Benefits and harms of affirmative action laws in American society

Saving Affirmative Action Laws

Affirmative action laws apply to many sections of societal interactions be it school admissions, business, or employee hiring, they attempt to balance the history of racial discrimination that marked the period before the laws came into being. Affirmative action requires that persons making decisions relating to employment, business and education take into account factors such as religion, sex, color, race and national origin. The major advantage of the laws is that they promote the opportunities available for minority groups in the society. The major proponent of the laws is that they compensate for persecution, discrimination and exploitation that was present in the past. Over the last few years, there has been debate on the benefits and harms brought about by affirmative action with several arguing that though it has met its intended benefits, the law also disadvantages minority groups since they may end up in institutions that will not serve them as well as less elite ones would. Therefore there is a need to examine the benefits and harms brought about by affirmative action in the quest to create new solutions that would benefit the whole population.

History of affirmative action

Affirmative action was introduced by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 as one of the methods of addressing discrimination that was quite rampant in spite of constitutional rights and civil rights laws. However, the idea was first developed and enforced by President Lyndon B. Johnson four years later. In Executive Order 11246, President Johnson prohibited employers from using race, religion, color and national origin as discriminative factors. He them amended the law two years later in 1967 to include sex. Everything seemed to be going well until the late 70s when reverse discrimination became rampant. Several whites were irked by rejection from institutions that they qualified to as a result of places being reserved for less qualified minorities.

In 1986, affirmative action was put to the test in Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education when the Board of Education laid off white teachers

First problem: the mismatch theory

The mismatch theory or mismatch effect is the Espenshade and Radford, 2009( ADDIN EN.CITE 1987

ecNum>1156

ecord>

ec-number>11561156

Second problem: reverse discrimination

Affirmative action has over the years led to many cases regarding reverse discrimination. This has increased the attention and pressure on law makers to have a second look at the situation. According to affirmative action laws, women and minorities are entitled to preferential treatment. These two groups account for two thirds of the population thus creating the issue of reverse discrimination. A number of cases have highlighted this. These include San Francisco Police Officers Association v. San Francisco, where gender and racial preferences were highlighted in testing of employees, Hayes v. North State Law Enforcement Officers association where higher ranking officers were not promoted and these positions were instead given to black officers, Detroit Police Officers v. Young where preferential treatment was given to minorities that had not experienced any actual discrimination and non-minorities experienced excessive hardship. These cases are among many that have highlighted situations where non-minorities were passed up for promotion or opportunities which were given to less deserving minorities.

Third problem: devaluing accomplishments

Many opponents to affirmative action have argued that it devalues the accomplishments of individuals who are denied opportunities on the basis that these opportunities are reserved for minority groups Sher, 1983.

Scholars have argued that affirmative action hinders reconciliation between minority and non-minority groups since it exposes discrimination though in a reverse fashion Garry, 2006.

Fisher v. University of Texas is one of the major cases that have highlighted devaluing of accomplishments and reverse discrimination. According to the case, Abigale Fisher was denied an opportunity at the University of Texas because she is white. Sowell (2004)

has argued that affirmative action leads to minority groups designating themselves as preferred groups in order to take advantage of these group preference policies. Therefore they tend to reduce the incentives on non-minority groups and also undermine their performance though exemplary.

Corporates have also argued that affirmative action can harm a company's bottom line especially in a competitive economy. The supporters of this idea suggest that as corporations compete for quality employees, they have to consider minority groups thus they sometimes have to pick less qualified minority employees to satisfy the affirmative action requirements than the more qualified non-minority employees. Though this encourages diversity in the workplace and has its own advantages, at times it forces organizations to survive primarily on the diversity advantages than advantages of quality employees.

Conclusion

Affirmative action was a reasonable strategy towards eliminating discrimination that was rampant in the 50s and early 60s. Its main goal was to reapportion opportunities and wealth so that minority groups such as women and blacks. Through adopted affirmative action programs, discrimination was greatly reduced and minority individuals were given opportunities to enjoy the same socioeconomic opportunities as the non-minorities. However, over the years, affirmative action has outgrown its purpose and it currently leads to more disadvantages that it initially had. Three major problems have been identified which if not solved could create a vicious cycle that continue harming the society more than the advantages gained.