Why the GOP Can't End Affirmative Action
Louise Freedberg
Sunday, May 17, 1998, SF Chronicle
The GOP just can't get together on affirmative action. Newt Gingrich
and a
slew of other Republican leaders have all said they're against
affirmative
action -- yet three times in the past six months, Congress has
voted
against ending it at a federal level.
To explain the gridlock, look no farther than the gulf that separates
University of California Regent Ward Connerly and Representative
J.C.
Watts, R-Okla., the former University of Oklahoma football star.
The two
are arguably the most prominent African Americans in the Republican
Party
-- yet on affirmative action they are miles apart.
Connerly, the leader of the campaign to end affirmative action
in
California and nationally, has been lauded in GOP circles as
a civil rights
hero. At a Washington banquet last year, Gingrich hailed Connerly
as a
``genuinely historic figure'' who recognizes that ``he has a
challenge to
carry his vision of a color-blind America in which government
does not
discriminate.''
Watts, the only black Republican in Congress, is the GOP's key
weapon in
its effort to broaden its appeal to blacks and Latinos. He says
he is
against racial preferences, but when it comes to supporting legislation
to
end them, well, that is another matter.
Last month, when California Representative Frank Riggs, R- Windsor,
introduced an amendment to bar affirmative action at colleges
and
universities which receive federal funds, Watts publicly campaigned
against
it.
In a most unlikely partnership, he joined up with Representative
John
Lewis, D-Ga., a renowned civil rights activist from the 1960s.
``This is
not the time to eliminate the one tool we have -- imperfect though
it may
be -- to help level the playing field for minority youth,'' he
and Lewis
wrote in a letter they sent to all their colleagues. ``A vote
for the Riggs
amendment will take away the one opportunity, the one hope, that
thousands
of young people have to pursue the American Dream -- to know
that a higher
education of their choice is within their reach.''
Largely as a result of Watts' opposition, 50 Republicans decided
to vote
against the Riggs amendment, handily defeating the measure.
Connerly described Watts arguments as ``hogwash.'' ``Personally,
I have
great respect for him but it has been been mind-boggling to figure
out
where he is coming from,'' Connerly said in an interview. `He
says he's
opposed to preferences but then he can't seem to pull the trigger.''
But
Watt says that until the GOP takes active steps to find alternatives
to
affirmative action, it would be premature to end it. He notes
that, unlike
the Riggs amendment, a bill he proposed to revitalize inner-cities
has
never made it to the House floor.
``I'd sure like to see (the Republican leadership) throw their
support
behind community renewal and put the same kind of effort behind
that effort
that they put behind Riggs,'' he told the Washington Post.
The differences between Watts and Connerly will come as good
news for
supporters of affirmative action who are trying to prevent California's
anti-preference fever from spreading to Capitol Hill. As long
as Watts
opposes ending affirmative action, Connerly is going to find
tough going in
Congress, regardless of how many banquets are held to honor him.
Return to the News
and Announcements Page
Return to the Affirmative
Action and Diversity Homepage
Carl
Gutiérrez-Jones,
Department of English
University of California
Santa Barbara, CA 93106
E-mail: carlgj@humanitas.ucsb.edu