SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1SCOTT: GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE NEWS.  I’M SCOTT SAMUELSON, A PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY AT KIRKWOOD COMMUNITY COLLEGE IN IOWA CITY.  THIS SUMMER THE SUPREME COURT ISSUED A LANDMARK DECISION IN 2 RELATED CASES, PARENTS VS SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT NUMBER ONE AND NARRATIVE VS JEFFERSON, THE LOUISVILLE CASE.  IN A FRAGMENTED DECISION THE COURT RULED THAT RACE COULD NOT BE USED AS A FACTOR IN ASSIGNING CHILDREN TO SCHOOLS EVEN WHEN IT WAS BEING USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTEGRATION.  MANY WOULD ARGUE THAT THIS DECISION STANDS WITH DECISIONS LIKE BUSEE VS FERGUSON OR BROWN VS BOARD OF EDUCATION AS ONE OF THE MAJOR PRONOUNCEMENTS OF THE COURT ON A MATTER OF RACE.  BUT IS THE DECISION ENLIGHTENED OR BACKWARD?  A STEP FORWARD OR AWAY FROM A MORE JUST SOCIETY?  REALLY THERE ARE 2 ISSUES.  DO WE HAVE A RIGHT TO PURSUE DIVERSITY AS A PEOPLE AND IS IT RIGHT TO PURSUE DIVERSITY.  WE HAVE 3 FINE PANELISTS ON TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE WITH US.  TUNG VIN, PROFESSOR OF LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA, THANK YOU FOR BEING ON.  KATIE MULHOLLAND, SUPERINTENDENT OF LINN MAR SCHOOLS, THANK YOU KATIE FOR BEING ON AND ALFRED RAMIREZ, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF DIVERSITY FOCUS.  THANK YOU FOR BEING ON ALFRED.  OK, SO MAYBE THE FIRST THING TO DO IS TO START WITH JUST GETTING A SENSE OF WHAT AGREED TO THE PLANS OF LOUISVILLE AND SEATTLE ENTAILED.  TUNG, COULD YOU TAKE THAT ONE?

 

TUNG: SURE, THE SEATTLE PLAN BASICALLY INVOLVED THE 10 SCHOOLS IN SEATTLE AREAS AND SOME OF THEM WERE MORE POPULAR THAN OTHERS SO EVERY STUDENT WAS ALLOWED TO RANK THEIR PREFERENCE FOR THAT PARTICULAR STUDENT AND SOME SCHOOLS ENDED UP BEING OVER SUBSCRIBED BECAUSE THEY WERE MORE POPULAR.  SO TO DEAL WITH ALLOCATING SPOTS THE SCHOOLS INSTITUTED A SERIES OF TIE BREAKERS.  THE FIRST TIE BREAKER WAS IF YOU HAD A SIBLING ALREADY ENROLLED IN THAT PARTICULAR SCHOOL, THEN YOU GOT THE PREFERENCE BECAUSE OF THE DESIRE TO KEEP THE FAMILIES TOGETHER.  A SERIES OF THE FIRST TIE BREAKERS DID NOT SETTLE ALL THE REMAINING SPOTS THAT NEEDED TO BE FILLED OUT.  THE SECOND TIE BREAKER LOOKED POSSIBLY TO THE RACE OF THE PARTICULAR STUDENTS AND THE RACIAL COMPETITION OF THAT PARTICULAR SCHOOL SO IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DID, IT LOOKED AT SEATTLES WHITE, NON WHITE RATIO WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 40% WHITE, 60% NON WHITE SO IF A PARTICULAR SCHOOL MEDIATED TOO MUCH FROM THAT PARTICULAR RATIO, THEN THE TIE BREAKER WOULD GO IN PREFERENCE OF THOSE PARTICULAR STUDENTS WHO WOULD BRING THEM BACK TOWARD THAT RATIO.  IN SOME SCHOOLS THIS ENDED UP MEANING THAT MINORITY STUDENTS RECEIVED THE PREFERENCE BECAUSE THEY WOULD HELP TILT THEM BACK TOWARD THE 60/40 MIX BUT IN OTHER SCHOOLS IT MEANT WHITE STUDENTS WOULD GET THE PREFERENCE BECAUSE THE SCHOOLS WERE OVER PRESCRIBED BY MINORITIES SO TO SPEAK SO IT’S THE PLAN, ALTHOUGH IT MIGHT BE LOOKED AT AS MORE BENEFITTING MINORITIES, IT ACTUALLY IN SOME INSTANCES, WORKED THE OTHER WAY AS WELL.  THE LOUISVILLE PLAN WHICH IS THE OTHER CASE, OPERATED BASICALLY THE SAME WAY, LOOKING AT THE RATIO OF THE WHITES TO NON WHITES STUDENTS AND AGAIN IF THE SCHOOL DEVIATED TOO FAR FROM THAT BUT NO MORE STUDENTS THAT EXASPERATED THE EXTREMES TO BE ADMITTED TO THAT SCHOOL BASED ON THE PREFERENCES.  SO THAT’S THE WAY THAT RACE ENTERED INTO THE CASES, THE TIE BREAKER IN TERMS OF HELPING TO BALANCE OUT THE SCHOOLS. 

