About Affirmative Action

Over the past several years, race-based opportunity policies have been on the defensive. In 2006, 58% of Michigan voters approved a state-wide referendum ending affirmative action in public education. A year later, the U.S. Supreme Court forced public school administrators to use socioeconomic status, not race, to integrate segregated public schools. In 2008, Nebraska voters approved a state-wide ballot initiative banning all racial preferences, while voters in Colorado rejected a similar measure; future referendums are being prepared in other states. President Barack Obama injected energy into the race v. class debate when he suggested that poor whites should at times be given preference over more privileged blacks.

Supporters of class-based policies argue that it provides the best prospects for upward mobility, particularly among blacks. For example, data indicates that integrating poor children of all races has not led to improved academic achievement, but integrating poor children with more affluent communities has yielded results. They also argue that racial diversity is still indirectly promoted since African-Americans are far more likely to attend schools with concentrated poverty. Class-based policies may also generate greater popular support since lower- and middle-class whites, a large segment of the population, often pay the highest price for race-based policies.

Opponents counter that race-based policies maintain overall quality by replacing the least qualified majority candidate with the most qualified minority candidate. They also point to data that shows the deleterious effects of class-based policies on black entry into schools or jobs; following the 1996 enactment of California\'s Proposition 209, UCLA\'s incoming black student rate has dropped to the lowest level in three decades. Perhaps more importantly, class-based policies ignore the foundational goal of affirmative action, which was to use racial preferences to achieve diversity and social justice.