A newly trenchant debate on affirmative action is breaking into the presidential race, with ballot measures pending in Colorado, Arizona and Nebraska that seek to end the factoring of race, ethnicity, or gender in government funded programs. On a national level, the ballot initiatives have candidates and activists raising questions about the future look of affirmative action.

For Obama---whose candidacy has walked the fine line between being all about race, given his historic position as the first African American presidential nominee, and trying to position himself as transcending race--the question of affirmative action is particularly personal. During his time at Harvard, Obama reportedly stated that he had "undoubtedly benefited from affirmative action," and that "the success of the program speaks for itself." In terms of policy, Obama has rejected measures that would ban affirmative action or end existing equal opportunity initiatives.

However, he commented in July that "We have to think about affirmative action and craft it in such a way where some of our children who are advantaged aren't getting more favorable treatment than a poor white kid who has struggled more," and in April said that his daughters, coming from an affluent African American family, should not benefit from affirmative action. In other words, he'd like affirmative action to be more about class and less about race.

Many young activists agree with the sentiment that economic status should somehow be reflected. Sahar Massachi, a student at Brandeis who has been active in their campus debate, said he thinks "people would applaud a change of affirmative action from a race-based to class-based one, or perhaps a melding of the two." Sarah Burris, a blogger for Future Majority and Rock the Trail, who grew up in Oklahoma and Kansas, said she would like to see a more inclusive law, especially as the country heads for an economic downturn. She worries especially about the growing marginalization of rural youth. "Amusingly enough, it's the thing that brings rednecks and African Americans together - we're all becoming increasingly disenfranchised because of our [class] status."

But the question on the ballot this year isn't about redefining affirmative action: state initiatives like Amendment 46 in Colorado have the potential to abolish any such equal opportunity initiative. Israel Garcia, who is working for the United States Students Organization (USSA) on an alternative in Colorado, Amendment 82, said he feels that right now, debating the merits of class vs. race-based policies "is just a way of dividing the issue."

"This isn't about dissecting people, putting them in categories. This society is not equal on a number of fronts," he said. "We're focused on keeping the doors for opportunity open, then we'll have the ability to invent more programs as we feel the need."

USSA has found broad support on campuses throughout the state, and through local activist groups such as New Era Colorado for opposing the ban on affirmative action. It seems there's a consensus on the need for equal opportunity initiatives, but refining--or expanding-- them may have to wait: perhaps until Obama takes office, if he does.

Comments (32)

1. should be about money.

   we're all africans, after all.

   and actually,

   since all life comes on this here globe (probably) comes from the same common ancestor,

   we're all related to ash trees and elvis, as well.

   should be about money. allow the poor to have the opportunity to express the genius that otherwise gets unnoticed.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 08/12/2008 @ 7:16pm

2. Oh Happy, why am I not surprised that you would be the first to comment on affirmative action.

   I agree that affirmative action-as is-has passed it's prime, but even so I am not ready to put my future in the hands of people like you without recourse. Once our generation passes out of the workforce, maybe. The young people in this country comprehend how unfair the system was and won't allow a return to it.

   I am surprised when angry white guys who fail blame it on affirmative action. If a man has every advantage from birth that affirmative action supposedly bestows on us, what is his excuse? Maybe some white males are just losers. Or annoying. Or closed minded. I confess if I were hiring for my business I probably wouldn't hire a whiner, for example, no matter how qualified they were, but I don't think I would tell them that. So what's to keep this hypothetical whiny white guy from thinking I hired the cheerful, but less qualified black guy or woman because of affirmative action instead of his own unbearable personality flaw?

   Posted by Pogge at 08/12/2008 @ 7:27pm

3. Oh God. Affirmative Action here we go. At least Obama is echoing my opinion on this. Growing up with the advantages of private school I never thought I deserved Affirmative Action treatment. However I always thought it should be about class not race.

   Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/12/2008 @ 7:05pm

   The "reverse racism" is meant to equalize a system that is already biased to those who grow up rich. If the system isn't leveled out then all that happens is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. I am sure you are fine with that but education is the method to get anywhere in this country. In order to assure the pursuit of Happiness we need to ensure that all Americans rich and poor have access to at least a decent education. Not that those who live in crappy inner cities but are overall smart kids get looked over because they got A's in a public school instead of B's in a private school.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/12/2008 @ 7:53pm

4. So anyone wanna guess what Frank's Obama bash will be this time? Probably along the lines of Happy saying that the only reason Obama got to where he is is because of Affirmative Action.

