Income Based Affirmative Action

Jacqueline McGuinness

English 125: Justice, Political Thought and Action

12/11/12

Income Based Affirmative Action

Outside the Supreme Court [2]

Race-based affirmative action is under review by the Supreme Court in the case, Fisher v. University of Texas.  Affirmative action in college admissions is devised to foster diversity and remediate inequalities for groups who were historically excluded from college opportunities.[1]  Fisher is suing UT because she felt unfairly denied due to race-based affirmative action. UT, however, argues that race-based affirmative action is the best method in promoting diversity on its campus.[3]  Opponents of UT’s affirmative action plan want to increase racial diversity, but do not think racial preferences are the best way to attain that goal.   A progressive form of income-based affirmative action is the most beneficial way to help the disadvantaged and provide diversity within universities.

 Opportunity or Discrimination?

Supporters of race-based affirmative action think racial preferences give minorities an opportunity today that they previously lacked.[4]  In the past, minorities have suffered from persecution and have had to endure the resulting negative consequences.  The question is, however, whether college admissions is the place society should rectify past discrimination.  Providing an unequal opportunity for applicants based on race is a form of discrimination, a term coined “reverse discrimination.”[5]  This reverse discrimination seems to rely upon the same underpinnings as racism by providing unequal opportunity to applicants. 

 To advocate for a race-neutral admissions, one need not accept the premise that racism has been fully abated.  Racism is all too common, as exemplified through Alim’s narrative, “#WeAretrayvonMartin: Breaking the silence around racial abuse.”[6]  Alim is an educated graduate student, but is still a target of racism because he is black.  New reforms must take place to address this societal wrong.  Race-based affirmative action, however, is not the place where issues of racism should be solved. 

 Alim was a minority who received an upper level education, and is now a graduate, yet still faces racism.[7]  Race-based affirmative action has been in place for more than fifty years, but has failed to eradicate racism.[8]  There needs to be a different strategy to eliminate racism.  If universities are going to take any contingent fact of birth into consideration, it must be the socioeconomic status of applicants.  Income-based affirmative action would operate to the greatest benefit for disadvantaged students.  Universities will still achieve diversity because the socioeconomic status of minorities generally is concentrated in the target, low income demographic.  This is a tangible solution that will help lift the underprivileged students out of poverty.

 Economic Statues

Some argue that past discrimination has given rise to an overall lower economic status of many minorities, and they are therefore at a disadvantage.[9]  This argument is valid for economically disadvantage minorities.  A question emerges, however, as to why the same preferences should be given to wealthy minorities?  An upper-middle class black student is much more comparable to an upper-middle class white-student, than an underprivileged white student.  The Supreme Court recognizes the fact that it is unfair to give racial preferences to wealthy minorities.  Justice Alito explained, “I thought that the whole purpose of affirmative action was to help students who come from underprivileged background.”[10]  Race based affirmative action is unjust because people of the same economic status have similar resources regardless of race.  The Supreme Court has stated that those colleges which seek diversity must give “serious, good-faith consideration” to race-neutral ways of achieving racial diversity.[11]

 In a recent interview, Barack Obama was questioned about his view on affirmative action.  This interview is interesting because it personalizes race-based affirmative action, by inquiring of Obama how this practice relates to his family.  In this interview, the President states that although his children are of a minority race, college admission representatives should consider them to be from a privileged background.[12]

Another interesting perspective on this issue would be that of Martin Luther King Jr.  To King, the substantive underpinning of justice is equality.[13]  King would likely align himself with the view of Obama.  King would be in support of a process that was as fair as possible, and had a broad view of the disadvantaged.  Many minorities would still be advantaged by income-based affirmative action, but in a more inclusive scheme.  A comprehensive range of disadvantaged students would then benefit from affirmative action.     

