Compare and Contrast the 2 books ` The Color Blind: California`s Battle to End Affirmative Action` and Affirmative Action Is Dead; Long Live Affirmative Action

Running head : WHAT IS THE PROBLEM

What is the Problem with Affirmative Action : Chbvez and Crosby Attempt an Answer

John Doe

University of Anywhere

What is the Problem with Affirmative Action : Chbvez and Crosby Attempt an Answer

Chbvez 's Case Study : Proposition 209 , and the 1996 Presidential Race

Having benefited from affirmative action , Lydia Chbvez admits her interest in the policy began with a personal reflection upon her own educational background . Chbvez is a Latin American woman who went to the University of California at Berkley . It is one

of the universities affected by California 's affirmative action controversy . Her years as a journalist and her interest in the led to the publication of The Color Bind : California 's Battle to End Affirmative Action , a neutral look at the controversy of affirmative action

Chbvez is worried about the touchy subject affirmative action , in the mid-1990s and proposes an explanation . The policy , concerned with racial issues , became political at a time of high racial tension in California (Chbvez , 1998 . To that end , Chbvez sets out to illustrate how that growing racial tension in California led to the California Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI

The initiative , spearheaded by two white bay area academics wishing to put the measure on the state ballot as Proposition 209 , would end affirmative action in California (Chbvez , 1998 . The academics developed CCRI out of fear that reverse discrimination was often the end result of the University of California 's admission and employment policies (Chbvez , 1998 . As evidence that many Californians might hold this same fear , Chbvez (1998 ) talks about the events that led up to Proposition 187 , two years before (pg . 34-38 . Californians had voted in favor of 187 , which eliminated state funding for education and medical care of illegal aliens and their families (xi . Chavez thinks that many critics of affirmative action , supporters of 187 , would probably show equal support for Proposition 209 (Chbvez1998

California 's decision on 209 could affect the nation (pg . xiii-xvi . As a state that often leads the nation in trends and policy , California 's drive to end affirmative action could predict a similar drive on the national level (Chbvez , 1998 . Chbvez (1998 ) and others proved correct in this concern as the 1996 presidential election got under way and California with its huge electoral vote and affirmative action controversy became national news (pg . 110

Throughout the book , Chbvez returns to the reason for CCRI and Proposition 209 . Some assert it is the work of angry white males However , Chbvez points out that the issue is more complicated and that such statements are particularly vulnerable when one points out that Ward Connerly is one of 209 's most prominent spokesmen . Connerly , a successful black businessman , often used his rags-to-riches story to prove that affirmative action is unnecessary . He declares that hard work not special opportunities were responsible for his fortune (Chbvez 1998 . But Chbvez cautions her readers on trusting Connerly . He enjoyed a middle class upbringing and benefited from federal contracts set aside for minorities , i .e . Connerly came across as a hypocrite in his public dislike of preferential treatment . More important , Chbvez insists Connerly likely saw the political potential or Proposition 209 . His friend , Pete Wilson , Governor of California , hoped to be the Republican presidential pick in the 1996 elections (Chbvez , 1998 . Wilson had capitalized on Proposition 187 to win the Governor 's office in 1994 (Chbvez , 1998 ) and while Connerly successfully drew Republicans behind CCRI and as a result Proposition 209 , Wilson hoped to achieve the oval office as its most passionate public champion (Chbvez , 1998

In her bid for fairness , Chavez was equally concerned with talking about the efforts of those that opposed Proposition 209 . So , she focuses on the efforts of various women and minority interest groups that tried to warn Californians why they should vote against Proposition 209 . When groups like NOW and the NAACP failed to keep 209 off the ballot , they then tried to get Californians to vote in opposition to 209 (Chbvez 1998 . According to groups Chbvez (1998 ) interviewed , they were not successful because they united too late and lacked funding (pg . 43 90-91 ,159 , 238 . Equally important , the groups could not get popular Democratic support on an issue that was actually very liberal (Chbvez 1998 . In fact , Chbvez (1998 ) points out , Republican support for anti-affirmative action groups in California , definitely outweighed Democratic support for pro-affirmative action groups to the tune of nearly 3 .6 million with 1 million from the state Republican Party (Chbvez ,1998

