Daily Nexus Interview with Carl Gutierrez-Jones; June 26, 1995

Nexus: People on all sides of the Affirmative Action debate have different associations with the concept of diversity. What does diversity mean to you?

Gutierrez-Jones: It's certainly inclusive of race and gender and sexuality.... The reason for race and gender being central to Affirmative Action as it was first conceptualized is because those categories have exercised a tremendous input on the way U.S. society has been shaped. To try and pretend that we can truly affect diversity without having those categories in place is disingenuous.

Nexus: Should the UC strive for diversity in admissions, hiring and contracting? Why or why not? If so, how can diversity best be achieved?

Gutierrez-Jones: There's a lot of confusion because people don't know exactly how to move forward given the restraints that have been placed on them by the regents. My understanding of the positive value of diversity has to do with what our mission is here on the campus. In part, that mission is to prepare students to go out and be contributors to the society in all of its complex dynamics. Part of our responsibility is to make sure students are prepared to work in the diversity they're going to find when they move out into the state, and so, to have Affirmative Action turned back the way that it has ... there won't be the kind of mix on campus to prepare people, and that's not just a matter of seeing different skin colors on campus. That's a matter of students from diverse backgrounds and faculty, and administrators and staff from diverse backgrounds. .

Nexus: Have you heard any sensible arguments as to why AffirmativeAction should be repealed at this time?

Gutierrez-Jones: I haven't, and I say that as a product of Affirmative Action, as an interested party. There are a couple of things at issue here, and I think it's very important to have them all on the table. One is the question of the level playing field. The opponents of Affirmative Action have claimed that effectively Affirmative Action creates reverse discrimination. I've devoted my life to studying race issues, and there is a mountain of evidence which supports the assertion that the playing field is not level, has never been level.... So my perspective is that if Affirmative Action has a problem, it's that it doesn't go far enough.

Speaking as a professor in the UC system, I wouldn't want to lose sight of the fact that the regents' decision goes beyond the specific issue of Affirmative Action, because the way that that decision was reached violated one of the most fundamental principles organizing the UC system,which is shared governance. This is an unprecedented decision that overturns the chancellors; it overturns Academic Senates on all the campuses; it overturns the students, and what their groups have had to say.

Nexus: What events or trends do you feel led up to the recent vote by the regents?

Gutierrez-Jones: That is an interesting question which I would rephrase as "why now?". And, if I can put this in perspective, just a year ago, the regents devoted a $1 million initiative to understanding better the powerful dynamics of race and gender on campus. As of last October, Gov. Wilson ... had signed 21 bills into law supporting Affirmative Action. The regents, of course, themselves in 1988 granted powers to the faculty and administration in the UC system to work out hiring and admissions. It would enhance the number of people of color and women in the system, so this is a marked reversal. The only reason that I have found convincing for this reversal is presidential politics, and I think that was very much in evidence at the regents meeting. I believe that Gov. Wilson has decided to make this the plank on which he will run for president.... He's chosen an issue which certainly is divisive and may well attempt to build upon 187, and what Wilson was able to do in terms of fostering scapegoating towards immigrants.

Nexus: Given the opposition to Connerly's proposal by the president of the UC, chancellors, faculty and student governments, do you feel the Board of Regents overstepped its bounds or violated constituents' trust?

Gutierrez-Jones: I do think that trust was violated and what the results of this decision will be are far-reaching. Shared governance is out the window. I take it that people will find informal ways to attempt to maintain the goals, which have never been rescinded. The goals of creating a representative UC constituency remain. The means are what are attacked by the regents' proposal These kinds of informal negotiations concern me greatly.

Beyond that. my concern goes beyond what was on the table in terms of policy at the regents meeting. How many students are not going to apply because of what's happened? Not simply students of color and women, but all students who see in this message a closing of the doors at this campus. I also have to be concerned about how the regents' decision will be translated into a reaction against research that's race-oriented and departments that have organized themselves around race study.

Nexus: Some Affirmative Action proponents are likening the regents' decision to closing the door on access to the UC for minority and women applicants. Do you agree or disagree? Why or why not?

Gutierrez-Jones: I think there was an interesting dynamic that took place at the regents meeting and it was a confusion between questions of access and questions of choice. People who've been following the stories about the regents' decision know that Berkeley and UCLA tend to be the schools that are focused upon. There's a reason why [Regent Ward] Connerly and company wanted to do that. Those schools are obviously in the greatest demand ... where questions of who gets in and who doesn't in terms of people who are admitted strictly by merit, limited notion of merit though it may beÑSAT scores and gradesÑhave the most tension with those students that might be admitted through special processes that may be affected by Affirmative Action. That's a question of choice.

Throughout the UC system you find a different situation. For instance, at UC Santa Barbara, we're almost at the point where our entire student body that has been admitted in the last two years meets the top merit requirements.... Many students that might appear to be pushed out of UC by Affirmative Action when you're looking only at Berkeley and UCLA ... are really denied perhaps the choice of their number one pick university, but ... they're students who could be bumped to other campuses.... So the numbers were actually far more dramatic, which is exactly what Connerly and company were hoping for.

It's really striking that the regents should attempt to move as far es they have in eliminating race and gender as a criteria.... I think there is a danger inherent in there, that leads people to question the role of the regents, who should first and foremost be concerned about protecting the UC, not helping a friend into a presidential campaign.... Perhaps it is time now for a kind of accountability to work itself out through election.

[Return to top]
[AAD Homepage]

Carl Gutierrez-Jones
Department of English
University of California Santa Barbara, CA 93106
E-mail: carlgj@humanitas.ucsb.edu