 

 

SCOTT:  WHAT I’M NOT COMPLETELY CLEAR ON IS IN TERMS OF SEATTLES TRYING TO COME CLOSER TO THIS 60/40 BALANCE, WAS THERE LIKE AN OUTER LIMIT THEY HAD IF THE RATIO GOT OUT OF WHACK TOO MUCH?

 

TUNG: RIGHT.  IT’S 10 %.

 

SCOTT: WELL KATIE MY NEXT QUESTION IS DID THE PARENTS WHO BROUGHT THIS SUIT AGAINST THE SCHOOLS HAVE A LEGITIMATE COMPLAINT?

 

KATIE: IT’S REALLY HARD TO SAY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR MOTIVATION WAS AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE TRYING TO GET THEIR KIDS IN OR KEEP THEIR KIDS OUT.  IT REALLY IS DIFFICULT AND YOU HAVE TO ARGUE FOR THE PARENTS WHEN THEY WANT TO MAKE A CHOICE FOR WHERE THEY WANT THEIR CHILDREN TO GO TO SCHOOL.  YOU CAN’T ARGUE WITH THEM BEING VERY FORCEFUL ABOUT DOING IT.  AS FAR AS DIGGING INTO THE EXACT MOTIVATION VERSUS THE LEGAL ASPECT AND SETTING OUT THE LAW, IT WOULD BE HARD FOR ME TO SAY. 

 

SCOTT: YEAH, IT IS A TOUGH QUESTION.  ALFRED, WHAT DO YOU THINK?  DO THE PARENTS HAVE A LEGITIMATE CASE HERE OR NOT?

 

ALFRED: I DON’T KNOW THAT IT’S AN ISSUE OF LEGITIMACY.  IT’S CASE BY CASE, PARENT BY PARENT, FAMILY BY FAMILY.  I WOULD GUESS THAT IN ALMOST EVERY INSTANCE IT WAS A MATTER OF PREFERENCE BASED ON CONVENIENCE, IS THE SCHOOL RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET OR 30 MINUTES AWAY.  ALSO, WHAT ARE IDENTIFIED AS THE BEST SCHOOLS AND OF COURSE EVERYONE WANTS THAT TOP TIER SCHOOL.  IF YOU DON’T GET YOUR CHOICE THEN YOU’RE UNSETTLED.  THE OTHER THING I THINK THEY INTERJECTED INTO THE CONVERSATION IS REALLY IT’S JUST AS MUCH ABOUT CLASS, ECONOMIC CLASS AS IT IS RACE AND THERE’S A STRONG CORRELATION BETWEEN THE ECONOMIC CLASS OF A SCHOOL THAT’S PREDOMINATELY MINORITY AS OPPOSED TO ONE THAT IS NOT AND IT TRICKLES DOWN THEN TO THE QUALITY OF THE TEACHING, NOT SO MUCH PRIVATE TEACHERS BUT THE TAX PAID SUPPORT MATERIALS AND PROGRAMS OR WHAT HAVE YOU SO IT GETS PRETTY COMPLICATED.

SCOTT: BUT WHAT ABOUT JUST, I GUESS TO ME THE HEART OF THIS, IS IT OK FOR US TO USE RACE AS ANY FACTOR AT ALL IN DETERMINING WHO GOES WHERE TO A SCHOOL? 

 

I THINK IT’S A DEFINITE CRITERIA THAT COULD AND SHOULD BE EMPLOYED.  AS A SUPREME COURT RULE, LET’S BE AWARE THAT THIS IS A VERY CONSERVATIVE SUPREME COURT, THERE’S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SUPREME COURT THAT THINKS AFFIRMATIVE ACTION QUESTIONS IS AT A HIGHER EDUCATION LEVEL.  IT’S KIND OF A REVERSAL OF THINKING WITH THE NEW COMPOSITION.  I THINK RACE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS A FACTOR BUT AGAIN, THIS IS A STRONG CORRELATION BETWEEN RACE, CLASS AND SCHOOLS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT.  AT SOME POINT WE REALLY DO HAVE TO LOOK AT THE GREATER GOOD AND REALLY DETERMINE THAT IF WE WANT OUR CHILDREN TO GROW UP IN A GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT TO LITERALLY INTERFACE WITH PEOPLE THAT THEY MIGHT OTHERWISE NEVER INTERFACE WITH THAT WE DO HAVE TO DO SOME, I GUESS MORE CHOREOGRAPHY, SOME ORCHESTRATING  AND IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE AN ALL OR NOTHING APPROACH.  THERE COULD BE MAGNET SCHOOLS, THERE COULD BE MAGNET PROGRAMS. ** PROGRAMS, THERE’S SOME PRETTY  NOVEL PROGRAMS AROUND THE COUNTRY THAT MANAGE TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE IN A WAY THAT MIGHT NOT SATISFY ALL BUT LOOK AT RACE, CLASS AND MIXTURE.

