A note about Affirmative action

[Blake]

You are cool, your viewpoints are interesting and as close to neutral as possible. Its SAAPS that gets my blood a little stirred. Sorry if i offended u

Hey, I try being as neutral and critical as possible, unlike most people out there. Oh well, just doing my '' thing ''

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[velo]

this trend is sterotypical. URM's are accepted with less GPA and MCAT scores. like its everyone. So i'm a racist now... i guess u are only for understadning and tolerence when talking about your race.

huh? read my posts!! I've been defending AA this whole d@mn thread!! you're completely alienating people on YOUR side of theis argument mochief....why? people for AA are generally not racists (not that people against it are, I think they've raised some valid points) but you're showing that you clearly are a racist...its getting harder and harder to back you up

 

[medlaw06]

OBVIOUSLY, there is NO correct answer to the issue affirmative action....

SO, before we go ahead and stereotype (and ultimately offend) Germans, Blacks, Hispanics, Indians (american and eastern), Chinese, Japanese, English, French, etc etc CAN WE PLEASE END THIS THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[mochief2000]

huh? read my posts!! I've been defending AA this whole d@mn thread!! you're completely alienating people on YOUR side of theis argument mochief....why? people for AA are generally not racists (not that people against it are, I think they've raised some valid points) but you're showing that you clearly are a racist...its getting harder and harder to back you up

Lord , have mercy. I never said u were against AA. I am for AA, so why would i call myself a racist.Read my post. when have i said people don't have good post and there views are not interesting. And if u call me a racist one more time...
I even said sorry to u.

 

[care bear]

Go pick up a non-classist text on the south, ante-bellum to present. You will be surprised.

i don't need some biased textbook you picked up on the side of the street, i have my FAMILY and their EXPERIENCE. . .and all the objective historical information out there to back me up.

do you even know who Jim Crow was???? why in the world would they name law to discriminate against poor WHITES 'Jim Crow' Laws?

 

[Noeljan]

Hey mocheif
I agree with you on the whole blacks not having role models willing to work hard, etc...this is the problem I have with people glorifying the NBA, and stars etc. They are no better than anyone else. It is not only in black communities but all poor and uneducated families. All these people can see in front of them is some magical easy way out (ie the NBA, acting, going to hollywood, etc) that they do not see that most people get from point A to B with tons of work. No poor families of any race usually have people who have even gone to college to look up to, or anyone in any sort of scholastic environment. Yet, these kids see the stars on TV buying 50000 purses or dog outfits. They want those things too, but have never had any supporting them on how to achieve such things. Thus, many resort to crime for easy money in hopes of getting a record deal.
My problem with AA being only for blacks is that there are people of ALL races coming from such situations. What do you say to a white/asian etc who had to go through all this. Are they just out of luck? Why should they be? Is it their "fault" they were born an ORM and in such a setback from day one yet since they are white they should somehow magically have all the things everyone claims we all have? I think if it were entirely based on income and education everyone wins like I said before. If the amount of blacks are from poor uneducated families as everyone says, well wouldn't the deserving still be rewarded? Only this way, all those who have had to endure such hardships would be rewarded based on fact and the argument would have much more support.

 

[learss]

Hey mocheif
I agree with you on the whole blacks not having role models willing to work hard, etc...this is the problem I have with people glorifying the NBA, and stars etc. They are no better than anyone else. It is not only in black communities but all poor and uneducated families. All these people can see in front of them is some magical easy way out (ie the NBA, acting, going to hollywood, etc) that they do not see that most people get from point A to B with tons of work. No poor families of any race usually have people who have even gone to college to look up to, or anyone in any sort of scholastic envirnonment. Yet, these kids see the stars on TV buying 50000 purses or dog outfits. They want those things too, but have never had any supporting them on how to achieve such things. Thus, many resort to crime for easy money in hopes of getting a record deal.
My problem with AA being only for blacks is that there are people of ALL races coming from such situations. What do you say to a white/asian etc who had to go through all this. Are they just out of luck? Why should they be? Is it their "fault" they were born an ORM and in such a setback from day one yet since they are white they should somehow magically have all the things everyone claims we all have? I think if it were entirely based on income and education everyone wins like I said before. If the amount of blacks are from poor uneducated families as everyone says, well wouldn't the deserving still be rewarded? Only this way, all those who have had to endure such hardships would be rewarded based on fact and the argument would have much more support.

