April 10, 1996

My name is Sally Pipes and I am here to testify in support of AB 2468, sponsored by Assemblyman Richter. This is a fair and effective way for the state of California to bring itself into accordance with the principles upon which this country was founded -- the Declaration of Independence's "self-evident truth" that "all men are created equal." This principle, which Abraham Lincoln called "the standard maxim for a free society," requires public institutions to treat individuals equally, regardless of race, ethnicity or sex.

We must be entirely clear about what is at stake in this debate. This bill would get the state out of the business of granting preferences to people based exclusively on their biology. The current system of preference programs in admissions to the state's universities, in contracting, and in civil service means one person gets help at the expense of another. This is a zero sum game.

At its heart, this issue is a question of fairness. Continuing the state's race- and gender-based preference programs means that California endorses a definition of fairness based on equality of representation. Preference programs today are not about making up for past wrongs, but are based on the goal of gender and racial parity. It is an impossible goal. Representational goals are ultimately unattainable. They create incentives for groups to capitalize on differences, instead of working towards commonalities.

Fairness in this country, as defined by its original national ideals, is about equality of opportunity, equally protected under the law. That the United States has never fully lived up to the principle of universal equality is no reason to willfully violate it today. The irony of today's affirmative action programs, which grant preferences on the basis of race and sex, is that the solution perpetuates the very problem it was intended to solve.

Last summer, the Pacific Research Institute released a study by policy fellow Michael Lynch that analyzed admission policies to the University of California's medical schools. Among his more disturbing findings was the fact that Vietnamese students were being rejected with a higher mean GPA than many accepted students who fell into the category of targeted minorities. What is California saying to these students, many of whom came from severely disadvantaged backgrounds? We are telling them their struggles don't count. Try to explain to the parents of one of those Vietnamese students, many of whom came to this county believing in the American ideal, that their son or daughter cannot attend UC Irvine because there are simply too many qualified Vietnamese students.

On the altar of numerical diversity, the state's preference programs have sacrificed the original goal of affirmative action programs -- widening the door of opportunity for success. Targeting particular groups for preferences at the expense of others privileges one group over another -- the very kind of social engineering that tolerated segregation in this country.

I am Canadian. The programs we are discussing here this morning spring from the same seed I watched spoil the spirit of the Canadian nation. I have witnessed the good intentions of the multicultural advocates sour into the Balkanization of my country. I urge you to learn a lesson from your Northern neighbors and end state-sponsored gender- and race-based preference programs. California should get out of the discrimination business.

Sally Pipes is President of the Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy.