During the past two weeks our hypothetical Chief Executives (you) had to make a decision concerning the future of affirmative action. The options presented were the following:

Option A: Endorse the California Initiative to End Affirmative Action. The Civil-Rights Act of 1964 enacted into law the principle of a colorblind society. Affirmative action goes against that principle. Affirmative action has little effect on the people who need it most -- those who live in the inner-city -- and worsens the racial climate on campuses and in workplaces by fostering the idea that minorities aren't fully qualified to be there.

Option B: Strongly Oppose the Initiative to End Affirmative Action. Abolishing affirmative action would cause a massive and immediate drop in the black presence at universities, in the military, and in the civil service. Even those institutions that don't discriminate would be forced to select and promote people on the basis of test scores, in which there are still enormous racial gaps in performance. Unless you think that minorities and whites have equal opportunity, you can't end affirmative action.

Option C: Mend It, Don't End It. Jettison set-aside program, which reserve a fixed percentage of government business for women and minorities, but preserve affirmative action in university admissions and support the general principle of encouraging positive efforts at minority recruitment and training.

The Results

Option A: 46%
Option B: 20%
Option C: 35%

Respondents who chose Option A felt strongly that reverse discrimination is just as wrong as regular discrimination. Many said that we should be helping all people instead of giving preferential treatment to particular to races and genders, and some argued that affirmative action stigmatizes those it's trying to help. Others argued that the program lowers everyone's standards.

Those who supported Option B believed that while affirmative action may not be needed in future, it is still a necessity now, at a time of downsizing, shrinking wages, and large economic and educational disparities. Others argued that the program serves to level the playing field, rather than just meet a quota.

Supporters of Option C felt that affirmative action would be more fair if it were modified to cover only those in a low socioeconomic class. Many agreed that it's the government's job to do something about injustice, but that affirmative action should be enforced as was originally intended -- only organizations that have practiced discrimination in the past should have to fill quotas. Finally, some felt that this issue is not one that should be discussed during the presidential campaign, lest it be drained of substance by the electoral process.

Party Lines

Option	Democrats	Republicans	Independents	Other	Unregistered
Option A	4%	24%	9%	5%	2%
Option B	13%	2%	2%	1%	1%
Option C	20%	3%	6%	3%	1%

Party and Significance

Significance	Democrats	Republicans	Independents	Other	Unregistered
Completely Irrelevant	1%	0%	0%	0%	0%
Not Very Important	13%	6%	3%	3%	1%
Fairly Important	18%	10%	9%	5%	2%
Very Important	10%	12%	5%	2%	1%

The Significance of the Issue

Issue	Most Significant	Very Important	Fairly Important	Not Very Important	Completely Irrelevant
Affirmative Action	1%	31%	44%	22%	2%
Abortion	9%	39%	26%	22%	4%
Drugs	2%	38%	39%	17%	1%
Cuba	0%	5%	28%	63%	3%
Welfare	5%	53%	36%	5%	1%
Balancing the Budget	17%	49%	21%	9%	3%
Tobacco Regulation	0%	10%	28%	43%	15%
Trade Policy	6%	35%	45%	13%	0%
Campaign-Finance Reform	9%	41%	27%	20%	4%
Health-Care Reform	4%	39%	41%	13%	2%
Entitlement Reform	12%	56%	27%	4%	2%
Immigration Reform	2%	32%	50%	15%	1%

Age

Age Range	Option A	Option B	Option C
Under 18	2%	1%	2%
18-34	15%	6%	19%
35-44	9%	3%	5%
45-54	9%	4%	3%
Over 55	6%	5%	3%

Race and Gender. There were too few non-white respondents to present a good statistical analysis of whether responses differed among the races. Women made up 23% of respondents to this scenario.

Gender	Option A	Option B	Option B
Female	11%	3%	9%
Male	31%	16%	25%

Gender and Significance

Significance	Females	Males
Completely Irrelevant	0%	1%
Not Very Important	4%	17%
Fairly Important	13%	29%
Very Important	6%	24%

Click here to return to the Executive Decision index page.