   Except I don't think Affirmative Action applies to the Senate.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/12/2008 @ 7:57pm

5. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 08/12/2008 @ 8:14pm

   Why?

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/12/2008 @ 8:32pm

6. Except for Colorado, these initiatives will have no effect on the presidential race; and in Colorado, it may have the "opposite" effect intended by the Republicans.

   The republicans will win Arizona and Nebraska, so who cares what divisive crap they put on their ballots?

   Posted by Metteyya at 08/12/2008 @ 8:39pm

7. Years ago my Texas friend she of the "born again virginity" also introduced me to the concept of "marrying up". At the top of that social order were the trust fund babies, boys born with so much money already in the bank that neither they nor their wives need ever work a real job. Imagine, she and her friends told me aas we strolled along the beach on Padre Island, never having to ever look at a price tag, pay a bill or be anywhere unless it was a can't miss charity event. I heard the term "legacy" for the first time that night as in "he got into Yale as a legacy even though his grades were dismal because his dad and uncle went there".

   Now that, my friend is affirmative action,a system where not only do you not earn the money, but you can afford to buy politicians(or become one!) to protect you from nasty things like inheritance or capital gains taxes.

   Posted by Pogge at 08/12/2008 @ 9:00pm

8. HAPP...DARIN...MAASCH...

   what is McCain's view on AA (including the one he had BEFORE running this year)?

   Posted by Maskdelta at 08/12/2008 @ 9:53pm

9. Education Statistics > Universities > Top 500 (most recent) by country

   #1 United States: 168

   #2 Germany: 40

   #3 United Kingdom: 40

   #4 Japan: 34

   #5 Italy: 23

   #6 Canada: 23

   #7 France: 21

   #8 Australia: 14

   #9 Netherlands: 12

   #10 Sweden: 11

   Posted by frosty zoom at 08/12/2008 @ 9:54pm

10. Education Statistics > Universities > Top 500 (per capita) (most recent) by country

    #1 New Zealand: 1.239 per capita

    #2 Sweden: 1.222 per capita

    #3 Israel: 1.115 per capita

    #4 Switzerland: 1.068 per capita

    #5 Finland: 0.957 per capita

    #6 Denmark: 0.92 per capita

    #7 Norway: 0.871 per capita

    #8 Ireland: 0.747 per capita

    #9 Austria: 0.733 per capita

    #10 Netherlands: 0.731 per capita

    #11 Hong Kong: 0.725 per capita

    #12 Canada: 0.701 per capita

    #13 Australia: 0.697 per capita

    #14 Belgium: 0.675 per capita

    #15 United Kingdom: 0.662 per capita

    #16 United States: 0.568 per capita

    #17 Germany: 0.485 per capita

    #18 Singapore: 0.452 per capita

    #19 Italy: 0.396 per capita

    #20 France: 0.346 per capita

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/12/2008 @ 9:56pm

11. Education Statistics > Universities > Top 500 (per $ GDP) (most recent) by country

    #1 Israel: 0.06 per $1 billion of GDP

    #2 New Zealand: 0.05 per $1 billion of GDP

    #3 Sweden: 0.032 per $1 billion of GDP

    #4 Hong Kong: 0.031 per $1 billion of GDP

    #5 Finland: 0.027 per $1 billion of GDP

    #6 Canada: 0.023 per $1 billion of GDP

    #7 Australia: 0.022 per $1 billion of GDP

    #8 Switzerland: 0.022 per $1 billion of GDP

    #9 Netherlands: 0.021 per $1 billion of GDP

    #10 Denmark: 0.021 per $1 billion of GDP

    #11 Austria: 0.021 per $1 billion of GDP

    #12 Hungary: 0.02 per $1 billion of GDP

    #13 Belgium: 0.02 per $1 billion of GDP

    #14 United Kingdom: 0.019 per $1 billion of GDP

    #15 South Africa: 0.019 per $1 billion of GDP

    #16 Singapore: 0.019 per $1 billion of GDP

    #17 Ireland: 0.016 per $1 billion of GDP

    #18 Norway: 0.016 per $1 billion of GDP

    #19 Germany: 0.015 per $1 billion of GDP

    #20 Italy: 0.014 per $1 billion of GDP

    #21 United States: 0.014 per $1 billion of GDP

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/12/2008 @ 9:57pm

12. There's a lot of misinformation about AA floating around.

    First of all, it doesn't displace white workers or white students.

