Colbert King is Deputy Editor of the Washington Post‘s editorial page, and he has a regular column there commenting, usually, about Washington, D.C., affairs. His most recent column, “Scapegoat Syndrome,” criticizes Jennifer Gratz, lead plaintiff in the case against the University of Michigan’s racial preferences (20 points, etc.) in undergraduate admissions. According to King, she unfairly scapegoats blacks for what is in fact simply the general unfairness of life. (Didn’t I just discuss another Washington Post columnist making the same troubling assertion? Yes. Maybe this is a new WPost mantra.)
Here’s is King’s argument, in full:
[Gratz] wanted to attend the University of Michigan in 1995 along with thousands of others. It turns out that 4,000 applicants were ultimately granted admission to the university. Alas, Gratz, who had a good SAT score and grade-point average, was not one of them. In fact, more than 1,500 students with grade-point averages and SAT scores lower than Gratz’s got into the school. Those 1,500 students, by the way, were not beneficiaries of affirmative action; they were admitted on the basis of other admissions criteria that awarded extra points on a 150-point admissions scale to ensure that a broad and diverse array of talented students attend the university.
Gratz apparently was okay with that, because she didn’t kick up a fuss about the 1,500 students with lower scores and grades who got in ahead of her. But then she learned about other students with lower scores and grades who got in because the university awarded them 20 points on the 150-point scale. The difference between the 1,500 students with lower scores and grades than Gratz and the others with lower scores and grades is that the latter group — minorities — were beneficiaries of affirmative action.
It seems that Gratz, who is white, could graciously lose out to white students with lower grade-point averages and test scores. But losing out to similarly situated African Americans and Latinos was just too much to take.
These numbers strike me as suspicious, but I don’t have time right now to check them thoroughly. I will try to do that, and Update if necessary. Meanwhile, assuming the numbers are correct, King is saying here that 1500 non-minority students with grades/test scores lower than Gratz’s were admitted, but she chose to complain only about the minorities with lower grades/tests who received preferences.
Some quick points:
1. Notice that King does not say how many minorities leaped over Gratz and were admitted because of the 20 racial bonus points they received.
2. He does not deny that Gratz would have been admitted if there had been no racial preferences given to others.
3. His complaint against Gratz rests on the untenable assumption that Gratz cannot have been the victim of racial discrimination because other whites/Asians with lower grades/test scores were not victims of racial discrimination.
King is thus arguing that Gratz has standing (I’m speaking morally here, not legally) to claim that she was discriminated against because of her race only if she were the only victim of such discrimination. This is absurd as a matter of both common sense and law. (Connecticut v. Teal, 457 U.S. 440 [1982], for example, held that an employer could not defend a discriminatory employment practice even by compensating for its effects by taking other affirmative measures to insure that the resulting hires reflected the racial composition of the applicant pool.)
In short, the fact that a university’s policies may result in the admission of substantial numbers of whites and Asians does not give it license to use, as even a part of its procedures, a policy that discriminates on the basis of race. And this is right, King and his fellow preferentialists need to be reminded, because all discrimination based on race is wrong.
UPDATE – Hmm. Not only have I just dissed a Pulitzer Prize winner, but Slate says he deserved it. But didn’t SLATE also think Al Gore deserved to be president?
I am intrigued by that 1500 number. Of the 4000 students who were admitted, 37.5% had lower grades and test scores than Jennifer, who was not admitted? No, more, because this apparently doesn’t include the minority students. Does University of Michigan publish the race, GPA, and test scores of each of its applicants somewhere? I’d be very interested to see them.
Interesting how the columnist equates Jennifer’s complaint with antisemitism. I am impressed by his creativity on that one.
Didn’t Harvard used to allow Jews to attend, but no more than a certain percentage?
That wasn’t discrimination, since after all, Jews were allowed to attend. They just didn’t want too many of them.
Laura – I will try to look into that number. Anti-semitism comparison is indeed interesting, as
Dean – said. Dean, you’re absolutely right: the Ivy League did not exclude Jews; they simply “took religion into account” in ordre to promote “diversity.” Had they not done so, they claimed, and looked only at academic merit, their student bodies would have too many diversity-reducing Jews. Thus they used a “diversity” argument to keep Jews out, just as Michigan et. al. use a “diversity argument” to reduce the number of whites (now including Jews!) and Asians.
But those 1500 studnes hasd some special skill or taltent–sports, music, legacy, etc. All the minority kids had was different colored skin. That doesn’t taken any skill or dedication or ability. It just takes biology. Why reward someone for that?
Wiuth legacies, shouldn’t loyalty to the home state school be a plus? They could be spending their tuition dollars somewhere else.
IF Gratz is supposed to be gracious, why woulnd’t some African-Amrerican kid be ashamed to get points for skin tone?
Colbert King just won a Pulitzer Prize for commentary. There are dozens of more talented columnists writing — James Lileks, to name just one. Or the late Michael Kelly.
20,000 people applied to the U OF Michigan that year. If you eliminated ALL African American, Hispanic, and Native American applicants, the fact remains that ONLY 4000 students were accepted, meaning almost 12,000 white and Asian students would’ve still been REJECTED. Given the FACT that 1400 plus white and Asian students were accepted with LOWER TEST SCORES or GPA than Jennifer Gratz,(including two time Super Bowl MVP QB Tom Brady, who had a high school GPA of 3.5) OBVIOUSLY there are OTHER FACTORS involved with the admissions process.
Where does this sense of ENTITLEMENT among many whites come from in this case, and others?
As far as the poster who claimed that African American students should feel a sense of shame because they were accepted to Michigan based upon Affirmative Action, I would point you to our President of the United States, George W. Bush, who was accepted to Yale, a more prestigious school, with FAR LOWER test scores and grades than Jennifer Gratz. Do you think our President feels a sense of “shame?”