Inconvenient news

An unpopular truth

[Reprinted from Issues & Views November 26, 2001]

What happens when a university system polls its faculty to learn their opinions on racial preferences and "diversity?" When the opinions conflict with those of the college administration, a bundle of troubles might follow. In "Survey Results Unwelcome," in the Fall 2001 edition of Campus magazine, Marc Levin describes the scene in Connecticut:

The results of a survey asking faculty at public universities in Connecticut about their views on racial preferences has proven difficult, if not impossible, for the University of Connecticut (UConn) administration to handle. The survey in question demonstrates that the majority of faculty at three higher education institutions hold opinions sharply at odds with prevailing campus political orthodoxy--namely, 61% of the faculty at the University of Connecticut, Connecticut State University, and Connecticut community colleges said they were opposed to racial preferences in hiring of faculty and admissions of students.

The survey is widely seen by campus moderates as a devastating political defeat for leftist campus political forces, since the campuses have largely been considered bastions of support for racial preferences. Suddenly, that support is in question.

The survey caused such a backlash that a special task force was charged with investigating and, perhaps, discrediting the survey results. Although the task forced charged with the investigation ultimately fizzled out, its existence alone cast a pall of political correctness on the UConn campus.

The poll was co-sponsored by the National Association of Scholars (NAS), the Center for Equal Opportunity, and Ward Connerly's American Civil Rights Institute. These groups commissioned the UConn Center for Survey Research and Analysis, which frequently conducts opinion polls for outside organizations, to perform the survey. In the past, the Center had conducted polls for liberal groups such as the Media Studies Center and First Amendment Center and had never triggered a protest, let alone an investigation.

NAS President Stephen H. Balch said, "The very fact of an official inquiry, whatever its conclusions, puts the Center for Survey Research and Analysis on effective notice that it can ask 'politically incorrect' questions only at its peril."

The investigation has come to a close, petering out with no action recommended or even a formal report issued. However, observers consider it remarkable that an investigation could even be triggered by a survey that asked straightforward questions in a scientific manner and reported results correctly. The two questions asked in the survey were modeled after Proposition 209, the 1996 California initiative which abolished racial preferences. The questions stated:

"Do you feel that (name of home institution) should or should not grant preference to one candidate over another in faculty employment decisions on the basis of race, sex, or ethnicity?"

"Do you feel that (name of home institution) should or should not grant preference to one applicant over another for student admission on the basis of race, sex, or ethnicity?"

Despite the UConn administration's unprecedented and overwrought response to the results of the NAS poll--in effect, attacking the messenger carrying inconvenient news--the truth is that faculty objection to the racial preferences regime on America's campuses may now be too genuine, too deep, and too contentious for them to ignore.

Copyright © 2008 Issues & Views