Affermative Action

Affirmative Action

Affirmative Action efforts were started in 1964 to end the long history of overlooking qualified people of color and women from higher education. Affirmative

Action sets standards for a business or office of admissions, so that a white man does not have the upper-hand over an equally or greater educated minority. The initial way the government tried to justify Affirmative Action was to develop a human resource approach: first identifying the problem, which is racism then establishing the solution

(Phillips 67).

The intent of Affirmative Action helps cut down discrimination in the work place and in schools, despite the fact that some believe that affirmative action is a form of reverse discrimination. In contrast, the first goal of Affirmative Action was to help people who were poor or badly educated, elevating them to positions for which they were not objectively qualified (Buckley 95). Cousens, author of Public Civil Rights Agencies and Fair Employment indicates that the Affirmative Action techniques have the advantage of not only persuading employers not to discriminate when hiring or accepting, but to expand employment and educational opportunities for minority groups (22).

Therefore, Affirmative Action is legitimate because it does reduce discrimination in the work place and related areas such as University acceptance of college students. In the end, it should in no way be abolished.

However, Affirmative action is highly controversial. Right now Proposition 209, in California which bans all programs involving race and sex preferences run by the state, has passed but it will not be put into total action due to some questions of constitutionality (Ayres 34). The law will start slowly first, ending Affirmative Action in the schools of California, leading up to the abolishment of Affirmative Action all together. An argument was declared by Mark Rosenbaum of the Southern California

Branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, “ Proposition 209 should be declared unconstitutional because it singles out women and minorities and, at a time when discrimination still exists, sought to preclude them from attaining constitutionally guaranteed right, like jobs and schooling.” (Ayres 34). As R...

... middle of paper ...

...Maybe the world hasn’t exactly found equality as a result, but with Affirmative Action, the world is a lot closer to equality than without it.

Works Cited

Applebome, Peter. “Affirmative Action Ban Changes a Law School.” New York Times

2 July 1997: a14.

Ayres, B. Drummond, Jr. “Affirmative Action Battle Moves to Courts.” New York

Times 1 Dec. 1996: 34.

Benac, Nancy. “Clinton Defends Preference Programs, Backs Reforms.” Associated

Press Writer. <http.//sddt.com/files/librarywire/dn95_07_19_09.html>. 19

July, 1995.

Buckley, William F., Jr. “The Two Sides.” National Review 14 Oct., 1996: 95

Cousens, Frances. Public Civil Rights Agencies and Fair Employment. New York:

Praeger, 1969.

Hair, Penda D. “Color Blind-or Just Blind?” Nation 14 Oct. 1996: 12.

“Once to Every Man.” National Review 16 June, 1997: 12.

Phillips, D. Rhys. Equality in Employment. Ottawa: Canadian Gov., 1985: 285

Porter, Horace. “Affirmative Action: 1960’s Dreams, 1990’s Realities.” Chronicle of

Higher Education. 29 Nov. 1996: B6