Balance the Board

Since the Board of Regents for the University of California (U.C.) phased out affirmative action in 1997 after the passing of Proposition 209, minority admissions have dropped by 50 percent (from 24.7 percent in 1997 to 12.2 percent in 1998). This drop shows the devastating affect that anti-affirmative action policies have on student body diversity, as well as the unfairness of the admissions policies that have replaced affirmative action.

Several minority students and civil rights groups, including the NAACP, have filed a lawsuit against the university system. The lawsuit alleges that current university admissions policies are discriminatory because advanced placement courses--classes which many minority students are unable to take by virtue of the high school they attended--figure in highly. At the very least, the Board of Regents must reexamine those admissions policies which are under attack.

The Associated Students of the University of California (ASUC) passed a bill urging recently elected Democratic Governor Gray Davis to appoint pro-affirmative action regents to the Board of Regents. While this action alone would not reverse the ban on affirmative action, Amanda R. Canning, academic vice-president of the ASUC said, "I think that it is time that the regents experience some diversity themselves, not just ethnic diversity, but diversity of thought."

The ban on affirmative action is not likely to be overturned anytime soon, but a symbolic action that would make the U.C.s appear more welcoming to minority students is a step in the right direction.

One such move is a proposal by Regent Bill Bagley to overturn the anti-affirmative action decision. Another proposal would require that the top four percent of students from each high school in California be admitted to the U.C. system.

While it is not clear yet which of these solutions, if any, is the best route towards a more diverse student body--what is clear is that the Board of Regents must do more to ensure that the U.C. campuses are representative of the state of California. If Davis appoints regents who are more diverse, then the debate over how to pursue a talented and diverse student body will be more balanced and fair.

The current anti-affirmative action policy, makes the U.C. system unattractive to top minority applicants, especially as big-name schools in the east actively recruit them. Given this current atmosphere, it is no wonder that, as admissions of minority students have plummeted, so has the percentage of minorities enrolling in the U.C. system.

A change in the make-up of the Board of Regents would give minority applicants advocates in the U.C. system and provide a welcome balance to the virulent conservatives like Regent Ward Connerly who spearheaded the anti-affirmative action effort. Current regents have been appointed by 16 years of Republican governors preceding Davis--in fact, former Governor Pete Wilson pushed strongly for the anti-affirmative action vote.

The U.C.s are meant to serve students in California who meet the academic standards for admission. The U.C.s also must provide a learning environment that fosters diversity, something that almost every university in the United States has identified as vital to the development and education of its students.

After giving them the cold shoulder, the U.C.s need to convince minority students that they are valuable assets to their universities. A little diversity in the Board of Regents will do much to further this goal.

Whether or not affirmative action is on its way out for good is one debate. But no one will ever doubt the effect of a good image. Davis should take the ASUC's advice and make the Board of Regents a model in diversity to which the Universities it oversees can aspire.