Affirmative Action in US Politics

Introduction

Affirmative Action programmes are programmes designed to put right past discrimination and to prevent future discrimination.

These programmes usually involve preferential treatment for a minority group and are commonly associated with African-Americans

Arguments against Affirmative Action

It is unconstitutional and un-American

The Declaration of independence pledges that "all men are created equal". This suggests the Founding Fathers were not racist.

The American dream is a tale about how anyone with talent can succeed

Republicans have claimed affirmative action programmes prevent self-reliance. The Constitution, they argue, should protect individuals and not groups

It is unfair

Why should white Americans pay for the sins of their ancestors? Even blacks owned slaves

Other minority groups such as Chinese Americans have prospered without preferential treatment

Public sector workers suffer the most from these schemes, as well as those in moderately paid positions, not the rich

Affirmative action was merely a response to civil unrest and race riots in the 1960s

President Ford said affirmative action was a victory for "lawbreakers" and "mad dogs"

It is unnecessary

Many blacks have prospered in recent years, as demonstrated by the emergence of a black middle class and politicians such as Barack Obama.

  • More blacks than ever are taking part in politics (Ben Carson as head of dept for Trump).
  • Front loading in states with large minority populations has led to them influencing the vote greatly

Segregation is a choice - even wealthier blacks in suburbs are segregated, even though they could afford to live in white areas

Black underachievement is blamed on family structure and black culture (violence, drugs, gangster rap)

The Supreme Court (SCOTUS) recently struck down key parts of the Voting Rights Act 1965. The key claim made by the the court was that racism is no longer so prevalent in the south.

It is counter-productive and poorly implemented

Preferential treatment in education has meant weaker students are ill equipped to handle the workload at the universities they attend

Those minorities who are successful face the stigma of affirmative action

It is not the fault of those in the suburbs that the cities are a mess, yet they had to endure busing, which was universally deemed to be a failure. Programmes such as these led to backlash against affirmative action (e.g. failures such as this led to the banning of affirmative action in California under proposition 209)

Arguments for Affirmative Action

The Constitution has not provided equality for all and affirmative action is there to ensure that it does

The Founding Fathers supported slavery and for 100 years the Constitution allowed for legalised segregation. The US government has a duty to right these wrongs

Past programmes to remedy poverty benefits whites instead of blacks (e.g. New Deal created construction jobs for Irish Americans. The GI bill helped American soldiers who had fought in WWII find housing but did not benefit non-whites very much)

Made the USA a fairer place

By 2002, 70% of blacks were in white collar jobs (compared to 15% in 1960)

Steady flow of blacks moving from cities to suburbs, promoting a black middle class

46 blacks in the house of representatives, largely as a result of redistricting that created minority districts

Blacks with a uni degree has increased by 43% since the 1970s

Nixons affirmative action programmes broke up white-dominated unions in the construction industry

Social justice has not been realised, thus affirmative action needs to continue

The Supreme Court decision in Brown v Board did not end segregation

Racial profiling proves that America is still institutionally racist. There have been many allegations of police brutality e.g. 2014 Ferguson riots following the death of Michael Brown by a white police officer who was acquitted

More blacks in jail, parole or on probation than there are black men in uni

Blacks are less likely to own a house and have savings, which means they have fewer sources of income. Far more lost their houses in the credit crunch due to them taking out sub-prime mortgages

Affirmative Action is not as radical as critics suggest

The Supreme Court has watered down affirmative action (e.g. California v Bakke 1978 banned using affirmative action for righting past wrongs). Affirmative Action can now only be used to promote diversity as declared in Fisher v Texas 2016. Current the supreme court could end affirmative action all together, given their increasingly conservative nature

Number of initiatives banned affirmative action at state level (e.g. Arizona's proposition 107 bans affirmative action in employment)

Reparations advocates say that:

  • There needs to recognition of the scale of the disaster that befell the slaves; it is not recognised as a crime against humanity which it was
  • Cry for reparations has been made since the slaves were freed but ignored. It could help white guilt and ease psychological grievances felt by blacks
dec