 A Dirty Secret

Most people assume affirmative action is primarily helpful to minorities who have a low socioeconomic status.  Many universities, however, are more concerned with having a campus with students of all colors than with social mobility.[14]  In fact, a 2004 study concluded that, “rich kids outnumbered poor kids on selective campuses by 25 to 1.”[15]  Another study shows that in top universities, “86 percent of African American Students are middle or upper class and the white students are even richer.”[16]  These statistics demonstrate that poor students are being unfairly overlooked in the admissions process and are in need of aid.   Although many universities claim to boost the number of students who come from low-income families, these claims may actually not be true in many universities.  In 2005, William Bowen, PhD, author and past president of Princeton University, published a study stating that students of Black and Latino descent were 28% more likely to receive admissions into universities, but students of low income were not at all more likely to be admitted.[17]

 A low socioeconomic status has an array of negative consequences borne by the poor students.  Living in a poorer neighborhood is correlated with a poorer educational system.   In addition, lacking monetary resources may make extracurricular activities and tutors less accessible.  Many poorer students have weaker applications, because they are more likely to be first generation college students and, therefore, lack a role model to emulate. Universities overlook these disadvantages faced by students from a lower socioeconomic background, illustrating flaws in race-based affirmative action. 

Now What?

UT has implicated race-neutral ways in which it can achieve diversity in its campus.  In 1990, UT was banned from using race-based admissions for a period of time.  It therefore initiated two race neutral programs that would still provide its campus with racial diversity.  The first was its ten percent program, which automatically admitted the students in the top 10% of public high schools in Texas, including minority high schools.[18]  The second was economic preference to disadvantaged students.[19] Since the ten percent plan has been adopted, there have been considerable increases in racial diversity.  The population in Texas is “38 percent Hispanic and 12 percent Black.” [20] With this ten percent plan alone, 26% of freshmen applicants were Hispanics and 6% were Black.[21]  These statistic show UT was successful in diversifying its campus through race neutral programs.

 A progressive form of affirmative action would be to focus on the economic disadvantages rather than race, to achieve diversity.  In 2010, University of Colorado at Bolder, found economic preferences could produce more racial diversity than race-based admissions.[22]  California can be looked upon as an example towards progressive affirmative action.  Affirmative action is banned in California, but the state schools have still been able to maintain thriving campus diversity.[23]  A properly structured system will call for universities’ practices to be altered, in ways including “aggressive outreach, de-emphasizing of standardized tests, affirmative action based on class instead of race, and eliminating legacy preferences which presently mostly benefit whites.”[24]

----------------------

[1] Mark Sherman, "Fisher v. University of Texas: Suprem Court takes up Affirmative Action."  October 12, 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/fisher-vs-university-of-texas-supreme-court_n_1954297.html

[2]Photo by the Associated Press, "Fisher v. University of Texas: Diversity in the classroom is still needed."http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/politics-raising-children/2012/oct/14/fisher-v-university-texas-diversity-classroom-stil/

[3] Sherman

[4] Ibid

[5]zeitgeist. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc.http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/zeitgeist

[6]Sammy Alim, #WeAreTrayvonMartin: Breaking the silence around racial abuse.  March 24, 2012.   http://current.com/groups/news-blog/93714551_wearetrayvonmartin-breaking-the-silence-around-racial-abuse.htm

[7] Ibid

[8]Richard Kahlenberg, A new Kind of affirmative Action can Ensure Diversity.  October 3, 2012, http://chronicle.com/article/A-New-Kind-of-Affirmative/134840/

[9]"Fisher v. University of Texas: Diversity in the classroom is still needed."http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/politics-raising-children/2012/oct/14/fisher-v-university-texas-diversity-classroom-stil/

[10] Sherman

[11] Ibid

[12]“Barack Obama’s views on Affirmative Action.” ABC News on Youtube.  January 4, 2008.  Accessed December 8, 2012.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saIVafSC38k

[13] Martin Luther King Jr, "Letter from a Birmingham Jail [King, Jr.]"April 1963, http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

[14]Richard Kahlenberg, A new Kind of affirmative Action can Ensure Diversity.  October 3, 2012, http://chronicle.com/article/A-New-Kind-of-Affirmative/134840/

[15] Ibid

[16]Ibid

[17]  Richard Kahlenberg, "Why not affirmative Action."  November 8, 2012, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-11-08/opinions/35503696_1_racial-preferences-race-neutral-methods-grutter

[18] Sherman

[19] Ibid

[20]Richard Kahlenberg, A new Kind of affirmative Action can Ensure Diversity.  October 3, 2012, http://chronicle.com/article/A-New-Kind-of-Affirmative/134840/

[21] Richard Kahlenberg, What Obama should say about the Texas Affirmative Action Case.  Febuary 21, 2012.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2012/02/fisher_v_texas_how_obama_should_talk_about_affirmative_action.html

[22] “Studies show that race neutral college admissions could work.”  Ocotber 3, 2012, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/10/03/study-race-neutral-admissions/1609855/