American Domestic Policy Pros And Cons

Words: 1846
Pages: 8

The United States of America is commonly referred to as the great “melting pot”, meaning our country’s composition is made up of many different types of people and cultures. Immigrants have poured into this great land for centuries now. Originally, the United States sought to assimilate immigrants in hopes of achieving homogeneity. After countless years under the assimilation strategy, American domestic policy evolved. Washington acknowledged the potential advantages of its citizens possessing different backgrounds, meaning everyone brings different tools to the table. Without diversity, society has the potential to succumb to tunnel vision. When everyone has a similar background, chances are they will think the same; however, outside-the-box …show more content…
Kennedy sought to diversify society within very critical realms: higher education and industry. On March 6, 1961, President Kennedy issued Executive Order No. 10925 reading, “Whereas it is the plain and positive obligation of the United States Government to promote and ensure equal opportunity for all qualified persons, without regard to race, creed, color, or national origin…” (Exec. Order). This system of equality assurance is now commonly referred to as “affirmative action”. Over the past fifty plus years of the plan’s existence, many disputes have been made over the alleged equality behind the implementation of the good-willed policy. Many of the accusations involving inadvertent wrongdoing found their way to the United States Supreme Court, where the justices collectively ruled against certain affirmative action practices. The current and arguably flawed affirmative action system within the United States should be replaced with a more effective system resembling those of various institutions of higher education within Israel in order to ensure diversity is fostered more …show more content…
Under affirmative action policies like that of the University of Michigan, a minority could receive a significant racial boost, placing them higher on the admissions list than a more intelligent student. The Texas 10% plan “did not lead to the admission of ill-prepared students” (Fletcher & Mayer 181). Texas students who graduated within the top 30% of their high school class remained unaffected by the policy change (Niu & Tienda 64). “There is tentative evidence that students who graduate at the top of their high school classes generally perform well in college, even if they attend low-resource high schools, partly because of their strong motivation to excel” (Niu & Tienda 46). Tienda and Niu also found no evidence that students were seeking out-of-state options because of supposed overcrowding at Texas universities (45). A main success of the Texas Top 10% plan is that it targeted various groups by a design dependent on high school economic status. The amount of resources a high school is allocated greatly effects the performance of its students. Because all high schools receive the same treatment under the policy, students from all educational backgrounds receive the same chance at attending college (Niu & Tienda 65). Mark Long even stated that within Florida, diversity was maintained