CATHERINE JUN/Daily Bruin Regent Ward
Connerly, who spearheaded SP-1 and 2 to ban affirmative
action in the UC system, voted for their repeal Wednesday.
By Shauna Mecartea and Kelly
Rayburn
Daily Bruin Reporters
The item that passed Wednesday at the UC Board of Regents
meeting was the result of a long and arduous process.
Regents worked around the clock this past week trying to come up
with an item that would pass by a significant majority.
“I haven’t slept for three days,” said Student
Regent Justin Fong at the meeting. “Amendments were made
through the night until today.”
But the process began before that. Since the passage of SP-1 and
2, which ended the use of affirmative action in the UC system in
1995, students, faculty, politicians and others have demanded that
the regents add the measures to the agenda for a revote.
At UCLA, protests against the regents’ only two
“standing policies” included one in 1995 of 3,000 that
flowed into Westwood, one in 1998 that got 89 students arrested and
one this March that included 1,000 people.
After six years, the original wording of item RE-28 upset many
long-time activists and some regents, even though it was designed
to resolve the future admissions policies and clear the UC’s
reputation of not being a welcoming institution to minorities.
Fong announced last week that he planned to propose a substitute
motion, claiming that RE-28 failed to comply with the demands of
students and faculty members.
“We need a full repeal of SP-1 and 2,” Fong said
last week.
Fong’s proposal stated that “the Board of Regents
rescinds Regents’ Policy SP-1 and SP-2,” while the
language in the first public draft of RE-28 called for the
“replacement” of SP-1 and 2, and then later read
“supersede.”
Both complied with Proposition 209, the 1996 state voter
initiative that ended the use of affirmative action for all
state-funded entities.
At the time, other regents said Fong’s proposal was
redundant.
“Supersede means the same thing as rescind,” said
Regent William Bagley, a long-time opponent of SP-1 and 2.
Regent Ward Connerly, who spearheaded the end of affirmative
action with SP-1 and 2 and Proposition 209, said that RE-28 was
revised “to do what is best for the University of
California.”
“For several weeks (Regent Judith) Hopkinson and I
exchanged versions of what would become RE-28 to have it pass with
a majority,” Bagley continued.
Other regents said they realized that since the repeal would
mostly be symbolic, because Proposition 209 supersedes SP-1 and 2,
the regents should do their best to comply with what California
wants.
“How we said it created the symbolism,” Hopkinson
said. “When I redrafted that resolution I did that with that
in mind.”
The regents were pressured by Fong, student activists and by
California state legislators, who passed ACR-21, a resolution that
requested that the regents repeal SP-1 and 2.
Since RE-28 was reworded to state “repeal” instead
of “replace” or “supersede,” Fong said he
decided to not propose his substitute motion.
“I was satisfied with the language and it contained the
principles which I desired so I decided not to present the
motion,” Fong said. “The end result is what
counted.”
But Connerly said it didn’t really matter to him whether
the item said “supersede” or “rescind.”
“I would have never voted on an item that would in any way
ever bring back preferential treatment on the basis of race to UC
admissions,” Connerly said.
Fong said the unanimous vote will encourage more minorities to
apply and was content ““ though exhausted ““ after the
item’s passage.
“I just want to sleep now,” he said.