Well house Speaker Newt Gingrich has laid out an ambitious agenda for the republican-controlled Congress this year including major changes or the outright elimination of federal affirmative action programs the debate it could be the Civil Rights debate of the 1990s and not only are members of Congress calling for changes in affirmative action. But the US Supreme Court is reviewing several affirmative action cases and a heated debate is starting to develop out in California over a proposed referendum measure, which would have a profound National implications California civil rights initiative would prohibit the state from discriminating against or giving anybody a preference on the basis of race or sex of action has been a staple of federal policy since the 1960s but more and more people say that affirmative action has outlived its usefulness and that it's time to move Beyond preferences based on race or sex the day. We thought we'd spend the hour taking a closer look at the pros and cons of affirmative action are guests here in the studio R Stevens.Diversity in equal opportunity and former president of the Saint Paul n-double-acp also match pearlstein president of the minnesota-based center of the American experiment. He has studied this issue extensively and we'd like to invite you to join our conversation as well as to 276 thousand to 276 thousand or if you're calling from outside the Twin Cities. You can reach his toll free at 1 800 to +422-828-227-6004. 1 800-242-2828, Thanks for coming. And I do appreciate it. You know what President Clinton has ordered what he says it'll be a top-to-bottom review of all of the government's various affirmative action programs last week. He said quote it is time to look at all these programs which have developed over the last 20 to 25 years and ask ourselves. Do they work? Are they Fair? Do they achieve the desired objectives Steven Zachary? What's he going to find?Well, I think that that what he's going to find is that some programs are doing very well for affirmative action. And I think that that's some programs may need some modification. I'm a little concerned that when he his motivation for going into this type of study and why there's an isolated study instead of taking a look at the entire human resource function and Civil Service process to see whether or not that is a barrier to people of color women in person with disability instead of just eradicating affirmative action. If we look at the economic development of the entire economic development of different areas of the country and not just whether minority businesses should be given an opportunity to participate in the government contracts. So I'm a little concerned about the motive for taking a look at affirmative action, but I think if there's an honest examination of it what you'll find is that affirmative action has helped.People historically excluded from participating in the process and that there is still a need for affirmative action in human resource management as well as in government of opportunities. What are the things that I think he will find that way back up first by saying I am struck by the fact that this issue has become so high profile so quickly from live action has been with us upwards of three decades in the fact of the matter is there has never been in this Society in this nation wide open full fledge debate on this question form of action has developed its reach full administrative flower. If you want to call it that during the Nixon Administration has happened in the courts at this happened in the bowels of the executive branch of her focusing now on the federal government. No president has ever truly run on it. No presidential candidate has ever truly run against it.It has been for reasons of political correctness a great unspoken getting more specifically to the question. I think the review will find that there's all kinds of affirmative action. I would hope that's one of the things we could discuss today. The federal government is not involved in all kinds of affirmative action all institutions in the society to one degree or another I would argue for the most part are involved in some ways good ways. And otherwise, I would argue excessively feverish and counterproductive wise what is wrong with the the basic concept of a colorblind Society. Is that even possible? We stay here a lot about that that was going to The Benchmark, you know, 30 years ago. And is that the an outdated notion why I think that that is a Utopia to say that we're going to get to a color-blind society. When you look at around the world color and ethnicity is a wedge that has driven countries apart for the history.Humankind so does suggest that United States is going to rise above the historical Notions that have taken place throughout the world. I think is a little naive. I think we also was interesting and we talked about colorblind, but we talked about affirmative action. We're also talking about all facets of people have been excluded gender exclusion is a significant part their studies talking about the glass ceiling how far women can can rise in the employment setting primitive action has helped the number of women enter the workplace in non-traditional jobs. We can drive down the road now and see women working in road crews in areas that they haven't worked in before affirmative action is help eradicate the stereotypes that existed for persons with disabilities and although we take a look when we talked about colorblind and we talked about affirmative action as minority preferences. I think thus that we as a society need to understandThat we're talking about the majority of the population in the country when we talked about affirmative action my right eye. I read somewhere that women white women are the major beneficiaries of affirmative action policies that right. Well, that's a matter of opinion. I think that that the United States Society is the major benefactor in the fact that we now have a benefit