OVERVIEW OF THE POLICY
"The policy of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) shall be to work toward the building of an open society in which social, ethnic, racial, sexual orientation and gender differences are accepted and respected with in which individual and institutionalized racism will not be encouraged, supported or tolerated". This is the heart of the NASW stance on racism. It stresses equality for everyone in all matters of society, regardless of race, and the existence of racism is intolerable. The policy goes on to state the institutions such as education, employment, health care, welfare, and social service should be easily accessible and relevant to the lives of minorities. To insure this, social work as a profession should use its resources to lobby for legislation, educate and work with various organizations to advocate for changes.
For the purposes of this paper, this analyst will focus on the NASW stance on affirmative action. Affirmative action plans are not sufficiently enforced and they should be given the resources and authority needed in order to be successful.
The policy already acknowledges the existence of affirmative action. NASW is trying to fight the battle of racism that has been brewing for over 100 years in America. It is the same call for equality that other plans, such as Emancipation Proclamation and Brown vs. The Board of Education have already stated. However, NASW says that the problem is in the resources to support affirmative action and steps need to be taken to insure this.
HISTORY
Perhaps no aspect of America has such a notable history as racism. Lance Morrow calls it the "oldest American melodrama" (Morrow, 1994), and Thomas Jackson calls it the "national obsession" (Jackson). Racism in America can be traced back to settlement when the Indians were seen as savages and displaced to reservations. Then, the institution of enslaving blacks came about which was the beginning of hundreds of years of separation, discrimination and legislation.
The grandfather piece of legislation which called for equal rights was Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation which freed the slaves. Later, the thirteenth amendment to the Constitution was ratified proclaiming slavery illegal. The Plessy vs. Ferguson decision of 1896 stated that "facilities for blacks were supposed to be equal to facilities for whites" (DeNitto, 1995, 369). DeNitto goes on to say that this was not the case. Plessy vs. Ferguson was overturned in 1954 by the US Supreme court ruling of Brown vs the Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. This ruling said that separate was not equal and was unconstitutional and discriminating. This marked the "official recognition of racial inequality in America" (DeNitto, 1995, 70). Ten years later, the Civil Rights Act was passed which made it unlawful to discriminate on the basis of race, age or sex.
After the Civil Rights Act was passed, other pieces of legislation and judicial have been passed to ensure it is upheld in education and in the work place. One of these was the plan for affirmative action. In 1965, "L.B. Johnson signed an executive order requiring federal contractors to undertake affirmative action to increase number of minorities employed" and in 1974, Nixon "declared that affirmative action programs should also include women" (http://wco.com/~acasul/aa2.htm). Since the implementation of affirmative action, there has been decision after decision handed down by the courts against affirmative action programs, as they promote reverse discrimination by denying whites opportunities in order to fill quotas (DeNitto, 1995).
The most recent major development in affirmative action is the California civil rights amendment or Proposition 209 which calls for "prohibition against discrimination or preferential treatment by state and other public entities"
- Prohibits the state, local governments, districts, public universities, colleges, and schools, and other government instrumentalities from discriminating against or giving preferential treatment to any individual or group in public
Does not prohibit reasonably necessary, bona fide qualifications based on sex and actions necessary for receipt of federal funds.
-Mandates enforcement to extent permitted by federal law.
- Requires uniform remedies for violations. Provides for severability of provisions if invalid.
(http://vote96.ss.ca.gov/vote96/html/bp/209.htm).
The wording of this is similar to that of the 1964 Civil Rights Act which also said it was illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, sex, or religion.
SUPPORT FOR THE POLICY
Those who are likely to support affirmative action and the pumping in of resources to help such programs are those for whom the policy is intended to help, minorities. The NAACP would be most supportive of this as they are an organization striving to obtain equal rights for blacks. "Affirmative action is necessary because it opens doors to minorities that never had been legally opened before in this country" (Madkins, 1989, p.29). Affirmative action provides minorities with opportunities they otherwise would not have due to discrimination. Of course many minorities are going to be supportive of any program which ensures equal opportunities in employment and education.
OPPOSITION OF THE POLICY
Those who are opposed to affirmative action programs are capitalist businessmen. With little education opportunities, there are not many jobs for blacks except for the menial jobs no one else wants. This allows employers to set wages just low enough for living, and in turn, sell the product for more than the cost of production. "This is the source of all profits" (Hall, 1996). With affirmative action, blacks have a greater chance for education and job advancement, destroying the profit of the capitalist.