 

SCOTT: SO TO SOME DEGREE THE PUBLIC GOOD SHOULD BE ON OUR MINDS AND DIVERSITY IN SOME WAY MIGHT PLAY A ROLE IN AIDING.  WELL LET ME TURN TO YOU AND ASK, IS IT EVER OK TO USE RACE TO DETERMINE WHO GOES WHERE TO WHICH SCHOOL? 

 

WELL I GUESS WHEN YOU SAY OK YOU MEAN LEGALLY? 

 

SCOTT: RIGHT.  LET’S START WITH THAT.  IS THAT, SHOULD THAT BE COMPLETELY RULED OUT IN AMERICA LEGALLY OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT IF A DEMOCRACY DETERMINES THAT THAT’S A GOAL THEY WANT TO PURSUE THEY SHOULD BE GIVEN THAT RIGHT?

 

WELL WE HAVE TO TAKE A STEP BACK.  AN EASY WAY TO THINK ABOUT IT IS SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT EVER CONSIDER RACE IN ANY DECISION.

 

SCOTT: OK. 

 

IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT THE ANSWER HAS TO BE YES.  AN EASY EXAMPLE I GIVE IN AN EXTREME WAY.  LET’S SAY THE FBI WANTS TO INFILTRATE THE KKK.  I THINK IT WOULD BE FAIR AND REASONABLE FOR THE FBI TO SAY TO AN AFRICAN AMERICAN OR ASIAN WHO OTHERWISE WOULD BE QUALIFIED, I’M SORRY BUT YOU ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR THIS PARTICULAR TASK, EVEN THOUGHT THERE BE BENEFITS FOR COMPLETING THAT PARTICULAR TASK BUT THE NATURE OF IT SETS THAT RACE WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED.  SO LEGALLY THE WAY THAT WE EVALUATE THESE, THE LEGITIMACY, THE LEGALITY CONSTITUTIONALITY, BRINGS US TO ASK THE QUESTIONS, DOES THE GOVERNMENT HAVE A COMPELLING INTEREST, IS THE GOVERNMENTS CHORE OF HOW TO COMPLETE THAT NARROWLY TAILORED AND THESE ARE LEGAL TERMS AND I WON’T GET INTO THE NITTY GRITTY BUT I THINK THAT THEY HELP US A LITTLE BIT IN THINKING ABOUT THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION WE POSED.  IN TERMS OF SCHOOLS, SHOULD IT BE LEGAL.  WE KNOW WHAT THE SUPREME COURT SAID IS THAT DIVERSITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION IS A COMPELLING INTEREST.  I’LL JUST INTERJECT THAT I THINK WITH MY OWN EXPERIENCE IN TEACHING LAW CLASSES, CERTAINLY IN HUMANITY SIDE FIELDS I CAN SEE THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN DIVERSITY BASE.  I’VE HAD SOME CONSTITUTIONAL LAW CLASSES THAT HAVE BEEN BASICALLY ALL WHITE STUDENTS AND I’VE HAD ONES THAT HAVE HAD GREAT DIVERSITY IN THOSE CLASSES AND IT’S A LITTLE BIT HARD TO DEFINE HOW EXACTLY DIFFERENT BUT IT DOES SEEM TO BE DIFFERENT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE RACIAL TYPES OF CASES.  SOME OF THE CLASSES THAT ARE MORE DIVERSE ARE MORE SENSITIVE TOO TO THESE ISSUES AND ARE MORE WILLING TO ENGAGE, WHICH IS NOT SAYING THAT THE OTHER CLASSES ARE NOT WILLING TO ENGAGE BUT I THINK THEY DON’T HAVE THE SAME CONTEXTS.