    Second of all, AA is to ensure that people are hired based on merit and not just because they're white and/or male.

    Third of all, it works. Especially for white women. It also works for minorities.

    Now, maybe it doesn't work for those who're white and/or male, but it's not supposed to. As evidenced by every study, you don't need help.

    Posted by no1kstate at 08/12/2008 @ 10:04pm

13. Bush's Last War

    Bush is after the Endangered Species Act with a lame-duck vengeance bordering on the sociopathic. He's proposing a whole new way to gut the Endangered Species Act. By cutting scientific review by independent experts, reports the AP.

    Normally federal agencies have to consult with scientists at the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service before building roads, dams, mines, and whatnot. You know, in consideration of any one of the 1,353 animal and plant species in danger of extinction. But, no, says Bush. Who needs science when god whispers in your ear?

    Not only that, the draft rules would also prohibit federal agencies from assessing greenhouse gas emissions from construction projects. This is Bush's way of getting back at the listing of the polar bear on climate change grounds.

    Senator Barbara Boxer says the draft rules are illegal. Nevertheless the new rules are subject to a 30-day public comment period before they're law. That's all. Then Bush can launch his last war against eagles, owls, whales, ferrets, manatees, wolves…

    Look for the casualties in court.

    <<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>

    how about some affirmative action for the animals?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/12/2008 @ 10:07pm

14. School choice and vouchers are just hunky dory unless you have the misfortune of living an area where there is one school and one school only. Vouchers and school choice are great if you have transportation to the school of your choice. School choice and vouchers are great unless you have three kids with entirely different academic needs.

    NO! NO !NO! We need every school to be a great school and it isn't necessary to turn education into a free market free for all to acheive that. The best way to educate children is in small, neighborhood schools and that costs money, Happs. Unless you think those private schools are going to start franchising that means our government uses our taxes to educate our children equitably.

    Posted by Pogge at 08/12/2008 @ 10:56pm

15. our government uses our taxes to educate our children equitably.

    Posted by Pogge at 08/12/2008 @ 10:56pm

    although schools must certainly be run locally,

    funding must not be local.

    to have local property taxes fund schools is just unfair.

    equal funding across all economic demographics would enable a society to find and cultivate many more gifted people who could in turn better society.

    and no, i'm not saying private schools should be abolished.

    they should be made irrelevant.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/12/2008 @ 11:51pm

16. happy,

    i attended public schools. they were and are today, excellent.

    and they have the dreaded teachers unions, too!

    in fact, they just bought bce, inc., my isp.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 12:11am

17. Club the baby seals! Dominion! Capitalism!

    Affirmative action for baby seals! Socialism!

    Posted by winyahn at 08/13/2008 @ 12:18am

18. When my uncles counseled me years ago, to "get that sheepskin" I didn't fully understand that euphemism. I do now. That was the way it was. Hopefully, education will mean something else to future generations. (Remember the brilliant performance of Sid Caesar with Captain Picard in the Next Generation episode?)

    Posted by Sorelish at 08/13/2008 @ 01:44am

19. "I am surprised when angry white guys who fail blame it on affirmative action."

    You are? Comeon, you may DISAGREE, but certainly it's not suprising. Put yourself in their shoes. They probably have emperical, mathematical, proof that several times in life they gave up a spot for affirmative action.

    Moreover, the white guys saying this usually did not "fail." They are successful, just not AS successful as their SAT scores may have predicted. If a guy has a upper 1% SAT score but not an upper 1% income, and high SAT scores are being systematically ignored by colleges if the test taker was white, then yes--Affirmative Action may have lowered their income.

    It's a zero sum game, and what white people are saying is both accurate and emperically true. Your OPINION these facts it is much more qualitive in nature.

