 
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 2063
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 1:31 pm: |    |
The lawyers at UoM obviously must have thrown in the towel. Not much peeping this week from the strongest procrastinator... |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 279
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 1:38 pm: | |
The holiday just ended yesterday for many in lieu of Gerald Ford's funeral. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 455
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 1:39 pm: | |
Livernoisyard:
I think the 6th circuit ruling only addressed the TRO, although the court seemed doubtful about BAMN's chances for success on the merits of a challenge of the law...either way, I don't think the constitutionality of the amendment itself has actually been challenged yet...
however, when CA passed the same law 10 years ago, there was a challenge that was dismissed by the 9th circuit, and the USSC subsequently refused to hear the case... |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 2066
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 1:46 pm: | |
Dream on...
From today's Detroit News: U-M suspends admissions
"University to review how to implement Proposal 2
Marisa Schultz / The Detroit News
The University of Michigan will suspend admission decisions until Jan. 10 while university officials decide what to do next after a federal appeals court ordered the state's three largest universities to immediately comply with Proposal 2.
The pause in admissions decisions, announced Wednesday by U-M Provost Teresa Sullivan, applies to undergraduate, transfer, Rackham Graduate School programs, non-Rackham graduate programs and professional programs.
The university will continue to accept undergraduate applications until the Feb. 1 deadline and make admissions decisions into the spring, which is typical.
"There is plenty of time for the applications to be fully considered," said U-M spokeswoman Julie Peterson. "We are not concerned by this very brief delay."
On Dec. 19, a federal judge granted a request from U-M, Michigan State University and Wayne State University to push back the effective date of Proposal 2 from Dec. 23 to July 1, when their current admissions cycle is complete. They argued that retooling admissions and financial aid programs in the middle of an admissions cycle would be logistically impossible and unfair to students who would be judged under two different standards.
But on Friday, a three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the decision and ordered the three universities to immediately comply with the new law.
U-M considers race as one factor in undergraduate admissions. Wayne State and MSU officials say they do not; however, they were concerned whether they were complying with Prop 2 in graduate school admissions and financial aid programs, respectively. Neither has suspended admissions decisions.
Peterson couldn't say whether the university will quickly revamp its admissions criteria for admitting the remaining half of the 2007 freshman class or whether U-M will appeal the recent court ruling.
"It's a period for us to consider what our next actions will be," Peterson said.
# U-M will not make any new admissions decisions until Wednesday.
# The delay applies to undergraduate, transfer, Rackham Graduate School programs, non-Rackham graduate programs and professional programs.
# U-M has not said how it will admit students when admissions resume.
# The deadline to submit undergraduate applications is Feb. 1. Students should get their applications in as soon as possible.
Source: U-M |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 2067
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 1:51 pm: | |
Notwithstanding any constitutional challenges, the law applies now and its effects on its timeliness of taking effect will be felt in four states should the other three states enact any such similar legislation. |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 280
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 1:52 pm: | |
I read the article at 6am this morning. Thanks.
Your point? They kept quiet before asking for the extension in the first place. Also, keep in mind that they are not the only party seeking this extension. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 456
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 2:07 pm: | |
"If you don't know I'm not going to waste my time telling you.
:crickets:"
Yep...that's about what I expected...thanks |
Zug
Member
Username: Zug
Post Number: 161
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 2:54 pm: | |
I have addressed the sports issue before. I think there are opportunities for many people when it comes to sports. Professional sports have scouts who look at tons of college and even high school athletes a year. Many people are given sports tryouts. Just as affirmative action does not guarantee graduation from college or promotions (or not getting fired) on the job...trying out for sports does not guarantee making the team. So, just because whites do not make the professional team in certain sports, do not mean whites are not given the opportunity to make the team.
But even beyond this aspect, I think people shouldn't be narrow minded about who can play specific sports. I do think talent should be looked for in all corners. For example, 15 years ago, many Americans blindly assumed that American blacks were the best basketball players in the world. Now the USA basketball team cannot win international tournaments, about 1/3 of the NBA is international, arguably the best center in the league is from China, and the 2-time defending MVP is a white Canadian. I think this is because scouts have expanded their ideas of who are capable basketball players. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 457
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 3:42 pm: | |
Zug:
And that's how it should be. If the whites you speak of were given extra points during tryouts because they are underrepresented in the sport they are trying out for, then they would be bumping a more qualified athlete out of the way, which would lower the quality of play and make the sport less interesting to watch...
