Last Monday, 80-20 EF urged you to forward "UGLY facts on discrimination against Asian American youth" to your best friends, regardless of race.
S. B. Woo has always done himself whatever he has urged you to do. So he forwarded the powerful data to 2 US senators, 2 governors, 2 retired generals, 2 retired admirals, 3 chiefs of staff for US senators, many mainstream reporters and a lot of other VIPs.
He asked them to read it and just tuck the shocking but true information somewhere in their cognitive system. He also told them that the info contained in the "UGLY facts" has never been disputed by anyone, not even by the Ivy League college presidents who have acknowledged receiving the "UGLY facts."
Reaping the Fruits of One's Hard Work
He was surprised to receive many replies, including the following:
1) From U.S. Senator Tom Carper of Delaware:
"Hi, S.B. It's getting late, and I'll be rising at 5am in order to catch a 6:25am
train to DC tomorrow morning. I have not had time to review carefully the information that you've sent me tonight. I'll try to take a closer look at it in
the morning on the train and, then, discuss it with my senior staff in the
morning once I've arrived in the Hart Building. Once we've had a chance
to drill down on this information, we'll be back in touch later this month.
My very best to you and Katy! Take care. tom" (Emphasis added)
2) From a retired general (name withheld by S. B. since the general is not a
public person any more and he was replying to S. B. as a friend, not to EF.)
"My observations of Asians in America are that they do exceptionally well in
the managerial, technical, military and educational fields of endeavor. I
cannot comment on the statistics in your note. ..... Tucked it away, I did, in
(what is left of) my memory. As always, SB, I appreciate your
thoughtfulness." (The 2nd emphasis was added)
3) From a retired admiral (name withheld by S. B. for the same reasons)
The admiral even had a question about our data: "On the medical school
acceptance, I noted that the GPAs stopped at 3.8. .... (A Medical professor)
"told me that medical school acceptance criteria started at 3.6 and only
rarely accepted anyone below a 3.6 GPA. It would be interesting to
examine the data for Asian-American students with GPAs 3.8 and above."
My reply to the Admiral: " .... The following information will fill out the gaps
your pointed out to me. As it turns out, the new data do not change the big
picture - Asian Ams, a historically disadvantaged minority, have lower
acceptance % than whites, except in two areas shown in green.
(red letters indicate New categories. Numerals in green show Asian
acceptance rates higher than those of whites, only by decimal points.)
US MEDICAL SCHOOL ACCEPTANCE RATE (2013- 2016) BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP, FOR MCAT SCORES 24-45
AND GPAS 3.8-4.5
Did you do your share by forwarding the "UGLY facts" to let
"The World know"? If you did not, do it now.
We are deeply grateful to all who have done your share to help our children gain equal opportunity.
PS: Want to watch "SMALL Enough To Jail" by PBS? I recommend it. Click on
http://www.pbs.org/video/abacus-small-enough-to-jail-1f2gro/ . We salute the courageous Sung Family forwinning one for us. Was the incident caused by racism? Partly. But another reason is that we are SMALL and weak. Most human beings "accommodate the strong and step on the weak." We as a community are sooooo weak. That is how 80-20 is different. 80-20 tries very hard to help make ALL OF US strong!
Public scrutiny is a very powerful weapon against injustice. 80-20's "Ugly facts on discrimination against Asian Am youth", shown below, has very powerful data. Let's put the two weapons together to obtain the explosive desired result -- a level playing field for AsAm children. Note: our data in "UGLY facts ..." have not been disputed by anyone, including the presidents of the Ivy League colleges.
Forward this shocking but true information to your best friends, regardless of race.
If you don't, don't ever come to 80-20 to complain about discrimination against your kids again.
80-20 EF President who volunteered for the last 19 years
The most complete documentation of UGLY discrimination against Asian American youth
Here is a complete account of the ugly discrimination against AsAm youngsters by elite colleges, including a number of NEW discoveries. These colleges are using the nobility of diversity as a cover to give an illegal advantage to white applicants over AsAms, thereby imposing an illegal quota on the number of AsAm students admitted. Read item 2) carefully.