from all aspects of our society women person with disability of older workers younger workers. I think that when we have every phase of our society of full participation in the government process an employment, I think it's just makes it for a bit of society. So they told about his concept of a colorblind Society is that is that clearly both with left and right in many respects on on this question parting company with the left clearly. There are many people in the Democratic party on the liberal side of the equation. Where just far too quick to take racing.President of accounting to use the jargon allocating benefits and burdens and Society. So for example, the dfl party in the statements is a form of affirmative action said that they're senatorial candidate last year was one way or the other going to be a woman I would argue that did not help the Democratic party did not help the dfl party in the state. I would argue is one of the reasons and winning. A lot of people don't want to put up with that kind of thing. I having said that Republicans and conservatives a very good in arguing against something called affirmative action, but then they wind up doing it themselves. Anyway, I'm very pleased. For example, the Clarence Thomas is a member of the Supreme Court, but obviously his race had something to do with his nomination the Bush Administration of course said no, that was a charade.So what's what's the what are we really talking about? Here? Are we talking about like official government mandates is that what gets people all stirred up about this subject? I think it's any number of things preferential admissions based on race in colleges and universities and graduate programs in law schools in medical schools are not necessarily the product of the federal government or any government, but when I talked about how affirmative action is embedded in the culture, that's one of the things I am talking about. Will there be will there be a pressure to continue having those kinds of admissions procedures regardless of what the Supreme Court says about Bill Clinton says, I would say yes, but they're not I'll still be legal as is it is a good question. Do those programs make a lot of people very mad. Absolutely. Do they often bring in two programs people of color who benefit from them absolutely do they often?Those very same protected class members because they wind up in situations where their overmatch that's true. Again much more complicated than is usually reported me ask you. This is a r r equal opportunity laws. And affirmative action policies and laws are they mutually exclusive know what if what equal opportunity laws say is that there will not be any discrimination. What affirmative action came into play is that it's a remedy for the past effects of discrimination and they debate is whether or not the past effects of discrimination have been remedied and it when we start moving into that discussion, if we keep our focus on that discussion, then I think it's going to be a fruitful discussion and I think that when we do that affirmative action laws and policies will be upheld. I think that that where we going to start to deviate is when we start playing politics with it whether or not my constituents are for it or against it, but if we keep it at the narrow focus of whether the past effects of discrimination have been eradicated. I think it's going to be a very fruitful dialogue. I also think that We start looking at whether or not we want to have weather benefits of institution such as a University of Minnesota law school where I went and and and I'm happy that they had affirmative action because it was a time when African-Americans were not allowed there. You did not participate in law school activities and I think that that the University of Minnesota benefits by happy and diverse because it brings in different aspects of of the conversation and a different point of view which makes our society more in wrist. So I think if you look at whether we want a diverse Society in all aspects and weather the past effects of discrimination have been eradicated if we look at those two, I think we have a very positive discussion on affirmative action. Steve. How would you respond to the fact that someone who is of Hispanic origin who has not lived in the United States for more than 6 months. Who has by definition never been discriminated against in the United States is a beneficiary of affirmative action's member for protected class. Number one. Do you justify that and number two there are any number of other folks of other non-selected minardi groups who have indeed been discriminated against in the society who are not protected class members. That's a good question. And I think the best answers to start to look a selection criteria. I think that that the same people who oppose that type of entrance criteria should also be the same people that opposed entrance criteria that may assist when a person donates money for a wing for a library and whether not that person should be a permitted to get preferential treatment. I think there's a number of aspects which come into play should a person who Had a bent had a better if you will live because of the economic situation they came in they were allowed to study and in schools that wear storical segregated. They were allowed to have to Touro special tutorial because their family had the economic means to provide that there are a number of factors which coming to play but I think we start targeting. Well, this is one aspect that we need to eradicate in the selection process. I think that we need a Raticate a number of areas preferential treatment and subjective criteria come into play in every selection. Say I agree with you if you're talkin about the Sons and Daughters of rich lumnah and at the risk of extending this in the state of California and I suspect it's true. I know it's true in other parts of this country. If you are a chinese-american or a Japanese-American you need