Affirmative Action Bill (Failed)

[Ebowed]

That is indeed disturbing, and it needs to be corrected. Do you believe that these circumstances in public schools exist because of race alone?

It's rather interesting actually.  These academies were set up in the late 60s and early 70s by white parents who were opposed to integration.  If you talk to the folks that live there, they will say that they merely continue to send their children to these private schools "out of tradition," or they embrace the mantra of these academies about "a quality education" (a not-so-subtle reference to the state of the black-occupied public system).  It's not so much about income as these schools are quite cheap in tuition so that poor whites can afford to send their children there.  They will say that it has nothing to do with race, but the statistics don't lie.

Of course these schools claim that they don't discriminate on the basis of race, and their crumbling statuses across the Black Belt have forced some of them to begin accepting a small number of black students, often in conjunction with improving the competitiveness of their sports teams.  It's ironic that these private schools are in many ways actually extremely inadequate compared to the public system - and of course they are likely to teach creationism, nationalism, and Confederate pride in the classroom.  No one in these communities actually has access to a decent education, not just blacks.  Here is one such example of a school I'm talking about:
Humphreys Academy, in Belzoni, Humphreys County, MS.

Have a look through the photos and tell me if you would pick that the town of Belzoni is 68.06% black.  (The public school district for Humphreys County is 96% black, however.  Hmm...)

I've gone off on a tangent, here, I suppose, but my point is that in a system where whites and blacks are still de facto segregated (even if there has been, in the last decade, minimal integration - these places don't want to be investigated by the IRS), given the dynamics that would lead to a situation like that, do you think blacks are given an equal opportunity, regardless of income?
 

I mean, what about the Whites that go to the very same schools, why should the Blacks get the prefered treatment?

Fair question, but affirmative action is not yet outdated.  It is clear to me that racial inequalities still exist throughout the education system, for a number of reasons.  Of course I support taking income into account as well.  If we have two students of equal academic performance, and one is from a wealthy black family, and the other is from a poor white family, we would have to take their socioeconomic backgrounds into consideration.

Yes, but as with affirmative action, it served a purpose at one point.

If we acknowledge that affirmative action served a purpose at one point, then is it fair to call the program inherently racist?

By the way, I would dispute that the Bureau of Indian Affairs has outlived its usefulness - the level of poverty on some Indian reservations is disgraceful.  Shannon and Todd counties, SD, are places where people do not necessarily have indoor plumbing.

[Purple State]

I will be bringing amendments for this. While I am not a supporter for affirmative action, the issue is not a (excuse the pun) black or white matter. Private institutions should be allowed to run themselves in whatever way they believe to be most efficient. However, there do exist caveats to this principle. That I support unions and workers' rights indicate this clearly.

As such, I will be offering amendments tomorrow to bring this to an appropriate middle ground.

[Franzl]

That is indeed disturbing, and it needs to be corrected. Do you believe that these circumstances in public schools exist because of race alone?

It's rather interesting actually.  These academies were set up in the late 60s and early 70s by white parents who were opposed to integration.  If you talk to the folks that live there, they will say that they merely continue to send their children to these private schools "out of tradition," or they embrace the mantra of these academies about "a quality education" (a not-so-subtle reference to the state of the black-occupied public system).  It's not so much about income as these schools are quite cheap in tuition so that poor whites can afford to send their children there.  They will say that it has nothing to do with race, but the statistics don't lie.

Of course these schools claim that they don't discriminate on the basis of race, and their crumbling statuses across the Black Belt have forced some of them to begin accepting a small number of black students, often in conjunction with improving the competitiveness of their sports teams.  It's ironic that these private schools are in many ways actually extremely inadequate compared to the public system - and of course they are likely to teach creationism, nationalism, and Confederate pride in the classroom.  No one in these communities actually has access to a decent education, not just blacks.  Here is one such example of a school I'm talking about:
Humphreys Academy, in Belzoni, Humphreys County, MS.

Have a look through the photos and tell me if you would pick that the town of Belzoni is 68.06% black.  (The public school district for Humphreys County is 96% black, however.  Hmm...)

I've gone off on a tangent, here, I suppose, but my point is that in a system where whites and blacks are still de facto segregated (even if there has been, in the last decade, minimal integration - these places don't want to be investigated by the IRS), given the dynamics that would lead to a situation like that, do you think blacks are given an equal opportunity, regardless of income?
 

I mean, what about the Whites that go to the very same schools, why should the Blacks get the prefered treatment?