And AA in college admissions is not about giving people the opportunity to apply...it's about automatically granting admissions to people if happen to have a certain skin color, giving no chance to person who was competing for the same seat but got denied...U of M even admitted three years ago that they admit virtually every black and hispanic who applies to their school, regardless of how their credentials compare to others who are applying for the same seat |
Zug
Member
Username: Zug
Post Number: 162
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 3:54 pm: | |
I look at AA in admissions as giving people an opportunity to succeed in college. Ultimately, graduation is what's important, not admission. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 459
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 4:10 pm: | |
The problem with that theory is that the people who had the same test scores as many of those who were admitted but didn't have the same skin color don't even get the opportunity to graduate |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 2068
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 4:11 pm: | |
There's meritocracy (equal opportunity) versus AA, which means equal outcomes. One requires hard work by necessity, and the other doesn't. |
Detroit_stylin
Member
Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3519
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 4:14 pm: | |
Damn I seriously wonder why some are so focused that AA did help people of color, yet they dont rant on women, nor any one else that fell under its protection...
and then the NBA references why is it that you only seem to make it a Black and White thing?
That causes me to question your true joy at AA being struck down here. I just call a racist as I see one...
(Message edited by Detroit_stylin on January 04, 2007) |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 2069
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 4:26 pm: | |
Perhaps, the feelings that one has when not letting go after losing an unfair privilege that he shouldn't have had in the first place is the true sign of his being a racist. |
Spartacus
Member
Username: Spartacus
Post Number: 168
Registered: 07-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 4:34 pm: | |
You lose credibility when you claim that AA protects homosexuals.
Those of you that favor AA, are you upset that Wayne State and MSU don't use race as a factor in their admission process?
Most of the discussion on this board deals with college admissions. The AA that has arguably a greater impact, but does not get as much press, is government contracting. By creating set asides, or other preferences we are all effectively paying more in taxes than we would otherwise. Many of these minority firms are shams. It is very common for an already existing non-minority company to create a new company with a minority owner figure head. The minority company gets contracts and one minority/woman gets a windfall at the taxpayers expense. This seems inherently unfair to the rest of us who foot the bill (not to mention the companies that miss out on the contract in question). Also, maybe someone can explain to me why an asian american is considered "disadvantaged" for these purposes. Does an Asian Indian with a Ph.D. from a wealthy family really need any advantages from our government. |
Spartacus
Member
Username: Spartacus
Post Number: 169
Registered: 07-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 4:55 pm: | |
This is an article that discusses a study done by a UCLA professor.
He concludes that minority preferences in law school admissions hurt black applicants. Black students are essentially getting into law schools that they are unqualified to attend. He believes that there would actually be more black lawyers if the students and schools were better matched.
http://www.equaljusticesociety .org/press_2004_dec_calbarjour nal.html
"For his study, Sander primarily used grades, test scores and bar exam results collected by the Law School Admission Council. The data came from 27,000 students who entered 160 law schools in 1991. He also used data from a study of his own that began looking at students who entered law school in 1995. Among the findings:
After the first year of law school, 51 percent of black students are in the bottom tenth of their classes compared with 5 percent of white students. About two-thirds of black students are in the bottom fifth of their classes. Without racial preferences, 14 percent fewer black students would be admitted to law schools, but those admitted would be more successful.
About 19 percent of blacks and 8 percent of whites drop out of law school. If preferences had been abolished, the number of black attorneys emerging from the Class of 2004 would have been 8 percent higher.
Blacks are nearly six times as likely as whites to fail the bar exam on multiple tries. Without racial preferences, the number of black students who would pass the bar exam on the first try would likely increase by 22 percent.
Of all students who started law school in 1991, 48 percent of blacks and 78 percent of whites graduated, took the bar and passed it on their first attempt. Without racial preferences, 74 percent of black students would be likely to make it from the first day of law school to passing the bar on the first try because fewer unqualified students would be admitted to law school, there would be less attrition and academic performance — the principal predictor of success in passing the bar exam — would improve.
