Should summer programs go race-blind?

For the Supreme Court, the summer was about race. In the humid heat of late June, the justices ruled that affirmative action was constitutional. Sort of. Racial preferences are one of the few subjects that still get the American public riled up, so the decision could not be a clear yes or no to the University of Michigan's affirmative action programs and the many others they resemble. The Court hedged its bets, saying that preferences are permissible but quotas are not. Some of the Justices looked forward to the day when affirmative action would no longer be necessary while proclaiming the value of diversity on a college campus. Advocates on both sides of the issue went home unsure who was victorious.

While the Supreme Court issued proclamations on leveling the playing field, the vision of equal opportunity was playing out here on campus. The Princeton University Preparatory Program draws honor roll students whose families earn below the state median income from local high schools in Ewing, Princeton, and Trenton. The Daily Princetonian's Summer Journalism Pro-gram invites minority high school students to campus for a week to learn about the production of a daily newspaper. Both programs emphasize college admission as a goal for their students.

Many of us at Princeton were handed opportunity at birth. Our parents attended Ivy League schools. Our families could afford to send us to expensive summer enrichment programs. Our high schools had well connected guidance counselors who knew us by name. We are lucky. These opportunities are much harder to come by for students from minority backgrounds or from families who don't have the money for private schools, college counselors, or summer programs. That the University and The Daily Princetonian summer program have undertaken to provide them is not only admirable but a true example of Princeton serving the nation.

Because the PUPP program selects its students based upon high school achievement and family income, it was unaffected by the Court's decision on race-based affirmative action. The 'Prince' program, however, will revamp its criteria next year, making socioeconomic disadvantage, rather than race, a prerequisite. The program's maneuvering to accommodate the University and the Court exposes the problems inherent in the rejection of race-based affirmative action. The 'Prince' designed its summer journalism seminar to increase the diversity of college newspaper staffs, including its own. Certainly there is value in having people of all backgrounds in the newsroom and on the editorial page — not only poor, rich and middle class, but white, Hispanic, African-American and Asian. I am a white woman from an upper-class suburban family. What I write about inner city education reform, campus segregation, racial discrimination, or affirmative action is different than what someone of a different race, gender, or economic status would write. On a campus so devoted to discourse and discussion, we must recognize the value in hearing many different perspectives. What is so discriminatory about saying that minority students should be encouraged to make their voices heard?

The second irony inherent in the Prince's shift to economically based selection is that race and economics are so tied up in one another. The politically correct take on affirmative action in the last few years has been to advocate that universities shift to a system of socioeconomic preferences. Eager not to offend anyone, advocates of such a program manage to argue on behalf of the disadvantaged while still avoiding helping out the wealthy black kids from Beverly Hills one might believe were flooding applicant pools if one listened to those who oppose affirmative action. Unfortunately, minorities are a disproportionate segment of the low-income population in this country. One might even suggest that it has something to do with ongoing discrimination and a perpetual cycle of poverty, a cycle that might be broken by giving these students a leg up, perhaps in the form of a summer on an Ivy League campus under the tutelage of undergraduate journalists or talented teaching assistants.

Every one of us who calls Princeton our home is privileged to be here. We have an obligation to extend those privileges to those who would not find them on their own. The founders of PUPP and the 'Prince's' summer journalism program deserve to be commended for their work. They will continue to provide students with opportunities to visit Princeton, learn about college, and plan for the future, regardless of what criteria they are told they can and cannot use. The lesson they teach all of us is valuable. While we debate who should receive what advantages and when, they are taking action. When it comes down to ending inequality in America, action is what we need.

Katherine Reilly is a Wilson School major from Short Hills, N.J.