quote:The Proactive Recruitment of Multicultural Professionals for Tomorrow fellowships and the Bridge to the Doctorate fellowships are aimed at increasing enrollment of minorities in graduate programs where they are underrepresented. The Proactive program, begun in 2000, has aided 78 students, while the Bridge program, begun last year, has aided 24 students.
A third program, the Graduate Dean's fellowships, are for women and minorities who have overcome adverse social, cultural or economic conditions. It was started in 2000 and has aided 27 students.
My question is why is our Justice Department pursuing this? The article doesn't say who filed a complaint (if anyone) or who has been harmed by these programs. The school countered by asking for a meeting with the Justice Department, implying, I think, that the JD hasn't even talked with the school's administration before threatening them with a lawsuit.
The school also said that they have many other scholarships open to everyone.
I hope someone can post further info on this -- I'd really like to hear some background and reasons for the Justice Department's role here.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
by the way, I found this paragraph particularly Orwellian:
quote:The graduate scholarships, or fellowships, violate Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, the department said. The letter said Justice's civil rights division will sue SIU if it does not discontinue the programs by next Friday.
I'm trying to remain non-snarky (despite the Orwell reference) until more information is posted about this (at which point I may become very snarky), but I wanted to state that this kind of set me off. It just had me thinking about how twisted the civil rights act of 1964 must now be when it can be used to eliminate scholarships for those whose rights were finally recognized under that act.
miniJustice?
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Hmm...how I feel is determined by whether or not these scholarships are funded by private funds or public funds.
If they are private funds, I think anybody should be able to establish whatever criteria they wish for their scholarship. If I want to set up a scholarship fund and say the only people eligible are females born in St. Clair County with red hair, who are members of a Presbyterian church and a love of fantasy fiction then I should be able to do that - it's my money.
But public funded scholarship opportunities should be merit based or based on financial need without regard to gender or race or religious background.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
*nods* I can see the point of that, Belle.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
(How about changing that third scholarship to be for anyone who has overcome adverse conditions?)
Posted by lord trousers (Member # 8741) on :
The scholarship is created by Southern Illinois University Carbondale (SIUC):
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: by the way, I found this paragraph particularly Orwellian:
Orwellian because you disagreed?
quote:It just had me thinking about how twisted the civil rights act of 1964 must now be when it can be used to eliminate scholarships for those whose rights were finally recognized under that act.
Did the Civil Rights Act of 1964 confer race privileges?
There's room for argument on whether currently disadvantaged races ought to be helped up to compete. Yes, it would be discrimination - but you could argue that it's justified. Don't go saying the Civil Rights Act confers race privileges and prescribes discrimination, though.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Actually, there's a nondiscriminatory reasoning for supporting participation of minorities in certain fields, particularly law and medicine. In both of those cases, comfort is important -- comfort with one's lawyer or doctor. One problem that has been perceived is sometimes poor minority populations are less comfortable with doctors and lawyers who are white. This is a non-discriminatory reason for supporting sufficient minority doctors and lawyers (and quite possibly other professionals, such as psychologists) so that comfort can be maintained.
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
quote:Originally posted by Belle: If they are private funds, I think anybody should be able to establish whatever criteria they wish for their scholarship.
But public funded scholarship opportunities should be merit based or based on financial need without regard to gender or race or religious background.
Totally agree with Belle here. If it's a private scholarship, they should be able to hold whatever criteria they want for giving it out. It's public though, there shouldn't be any favoritism towards any particular race, gender, religion, whatever. It should be either merit-based or financially-based.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:There's room for argument on whether currently disadvantaged races ought to be helped up to compete. Yes, it would be discrimination - but you could argue that it's justified. Don't go saying the Civil Rights Act confers race privileges and prescribes discrimination, though.
I didn't think I had. You seem to be reading more than what I wrote. But then, I sort of expected that when I decided to point out that using the civil rights act of 1964 to END a scholarship for minorities seems Orwellian. I understand that the aim of the law was equal rights. It also pretty well understood that the people who didn't have equal rights back in 1964 WERE the minority folks. Hence my sense of bitter irony over using that law to end a scholarship for minority students under-represented in some fields or at a particular institution.
Hey, I know all about reverse discrimination and the argument that equal rights means equal for everyone.
What I preliminarily object to is in an era when I think one wouldn't have to look too hard to find continuing discriminatory practices AGAINST minorities everywhere in this country, that our Justice Department is aparently pursuing this tiny thing. I mean, really, I don't hear much about our Justice Department going after gender or race bias in housing or hiring. It could just be that this made news and their other major efforts did not. But I'd sure like to know that my tax dollars aren't being spent to ferret out unfair scholarships that helped out a few minority students over the past 5 years or so when there are bigger and far more important things to worry about, and when the baseline racism and sexism in this country is still skewed in the direction of screwing over the minorities and women.
But hey, I'm not happy if public dollars are being used in a way that doesn't reward merit either. Maybe we should start by examining Bush appointments to Justice Department...
Or FEMA...
Or the Department of Education...
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Having an ethnically diverse pool of doctors, lawyers, professors, and businessmen is good public policy, just like having a diverse economy is good public policy. I support the use of public funds going to these fellowships. The same is said for any funding out there to entice women to pursue these fields.
These scholarships are only partly about the individual getting the money, the other part concerns changing the face-- and possibly the substance-- of these disciplines, and extending those changes into the community. It may appear that I'm merely home-teaming, and there is nothing I can say that'll change anyone's opinion out there if that's what they believe, but I believe that I'm being fair this is just good policy. The whole idea that everything can be reduced cleanly to some metric of "merit" is preposterous, and it leads to all sorts of inappropriate tests, and I'm talking about an entire gamut of standardized tests sweeping the nation in the name of merit.
That said, I fully believe that Hatrack should give me a stipend for being black, sticking around and adding my two cents, which given my race and the perspective my race affords, is worth more than 2 cents from another cubicle-dwelling LDS hatracker. *leans back and waits for the flames*
Since I am generous and OSC picks up the tab for the whole forum, I'll continue to participate and just consider it my civic duty. Carry on.
[ November 12, 2005, 11:17 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by RoyHobbs (Member # 7594) on :
Nice and snarky there Bob... Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Since I am generous and OSC picks up the tab for the whole forum, I'll continue to participate and just consider it my civic duty. Carry on.
Too bad about that..
Actually, I could usually just post ANY sort of racial argument and simply change the races around, Irami, and usually get the same effect of reading one of your posts.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)