[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 36 (Wednesday, March 19, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H1164-H1165]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             DISCRIMINATION: TWO WRONGS DO NOT MAKE A RIGHT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Fowler] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Speaker, the debate over affirmative action is not 
about whether discrimination exists in America today, because we all 
know that it does. The debate is over whether granting preferences 
based on race or gender is the way to eliminate that discrimination.
  Webster's defines discrimination as, ``a difference in treatment or a 
favor on a basis other than individual merit.'' Is that not what 
current affirmative action programs are all about, making decisions 
based primarily on gender and race?
  The central tenet of all affirmative action programs is to give 
preferential treatment to someone not based on individual merit.

                              {time}  1830

  Individual merit ranks second to considerations of race or gender. It 
is clear that today's affirmative action programs fit under the 
definition of the word ``discrimination.'' That brings us to the crux 
of this argument: Does it make sense to fight discrimination with 
discrimination, or do two wrongs make a right?
  The answer to both, in my opinion, is no. Our country was built on 
the ideal of equal opportunity for all, and the original intent of 
affirmative action programs was to help provide a level

[[Page H1165]]

playing field for those who were not getting that opportunity. 
Unfortunately, once the Government got hold of it, that program which 
started out with the best intentions became a hire-by-the-numbers 
system involving quotas, set-asides, preferences, numerical goals, and 
timetables. What has been left out of the equation is the notion of 
individual merit, the important question of, Is this the best person 
for this job?
  Today's affirmative action programs harm our society, both by 
lowering standards and by leaving the beneficiaries of the program to 
doubt their own ability. As a woman, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt 
that women can compete with any man on an equal playing field. I find 
the assumption that we need preferential treatment in order to succeed 
insulting.
  Have women had a harder time advancing up the corporate ladder and 
getting access to educational opportunities? There is no doubt about 
that. But is affirmative action the way to create more opportunities 
for women, a quota here, a set-aside there, or should we be focusing on 
removing the barriers that keep women from advancing and succeeding on 
their own?
  The Glass Ceiling Commission, started by former Labor Secretary 
Elizabeth Dole, takes a second approach. It has been tremendously 
effective. The Commission identified the barriers in the workplace that 
keep qualified women from moving up the corporate ladder. It then set 
about working with companies to find ways to remove those barriers, 
allowing women to advance on their own merit and qualifications.
  Much of this process involves changing long-held beliefs, attitudes, 
and prejudices. Elizabeth Dole created the Glass Ceiling Commission 
from her firsthand knowledge of the kinds of barriers, both 
institutional and personal, that women face in both academia and the 
workplace. She was 1 of only 24 women in her Harvard law school class 
of 550, and I have heard her many times recount the disturbing yet not 
surprising comment made by one of her male classmates to her on her 
first day of class back in 1962. He said, ``Elizabeth, what are you 
doing here? Don't you realize there are men who would give their right 
arm to be in this law school, men who would use their legal 
education?''
  Not only was this man's attitude toward women at Harvard law school 
wrong, but he was certainly wrong about Elizabeth Dole using her legal 
education. Affirmative action programs treat the symptoms. What we 
should be treating is the illness itself. The problem with just 
treating the symptoms of discrimination with further discrimination in 
the form of affirmative action is that you make the underlying illness 
worse. You intensify feelings of resentment and prejudice among the 
very people from which we need to eradicate it.
  If women and minorities are to be treated equally, and with respect, 
too, it is time to stop dividing our country along race and gender 
lines. Let us get back to traditional forms of affirmative action 
involving nondiscriminatory outreach, recruitment, and marketing 
efforts, and empower all Americans by providing equal opportunity in an 
atmosphere of strong economic growth.

                          ____________________