INSIDE:

NEWS/STORIES/ARTICLES
Book Reviews
Columns/Opinion/Cartoon
Films
International
National
NW/Local
Recipes
Special A.C.E. Stories
Online Paper (PDF)

NW RESOURCE GUIDE
Archives
Consulates
Organizations
Scholarships
Special Sections

Upcoming

The Asian Reporter Eleventh Annual Scholarship & Awards Banquet -
April 2009

May, 2009

Asian Reporter Info

About Us

Advertising Info.

AR Merchandise
Contact Us
Subscription Info. & Back Issues

Readers Map on Frapper

ASIA LINKS
Asian Studies
Currency Exchange
More Asian Links
Public Holidays
Time Zones


Copyright © 2000 - 2008
AR Home

My Turn by Elisa Dozono

From The Asian Reporter, V18, #7 (February 12, 2008), page 6 & 7.

This time of year (many years ago) I was no different than other anxious students awaiting word from my college of choice. Only, once I did hear from Boston University and later Lewis & Clark Law School, unlike many of my non-ethnic colleagues I presume, I wondered, "Did I get in because of my race?"

Since successfully completing both undergrad and law degrees, I now ask, even if my race did help, did it matter in the end? Certainly, it did not mean I worked any less hard to earn those degrees. In fact, I probably worked harder to prove I earned my spot in the class. And whether or not BU had an affirmative action program (I have no idea if they did), didn’t some people assume I got in because of my race anyway, rather than my great writing sample, commitment to journalism, solid grades, and SAT scores?

At a recent conference organized by Judge Ann Aiken of the U.S. District Court of Oregon, one speaker pointed to a cartoon of six college applicants. Of the five admittees, four were white — an athlete, the son of a wealthy donor, the daughter of an alum, and a person from a distant state — the fifth, a minority. Yet the sixth unsuccessful applicant, another Caucasian, points to the minority as the reason he did not get in. Why, questioned Professor Ana Maria Merico of the University of Arizona James Rogers College of Law, do we let people make assumptions and point fingers so easily?

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas set a prime example of those who enable affirmative action critics. With the launch of his biography and book tour last year, he made a renewed assault on the affirmative action policies that put him on track to his seat on the nation’s highest court. Justice Thomas decried his Yale Law School diploma as worth a mere 15 cents, noting he had to "settle" for a job working for Missouri Attorney General John Danforth. A fellow Yale grad, Danforth, later as Senator, became Thomas’ cheerleader-in-chief in the Supreme Court confirmation process. How do we let pass Justice Thomas’ argument for shutting the doors of opportunity behind him, only after he’s through?

The Oregon State Bar recently erupted with controversy first over the retention of "elimination of bias" continuing legal education requirements, and then over the engineered resignation of its affirmative action director. Supporters of diversity in the legal profession, and minority lawyers in particular, were outraged with reduction in profile and budget for the Bar’s affirmative action staff and excoriated the executive director for what they felt was a disrespectful lack of communication. To date, no replacement has been found, and one can’t help but wonder if it’s because of cynicism that the position will be relegated to little more than window dressing in the Bar’s new building.

Times like these have made me wonder when affirmative action became a four-letter word. When did it fall from a noble premise geared toward righting discriminatory wrongs of generations past and instead become a scarlet letter?

It’s interesting to me that "diversity" has become the new buzz word, and yet, "diversity initiatives" have not achieved any better standing in our social or business structures. At many firms, "diversity" initiatives remain a separate part of the budget from other "business development" programs. Yet why should the Arlington Club and the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce have separate importance?

In the past year, I have been given the remarkable opportunity to sit on two committees to appoint judges to the federal bench, first a magistrate judge and then a lifetime judicial appointment. Neither committee wished to make diversity a factor for fear of being tainted as not having put the "best qualified" candidate forward. But who decides whether we have put the "best qualified" forward rather than "differently qualified."

Where people have equal ability, you inevitably must take different factors into consideration. It’s like choosing a new coat — if you already have two black ones, you consider buying a brown one or a white one because it gives you options. Or for Blazer basketball fans, it’s like choosing a talented center instead of a high-scoring power forward.

In any profession where we connect with a surrounding community that is increasingly diverse, we benefit from more choices, more perspectives, and better bench strength. That’s why we cannot abandon affirmative action programs which help us build that bench strength.

Last month, Willamette University decided to dismiss the bottom five percent of its first-year law school students. Of its 159 first-year law students, 33 were minority. Out of the nine students dismissed, six were minority. In other words, two percent of the non-colored students, but 18 percent of the minority students got kicked out a short three to four months after starting their law school career.

Many minorities are their family’s first generation of lawyers, and they, like any rural or lower-income student, likely lack role models who can teach them the tricks of law school. Lewis & Clark’s "Academic Enhancement Program" helps push disadvantaged students to succeed, but in the end, it is up to the student to pass or fail.

If we let minority law students fall by the wayside, we will never have the pool of quality minority lawyers to even consider whether diversity should matter in the federal judiciary — a body that makes significant legal decisions affecting minorities, from migrant worker rights, to profiling for national security, and, yes, on affirmative action.

So, consider: Do we belittle achievements by acknowledging race, or is it the way we acknowledge it? Are achievements truly less because of one’s race, or do we as a society take the blame for casting such aspersions and making race a negative issue rather than a strength?

Eleanor Roosevelt once said, "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." If we, as a society value the greater sum of our differences that makes our nation great, we can change the discourse and once again make affirmative action an affirmative and positive power.