Comparing Jewish Ams. with Asian Ams (Part II)

   This is part II of "Our Rich & Powerful."

                       Asian Americans Are the New Jews

   Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Daniel Golden called Asians "the new Jews, inheriting the mantle of the most disenfranchised group in college admissions." Golden observed, "Average SAT scores for Asian Americans admitted to the Ivy Leagues are substantially above those for any other group, including whites . . . ."

                       To the Jewish Ams, Charity Begins At Home

   They help themselves. In 2010, the Jewish community spent at least $28 per Jewish Am. to protect their rights and advance their rightful interests. See FOOTNOTE 1.
   In contrast, 80-20 PAC and Educational Foundation can only spend $0.007 per Asian Am. See FOOTNOTE 2.

  Asian American "Rich & Powerful" Don't Help Their Own People

   In 2000, Lulu and Anthony Wang gave $25 million to Wellesley College. In 2002, Charles B. Wang donated $52 million to SUNY. In 2007, Jerry Yang and his wife Akiko Yamazaki pledged $75 million to Stanford. In 2008, Oscar L. Tang gave $25 million to Philips Academy Andover. In 2012, the Chao family, including former Sec. of Labor Elaine Chao, donated $40 million to Harvard Business School. The sum is $217 million over 12 years, averaging $18 million per year. While we appreciate these wonderful individuals' good deeds for our nation, we like to call to their attention the following contrast.
   In comparison, to the best of our knowledge, not a single Asian Am has given more than $3 million to an Asian Am cause in the history of America.

           Asian Ams Are the Most Discriminated Against in the USA

   As the mainstream media have increasingly noted:
      (a) Our children face the tallest barrier in applying to elite colleges, &
      (b) Our adults face the lowest glass ceiling in workplaces.
   God helps those who help themselves. We must help ourselves first. Forward this newsletter to those who ID with us. To comment, click http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/politicaledu/posterboard.asp


Sincerely,

S. B. Woo,
President, 80-20 Educational Foundation (EF)
http://www.80-20EF.org

                                          Announcement

  S. B. Woo will be a panelist and the keynote speaker at Asian Pacific Am. Law Students 2nd Annual Meeting at Columbia University on April 6, 2013 (Sat.), from 2 to 8;30 p.m. AsAm Lawyers are particularly welcome. For details, click http://blogs.law.columbia.edu/apalsaconference/ . For the registration
page, http://blogs.law.columbia.edu/apalsaconference/registration/

   FOOTNOTE 1 - Annual budget of 3 Jewish Am. orgs in 2010

AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee): $67 million. Go
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee#Membership
ADL (Anti-Defamation League): $60 million in 2005, likely more now. Go
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0002_0_01146.html
AJC (American Jewish Committee): $42 million. Go
http://www.guidestar.org/PartnerReport.aspx?partner=justgivews&ein=13-5563393

   FOOTNOTE 2 -- In 2010, annual budget of 80-20 PAC and EF combined is about $100,000.
  

Are our "rich & powerful" doing their share to help? (I)

   "To those whom much is given, much is expected." --
                                                                          John F Kennedy

   Are our "rich & powerful" doing their due shares to help Asian Americans become equal citizens of the USA?

   This is such a sensitive topic that few will dare to touch with a 10-Foot-pole. However, for the sake of our community, 80-20 EF believes that we must together examine this issue and let truth be known.

   Frankly, most Asian Americans believe that our elites, on the average, have not done their share. Their collective records are not good.

   (a) Donation Record of Our RICH: Many Asian Ams have donated tens of millions to good causes in the mainstream society. We thank them for that. However, our rich has been STINGY toward its own community. Personally, I don't know of a single Asian Am. who has donated more than $3 million to an Asian Am. cause.

   (b) Performance Record of Our POWERFUL: Our so called "powerful" have truly been TIMID to fight against inequities committed against its own people. Examples of serious injustices committed against Asian Ams are:

     i) Extreme paucity in life-tenured Asian Am. federal judges;

     ii) Irrefutable statistical evidence that Asian Ams have the lowest manager-to-worker ratio in private industries, universities and the federal government when compared to all other races/ethnics.

    iii) Asian Am students face the highest college admission bars, higher than that for white applicants! It is blatantly ANTI-Asian-Am. but disguised as an affirmative program.

   Did any of our elected Asian Am. officials or former cabinet and sub-cabinet member, or university trustees and presidents or ethnic media CEOs & editors, or president & executive director of our national civic organizations fight for us on these issues? NO!

   Was it because such inequities were unsolvable? NO! 80-20 Initiative has tackled all 3 issues, with reasonable success.