grades and test scores to get into let's say Berkeley for focusing on California that are really very high if you're white They have to be high but not as high next in line would be blacks Hispanics and American Indians. There. Is this pecking order are you going to argue that Hispanics have been discriminated against more than Japanese given the history of what did happened to Japanese Americans back during the second world war. The point is the inconsistencies here are so profound and in some ways so offencive and they do not help the kids involved quite frequently. They do not helping institutions and at some level obviously I am divorced and subscribe Notions of diversity. I resonate I'm proud but so much of what we do in the name of affirmative action, and this is the key makes matters worse at the ideas to improve race relations quite often. We make them worse. Oh, I think that I have to differ possibly on that because when we start talking about how we making race relations worse, who do we ask that question too? If we say if someone came to me and said does affirmative action make race race relations better. I would say yes, because now I feel that I have the same opportunity to participate in the in the United States dream as other people. Would you argue fully recognizing that on many campuses there weren't that many can I fully acknowledges people of color back when I went to school and in the lights 60 but I would argue that there is more segregation now on many colleges and universities. Then there was back then more segregated dining facilities more segregated social facilities more course working. It plays itself out this Dynamic Place itself out in in curricula as well more courses focusing on Oppression studies just about everything while not necessarily intended to divide people but the effect is to further divide folks. And in this nation, I don't I don't necessarily have to agree with that. I look at the picture of my grandfather 1927 when he graduated from the University of Iowa medical school there when he was the only person of color and it was only one additional woman in it whole and entire class. If you look at the University of Iowa's graduating medical school class. Now, you see faces that are different than that that existed in 1927. So I think that that we start talking about has it and has affirmative action made opportunities better. I think that it has me some listeners on here, but I do want if you fellows could tell me one thing here. What's the difference between a goal and a quota? I wait we hear those terms bandied about a lot technically a goal is something that one tries to reaches a certain percentage of a certain group of people admitted to students who are employed in a certain job category. Let's say a quote is something that you have to reach now. The argument quite frequently made on the right is at in a de facto way. There is no great difference because if you're an employer and you don't meet your goal, you know that the federal government may come beating up on you and the beginning number of activist groups who will be quite displeased with you. So, oh well while technically you're not obliged to reach that number you say my goodness. It's just easier to acquiesce in and you wind up having that goal service of quota and do the preferences that are that are talked about under affirmative action programs. Do they differ in any substantial way from the kind of preferences that have historically been beforehand to say Veterans Day? Veteran's preference we are about the jet is there a is there are some basic difference between those two things you are if you came out you were automatically given an opportunity such as the GI bill which was an affirmative step to assist veterans rightfully that that have benefited to society. I think that that there's been a number of affirmative programs and we start talking about preference is is we need to be very careful. That is that what we look at is the eradication of past discrimination not providing preference and we look at the goal. The law requires 8 factors that come into play unemployment rates the Census Data the skills necessary for a job in innocent. Actually. I got a call from the vaccine the most misunderstood science there is because it is the state of So do we have a computer program that's very sophisticated which establishes the goals and it takes a look at all these factors and give him a wait. So it's not like we just pull number out of the air and say well this is where how many people you should have it's a scientific method that goes in the place. I think that they would have to say is a preference is a little misleading very briefly with something like a veteran's preference. This is based upon something that someone has done they served in the military with racial preferences is based upon what you are what you are born as and there's a difference they're all so by definition, once you start dividing people by way of race and ethnicity to a certain degree certainly sex. That's far more sensitive. It has the far greater potential to rip the society apart Our Guest today or Stephen Zachary who is with the Minnesota office of diversity in equal opportunity is former president Lee St. Paul n-double-acp. Johnny is Mitch pearlstein who's the president of Minneapolis pay center of the American experiment? We're talking today about affirmative action programs. I think you're going to hear a whole lot about this subject over the next couple of years apparently is going to become a source of for subjective major debate and Washington Supreme Court's looking at this issue, California ballot referendum promises to buy chocolate could be a national debate on this issue parently. It's going to become part of the presidential politicking. So we thought we would take a closer look at the what's involved in this debate. If you'd like to join the conversation. Let me give me the phone numbers to 2276 thousand. That's