Sander says the “credentials gap” between blacks and whites puts blacks at a disadvantage from the start. “Students who stumble at the beginning of a course often become progressively more confused as the semester wears on,” Sander wrote."
“. . . In a less competitive school, the same student might well thrive because the pace would be slower, the theoretical nuances would be a little less involved and the student would stay on top of the material.” |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 460
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 4:59 pm: | |
"Damn I seriously wonder why some are so focused that AA did help people of color, yet they dont rant on women, nor any one else that fell under its protection..."
because women typically have better grades and test scores then men, so if they bumped a man out of a university seat, then it was justified
"and then the NBA references why is it that you only seem to make it a Black and White thing?"
don't know what you mean...I referenced professional sports, not the NBA...and I never made it a black and white thing...Zug did that
"That causes me to question your true joy at AA being struck down here. I just call a racist as I see one..."
well then you're blind as a f*ucking bat, either by choice or by birth, and you probably always will be |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 282
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 5:02 pm: | |
"because women typically have better grades and test scores then men, so if they bumped a man out of a university seat, then it was justified"
You never had a shot at getting into Michigan, AA or not. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 461
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 5:14 pm: | |
I graduated from Michigan, dipsh*t |
3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity
Post Number: 395
Registered: 01-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 5:36 pm: | |
Thejesus: I do like your style.
Re: law schools. It's difficult for me to believe that law schools are very different from one another, or that one school is "harder" than another. I graduated from WSU Law, and I was recruiting partner for my firm for 2 or 3 years. I recruited from seven law schools at the time, including U. of M. (Frankly, I never hired anyone from U. of M. because they all came in to the interview w/ their GPA's out to 5 decimal places and I figured their emphasis was on the wrong things. (They also all seemed to be loaded up way too heavily w/ "sociology" type classes such as "Law and Society" etc. Very light on Corporations, Commercial Transactions, Regulated Industries, Taxes, Partnership Law etc. One of my sons graduated from MI Law but I believe my WSU education was far better than his...although he does very well.)I tried to hire people who had a couple of kids, a demanding day job, and went to night school at WSU, U. of D., or DCL.
Give me a hungry lawyer used to working his or her butt off who wanted to make a lot of money dealing with sophisticated business people and the door was wide open. I always paid a little more to get who I wanted as well. Black or white, male or female. They had to be hungry.
I guess my point is that anyone who is properly motivated and can read English can get through law school. Most teach the same courses from the same textbooks etc. It's a rather easy curriculum as a matter of fact, if one does the work. Quality of professors is a factor but every school I'm aware of has both good and bad ones. |
Spartacus
Member
Username: Spartacus
Post Number: 170
Registered: 07-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 5:49 pm: | |
If you have a 145 on the LSAT and everyone else in your class has a 170 then I think its pretty safe to assume that you're going to have a hard time with law school. If you get into a school that you're not qualified to gain admission to I think its fair to assume that are not likely to thrive at that school. If you're struggling in school it is more likely that you: would do poorly relative to his classmates; quit or fail out of school; or be so traumatized as to diminish the odds of success on the bar exam. |
3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity
Post Number: 396
Registered: 01-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 6:24 pm: | |
Spartacus: You are so wrong. That was essentially my point; be fluent in English, want to be a lawyer, and work your ass off and that's all that counts. To hell w/ LSAT scores, which are essentially useless in my opinion other than as a crutch and cover-your-ass factor for the Admissions Office.
If one can graduate from WSU one can just as easily graduate from Harvard Law. There just is very little difference. When I practiced law for a living,I interacted with many lawyers from high profile law schools on big money deals and education-wise there was not an iota of difference in our performances as a result of where we went to school.
I don't want to bore you, but I barely got through a local undergraduate school w/ a 2.1 gpa. Got out of the Army and made out very well in business. Got bored and sold out. Took the LSAT (because I had so many lawyer friends and I'd paid so much dough to lawyers I thought I'd give it a try. scored off the charts LOW. Was rejected by WSU, U of D, AND DCL. A lawyer friend told me he could get me into DCL. However, WSU must have wanted "diversity," someone w/ "life experiences," and must have had some drop-outs, because I got a telegram the day before registration telling me I had been provisionally accepted. I went, worked hard, enjoyed most of the classes tremendously ( and aced them) and graduated w/ honors way up in my class rank, and in the process did much better than most w/ much higher LSATs (I have to believe my LSAT was the lowest of the class. When I took it I was not highly motivated, had been out of school for 8 years, and wasn't even sure I wanted to goto law school.)
