In a just published report of President Bush’s appearance before the Unity convention of minority journalists in Washington, Carl Hulse writes in the New York Times writes that the president faced some tough questions about his “opposition to affirmative action quotas.”
As the transcript of the president’s appearance makes clear, however, neither the questioners nor the president equated affirmative action with quotas.
Q In one of the most closely watched cases of the 2003 term, the Supreme Court split the difference on affirmative action, allowing Bakke to stand, but rejecting the numerical formulas used by the University of Michigan undergraduate schools. I’d like to hear your own view about when, and if, race and ethnicity are admissible as factors for consideration both in college admissions and in hiring in the workplace. (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. I agreed with the Court in saying that we ought to reject quotas. I think quotas are discriminatory by nature. They discriminate — I think they discriminate on the bottom, and I know they discriminate on the top. And so I agreed with their assessment that a quota system was an unfair system for all.
As you might remember, we also agreed with the finding that — in terms of admissions policy, race-neutral admissions policies ought to be tried. If they don’t work, to achieve an objective which is diversification, race ought to be a factor. I agree with that assessment. I think it’s very important for all institutions to strive for diversity, and I believe there are ways to do so.
And later:
Q Mr. President, you say, “Quotas are an unfair system for all,” with regards to your opposition to affirmative action.
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, no, whoa, whoa. With regard to my opposition to quota systems.
But apparently for Mr. Hulse and the NYT, “affirmative action” and “quotas” are interchangeable.
Come to think of it, maybe they’re right.
What if the special preference group not only meets the quota, but actually exceeds it, due to administrative exuberance? What if the special preference group makes up the entire workforce or student body?
“That’s okay” according to AA backers, since an all minority workforce or student body is all the more diverse, which is what AA is all about.
In other words, AA goals are not limited to a quota. AA wants it all, and will defend its right to have it all down to the last “racist!”, “nazi!”, and “bigot!”.
A quota has limited goals. AA’s goals are unlimited. And the time frame for AA is unbounded. AA expands to fill all time and all space.
And minority students are increasingly specialising in special preference AA at college and university. Ethnic studies departments become guerilla AA training camps. “AA forever!”