|
||
       
|
Affirmative
Action Supporters to Rally Thursday As affirmative action stands on its last legs, protesters led by Rev. Jesse Jackson will nevertheless march against Proposition 209 across the Golden Gate Bridge on Thursday. UCSF faculty and staff are expected to schedule time off to join the march, originally slated to commemorate the 34th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. The event could have turned into a funeral march for affirmative action in California after a federal appeals court in San Francisco ruled last Thursday to let stand a decision to uphold Prop 209, making the measure effective the day of the march. But on Friday, the US Court of Appeals delayed for at least another week enforcement of Prop 209 and opponents filed an emergency petition for a stay to block enforcement of the initiative while they pursue their appeal to the US Supreme Court. The march will begin at 10 a.m. when several speakers including Jackson will address the crowd on the San Francisco end of the Golden Gate. Michael Adams, director of the Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Office at UCSF, who is unable to march, was not caught surprised by last week’s seesaw ruling. “I expected this outcome,” he said last Friday. “I think the momentum is swaying to completely abolishing affirmative action, at least in offering preferences. But we have been preparing since the election to try to determine what is permissible under the law. And Prop 209 parallels the Regents’ decision, which first prompted us to look at our policies.” Last week’s court rulings set the stage for a final showdown in the nation’s highest court. Already an estimated 23 states are considering reversing affirmative action programs. Adams says the high court should hear the case given the measure’s impact in California and on campuses. “The greatest effect it’s having is socially and psychologically and the feelings it’s creating among some groups who still feel discriminated against. “In a practical sense, however, I’m wondering how much difference it will make nationally because many companies have never really met their affirmative action goals anyway,” Adams said. Although rejected at the San Francisco polls, the controversial initiative passed by 54 percent of state voters last November. It bans affirmative action policies in state and local government employment, education and contracting. The state measure was first blocked three weeks after it was passed by a US District Court judge in San Francisco, who ruled that the initiative violated the constitutional rights of women and minorities. But last April, a panel of the US Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that the measure is constitutional. The initiative mirrors the policy passed by UC Regents in July 1995, which took effect with graduate school classes entering this fall and will apply to undergraduates next year. The US Labor Department began an investigation on the impact of UC’s policy on graduate admissions, the second federal inquiry into the University’s policies. The review stems from a complaint filed in January by civil rights groups after minority enrollment plummeted at the University’s three law schools. For reasons that remain
unclear, UCSF’s own enrollment of underrepresented
minorities fell for the second year in a row. The number
of African Americans, Mexican Americans and Native
Americans in the School of Medicine’s entering class
fell from 41 in 1995 to 29 last year and to 26 this fall,
according to Michael Drake, associate dean of the UCSF
medical school. Indeed, UC is required to compare its minority and female workforce to those with requisite skills in the labor force. If there is underrepresentation of women and minorities, the University must set goals (not quotas) to correct the disparity and make good faith efforts toward achieving those goals. These factors can also be considered when planning a strategy for outreach activities to create a diverse pool of applicants, Adams said. By Lisa Cisneros 1st appeared 08/25/97 |
|