                80-20 Educational Foundation's Belief
   Before Asian Americans become EQUAL citizens, our elite must do their share to help. Our rich must NOT BE STINGY. Our powerful must NOT BE TIMID.

                          What We Can All Do!

   Please (a) forward this e-newsletter far and wide. Hopefully, it will reach some of our "rich and powerful" and their children, for our elite to reflect on their obligations. (b) Post your comment, and help correct any inaccuracy that I might have made in this article, especially regarding the donation record of our rich. We need to know the truth before we may cost effectively advance our own causes. There will be parts 2 and 3 discussing obligations of our "rich & powerful" BEFORE we reach our equal citizenship.

   Please go post your comments NOW at: 
http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/politicaledu/posterboard.asp .

   It takes a village, friends. We must each do our part.


Sincerely,
S. B. Woo, a volunteer president
80-20 Educational Foundation, Inc.
http://www.80-20EF.org

   80-20 gratefully acknowledges the generosity of
1) Chia-Lin Pao Tao Trust, Tucson AZ:                 $500.00
2) Shen Wu Family Trust, San Diego, CA:           $250.00

     ANNOUNCEMENT! Are you an employee of the following companies? They "gift-match" for your donation to 80-20 EF.

    i) Boeing      ii) Adobe      iii) ATT      iv) Microsoft
           v) TE Connectivity                 vi) Verizon
                        vii) Amylin Pharmaceuticals
  

Ivy Schools set an Asian Am. quota

                                  17% +/- 2% but "Not a Quota"?

Dear Fellow Asian Americans and Friends,

   When it looks like a DUCK, swims like a DUCK, and quacks like a DUCK, it is a DUCK!

  Ron Unz's summary on an "AsAm Quota" and his much longer "meritocracy" article generated ferocious debates from all sides regarding race-conscious college admissions, yet conspicuously missing is any challenge to his key finding that all Ivy Leagues converge to a 17% +/- 2% AsAm "quota" despite strong demographic and academic performance trends otherwise. In the absence of contradicting data, such a convergence is not explainable other than suggesting A HIDDEN QUOTA.


  THE SILENCE IS DEAFENING.
   When will the civil right community, including many of the AsAm organizations, seriously evaluate this data convergence and benchmark it against the basic American value of fairness? Since when does the high ideal of "Equal Opportunity" become synonymous to "Equal Outcome"?

   Just insisting there is "no AsAm quota" is of no merit unless backed by data. Such a claim also has a bad track record: No university ever admitted to having a Jewish quota during 1920-1950, even though it is now an universally accepted fact. Authored by: A Guest Writer

   FORWARD this e-newsletter to all Asian Am Ivy students. Ask them to spread these FACTUAL INFO all over their campuses. When the people with power e.g. Ivy administrators are DISCRIMINATING AGAINST US BY LYING AND PRACTICING ILLEGAL POLICIES (quota is illegal), RIDICULE THEM !!

   Ron Unz's summary on an "AsAm Quota" was published by The National Review. It was cited by SCOTUSblog (Supreme court of the US blog) which may hopefully have an impact on the Supreme Court decision. The article also summarized S. B. Woo's piece in NY Times' Room for Debate.

   Post your comments at: 
http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/politicaledu/posterboard.asp .


Sincerely,
S. B. Woo, President, a volunteer
80-20 National Asian Am. Educational Foundation
http://www.80-20EF.org
  

The Power of One - a salute to 80-20 supporters

   The following illustrates THE POWER OF ONE!

   80-20 is the ONE. Most other Asian Am national organizations are lined up on the other side on the college admission issue.

   Without 80-20, which opposes ALL those so called "civil rights" Asian Am. orgs., these articles in prestigious publications, shown below, would NOT have been written! With 80-20 speaking up for Asian American parents and children, the tide has changed! 7 articles in 4 weeks! These prestigious mainstream print media are speaking out in increasingly more firm condemnation of discrimination against us! See the titles of the 3 latest articles, shown in red!

1) The American Conservative, 11/28/2012. Read Ron Unz's article!
2) Forbes, 11/30/2012, which strongly supported Unz' article
3) NY Times "Room for Debate", 12/19/2012, SB Woo was a participant
4) NY Times Op Ed, 12/20/2012, by Carolyn Chen
5) Business Insider, 12/20/12, "Ivies Discriminate Against Asians"
6) The Atlantic, 12/21/2012, "Ivies Fair to Asian Americans? "
7) Washington Monthly, 12/22/12, "Discrimination Against AsAm in Ivies"

   The power of one. 80-20 is the one!

   Almost all the articles compared the discrimination against Asian Ams to how the Ivies used to discriminate against Jewish Am students. That was the CENTRAL theme of 80-20's amicus brief to the Supreme Court.

