News from
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Communications and Publications, Stanhope Hall
Princeton, New Jersey 08544
Tel 609/258-3601; Fax 609/258-1301
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Mary Caffrey (609) 258-5748
Date: November 13, 1996
New Book Offers Students' Perspectives on Affirmative Action
Princeton, N.J. -- A generation after it began, "affirmative action" has brought both profound change and unending debate about its fairness. The policy has allowed group preferences to correct the effects of discrimination, both past and present, and today some ask whether the policy should change. Last week, voters in California approved a constitutional amendment to prohibit racial preferences.
That question is the subject of a recently published book, Race versus Class: The New Affirmative Action Debate, written largely by students at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and edited by Associate Professor of Politics and Public Affairs Carol M. Swain. The book is published by the University Press of America.
The book is an outgrowth of a Wilson School task force led by Swain in the spring of 1995. Swain opens the book with a chapter on the history of the policies known collectively as "affirmative action." The other chapters, which cover such topics as the difficulty of classifying people by race and the racism in housing markets, are written by seven members of the Princeton Class of 1996 and one, Fredrick M. Vars, from the Class of 1995. Proceeds from the book will be used to fund a program in the study of race relations, Swain said.
A common thread of these chapters is an argument that class should be the new foundation for "affirmative action," with race playing a role in determining who receives preferences. Several writers argue that giving extra assistance to those from lower socioeconomic classes, particularly those whose parents lacked education, ensures fairness not only to poor whites, but also to poor blacks. These writers assert that poor blacks can end up worse off if universities and job recruiters target well-off, well-educated African Americans when filling minority slots.
Among the points made by student writers:
- Low-income students suffer in a financial aid environment that increasingly emphasizes loans over grants. These students are not likely to take out loans that exceed the annual family income.
- Polls show that the public supports the original goal of "affirmative action," which called for encouraging women and minorities to "enter the race." But the term "affirmative action" has been bound up with concepts like "quota" and "reverse discrimination" to the point where it causes the public to react negatively.
- Conservatives who oppose "affirmative action" on libertarian grounds have done a much better job articulating their position than have the progressives, who support "affirmative action" on moral grounds. Their arguments that the policy seeks to compensate minorities and women for past wrongs and redistribute wealth are actually separate goals that demand separate responses.
- "Affirmative action" has suffered from poor enforcement of existing laws. A chapter on the history of federal housing policy explores this problem.
New Approaches Proposed
"If the goal of affirmative action is to allow everyone to begin on the same starting line -- or at least not penalize individuals for characteristics such as race or gender -- economic disadvantage must be considered in the equation," writes Jonathan Goldman, who proposed a new class-race matrix called Fresh Start, which could be used by college admissions officials when determining which of two equally qualified applicants should be admitted.
The matrix would weigh class more heavily than race and could be expanded to include gender and sexual preference. The student deemed most disadvantaged based on these criteria would have preference in the admission process. Goldman writes that the Fresh Start approach should be applied only to higher education. "Hiring in the work force should be based solely on merit without regard to class, race or gender," he writes.
Swain is particularly interested in developing good polling data. She has completed a questionnaire that removes much of the "loaded language" that have marred other polls.
Not every contributor to Race versus Class agrees that a
race-based affirmative action policy has no legitimacy. Vars, who was not part of the 1995 task force, said, "The case for affirmative action is the history of racial discrimination. The compelling reason isn't to help poor people. Affirmative action is trying to make up for 300 years of discrimination. If you want to have a stronger social welfare policy, I'm for that. But we should not pollute the compelling case of racism."