1) DISCRIMINATION at the Graduate School Entrance Level:
The following table is published by the Am. Assoc. of Medical Colleges (AAMC). The info in the first 10 columns shows that the acceptance rate for AsAm applicants is always the lowest in 9 different combinations of comparable MCAT score & GPA, lower even than their white peers. The info. in the last 2 columns on the right show that the average AsAm MCATs score is the HIGHEST among all races, and yet they are accepted at the LOWEST rates among all races. Outrageous!
The bar chart below, based on the info shown in the above table, illustrates theglaring differences in admission rates.
The desire for diversity and the intent of the Affirmative Action Program causes the higher acceptance rate of Hispanic & Black applicants with comparable academic achievements, which most AsAms understand and embrace. However, why are AsAms given a lower acceptance rate than white peers? Isn't that the REVERSE of Affirmative Action?
2) DISCRIMINATION at the College Entrance Level:
In Table 3.5 on p 92 of Princeton Prof. Espenshade's famous book, "No Longer Separate, Not Yet Equal", the following shocking fact was revealed:
Table 3.5 (emphasis added) Race Admission Preferences at Public & Private Institutions
Measured in ACT & SAT Points, Fall 1997
---------------------------------------------------- Public Institutions Private Institutions ACT-Point Equivalents SAT-Point Equivalents Item (out of 36) (out of 1600) ------------------------------------------------------------------- Race
(White) -- -- Black 3.8 310 Hispanics 0.3 130 Asian -3.4 -140
For the sake of diversity, we do embrace the idea of granting extra points to the ACT & SAT scores of blacks and Hispanics -- we would add even more, if needed. However, why are 140 SAT pts.taken awayfrom AsAm applicants? To give the white applicants an advantage of 140 SAT pts. over the historically disadvantaged AsAms by using the nobility of diversity as a cover? This is the reverse of affirmative action. This is a gross abuse of affirmation action. This is outrageous discrimination.
We estimate that the AsAm admits into the Ivy Leagues colleges would be about 25%, not 18%, if AsAms were not deceitfully forced to yield 140 pts to whites.
3) DISCRIMINATION - a cabal to impose ILLEGAL quota on AsAms?
The black dotted line shows that the number of college aged AsAms in our population has approximately doubled over a recent 20 year period. The red solid line indicates the % of AsAm students at the California Institute of Technology where "race preference" admission is not permitted, tracks that increase.
In strong contrast, the Ivy League colleges converge to 16% +/- 3% AsAms students.. It smells of an Ivy League cabal against AsAm students.
4) Cowardly DISCRIMINATION against the weak & disorganized:
Some may say AsAms are only 6% of the national population, 16 +/- 3% is already too many. Really? Are they advocating a quota, which the Supreme Court ruled as illegal? America's ideal is meritocracy.
Jewish Americans comprise only 2% of the national population. Look at the % of their youngsters in the Ivies, as reported by The Jerusalem Post in 2015.
Yale: 27% (1,500 Jewish undergrads out of 5,477 total),
Harvard: 25% (1,675 out of 6,694 undergrads),
Cornell: 21% (3000 out of 14315), and
Columbia: 35% (3000 out of 8,613).
Further internet research reveals the following:
Penn: 25% Princeton, Dartmouth and Brown: 13% to 20%
It is a testament to America's decency that discrimination against the Jews has stopped. Nevertheless, the Ivies' discrimination against the weak and unorganized AsAms is cowardly.
5) Harvard's "Holistic Evaluation" is a Charade. The White House Commi-
ssion on Presidential Scholars tells annually that AsAms are not Nerdy:
Harvard has never defined its "holistic evaluation." It fought tooth and nail to
keep its admissions records secret. What is Harvard afraid of? How about
practicing the transparency, which Harvard preaches to its students and the
rest of the nation so frequently?