    For example, this:

    "If a man has every advantage from birth"

    Many white people are poor. The income differential between blacks and whites is only 10%; for hispanics, even less. And the standard deviation is huge. Micheal Jordan is black; so's the former CEO of Merryl Lynch, the current CEO of Symantec and the current governer of New York. These people all have (very priviliged) kids. And the residents of most midwestern trailer courts are...white.

    "that affirmative action supposedly bestows on us, what is his excuse?"

    Affirmative action does not "supposedy" bestow an advantage. It emperically, actually, bestows a measurable compensation, that may or may not be excessive. For example, at the University of Michigan, the difference was 50 points out of 200 total points in the admissions system. Some people may argue that if the income differential between races is less than 10%, then the compensation should be 20 points or less.

    Posted by test10022 at 08/13/2008 @ 06:05am

20. "Maybe some white males are just losers."

    WOW. There is no better justification to getting rid of the policy than statements like this. Start calling the victims of reverse descrimination losers, and you make ALL of us want to get rid of the policy--tomorrow.

    I think you're a loser. And you don't write very well.

    "Or closed minded."

    Uh, I certainly don't want to open my mind to your sentiments, loser.

    "I confess if I were hiring for my business"

    I hope you're not a SBA disadvantaged small business. I hope you're competing in the free market. Because I'd like nothing better than to see you go out of business.

    "So what's to keep this hypothetical whiny white guy from thinking I hired the cheerful, but less qualified black guy or woman because of affirmative action instead of his own unbearable personality flaw?"

    Well maybe white guys aren't exactly eager to work for a manager who starts with the attitude,

    "if you're white, and you're working for me you must be a loser. Admit it...a loser. And don't start telling me your SAT scores or complaining about affirmative action, loser"

    There's a whole bunch of white and asian people with really high SAT scores who will be much happier working for the competition.

    Good luck in your business. The only thing I'm greatful for is you're so racist that you'll probably never hire a white guy anyway...sparing them a few months of misery working for your sorry a--

    Posted by test10022 at 08/13/2008 @ 06:13am

21. "now, you understand why the Education Establishment sees charter schools as a dire threat and dole out charters like so niggardly?"----Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/12/2008 @ 11:58pm

    That's "dole out charters like so magically"

    Posted by Maskdelta at 08/13/2008 @ 07:23am

22. Posted by test10022 at 08/13/2008 @ 06:13am

    All my employees at present are happy (but not 2 happy:) white guys. My hypothetical white guy is a negative, crabby whiner. Kind of like you.

    As for the writing Bubby, this public school graduate is published. Are you?

    Posted by Pogge at 08/13/2008 @ 08:40am

23. Affirmative Action has been socially divisive and may have outlived its usefulness. It is, in some ways, used now as grounds to exclude both qualified job candidates and qualified student applicants. It contradicts the 14th amendments equal protection clause by setting up criteria that make some people preferred over others.

    There are other ways to insure that everyone has access, for example, to a college education. Community colleges actually provide a very decent and affordable incipient college education to everyone from high school aged kids to senior citizens. And, CC's have competent professors whose main charge is to teach and not, as in many other colleges and universities, hide from the students and conduct their grant writing and research projects. Moreover, CC's do establish a sound educational foundation for their graduates to continue to four year schools and beyond. In short, they are affordable, with generous public financial aid for the poor, and educationally sound.

    In the job market, the idea of labeling, for instance, white males as a favored class who have enjoyed the centuries old purported "white male privilege" flies in the face of the social reality that most people have faced throughout history. Most men and women in the past had pre-defined roles with little if any choice as to how they were to live and how they were to earn a living.

    A few people may have enjoyed and today still enjoy aristocratic privilege, but institutionalizing other forms of inequality through affirmative action only makes things worse.

    Posted by Marco Marco at 08/13/2008 @ 09:14am

24. Posted by Marco Marco at 08/13/2008 @ 09:14am

    The privileged class fear that the poor and middle-class white folks who consistently vote against their best interests will one day realize that when it comes to poverty color doesn't matter.

    Years ago Cousin Obi loaned me-a single working welfare mom-two hundred bucks to rent an apartment. He sent the cash Western Union with the message "Peasants helping peasants". It has become my motto, particularly now that finances are not much of an issue. I will always be poor in my head and that's okay. Remembering where you came from maintains good character.

