Affirmative Action is NOT Reverse Discrimination

2095 Words5 Pages

Affirmative action is not the source of discrimination, but the vehicle for removing the effects of discrimination. The Labor Department report found less than 100 reverse discrimination cases among more than 3,000 discrimination opinions by the U.S. District Court and the Court of Appeal between 1990 and 1994. Discrimination was established in only six cases. The report found that, “Many of the cases were the result of a disappointed applicant…. erroneously assuming that when a woman or minority got the job, it was because of race or sex, not qualifications.”(SF Chronicle, March 31, 1995) Job discrimination is grounded in prejudice and exclusion, whereas affirmative action is an effort to overcome prejudicial treatment through inclusion. The most effective way to cure society of exclusionary practices is to make special efforts at inclusion, which is exactly what affirmative action does.

Violates the principle of merit

Because we still don’t have equal opportunity. Affirmative action, though initially created to redress the consequences of slavery and segregation, must also serve to stem the effects of continuing discrimination against women as well as people of color. The selection of unqualified candidates is not permitted under federal affirmative action guidelines and should not be equated with legal forms of affirmative action. There is a mandate that in choosing a person of color when past discrimination has resulted in white people receiving preferential treatment. Most jobs are found by word-of-mouth. Since neighborhoods tend to be more segregrated word of mouth leads to the perpetuation of discrimation, intentionally or not. Affirmative action pushes employers to try harder, to cast wider net.

Does affirmative action mean quotas?

No. Affirmative action plans do not impose quota; they simply seek to increase the pool of qualified applicants by using aggressive recruitment and outreach programs, setting goals and timetables and establishing training programs, among other measures. In 1976, Allan Bakke sued the University of California Medical School at Davis for denying his admission on the basis of reverse discrimination, because 16 out of 100 places in the medical school class were reserved for “economically and educationally disadvantage applicants.” The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bakke, holding that the policy of reserving ...

... middle of paper ...

...is understandable -- after all, White men, who have traditionally benefited from preferential hiring, do not feel hampered by self-doubt or a loss in self-esteem). Indeed, in many cases affirmative action may actually raise the self-esteem of women and minorities by providing them with employment and opportunities for advancement. There is also evidence that affirmative action policies increase job satisfaction and organizational commitment among beneficiaries (Graves & Powell, 1994).

Affirmative action is nothing more than an attempt at social engineering by liberal Democrats.

In truth, affirmative action programs have spanned many different presidential administrations -- both Republican and Democratic. Although the originating document of affirmative action was President Lyndon Johnson's Executive Order 11246, the policy was significantly expanded in 1969 by President Richard Nixon and then Secretary of Labor George Schultz. President George Bush also enthusiastically signed the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which formally endorsed the principle of affirmative action. Thus, affirmative action has traditionally enjoyed the support of Republicans as well as Democrats.

Open Document