As high school seniors across the nation get ready for Homecoming, today the Supreme Court will be hearing arguments that could determine what kinds of experiences they will be exposed to in college next year. The Court will hear Fisher v. Texas and decide whether the University of Texas -- and, by extension, all institutions of higher learning -- can consider the race of a student as one factor among many in a holistic review of a student applicant. The Supreme Court has already endorsed as constitutional an admissions policy very similar to that used by Texas a half-dozen times over the last half century, and, most recently, nine years ago in Grutter v. Bollinger. Yet, despite having this matter settled many times previously, we are somehow again debating the importance that quality and diversity play in our nation's colleges and universities.
Sadly, you may not hear many Members of Congress speak about this important case. It will, after all, be heard less than one month before the election and the topic is touchy. Many ask themselves, "Why should I care? Aren't we living in a society where we don't need to consider a person's race anymore?" To answer this question, one must consider the fact that college diplomas still remain elusive for many minorities. White students are five times as likely as black students to enroll in a highly selective college, and two to three times as likely to gain admission -- even after accounting for income differences between black and white families. Other minorities, Hispanics and low-income Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPIs), face similar hurdles. This racial disparity cannot be attributed to academic preparation, as the racial gap in preparation has actually narrowed in the last few decades, but rather to the fact that while we have made progress, we still do not live in the kind of post-racial society in which equal opportunity policies are not needed.
Considerations of applicants' test scores, socio-economic status, leadership skills, grades, geography, extracurricular activities, life experiences and racial and ethnic background (and experiences that one might have as a result of that background) lead to a more diverse campus environment and better educational experiences for all students. The over 70 amicus briefs filers on behalf of the University from a wide range of groups such as military leaders, colleges and universities, social scientists, religious groups, civil rights organizations, women's groups and many of America's largest companies all agree. I, too, agree with our nation's flagship universities and top-tier institutions that we must have the flexibility to consider all sides of an applicant for admissions.
Some think that university admissions should be decided solely on grades and test scores. They are certainly key factors to consider, but I think we all would agree that it is nonsensical to suggest that one's SAT score in high school should dictate how wide the gates of opportunity should be for the rest of one's life. However, should the Supreme Court vote against the University of Texas in favor of Fisher, given persistent achievement gaps, even after controlling for family income, this is exactly what would happen. The ruling would make the student bodies of many colleges less diverse and cause the lives of those already attending the universities to be less enriching. Less exposure to diversity is not only an issue of racial understanding and about opening up the doors of opportunity, but also one that strikes at the heart of our nation's economic competitiveness.
Our businesses rely on our higher education system to provide the pipeline of talent we need to compete globally. These companies know, through decades of experience, that students who are exposed to others from diverse backgrounds make for better workers. These benefits accrue regardless of the student's race. Diversity in our workforce is vital to getting our economy get back on its feet and crucial to the success of American enterprises as our international business grows.
I wholeheartedly believe that when a student's race is considered, it must be done in a careful and thoughtful way. Let us hope, for the sake of our nation's economic health, that the Supreme Court continues to let universities determine their own admissions criteria.
Rep Michael Honda is the representative of Silicon Valley and member of the House Budget and Appropriations Committees.
Follow Rep. Mike Honda on Twitter: www.twitter.com/repmikehonda
Previewing Your Comment.
This comment has not yet been postedCourt. Texas permits undocumented immigrants who graduate from Texas high schools to pay in-state tuition rates at state colleges and universities. The University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) charges Mexican students who live across the Rio Grande in Juarez a special rate that is higher than what Texas residents pay but lower than what residents from other states pay.
texas is a flyover state- avoid it at all costs..
there is nothing good happening in texas.
the governors summer home is called nggrhead ranch.. for gods sake
Does a poor inner city black student have less opportunity than a poor inner city white student? Perhaps... but it is likely that neither of them have the same opportunities as anyone from a middle- or upper-class suburb, black, white, brown, or otherwise.
