The Michigan one was written by the same people to get around the loopholes that the California one had. It says implicitly: "No public institution shall use race, gender, ethnicity, or anything else in consideration of personnel to acceptance." or something like that. This would pretty much destroy the Supreme Court decision that upheld todays iteration of affirmative action.jgkspsx said:If it's any consolation, Ward Connerly's bill in CA was basically abandoned by higher ed institutions very quickly. I think by this point it's not really in force anymore -- the governmental and education entities affected found many loopholes.
You don't think that income-based admissions multipliers, or admission multipliers based on school district (i.e. a good student from a crappy district would get an advantage over a better student from a very good district) would be an effective replacement, anyway? I don't want it to pass, but I don't know how much of an effect it will have if it does.
And there's no way people can say they understand AA and agree with getting rid of it, unless they don't think minorities deserve extra help. The people I see by and large who oppose AA are the people who go around saying that racism doesn't exist anymore, but they ignore that it's been around so long that ti's completely institutionalized. Ugh.
I need a pizza and some beer... I just know Michigan is gonna elect DeVos.