Also there are some blacks who oppose affirmative action. Rick Finley's article "Quotas Hurt King's Legacy", he sites Shelby Steele, a black associate professor at San Jose State University saying, "Affirmative action robs us of our dignity. It says that somehow color, not our hard work, can bring us our advancement" (Finley, 1995). According to Professor Steele, blacks resent the stigma placed upon them as a result of affirmative action programs.
SOCIAL PROBLEMS RELATED TO THE POLICY
The NASW policy on racism, especially where employment is concerned, is aimed at eliminating inequality towards minorities in the work place. The utopic end result of such a policy is the total amelioration of unequal employment opportunities and give minorities an equal chance and greater chance of moving up the coperate ladder.
PREVIOUS EFFORTS
Efforts to aid minorities can very well be traced back to the dual roots of social work, especially the settlement houses. These institutions helped to educate the immigrants so that they would be better equipped to be employed in American workplaces. Today, affirmative action seeks to provide education and job training programs to increase the chances of minorities getting into the job market with good jobs (http://wco.com/~acasul/aa2.htm). Affirmative action carries out the work of the first social workers during industrialization.
CONSEQUENCES
Looking upon the history and previous efforts to put an end to racism, one can only imagine today's society if such efforts had not been made. Minorities would be denied good educational opportunities without such rulings as Brown vs the Board of Education, and they would most likely not have any rights with out the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
IMPACT OF THE POLICY
Much of the focus of affirmative action is directed towards giving minorities a better chance at employment and education. With this also comes a hopeful state of mind, giving the minority a happier outlook on life. "Affirmative action encourages and gives hope to many formally disenfranchised blacks in this country" (Madkins, 1989, 29). Affirmative action does more then just provide jobs. It alters the mind set which is such a distinguishable part of the culture of poverty theory. It is significant in raising the esteem and confidence in minorities (Madkins, 1989, p.29) except those who feel it "robs them of their dignity" (Finley , 1995).
BENEFICIARIES
The beneficiaries of affirmative action programs would be the minorities for they are whom the program is intended. With affirmative action plans implemented and backed up, minorities have a chance at furthering their education without discrimination. As Horace Porter, an associate professor of English at Stanford University notes, "They deserve, as I did, the truly level playing field affirmative action seeks to provide. Otherwise, they will not be as lucky as I have been and their dream of going to college will remain just that" (Porter, 1996).
Another way minorities will benefit by this policy is the opportunity for better wages. "The typical black today earns only sixty-two percent of what America earns" (Reisman, 1996). If social work advocates for an adequate minimum wage that reflects the realties of the economy, as the policy says, then the wage gap can be narrowed helping minorities attain a better life and a greater chance in the working world.
Because of affirmative action and other advances in racism reform, America as a whole benefits. In 1951, President Truman ordered and end to segregation in the military (Impaco, 1996,). The military practices "supply side" affirmative action meaning the military looks at qualified candidates then sets goals instead of basing plans on total number of minorities (Dickerson, 1996,). This will ensure that America's best will be defending her.
ABSORBING THE COSTS
With the shifting about of resources to ensure minorities get a fair shot, there are those who have to eat the costs of these shifts. Already mentioned is the accusations of reverse discrimination in the courts. positions that were once guaranteed to white males are no longer guaranteed. In an article off the internet, Professor Stanly Fish says, If today's white males do not deserve the disadvantages (statistically negligible) they suffer, neither do they deserve to be the beneficiaries of sufferings inflicted for generations on others..."
(http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/aasc/policy/partii.html#2a3).
As is true with other U.S programs, there must be funding. If programs for job training and effective affirmative action programs are to be a reality then the cost would lie with the taxpayers for this is the source of the U.S economy.
TARGET AND NON TARGET GROUPS
The NASW policy is targeted towards minorities. The policy to aid affirmative action program is aimed at improving conditions for minorities to compete in the job market.
As Newton's third law states, "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction". For the majority of policies enacted, there will most always be an effect on those for whom the policy is not directed. Those who have to swallow the costs of such policies are greatly affected as they must learn to cope with new ways of doing business. Also it will effect the tax payers as money is either increased or rerouted to support such plan efforts.
VALUES OF THE POLICY STATEMENT
This policy stresses the value of equality and humanity among people. Affirmative action is the effort to insure minorities the chance at equal opportunities for jobs, education and promotions (http://wco.com/~acasul/aa2.htm). Affirmative action promotes the value that every human being is worth something and deserves fair, humane treatment.