I agree with some of the points you have made especially on the subject of role models in poor communities.

But you should know that AA is not only for blacks. It also includes other minority groups and white women. Additionally, AA is not a quota system or a guaruntee to any URM that they will be automatically be admitted to medical school or to any college or university

 

[W222]

Excellent post NoelJan. Ohh and Jim Crow refers to a slave owner who was made fun of in a song that was popularized by a traveling singer in the early 1800s.

 

[W222]

Actually white women are no longer AA in medical school admissions.

 

[learss]

It's not even worth it anymore. Professors have lied so much to students these days students actually believe ridiculous nonsense as reality. Jim Crow laws were primarily classist, not racist.

Jim Crow laws were classist? In what world are you living in? Jim Crow was the legalization of racial segregation. Not class segregation, but racial. "No blacks allowed" signs were part of Jim Crow. "Separate but equal" doctrine also Jim Crow. Read a history book

 

[mochief2000]

interesting post Neoljan. I think the difference is that the society never says they (white) don't have the intellectual capacity. the media protrays the other races as inferior in terms of academics. not sayin it showing it. not intentionally though.

and it's true white woman are not URM. man, women outnumber men in acceptances in 2003. wow, they are definetly working harder. Reminds me of the destiny child's song "independent women"

 

[Blake]

interesting post Neoljan. I think the difference is that the society never says they don't have the intellectual capacity. the media protrays the other races as inferior in terms of academics.

and it's true white woman are not URM. man, women outnumber men in acceptances in 2003. wow, they are definetly working harder. Reminds me of the destiny child's song "independent women"

At my university, it's 70 % women, 30 % men. Well, it's a good ratio when you're a guy

 

[mochief2000]

At my university, it's 70 % women, 30 % men. Well, it's a good ratio when you're a guy

I need to transfer!! what school u got too...

 

[Blake]

I need to transfer!! what school u got too...

It's in Canada, french Canada. I prefer to not reveal the school for privacy reason

 

[Sapps]

Segregation has absolutely nothing to do with Jim Crow laws. Egads, there some ignorant people. I don't blame them, though, I blame our ridiculous public education and biased media. "Jim Crow laws" were laws that were supposedly enacted on the grounds that they would predominantly curtail civil rights to black Americans. These were more generally used to deny voting rights, less so for other things. The problem was, though, that almost every Jim Crow law that was enacted was actually classist. It's only in recent retrospect that classist and racist teachers/media talking-heads/race baiters have claimed it was all about race, totally ignoring the class angle.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

Then why did they institute grandfather clauses allowing poor whites to circumvent poll taxes?

It was treating people differently based on their race. Period. They just put a pretty name on it (Separate...........but equal). Of course, now we call it "diversity"....

 

[N-toxicologist]

UNTlabrat
you are one of the ones that think we are inferior. You being reading to many Utopia books. it doesn't exist. fairness doesn't exist, AA is tryin to close the gap, tryin. answer this. If I put u on the olmypic team, does it men u will win a medal. If they put me in medical school, does it mean i will graduate. We all have to pass the same test. Now am i still "inferior".

I'm still cold, don't let me warm up.

Mochief,

I do not believe anybody is "inferior." Try reading my post again. I said, AA does no favors because there will be that stigma of being an AA admission. I agree that fairness does not exist. There will always be prejudice. If you want to give the disadvantaged a level playing field (and I do believe in level playing fields), do it on a basis other than race. Don't you think that there are white, asian, and indian applicants who have had similar hardships as those targeted by the URM system? But since they are over represented, too bad for them, right? I would prefer a system based on socioeconomic factors, life experiences, etc. not the color of your skin. I don't think anybody should be judged solely or mainly on the basis of color or race. I don't know how you interpreted me being racist or thinking that minorities are inferior, for Pete's sake. Geez!

 

[N-toxicologist]

I hate to burst your bubble but with or without AA there are a lot of people who believe minorities are inferior. AA does not propagate the idea that minorities are inferior; it is people who have an agenda to prove this that use AA as a key point.....

