Affirmative Action

Prop 16 allows the state to use race and other demographics as factors when deciding whom to hire into government positions, whom to admit to public universities, and whom to select for government contracting.

Centuries of discrimination have created persistent disparities in California. Even among young people, educational attainment is about twice as high for non-Hispanic Whites as for Blacks and Hispanics. Income of young Blacks and Hispanics of color is about 40 percent lower, and they’re about 70 percent more likely to be in poverty.

We must rectify this injustice as we have with other injustices. Until five years ago, same-sex marriage was illegal in the U.S. By highlighting this flagrant violation of equal protection, liberals won in the court of law and in the public, with support for gay marriage having risen consistently since 2004, across all demographic groups, religions, and political affiliations. As my own research has shown, more egalitarian (race-blind) social protection policies would dramatically shrink racial economic disparities. Many race-blind policies, such as baby bonds and student loan cancellation, have emphasized racial justice as a rationale, given the disproportionate benefits for people of color due to their higher student debt and lower income, on average.

If liberals had instead demanded special rights for same-sex couples, we would have missed the opportunity to appeal to equal protection, and I doubt we would have moved public opinion or the law as quickly. Race-conscious social protection policies offer a barometer: only 1 in 5 Americans support reparations, which are probably unconstitutional.

Hiring based on race, as Prop 16 would permit, is similarly unpopular, with over 70 percent of Americans opposed. This isn’t surprising; the relationship between employment, education, and income makes racial preferences in these domains effectively a form of reparations.

Evidence suggests that race-conscious programs could drive racial resentment. For example, a survey experiment found that racial resentment among conservatives is closely tied to opposition to race-conscious programs. Opening up public housing to immigrants in Austria also increased support for anti-immigrant parties; competition of similarly salient zero-sum benefits like public university admissions and government jobs could also spark a backlash. Rather than justifying stinginess or exclusion, these results suggest that equal opportunity to scaleable assistance like cash transfers and tax credits is a safer way to form a safety net (abolishing exclusionary zoning laws, rooted in racism, would also help).

Finally, and on a personal note, demographic trends make race-conscious policies harder to implement. Reflecting our melting pot of a country, a 2015 survey identified 1 in 15 Americans as mixed-race---about half the Black population share. About a third of these mixed-race individuals have changed how they describe their own race throughout their life. I am one such person: my dad is Latino and my mom is non-Hispanic White. Should people like me be strategizing about which box to check on a form, to maximize chances at getting into a university or getting a government job?

If we want an egalitarian, race-blind future, we need to create it today.