the Twin City area number 227-6004 calling from outside the Twin Cities. You can reach his toll free at one 802-422-8028 go to our first caller from Fargo march on the line height. Come into the picture, but my concern is that how do we have I any establish system to protect minorities against those bigger than the races. I mean RV do it. Do we have any chicken balance in the system? Then you modified are affirmative actions that you do not go back to the 1960s. Thank you very much. I'm going to listen to your comments and do we have enough in and of themselves to do to prevent discrimination at least on an individual basis as opposed to going to a group basis while we've looked at our formative action laws in and they are in some areas of the country where I think Minnesota has we have a tendency to be spoiled because we have a great he stayed human rights act for the different parts of the country. That's not the case. So I think that that the protect those protections still need to be put in the play, but I also think that what we need to look at is the motivation for the examination of affirmative action and who's going to be there. Examine it and I think that the caller from Fargo was was correct. We really need to make sure there's a check on the examination process to make sure that is not an guys for eradication. Well, if the person in the United States is entitled to review the members of Congress are entitled to review journals are entitled to review. This is a profound issue in this nation, which as I mentioned before has not had a very good debate and review over the last three decades. So I would argue anyone who wants to jump in as the right to jump in and I would argue less I'm persuaded otherwise and some specific instances that there are plenty of laws on the book in this nation nationally at the state level more local levels to stop to to at least prohibit discrimination. We were talking before there is a distinction between equal opportunity laws and affirmative action procedures callers from the Fargo-Moorhead area. Let's go to our next caller. Yes, and I am a Protestant. And I just I wanted to give the perspective of somebody who was converted to to the importance of affirmative action and that came wind I accepted the fact that that being white and being male in this country. I was born with certain advantages that other people weren't and also with the except that we're not just talking about past discrimination. Now, we're talking about current discrimination which goes on every day in this country against Asians working programs in order to try to give balance to what goes on every day in this country and I would just like to have to say about that and what about the focus of affirmative action programs to correct existing? Eye problems as opposed to remedial action would be my interpretation of this Society right now is not as sour as as as his again. One of them do we live in less than a perfect world out? I assure you I understand that but again with so much that is done in affirmative action with the best of intentions. We wind up making matters worse. So we let's talk about admissions preferential admissions to distinguish colleges and universities and medical schools in the rest. There is a theory called the mismatch Theory. It's really quite straightforward an order for schools to bring in the number of people of color that they would like to do. So and given the fact that unfortunately many Black and Hispanic and American Indian students don't have the grades in the test scores in the preparation of many other students both White. An Asian that they wind up admitting students who are overmatched. They're mismatched in those Elite institutions students. In other words who might do great at pardon me in Mankato. I do great at Mankato State but are overmatched at Carlton and this filter is its way throughout the entire system and one of the reasons that there are so many black men particularly dropping out of college is precisely this mismatching of the of the preparedness and the demands of the institution. So again, it sounds just lovely but it always doesn't work out. Just great. I think I would have to to question that I think a good example is myself Who coming out of high school was told that my test scores. And my grades and such were not sufficient to enter into the University of Minnesota as a freshman in that maybe another institution would be sufficient for me to get my education ironically enough. When I applied to the University of Minnesota law school at that point my grades and such were good enough. I think so we start talking about grades and preparedness and test scores. Those are all subjective criteria. No one can has focused and said the top person in the country in grades in test scores is going to be the best person to succeed in a particular institution doesn't been a number of people who have had great test scores and and have dropped out but we don't take we don't abandon that as a criteria. So as we look at this entire thing, there's a number what we're saying is give an opportunity and if people fail then people people are Going to fail just because someone fails doesn't mean that we have to ban in the entire system because if we did we would have no system of of entrance into any phase of our society. I am not arguing against all latitude. I am saying that the degree to which many of these programs are pursued are not in the best interest of the students involved many of them come in less prepared than others and they stay that way unfortunately and great percentages of minority students Dropout of these institutions for these reasons the psychology involve without getting too far involved would go something like this in front of action of students get admitted they don't do as well as generally speaking and everything is generally speaking. I'm very happy that Steve did well in school, but they're not doing as well as their peers because they're not prepared to do as well as their peers in their two interpretations one can then offer one. I simply not good enough. Or two that this is a racist institution. Well, it's a lot more attractive to conclude the second if you're in that kind of situation and that's another way in which relations race relations become poison at many colleges and universities. It's no great accident that there are more racial a grievances at the most distinguished liberal colleges and universities in this nation as opposed to any number. Steve got a quick comment, or should we go back to the go back to Malcolm's on the phone again. Now we got you hooked up a professor in the midwest here and I'd like to share with you some of my personal experiences, which I think of her man of action does make things worse for both faculty and students and cable keep it short, please. First of all, what happens is that many of these job searches for faculty there such restrictions that are placed that the jobs wind-up never being filled to either by a minority candidate or by anybody. I personally witnessed searches in which the vice president is come in and said, you won't get funding for this position unless you find a woman or a minority. In fact, we're even told that we could lower standards by bringing in a master's candidate. We were unable to even do this and we lost the position. I personally I am I should say White I am an African story and I have adopted a child of color on I think I'm sensitive to any of these issues. If I even my in my own search, I was often called on the phone, I think because my name is Malcolm and taught African history that certain assumptions were made and I was offered jobs on the phone and part basenjis great you've even published and we just can't wait to get the black role model on campus. I said, why do you think I'm black and there's a silence jobs were withdrawn immediately invitations to come in where are withdrawn immediately and why can't I be black role model someone who has wife who thinks African history is worth dedicating my life to that happened in history is for all people. This is diversity of ideas. And I think the people don't realize that. Buy front of action restrictions and actually lead to these jobs not being filled at all in that nobody gets the African history I join your comments on this. Thank you, but I think that that maybe what we need to do it again we're talking about is extremes. We maybe we don't need to abandon affirmative action. Maybe we need to move affirmative action to the next level. Maybe we need to start making the environment open so that people know that there's opportunities waiting for the light at the end of their study. I think a good example is the state of Minnesota has a program called seeds where we attract young disadvantaged people regardless of their race, but when you start talking about disadvantage arts society has historically discriminate against people of color so that when you started identifying disadvantages it Greater prepper population of persons of color and what we've said is that we want to help students have a look at an opportunity that has not been available to him. We look at the statistics. 70% of jobs are got the word of mouth. And if you don't have someone in the system allowing you to have access to that system you're excluded. So what I would recommend for that institution is that perhaps they might want to consider an internship program. We have great internship programs at the State University Systems, which attract people into graduate programs and then into professorships and ID password a broadening of thought which I think is good for University. Anytime university has one monolithic thought from the one background of people as they grew up. I think that really hinders the whole open educational process that we wanted. The higher education is the problem now with the with the policies or with the kind of The Bean County mentality that seems to go in once you have the policy and once you have but a gentleman here was playing about well G-Eazy, I mean all this all fine, but this is exactly the point. I have been making the way these things actually play out. Is not the way that proponents the most biggest proponents would lead you to believe it has to do with the way in which gold turn into quoted it has to do with the ways in which college president's and Dean's and others put pressure on departments to hire the right way. It's really very ugly quite frequently and it's very unfortunate doesn't serve anybody unless we are willing to understand and grapple with the way this really works rather than the way it has Bill. We will not make great progress. I think that that this blanket statement that affirmative action is bad globally. I do not think we need to take a look at each and every program which is why I invite invite anybody to come and take a look at the state of Minnesota's affirmative action program as it goes across the board and I think that's what you'll find. Is that a good and Highest rated affirmative action program is going to benefit Society enormously. Let me get very specific exceedingly good authority. Very good department has a very large department. They had or have gone something like 20 years without a pointing a white male heterosexual to a tenure-track position the pressures to fill all those other categories are such that the people in the position to make those hires make certain that they do so no one is going to convince me that those have been open and fair searches. Martha's on the line up from St. Paul's I had it sounds like talking about the way it really work since and someone and my concern is that we're always talking in General Sessions when we talk about these programs and it's it's hard to relate them to individual. I have in my particular family a kind of a raging debated every family dinner. I have a son who is he himself is the white heterosexual losing out repeatedly to two women who