    We need to look past the color barrier and ask ourselves what has Mr.or Mrs. Politician done for me lately.

    Posted by Pogge at 08/13/2008 @ 09:26am

25. Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/12/2008 @ 9:36pm

    Nope. Because Charter schools would be able to reject students. So just like universities when a student came out of say an inner city schools and tried to switch to a charter school they would be rejected. Because A's in an inner city school aren't worth as much as B's in a private privileged school.

    The right's answer of CHARTER SCHOOLS, as much as you may claim to have the answer to everything, is not enough of a solution. There aren't enough private schools to go around. Which means otherwise bright kids will still get trapped in bad schools, which will become worse because of their lack of money. Yes, we need to change the system. No, charter schools are not the end all solution as Republicans like to think.

    "Privatize it" isn't going to work. We need creative solutions beyond the typical thought process. Creativity in solving national problems is something both sides of the political spectrums lack. They stick t one trumpet call. The right says the solution to every problem is to privatize it. The left says the solution to every problem is to make it publicly owned. Often times the solution is somewhere in the middle. Privatization with public help. I think that is where the solution for education is. Charter schools with heavy early government funding to make ENOUGH and get them up to snuff. However I don't think anyone can argue the problem and solution begins at home with the parents.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/13/2008 @ 12:08pm

26. White males aren't discriminated against when it comes to affirmative action. I repeat, NEITHER WHITE WORKERS NOR WHITE STUDENTS are displaced. For example, white students still get into their first choice schools at a higher rate than minorities get into their first choice.

    So cries about reverse discrimination are false. Absolutely false. If a white man is missing out on some opportunity, it's probably because he wasn't as good as the other applicants regardless of race, NOT because a person of color received an unfair advantage.

    Posted by no1kstate at 08/13/2008 @ 12:42pm

27. Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/13/2008 @ 12:34pm

    I agree with you that rules do need to be enforced. Part of the problem is that public schools keep shitty kids in them because they can't kick them out. If they could kick them out maybe serious kids could get a real education. I agree with you that throwing money at the problem is not the solution BUT at the same time I think charters are not the end all be all solution.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/13/2008 @ 12:57pm

28. You begin by expecting someone else to do something for you!!!!!!!!..at no cost to you!

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 1:14pm

    uh, isn't that taxes are for?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 2:26pm

29. Your mindset is exactly what the Founding Fathers would find confusing, for they set up the place so YOU could do for YOURSELF with out interference from the govt...not so the govt could do it for you.---Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 1:14pm

    MAASCh, then what do we need with government? Seems the Founding Fathers "set up the place" so that folks could elect representatives to use governmental power to the purposes that those who elected them WANTED?

    If that was "laissez-faire capitalism"...then that's what the REPRESENTATIVES enacted....

    if it was "socialism"...then that's what they enacted.

    Nothing in the Constitution says "Sorry, no government largesse or welfare or 'collectivist' domestic programs"...does it? It's talking about democratic republicanism...not capitalism.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 08/13/2008 @ 3:31pm

30. Discrimination is the treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice.

    affirmative action, in the United States, programs to overcome the effects of past societal discrimination by allocating jobs and resources to members of specific groups, such as minorities and women.

    So you fix past discriminations with more discrimination.

    Posted by middleborn at 08/13/2008 @ 4:10pm

31. Poggie is a troll.

    She first posts that "if her business" had employees; then subsequently posts who the employees, hypothetically, are.

    That said, I still find her attitude, and her posts, offensive.

    It's not the affirmative action recpient's place to be calling other people losers. Play the game without handicaps first; then start gloating over the results.

    Posted by test10022 at 08/13/2008 @ 8:51pm

32. Instead of the invasion of privacy and the bureaucracy to vet an applicant's poverty (race, etc.) the U.S. should do what many countries like Mexico do: give a free education to those who can pass the entrance test.

    Not to mention free (funded by taxes, of course) health care to EVERYONE -including foreigners, as ill American abroad are overjoyed to find in many places.

    That's the simple equitable way to do things that works.

    Posted by Evan Ravitz at 08/14/2008 @ 5:28pm