In search of fairness: a better way - UCLA shows that class-based affirmative action won't lead to a 'whiteout'

Washington Monthly, June, 1998 by Richard D. Kahlenberg

As a matter of justice, one could argue, blacks should receive bonus points above and beyond any socioeconomic preference because they face discrimination not faced by whites. Granted, discrimination against an applicant's parents or grandparents in employment or housing is already captured by the economic preference for low family income and living in bad neighborhoods and attending bad schools. But what about the fact that black students themselves are more likely to be harassed by the police or by security guards in the mall or that they have difficulty getting a taxi -- all because they are black? These are highly troubling forms of discrimination, and our legal system must hold discriminators accountable by, for example, punishing offending cab drivers. But it is hard to see how this form of discrimination justifies a blanket preference for all African Americans and Latinos to Berkeley.

A more direct link might be shown if it were demonstrated that racist elementary and secondary teachers have unjustified lower expectations for black kids, which unfairly reduces their academic performance. This is a serious argument, if proven, but the proper remedy is better training of teachers. The problem with providing explicit racial preferences in university admissions to offset low expectations of K-12 teachers is that the very existence of such preferences may feed low expectations in the future. There is some evidence that the cure can promote the disease: Researchers find, for example, that the "mere mention" of affirmative action during polling can increase negative white responses about blacks generally. A final explanation might be test bias: that the SAT and LSAT are culturally biased and do not demonstrate the innate ability of students. The claim is certainly true -- the tests are culture-bound -- but it is highly important that all students be able to master mainstream American culture. As Alexander Bickel wrote: "Culture in the larger sense is what universities aim to transmit and what students must work and achieve in."

In any event, the Supreme Court does not allow universities to give preferences to African Americans on the presumption of societal discrimination. In practice, remedial preferences are normally available only if an individual applicant documents specific ways in which discrimination has made her academic record unpredictive of her long-term potential. Where such showings can be made, these individualized preferences based on racial discrimination (as opposed to race) are in my view fully justified; but that is quite different from adding large bonus points based on skin color across the board.

On the other extreme, there is the genetic explanation, an ugly theory that rears its head periodically, but has been thorough discredited on each occasion. It may be that some conservatives embrace racial preference precisely because they suspect that there are deep intractable genetic differences between racial groups, and preferences are the only way to keep the peace. Nathan Glazer, for example, responded to the argument made in The Bell Curve not by disputing its accuracy but by asking, "whether the untruth is not better for American society than the truth" At bottom, those who say class-based affirmative action won't produce additional racial diversity -- no matter how fair -- are too pessimistic about the abilities of black people.