I'm not sure what bubble you think you are bursting of mine. Yes, prejudice will abound with or without AA, but I believe it serves to proprogate the negativity if it a widely known fact that some people got in with lower stats based on their race. This detracts from those minorities who worked their asses off to get there, but face the stigma of being thought of as "an AA admission." In my response to Mochief, I agreed with others that if you want to look past the numbers to diversify admissions, look at socioeconomics, life experiences, etc., not race

I believe every black female character I have ever seen is either the bitch who will stop at nothing to succeed, the slut, or the woman who is always on her man's case, or on welfare etc. Likewise, black men have the privilege of either being the comical side kick, the angry man or some other derivative of black male stereotypes and I am not even going to discuss the spiritual Native American or the saucy Latina/o. The problem is these stereotypes are so overplayed that they have become engrained in the consciousness of mainstream America and most people harbor these racist ideas without even thinking about it. Then to make thing worse they try to use these stereotypes as supporting arguments for their cases.

I agree that the stereotypical caricatures out there hurt. What about the Asian, Indian, and Middle Eastern stereotypes? The over represented aren't privy to any less discrimination. Luckily, I have had the privilege of growing up in diverse conditions and had the pleasure of meeting people outside my "bubble." Those stereotypes do not ring true with me, and frankly, they embarrass me.

 

[Sapps]

Then why did they institute grandfather clauses allowing poor whites to circumvent poll taxes?

It was treating people differently based on their race. Period. They just put a pretty name on it (Separate...........but equal). Of course, now we call it "diversity"....

"They". heh. It's not like every state had such laws. If you don't think they were primarily focused on class, you should well know that almost all of the states BOTH north (which had near negligible amount of blacks by large) AND the south states had literacy/property/poll tax types of laws. It was rather ubiquitous. The "grandfather clause," which was indeed primarily focused on race, was only enacted by several states.

 

[kae51202]

Mochief,
I would prefer a system based on socioeconomic factors, life experiences, etc. not the color of your skin. I don't think anybody should be judged solely or mainly on the basis of color or race.

Umm, I think you are over-simplifying the matter a tad. I don't think Adcoms seek exclusively skin color, but more, the implications of admitting that person inside the skin. For example, the more role models URM children have the more inspired they would be to do the same...the more minorities in medicine...more minorities can be helped to move upwards...this spreads to other professions unless they are already on this track...end AA within X years?

On another note, I've said it before URM still have to perform in medical school, take boards, rotations, etc. People are acting as if URMs are getting a free ride through the medical school and the rest of their lives. They will still be URMs in this world and face the same discriminations they did before.
And I seriously doubt that any Adcom is going to let ANYONE in, URM or not that they don't feel will be an asset to their institution. They still have to be interviewed, liked and OFFERED a spot in the class. I can rest assured that if an Adcom doesn't feel confident accepting someone, in this case URM, they won't. They will replace them with another URM ( if they wish) that fits the bill. In the end they will have achieved their goal to have a qualified candidate that THEY feel will benefit THEIR medical school.

 

[kae51202]

I think I just brought up an interesting point-perhaps some of the hostility and anger is due to the fact that some Americans are not ready for more minorities in medicine and other professional fields. Perhaps this scares them; I mean what would America truly be like if things were equal? It actually scares me too, to finally live in a world where I don't have to worry about what's going to happen to my little brother and male cousins if they are pulled over on the wrong day by the wrong cop. It may sound trite but its reality for ME. To never have to worry that my family will be discriminated by people who are supposed to provide them with proper healthcare if I am not there with them to talk "proper" as per Bill Cosby...the list goes on.
Sorry to get so emotional on you all just wanted to make sure you were still awake

 

[Sapps]

I think I just brought up an interesting point-perhaps some of the hostility and anger is due to the fact that some Americans are not ready for more minorities in medicine and other professional fields. Perhaps this scares them; I mean what would America truly be like if things were equal? It actually scares me too, to finally live in a world where I don't have to worry about what's going to happen to my little brother and male cousins if they are pulled over on the wrong day by the wrong cop. It may sound trite but its reality for ME. To never have to worry that my family will be discriminated by people who are supposed to provide them with proper healthcare if I am not there with them to talk "proper" as per Bill Cosby...the list goes on.
Sorry to get so emotional on you all just wanted to make sure you were still awake

Oh, nice. The whole racist police canard. Take a look a Cincinnati: you know, the place that some blacks decided to have a little race riot recently, attacking innocent white people? The 15 black perps killed in X many years was hyped up to no end by the liberal, racist media. Of course, what they never said was that 12 of those 15 were situations where the black perp killed pulled a gun on the officer(s). The remainder? Black officers killing unarmed black perps. Communist News Network wouldn't touch the real facts of that one, or the race riots themselves for that matter, with a 10 foot poll. When it comes to race in this country, whatever it is, it's generally a lie/obfuscation.

