FREE ESSAY ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
A NECESSARY POLICY TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION AND INEQUITIES
OR
A DISCRIMINATIVE AND INEQUITABLE POLCY
INTRODUCTION
Historically, there have been arguments about what Affirmative Action (AA) really is. The
basis of the argument for the most part, debates the goal(s) of AA. Is the goal of AA to
erase past inequities for the disabled, minorities and/or women without protest? Or is
Affirmative Action a culture or spirit that rewards diversity and differences? Basically
there are two definitions or schools of thought for AA.
The first school of thought is that AA is an umbrella term for laws and policies that the
United States Executive, Judicial, and legislative bodies have mandated. Specifically, AA
is a series of social policies and statutes that regulate activities and laws with the
primary intent to achieve equity and increase opportunity for all.
The second school of though is that AA is an umbrella term defining a broader set of
activities whereby public and private institutions voluntarily incorporate practices and
polices to increase diversity, opportunity and equity. Under this school of thought, AA
is in spirit and an institutional policy.
The intent of this paper is to address the serious and profound arguments of both schools
of thought. In addition, this paper will address issues relative to determining whether
or not AA is necessary instrument for the demise of discrimination and the formation of
justice and whether or not AA needs to be maintained, modified or terminated.
I. Affirmative Action Background
A. A Brief History of AA in the United States of American
Contrary to popular belief, the concept of AA actually began prior to the executive order
signed by President John F. Kennedy in 1961. The concept of AA began upon the signing of
Amendment XIII of the Constitution. 
1. The Late 19the and Early 20th Century 
America began to deal with the inequities and lack of justice for mean of African decent
in the 1800s. In my opinion, the initial and most significant policy or law relative to
AA was Amendment XIII to the Constitution. The 13th Amendment states, "Neither slavery
nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have
been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their
jurisdiction" (US Constitution, Amendment 13, Section 1). Further cited, "Congress shall
have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation", (US Constitution,
Amendment 13, Section 2). While the intent of the 13th amendment was to abolish slavery
and begin the long process of just and equal rights for all American citizens. Historians
cite various reasons for the 13tha amendment, some say it was Lincoln's understanding and
belief that slavery was wrong. Other Historians cite that Lincoln had no choice but to
free the slaves in hoes of African American men joining the losing forces of the North
during the civil war. Whatever the reason, slavery was now against the law.
Soon after the execution of the 13th Amendment, the governing forefathers once again
determined and agreed that it was necessary to clarify citizen's rights. Directly
resultant, the 14th, 15th, 16th and 19th Amendments were executed. All of these
amendments were necessary modifications to the highest law of the land to establish
justice and equity for all Americans.
2. The Middle of the 20th Century
By the midpoint of the 20th century America still did not truly realize the intent and
fruition of equal rights for all. As such, once again there was a need to clarify the
rights of Americans. The late 1950s and early 60s there was a television in over 70% of
homes in America. This forum of mass and popular media brought about an all time public
knowledge of racial injustices. One could say that the television a proponent of civil
rights, as directly resultant of its popularity, there were major changes in America's
views and attitudes on civil rights.
In 1961, President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order (EO) 10925. This EO was
significant, as it introduced the term "Affirmative Action" to America. The order
instructed federal government contractors to "take affirmative action to ensure that
applicants are treated equally without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national
origin" (Kennedy, EO 10925, 1961). The Kennedy EO also created the Committee on Equal
Employment Opportunity. 
While the Kennedy administration began AA, it was the Johnson administration that really
added the provisions that would truly allow for effective implementation of AA. Under the
Johnson administration, the US Government enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1064. This act
was and still is considered landmark legislation, as it prohibited employment
discrimination by large employers (a large employer is defined as an employer with 15 or
more employees). The key was that the act governed all employers, not just government
contractors like the Kennedy EO. The Civil Rights Act established the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC). As a follow-up to the Civil Rights Act, Johnson issued EO
11246, which required expansion of job opportunities for minorities in government
contracting firms. This order also established the Office of Federal Contract Compliance
(OFCC) a division of the Department of labor, which was chartered to administer the
order. Finally in 1967, Johnson amended the order to include women. 
