The author concludes that Espenshade and Chung's inattention to the distinction between negative action and affirmative action effectively marginalizes APAs and contributes to a skewed and divisive public discourse about affirmative action, one in which APAs are falsely portrayed as conspicuous adversaries of diversity in higher education. The author will also argue that there is ample reason to be concerned about the harmful effects of divisive and empirically unsupported claims about APAs influencing the public debate over affirmative action, particularly in Michigan, where an anti-affirmative action initiative nearly identical to California's Proposition 209 will appear on the November 2006 ballot. For example, in commenting to the press about Espenshade and Chung's study, Roger Clegg of the Center for Equal Opportunity-a leading advocacy group working to dismantle affirmative Action- cast the issue in starkly (and falsely) divisive terms: "If eliminating race-based admissions results in more Asian students or fewer African American students being admitted to top schools, so be it"
William C. Kidder,
Negative Action Versus Affirmative Action: Asian Pacific Americans are Still Caught in the Crossfire,
Mich. J. Race & L.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjrl/vol11/iss2/7