Reno discusses affirmative action and social equality with grad students

By Lissa Harris

This June, the Supreme Court is expected to rule in two lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the University of Michigan's use of race in admission decisions. The fate of affirmative action policies at universities across the country may hinge on the outcome.

Janet Reno says she hopes the court will see the merits of Michigan's case. But while university affirmative action policies lie at the heart of the legal and cultural debate that has now reached the nation's highest court, the former U.S. attorney general argues that they are only a small part of what is needed to bring about racial equality in American society.

During her visit to campus as a Frank H.T. Rhodes Class of '56 University Professor, Reno held a conversation Jan. 10 in Sibley Hall's Hartell Gallery with a small group of graduate students on the topic of affirmative action. In the discussion, Reno argued that before social equality can be achieved, affirmative action -- including affirmative action based on socioeconomic status -- would need to be implemented in many sectors of society.

She spoke forthrightly about the need for policies that work to level the playing field between the races at all educational levels, not just the university level.

"How are we going to be able to build a strong nation if we are not operating on all four cylinders?" she said. "We're not going to be able to do it, unless we develop an affirmative action system throughout the educational system."

Reno contends that if used properly, affirmative action policies benefit not only the recipients, but society as a whole. Taking applicants' backgrounds into account, not solely their test scores or resumes, allows businesses and universities to reap the benefits of a broader wealth of human experience. Reno said that the business world, recognizing the economic value of work force diversity, has been largely supportive of affirmative action in the workplace and in higher education.

"Corporations are probably more in tune than a lot of government agencies," she said. "Corporate interests are perhaps some of the largest supporters of affirmative action policies, because they understand that with affirmative action comes a work force that looks like America."

Sara Townsley, a graduate student in biochemistry, molecular and cell biology who took part in the discussion, is critical of affirmative action on the basis of race. The topic strikes home to her: Townsley, a former military prosecutor, was denied admission to the University of Michigan's law school, and she believes that she would have been admitted but for the university's affirmative action policy.

"Martin Luther King's goal was for us all to be judged, not by the color of our skins, but by the content of our character," she said. "That's what the 14th Amendment says. The color of our skins should not be taken into account."

Ralph Christy, J.T. Clark Professor in applied economics and management, has a different perspective. Christy spoke at the event about his efforts to bring business leaders to the Cornell campus to discuss workplace diversity and affirmative action. He sees affirmative action as a way to begin to address racial inequities brought about by a long history of racism in American social institutions: "Racial preferences are nothing new. Affirmative action has been in place for 30 years. Racial preferences have been in place for 400 years. So for 30 years, racial preferences have benefited the minority. But for the past 400, they have benefited someone else."

Michael Garcia, a graduate student in English, was glad to see the issue debated openly at Cornell. "This is the first time I've seen two opposing points of view on the topic on campus," he said. "I think it's wonderful."