\doc\web\2004\02\annekim.txt Acting Affirmatively Legislature must follow through on bill supporting academic diversity Seattle Times 2/15/2005 By ANNE KIM Kim's article calls for replacing a voter-imposed ban on racial preferences with a return to admissions with the sole goal of achieving certain politically "acceptable" numbers. of races as long as it's not called a quota. Yet the numbers she cites show the only significant "imbalance" is too few whites, and too many Asians when compared against 2000 census figures. Arthur Hu responds: Be careful what you wish for. Anne Kim's numbers for the University of Washington shows minorities are already within a couple points of politically correct in a state that only has 3 percent blacks. At 54 percent, the largest "imbalance" is that Whites are barely 4 points over minority status, while Asians are 25 points above our tiny population. Only Malaysian-style restrictions on Asian admissions to protect low scoring whites can bring "acceptable" diversity. The real problem is that our tax dollars are indoctrinating students like Ms. Kim into the mindless cult of "diversity". Arthur Hu 12422 107th pl ne Kirkland WA 98034 Comparison with population by Arthur Hu Feb 15, 2004 Race UW% State% Pt Dif VsState VsWhite afam 2.85 3.20 0.35 0.89 1.30 amind 0.92 1.60 0.68 0.58 -1.19 hisp 4.34 7.50 3.16 0.58 -1.18 asian 29.38 6.00 -23.38 4.90 7.15 pi 0.86 white 54.01 78.90 24.89 0.68 1.00 none 5.14 Source: www.census.gov for washington state, 2000 census Vs State = UW pop div by state pop Vs White = Vs State div by white rate. -2.00 = 1/2 * No minority is off more than 3 percentage points. * Blacks and native Americans within 1 point of correct * Compared to white under-representation, American Indians and Hispanic are within 20%. Blacks are 30% better represented than whites * White under-representation of 25 points is almost exactly equal to Asians over-representation of nearly 24 points. ------------------------ Anne Kim: A state Senate bill would allow race to be considered as a factor in admissions again in Washington public universities. It's about time. Following last summer's U.S. Supreme Court ruling for fhe University of Michigan Law School's affirmative-action policy, Senate KIM Bill 6268 would make a change to Initiative 200. It would allow the NEXT team state's public universities to consider a student's race or national origin in the admissions process, What it would not do is allot reserved spaces or give particular racial or ethnic identities predetermined weight in admissions. It's common sense that this legislation should be passed. Currently the inability of state colleges to consider a student's race as a factor in admissions perpetuates the vastly unequal social structure of this country and inhibits truly diverse discourse between college students, g We live with the consequences of histories of hundreds of years of slavery, Jim Crow laws, racially targeted anti-immirigration laws, and countless other forms of systemic and cultural racism. The inequalities that this history has created cannot simply be undone by ending institutionalized racism. It's naive to think that the social economic and power inequalities instituted since this nation's inception can be wholly erased within the 50 years after the civil-rights movement. But by allowing race to be considered as a factor in admitting students into universities, students of color living within the consequences of this history are given the chance to earn higner incomes, gain social capital and thus give back to their communi- ties. Through this direct mechanism of affirmative action, our racially unequal social structure can begin to be deconstructed. Yet in Washington we lost this mechanism when 1-200 was passed in 1998. The consequence of I200 at the UW, for example, was a 32-percent drop in the number of minority freshmen in 1999. As of 2002, due to the work of various recruitment programs, the percentage of underrepresented minority students in the UW's freshman class has returned close to pre-I200 figures. Here is the racial make up of enrolled freshmen last fall, according to the UW: African American 2.85 percent American Indian .92 percent Hispanic /Latinos 4.34 Asian Americans 29.38 percent Hawaiian / Pacific Islanders .86 percent Caucasians: 54.01 percent Not indicated: 5.14 percent International: 2.49 percent Yet, the current level of racial diversity in Washington's public Universities is still unacceptably low. There's something wrong with the admissions process when I see only a handful of students of color (usually no black students) in my classes. In order for academic discourse to be truly broadening and non-exclusionary; the backgrounds and viewpoints of students must be rich in diversity. Students need to exchange a range of experiences both inside and outside the classroom. With out this diversity, students aren't receiving the education they deserve. Yet, some people continue to argue that admitting students on the basis of color for any reason is wrong. This is simply a poor excuse for blocking affirmative action. These people not only ignore the current repercussions of the historical lack of access to privileged institutions that people of color have experienced,but also have a misinformed understanding of how this proposed affirmative-action legislation works. This affirmativ.e-action policy is not about admitting students solely on the basis of the color, of their skin. Instead, It would allow colleges to take a student's entire identity and experience into consideration when admitting them, including a student's racial identify. Prohibiting schools from considering a characteristic that for many students has a huge influence on their individual identity only makes the admissions process uneven. Yes, state schools have been experiencing budget cuts and over-enrollment, but the lack of racial diversity at public universities cannot be ignored. Diversity within the student body is essential for academic discourse and for addressing larger social needs like equal access in the workforce. State lawmakers must allow public universities to use affirmative action policies in order to create a truly diverse academic environment and to change racially unequal social structures. Anne Kim is a UW junior: E-mail:NEXT@seattlettmes.com Arthur Hu responds: Be careful what you wish for. Anne Kim's numbers for the University of Washington shows minorities are already within a couple points of politically correct in a state that only has 3 percent blacks. At 54 percent, the largest "imbalance" is that Whites are barely 4 points over minority status, while Asians are 25 points above our tiny population. Only Malaysian-style restrictions on Asian admissions to protect low scoring whites can bring "acceptable" diversity. The real problem is that our tax dollars are indoctrinating students like Ms. Kim into the mindless cult of "diversity". Arthur Hu 12422 107th pl ne Kirkland WA 98034 Comparison with population by Arthur Hu Feb 15, 2004 Race UW% State% Pt Dif VsState VsWhite afam 2.85 3.20 0.35 0.89 1.30 amind 0.92 1.60 0.68 0.58 -1.19 hisp 4.34 7.50 3.16 0.58 -1.18 asian 29.38 6.00 -23.38 4.90 7.15 pi 0.86 white 54.01 78.90 24.89 0.68 1.00 none 5.14 Vs State = UW pop div by state pop Vs White = Vs State div by white rate. -2.00 = 1/2 * No minority is off more than 3 percentage points. * Blacks and native Americans within 1 point of correct * Compared to white under-representation, American Indians and Hispanic are within 20%. Blacks are 30% better represented than whites * White under-representation of 25 points is almost exactly equal to Asians over-representation of nearly 24 points. H-Bd@Yahoogroups. Com; Tim Fay; Aadap-L; Arn-L; Educationloop; Wa-Ed; Northwest Asian Weekly