Kenneth, one of the problems we get into when discussing affirmative action is in definition. For instance, some will say affirmative action means "quota's" based on race, gender or sexual orientation. Another person may see affirmative action as simply trying to help out a segment of the population which has heretofore been ignored.
Colin Powell comes from a military background, and I believe he sees affirmative action policies similar to the way the services implemented them. Here's an example....
Many years ago the services realized blacks were disproportionately represented in the officer ranks. So, instead of implementing across the board quota's, they attempted to examine the root cause. Toward that effort, they discovered that traditional ways of looking for young men to go into the military academy's, often times, prevented them from recruiting highly qualified black applicants. They simply never visited black inner city high-schools, because of a deep seated tradition of recruiting at mostly white high schools. However, instead of enforcing quota's, they started sending recruiters to inner city schools in an effort to find qualified black applicants. In other words, the services were limiting their search for talent by focusing on predominately white schools.
Some would call this king of effort "affirmative action", others simple common sense. I would call the effort a smart strategic initiative, which strengthened the services.
Therefore, definition and details become the key. And one should ask the detailed questions when discussing affirmative action policies.
Blind quota's are not the answer, but examining the system in order to find the best talent can be. Traditional hiring practices which focus on specific demographic talent may be inadvertently preventing minorities from getting hired, or finding a desk in a prestigious school.
I believe that's what Colin Powell has been trying to tell Republicans. And I think he makes a good point. |