 

SCOTT: SO CAN WE TOTALLY SEPARATE OUT I GUESS IT’S A QUESTION I HAVE ON MY MIND, CAN WE TOTALLY SEPARATE OUT THE IDEA DO WE HAVE AS A PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO USE RACE VERSUS IS RACE A POTENTIAL GOOD.  IN OTHER WORDS DO WE HAVE TO SOMEWAY SAY RACE, PURSUING DIVERSITY AND PURSUING RACIAL DIVERSITY IS A GOOD IN ORDER TO ARGUE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO PURSUE IT OR CAN WE JUST SORT OF BE COMPLETELY NEUTRAL ON THE QUESTION AND SAY YOU SEE WHAT I’M GETTING AT?  I DON’T KNOW, MAYBE PURSUING DIVERSITY IS A BAD THING AND DESTRUCTION OF PEOPLE BUT IF THE PEOPLE WANTS TO DO IT, LET THEM DO IT.  IN ONE WAY YOU CAN IMAGINE A CONSERVATIVE KIND OF LEGAL POSITION TAKING THAT POINT OF VIEW.  LET THE DEMOCRACY SORT IT OUT AS LONG AS IT’S NOT COMPLETELY DESTROYING AGAINST A RACE OF PEOPLE.

 

I THINK THAT TO SOME EXTENT CERTAINLY THE LIMITATIONS OF THE LAW WHICH IS TO SAY THE LAW IS NOT NECESSARILY CONCERNED WITH WHAT IS MORALLY RIGHT OR WHAT OUGHT TO BE.  IT IS MERELY CONCERNED WITH WHAT IS LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE AND JUSTICE HOLMES OF THE SUPREME COURT ONCE SAID IF THE PEOPLE WANT TO GO TO HELL, IT’S MY JOB TO LEAD THEM THERE.  I THINK YOUR QUESTION TO ME, DO WE HAVE A RIGHT TO USE RACE IS THE LEGAL QUESTION AND IT IS THE QUESTION OF IS IT GOOD TO USE RACE IS ONE THAT IS SOMEWHAT IRRELEVANT LEGAL QUESTION.  IT’S VERY RELEVANT TO THE POLITICAL QUESTION PERHAPS BUT NOT SO MUCH THE LEGAL ONE.

 

SCOTT: WELL MAYBE LET’S TURN TO THE POLITICAL ONE FOR A SECOND.  KATIE, WHAT DO YOU SEE?  IS DIVERSITY GOOD IN THE SCHOOLS?  HOW IS IT A GOOD?

 

KATIE: WELL DIVERSITY IS A GOOD IN THE SCHOOLS AND IT’S VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT’S REPRESENTATIVE OF OUR NATION AND OUR WORLD.  BUT I GUESS I’LL GO BACK TO WHEN I FIRST STARTED TEACHING IN 1975 AND I WAS TEACHING IN WATERLOO, IOWA AND WATERLOO, IOWA IS UNDER A DE-SEG PLAN AND WE HAD JUST COME OUT OF THE EARLY 70'S WITH A VERY VERY STRONG RACIAL EVENTS AND IF YOU REMEMBER THAT ERA AND TIME, WHEN THE SCHOOLS WERE SEGREGATED OR THEY WERE CALLED NEIGHBOR SPLIT SCHOOLS BUT THE CHILDREN LOCATED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WERE OF ONE RACE.  BUT THE DIFFICULTY WAS THAT CHILDREN WERE NOT GETTING THE SAME EDUCATION.  WHEN YOU LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY AND THE FOUNDATION OF A DEMOCRACY IS THAT WE BUILD AND EDUCATE A POPULUS AND CLEARLY THE SEGREGATION OR THE NEIGHBORHOODS OR HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DESCRIBE THE ECONOMICS, WAS CLEARLY NOT PROVIDING CHILDREN ACROSS THE UNITED STATES WITH THE EQUAL ACCESS TO THE SAME OPPORTUNITIES FOR EDUCATION.  YOU START TO BEGIN TO TALK ABOUT WHAT IS IT ABOUT DEMOCRACY AND WHAT IS IT THAT WE WANT TO BUILD AS A NATION AND WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO WITH PUBLIC EDUCATORS AND PUBLIC EDUCATORS, WE HAVE A REAL COMMITMENT TO BUILDING THAT DEMOCRACY AND PROVIDING THAT EQUAL OR EQUITABLE OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL STUDENTS TO HAVE THAT KIND OF EDUCATION THAT THEY CAN COMPETE AND COMPLETE AND SUCCEED.  THAT KIND OF ROLLS INTO THE ECONOMIC SUCCESS OF OUR COUNTRY AND WHEN ALFRED MENTIONED, TALKING ABOUT CLASS, IT IS ABOUT AS MUCH ABOUT POOR WHITE RURAL PEOPLE AS IT IS ABOUT AFRICAN AMERICANS IN THE LARGE CITIES.  WHEN I LOOK AT THAT WHOLE ISSUE AND I GUESS I LOOK AT IT IN A VERY MINOR WAY OF THE DECISION, I KEPT READING RACE ALONE, RACE ALONE CAN’T BE THE DETERMINING FACTOR.  SO I LOOKED AT JUSTICE KENNEDY, SOME OF HIS COMMENTS AND I FELT WHAT I READ IN THERE EVEN THOUGH THIS WHOLE COURT IS VERY CONSERVATIVE IS HE’S GIVEN US A CHALLENGE AS EDUCATORS TO DO MORE.  HE’S SAYING THAT LEGALLY OR WITHIN THE LAW, WE OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT IN THIS COUNTRY, A BETTER WAY THAN RACE ALONE.  IN THE DISTRICT I WAS IN BEFORE I CAME HERE WE WERE BUILDING SCHOOLS AT A RATE OF 2 A YEAR.  IN ONE PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD, THE INDIAN FAMILY OF WANT HOMES IN THIS ONE NEIGHBORHOOD AND POPULATED THE SCHOOL.  NOW THAT’S A WHOLE DIFFERENT CONTEXT THAN MOST PEOPLE ACCEPT.  YOU HAVE TO ARGUE, BECAUSE THEY BOUGHT THEIR HOMES THERE BECAUSE IT WAS A CULTURE THEY WANTED TO SHARE AND THERE WERE DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF INDIAN FAMILIES COMPARED TO THE BALANCE OF THE WHOLE DISTRICT SHOULD WE HAVE TOLD THEM NO, THEY CAN’T GO THERE.  I MEAN YOU SIT AND DEAL WITH ALL SORTS OF MORAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES BECAUSE TO SOME DEGREE, PARENTS HAVE CHOICE AND THEY STRUGGLE AND WORK FOR THAT CHOICE SO I SEE IT AS WE’VE GOT TO DO A BETTER JOB AND NOT BASE IT ON RACE ALONE IF WE WANT TO BUILD THIS DEMOCRACY THE WAY IT’S SUPPOSED TO BE.