Fortunately, another group also performs a holistic evaluation of high school graduates annually. The esteemed "White House Commission on Presidential Scholars" evaluates all high school graduates "on academic
achievement, personal characteristics, leadership, service, and other
extracurricular activities, and an analysis of their essays."
The Presidential Scholars Award Program, where clearly defined holistic evaluation is used, has named AsAms to 28% of their finalists spots
averaged over the last 15 years. Over that same period, AsAms have made
up only 18% of Harvard's admissions.
Shame on you, Harvard. Your holistic evaluation is a charade in order to
place a quota on AsAm students, just as you did against Jewish students decades ago.
6) 3 Supreme Court Justices also saw DISCRIMINATION:
Supreme Court Justices J. Alito, John Roberts and Clarence Thomas stated in their dissent, issued on June 23, 2016 (pp 22 -27):
"... discriminates against Asian American students...including racial discrimination that undeniably harms Asian Ams ... the court's willingness to allow this discrimination against individuals of Asian descent is particularly troubling, in light of the long history of discrimination against Asian Americans, especially in education ... In particular, the Fifth Circuit's willful blindness to Asian-American students is absolutely shameless." (emphasis added)
7) How 80-20 EF Sees Things:
On Ivy League colleges: These institutions are superior in numerous ways. However, they have committed discrimination against AsAm students, and have practiced hypocrisy and deceitfulness with their decision to favor white students over their AsAm peers. It is a very shortsighted policy, possibly induced by racism and self-conceit. History will not be kind to the presidents of these colleges, who participated in this apparent cabal.
On AsAm community: Our community is definitely at fault as well. We have the average educational level and financial strength to understand the seriousness of this discrimination against our children. We have the generational responsibility to urgently put our assets together to fight against it. But we have not been able to get our act together yet.
History will not be kind to us, and will possibly be very harsh on those families who donated tens and hundreds of million dollars to get a Harvard building named after themselves. Those ignorant and vain acts will be seen as marks of shame on those families.
S. B. Woo
President and a volunteer for the past 18 years
80-20 Educational Foundation, Inc, a 501 C-3 organization,
The time was late 2001. Pres. Bush had been elected. Karl Rove was the Senior Advisor to the President. He was the guru to ensure the re-election of Bush and the victory of the Republican Party for decades to come. Elaine Chao was the Labor Secretary in charge of enforcing Exec. Order 11246 - a law with teeth designed to remove the glass ceiling imposed on minorities.
True Story: S. B. Woo tried to induce Sec. Elaine Chao to stand up for AsAms and enforce E.O. 11246, to remove the glass ceiling above us. Sec. Chao, at that time, showed little understanding of the substance of the issue and even less interest. Later, Karl Rove and I corresponded twice. I asked him to induce Elaine Chao to enforce E.O. 11246 for AsAms. In exchange, we'd try to organize a bloc vote in favor of the Republican Party. Rove didn't accept such a deal. Result- the AsAm bloc vote greatly favors the Democrats: Since the Democrats were apparently more willing to cooperate, 80-20 worked hard to produce bigger and bigger bloc votes for those Democratic presidential candidates who gave written promises to 80-20 to help AsAms. Pres. Obama, who tripled the number of life-tenured AsAm federal judges, and doubled the number of AsAm federal workers having the top rank of SES (Senior Executive Service), benefitted greatly from 80-20 organized bloc votes. See below on how AsAms have voted increasingly Democratic owing to 80-20's advocacy. Had Mr. Rove known the severity of punishment on the Republican party, he would have certainly chosen to work with us back in 2001.
Please note the sudden DECREASE in the "Advantages to Dem." column of the above table, every time 80-20 gave the lesser endorsement of "withreservation", as in years 2004 & 2016.
Actually, 80-20 has always advocated a SWING bloc vote. Imagine how much a Dem. presidential candidate would be hurt in 2020, if 80-20 were to endorse a Republican presidential candidate.