   What are the lessons for us?
      i) "One man (or organization) in the right is a majority," and
      ii) God helps those who help themselves. Asian Ams DON'T HELP OURSELVES ENOUGH! So many Asian Am. "civil rights" orgs are for the the race-conscious college admission policy. Ridiculous? Scary?!

   Does 80-20 really enjoy the power of ONE? NO! 80-20 would much rather be just one org. in an UNITED Asian Am. community fighting for equal opportunity of Asian Am. adults and children and help make America a "more perfect Union." We urge our sister organizations to re 44d -think their past and work together.

   Which Asian Am civil rights orgs are still supporting the race conscious college admission? They are OCA, JACL, Asian Am. Legal Center of Los Angles, AAJC of Washington D.C. AALDEF of NY.

   80-20 has repeatedly reached out to them & requested joint examination of issues and UNITED action. We've NOT succeeded yet. 

 
YOU CAN HELP. Talk to people in those organizations!

Sincerely yours,

S. B. Woo, a volunteer,
President. 80-20 National Asian Am. Educational Foundation,Inc.
http://www.80-20EF.org
  

PS We gratefully acknowledge the generous donation of

1. David & Helen Yao, Yorktown Heights, NY:      $1,000
2. Stephen Ko MD, Mendham, NJ:          $1,000

GOOD NEWS. Students Oppose Race-conscious admission

                                      Announcements

(1) 80-20 is eligible for GIFT-MATCHING with the following companies.

1) Boeing    2) Adobe    3) ATT    4) Microsoft and 5) TE Connectivity

    If you work for another company with a GIFT-MATCHING program, please apply for 80-20 EF to be eligible for it. An Asian Am employee of Verizon just did. We thank this person.

                   (2) Please forward this email to Asian Am. students.

        Students Oppose "Race-Conscious" College Admission

(1) Brown Univ.
   The Brown Daily Herald reported Nov. 29 the surprising results of a poll that found "more than 58 percent of students oppose the University's consideration of race in student admissions decisions, while over 34 percent of students said they supported the policy."
http://www.browndailyherald.com/poll-most-students-opposed-to-use-of-race-in-admissions-1.2798318#.UMDCaY4WclJ

(2) Univ. of Texas
   In a NY Times article which quoted 80-20's amicus brief to the Supreme Court, it also reported the following. The 8 Asian Am. students, shown below, who are attending the Univ. of Texas all disagree with their instructor in a political identity class. The students oppose using race as a preference for admission which the U. of TX practices.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/affirmative-action-a-complicated-issue-for-asian- americans.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0#

(3) About a Great Book - MISMATCH by Richard Sander & Stuart Taylor, Jr.
   "Great review of a great book -- and of course that's what you would expect from Thomas Sowell, a national treasure. He's correct in his praise and in his one criticism, namely the failure of Mismatch to call for an outright end to racial preferences." -- Roger Clegg, who is President & General Counsel of the Center for Equal Opportunity. To see the book review itself, click on http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.2035/article_detail.asp#

(4) NPR, Nat'l Public Ratio, quotes 80-20 on college admission
   A November 21 NPR article quotes S. B. Woo speaking out against "race-conscious" college admission.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/11/21/165654268/as-talk-of-affirmative-action-heats-up-asians-contemplate-their-position
   A few months ago, when 80-20 EF decided to fight against "race-conscious" college admission, did you think that it would be noticed by so many mainstream media? Did you thick we could exerted such influence?

   Support 80-20. It has greatly expanded YOUR GROUP political clout.

   Post your comments at: 
http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/politicaledu/posterboard.asp .

Sincerely yours,
S. B. Woo, a volunteer,
President. 80-20 National Asian Am. Educational Foundation, Inc.

PS We gratefully acknowledge the generous donation of
1. Choong & Hsia Foundation, Los Altos, CA:      $1,000
2. The Baltimore Family Fund, Pasadena, CA:      $1,000

NY Times Quotes 80-20's Amicus Brief

[A] Good News
   NY Times published a long article entitled "Asian-Americans in the Argument" It quotes a paragraph from 80-20's amicus brief!. See http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/affirmative-action-a-complicated-issue-for-asian-americans.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0#

   The article starts with the picture of 8 U. of TX students. They all disagreed with their instructor who supported the "race-conscious" college admission.



   Alright, you guys!!!!!!!!

   Think hard now!

   Which Asian American organization has the ability to put YOU in the argument on big issues?

   In the SUPREME COURT, 80-20 EF's amicus brief advocating a "race-neutral" college admission has placed YOU in the argument!

   In the PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, 80-20 PAC's advocacy for an Asian Am. bloc vote placed YOU in the argument, as reported in LA Times, CNN, Politico, and all other major TV channels for a delivered 74% bloc vote.