Trust me. Law school is no big deal. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 463
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Monday, January 08, 2007 - 9:08 am: | |
Zug:
I noticed how you asked the question about SES in Public Employment twice, but then didn't feel like discussing it any more after I responded to you...perhaps I answered your question, but I anticipated that you'd have more to say about it... |
Danny
Member
Username: Danny
Post Number: 5391
Registered: 02-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 08, 2007 - 9:11 am: | |
The Ghettoman is glad that Affirmative Action policies and quotas by means of race and gender is being abolished forever!! Now folks around Michigan can get into colleges not my race and gender but to grades and experiences. |
Zug
Member
Username: Zug
Post Number: 165
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 08, 2007 - 12:48 pm: | |
I was just curious as to how a supporter of SES affirmative action would address this aspect which previously existed in affirmative action. I actually think this is a good strategy for college admissions, but it's applicability elsewhere is difficult to implement. And upon consideration of your answer I am still skeptical that inequalities will be addressed. I don't necessarily believe that the people applying for the same job would be in the same SES. Not everyone applying for jobs are unemployed, there are people with connections, and some people have spouses who can boost their SES, and probably other things if I think long enough. Hell, there are some government jobs that you can't have unless you own a "reliable vehicle". Tell me that's not class-biased to an extent. I just keep hearing that people support SES based affirmative action. It seems straightforward enough to implement for college admissions, but it does nothing to address other inequalities that affirmative action at least attempted to address. The crazy conspiracy angel is also whispering in my ear, "How come we can find ways to get the poor into college where they need to take out thousands in loans, but can't help them get a decent job?" May be off the wall, but I have thought it. So, in general, I was just genuinely curious. Granted, education is a part of SES, so helping people gain an education is an important stepping stone. However, wealth (not income) and social connections still exist for those in a higher SES. In addition, I still wish SES affirmative action, even if just for college admissions, could be made into a law that can be enforced. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 464
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Monday, January 08, 2007 - 1:31 pm: | |
See, i don't really think the people who voted for Proposal 2 were really interested in having any type of AA program for public employment...
SES-based AA really only applys to college admissions, and once people graduate and go to apply for the same job, they should be looked at as equals, so SES-based AA wouldn't really apply at that point...and racial preferences and quotas in these types of situations are exactly what we wanted to get rid of when we passed Proposal 2...voters of Proposal 2 don't want some back-door process of keeping the same broken system in place (which is what some of the Universities are attempting to do)...
As far as what a job applicant's spouse's income might be, that's not something employers should be concerned with...government jobs (or any job for that matter) aren't welfare programs...when you apply for a job, you're actually supposed to be give something in return in order to get something in return, and if you can give it better than someone else, then you should get the job over them...that's the true spirit of Proposal 2...
Now as far as ensuring that minority applicants are not discriminated against, people tend to forget that Proposal 2 was not just about baring preferential treatment for certain races...it also makes it illegal for qualified applicants to be discriminated against because of their race, gender or national origin...
It really covers all the bases and I'm very proud of our state for being one of the first to put such a thing in place...
(Message edited by thejesus on January 08, 2007) |
3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity
Post Number: 404
Registered: 01-2005
| | Posted on Monday, January 08, 2007 - 5:18 pm: | |
Thejesus: well said. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 465
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 8:40 am: | |
ty |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 466
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 3:06 pm: | |
Group will ask high court to allow more time for universities to comply with Proposal 2
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.d ll/article?AID=/20070109/UPDAT E/701090429
Does anyone else find this quote from Shanta Driver absolutely hilarious?
"Proposal 2's backers are trying to get right-wing activist judges to use Proposal 2 as a weapon to re-segregate Michigan's universities."
(Message edited by thejesus on January 09, 2007) |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 2153
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 3:12 pm: | |
SCOTUS is handling fewer cases than usual these past few years. I'm sure that BAMN is near the top of its docket. |
3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity
Post Number: 405
Registered: 01-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 3:39 pm: | |
"Hilarious?" I'd say "frightening." Reasonable people can differ, but they're nuts.