Having followed the controversy of Proposition 209 and the unsuccessful efforts of CCRI and the Republican Party to make it a wedge issue outside California , Chbvez concludes the book using the above to outline her concern for both the Californian and American constitution . Her close look at 209 's formation and completion in California illustrates the vulnerability of America 's legislative process (Chbvez , 1998 Wealthy self-interest groups unfairly took advantage of the initiative process (putting something on the ballot for consideration ) resulting in a manipulation of the process by politicians to the end that the rights of vulnerable minorities were trampled upon and the long term interests of the majority disregarded (Chavez , 1998 . As further proof , Chavez points out that the language of Proposition 209 presented problems . It was worded in such a way that anti-Proposition 209 activists often told her in interview that their largest battle lay in convincing voters of the results of voting yes to 209 (Chbvez , 1998 . Instead of granting equal opportunity for both whites and minorities , 209 would end any legal ways to ensure equality (Chbvez , 1998

In conclusion , Chbvez 's book is about the warning with which she ends the initiative process is vulnerable . Making a new law or changing the state constitution is too important to permit the scheming use of purposely confusing language , especially to serve narrow interests (Chbvez , 1998 . Her audience could even assume that she is in favor of affirmative action as she points out that in 1997 there was a 30 and 80 drop in Latino and Black enrollment , respectively , at California 's prestigious Boalt Hall School of Law . With minority enrollment dropping in just three years Chavez warns that all those claiming a fight against discrimination , reverse or otherwise , would soon have a chance to prove whether discrimination was ever the issue

Crosby 's Claim That Americans Do Not Understand Affirmative Action

Like Lydia Chbvez , author Faye J . Crosby wants to examine why affirmative action , a rather unremarkable policy is anything but when popularly discussed . In writing her book Affirmative Action Is Dead Long Live Affirmative Action , Crosby tries to solve the puzzle of America 's indecision over affirmative action . She starts by defining it affirmative action is the expenditure of energy or resources by an organization in the quest for equality among individuals from different discernable groups ' or alternatively the APAs both voluntary and mandatory efforts undertaken by federal , state , and local governments private employers and schools to combat discrimination and to promote equal opportunity in education and employment for all (Crosby , 2004 . To the end that she defines it , Crosby 's argument is that most Americans are unaware of what affirmative action is and more important , how it operates . She also states that Americans react positively or negatively towards the policy based on two things (1 ) how much they know about it and (2 ) what they associate with it (Crosby , 2004 . If Americans are told that Affirmative action ensures equal opportunity they take a more positive view of the policy . If told that the policy involves quotas set-asides or any preferential treatment - all misconceptions - they take a negative view of affirmative action (Crosby , 2004

It should be noted that the degree to which Americans view affirmative action as a positive or negative policy is largely based on their race (Crosby , 2004 . Misled Americans see affirmative action as a policy that uses reverse discrimination and gifts unworthy minorities with opportunities at the cost of trained whites (Crosby , 2004 . According to Crosby (2004 ) the half truths about the policy is prolific throughout America , throughout all classes , races and education levels (pg . 73 Crosby blames such widespread jargon on a number of factors , three as follows (1 ) the possibility that affirmative action does not work (2 leaders aware of how the policy works choose not to share that knowledge with the general public and /or (3 ) media sensationalists intent on creating controversy for better sales play on fears about its meaning For any of these reasons or more , many Americans rarely arrive at a proper definition of affirmative action . They are generally guided by errors that the policy permits quotas , seat asides and preferential treatment (Crosby , 2004

Which Author Argues Best

Crosby basically argues for affirmative action , referring to it as a measure that may still help the nation reach the non-discriminatory ideal to which so many Americans feel real and long-lasting commitment (2004 . However , the policy can only do this after Americans develop a less idealized view of justice (Crosby , 2004 . Crosby loosely defines justice as an understanding that all people desire their input to result in an output that rewards them best (2004 . Meaning all students want to feel that their hard work in college will ensure them a great job Crosby (2004 ) is suggesting that Americans join together justice and meritocracy (rewards based on worth (pg . 31-34 . Crosby hopes that Americans will realize that justice , code for equality , is more complex than playing favorites or even getting one 's desire in a melting-pot society . Then terms like reverse discrimination and preference drop out of usage in connection with affirmative action (Crosby , 2004

