美国

Asian Americans would lose out under affirmative action

作者 美华 215 阅读 0 评论
10月1日、美国【洛杉矶时报】的Opinion L.A.栏目登出硅谷华人协会(SVCA)理事Henry Yang的如下文章,这是今年华人反SCA-5运动以来美国主流媒体首次刊登华人及华人团体的反对SCA-5的文章。特将此好文分享给大家,希望美国华人进一步团结起来,拿自己手中的选票保护自己的利益。

10月1日、美国【洛杉矶时报】的Opinion L.A.栏目登出硅谷华人协会(SVCA)理事Henry Yang的如下文章,这是今年华人反SCA-5运动以来美国主流媒体首次刊登华人及华人团体的反对SCA-5的文章。特将此好文分享给大家,希望美国华人进一步团结起来,拿自己手中的选票保护自己的利益。

---------------------------------------------------------------------

By YUNLEI YANG (Henry Yang)
OCTOBER 1, 2014, 10:08 AM

A recent Field Poll claimed that most registered voters and Asian Americans in California support affirmative action. Based on the poll data, Karthick Ramakrishnan, a professor of public policy and political science at UC Riverside, indicated that the intense opposition to State Constitutional Amendment 5 (or SCA-5) earlier this year, an attempt to restore affirmative action in California’s public universities, “was primarily concentrated among a small group of Asian American activists, with the more numerous silent majority still supportive of affirmative action.”

As an official with the Silicon Valley Chinese Assn., which was a major force behind SCA-5′s defeat, I find the poll question misleading and Ramakrishnan’s reasoning deeply flawed.

The original text of the poll question, written by a group Ramakrishnan directs, was, “Do you favor or oppose affirmative action programs designed to help blacks, women, and other minorities get better jobs and education?” Who would not answer “yes” to such a noble goal? But, as noted in the
New York Times, responses to affirmative action polls differ widely based on question wording. In amore relevant poll conducted by Gallup, 67% of respondents rejected the consideration of race in college admissions.

One major flaw of Ramakrishnan’s question is that it mixed several topics. The anti-SCA-5 movement exclusively focused on racial preference and discrimination in college admissions, which SCA-5 would have reintroduced. In contrast, the Field Poll included employment, where the situation is vastly different from college admission and where Asian Americans often face discrimination and are underrepresented, especially in management and executive levels. In addition, the poll mentioned gender, which was not an issue in the anti-SCA-5 movement.

Another big question is whether Asian Americans are, for polling purposes, regarded as “minorities.” It is an indisputable fact that Asian Americans are hurt most by race-based affirmative action in college admissions, and yet the question implies that Asians are beneficiaries by using the words “other minorities.” This possibly confused poll respondents and affected the results.

Last, but not least, it’s highly questionable that affirmative action helps blacks and other minorities, which the poll takes as given. There is a famous book written by UCLA law professor Richard Sander and journalist Stuart Taylor, and the title says it all: “Mismatch: How Affirmative
Action Hurts Students It’s Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won’t Admit It.”

Given all this, a more accurate poll question would be: “Do you favor or oppose race-based affirmative action programs with the intention to help blacks and some other minorities (excluding Asians) to get better education, at the expenses of whites and particularly Asians, who
have been historically discriminated against? (Please note that according to some studies, these affirmative action programs may actually hurt students they are intended to help.)”

I would be very interested to know the result.

My grass-roots organization gained firsthand knowledge of Asian Americans’ stance on this issue when we united with other organizations to defeat SCA-5 in March. Within a few weeks, our online petition at change.org collected more than 100,000 signatures, most of which came from Californians of all ethnicities but particularly from Asian Americans. Thousands of phone calls and letters flooded state lawmakers’ offices. We launched an online donation call for a then little-known anti-SCA-5 state Senate candidate named Peter Kuo, and in four days donations from Asian Americans across the country totaled more than $60,000.

To be clear, my group supports affirmative action in college admission that benefits socioeconomically disadvantaged students of all races. This practice has been implemented in California’s universities since the passage of Proposition 209. And it actually works: With Proposition 209 in effect since 1996, African Americans and Latinos now account for a greater share of the University of California system’s overall admissions than when affirmative action was being practiced. In fact, Latinos’ numbers now exceed whites’ in UC freshman enrollment.

Race-based affirmative action is a complex and emotional issue. It requires a calm, objective and honest discussion. Biased or misleading polls and reports only serve to needlessly drive wedges between different racial and ethnic communities.

Yunlei Yang is a committee member of the Silicon Valley Chinese Assn.

-------------------------------------------------

【美国华人】 (ChineseAmerican.org) 是一个立场中立、传播美国华人正能量的互联网新媒体。其宗旨是:美国华人团结一心、关心政治、共同进步。


关注我们,请点击本文顶部蓝色【美国华人】微信名。或在微信“查找公众号”,搜索“美国华人”,或微信号:ChineseAmericans,再加关注。


浏览文中链接详细内容,请点击底部“阅读原文”。

评论

加入讨论

请登录后发表评论

还没有评论

登录成为第一个评论的人。

Related Posts

U.S.

FBI局长帕特尔起诉《大西洋》杂志索赔2.5亿美元,指控文章诽谤

美国联邦调查局(FBI)局长卡什·帕特尔已对《大西洋》杂志及其记者萨拉·菲茨帕特里克提起2.5亿美元诽谤诉讼。该诉讼指控杂志于4月17日发表的文章包含虚假且具有破坏性的指控,声称帕特尔在任期间存在“过度饮酒”和“无故缺勤”行为,危及公共安全。帕特尔的法律团队称该文章为“恶意诽谤”,旨在摧毁其声誉并迫使其离职。然而,《大西洋》杂志及其记者坚称报道基于对二十多人的采访,并提供了充分回应机会,表示将“积极辩护”。此案再次凸显了川普政府与媒体之间长期存在的紧张关系,并引发了对媒体责任和公职人员诽谤诉讼标准的讨论。

2026年4月21日
U.S.

美国劳工部长查韦斯-德雷默辞职,面临不当行为调查

美国劳工部长洛里·查韦斯-德雷默于周一宣布辞职,白宫表示她将转投私营部门。此前数月,她一直面临多项投诉,并据报道正接受劳工部监察长办公室针对其工作场所不当行为的内部调查。指控包括在工作时间饮酒、利用政府资源进行私人旅行,以及其丈夫肖恩·德雷默被指控对女性员工不当触摸。查韦斯-德雷默否认所有不当行为,并表示为推动川普总统的劳工议程感到自豪。副部长基思·松德林将担任代理部长。此次辞职是川普行政当局近期第三位女性内阁成员的离职。

2026年4月21日
U.S.

油价再次飙升:川普称美军扣押伊朗船只,霍尔木兹海峡局势升级

全球油价今天再次大幅上涨,此前美国总统川普宣布美国海军拦截并扣押了一艘伊朗船只。布伦特原油价格飙升5%,达到每桶约95美元。此举发生之际,伊朗就霍尔木兹海峡的开放与关闭立场反复,加剧了国际社会对这一关键航道能源供应的担忧。尽管美国副总统JD Vance将率团前往巴基斯坦谈判,伊朗国家媒体却称德黑兰暂无计划参与。市场对地缘政治言论的反复感到疲劳,更关注实际行动,同时全球多国正面临能源危机带来的具体影响。

2026年4月20日