[Daniel冯版]

1. Why is your group so outraged?

[经大肥猫修改后：] 

1. Why such outcry? 

 Because the purpose of this Act is to explicitly exclude Chinese Americans from “Asian Americans” group at large, to further promote the behavior of discriminating people based on their races. Our sensitivity to this issue traces back to decades of affirmative action in the U.S., which, on the surface seems to benefit the underrepresented minorities, but in reality, discriminate against Asians, especially in college admissions. This discrimination was further exacerbated in January 2014, when the State of California passed the “SCA 5” – short for Senate Constitutional Amendment 5, which lifted a 1996 ban keeping University of California and California State University schools from considering race or ethnicity in admissions and recruitment. Because ethnic Chinese high school graduates tend to have higher scores than Asian students of other ethnicities, this bill is an effort of these other ethnicities to distinguish themselves from the Chinese ethnic group. College-admission standards, however, should reflect the students’ efforts, not by race. 

 This Act does not spell out how the data being collected will be used. What’s the specific goal of this policy? Are there any restrictions to its use? When, if ever, this Act will no longer be necessary and the law would be made obsolete? Are there any criteria set in place to evaluate this policy’s effectiveness? 

 I was not aware of this bill until very recently. This is the case for hundreds and thousands of Asian Americans residing in RI. This shows that the state legislature did not make adequate effort to reach out to Asian Americans in RI. Has every resident in RI with an Asian surname informed by mail or by phone? Has there been any flyers sent out? Notices posted? I would like to challenge the legitimacy of the process of this bill being passed. I strongly suggest a re-evaluation of this policy and set a new open-hearing window. 

Whether it is constitutional is not to be judged by you or me. It is up to the supreme court. Its intention may be good, but good intentions do not make reasonable policies. It offends me the most because it singles out the Asian population, as if 4% is not already a small enough minority, and as if Asians are the only ethnic group that has diverse culture background and potentially different needs. 

Within the state, I can think of two goals. 1. To repeal this policy and re-evaluate this policy’s passing, re-open the open window period. 2. To influence the implementation of this act, increase its transparency, and promote broader community participation in the process of its implementation -- both from the Asian community and other ethnic groups; we are also seeking legal advice regarding a potential repeal. More broadly, we want to raise awareness across the nation so Asian groups in other states can have their voice out before their state legislators rush more bills without full involvement of all parties affected.

We’ll unite with other ethnic Chinese Americans in each state to raise awareness of this issue and to prevent this law/policy from being implemented in another state.