 

[kae51202]

Oh, nice. The whole racist police canard. Take a look a Cincinnati: you know, the place that some blacks decided to have a little race riot recently, attacking innocent white people? The 15 black perps killed in X many years was hyped up to no end by the liberal, racist media. Of course, what they never said was that 12 of those 15 were situations where the black perp killed pulled a gun on the officer(s). The remainder? Black officers killing unarmed black perps. Communist News Network wouldn't touch the real facts of that one, or the race riots themselves for that matter, with a 10 foot poll. When it comes to race in this country, whatever it is, it's generally a lie/obfuscation.

Wow, some people really are ignorant-I don't want you taking care of me. How long did it take you to dig that one up? Maybe you should have taken that time to try to understand that I was sharing PERSONAL experiences about MY family to demonstrate why I feel a need for greater representation. And where to get off implying that I hold true are possibly lies. I don't need the media to confirm anything that I can see with my own 2 eyes. I have nothing against all cops nor any one GROUP of people, my uncle has been on the force for 20+ years. Please, let's not turn this into a 15 bad black people did this scenario. Guess what? There are bad white people too/whatever ethnicity you belong to, but citing examples of the murders they committ isn't going to make me sleep better tonight so I won't. Sweet dreams.

 

[OrthoFixation]

Umm, I think you are over-simplifying the matter a tad. I don't think Adcoms seek exclusively skin color, but more, the implications of admitting that person inside the skin. For example, the more role models URM children have the more inspired they would be to do the same...the more minorities in medicine...more minorities can be helped to move upwards...this spreads to other professions unless they are already on this track...end AA within X years?

On another note, I've said it before URM still have to perform in medical school, take boards, rotations, etc. People are acting as if URMs are getting a free ride through the medical school and the rest of their lives. They will still be URMs in this world and face the same discriminations they did before.
And I seriously doubt that any Adcom is going to let ANYONE in, URM or not that they don't feel will be an asset to their institution. They still have to be interviewed, liked and OFFERED a spot in the class. I can rest assured that if an Adcom doesn't feel confident accepting someone, in this case URM, they won't. They will replace them with another URM ( if they wish) that fits the bill. In the end they will have achieved their goal to have a qualified candidate that THEY feel will benefit THEIR medical school.

In opposition to your post, the problem is creating a priveleged applicant class (AA=lower stats, in general) DOES create a quota system, no matter what you label it, based on skin color.

And BTW, what constitutes black for example? Must one be 100% african american or is 51% OK (if your pigment is dark)? What about 10%? Where do you draw the line? From what I have found, this is a self-declared and self-policing status. There is no verification or authentification whatsoever.

Only socioeconomic, educational opportunity history, etc. should be considered. Not pigment.

The fallacy of this whole BS system is that lower stat matriculants can and do progress and graduate medical school, irregardless of race and ethnicity. This includes passing boards. The issue is the non-URM with equal hardships was not considered, even though his stat's were equal. The problem was pigment. He too could have had overcome the obstacles and became a doc, given the opportunity. So this whole concept of MCAT+GPA=X being a predictor is true, but less critical than the system would have us believe.

Bottom line = discrimination based on skin color is wrong, no matter which way the pendulum swings.

Hell, discrimination exists due to many factors: wealth, looks, weight, gender, hair loss, and so on. When will we start boosting stats b/c of those factors? Why should a privileged person of color have more opportunities than a poor white kid. All we do is give a whole sector of the public a crutch for life. While meant as an aid, it only becomes a crippling appendage. That is why socialism and communism failed.

 

[N-toxicologist]

Umm, I think you are over-simplifying the matter a tad. I don't think Adcoms seek exclusively skin color, but more, the implications of admitting that person inside the skin.

No, I agree they look at other factors (go back to my earlier postings in this thread.) BUT, all disadvantages equal (like childhood poverty, etc.), having defined a URM implies that race will be a deciding factor if given the choice between a poor white kid and an URM. Race should not be a factor in deciding disadvantaged status. All races have disadvantaged individuals who deserve a shot.