3. The 70s, 80s and 90s
There were quite a few AA executive orders, policies and laws issued under the Nixon
administration. In the early part of his administration, Nixon and his administration,
authorized flexible goals and timelines to correct under-utilization of minorities by
federal contractors, in 1971 the order was amended to include women. Also in 1971, Nixon,
under EO 11625 direct federal agencies to develop comprehensive plans and programs for
Minority Business Enterprise (MBE) to enhance and promote minority business participation
in government contracting programs. However, in 1973 Nixon, in what is considered one of
Nixon's "trickiest actions", issued a memorandum identifying "Permissible Goals and
Timelines in State and Local Government Employment Practices" (Memorandum, Nixon, 1973).
This memorandum provided guidelines and policy that for corporations to use when
implementing goals timetables and impermissible quotas. Clearly, this memorandum cited
Nixon's goal to eliminate the quota system initiated in 1969.
From 1978 until the present, there have been many Supreme Court rulings, Executive orders
and other AA legislation in-acted. The 1980's under both the Reagan and Bush
administrations the focus was on economic empowerment and set the stage for future
attempts at ending AA. Outside of Reagan's 1983 EO 12432 execution, there were no
material laws or policies in support of AA executed. The period ranging from 1984 through
the mid 1990s it was an unpretentious era for AA. It was not until 1995 when President
Clinton announced his "mend it, don't end it" (Washington Post Archives, 1995) policy on
AA did the fight to maintain AA revive.
Contrary to the Clinton Administration's policy, in 1996 the state of California
Proposition 209 was passed. This law, a definite blow to AA, permits gender and racial
discrimination that is "reasonably necessary" to the "normal operation" of public
education, employment and contracting (Clause (C) of Prop. 209, 1996) In 1998, the ban on
AA went into affect at the University of California.
B. Affirmative Action Laws
AA laws prohibit discriminatory practices and bias treatment. AA laws are composed of
federal and state statutes that are based upon the Constitution of the US. As noted
above, AA laws are basically anti-discrimination policy and regulations that are executed
at the federal, state and local government levels. These laws and regulations are
designed and implemented in an attempt to prevent and in some cases "correct past"
inequities and discrimination based upon a person's race, sex, religion, creed, national
origin, physical ability, and age. Just recently AA was expanded to include laws to
prevent discrimination based upon sexual preference and orientation. 
C. The effects of Affirmative Action on Women, African Americans and the Disabled
The enduring effect s of historical oppression include the losses of adequate education
and honorable employment that has haunted the African American, disabled and women in
America. AA preferential programs, laws and policies were established with the intent to
"correct" the action s and behavior of those individuals and entities guilty of past
unlawful discrimination. The AA Quota system was designed to redistribute the unjust
enrichment of the past. Racial, gender and physically challenged preferences for societal
re-balancing cannot be denied.
1. Women
The implementation of AA has created cracks in the proverbial corporate glass ceiling.
Women now constitute approximately 35% of the world's labor force (Department of Labor
Statistics, DOL Website, 1999). Labor trend analyzers cite that women of all racial and
ethnic groups are more than likely to be employed in service industries, finance, real
estate, wholesale and retail trade. While AA activities and provisions have effected
progression for women in certain industries, America as a whole has a ways to go. The
1998 Gallup/Newsweek poll showed that between 1987 and 1997, the proportion of women
holding the title of executive vice president rose from 7 to 12 percent. Those at the
senior vice president level rose from 18 to 35 percent (Gallup/Newsweek, 1998, 6). 
2. African Americans
AA laws and policies such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, opened doors that were locked
for African Americans. The "Quota" system, while controversial, insisted that
corporations have a certain percentage of minorities in management level positions. In
addition, AA laws allowed for minority student's admission in schools that would not have
been accessible otherwise. and 
3. 
Bibliography
1. Lyberger-Ficek and Sternglanz (1975) uncited reference in Gross.R.D., (1987)
Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behaviour, Hodder and Stoughton. 
2. Condry, J., Condry, S., (1976) Sex Differences: A study in the Eye of the Beholder
Child Development 47 (1976) 817 in Fausto Sterling, A., (1992) Myths of Gender,
Biological Theories about Women and Men, (p150) New York: Basic Books