To the Daily:
Your story on the legal response of the University to the class action suit regarding affirmative action ('U' offers response against lawsuit," 12/4/97) closed with a quotation from me, and I thought I should clarify a point that bears on the case.
It is true that Justice Powell, in the famous 1978 Bakke v. California case on affirmative action, argued that race could be used as a "plus" (as I was quoted in the story). However, his "opinion" was not the opinion of the court.
Only his "decision" to require the University of California-Davis medical school to enroll Allan Bakke represented the ruling of the Supreme Court. Four justices voted for Bakke's acceptance on statutory grounds, arguing the "plain language of the statute" (the 1964 Civil Rights Act) forbids exclusion on the ground of race.
Four other justices voted against his acceptance on constitutional grounds, arguing that "racial classifications are not per se invalid" under the 14th Amendment.
Powell voted for Bakke's acceptance on constitutional grounds, but argued that race could be used only as a "plus" in the interest of diversity and not as a fixed barrier for those not of a specific race.
In short, no justice's "opinion" or reasoning garnered a majority of the Supreme Court's votes. As was noted by the Circuit Court opinion in Hopwood v. Texas: "While he (Powell) announced the judgment, no other justice joined in that part of the opinion discussing the diversity rationale." Thus, the Supreme Court has yet to establish a firm precedent regarding affirmative action in schools because no majority of the justices have agreed on the reasoning or argument for their decision.
Simply put, a majority in Bakke agreed he was unjustly excluded from applying for some seats in the medical school (16 were set aside for "disadvantaged" students), but no five justices could agree on the reason why!
Lucas Morel
John Brown University
To the Daily:
I believe that most people on campus have the social skills to make friends with people of diverse backgrounds.
People who say that members of different ethnic groups stick together and desire to socialize with members of their group use this as an excuse. This is comparable to using the excuse that your graduate student instructors did not drop by your dorms or apartments to tutor you as a reason for failing a test.
The University provides the opportunity for students to interact with each other. And like GSIs, the University provides the opportunity for you to excel in your studies, too. However, you must take advantage of these opportunities rather than to have the University spoon-feed these opportunities to you.
This campus constitutes a student body of adults. It does not constitute a student body of pre-schoolers who need the recess lady to mediate their relationships.
Grace Yee
LSA senior
To the Daily:
I saw the ABC television news broadcast (about the affirmative action lawsuit facing the University). It was a terrible sound bite; The reason why it was so terrible and so painful to those in favor of affirmative action, was that University President Lee Bollinger told the truth and was honest about the subject, whereas most people in favor of it are afraid to say the truth.
Affirmative action is discrimination at its core and can never be "mended." The U.S. Constitution is based on individual rights, not group rights. During the early years of the nation when slavery was allowed, an honest appraisal of the U.S. Constitution clearly shows that the rights of black people were ignored, "for the greater good," that being, avoiding the dissolution of the union.
In the end that could not be avoided, and a terrible civil war was the price of ignoring the Constitution. We are again told by those in power in the White House and the University the same argument that "the greater good is served" in ignoring the rights of white people. This too will not come without a price, the price of continued racial distrust and division.
You can not resolve a moral failure with an immoral solution, no matter how good the intentions, ends will not justify the means, and unintended consequences are usually the result.
I hope that my school will lead the way to the future, and not the past.
David Mohler
University alumnus
To the Daily:
In response to Erin Carey's letter ("MSA cannot force students to vote"12/8/97), I must say that I'm getting rather sick of MSA members constantly blaming their shortcomings on the student body. They blame students for not voting in the MSA elections, for not educating themselves about the candidates and for laughing at them when they campaign. However, they are unwilling to take any responsibility whatsoever for this.
The fact is that if these MSA candidates want other students to give some legitimacy to their resume-building game by voting, then they need to do something meaningful with MSA to make students care about it.
They have utterly failed to do this (that is, assuming that they ever tried). Instead, they would rather blame us for not caring about them even though they haven't given us any reason why we should.
Let me clue you in, MSA: The reason why people laugh at you is because your institution is widely seen as a joke. Whose fault is that? Yours!
You have the opportunity to do something meaningful with MSA, but you have failed. The proof of this is in the thousands on campus who won't give you the time of day. If you want to change that, stop blaming them and do something to change their minds. Otherwise, blame yourselves. You can't expect people to vote for you just because once in a while they see your smiling faces plastered all over campus
Chris Borhani
Rackham
To the Daily:
I am writing this letter because upon picking up my Dec. 5 copy of the Daily, I was shocked to find no reference to the production of "Princess Ida" by the University's Gilbert and Sullivan Society.
Being a company promoter for the show, I called the Daily and had a reviewer come to the Wednesday dress rehearsal, with the understanding that an article would be published on Friday.
However, in lieu of a review for "Princess Ida" was another review of "Henry V," in addition to the review which was published earlier in the week. The Gilbert and Sullivan Society is a 51-year old University institution, incorporating many students, as well as faculty and staff, and I think it is horrendous that the only mention of the production is a quip in the Weekend, etc. section about a "little known operetta."
UMGASS does great work every semester to put out a wonderful and funny show; to receive support from the student newspaper would have helped us to spread the word that the show is not something to be avoided like the plague. Although apparently that is how we are seen by the Daily.
Stephanie Teeters
LSA sophomore
12-10-97
| Previous Article |
should be sent to: daily.letters@umich.edu | should be sent to: online.daily@umich.edu |