get promoted with sometimes know to not too many qualifications and especially if they're women of color. They even have a better chance of getting promoted when when he doesn't stand out on the other hand. I have a daughter who is saying yeah, but I don't think it's really not fair to women when it's really tough for women. There's a glass ceiling and we go back and forth in the fact is that in both cases? He's being discriminated against Because he's a ride home with of white heterosexual and my daughter and hurt the circumstances. She seems to be coming up against this is being discriminated against two. It seems to me that what we need is more of these. Seriously evaluations of how programs work for individuals and and in which situation the program still work while in the bank they seem to be moving a lot of women out there. You just mentioned the university who was being promoted at the universities on the other hand. They're their businesses where women are hitting that glass ceiling. So we need to know what we need new kinds of solutions. I think how do you let's assume for a moment that everybody could agree that the diversity is a is a noble goal one. That's worth pursuing. How do you how do you how do you balance that with with what appears to be kind of an ongoing problem at least in some areas with trying to administer these programs and some in a reasonable Equitable manner that The Simple Solution is decaf people administer it who basically know what they're doing and really have Inside them the desire to make it happen. If you have someone of that you just decide because you want to hire someone you want to have a person of a different of some diverse background and you say we have to hire so let's put them in affirmative action and their unqualified to perform that function then we condemn the entire program. I think that that when you get good people who know what they're doing and can move the agenda forward and have the passion for affirmative action and it diversifying the workforce or the institution that the search in the The Innovation and Desire with moving forward and also to be able to talk strongly about the fact that there are going to be instances that are not perfect. But let's not abandon the entire program for those isolated incidents that are perfect list instead work on modifying those instances that make it better an examination of The English Department to determine why it is that the statement that you know, if we believe that that is the case and I have no facts to deny why is it and is it to the benefit of The English Department at the University of Minnesota to have to have that type of diversity in the move towards that if we keep the current regime of rules and regulations and Court decisions and assumptions and all I have no confidence whatsoever that we can better trained technocrats to work the system better LBJ sign the main Executive Order 11246 creating affirmative action for federal contractors, in essence 30 years ago in 1965 my goodness, if we haven't figured out how to get the mechanics right now. We're not And we talked about the president's and Dean's and departmental chairman. We just not talk about middle level administrators. So for me, it's not a matter of the implementation. It's the very rules and the Court decisions and assumptions and the pressures at these institutions in business and in the universities in Ellsworth, that's the real real real service system and overburdened some Nest that the civil service system has which was signed in the plate long before that. If we say that time is the element of determining a success then we should have a band in the civil service system if some 50 years ago, but instead we still have this grinding civil service system that has historically excluded people. We have a government contract system where where the Visas are so profound and we having a band in the entire government to contract system has been systems that have been in Play that have excluded people of color that we have not said Willis abandon these because they're wrong. But as soon as it comes to people of color women in person with disability those programs are held at a higher level of scrutiny. And when there's some sort of of artificial desire to have them achieve a certain go on that doesn't happen. We say throw the whole thing out and I think that that is highly unfair and I think it really moves our society into a area that we really should move as a society. One of the reasons out that Johnson push so hard that President Johnson push too hard for affirmative action was the theory that just forget about discrimination for a moment. If you want to diversify the workforce you want to diversify government positions and so on organizations just self-perpetuate the all I do is hire the same kinds of people but no matter what kind of people those maybe and absence from outside pressure. Nothing will fundamentally change and I'll let us assume tomorrow. There were no affirmative action laws in effect. And then somehow the the momentum for affirmative action had ceased what do what would there be in it for any agency to try to diversify two different kind of people in the building who they made him feel uncomfortable back to the time of Johnson. He was not advocating at that time the elaborate Machinery that we now have the Precision of the goals in the time tables in the paperwork and the rest and that's what he was talking about is opening up searches trying hard to look for folks that you had to look for before particularly unemployment. But the assumption that the time was also in admissions there wasn't any assumption at the time that criteria would be changed dramatically about who would get hired and who would get admitted and the rest remember this was only one year after the passage of the nineteenth six. For civil rights act were Hubert Humphrey. The champion of the Act was on the floor of the Senate and said no the 1964 Civil