Fair question, but affirmative action is not yet outdated.  It is clear to me that racial inequalities still exist throughout the education system, for a number of reasons.  Of course I support taking income into account as well.  If we have two students of equal academic performance, and one is from a wealthy black family, and the other is from a poor white family, we would have to take their socioeconomic backgrounds into consideration.

Yes, but as with affirmative action, it served a purpose at one point.

If we acknowledge that affirmative action served a purpose at one point, then is it fair to call the program inherently racist?

By the way, I would dispute that the Bureau of Indian Affairs has outlived its usefulness - the level of poverty on some Indian reservations is disgraceful.  Shannon and Todd counties, SD, are places where people do not necessarily have indoor plumbing.

Yeah, I don't disagree with you, but my main point is what you said yourself:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think our main priority should be improving the public school system in areas like that, which of course, is easier said than done, but it'd be superior to artificially supporting one race over another, especially when you agree that the dire state of education in states like Mississippi affects people of every race.

Although I am generally opposed to the idea of vouchers for private schools, I would be willing to consider them on a limited basis for places like this, at least for the time being.

Ultimately, though, I don't think affirmative action can be justified....it's simply too artificial. How are we ever to know when minorites no longer need that support? Or will it ever end? I think minorities will always claim that they're put a disadvantage (and yes...I'm not arguiing that they don't experience difficulties that White wouldn't). Eventually Whites will also be a minority...will we then create an "affirmative action" program for them?

We can and should provide assistance to people of exceptional talent and limited financial means....and I contend that those qualities are much more likely among ethnic minorities at present. I think that they can be effectively supported under that kind of system.

[Purple State]

I bring the following as an amended version of the current bill:

Section 1: Atlasia recognizes the following forms of affirmative action, based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or any factor not related to economic status, as an unacceptable form of discrimination that shall be prohibited:
     a. Affirmative action in which the expressed or understood criteria for acceptance and promotion are purposefully disregarded.
     b. Affirmative action in which the basis for advancement or the qualities of merit are defined, in whole or in part, by standards that benefit a targeted group based on the previously enumerated factors.

Section 2: Policies of affirmative action or discrimination that are deemed necessary for the proper function of a private institution may receive a waiver from the OAL after providing necessary proof of such a need.

[Franzl]

I'm not quite sure where I stand on that amendment....I need to think about it.

Regardless, I will not accept it as friendly because I would like to see where my fellow senators stand....I request a vote on it.

[MasterJedi]

I request a vote on it.

You'll get it, after the 24 hours of required debate.

[Ebowed]

Here's a form of 'affirmative action.'  Public school hiring three P.E. teachers.  The three most qualified applicants are male, but the school wants to hire at least one female as the P.E. teachers also handle sex education.

Such a decision would be prohibited by this bill in its original and amended form.

[Devilman88]

Here's a form of 'affirmative action.'  Public school hiring three P.E. teachers.  The three most qualified applicants are male, but the school wants to hire at least one female as the P.E. teachers also handle sex education.

Such a decision would be prohibited by this bill in its original and amended form.

That is not affirmative action. This is affirmative action, a police force  is look for three new workers. The top three qualified applicants are white, but due to having to fill a quota the have to hire one person that isn't white, even if that person isn't very qualified.

[Ebowed]

That is not affirmative action. This is affirmative action, a police force  is look for three new workers. The top three qualified applicants are white, but due to having to fill a quota the have to hire one person that isn't white, even if that person isn't very qualified.

Lol, no.  As you state, that is a quota.  Which is not the same thing as affirmative action.

Here's a more appropriate illustration: the police force is looking for three new workers.  There are four equally qualified applicants; three white and one black.  In the hope of increasing workplace diversity they pick two of the whites and the one black to fill the positions.

[Devilman88]

That is not affirmative action. This is affirmative action, a police force  is look for three new workers. The top three qualified applicants are white, but due to having to fill a quota the have to hire one person that isn't white, even if that person isn't very qualified.

Lol, no.  As you state, that is a quota.  Which is not the same thing as affirmative action.

Here's a more appropriate illustration: the police force is looking for three new workers.  There are four equally qualified applicants; three white and one black.  In the hope of increasing workplace diversity they pick two of the whites and the one black to fill the positions.

That is not always the case. Alot of the times they have to not hire someone who is qualified for someone who less qualified because of affirmative action.

[Ebowed]

That is not always the case. Alot of the times they have to not hire someone who is qualified for someone who less qualified because of affirmative action.

Except that they don't "have" to.  Affirmative action is not, and has never been, synonymous with quotas.  To equate the two would be a fundamental misunderstanding of what this discussion is about.

[Devilman88]

That is not always the case. Alot of the times they have to not hire someone who is qualified for someone who less qualified because of affirmative action.

