Outlining what he calls “affirmative consideration,” Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Deval Patrick is calling for a new approach to undo past discrimination.
In remarks to a Black law school alumni debate on affirmative action, the Clinton administration’s chief civil rights advocate argued for the need to defuse the politically-charged atmosphere surrounding affirmative action.
Patrick outlined his approach without spelling out the details of how it would be implemented.
“This is what I call `affirmative consideration,’ where race, ethnicity or gender is a factor, but is not necessarily dispositive,” Patrick said in a keynote address to a recent Boston College Law School Black Alumni gathering.
“This kind of affirmative action guarantees nothing. It supports merit. It emphasizes qualifications. It embodies flexibility and the aspirations of an integrated workplace or school,” he said.
“This kind of affirmative action is what the early proponents, Republican and Democrats, have supported,” he said.
His remarks followed a morning of rapid exchanges over affirmative action before a gathering of the law school’s Black alumni.
On one side, conservatives including Errol Smith, vice chair of the California Civil Rights Initiative, Robert George, a writer for House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) and Phyllis Berry-Myers, secretary of the Center for New Black Leadership, challenged affirmative action supporters.
Arguing in support of affirmative action was a panel that included Dr. Dorothy Height, president and CEO of the National Council of Negro Women, Weldon Latham, a Washington, DC attorney who is a member of the Small Business Administration National Advisory Council, NAACP Legal Defense Fund director Elaine R. Jones and Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law director Barbara Arnwine.
Rhetorical salvos from the two sides came in the wake of recent a federal appeals court decision to declare unconstitutional the University of Texas law school’s admissions procedure. The court in Hopwood vs. University of Texas struck down the law school’s use of racial classifications in its admissions process.
Arnwine said the decision adds to the pessimism of Blacks about the future of affirmative action.
“Once again we’re looking at a judge applying ideology to his own opinion,” she said.
NAACP/LDF director Elaine Jones agreed, saying that the action is a constitutional assault on affirmative action because it attacks the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. “The 14th amendment is the affirmative action amendment to the Constitution,” Jones said.
On the other side, Smith from California applauded the Hopwood decision as a way of avoiding a selection process that is “presumptive of inferiority” of Blacks and other minority students. He characterized himself as “a catalyst for positive change.”
His philosophy is fueled by the view that racial preference formulas demean Blacks. The assumption is that “people who look like you and [me] can’t make it,” he said.
According to Smith, as affirmative action programs remain in place, the image of Blacks worsens. Already, he said, Asian bankers, when polled about the topic, said they would loan money to Hispanics in the name of economic development but would loan money to Blacks as a way of meeting affirmative action lending mandates.
Berry-Myers, part of the group of Blacks who testified in favor of the Supreme Court nomination of Justice Clarence Thomas, said that while she and other Black Republicans embrace anti-discrimination programs, they abhor affirmative action mandates by the government.
“The federal government should fight discrimination, not promote it,” she said. Height said that many of the opponents of affirmative action are ignorant of their roots. She said many people misunderstand Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s statement that people should be judged by the content of their character, not by the color of their skin. Height said it was important to note that his life focused on tearing down an unjust system and opening doors to those shut out of opportunity.
“Many of us are the beneficiaries of open doors, but don’t know how they got open in the first place,” she said. “Many of us are not old enough to know where we came from.”
Berry-Myers, part of the group of Blacks who testified in favor of the Supreme Court nomination of Justice Clarence Thomas, said that while she and other Black Republicans embrace anti-discrimination programs, they abhor affirmative action mandates by the government.
“The federal government should fight discrimination, not promote it,” she said. Height said that many of the opponents of affirmative action are ignorant of their roots. She said many people misunderstand Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s statement that people should be judged by the content of their character, not by the color of their skin. Height said it was important to note that his life focused on tearing down an unjust system and opening doors to those shut out of opportunity.
“Many of us are the beneficiaries of open doors, but don’t know how they got open in the first place,” she said. “Many of us are not old enough to know where we came from.”
COPYRIGHT 1996 Cox, Matthews & Associates
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group
© Copyright 2005 by DiverseEducation.com
