To Fight Inequality, It's Time to End the College Admissions Scam
A Commentary By Scott Rasmussen
There's a strong desire among many Americans today to address a growing problem of income inequality. That desire helped President Obama raise taxes on upper-income Americans a few months ago.
It's reflected in the fact that just 35 percent believe the U.S. economy is fair to the middle class, and only 41 percent believe it's fair to those willing to work hard. Still, it's not really the inequality that bothers people. After all, 65 percent believe that it's fair for those who create very successful companies to become very rich. The problem comes when some people earn big bucks simply because they can game the system in ways that aren't available to most Americans.
In America today, one of the biggest parts of gaming the system unfairly can be traced to the elite universities. Those who graduate from a top school have the credentials and connections to do well in life. It doesn't even matter how well they did in school or how hard they are willing to work.
Americans strongly believe that those who get more done should be paid more than those with a better education. But they don't see the system working that way.
This wouldn't be a problem if admissions to elite schools were based solely on finding the most qualified students. If a well-qualified poor or middle-class student had an equal chance of getting into a top school, Americans would embrace the result. But whether it's Harvard, Yale or any other elite university, the admissions process is designed to favor the wealthy and well-connected.
Elite schools give preferences to the children of those who previously attended the school. They also give preferences and special treatment to the children of large donors. These special preferences allow the well-connected to get into an elite university at the expense of more qualified students who don't have friends in high places.
Few Americans see this as fair. Just 38 percent believe it's fair for alumni children to receive special preferences. Not surprisingly, there is a clear income divide on this question. Most people who make at least $100,000 a year think such legacy preferences are fine. Most who earn less don't share that view.
In other words, those who benefit from the status quo think it's fair. Those who are discriminated against disagree.
Americans have a clear view of the way college admissions should work. Seventy-one percent believe it's best for our country if only the most qualified students are accepted. Seventy-eight percent believe admissions departments should not be allowed to know how much the parents of an applicant give to a school.
So far, this issue has not become a focal point for the populist mood sweeping the country. That's because just 40 percent recognize that our elite schools give such preferences to legacy students and the children of large donors. The awareness is much higher among those who benefit from the status quo.
But there are warning signs on the horizon. If a school gives admissions preferences to children of large donors, just 37 percent believe donations to the school should be tax-deductible. Americans don't mind private clubs. They just don't think taxpayers should fund them.
To fight income inequality in America, you need to fight the private club that gives special preference to the wealthy and well-connected. That means either making the college admissions process more equal or placing less value on the credential of graduating from a self-selecting club.
To find out more about Scott Rasmussen, and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2013 SCOTT RASMUSSEN
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM
See Other Political Commentaries.
See Other Commentaries by Scott Rasmussen
Rasmussen Reports is a media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion information.
We conduct public opinion polls on a variety of topics to inform our audience on events in the news and other topics of interest. To ensure editorial control and independence, we pay for the polls ourselves and generate revenue through the sale of subscriptions, sponsorships, and advertising. Nightly polling on politics, business and lifestyle topics provides the content to update the Rasmussen Reports web site many times each day. If it's in the news, it's in our polls. Additionally, the data drives a daily update newsletter and various media outlets across the country.
Some information, including the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll and commentaries are available for free to the general public. Subscriptions are available for $4.95 a month or 34.95 a year that provide subscribers with exclusive access to more than 20 stories per week on upcoming elections, consumer confidence, and issues that affect us all. For those who are really into the numbers, Platinum Members can review demographic crosstabs and a full history of our data.
To learn more about our methodology, click here.