[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 12 (Thursday, January 23, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1462-S1463]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I wish to address the importance of 
maintaining a commitment to affirmative action in college admissions 
programs.
  President Bush, unfortunately, took our nation a step backward when 
he announced last week that his administration would file an amicus 
curiae brief with the Supreme Court opposing the admissions policies of 
the University of Michigan. The President apparently believes that 
college admissions decisions should never consider the race of 
applicants, even though he also says that he supports the pursuit of 
campus diversity.
  In 1978, in University of California v. Bakke, the Supreme Court 
ruled that campus diversity can be a ``compelling governmental 
interest'' that justifies reasonable, narrowly tailored affirmative 
action programs at universities. The Supreme Court said that colleges 
and universities cannot use quotas to achieve campus diversity, but 
affirmed that campus diversity can be a worthy goal of college 
admissions policies. In December 2002, the Supreme Court, for the first 
time since its Bakke decision, agreed to review two cases that 
challenge a university's affirmative action programs--Grutter v. 
Bollinger, which involves the admissions program at the University of 
Michigan Law School, and Gratz v. Bollinger, which involves the 
undergraduate admissions program at the University of Michigan.
  Some, including President Bush, have criticized affirmative action 
programs in higher education, like those in place at the University of 
Michigan, as ``quota'' programs. They are simply wrong. These 
affirmative action programs do not set quotas or numerical targets for 
admitting a certain number of students of a particular race or 
ethnicity. In fact, the Bakke decision long ago prohibited colleges 
from employing a quota system. So, for President Bush to suggest that 
this is a question of whether to support a quota system is a 
mischaracterization of the issue before the Court.
  Some critics have also wrongly stated that affirmative action 
programs admit students primarily on the basis of race. According to 
the Washington Post, the President stated that the University of 
Michigan's admissions system selected students ``primarily on the basis 
of the color of their skin.'' But again, this is simply not an accurate 
description of the current law or of how students are admitted to the 
University of Michigan.
  Rather, in most affirmative action programs for college or graduate 
school admissions, race is simply one of numerous factors that can be 
considered by admissions officers to create a diverse student body. For 
example, under the University of Michigan's undergraduate admissions 
policy, the University considers the entire background of the 
applicant. Students are evaluated on a 150 point scale to determine 
their fitness for admission. The

[[Page S1463]]

vast majority of these points--110 of 150 points--are awarded based on 
academic achievement. That means grades, test scores, and curriculum. 
The University also considers other factors like leadership, service, 
and life experiences. Only 20 points can possibly be awarded on the 
basis of race. A student who is socioeconomically disadvantaged can 
also earn 20 points but students cannot earn 20 points for both race 
and being socioeconomically disadvantaged. Thus, the University does 
not have a quota or numerical target for minority students, nor does 
the University admit students primarily on the basis of race.
  Like the University of Michigan, most colleges and universities 
generally give academic records--such as college grades and 
standardized test scores, the caliber of high school attended, and the 
rigor of the student's chosen curriculum--the greatest weight in 
determining whether a student gains admission. But other factors--such 
as extracurricular activities, race, athletic talent, geographic 
diversity, or whether students are related to alumni--are also 
frequently given consideration in the college admissions process. Many 
colleges give preferences to the children of alumni, and these 
preferences will often work to the disadvantage of people of color. So, 
race can be a factor but is not the sole factor in determining 
admission to college.
  I am especially disappointed in the Bush Administration's decision to 
oppose affirmative action programs because the President has said that 
he is committed to equal educational opportunities for all America's 
children. The President has said that education is one of his top 
priorities. Yet, he has now turned his back on many of the students he 
promised to help. By submitting an amicus curiae brief to the Supreme 
Court favoring the abolition of affirmative action programs, the 
President sends the message that he opposes creating higher education 
opportunities for minority students, who do not always have the same 
educational opportunities at the secondary school levels as white 
students.
  I might add, that I believe Congress also has an important 
responsibility to ensure equal access to higher education. I strongly 
believe that Congress can do more to ensure that students meet the 
costs of today's college education. That is why Senator Collins and I 
have recently called for a doubling of Pell Grant funding by 2010. Pell 
grants are an important support for all low income students, regardless 
of race. In fact, if it were not for the Pell grant program, many low 
income students would not have the chance to attend college at all.
  The Pell grant, however, does not cover what it once did. The price 
of a college education at both public and private institutions has 
increased dramatically. Congress needs to increase the funding of the 
Pell grant program to keep up with the increasing costs of higher 
education.
  One of the greatest strengths of our nation is its pursuit of equal 
educational opportunities for all students. Our nation's colleges and 
universities are the envy of the world for their rigorous curricula and 
high-caliber professors, but also for their enriching experience of 
learning in an environment with students who represent a range of 
racial, ethnic, and social and economic backgrounds representing every 
part of America, if not the world. I am deeply disappointed that the 
President decided to put the government of the United States of America 
on the wrong side of the case where the Supreme Court will address this 
crucial issue. I hope that the Court will affirm the importance of 
campus diversity and uphold affirmative action admissions policies that 
allow colleges and universities to achieve this important diversity.

                          ____________________