 

SCOTT: YEAH, LET’S DEAL WITH THAT ALFRED BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED THAT BEFORE TOO THAT MAYBE CLASS IS MORE IMPORTANT, IS THAT TRUE?

 

ALFRED: IT’S NOT MORE IMPORTANT, IT’S JUST SUCH A HUGE CORRELATION BETWEEN RACE AND DIVERSITY AND I LOOK AT THE SCHOOLS, WHO’S PLACED IN  WHAT SCHOOL, WHAT PART OF TOWN AND WHAT PROGRAM DO THEY BENEFIT FROM OR LACK.  THIS IS REAL INTERESTING.  I GREW UP IN EAST L.A.  WENT TO COLLEGE IN NEW YORK CITY AND HAD NEVER BEEN ON A PLANE AND JUST WITH A BROCHURE.  MY MATH TEACHER TOLD ME AT CHRISTMAS BREAK THAT MY COUNSELOR WHO HAD  WRITTEN MY RECOMMENDATION  HAD BET DINNER AGAINST ME THAT I WOULD FAIL BY CHRISTMAS AND COME BACK WITH ALL MY BELONGINGS AND I WAS STUDENT BODY PRESIDENT, HAD RAN TRACK, WAS THE LEAD IN THE SCHOOL PLAY AND HAD AN AFTER SCHOOL JOB FOR 4 YEARS SO I DOING EVERYTHING I COULD TRYING TO EXCEL, TO SUCCEED BUT IN MY SCHOOL IT WAS A LOW EXPECTATION, EVEN IF THE STUDENTS HAD HIGH ASPIRATIONS AND THAT PLAYS OUT ACROSS THE COUNTRY DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU GO TO SCHOOL, WHERE YOU’RE SWITCHED TO THAT COLLEGE OR EVEN IF COLLEGE IS AN OPTION TO PROCEED AN OBTAINABLE DEGREE, YOU REALLY ARE TAUGHT TO THAT LEVEL.  AS I WOULD GO OUT AND COMPETE WITH OTHER SCHOOLS IN TRACK WE COULD SEE JUST PHYSICALLY PULLING UP IN THE BUS WHAT THAT TAX BASE MEANT FOR THAT SCHOOL AND THAT PROGRAM SO SHORT AND SWEET, I’D JUST SAY THAT REALLY THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF REMEDIES IT ISN’T JUST THAT INTEGRATION OR BUSING REMEDY, WE NEED TO LOOK AT LITERALLY, HOW OUR FUNDS ARE DISTRIBUTED ACROSS THE STATE OR ACROSS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND ARE THERE WAYS TO MOVE AROUND AND WITH RACE, CLASS ** AND EVEN ABILITY AND I THINK WHAT’S VERY BOTHERSOME TO ME ON THIS WHOLE COURT RULING AND THE SENTIMENT IN THIS COUNTRY BECAUSE WE’RE REGRESSING.  THERE IS SOME RACE ISSUE THEY MOVE TO THE RACE AND DIVERSITY AND IT’S BEEN MISUSED AND ABUSED AND OVERLY EMPHASIZED FOR THE NEGATIVE REASONS.  RACE, ETHNICITY SHOULD BE USED AS CRITERIAS AS SHOULD I GUESS ATTAINMENT, LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT AND REALLY IT SHOULD BE BASED ON ALL OF THOSE ELEMENTS. 

