Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Home › News › Education

CU sees 'big impact' if Amendment 46 passes

By Myung Oak Kim, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published July 25, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Education

More stories »

The University of Colorado, which has been working to increase its minority enrollment at the Boulder campus, said Thursday it couldn't consider an applicant's race, gender or ethnicity if voters dismantle state affirmative-action programs.

The university also said about 100 privately funded scholarships designed to benefit women and minority students could be restricted if the November ballot measure, Amendment 46, becomes law.

"If this initiative is passed by Colorado voters, it would indeed have a big impact on the University of Colorado, as we would have to modify some of our admissions programs," said spokeswoman Deborah Mendez-Wilson.

"We're not sure of the full impact at this point."

Mendez-Williams added that "no matter what the outcome of the election, we will continue as we always have to value diversity in all its forms."

In response to questions from the public and the media, the university recently studied the potential impact of the ballot measure, called the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative. It prohibits the state from granting preferential treatment on the basis of race, sex or ethnicity in hiring, education and contracts.

Mendez-Wilson said CU does not consider race or gender in hiring.

The university and the Board of Regents have not taken a position on the ballot measure.

CU Boulder's admissions process involves two rounds of review. It considers an applicant's academic record, extracurricular activities and reference letters. Then the school looks at other factors such as race, ethnicity and whether a parent attended the school.

The Denver and Colorado Springs campuses do not use race or ethnicity considerations in admissions.

Colorado State University says it does not require applicants to report their race.

However, if an applicant volunteers the information, the admissions committee could consider that among other factors, said Brad Bohlander, a university spokesman.

But, he said, race would no longer be considered if the measure passed.

The university is studying the measure, and it will be discussed next month at a board of governors meeting.

Jessica Peck Corry, executive director of the civil rights initiative, said the CU study confirms her view that the measure would not eliminate any school programs.

She said passage of Amendment 46 should not cause minority and women enrollment to drop.

"What this initiative does is open the door to all Colorado students, regardless of race or gender," Corry said.

Comments

  • July 25, 2008

    12:11 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    SL10 writes:

    Cool, now the white man has a chance to go to school now. Esp. vets.

  • July 25, 2008

    3:13 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    longpasttime writes:

    This is as it should be. Race and ethnicity shouldn't be be criteria for admission to school. Grades and merit are what count.

  • July 25, 2008

    6:36 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    rumplstilskin writes:

    The one pushing this bill is a black buisness man from California by the name of Ward Connerly, he knows that the current system is bigotted and would rather be known for his intellegence and merit rather than being handed something, horay for this man it is time affermative action goes out the window, google Colorado Amendment 46 and read it for yourself, I LOVE IT!!

  • July 25, 2008

    9:33 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    fastnloose writes:

    Finally,a level playing field.

  • July 27, 2008

    2:19 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    JM_Mantan writes:

    let's pass a bill that gives white men more of a chance to go to school because those minorities are being guaranteed so many spots that they don't deserve. A 19% minority enrollment rate across all CU campuses in 2006 infringes on equality.......right. That's some bs. Schools are trying to promote diversity but they're not giving them open slots, they also meet the criteria that's needed to be accepted by a university. Have ya been to Boulder or Fort Collins? I don't think white people have a problem getting into those schools.

  • July 27, 2008

    10:19 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    blondefrog123 writes:

    Affirmative action is patently racist and fundamentally unfair. How long are we going to hang onto this completely flawed and discredited philosophy? It's a sick cousin to whites having to pay reparations. The logic escapes me here. All men are created equal and no on can consider race in hiring, right? Then comes the rampant political correctness of affirmative action that is a blight on our (and across the U.S.) state's universities, and we say, "Why?" Isn't it time to do away with the post Civil War era philosophies? Surely we're past that now. It's time the legislature, the people of Colorado, and the administration at our colleges wake up to true equality.

  • July 28, 2008

    7:45 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    uleducokc writes:

    It is disappointing to see that the same inequities that brought affirmative action to life still persist -- as do the same tired complaints associated with it. If individuals could be relied upon to make decisions fairly, treat others fairly, and offer equal opportunities to everyone, measures like affirmative action would never have been necessary, nor would they continue to be necessary. But those of us willing to be honest with ourselves can recognize that unfairness does exist -- no matter how much we might want to wish it away. History (and the present day) shows us that privileged people are rarely willing to share those privileges without being forced. For those individuals lamenting the "unfairness" of affirmative action to whites, you need only examine the reality of its application: the single largest beneficiaries of it are WHITE WOMEN...not racial minorities. Affirmative action is hardly the stuff of "post Civil War era philosophies"... Racism and discrimination are alive and well.... and from the comments on this blog, the only thing that has changed since the post Civil War era is the desire to cloak racism, prejudice and discriminatory thinking in a fallacious mask of a "level playing field"... Sad, but not surprising.

  • July 28, 2008

    10:19 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    kevinjjones writes:

    "It prohibits the state from granting preferential treatment on the basis of race, sex or ethnicity in hiring, education and contracts."

    Any reason the more trendy favoritism of "sexual orientation" was excluded from this measure? The recent announcement of a scholarship for out-of-state(!) GLBT students made me think the university is just importing activists to strengthen the political might of the relevant parties.

  • July 29, 2008

    11:10 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Dhawk0948 writes:

    This is fine if you believe the playing field is level, if the kid raised in a poverty-stricken area like the San Luis Valley has the same advantages educationally as the kid from Cherry Hills Village. The real problem is white people who haven't got the intelligence or ability to make it into college blaming minorities for their own ignorance or stupidity.

  • September 27, 2008

    12:15 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    nooeulan writes:

    I am fully convinced that Amendment 46 is **deceptively designed to promote inequality** between the sexes and among the races so that more non-minorities and non-female people would have preferential treatment in higher education and in the job market.

    For example, before affirmative action there was inequality regarding the quality of education in the schools around the nation. And that is true even today.

    For those interested, I encourage you to read a speech related to inequality matters written by a journalist named Bill Moyers called "This is the Fight of Our Lives" published on June 16th, 2004.
    You can find it here: http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0...

    In the speech, Bill talked about an article written on March 10, 2004 in the New York Times about a school near Mount Vernon that had a student body that was 97% African-American and every 1 in 10 students lived in a homeless shelter. Their library was in very poor condition. "The newest encyclopedia dates from l991, with two volumes -- "b" and "r" -- missing. There is no card catalog in the library -- no index cards or computer."

    With schools like this, here and there in poor neighborhoods all over the country I think its no wonder that minorities tend to test lower on college entry exams more so than non-minorities. That being the case, with Amendment 46, I think the people getting "merit" based scholarships would likely be non-minorities more so than it would be minorities. And I think it is important to have affirmative action around to continue encouraging people to be taking race into consideration and its tendency to have a queer relationship with privilege.

    I do not believe that people should be denied the ability to go to college or pay for college simply because they were born into the "under-privileged" class. Affirmative Action tries to get those kinds of families and schools the programs and support that they need in order to overcome the odds of being "under-privileged" and still have a chance at competing with people who have always had the quality education that everyone deserves and is the quality education that not everyone gets.

    This is one of the reasons why I am voting no on Amendment 46.