Within the rigorous months of November through January, a significant number of undergraduate admission departments across the nation

are overwhelmed with applications. On each application, the one box that has created much controversy is the applicants ethnicity. If a minority race were checked, such as African American or Hispanic, Affirmative Action would greatly increase the applicants chance of acceptance based on his ethnicity. Although some protest against this action, a major way to uphold the democracy that America sanctions, ensure diversity in colleges, and be morally fair is to preserve Affirmative Action. America is often referred to as the land of opportunities, but how well does it uphold this widespread view within the education system? Being a democracy, America should provide each individual with an equal chance to succeed and be educated, regardless of race. So, with chances being available, minorities shall more easily be integrated in

Kate Becker
Recently, universities, businesses, and many politicians have decided that affirmative action has outlived its usefulness. They argue that it is time for our society to become colorblind, and that affirmative action gives minorities an unfair advantage in getting jobs, entrance into college, or government contracts. But how can our government adopt colorblind policies when its citizens still are handicapped by race? Studies have shown that African Americans, regardless of their financial status, are discriminated against in activities ranging from a job search to going out to dinner. Prejudice, whether it be subtle or overt, remains. Affirmative action gives minorities a fair chance for success, and this will eventually lead to the end of stereotypes and prejudice.

However, affirmative action alone will not solve the problems faced by minorities. In conjunction with these policies, public education must be improved so that the problems of minorities (mainly African Americans) are attacked both through increased opportunities for jobs and increased qualification for those positions. Affirmative action alone creates a situation in which people may receive jobs solely on the basis of race, but education alone leaves deserving minorities without jobs because of the prejudice of employers. Together, however, these two solutions can end the cycle which traps many minorities. Should affirmative action be a permanent policy? Of course not. Ideally, all government policies would be colorblind. But now, we must continue to work toward "leveling the playing field." Once this has been achieved, affirmative action should be stopped. But it is clear that society does not ignore race, and for the government to abandon affirmative action now would be a denial of the reality of prejudice and an acceptance of the status of minorities in America.

Amy Kohn
Is it right to say that a person should be hired simply because they are white? If the answer is no, shouldn't we then question the wisdom of mandating that companies hire people simply because they are black? Or female? Or are snazzy dressers, for that matter? Many liberal, open minded people of all colors and genders have begun to say no. They have realized that there is no justice in declaring that it is wrong to fire people on the basis of their color, but wise and fair to hire people for the same reason. The primary reason for my belief that the affirmative action system needs change is the amount of resentment its programs have

created across the board. As the fierce debate surrounding this issue reveals, there is a growing frustration among those not receiving the privileges affirmative action provides. Many such people, when passed over for employment or advancement, have begun to wonder if those who have been promoted received their positions based on their gender or race, as opposed to their merit. The fact is, America is a nation of great diversity, and while the affirmative action programs were founded on very worthy goals, our nation cannot achieve social equality, or even harmony, by granting privileges to one group over another. Perhaps, instead of having quotas imposed on them, businesses suspected of discrimination could have their hiring practices monitored by an outside official from the government, or be penalized through fines and restrictions. In the end, the only way we can end discrimination in the work place is by ending discrimination in our nation as a whole. We form our beliefs and opinions as children, and it is with our youth that we need to begin fighting racism and prejudice, If Americans are taught from a young age to cherish diversity, to judge people by their characters, then they will retain these ideals as adults when it is they who run the workplace. In addition, the effects of education are long term, whereas the programs of affirmative action provide only a very temporary solution. But as important as eliminating discrimination is breaking the cycle of poverty. Minorities often become trapped in America's inner cities, where an impoverished school system leaves children unprepared to compete for quality employment. By improving the educational opportunities offered to these children, we will improve their employment opportunities as adults, and this, combined with a focused effort to eliminate racism, will do more to create diversity in the American workplace than affirmative

action ever could. Affirmative action must not be left as it is, but with a little reform, it can begin working for equality instead of against it. Equal opportunity in the true sense of the word is a concept well within our grasp. We must not be afraid to reach it.
For decades, some blamed the attrition problem wholly on AfricanAmericans' science-related standardized test scores, which remain on average lower than those of whites or Asians. It should surprise no one to learn that students with lower standardized test scores are indeed less likely to stick with science and engineering than students with higher scores, no matter where they attend school. More Opinion on AOL News
The 10 Worst Predictions for 2010 Conservative Media Bias Exposed? Sensible Gift Ideas for 2010 Newsmakers What Can Explain North Korea's Behavior?

Still more Opinion But that's not the whole story. As three independent scholarly studies show, part of the problem appears to be relative. A student who attends a college at which his entering credentials put him near the bottom of the class -- which is where a student who needed an affirmative action preference will be -- is less likely to persevere in science or engineering than an otherwise identical student attending a school at which those same credentials put him in the middle of the class or higher. The reasons for this comparative effect are doubtless complex. But they are based on a common everyday observation: A good student can get in over his head and end up learning little or nothing if he is placed in a classroom with students whose level of academic preparation is much higher than his own, even though he is fully capable of mastering the material when presented at a more moderate pace. Discouraged, he may even give up -- even though he would have persevered and ultimately succeeded in a somewhat less competitive environment.

The effect does not appear to be slight. In a 2004 article, University of Virginia psychology professor Frederick Smyth and University of Southern California psychology professor John McArdle predicted that 45 percent more minority women and 35 percent more minority men in their sample would have persisted in science and engineering if they had attended schools where their academic credentials matched their peers.
Sponsored Links

"How Do I Get Organized?"

(It's never been so easy... try.OrganizeYourself.com

Mortgage Refinance at 2.67%

$200,000 mortgage for $699/month. See Lower Payment NOW - No SSN... Refinance.LoanOffers.com

Refinance at 3.25% FIXED!

Home Refinance with No Hidden Fees, Points or Costs. Free Quotes! Mortgage.LendGo.com

I'll answer this question using the same framework as the foreign aid question: with four common political philosophies and their view on affirmative action. LIBERAL: "Affirmative action is needed to correct past wrongs against minority groups."The concept here is that minorities, particularly women, blacks and Hispanics, have not been treated equally in the past, and in order to speed up the desired result of equal treatment, we favor those groups in the present. Yes, unequal treatment of white males, but the concept is that since white males created the current institutions of society, white males are inherently favored. Hence, until non-whites and non-males are equally represented in institutions of societal leadership (i.e., until they have a chance to create the future institutions), they will not be treated equally, and should be favored at the entry point. CONSERVATIVE: "Reach out to minorities without quotas"Most GOP candidates do not try to fight affirmative action entirely, but

attack what they consider the most onerous aspect of it - quotas. Giving minority applicants an EDGE in the application process is ok, but giving a GUARANTEE is not. This is the current battleground of affirmative action. Conservatives are fighting to remove fixed numerical hiring requirements. Acceptable methods under this philosophy might be:-- Active recruitment of minorities (get more applicants and you get more hires)-- Adding points to minority test scores (favoring those applicants without a quota)-Favoring a minority applicant based on race, if all other factors are equal. POPULIST: "Racial & gender entitlements are reverse discrimination."The argument here is that we should not fight past discrimination with present discrimination. Of course, it's true that "affirmative action" IS discriminatory - to discriminate by race and gender is the policy's stated purpose. Generally, someone who relies on the "reverse discrimination" argument is really against affirmative action entirely - unlike the "reach out" argument above, where the concept itself is acceptable but certain methods are not. LIBERTARIAN: "Prosecute racial and gender bias, but stay out of hiring decisions."The argument here is that the government has always had the ability to fight racial and gender discrimination - via lawsuits against companies or agencies which are already laws on the books against that, and all that is needed is to enforce those laws. Look for companies which women and minorities in hiring and promotion practices, and sue them. Other than that, stay out of companies' business decisions. You can see he presidential candidates' views on affirmative action at:http://issues2000.org/News_Affirmative_Action.htm-- Jesse

Hien143Alex asked this question on 3/20/2000 answer? I'd like to know why people think the way they do about Affirmative Action. Any comments, suggestions, opinions, debates would be greatly appreciated. this question arises from a individual on here: "Affirmative Action does not treat everyone equally and as all parties want to be equal, changes are being proposed. Florida just went to One Florida where everyone is treated equally. The NCAAP does not want Affirmative Action changed. They want to be equal but when it comes to admission to college, government contracts , they want an advantage. People need to wake up and realize that equal is equal." Do you think Congress/government should end affirmative action??? Why/why not? -what do you believe to be the problem or objective of government action? -what do you think is an effective government action? -If you have any proposed solutions, why do you think it is a good one, what evidence? -Who else do you think would agree with you (experts in the field, interest groups, experts, etc.) _What should congress do? -Any rebuttals of important arguments against your proposals are

welcome. Feel free to email me at Hien143Alex@hotmail.com

budgetanalyst gave this response on 3/20/2000: list of questions to answer, and much of which requires that you express your opinion. You should keep in mind that "affirmative action" is not the same as being equal. Affirmative action is a program aimed at providing opportunities for people who were denied opportunities in the past due to racial or other discrimination. Affirmative action requires that steps be taken to make sure that past discriminatory practices are not perpetuated. The problems with affirmative action come about by how it ends up implemented and how it is perceived. There is no good way to make sure that past discriminatory behavior and attitudes are not affecting current actions, so various organizations and groups, such as state governments and universities, have come up with different ways of making sure. But these ways will one way or the other either adversely affect another set of people or make them think that they are adversely affected. And courts have found that setting up systems that result in giving preferences based on race or sex is illegal. What you have to do is come up with a system that makes good on past wrongs due to discrimination and that does not run into these problems. (I do not have a suggestion for you since I have not come up with such a system.) The system that you come up with does not have to be perfect; you simply have to provide an analysis of how it would solve some of the problems and what other problems it could create.

I will give you a hint about Congressional action - it is not needed because the courts are dealing with the issue on a basis.

Buy a link here

Further proof of the inadvertent harm being caused by affirmative action can be found in the remarkable success of historically black colleges and universities, where half of African-American students naturally have entering credentials in the top half of the class. HBCUs graduate more than their proportionate share of AfricanAmerican students with science and engineering degrees and send more than their share on to get Ph.D.s at mainstream institutions. A few years back, for example, the National Science Foundation reported that with only 20 percent of total African-American enrollment, HBCUs produce 40 percent of the African-Americans graduating with a bachelor's degree in the natural sciences. This is impressive. All of this is something high school seniors deserve to know. The commission challenges colleges and universities to tell them.