Rights Act would not require quotas would not require pronounce racial Consciousness. And the rest that was the spirit in which Johnson started affirmative action the police that that states the term had been used previously as well. Well, I think that if if first of all we need understand that affirmative action takes play in every hiring decision not front of action as it pertains to every time you met you make an affirmative step to fill a job and that affirmative step can either be calling your friend and asking for for referrals, which is mostly the case because 70% of all jobs are made through word-of-mouth or we stay when to take affirmative steps to also include letting people know of different background. So qualified people can be involved. I think you know, and and I focus in this is good in my colleague focusing on it. Cuz that's his background. Mine is Law. And for the first time in the history of the state of Minnesota. A qualified Asian person was appointed to the to the bench for the first time in the history of the state of Minnesota a 14-year judicial background person person African-American background was appointed to the court of appeals. Those were affirmative steps didn't say that we haven't hired pointed unqualified people what it said was that we want to make all our systems in the gov and state government reflective of the population. So we got a person who had 14 years of judicial experience when in fact there have been those those African Americans who has he been excluded from appointment in the past we've heard for the first time had a woman who who was the chief judge of the court of appeals. So I think that we start talking about affirmative action. It is an affirmative step to do something and every tiring decision has affirmative steps Jeff. If I can practice that really for both of your guests this afternoon, my former regular army officer and just as an observation to my best recollection, the Army has never been subject to the affirmative action laws of this country. And at the same time it is an organization that's not very very highly of and its ability to integrate people with a wide variety of background and diversity issues into it. When I was taken by the comment earlier about moving to a new level. I'm very much a supporter of affirmative action. I've only seen how diversity devices such an argument has become in the four years. I've been a civilian one of the ways that I think it was resolved with military with the fact we hired promoted and selected for position is not based necessarily on qualifications of right now because we could never find a total agreement on qualification and said we did it based on the potential of the individual to serve at higher-level. I like to ask her to guess this afternoon if that perhaps isn't an area to take a look at the moving it up next higher-level. Frankly. I've never heard anyone in the army. Acknowledge that frame is it exactly in in that way again? I am not opposed and some across-the-board way and Taking Chances on people and having a broad range of qualification. However, the again the way it often plays out is that we really do have two different tracks of employment and two different tracks of admissions. I will see the time and Newsweek just reported that the University of Texas law school in this case is going forward of the two hundred and some-odd blacks who applied to the law school only one would have qualified under the regular ngon affirmative action admissions criteria. It's that kind of disparity that opposes much of the problem. Then we start talking about problem that we need to be clear that who is the problem for I don't think that the that the students who entered an institution under the criteria that it has been mentioned. Consider the problem. I don't think that the institution that had the view from someone from the inner city of Houston that these that Houston law school has our Texas law school has been extremely damaged by that. So I think we start talking about that's what the problem is. I think we need to get asked who to ask. The question problem is and asked who he asked her to if you ask her to the people of color if we ask it to women if we added to a number of other groups, I don't think the majority given 51% of women adding person with disability adding senior citizens adding persons of color that the majority of the population would say that that affirmative action that has benefited all those groups is a detriment you may be right in terms of 51% of protected class members not wanting to change that but there are as you know, any number of black Scholars Glen Sorry, Sol Shelby Steele any number of others who would argue that it is precisely those protected class members who get admitted under different criteria and wind up again being overmatched quite frequently not in all instances. Certainly. Those are the kids. Those are the adults who are being a hurt the people who are being denied admission, even though they had higher and better credentials. That was our folks being hurt the very notion of intellectual Merit being The Guiding Light in principle of of a university that is being hurt. I would argue with at the very least. It was a three constituencies or two or three ideas Steve's on the line for Minneapolis with a call. Go ahead and that there is something of narrative historical redress for past grievances. However, I'm caught up on the noble ends. Not justifying any any particular means simply to get there. What I've seen in a decade of working for government is a system that has ended up being one of reverse discrimination and racial preferences. We've had helped Implement some of these programs. We've suspended normal hiring practices for minorities. We've used a gold plus a timetable with switch equals a quota. We've I actually offered higher pay to attract qualified minorities that we puts minorities on a fast-track offer promotions above people with more experience has been