However , Crosby argues against such idealism , warning her audience that get the wrong idea about something is our choice . Unless the disagreement is racially motivated , a reality Crosby (1998 ) thinks we must consider (pg . 93 . She points out that a great deal of the errors about affirmative action come from selfish reasons like a knowingly confusing the policy because one happens to be racist . If one is in fact a racist , then the fact that affirmative action is the same as equal consideration of all Americans will hardily factor into a bigoted outlook (Crosby , 1998 . And Americans are still to my surprise racist and sexist (Crosby , 1998 . Crosby determines that such Americans add to the confusion over affirmative action and that the roots of this confusion comes from a latent juvenile desire to idealize justice (1998 furthering the belief I should get what I think I deserve (pg . 27

Improving the Author 's Argument

Of the two books , The Color Bind : California 's Battle to End Affirmative Action and Affirmative Action is Dead Long Live Affirmative Action , the second is more convincing . Crosby proves her argument with facts and figures which clearly support her position . Most important she does not say she is not biased on the subject . While Chbvez uses facts and figures , not taking a position weakens her overall argument

The reading audience finds Crosby credible because she directly sates that America needs affirmative action . Instead of assuming that her readers know the correct meaning of affirmative action , she defines it for them . She lets the audience approach affirmative action in an unemotional manner . Crosby also warns readers that get the wrong idea about and dislike of affirmative action comes from a childish , knee-jerk reaction . She puts the audience on the defensive so they will listen to her argument without emotion . She dares readers to follow her logic before reacting to it

By not taking a stance Chavez lets readers approach her with their fallacies intact . It makes her argument hard to see . She does not define affirmative action , leaving readers unsure what she tends to treat fairly : the weakness of California 's initiative process or the weakness of affirmative action . One could argue that Chbvez 's book reads like the sensational press Crosby blames for the existing blunders about affirmative action . Take for example the following possible response to Chbvez 's work . At one point , she line ups Proposition 209 with one of its chief supporters , a former Klu Klux Klan grandmaster , David Duke (Chavez , 1998 . If she wanted to present 209 without taking sides that position is removed at this point . Whether readers understand 209 is not directly based on them knowing who supports it . As a result , Chbvez 's readers would miss the chance to think about the reality of reverse discrimination as they came to link 209 with hate and oppression

While Chbvez is believable , Crosby makes a better argument . Her use of logic could be as bad as Chbvez 's appeal to reader 's emotions . Yet Crosby wisely uses the first approach to talk about this hot subject Chbvez 's conclusion makes the reader question her fairness as it tries to draw out an emotional response . She wants readers to relate to the minorities rejected by California 's Boalt School of Law (Chbvez , 1998 Take for example the knee-jerk reaction one could have to Chavez supporters of proposition 209 are correct in their belief that unworthy minorities found favor over more trained whites . Which would mean that minorities are not intelligent rather than being poor - Crosby (1998 thinks it is the second (pg . 56-57 . Chavez 's argument is full of such fallacies , those that try to sway by emotional appeals

Ultimately , Chavez 's book , while good , serves best as a news piece and less as an argument . She could improve her book by removing stories that imply knowledge of people 's reasons for doing things . For example , she implies Ward Connerly is hypocrite to support Proposition 209 especially since he benefited from the very policy he sought to outlaw (Chbvez , 1998 . Crosby on the other hand gives Connerly 's actions a clearer look . With Crosby 's argument in mind , Connerly , quite humanly weighs the output of his actions to be greater than the input . In other words , as a black man , very publicly supporting 209 , Connerly became at best well known and at worst infamous . To that end Crosby 's argument could not have been hurt by a chapter on Connerly 's actions . In my opinion , such a chapter would add a spot of Chavez 's sensationalism and bring more life to Crosby 's logical tone

In all honestly , the two books widened my knowledge of affirmative action and the true weakness of present legislation . I learned the second from Chbvez while Crosby explained the first . Both authors present two good points (1 ) affirmative action should not be rejected without a close look at how useful it is (Crosby , 2004 ) and (2 ) the initiative process should be more closely checked . Laws are not made without care and they should not be thrown out under those same conditions (Chbvez , 1998

Works Cited

Chbvez , Lydia (1998 . The Color Bind : California 's Battle to End Affirmative Action . Berkley and Los Angeles : University of California Press

Crosby , Faye J (2004 . Affirmative Action is Dead Long Live Affirmative Action . New Haven and London : Yale University Press

What is the Problem PAGE 5 ...