Luckily, stupid as well. |
321brian
Member
Username: 321brian
Post Number: 249
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 1:07 pm: | |
Shanta Driver is a joke. She should thank all of us who voted for Prop. 2. Without it's passage she wouldn't have a job.
Judging from what I have heard come out of her mouth she isn't qualified for much else. |
Citylover
Member
Username: Citylover
Post Number: 2018
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 2:07 pm: | |
http://www.mlive.com/news/aane ws/index.ssf?/base/news-21/116 8443801307130.xml&coll=2 |
Zulu_warrior
Member
Username: Zulu_warrior
Post Number: 3126
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 2:30 pm: | |
What this means now is that when white people dont get into a university, they will know that they were not as smart as The Blacks who did get in...
or will they....hmmm? |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 467
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 4:22 pm: | |
"What this means now is that when white people dont get into a university, they will know that they were not as smart as The Blacks who did get in..."
that's exactly what we want and why we passed Prop 2... |
Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 5026
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 11:02 pm: | |
At the end of the day the universities are going to do what they want. Instead of using race, they'll simply add more points for place of residence to get the outcome they want to. What this proposal passing amounts to is simply pushing race in the admission's process underground. Ha! |
Citylover
Member
Username: Citylover
Post Number: 2019
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 11, 2007 - 8:50 am: | |
Perhaps we should look to Calif to see what might be in store for Mich |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 468
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 11, 2007 - 9:00 am: | |
Looks like the Supreme Court is going to hear BAMN's emergency appeal on the 6-month injunction...
Justice John Paul Steven's is assigned to our circuit and can hear and rule on emergency appeals of this type, and he just asked the parties to submit their briefs...
Even with this though, I don't see there being any legal basis for him to reinstate the injunction...
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20070110/U PDATE/701100448 |
321brian
Member
Username: 321brian
Post Number: 256
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 11, 2007 - 12:26 pm: | |
From Free Press article..."I think it's a step back, I guess, from all that's been done to make universities more diverse so everyone had an equal chance,"17-year-old Lauren Hollier of Detroit
Everyone will have an equal chance now. Start studying and maybe apply to State just to be safe. |
Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 5028
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 11, 2007 - 8:57 pm: | |
Yeah, it's so equal that people are still being given points because their parents went to the universities they are applying to among other ridiculous inequalities. MCRI wasn't created to put everyone on the same playing field, it was created out of spite of a particular group of people, and then threw their own white women under the bus with the others. It was cutting off one's nose to spite the one's face. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 469
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 11, 2007 - 9:36 pm: | |
Another lame attempt to justify racial preferences by invoking the 'legacy' argument...a few things to consider...
1. Most of us white people do not have parents who went to college, and so legacy points don't even apply to us...by contrast, ALL members of underrepresented minorities get preferential treament from all colleges with AA programs
2. Legacy points are only factor in when an applicant applies to the particular school their parents went to...by contrast, AA gives minority applicants a points boost when they apply to virtually any school in the entire country...
3. The points boost one might get for being a legacy applicant doesn't even approach the points boost given for being a minority applicant, which virtually amounts an automatic acceptance as long as your name is spelled correctly on your application...
4. A majority of the population would likely be in favor of eliminating legacy programs in public universities, so if you feel strongly about them, then you can put a petition together like MCRI did...however, I suspect that the pro-AA side of the argument would really prefer to keep legacy programs in place so they have something else to bitch about, which is why they haven't taken any action to try to eliminate them...
(Message edited by thejesus on January 12, 2007) |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 470
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 8:53 am: | |
LMichigan:
Please edumacate the rest of us on how white women were thrown under a bus by Prop 2...
Because from what I understand. women get better grades than men in general, so women will still beat out men academically in most cases...and as far as public employment and public contracting, Prop 2 makes it illegal to discriminate against someone because of their gender...
So really, I'd love to hear you explain that statement |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 297
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 1:21 pm: | |
Yet women were still drastically underrepresented in my engineering classes at the old Umich... especially as I got to the upper-level classes. Of course, I was underrepresented too, often being the only person of a "preferred race" in the room.
If women make better grades, why are they at... what was it, 75% of what white males were being paid on average for the same educational background and doing the same job?! |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 473
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 2:47 pm: | |
The ratio of men to women in your engineering class is easily explained by the FACT that fewer women apply to engineering programs due to women in general being less interested in the engineering field than men...