What brought up the above stories and these comments?
DOJ revealed that it was going to "investigate one administrative complaint filed by a coalition of 64 Asian American associations in May 2015 that the prior administration left unresolved".
Democratic Sen. Diane Feinstein of CA led a group of 4 other Democratic Congressional delegates to write to A.G. Sessions and DoED Sec. DeVos expressing displeasure about the news of this investigation.
80-20 is most upset by the persistent disregard of the Democratic Party and its elected or appointed officials to discrimination against Asian Am. applicants to Ivy League colleges. We have begun to communicate our frustration to DNC and Democratic officials.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presidents of Yale, & Harvard replied to 80-20's "UGLY facts .."
Neither of their replies disputed the facts contained in 80-20's "UGLY facts on discrimination against Asian American youth". If you have not read it yet, you really should. Click on http://conta.cc/2ikdKIe . Have you sent your 2 letters to your local media outlets yet? You can't love 80-20's political clout without putting in your share of the work.
S. B. Woo
President and a volunteer for the past 18 years
80-20 Educational Foundation, Inc, a 501 C-3 organization,
Retrospectively, the NYT's editors learned that the article could easily be the most laughed at analysis ever. It had 747 comments. 3 out of 4 comments panned the article severely. Go take a look at those comments. At the article, go to the upper extreme right corner and click on 747. Go to the "Reader's Picks" category to read how ordinary Americans feel.
The tide has definitely turned in our favor. The American public speaks out strongly against discrimination against AsAms students.
80-20 again played a key role. One of the 80-20 PAC Board members, Ved Chaudhary, submitted a comment to NYT. His comment was selected by NYT as one of 26 in the "NYT Picks" category. However, in complete contrast to the view of ordinary citizens, NYT picked mostly "politically correct" comments. Ved's comment garnered 106 recommends.
This is such a shallow/simplistic analysis of a very complex social problem. It does not even touch on the reasons why (and how) the top universities are (and will continue to remain) top universities.
It disregards the basic underlying fact that the Ivys are like the Olympics of the academic world. Is NYT going to do a racial analysis of athletes selected for the Olympics? Does it make sense to do that. Will Olympics still be Olympics if they took diversity/equal representation as objective? The analysis of admissions at Top Universities makes just as much (or as little) sense. Selection should be based on objective performance whether it is Olympics or the Top universities. Only then will they continue to foster the highest human achievement in a field where aptitude coupled with long term sustained high quality training, practice, and ambition to excel are required. Some ethnic groups take interest in professions (STEM, law, medicine); their children do well in preparing for those fields. Whats wrong with that? Why shouldn't they get admission based on merit and aptitude rather than be restricted by their race? What is race? Asian American is NOT A RACE. These people who came from 18 countries of South Asia, East Asia, South-east Asia and pacific islands, have such diversity of skin color, languages, foods/cuisine, faith/religions, social customs and socio-economic background that there is more diversity presented by Asian Americans than all other races combined.
Other 80-20 Board and staff members also made commends, including Jing-Li Yu, Pete Mauk and S. B. Woo. Some of those comments also garnered more than 50 recommends. NOTE how 80-20 has always reached out into the national political arena and played a vital role on issues impacting Asian Americans!
The most popular comment was apparently also submitted by an AsAm. See below for the comment submitted by Avi. We are proud of Avi. His comment garnered 423 recommends!
"Avi Texas August 24, 2017
How about a few charts for the professional sports, which races are vastly under represented?
Colleges entrance should be based on merit, considering socioeconomic hardship - this I absolutely agree. But not based on skin color, please.
And why are Hispanics, who have never been enslaved in this country, covered by Affirmative Action? While Asians (esp. Chinese and Japanese), who had been enslaved and locked up in camps, not covered by Affirmative Action? The stance the Times take on this issue is indefensible.
Put Your Shoulder On the Wheel!
See how the tide has turned in our favor since the publication of 80-20's