Eva M. Clayton: “Mr. Chairman, I am in complete opposition to the Riggs amendment that brings affirmative action to a screeching halt in…”

“Mr. Chairman, I am in complete opposition to the Riggs amendment that brings affirmative action to a screeching halt in the admission offices in colleges and universities across this Nation. Although the language of this amendment sounds bland and nonthreatening, nevertheless the intent of this amendment is to end affirmative action, those actions which would overcome past discrimination. The sponsors of this amendment talk about affirmative action as if they are quotas, which is not the case. The goal we are trying to reach is equality of opportunity, not based on race. How can we reach this goal when we fail to give opportunities to women and minorities to overcome past discrimination? I submit, Mr. Chairman, that in order to achieve equality, we must not quit our past endeavors. California and Texas both enacted laws that prohibit universities and colleges from using affirmative action as a legal remedy in cases of discrimination, to use affirmative action to increase campus diversity. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is counterproductive. It puts us further away from the goal we are trying to achieve, equality. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, because discrimination does indeed exist.”