[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 116 (Thursday, August 1, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1423]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      SPEAKING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. CARDISS COLLINS

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 31, 1996

  Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, according to a recent report 
prepared by the American Council on Education [ACE], ``Students of 
color have posted significant gains in college enrollment and the 
number of degrees they earned in recent years.'' However, the report 
warns that ``this progress is threatened by attacks on the use of 
affirmative action policies in higher education.''
  Clearly, affirmative action policies that increase the opportunities 
to obtain secondary education for those who without them will remain 
unprepared to meet out Nation's challenges must continue to play a key 
and significant role. Now there are those affirmative action opponents 
who take delight in pointing out the most inconsequential problems with 
such policies; but shamefully close their eyes to the great strides 
they have made toward better educating our national populace.
  Recalling for a moment may reference to the ACE report on affirmative 
action, we see that denying educational opportunities to the neediest 
is wrong. It is wrong morally. It is ethically wrong. It is the wrong 
path for this country to take if America is serious about remaining one 
of the most enlightened and better educated societies on the planet 
Earth.
  Perhaps an economic illustration will better serve my arguments for 
affirmative action. It is empirically factual that denying educational 
opportunities negates potential economic benefits for the country. 
According to findings prepared by Dr. Andrew Sum, Northeastern 
University, Center for Labor Market Studies, and the McIntosh 
Commission, personal economic benefits from obtaining a 4-year college 
degree has increased substantially over the past two decades.
  The fundamental shifts in the earnings capacity of workers with 
varying years of formal schooling can be seen most starkly in the 
earnings experiences of young adult males 20 to 29 years old in the 
United States over the 1973-92 period.
  The year 1973 is an important year because it marks the great 
economic divide in the American post-World War II era. During that year 
the real, or the inflation-adjusted mean annual earnings of all 20 to 
29-year-old men in the United States were equivalent to earnings 
totalling $23,522 in 1992; but, by the year 1992, the mean earnings of 
men in this age group had declined to $16,715--a reduction of nearly 29 
percent.
  While young men in each educational attainment subgroup, without 
diplomas, with diplomas, and the college graduates, experienced a 
deterioration in their real earnings position over this time period, 
the relative size of these declines varied widely by years of completed 
formal schooling, and cognate opportunities available for growth.
  When we look at the real annual earnings we see this more clearly: 
those who failed to obtain a high school diploma fell nearly 42 
percent; for high school graduates by 32 percent, and by holders of a 
bachelor's degree by just 5 percent. While the mean annual earnings 
advantage of young male college graduates over that of high school 
graduates was 15 percent in 1973, the relative size of this earnings 
advantage had risen to nearly 62 percent by 1992. This is significant 
on several levels, the least of which illustrates just how deeply 
divided economically the country has become when an imbalance of 
opportunities prevails.
  Both young black and white men with only high school diplomas have 
lost considerable economic ground during the past two decades. As a 
consequence, the earnings advantages of young male college graduates 
widened to a substantial degree, increasing from 15 percent in 1973 to 
62 percent in 1992.
  This is precisely what must be understood. Denying individuals an 
opportunity to attend college or graduate school in the 1990's has 
considerably greater personal economic consequences that it would have 
had two decades ago. This is the threat alluded to by the American 
Council on Education. It is a real treat. It is a threat we should not 
treat likely.
  Now you may ask, ``just who are the beneficiaries of Affirmative 
Action?'' I believe they are America's poor, its forgotten, its 
disadvantaged. I believe that it is America's mosaic melting pot of 
people all linked by opportunities denied.
  Therefore, instead of wasting our time undermining educational 
programs that have worked, we should be seeking ways in which to 
enhance them and thus grant greater opportunities for educationally and 
economically disadvantaged Americans. My Republican colleagues need to 
understand that the lack of educational opportunity, entrepreneurial 
and business growth, heavily contributes to the problems of crime, drug 
trafficking, hopelessness, and overall poverty.
  It is ironic that at the same time the Republicans in Congress are 
moving forward with their attack an affirmative action, they are also 
madly swinging their budget axe to chop down all of the programs that 
work to alleviate these crises, programs such as those for Head Start, 
child nutrition and school lunch, job training initiatives, student 
loans, COPS funding, public housing assistance, and so on. This is 
shortsightedness at its highest level.

                          ____________________