For example, the more role models URM children have the more inspired they would be to do the same...the more minorities in medicine...more minorities can be helped to move upwards...this spreads to other professions unless they are already on this track...end AA within X years?

There is no guarantee that URM's will go back to serve in an underserved community to provide such a role model, anymore than you can say that an ORM will not go off to serve the underprivileged. (While they may not be able to relate racially for the example you alluded to, they could still have an impact on the community)

On another note, I've said it before URM still have to perform in medical school, take boards, rotations, etc. People are acting as if URMs are getting a free ride through the medical school and the rest of their lives....

I never said this. I do believe that certain socioeconomic groups need a leg up. Do this at the primary/secondary education level, NOT adcoms. That seems like too little, too late. What about better science programs, advisors better informed on med school app processes, after school tutoring? Or, how bout financial aid for those expensive prep courses that help a person get those high MCAT scores? How 'bout it, Princeton, Kaplan? Trying to level the playing field at the level of adcoms is insufficient, in my eyes, even detrimental to the cause, especially if race is a factor.

....They will replace them with another URM ( if they wish) that fits the bill....

The fact that there is some "URM spot to fill" is WRONG.

 

[kae51202]

There has been so much mixing between the races over the centuries that I am not sure one can truly define rules as to what constitutes black. Is anyone 100% anything anymore? I don't know but can only speak for myself. In trying to define race down the lines we would find the same issues in asking someone what constitutes italian, domincan, korean..You will most likely find varying degrees of agreement.

I understand your point about a poor white kid deserving a chance but who is to say that this is not allready happenening. Admission committees evaluate all aspects of an applicants application and I am sure that poor white kids get in all the time as well with lower stats or what have you because the adcoms wanted them at their institution.
On the other hand I must add that a poor white kid still may be better off in this society that a privledged person of color. Getting into medical school does not make all your problems go away. I admit its an imperfect system that may not always appear fair if you're on a different side of the coin but I bet you that URMs would trade it to have had some of the opportunities whites have gotten in this country based on their skin color even if they don't realize it.

In opposition to your post, the problem is creating a priveleged applicant class (AA=lower stats, in general) DOES create a quota system, no matter what you label it, based on skin color.

And BTW, what constitutes black for example? Must one be 100% african american or is 51% OK (if your pigment is dark)? What about 10%? Where do you draw the line? From what I have found, this is a self-declared and self-policing status. There is no verification or authentification whatsoever.

Only socioeconomic, educational opportunity history, etc. should be considered. Not pigment.

The fallacy of this whole BS system is that lower stat matriculants can and do progress and graduate medical school, irregardless of race and ethnicity. This includes passing boards. The issue is the non-URM with equal hardships was not considered, even though his stat's were equal. The problem was pigment. He too could have had overcome the obstacles and became a doc, given the opportunity. So this whole concept of MCAT+GPA=X being a predictor is true, but less critical than the system would have us believe.

Bottom line = discrimination based on skin color is wrong, no matter which way the pendulum swings.

Hell, discrimination exists due to many factors: wealth, looks, weight, gender, hair loss, and so on. When will we start boosting stats b/c of those factors? Why should a privileged person of color have more opportunities than a poor white kid. All we do is give a whole sector of the public a crutch for life. While meant as an aid, it only becomes a crippling appendage. That is why socialism and communism failed.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

If there is nothing wrong with having an advantage because of your race during the admissions process, then why is it wrong to have an advantage based on your race when you're in med school?

You're still a URM right? That means you are disadvantaged no matter what stage in life you are. You are a victim.

Even if you "pass" medical school with extra help, you are still as qualified as everyone else. Just like you are as qualified as everyone else even though you got extra help during the admissions process.

 

[kae51202]

Quote:
There is no guarantee that URM's will go back to serve in an underserved community to provide such a role model, anymore than you can say that an ORM will not go off to serve the underprivileged. (While they may not be able to relate racially for the example you alluded to, they could still have an impact on the community)

You're right there is no guarantee that URMs will go back to these areas but then again we can't guarantee adcoms that anything we say is true. That's an accepted fact of life. But I have URM med school friends and attending mentors that practice in these areas and more than likely other URM will as well, not all, but many. And those who choose not to can still treat other URM elsewhere.