Hypothetically, explain how the children of a black Cardiologist on Long Island have less of a chance at the "Top-Tier" than the children of a white police officer in Queens?
If, and that's a big IF, what you're asserting is true, then what do you hypothesize is the root cause? A wealthy doctor would be able to provide his children with a secure home, consistent meals, a good school district to grow up in, sports to play, etc...
The Supreme Court has already ruled in a similar situation, DeStefano vs Ricci, where White firefighters cannot be punished because a Latino firefighter did not score as well on the same test.
It is not the fault of White people (or any people) if someone else does not perform to an equal or above standard.
until they put these laws on the books- there were no black students at any of these schools.
people like you have got yours- so you give us- the everything is equal- even steven argument...
they remove these laws from teh books- it will be all white again. your plan huh?
Actually they haven't. As per Grutter, in order to meet with strict-scrutiny the policy must be narrowly- tailored so as to be as inoffensive and specific as possible. Justice O'Connor's test requires "serious good-faith consideration of race-neutral alternatives." UT's top 10% rule, which is race-neutral is a great success and has already led to an incoming class that if I recall, is majority minority. UT must consider using only this law to achieve their desired results to be in good-faith. Their additional consideration of race is redundant and thus unconstitutional, unless they can prove that the Top 10% policy is ineffective, which it is not.
First, the University of Texas achieved ethnic and racial diversity without consideration of race or ethnicity in its application process. Specifically, the top 10% (now 8%) of graduates from every high school in Texas gain automatic acceptance to the University of Texas. Texas has many high schools where nearly all the students are minorities. These schools, among others, provide a steady pool of minority students GUARANTEED admission at UT.
The 10% rule is not at issue in the case before the Supreme Court. Rather, UT also admits students who do not otherwise qualify pursuant to the 10% rule. For this tier of applicants race and ethnicity are factors considered in the admission process. Ironically, on average the minority students admitted in this tier have higher grades and test scores that those admitted pursuant to the 10% rule. That's because at highly competitive high schools many otherwise qualified students don't graduate in the top 10% of their class. The easiest way to get admitted to UT is to attend an underperforming high school.
Thus, the question becomes why do we need a system that take race into account if there already exists a system that produces ethnic and racial diversity without considering race as part of the admissions process? Forget the straw men and PC blather, and take a stab at answering that question.
flyover it
and derailing anything having to do with human or civil rights- they can get their hands on....
we need a new court to overturn all the heinous backwards precedents set u by this court- as soon as possible....these are the most on the take people who have ever served as Justices.
Until race is not an economic impediment, nothing should change.
It is silly to target Texas as THE state that re-writes history. I can't think of ONE state in the US that hasn't done that. I can't think of ONE politician who hasn't done that, either. This case is just representative of many issues in many places, not one issue in Texas.
TX even admits the top 10% rulen has increased racial diversity in colleges partially because its public high schools aren't diverse. Look at how some the boundaries for some high schools are drawn. Look at how many of TX southern counties are mainly Hispanic or that that many of its urban areas like Dallas have and Houston are a smaller percentage of white residents then the state as a whole.
TX also admits the top 10% rule hurts students at private and parachial schools because the 10% rule only applies to public high schools so students, white or minority, have at a slight disadvantage when applying to the top TX colleges like UT Austin and UHouston because of the number of seats set aside to students from public high schools.
A racially diverse university can bring benefits but how does the university define having a 'critical mass' of minority students. I believe strict quatas have been ruled unconstituitional. Is UT Austin better off with 10% of students being African-American, 15% being Hispanic and 5% Asian American? or is UT Austin better off if 15% of students are African-American, 20% being Hispanic and 8% being Asian-American? To some extenst, there is a diversity paradox. As a student population grown more diverse, students tend to self-segregate based on race-which could lower interracial student interaction in the class room and in social-circles.