Affirmative action policies are a two-edged sword. As it strives to make the job market equal, it in some cases contradicts this value by discriminating other as is evident by Alan Bakke vs the University of California at Berkeley Medical School and Marco De Funes Jr. vs. the University of Washington School of Law. Both of these men had stronger grades and qualifications but were rejected entrance into their respective schools in favor of minorities (DeNitto, 1995).
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE POLICY
FISCAL COSTS
The most obvious fiscal cost would be in the way of taxes. If the government pools more resources to aid affirmative action plans, the money has to come from some where and as is true with other government programs, from the taxes of the American people. An effective plan needs to be overseen to ensure success and the overseer must be paid from some source.
Another cost that has already come about by the implementation of affirmative action plans is the various court costs. For any accusation of discrimination, in any direction, that goes to court, the legal counsel of both sides must be paid as well as the judge and the court. Currently a lawsuit is threatening the Jackson-Madison County school board on charges of racism and at the moment funds are being sought for legal counsel for the plaintiff (McLaughlin, 1996).
SOCIOLOGICAL COSTS
The major sociological cost for both sides of affirmative action is resentment. Rick Finley states that affirmative action has become an annoyance because of the assumption that blacks have made it where they are because of affirmative action and he quotes an unidentified black student as saying, "...It seemed that everyone at Dartmouth assumed I was there because of affirmative action. They didn't realize my credentials were just as strong as theirs" (Finley, 1995). There is an affirmative action stereotype that quotas set by affirmative action and not qualifications, will be the reason for minorities climbing the socioeconomic ladder.
With this policy, there is a chance of the building up of more racial tension. In his article pondering the true meaning of racism, Thomas Jackson expresses his displeasure of affirmative action allowing immigrants to come and be "entitled to affirmative action preferences over native born whites" while it is racists for whites to "work for their own interests (Jackson). As resentment built up in minorities against whites for disproportional treatment, then the same is true for the reverse.
ALTERNATIVES
This analyst has found an alterative to racism that does not involve government intervention but is a more human approach. In her article "How to Break the Cycle of Racism" Rebecca Severson suggests a few strategies to combat racism in the work place. One is simply to talk to minorities and "find out what work they do and what barriers they face in the organization that keep them from advancing or being included". She also suggests a "task force" in the workplace for developing action, confronting and recruitment strategies to "achieve a more bias-free work environment"( Severson, 1995, http://www.cnt.ort.tnw/183repro.htm). Finally she suggests simply being aware of unconscious racism as well will help to put an end to racism and the lack of advancement for blacks in the work place (Severson). These suggestions present a more human approach to doing away with racism in the work machine. Instead of depending on a bureaucracy for equality, the problem can be worked on by a more intimate environment which includes an actual input from minorities themselves.
The solution suggested by the NASW is the most feasible. yes, allowing the individual work places to use their own resources to combat racism would be less costly in a fiscal sense to America as a whole, but history has shown that without government resource policies lacking, there is no reason the individual employers to make an effort if they do not have to. Then the plight of the minority people would be back where they started.
Giving affirmative Action programs the proper funding to sufficiently work will most likely include costs at the present. However, if minorities are given the chance at better opportunities, then the chances of many of them pulling out of poverty is greatly increased. this will alleviate the strain on the tax payers by reducing the amount of money paid out by various public assistance programs.
ANALYST’S OPINION
The NASW policy on racism has many valid ideas for improving race relations but they will be most ineffective in annihilating racism. Racism is one giant cyclical mind game. Minorities are resentful of past atrocities and present conditions and whites are resentful of minorities for being handed opportunities on the basis of skin color, which is something they have been protesting for the better part of a century. Two wrongs do not make a right and discriminating against the whites will not solve the problem. "White Americans are being asked to devote themselves to the interests of other races and to ignore the interests of their own" (Jackson).
The NASW should strive to improve living, working, health care and educational conditions of minorities but not at the expense of whites. What must be done is programs in schools and in communities that do not pit one race against the other as affirmative action tends to do. Racism is a state of mind and until the mind set of America is changed, all the government programs money can buy will not solve the problem. History, although becoming more and more skewed due to political correctness, will show that racism is a problem that has existed since the earliest of times.
The best way to combat racism is to do away with programs such as affirmative action that use discrimination to fight discrimination. California has the right idea with Proposition 209. Sean Walsh, Governor Wilson's of California's press secretary is quoted as saying "The goal we want to achieve is a color-blind society. We're at a point in our society where we're giving special privileges and turning one group against another" (Ellis, 1995).
Return to Meliphyre's Domain