UC Regent Ward Connerly, the man behind the highly controversial decision in the 1990s to eliminate the use of affirmative action in admission to the University of California, has proposed the “”Racial Privacy Initiative.””
The initiative, if passed, will enact an amendment to California’s state constitution that will effectively prohibit classifying “”any individual by race, ethnicity, color or national origin in the operation of public education, public contracting or public employment”” within the state of California, with limited exceptions for law enforcement and low- income housing.
However, it seems that this proposal targets the admissions processes of public education institutions in California, as the initiative explicitly states it cannot supersede federal employment laws requiring the collection of racial statistics.
In real terms, this would mean the elimination of checkboxes for self-identification of race on UC applications. However, the proposal makes provisions for an exception on racial data collection for inmates, which leads to an interesting question: If we are collecting racial data to correct social injustices in our criminal system, why would we wish to stop collecting data to address inequalities and ill representation in the public universities of California?
While the Guardian recognizes the possible discomfort with being individually associated with one’s race on a government form, the discontinuation of the procedure would make it more difficult to address racial inequalities rather than create a race-blind system altogether.
Student organizations such as the Student Affirmative Action Committee depend on reliable statistics to make their case about racial misrepresentation in the UC student body.
Without undisputed data, the credibility of their claims would be undermined. Furthermore, since race is no longer a determining factor in admissions, the proposed change would have only a psychological benefit, in contrast with the real consequences of the statistical collection mess that would be created.
In short, as much as we’ve progressed, race is still an issue that needs to be addressed. While creating a race-blind society is admirable and even desirable presently for a great many UC students, there would be no alternative statistical method as reliable as asking every student who applied to the UC system to provide their race at their discretion.
The Guardian opposes this initiative in the hopes that a race-blind university system will eventually be achieved through the careful tabulation and directed actions aimed at a more complete representation of California’s population.