 

SCOTT: IT COMES OUT OF THE MAJORITY OPINION THE BEST WAY TO END SEGREGATION BY RACE IS TO END SEGREGATION BY RACE.  IN OTHER WORDS IT WOULD BE BETTER IF YOU WOULD JUST FORGET ALL ABOUT IT AND LET THINGS HAPPEN I GUESS ON THEIR OWN.  EDUCATIONS JOB IS SIMPLY TO PROVIDE A GOOD EDUCATION AND JUST IGNORE RACE FOR THE MOST PART.  IF IT’S AN ALL WHITE SCHOOL FINE, IF IT’S A MIXED SCHOOL FINE. 

 

I TOOK THAT AS ALMOST IRRELEVANT.  IT WAS SUCH A TURNAROUND OF THE ISSUE AND IGNORING THE FULL COMPLEXITY OF IT AND EVEN IN THAT JUDGEMENT TO LABEL IT AS WELL LET’S NOT SEGREGATE BY RACE OR DO THE WRONG THING WITH RACE.  I THINK IT WAS TOO CONVENIENT FOR ME. 

 

IT’S INTERESTING THAT IF YOU GO BACK TO 1978 WHEN THE BAKEE DECISION WAS DECIDED, APPARENTLY THE BACK STORY OF IT IS WHEN THE JUSTICES WERE TRYING TO DECIDE HOW TO DECIDE THE CASE THAT JUSTICE, I THINK IT WAS JUSTICE STEWART WAS READY TO VOTE TO UPHOLD THE PROGRAM BUT WAS MUSING THAT WELL, MAYBE WE’LL ONLY NEED THIS FOR ABOUT 25 YEARS OR SO AND JUSTICE MARSHALL CAME BY AND SAID NO, WE’RE GOING TO NEED RACIAL PREFERENCES FOR A HUNDRED YEARS AND THAT THAT WAS SO HARD TO ACCEPT FOR STEWART THAT HE CHANGED HIS VOTE.  OR IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN HOLLIDAY BUT IN ANY EVENT.  THERE’S SOMETHING, WHETHER THIS IS RATIONAL OR NOT THERE’S SOMETHING VERY, PEOPLE HAVE VERY STRONG FEELINGS ABOUT THE USE OF RACE, IF THEY’RE BEING SINGLED OUT BECAUSE OF THEIR RACE AND I THINK AS AN EXAMPLE YOU COULD THINK, HOW COULD SEATTLE SOLVE THIS PROBLEM WITH THE RACIAL IMBALANCE.  AN EASY SOLUTION WOULD BE RANDOMLY ASSIGN EVERY STUDENT TO A SCHOOL AND THEN IF YOU DO THAT THE MATH WOULD WORK OUT, EVERY SCHOOL WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY RIGHT RACIAL BALANCE.  WOULD THE PARENTS HAVE A LEGAL COMPLAINT?  NO.  THEY WOULD HAVE NO LEGAL COMPLAINT BECAUSE IT WAS A RANDOM SELECTION.  AND WHILE PARENTS WOULD NO DOUBT BE UPSET THAT A LOT OF THEM WOULD BE DRIVING AN HOUR ACROSS TOWN AND SO ON, MY SENSE IS THEY WOULD NOT BE UPSET THE WAY THAT PARENTS ARE UPSET WHEN THEY THINK I WOULD BE GETTING TO THE SCHOOL IF I WERE AN AFRICAN AMERICAN OR ASIAN OR WHITE BUT I CAN’T BECAUSE OF MY RACE. 

 

SCOTT:  BUT THERE IS SOMETHING A LITTLE FISHY I GUESS IF WE’RE GOING TO PURSUE RACIAL DIVERSITY BUT WE JUST HAVE TO DO IT SOME WAY THAT DOESN’T LOOK LIKE WE’RE PURSUING IT RIGHT?  IF IT’S A GOOD THING AND WE WANT TO PURSUE IT SHOULDN’T WE BE ALLOWED TO PURSUE IT?