Except that they don't "have" to.  Affirmative action is not, and has never been, synonymous with quotas.  To equate the two would be a fundamental misunderstanding of what this discussion is about.

Even if they don't have to, they could get sued for not hiring someone of a different race(other then white) or women so many places feel like they have to. The hiring process should have everyone on the same playing field and only look at people's qualifications.

[Ebowed]

Even if they don't have to, they could get sued for not hiring someone of a different race(other then white) or women so many places feel like they have to.

One outright fabrication after another.

No one is going to get sued unless they specifically refuse to hire minorities.  Which has nothing to do with the discussion, either.

[Bacon King]

I continue to concur with Ebowed. This bill, while well intentioned, is impractical and would ultimately be harmful to Atlasia.

[MasterJedi]

I hereby open up a vote on the amendment below. Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

Section 1: Atlasia recognizes the following forms of affirmative action, based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or any factor not related to economic status, as an unacceptable form of discrimination that shall be prohibited:
     a. Affirmative action in which the expressed or understood criteria for acceptance and promotion are purposefully disregarded.
     b. Affirmative action in which the basis for advancement or the qualities of merit are defined, in whole or in part, by standards that benefit a targeted group based on the previously enumerated factors.

Section 2: Policies of affirmative action or discrimination that are deemed necessary for the proper function of a private institution may receive a waiver from the OAL after providing necessary proof of such a need.

Aye

[Franzl]

Aye

[Purple State]

Aye


Addressing Ebowed, affirmative action, while a non-obligatory method by which organizations may increase diversity, has become, in organizational culture, a seemingly mandatory form of reverse discrimination. It has become embedded in institutions and oftentimes results in less qualified applicants being accepted instead of those more qualified in order to create more appealing diversity statistics, while harming Atlasia.

[Bacon King]

PS, could you please provide specific real-world examples of this occuring?

[Purple State]

PS, could you please provide specific real-world examples of this occuring?

Let's use the New Haven firefighters as an example. A test is given to firefighters by a city for the purpose of determining advancement. When the white firefighters happened to tend to score better than the black ones, the tests were disregarded. Unless the tests included inherently racist questions, the fact that these firefighters were more qualified should be the only qualification for advancement. That there happened not to be "enough blacks" in the group that was qualified should have nothing to do with it.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Aye

[Smid]

Aye.

[RI]

Aye.

[HappyWarrior]

AYE

[Ebowed]

Let's use the New Haven firefighters as an example. A test is given to firefighters by a city for the purpose of determining advancement. When the white firefighters happened to tend to score better than the black ones, the tests were disregarded. Unless the tests included inherently racist questions, the fact that these firefighters were more qualified should be the only qualification for advancement. That there happened not to be "enough blacks" in the group that was qualified should have nothing to do with it.

That's the sort of decision I'd prefer to defer to the head of the New Haven firefighters on, personally, but even so, that is not really what this bill is about.

Affirmative action has a useful purpose in education where it can be conclusively proven that minorities come from a distinct disadvantage.  That this bill does not provide any differentiation between private and public education, and would not make an exception for all sorts of circumstances (such as the P.E. teacher one I provided earlier) tells me that a ban on this practice is simply too far reaching.

And I have yet to see any evidence that because some employers and educational institutions practice affirmative action, anyone is being "forced" to pick unqualified applicants.  I suspect this is a myth.

[Purple State]

Let's use the New Haven firefighters as an example. A test is given to firefighters by a city for the purpose of determining advancement. When the white firefighters happened to tend to score better than the black ones, the tests were disregarded. Unless the tests included inherently racist questions, the fact that these firefighters were more qualified should be the only qualification for advancement. That there happened not to be "enough blacks" in the group that was qualified should have nothing to do with it.

That's the sort of decision I'd prefer to defer to the head of the New Haven firefighters on, personally, but even so, that is not really what this bill is about.

Affirmative action has a useful purpose in education where it can be conclusively proven that minorities come from a distinct disadvantage.  That this bill does not provide any differentiation between private and public education, and would not make an exception for all sorts of circumstances (such as the P.E. teacher one I provided earlier) tells me that a ban on this practice is simply too far reaching.

And I have yet to see any evidence that because some employers and educational institutions practice affirmative action, anyone is being "forced" to pick unqualified applicants.  I suspect this is a myth.

I think discrepancies in education need to be addressed, but not through allowing subpar students into schools over more qualified, but less minority, students. Instead, we need to promote education from the bottom up for our public schools, which is the path I heavily favor. The Help Atlasia Study Act was a phenomenal piece of legislation, as is, I believe, the school reform bill I proposed recently.