Over the past 40 years, the status of affirmative action at higher education institutions has, and still is a heavily debated issue in this country. Affirmative action can be explained as laws, and guidelines that are put into place to compensate for a certain level of discrimination in institutions. More specifically, at colleges and universities, groups who are considered to be historically excluded are given preferential treatment when their applications are being reviewed giving them an edge over individuals who are not a part of these groups. While this topic is heavily debated, and after several Supreme Court cases which ruled in favor of affirmative action such as “Bakke V. Regents of the University of California”, “Grutter V. Bollinger”, and most recently “Fisher v. University of Texas”, for millions of students in this country affirmative action practices are a necessity. For the time being, affirmative action should remain the same, however, eventually the severity of socio-economic barriers minority groups face in the college admissions process will gradually decline, removing the need for affirmative action.

To go into more detail regarding affirmative action, affirmative action in this sense can be defined as the ability for a university to use race as a factor in the admissions process in order to redress historical injustices in the past. The main factor in deciding which way the supreme court rules in cases regarding affirmative action is whether or not the practices of affirmative action are geared towards promoting diversity in the university. The issue that is created from this is that many people who are against the practices feel that the practices are attempting to promote equality of outcomes, while those in favor believe that the practices are creating accessibility and equality of opportunity for minorities (CrashCourse).

While affirmative action can be viewed as a necessity in the current state of our country and can even be beneficial to institutions altogether, there is a legitimate argument and level of frustration from those who are not in favor of the practices. What seems to be the main argument for those against the practices is that college admissions should be based on the merit of the applicant rather than create preferential treatment to minority groups. One of the other key points for the argument against affirmative action is that they understand that the past was unfair and racist, having said this, they believe that it is not fair practice in the present to reject an applicant simply because they are not part of a specific ethnic background that has been deemed historically excluded. Another aspect of opposition of affirmative action that often is ignored, is how these practices affect Asian-Americans in the college admission process. The issue among Asian-Americans in the application process is that the minority group is becoming much more competitive and is making the Asian minority group the most affected by affirmative action practices (Williams). In situations such as these, the reasoning behind not supporting affirmative action becomes more evident, but is still not the full picture of the issue.

The reason that these arguments against affirmative action are valid is since not every individual of a minority group requires affirmative action. For example, as a Hispanic male, I have never experienced discrimination or faced socio-economic barriers that have given me a disadvantage in the college application process. Therefore, in my specific situation, while I technically am a part of the minority group targeted by affirmative action programs, I do not face the same type of barriers or disadvantages that these programs are focused on eliminating. With this knowledge, I can agree that in some situations opposition towards affirmative action is valid, however, in most cases affirmative action is necessary for minority groups facing economic and social disadvantages. There is also a case to be made for the idea that many proponents of affirmative action are not in favor of expanding its practices but are rather confident that its implementation now will reduce the need for it in the future. This notion was reflected in the 2003 Supreme Court Case Grutter v. Bollinger where Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said “she expected that 25 years from now the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary” (Liptak). The reduced need for affirmative action in universities over time lessens the divide between those against affirmative action, and those in favor of its practices. The reason for this is because it validates the argument for those against affirmative action by essentially setting a deadline for its implementation, while also supporting claims such as my own, which state how affirmative action is necessary in the current America, however it should become less and less necessary looking ahead.

When talking about the necessity for affirmative action practices at colleges and universities, the main reasoning for this opinion stems from the statistics of minority admissions and how they changed before and after affirmative action bans in the state, as well as, the reinstatement of affirmative action practices. For example, when looking at the state of Florida, which banned affirmative action in 2001, at Florida State University, black enrollment dropped from 12% of the enrollment to only 7% of students enrolled over a 10-year time span. However, this is not the case for all universities. Specifically, at the University of Texas, after the affirmative action ban in 1997 Hispanic enrollment went from 13% to 18% before being reinstated in 2005 where it has continued to increase to 21% by 2011 (New York Times). At first glance, regardless of the change in percentages over the time periods, there is clearly an issue represented by the fact that at the University of Texas in 1997 Hispanics only made up 13% of the student body, while at Florida State University in 2011 black students only made up 7% of the student body. In Michigan, the University of Michigan saw black enrollment drop from 7% of the student body to 5% in 2011 after banning affirmative action in 2008. At this same time, the state of Michigan’s percentage of college age residents that were black rose from 17% to 19%.   So, while these statistics offer different outcomes due to the removal of affirmative action they can still be interpreted as beneficial to the minority groups being affected by them. From these statistics, we can see that even though the implementation of affirmative action practices does not guarantee a rise in minority enrollment, it also does not decrease the enrollment of minorities and has only increased it over time.  These studies are used and reflect the reasoning behind victories for proponents of affirmative action in Supreme Court cases such as Bakke V. Regents of the University of California, through statements such as “People do not learn very much when they are surrounded by only the likes of themselves” from Justice Powell in favor of race being used a factor in college admissions at the university of California (Orfield 62). When looking at affirmative action and its implementation in universities, we also have to understand that race is not the end all be all for college admissions. By this, I mean that if two students have identical test scores and grades, just because one is white, and the other is Hispanic, does not mean that the Hispanic applicant will automatically get chosen over the white applicant. The way Orfield frames this idea is by representing race as a “plus factor”. This idea of race being a plus factor explains how at the admissions level of highly selective university, the primary factor s always academic ability. However, the many other factors other than race, such as geographic diversity, income, etc. allow universities to achieve diversity without necessarily having to over value race in the admissions process and gain diversity from the many other characteristics of an applicant involved in a college application. (Orfield 68). So, while often times affirmative action is viewed as forgoing the merit of a student and solely focusing on race to determine admissions, statistics and studies reflect that this is not the case. In fact, the idea that academic ability is still the main component of college admissions and that race is secondary, promotes that as time goes on there should be less and less of a need to factor in race while keeping the admissions process fair for those not a part of minority groups.

The main issue that minorities face is the economic disparities between them and majority groups such as whites. In 2012, when looking at the average incomes among different racial groups, we see that white households bring in an average income of $57,000 per year. On the other hand, Hispanic household only bring in an average of $39,000 while black household only bring in an average of $33,000 per year (Perlberg). Knowing that most 4 year college educations can cost anywhere from $20,000 per year to $30,000 per year reflects that while minorities face social barriers when applying for colleges, one of the major issue they face is the cost of college. This is where affirmative action practices are most necessary as often times they allow minorities to receive scholarships, and financial aid that allow them to pay for and earn a college degree. Setting up these programs to give minorities an equal opportunity to achieve a college degree reflects how slowly the need for affirmative action will decline.

When looking at the issue of affirmative action, the focus should be placed on what to do moving forward. After researching and looking through various facts and statistics the direction that the issue needs to go in is one which has a deadline. By this I mean that as time goes on we need to continue to see the effects of affirmative action and eventually come to a conclusion of when the practices will become no longer necessary. The indicator which is most important for whether or not affirmative action is necessary should be a combination of college graduation rate of minorities, as well as their average incomes. By continuing to implement affirmative action in its current state, we can expect to see both numbers gradually increase until the gap between that of minority groups and that of whites is much less than it currently is. As for the deadline for affirmative action, the best place to determine this would be at the state level. The reasoning for this is because each state has a different racial makeup and each state must decide on its own whether or not they believe the playing field for minorities has been leveled.