 

I THINK SOME PEOPLE WOULD PERCEIVE THAT AS A VERY STRONG HARM.  I THINK THERE ARE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF NUANCE THAT YOU COULD DO IN TERMS OF USING RACE CERTAINLY.  AGAIN IF WE LOOK AT THE MICHIGAN CASES THE UNDERGRAD PROGRAM HAD A VERY SIMPLE PLUS 20 POINTS IF YOU’RE AFRICAN AMERICAN, PLUS 0 IF YOU’RE WHITE, I THINK PLUS 20 IF YOU WERE WHITE FROM THE UPPER PENINSULA SO IT WAS NOT PURELY A RACIAL BENEFIT BUT THAT WAS SEEN AS VERY CRUDE WHEREAS THE LAW SCHOOL SUPPOSEDLY HAD A MUCH MORE HOLISTIC APPROACH AND YOU COLD THINK ABOUT FINER VARIATIONS OF THIS.  YOU MIGHT MAKE STUDENTS WHO YOU THINK WILL BRING DIVERSITY MAKE THEM WRITE AN ESSAY AND THEN YOU READ THEIR ESSAYS AND YOU THINK WOW, THIS PERSON REALLY HAS DIVERSE EXPERIENCES, ARTICULATES THEM WELL, THIS IS SOMEONE WHO WILL BE VALUABLE IN CLASS.  AS YOU PURSUE THESE LEVELS OF HOW YOU USE RACE I THINK IT BECOMES MUCH MORE COMPLEX THAN JUST A SIMPLE UP OR DOWN.

SCOTT: YOU BRING UP A TIME, I WANT TO GO BACK TO THAT FOR A SECOND THIS IDEA BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE FEEL THIS SENSE OF DESPAIR WITH AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMS, THEY FEEL LIKE THIS COULD JUST GO ON POTENTIALLY FOREVER, IS THERE A DEADLINE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE WHERE WE SAY NOW WE’RE GOING TO STOP WORRYING ABOUT RACE OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT’S ALWAYS GOING TO BE A CONCERN ALFRED, WHAT DO YOU THINK?

 

ALFRED: I THINK IT REALLY JUST COMES DOWN TO WHEN DO WE REACH EQUITY, WHEN DO WE REACH EQUALITY, WHEN IS THERE PARITY.

 

SCOTT: BUT THAT SEEMS LIKE IT’S GOING TO BE 100 YEARS OR 200 YEARS THAN THE END OF 25 YEARS.

 

ALFRED: IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO HUMAN DECISIONS, RULINGS, INNOVATIONS.  WE COULD REALLY REMEDY MANY ISSUES AROUND RACETHICITY CLASS AND QUALITIES OF SCHOOLS FOR THE NEXT 50 YEARS IF WE SET OUR MIND TO IT AND IT’S ACTUALLY, THERE’S A LOCAL PIECE TO IT, THERE’S A STATE PIECE TO IT AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND IRONICALLY THERE’S A VERY SMALL PORTION OF WHAT COMES FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TOWARD EDUCATION.  REALLY IT LIES WITH THE STATE AND LOCAL LEVELS.

 

SCOTT: KATE WHAT DO YOU THINK?  WHEN YOU THINK OF SCHOOLS OF BEING A PLACE WHERE WE CAN TRANSFORM SOCIETY, SHOULD THIS BE A

 

KATIE: BUT IT’S A CIRCULAR ARGUMENT.  BECAUSE THE ONLY WAY TO GET THERE IS THROUGH EDUCATION AND FOR HAVING EVERYBODY BE ABLE TO ADVANCE TO THE PLANE THAT WE CAN PROVIDE THEM AND IF WE DON’T TRY TO DO SOME VERY THOUGHTFUL PLANNING ON DIVERSITY AND IT HAS TO BE TALENT, WHAT YOU BRING TO THE TABLE OTHER THINGS BESIDES WHAT YOU INHERENTLY, THE PHYSICAL TRAITS THAT YOU BRING.  YOU COULD ARGUE MALE FEMALE, YOU COULD ARGUE OTHER THINGS TOO SO WE’VE GOT TO FIX IT AND I GUESS THE MEASURE WOULD BE IF WE LOOKED 50 YEARS OUT AND WE DON’T NEED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, THAT DOESN’T MEAN WE HAVE TO TAKE IT AWAY, IT MEANS THAT’S OUR METRIC FOR MAKING SURE WE’RE ON TARGET. 

 

SCOTT: I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU TUNG, IN TERMS OF USING THINGS LIKE CLASS AS A KIND OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, CLASS WOULD PRESUMABLY BE NO PROBLEM FOR THE COURT.

 

TUNG: YEAH, IT WOULD BE REVIEWED UNDER VERY DIFFERENTIAL STANDARD. 

