February 15, 1996 We are currently nearing the end of the two-week period during which faculty members of the UCLA Academic Senate are permitted to vote on the senate mail-ballot resolution requesting that the regents rescind SP-1 and SP-2. Great care was taken in preparing the ballot, with scrupulous attention given to balanced arguments, both pro and con. Last Thursday, all faculty members received a yellow sheet of arguments from a group of about 40 members of the faculty who oppose the resolution. Because campus mailing facilities were used to distribute their views and because such attention had been given to balanced arguments accompanying the original resolution, we (the pro side, and initiators of the resolution) believed this to be a violation of Academic Senate fairness rules, and brought the case to the attention of the senate leadership the same day. The senate leadership seemed to share our concern. On Tuesday, Feb. 13, we were informed by Professor Lewis, chair of the senate, that no rules violation had occurred and that we are free to send out a statement of our own. Had we been so notified last week, we would have sent out a statement of our own. Now, of course, the voting period is nearly ended. Permit us to restate briefly our arguments in favor of the mail ballot. POLITICS: The pattern of political intrusion, begun by Gov. Wilson's pressuring the regents to pass SP-1 and SP-2, has been continued with, among other things, the joining of university policy to the California Civil Rights Initiative campaign. SHARED GOVERNANCE: In passing SP-1 and SP-2, the regents did not consult meaningfully with the president of the university, the council of chancellors, the academic council, and the student association; and they did not adequately evaluate the efficacy of existing affirmative action programs, the impact of ending these programs, or the probable effectiveness of alternative policies. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: 1) The university's affirmative action policies were developed to institute the regents' 1988 statement on undergraduate admissions. 2) The Office of Civil Rights reported in September of 1995 that our student affirmative action program, as it existed in 1990 (the model for each following year's admissions), complied with Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the standard outlined in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978). 3) Our affirmative action policies have been fully compatible with our pursuit of academic excellence.