Quote:
I never said this. I do believe that certain socioeconomic groups need a leg up. Do this at the primary/secondary education level, NOT adcoms. That seems like too little, too late. What about better science programs, advisors better informed on med school app processes, after school tutoring? Or, how bout financial aid for those expensive prep courses that help a person get those high MCAT scores? How 'bout it, Princeton, Kaplan? Trying to level the playing field at the level of adcoms is insufficient, in my eyes, even detrimental to the cause, especially if race is a factor.

I agree, I agree, I agree and this is what URM have been begging Congress for, for decades but these things cost money and take time. No one wants to be at a disadvantage.


Quote:
The fact that there is some "URM spot to fill" is WRONG.
In your opinion it is. Once again this goes back to my earlier post of the implications of having that person in that seat.

 

[OrthoFixation]

If there is nothing wrong with having an advantage because of your race during the admissions process, than why is it wrong to have an advantage based on your race when you're in med school?

You're still a URM right? That means you are disadvantaged no matter what stage in life you are. You are a victim.

That is exactly why I propose lower the USMLE pass threshold for URMs. If you need the boost to get in to a post-graduate, professional program after 4+ years of college, then certainly that affliction did not end with 2 or 4 more years of education. Continued subsidy is definately needed to level the field.

Now, if we could just get those pesky medmal lawyers to lower the standards for URM malpractice determination.

 

[JohnHolmes]

That is exactly why I propose lower the USMLE pass threshold for URMs. If you need the boost to get in to a post-graduate, professional program after 4+ years of college, then certainly that affliction did not end with 2 or 4 more years of education. Continued subsidy is definately needed to level the field.

Now, if we could just get those pesky medmal lawyers to lower the standards for URM malpractice determination.

This does nothing to improve the dialog and certainly nothing to eliminate the prejudices that detractors of AA claim do not exist.

There are good arguments on both sides of the issue.

Re: Ryo's argument, race is a factor in admission, not on grading tests. Tests can be quantified and standards for admission cannot. The goal of a test is to get everything "correct," but this standard is impossible when you introduce non cognitive and varied factors, such as the ones required in an admissions interview. Admissions are not unidimensional MCAT scores and grades, though detractors of AA will try to convince you otherwise. They want you to see test scores and decry the state of affairs and show you how we live in a meritocracy, although we do not. They would collapse the difficult decisions and compelling moral arguments for AA into a narrow tube that only examined standardized factors and bell curves. This is as inconsistent with the world we live in as they say using a "race bias" is.

They won't show you that 40% of African American males are born into poverty or races have been systemically marginalized for years, and its generational effects are still being felt today.

They won't tell you that a peer-reviewed, respected study released in 2003 showed strong employer biases against Africans.

They will point to other's who suffer and say "why don't they get help?" But this is a fallacy, because one group is in need, does not remove the rights of another. The AAMC also makes allowance for economically disadvantaged students, don't forget.

However, those on the militant left will resist any effort to scale back the scope of AA. As a society, we should move towards a point where it is unneeded. O'Connor got it right, we should hope and expect to have diminishing utility for AA in the future. If society decided to vote AA out of existence tomorrow, that should be a right afforded to a democracy.

There is no "right" to AA, but there is no "right" against it.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

Gbemi24 is right to a certain extent. Of all of the minority groups you could choose to be in the 19th century, I doubt you would choose to be black.

The question is, how do we say this without perpetuating the victimist mindset and the sense of entitlement. How can say, hey, no one is standing in front the school house door...no one is stopping you...without using various model minority arguments?

 

[JohnHolmes]

Ryo,

Good points.

However, if you were to poll Americans and ask who they thought had a sense of "entitlement" ... Africans and Mexican Americans will not come to mind.

 

[tofurious]

If you need the boost to get in to a post-graduate, professional program after 4+ years of college, then certainly that affliction did not end with 2 or 4 more years of education.

I like your style. The fact that AA is needed at levels beyond college means college AA doesn't work. The fact that AA is needed in employment of graduate degree holders means once again that AA has not worked in the professional schools. AA has not leveled the playing field. All it has done - and ever tried to do - was to achieve a quota acceptable to the militant reverse-racist groups.

If it were up to the adcoms, I doubt too many schools would admit that many AA applicants. Of course, their hands are tied by AAMC and the potential of having Jesse Jackson picket outside their offices.