 

SCOTT: WHAT ABOUT, THOMAS WROTE IN HIS DECISION I BELIEVE, IF OUR HISTORY HAS TAUGHT US ANYTHING IT HAS TAUGHT US TO BE AWARE OF ELITES BEARING RACIAL THEORIES.  IS THAT SEEM LIKE A FAIR THING TO SAY THAT EVEN THE BEST MEANING KINDS OF PROGRAMS TO PURSUE DIVERSITY MIGHT HAVE A WAY OF KIND OF BACKFIRING.  I TAKE IT THIS IS PART OF THE DEEP PHILOSOPHY BURIED AT THE HEART OF THE OPPOSITION TO THE PROGRAM THAT SOMEHOW JUSTICE IS BEST SERVED WHEN IT DOESN’T HAVE SOME KIND OF SOCIAL GOOD THAT IT’S TRYING TO ENGINEER BECAUSE THOSE THINGS BLOW UP IN ONES FACE.  THAT’S KIND OF THE ESSENCE OF THE CONSERVATIVE MORAL PHILOSOPHY. 

 

KATIE: IS HE SAYING THAT ENGINEERING DIVERSITY IN SCHOOLS WILL LEAD TO ENTITLEMENT. 

 

SCOTT: RIGHT AND HE CITED, IN THE OPINION THERE WERE CITATIONS ON BOTH SIDES ABOUT THE EVIDENCE OF ARE THESE PROGRAMS DOING ANYONE ANY GOOD OR NOT.  THOMAS CITED STUDIES THAT SAID LOOK THESE THINGS AREN’T EVEN HELPING ANYONE.  THIS IS JUST CAUSING FRUSTRATION TO PEOPLE WHO GET DENIED AND OTHERWISE, DOES THE EVIDENCE POINT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER HERE?

 

I WOULD JUST ADD TO THE CONVERSATION THAT THAT’S KIND OF AN ON THE MOUNT KIND OF POSITION TO TAKE AND WHAT REALLY IS ABSENT IN MUCH OF THIS CONVERSATION TOO IS THAT WE’RE A BEAUTIFUL WONDERFUL COUNTRY AND WE DO AT TIMES HAVE PAINFUL POINTS IN OUR HISTORY.  IF WE LOOK AT THE CONDITION TODAY IN THE SCHOOLS IT’S HISTORIC AND IT’S INSTITUTIONAL.  IN 1957 IT WAS BASED, IT WAS OUTRIGHT FINALLY A STEP TOWARD LOOKING AT IT AT RACISM AND PREJUDICE AND BIAS  AND DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE SO WHERE WE’RE AT NOW IS ACTUALLY DUE TO INDIVIDUAL ENGINEERING AT THE VERY LOCAL LEVEL AND AS CAUSE OF CONDITIONS CITY AFTER CITY, CITY AFTER CITY SO I DON’T BELIEVE WE’RE IN DANGER OF ANY GREAT INVISIBLE HAND TOTALLY MESSING THINGS UP.  I THINK IF ANYTHING, GIVE US MORE CREDIT AS A PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY TO GET IT RIGHT IF WE’RE AUTHENTIC AND GENUINE ABOUT THAT AND EGALITARIAN ABOUT IT. 

 

THE ONLY THING, I THINK THERE’S A LITTLE BIT OF DANGER IN RELYING TOO MUCH ON THE SOCIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE AS BOTH SIDES DID AND I WAS THINKING ABOUT THE ORIGINAL BROWN VS BOARD OF EDUCATION OPINION.  THIS IS A VERY LONG GEEKY MOMENT BUT FOR THE 7 SIGHTS OF SERIES OF SOCIOLOGICAL STUDIES ESTABLISHING THAT SEGREGATION HAD A VERY HARMFUL IMPACT ON THE MORALE OF THE STUDENTS AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE A SHAME TO HAVE THAT HINGE ON THE VALIDITY OF THOSE STUDIES BECAUSE WHAT IT IF THE STUDIES WERE DISPROVEN.  TO ME, BROWN SEEMS LIKE THE CORRECT DECISION REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE STUDIES SAY, THAT IS A LEGAL PRINCIPLE, THAT IS RIGHT.  BUT THAT IS THE DANGER OF IT HERE OF IT YOU HANG YOUR SHINGLE ON THESE STUDIES AND THEY TURN OUT TO BE WRONG, THEN YOU’VE LOST THE FORCE OF THAT PARTICULAR ARGUMENT. 

SCOTT: OK. I’M AFRAID WE’RE OUT OF TIME.  THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT I THINK WE HAVEN’T GOTTEN TO YET BUT MAYBE IT’S BEST AT THIS POINT TO MAYBE LEAVE THEM TO OUR HOME VIEWERS TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION.  I THINK THAT AS IOWA BECOMES A MORE DIVERSE PLACE AND WE’RE OBVIOUSLY CONTINUING TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT OUR EDUCATION THAT WE NEED TO START THINKING ABOUT SOME OF THESE ISSUES AND DECIDE HOW WE WANT TO HANDLE THEM AND CERTAINLY WE HAVE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT RACE OVERALL IN THE COUNTRY.  ANYWAY WE’D LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR WATCHING US TODAY AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU NEXT TIME ON ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE NEWS.  THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.