   Who BUT the 80-20 Initiative has the ability to PLACE YOU IN THE ARGUMENT i.e. MAKING YOU RELEVANT IN AMERICA!

[B] Bad News
   In the military court of INjustice, Sgt. Jeffery Hurst, who not only permitted his subordinates to racially and physically abuse Danny Chen, but also led in such abuses, was acquitted of all serious charges except for dereliction of duties. According to a news release from Fort Bragg:

   "Hurst was sentenced to reduction in rank to E4 and hard labor without confinement for 45 days by a panel of eight officer and enlisted members. The military judge for the Hurst court-martial was Col. David Robertson. The prosecution team consisted of Maj. Joshua Toman and Maj. Stephen Hernandez, and the defense team was civilian counsel Haytham Faraj and Capt. Jamie Gurtov."

   Asian Ams who STILL want to join the US Army are clearly placing their lives at risk, because those who want to abuse them can do so without due repercussion. What a shame for the US military!

   There are two more trials. 80-20 EF is contemplating further action when those two "trials" are done. What a shame!

[C] What Do You Want?
   Results like those described in [A] or [B]?

   For results in [B] just sit back, relax and continue to suck it up. For results in [A], you need to think about what YOU are willing to do to help make 80-20 stronger? For donating to EF, a tax exempt organization, click on http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/donate/donate.asp

   You make your own destiny.

   Post your comments at: 
http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/politicaledu/posterboard.asp.

Sincerely yours,
S. B. Woo, a volunteer,
President. 80-20 National Asian Am. Educational Foundation, Inc.

A Must Read. Replacing 80-20 with 90-10?

   Blacks voted 93 to 7 for Obama twice, and had voted 90 to 10 for the Democratic presidential candidate for decades. However, it has a weakness - can't SWING.

   A 90-10 bloc vote is 33% more powerful than an 80-20 bloc vote. That is because a 80-20 bloc vote yields a (80% - 20%) or 60% margin of victory to the endorsed candidate, but a 90-10 bloc vote yields a (90%-10%) or an 80% margin of victory. This is a 20% point increase over the 60 points. Hence, it is a 20/60 or 33% increase in power in helping the endorsed candidate win.

   The following numerical examples illustrate the huge power of a 90-10 bloc vote.

Example 1: POWER of casting a 80-20 bloc vote
Two candidates run against each other in a political division, which for simplicity is assumed to have two constituent groups only. One group has 1 million votes (6.7%) and the other has 14 million votes (93.3%). Candidate A, a novice, courts the larger group. When the ballots are open, candidate A wins the larger community by the ratio of 52/48. The margin of difference is 4%. Since the larger group has 14 million votes, 4% of 14 million votes provides a winning margin of 560,000 votes to candidate A. His opponent, candidate B, is a seasoned politician. She courts the smaller group and wins that community by a ratio of 80 to 20. The difference between 80% and 20% is 60%. 60% of 1 million votes is 600,000 votes. As a result, candidate B wins the election by (600,000 – 560,000) or 40,000 votes. Astounding? Yes.

Example 2: THE INCREDIBLE POWER of a 90-10 bloc vote!
[Same basic story as above, except the smaller group now votes 90-10, and the size of the larger group is increased to 19 million votes.]

Two candidates run against each other in a political division, which for simplicity is assumed to have two constituent groups only. One group has 1 million votes (5% of total) and the other has 19 million votes (95%). Candidate A, a novice, courts the larger group. When the ballots are open, candidate A wins the larger community by the ratio of 52/48. The margin of difference is 4%. Since the larger group has 19 millions votes, 4% of 19 million votes provides a winning margin of 760,000 votes to candidate A. His opponent, candidate B, is a seasoned politician. She courts the smaller group and wins that community by a ratio of 90 to 10. The difference between 90% and 10% is 80%. 80% of 1 million votes is 800,000 votes. As a result, candidate B wins the election by (800,000 – 760,000) or 40,000 votes.

   Incredible?! A small minority of 5%* can be the kingmaker by voting 90-10!! Leading you to the water is 80-20's job.    :-) :-)

   If you want both parties to COMPETE to share our rightful concerns, FOLLOW 80-20. Support us back.

   Post your comments at: http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/politicaledu/posterboard.asp .

   I thank Phil Choong of LA, a PAC Life Member, for suggesting the possibility of creating a 90-10 SWING bloc vote!

Sincerely,

S. B. Woo, a volunteer
President, 80-20 Nat'l Asian Am. Educational Foundation
http://www.80-20EducationalFoundation.org/

*5% is 1.7 % smaller than the 6.7% required by an 80-20 bloc vote, and is
0.33 of 5% or 33% more powerful!