that there are significant differences in;
geographical location, ethnic background, religion, socio-economic status, etc
What is our nation's obsession with race?
QUOTE
(1) Should this initiative be placed on the ballot in Michigan? why or why not?
Yes, the least the government could do is at least ask it's citizens whether or not it's okay with them to violate their civil rights.QUOTE
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
No. Hold on a sec, I have to do some quick math. White people=beneficiaries of race based admissions policies=racist...Black people=beneficiaries of race based admission=fair. QUOTE(Government Mule)
I think that the alternate decision by the court would resort to possible segregation.
What makes you say that?CP
[quote=Government Mule]I think that the alternate decision by the court would resort to possible segregation.[/quote]What makes you say that?
CP
[/quote]
Fair enough question.
I think that we take the word of the court to literal at times, and some yahoo somewhere in a red state I am sure, would read the alternative decision as HIS right to only accept white people into his/her school. And if anyone is taking odds, I'll take Dover PA, for this to happen.
CP
[/quote]
Fair enough question.
I think that we take the word of the court to literal at times, and some yahoo somewhere in a red state I am sure, would read the alternative decision as HIS right to only accept white people into his/her school. And if anyone is taking odds, I'll take Dover PA, for this to happen.
QUOTE
I think that we take the word of the court to literal at times, and some yahoo somewhere in a red state I am sure, would read the alternative decision as HIS right to only accept white people into his/her school. And if anyone is taking odds, I'll take Dover PA, for this to happen.
And if that was the case, said yahoo would be sued for all he's worth...and rightly so. No one would be able to get away with a blatently racist policy such as that in this country without immediate legal action...Unless of course it favors someone other than white males.CP
QUOTE(hayleyanne @ Jan 8 2005, 11:06 AM)
Questions for Debate:
(1) Should this initiative be placed on the ballot in Michigan? why or why not?
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
(1) Should this initiative be placed on the ballot in Michigan? why or why not?
(2) Do you agree with the Supreme Court's holding in Groetz that "diversity" on campus is a compelling enough interest to permit race to be considered in admissions?
1. Yes. I think this is an issue that should be decided by the people en mass.
2. Actually, the holding regarding diversity in education was the Grutter case dealing with the law school. The university (Gratz) case outlawed quotas. This is a minor quibble, but I just wanted to correct that. I disagreed with Justice O'Connor wholeheartedly in Grutter. I think diversity can be considered a nice thing, but in no way is it a state interest compelling enough to justify racial discrimination. Laws which violate the Equal Protection clause by way of race require strict scrutiny. Anything but strict scrutiny was used in this case.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.