Equality threatened

'U' must stand strong on afrmative action

The University's unwavering commitment to diversity gives students the prerequisite skills needed to work in today's multicultural society. CIR and other affirmative action opponents, if successful, would cause irreparable harm; forcing the University to serve only a homogenous cross-section of white and privileged state residents would leave graduates unprepared to face the working world.

Since introducing the Michigan Mandate, the University has increased its minority population from 12.7 percent in 1987 to 25 percent this year. Employers increasingly desire graduates with multicultural skills, and the University's environment is now better suited than ever to accommodate this need. Moreover, all state citizens' taxes help fund the University - these tax dollars should ensure accessibility. However, minorities often face circumstances that normally would make it impossible to continue their education beyond high school. The Mandate has opened a window of opportunity - a world-class education is now available for many minority students.

Merely upholding affirmative action is not enough - University officials cannot allow efforts to attract minorities to lose steam. Last year, the admissions office experienced a dearth of minority applications and extended the admissions deadline for minority students in a desperate move to correct the problem. These last-minute actions should not be necessary. Restructuring recruiting efforts could reach the students whom current efforts do not. Innovative programs such as on-site admission, where students can apply directly to admissions officers during school hours, should be expanded to prevent a repeat of last year's situation.

The University of Texas provides an alarming example of the consequences of eliminating affirmative action programs. A year following the Hopwood decision, which upheld plaintiffs' claims that the university's admissions policy discriminated based on race, total applications to the school have decreased 13 percent. Scholarships designed to attract minority students have been eliminated and the number of African American students entering the University of Texas law school has dropped to a sparse handful.

The landmark Supreme Court Bakke v. California decision stipulates that race can be a factor, but not the sole overriding factor, in public university admissions decisions. Jaye calls University policies "unfair, un-American and evil," and is looking to bring a class-action lawsuit against the University alleging discrimination in admissions and financial aid. Jaye's reasoning is flawed - the University also gives similar consideration to children of alumni, students from exemplary high schools and applicants from under-represented regions of the nation and Michigan. Thus, the University falls well within Bakke's established guidelines.

A lawsuit against the University - with its status as a large, public and selective school with a strong commitment to affirmative action - is inevitable. The University must vigorously undermine any of Jaye's, CIR's and other potential plaintiffs' erroneous claims - affirmative action's future may hang in the balance.

09-08-97