virtually Amore torium on the hiring and promotion of white males in certain sectors. So I am committed to the goal and then I'm very concerned about how we're getting there. Can you guess please comment when Rosa Parks fought for her right to sit on the bus to fought the apps that fight for Rose as Rosa Parks as an individual to be free from discrimination and now it seems that Removing to collect of a group rights in the particular white male is the one who's during the historical brunt of them. Thank you. I think that the that is very interesting when we look at the glass ceiling reports that women and persons of color hit a certain spot in corporations and governments. I would ask the viewer cuz I did it when I was present in the place if he I asked the top though Fortune 500 corporations list in the state of Minnesota to give the racial breakdown of their board of directors. If we start looking at the board of directors, if we start looking in a my ass to read the caller also to ask for corporate presidents corporate vice-president and we start saying that there's a fast-track for persons of color. I think that if there's a fast-track for persons of color, why do we see the absence of people of color the absence of women there has been no person of color in the state of Minnesota History ever elected to the Constitution office of Governor lieutenant governor Secretary of State Treasurer. Just a matter of time. Don't you think so well, I guess it just shows that that there's a long way that the state of Minnesota needs to go. When we start talking about affirmative action. Are you suggesting that there should be affirmative action for constitutional officers and and state government? Not what I'm suggesting is that the notion that that there's a fast track in the only people that are getting to the top of governmental and gain Corporate America structure are people of color and women If you really take a look at it that it doesn't the statement does not prove out. In fact, I think we have to acknowledge of call it a paradox. If you will if you take a look at all the CEOs and take a look at the board of directors of major businesses and all whom they are consistently overwhelmingly white male, but that's not to say that's not to prove that there aren't at other levels of middle management levels where I used to be for example, that being a white male doesn't necessarily help you n&k can indeed be one of the sad things about affirmative action. It would be impossible. I think to devise a better program that made more people or program that more effectively made more people mad when it comes to white males are they think affirmative action is out to do the man when it comes to protected class members. They don't see enough happening enough progress happening. So they view it as a sham it is this classic pop. That makes everybody mad. We are unfortunately about a time but I I want thing I didn't want to get a quick comment from both of you on we hear a lot about well it unlikely that are all affirmative action efforts are going to come to an end, but perhaps we should move to a deal where people who are truly disadvantaged individuals who are disadvantaged would be have a benefit for some kind of a preference in that there. Would that make any sense? We moved away from race-based gender-based disability based preferences and move to kind of a that's one criteria economic. I think that that we can we meet again look at the whole system the same people that are that are strongly opposing affirmative action. I would ask those same people to jump on the bandwagon and strongly opposed preference based on high economics people have bought their way to success in America, and I would hope that the same Opera Since to affirmative action opponent of affirmative action with jump on that on the bandwagon opposing privilege as it pertains to a segment of our population that's exclusively of a certain background Mitch quick, Well, I don't know exactly what Steve means we can listen for another show of low-lying benefits based on privilege or some such I have long argued that I would much rather Focus much more in socio-economic background poverty. For example that on simply raise the rent in the city or sex and I'm sure we're going to hear a whole lot more about this subject over the line. I don't think you appreciate your coming by Stephen Zachary and Mitch pearlstein stopping by today. If you miss part of the program, by the way, we're going to be rebroadcast in this discussion after 9 tonight on the FM news station good chance to take a little bit about what you hear it and give another lesson. That's coming up at 9 and I would like to remind you that this afternoon's programming on the FM news station is supported in part by Financial contributions from Minnesota Public Radio listeners, not tomorrow at midday. Turn our attention to the balanced budget amendment. They vote in the Senate tomorrow and will be joined here in the Studio's by former, Minnesota Congressman. Tenpenny talking about the balanced budget. That's tomorrow for today Gary I could thanks for turning in. Hello, this is Garrison Keillor Lake Wobegon Minnesota population. 1957 A Prairie Home Companion is doing a special broadcast on April 8th. We call it our talent from towns under 2,000 show. If you live in a small town and you have talent and you'd like to be on our national broadcast that day just send us a video tape or cassette about 10 minutes worth of be fine and send it to Talent under 2,000, Minnesota Public Radio 45 East 7th Street, Saint Paul 55101 Sandra cassette or video tape so that we receive it by March 1st. Don't think too hard about it. Just do it. Talent from towns under 2,000 A Prairie Home Companion April 8th. It's going to be fun. Any music anytime one phone call the public radio music Source One 875 music listen to Minnesota Public Radio. It's 27° at the FM news station cater W FM. 91.1 Minneapolis. St. Paul. The time now is 1.