If you walked into the College of Nursing at most schools, you might ask where all the men are at...again, the explanation lies in the two genders having different interests in general...
And women make 75 cents on the dollar compared to men because women have historically been discriminated against in general by employers...and though I know someone like you probably won't appreciate it, Proposal 2 addresses this issue by making it illegal to discriminate against women who apply for and hold government jobs in the state of Michigan |
Zug
Member
Username: Zug
Post Number: 166
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 3:02 pm: | |
Proposal 2 didn't make discrimination illegal. It just had a non-discrimination statement as a red herring to appear as if this is what affirmative action is replaced with. Government level legalized discrimination has been banned since the 1950s and 60s. |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 298
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 3:11 pm: | |
Michigan's Proposal 2 of 2006:
"Prohibit public institutions from discriminating against groups or individuals due to their gender, ethnicity, race, color or national origin. (A separate provision of the state constitution already prohibits discrimination based on the basis of race, color or national origin.)"
Please point out to me where in that salad dressing fluff of a second paragraph it says ANYTHING about trying to level the gender salary imbalance? Matter of fact, does it cover anything that ISN'T already covered under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? It was purely bullshit, an attempt to make what they were really trying to do more palatable to the voter.
(Message edited by iheartthed on January 12, 2007) |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 474
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 3:15 pm: | |
Zug:
I should have clarified. It wasn't the first law to make discrimination illegal, but discrimination is still illegal under Prop 2.
I guess what I was trying to get across is that it doesn't permit discrimination against minorities and women, which is one of lies being propagated by groups like BAMN |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 475
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 3:26 pm: | |
lhearthed:
I'd be happy to. You're quoting the ballot language, but here is an excerpt the actual language that was added to the Constitution...
"(2) The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, SEX, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT, public education, or public contracting."
If a woman holding a government job in Michigan is being paid less than her male counterpart and can show that the discrepancy is solely due to her gender, then she could sue under the language quoted above...
And the CRA might have already covered most of this, but that just means that women won't be any worse off under Prop 2...
The REAL bullshit were the lies being told by groups like BAMN with the whole "this proposal is going to eliminate breast exams and battered women's shelters" nonsense... |
Karl
Member
Username: Karl
Post Number: 5933
Registered: 09-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 3:47 pm: | |
This appeared today in "The Best of the Web Today" by James Taranto:
The Affirmative Action Quagmire
"With Michigan's new ban on affirmative action going into effect, and similar ballot initiatives looming in other states, many public universities are scrambling to find race-blind ways to attract more blacks and Hispanics," the New York Times reports. Racial preferences are illegal at public universities in California, Florida and Washington state, and were barred in Texas under a federal appeals court order until 2003, when the U.S. Supreme Court in Grutter v. Bollinger upheld the constitutionality of some racial preferences.
Within the Times article appears this astonishing admission:
Nationwide, after 30 years of debate, and litigation, over affirmative action, universities have made strikingly little progress toward racially representative student bodies.
Doesn't this show that affirmative action has failed? Perhaps if universities could employ outright quotas--declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in University of California v. Bakke (1978) and again in Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)--they could achieve "racially representative student bodies," albeit at the cost of wide disparities between the races among their students. But the court is unlikely to revisit its antiquota precedents, and even the Grutter-permitted preferences expire in another 21 1/2 years, if Justice O'Connor's obiter dicta can be believed.
If affirmative action as now practiced in 46 states does such a poor job of meeting its own goals, why do universities cling to it so tenaciously? |
Ltorivia485
Member
Username: Ltorivia485
Post Number: 2888
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 3:55 pm: | |
Without affirmative action programs, the social, economic, and educational gap between the haves and the have-nots will increase dramatically. This nation will be an international embarassment because it cannot educate its own citizens. I guess it's alright to deny access and opportunity for the (historically) disadvantaged and enrich the pockets of the few.
