Some commentators have suggested that affirmative action programs that take race, national origin or gender into account should be eliminated entirely and replaced by affirmative action programs to aid the economically disadvantaged --i.e., anti-poverty or "need-based" remedies. Programs to eliminate poverty and enhance opportunities for the economically disadvantaged are critically needed. But affirmative action based on economic need cannot provide an adequate or workable substitute for programs aimed specifically at eliminating the past and present effects of discrimination based on race, national origin, or gender.
Discrimination, Which Affects People at All Economic Levels, Cannot Be Eradicated Through "Need-based" Programs Alone.
In the workplace, discrimination cuts across all economic lines; women and members of racial or ethnic minorities who are not poor are nonetheless subject to the effects of sexual stereotyping and racial or ethnic prejudice.
- A woman can be sexually harassed no matter what her income.
- A minority or a woman can be refused a promotion regardless of income level.
- Women and minority business owners can be denied credit despite their income.
- Pay disparities between women and men persist across the entire spectrum of occupations and income levels, including among physicians and other professionals.
- Studies testing the success of equally qualified Black or Hispanic and white entry-level job applicants have shown that whites advance farther in the process--revealing unvarnished discrimination based on race and national origin. In fact, the discrimination against Blacks appeared to be worst in the jobs offering the highest wages and income potential.
- The "glass ceiling" bars minorities and women from moving into senior management positions in business based on their race, ethnic origin, and gender-- not their income.
In education, just as some scholarships are based on economic need, others are aimed at attracting a diverse student body and redressing discrimination based on racial and gender biases.
- Minority admissions programs have been successful in increasing minority enrollment and graduation in colleges and professional schools. For example, Rutgers Law School's Minority Student Program, established in the wake of the race riots in Newark in the1960's, includes a special admissions process, orientation program and other support services for minority students. The program has changed the face of the New Jersey bar.
- Minority scholarship programs, like the Banneker Scholarships at the University of Maryland, have increased Black enrollment and improved the climate on campus for everyone by attracting minority students who serve as role models and erase negative stereotypes. The university offers race-neutral, need-based scholarships as well, but they have not been effective in achieving these ends.
- There is an extensive network of scholarships for women, aimed at helping women break into fields of study from which they traditionally have been excluded such as math, science and engineering. Gender-based scholarships and other programs support women interested in pursuing these historically male-dominated fields; no need-based program could do this.
- These programs are particularly important in light of the large number of private scholarships earmarked for children of alumni or other categories of eligible recipients that exclude minorities or women, either expressly or in effect.
There Are Both Practical and Principled Obstacles to Selecting and Implementing "Need-based" Criteria.
No advocate of substituting need-based remedies for affirmative action has explained how such a concept could be implemented in practice.In the employment context in particular, such a system would be completely unworkable.
- Economic need is an amorphous concept; there isn't one simple or generally accepted way to identify or determine "need."Tax returns do not provide a complete picture and are of no use where the applicant was not previously employed.
- Some have suggested that the best indications of "need" may be supposed determinants of "life chances" such as quality of education or parental income, but there is no consensus on this concept or what measurements to use.
- Requiring job applicants (or current employees seeking promotions) to establish their economic need would be burdensome and intrusive. Expecting employers to verify the information submitted would place a huge burden on them as well, and compound the invasion of privacy of employees and prospective employees.
Affirmative Action Programs Provide Societal Benefits Different Than Those That "Need-based" Programs Offer.
Programs that increase opportunities for women and minorities produce a variety of benefits for our society as a whole. Need-based programs, even if they were feasible, could not provide the same benefits. For example:
- Minority admissions programs ensure the diversity in our nation's learning institutions that is essential to exposing our future leaders to a wide range of ideas and perspectives. Need-based programs would provide economic diversity, but not racial or ethnic diversity.
- The racial integration of police forces through affirmative action has led to better relations between minority communities and the police, which decreases racial tensions and improves public safety for all. Need-based programs could not achieve this end.
- The increased recruitment and training of women police officers, judges, and court personnel has led to improved handling of domestic violence cases, which benefits all members of the family and the community who are affected by violence in the home. Need-based programs could not accomplish this goal.
- Businesses report that using affirmative action to bring the diverse skills, background and knowledge of women and minorities into the workforce is good for product development, marketing and customer relations, and therefore enhances productivity and performance. Need-based programs could not produce the same results.
The National Women's Law Center is a non-profit organization that has been working since 1972 to advance and protectwomen's legal rights. The Center focuses on major policy areas of importance to women and their families including child support, employment, education, reproductive rights and health, child and adult dependent care, public assistance, tax reform,and social security with special attention given to the concerns of low-income women.April, 1997