Liberals are tirelessly spinning the facts surrounding the University of Texas admissions policy guidelines. Once again minority activists are demanding that the U.S. Supreme Court uphold as constitutional the Texas University System’s race preferences for student admissions. When it comes to higher education some people will say anything to get ahead on the line.
As a Texas father with children a few short years away from college, I am befuddled at the left’s cheap attack on an outstanding white female student’s fight for equal educational opportunities. Opportunities she earned and was denied by the politically charged and racially skewed admissions policies at the University of Texas. Apparently, if you’re white you start from the bottom of the application pile in a racially diverse Texas University system. The problem is Texas policies are a lie.
The logic of using racial preferences to achieve diversity has always escaped me; since I believe the most qualified applicant should always be chosen regardless of race or sex. The United States de-segregated education over half a century ago and disadvantaged students need to suck it up and earn their opportunities in the 21st century. Clearly if diversity was a fair requirement in American we wouldn’t have all Black Universities and a Black Congressional Caucus. So let’s set all the bleeding heart crap aside and look at the facts of the Texas case.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau Texas population by race is:
In 1996 a Texas law was created guaranteeing any High School student graduating in the top 10% of their high school class a spot in the Texas University System. No preferences are given to students who take tougher A/P courses. In other words academically superior students have to compete with classmates taking easier courses for a spot in the Texas University System. In order to achieve a goal of improved racial diversity the Texas University System began (in 2004) giving preferential consideration to minority applicants over non-Hispanic whites.
A non-Hispanic white female applicant (all A/P courses) was denied admission to the University of Texas because her A/P course grades were not as good as non-A/P minority student. Sounds unreasonable to me; especially when you consider that Black, Hispanic and other races are given raced based preferential admission over academically superior A/P white applicants at all levels.
Now unless I’m a complete idiot the University of Texas like most Texas schools have predominantly minority populations when whites are compared with other ethnicities combined as one group. After all you can’t have more whites then are represented by population statistics. So in fact, white applicants are a minority in Texas and should be given racial preference; unless of course you consider that more whites graduate in the top ten percent of their class then minority students then whole majority/minority thing gets racially convoluted.
This isn’t a race thing in Texas it’s an illegal alien thing; let me explain. Our Governor Rick Perry (we call him Governor Good Hair) a so called conservative Republican gave in state tuition rights to illegal immigrants some years ago. In state tuition is less than half the cost of out of state tuition. Currently an illegal alien living in Texas is now eligible to receive cheaper tuition then a black kid from Mississippi who attends a Texas University. Can anybody say “Hispanic vote”?
Apparently Civil rights legislation, access to a free public education, desegregation, social welfare and executive amnesty didn’t resolve our nation’s inequality issues for the minority community. Affirmative-action policies have always been wrongly designed to help struggling races gain advantages in education and employment historically monopolized by the majority white population. However, the shoe seems to be on the other foot now, so how is it then that a U.S. Census Bureau’s documented minority white population in Texas is being passed over in favor of lesser qualified Blacks and Hispanics?
Like many of you I will be watching the Supreme Court closely on this one. No telling what obscure interpretation we can expect from Chief Justice John Roberts.