Also, race has ALWAYS plagued American society. |
Spartacus
Member
Username: Spartacus
Post Number: 171
Registered: 07-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 4:01 pm: | |
uhhh, from what I've heard UM will give preferences to people who are from poor families. Does that make you feel better? BTW, I don't think any more or any less citizens will be educated as a result of this. If you think so, please explain why? |
Jelk
Member
Username: Jelk
Post Number: 4215
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 4:01 pm: | |
Based upon what I see coming out of so-called top-tier institutions like Northwestern, we can't even educate the "haves." |
Ltorivia485
Member
Username: Ltorivia485
Post Number: 2892
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 4:03 pm: | |
Spartacus, do you honestly believe that the majority of students at UM come from poor/working-class backgrounds? Please answer this for me. |
Spartacus
Member
Username: Spartacus
Post Number: 172
Registered: 07-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 4:08 pm: | |
No, I'm sure that isn't or won't be the case. I never said that.
All the students there weren't black when AA was in effect either. |
Ltorivia485
Member
Username: Ltorivia485
Post Number: 2895
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 4:12 pm: | |
But there was a higher percentage of blacks at University of Michigan (oh wow 9%) than after the Supreme Court ruling. Affirmative action works. White people are not being discriminated against. (In a state that is almost 79-80% white, I doubt a black person is ruining the lives of white Michiganders.)
People make it seem like it's not a big deal ("we are a colorblind society"), but when you're the only minority on a campus, it is really bothersome. For example, black students in California are fleeing the "prestigious" UC schools to matriculate at the local Cal-State universities or schools on the East Coast who naturally have larger and more friendly black populations. |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 2270
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 4:32 pm: | |
quote:Affirmative action works.
And just what does the "works" in this statement mean? This is a rather hollow statement, in that it's totally vague. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 498
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 4:02 pm: | |
For those who are interested, last week the US Supreme Court rejected BAMN's final appeal for a preliminary injunction to allow Universities to postpone compliance w/ Prop 2 until the next admissions cycle...
This is significant because it not only means that Michigan universities have to comply with Prop 2 immediately, but it also means that the United States Supreme Court is doubtful that the underlying action of BAMN’s appeal, which is that Prop 2 is unconstitutional, has any merit
If you recall, Judge David Lawson, a federal Judge here in Detroit, initially granted the injunction to allow Michigan universities to postpone compliance w/ Prop 2 until the next admissions cycle…however, this was reversed on appeal by the 6th Circuit…so BAMN then filed an appeal w/ Justice John Paul Stevens who is the USSC Justice assigned to the 6th Circuit
Now, for an injunction to be granted, the plaintiff must show a combination of irreparable harm and a good probability of success on the merits...and it seems safe to say that they’ve demonstrated the irreparable harm requirement by claiming that changing admissions policies in the middle of an admissions cycle would be difficult, time-consuming and unfair…which leaves us w/ the question of probability of success on the merits…
In reversing Judge Lawson’s injunction order, the 6th Circuit stated that it was highly doubtful that BAMN’s case would eventually succeed on the merits, mainly because BAMN’s central argument was that the 14th Amendment somehow compels what the 6th Circuit felt it actually prohibits, which is official conduct that discriminates on the basis of race…
So, in refusing to reinstate the Judge Lawson’s injunction order, the US Supreme Court is essentially affirming the 6th Circuit’s order and thus indicating that there are no constitutional hurdles preventing the people of Michigan from banning AA like we did…
So it looks like this is basically over…congrats to all those who supported Prop 2!!!
http://www.southbendtribune.co m/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/2 0070123/News01/701230399 |
Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 5078
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 6:55 pm: | |
Funny you posted that, and not the other decision, today, where a lawsuit to make the universities implement proposal 2, immediately, was tossed out. As in California, we're going to see legal wrangling continue. |
Sarge
Member
Username: Sarge
Post Number: 483
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 7:11 pm: | |
It wasn't tossed out. It was voluntarily dismissed.
http://www.mlive.com/news/aane ws/index.ssf?/base/news-21/117 0258058110940.xml&coll=2 |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 499
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 7:54 pm: | |
LM:
I was not aware of today's event, which was not a decision by a court, but rather, a Sarge pointed out, a voluntary dismissal by the Plaintiff, which is largely irrelevant...
All the Plaintiff was seeking to do was to force U of M immediately comply with Prop 2, which they have to do now anyways, and which they are stating that they will do...
We will continue to see suits brought by the Pro-AA crowd, but my point is that all indications are now that such suits will ultimately fail, as expected. |
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.