[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 123 (Thursday, July 27, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10842-S10843]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                    A TOOL FOR A COLORBLIND AMERICA

 Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, there is a great deal of nonsense in 
the political oratory on affirmative action. Like policies on 
education, religion or any other good thing, it can be abused.
  But fundamentally, it will make America a better place. It has made 
America a better place and is making America a better place.
  We still have a long way to go before we are a nation without 
prejudices and without the discrimination that comes from prejudices.
  Chancellor Chang-Lin Tien of the University of California-Berkeley 
had an op-ed piece in the Los Angeles Times that I think provides a 
needed balance.
  I urge my colleagues to read it.
  At this point, I ask that the op-ed piece be printed in the Record.
  The material follows:
              [From the Lost Angeles Times, July 18, 1995]

                    A Tool for a Colorblind America

                          (By Chang-Lin Tien)

       As an Asian American, I have endured my share of 
     affirmative action ``jokes.'' Even when I became chancellor 
     of UC Berkeley, I was not spared teasing about how 
     affirmative action was the reason I landed this coveted post 
     at one of America's great universities.
       Opponents of affirmative action use examples like this to 
     argue that affirmative action tars all minorities with the 
     same brush of inferiority--whether or not we benefit 
     directly.
       Affirmative action is not the source of the problem. As 
     much as America would like to believe otherwise, racial 
     discrimination remains a fact of life. Whether we preside 
     over major universities or wash dishes, people of color 
     confront discrimination.
       In my first months as chancellor, I was encouraged by 
     friends to get coaching to eliminate my accent. While a 
     European inflection conjures up images of Oxford or the 
     belles-lettres, Asian and Latino accents apparently denote 
     ignorance to the American ear.
       Our nation is far from fulfilling the Rev. Martin Luther 
     King Jr.'s dream of a country where people are judged on the 
     content of their character, not the color of their skin.
       King's immortal words challenged America to live up to its 
     founding principle--that all men are created equal. It is an 
     ideal all Americans embrace. Yet it has needed redefining as 
     America has struggled to broaden its concept of democracy to 
     include women and races other than Caucasian.
       King's challenge is especially relevant today as this 
     country undergoes a phenomenal demographic transformation. 
     His challenge will resonate on Thursday when the UC Board of 
     Regents considers eliminating race and ethnicity in 
     admissions and hiring.
       As an educator, I know that America's demographic shift 
     poses tremendous challenges. American universities must 
     educate more leaders from all racial and ethnic groups so 
     they can succeed in a diverse environment.
       How can America's educators accomplish this? Affirmative 
     action has been an effective tool for diversifying our 
     student body while preserving academic excellence. Yet its 
     opponents argue that affirmative action runs counter to the 
     principle of individual rights on which this country was 
     founded. Affirmative action, they believe, is based on the 
     ``group rights'' of racial and ethnic groups.

[[Page S 10843]]

       I agree that affirmative action is not a panacea. It is a 
     temporary measure that can be eliminated when we have forged 
     a colorblind society. That time has not yet come. It's 
     painfully clear that equal opportunity is still a dream for 
     many Americans.
       Although colleges and universities cannot correct the 
     nation's inequities, we can be a beacon of hope by offering 
     an education to help minority youth realize the American 
     dream.
       It is here where a fair, carefully crafted affirmative 
     action process comes into play. At Berkeley and many other 
     universities, in addition to strict academic criteria, 
     student admissions policies take into account special 
     circumstances that minority students have confronted.
       Critics accuse us of bestowing special ``group rights'' to 
     these minorities. They argue that the process should be 
     devoid of such group considerations and that students should 
     be judged solely as individuals.
       This argument, however, does not take into account what I 
     call ``group privileges''--advantages that certain groups of 
     students accrue by virtue of birth, not by hard work. After 
     all, the contest between white suburban students and minority 
     inner-city youths is inherently unfair. Inner-city students 
     struggle to learn in dilapidated schools where illegal drugs 
     are easier to find then computers, while suburban students 
     benefit from honors classes and Internet access.
       Ultimately, we must rebuild America's public schools. Yet 
     until America reverses the precipitous decline of its 
     schools, we have to give special consideration to young 
     people who have overcome countless obstacles to achieve 
     academically.
       Diversity benefits all students. It is
        critical to academic excellence. Only by giving students 
     opportunities to interact and learn about one another will 
     we prepare America's leaders for success in today's global 
     village.
       How else can universities prepare tomorrow's teachers for 
     working with youngsters whose families come from nations 
     around the world? How else can universities prepare business 
     leaders to succeed in the international market?
       Berkeley's experience discredits the persistent myth that 
     affirmative action lowers academic standards. Our fall 1994 
     freshman class, in which no racial group constitutes a 
     majority, is stronger academically than the freshman class of 
     10 years ago. Our graduation rates have climbed steadily. 
     Today, 74% of our students graduate within five years. In the 
     mid-1950's, when the student body was overwhelmingly white, 
     48% graduated within five years. We have diversified while 
     strengthening our role as a premier university.
       If America ends affirmative action before addressing the 
     underlying causes of inequality of opportunity, racial 
     divisions will deepen. Opportunities to dispel ingrained 
     beliefs about different races through interaction and 
     discussion will be lost. Many promising minorities will never 
     have the opportunity to excel as academic, cultural, business 
     and political leaders.
       Most important for me as an educator, excellence in 
     academic institutions that must prepare leaders for a diverse 
     world will be jeopardized.
       Instead of threatening the progress we have made, let us 
     address the problems that foster unequal opportunity and 
     racial strife. Only then can we look forward to the day when 
     affirmative action can be eliminated and the vision of our 
     founders will be fulfilled--that all Americans are created 
     equal.
     

                          ____________________