An Interview with William B. Allen, PhD

William B. Allen, Chairman of the Board, Toward A Fair Michigan, has served as a member of the National Council for the Humanities and as member and chair of the United States Commission on Civil Rights. Dr. Allen is a Professor of Political Science at Michigan State University. Formerly Director of the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia while on leave from MSU, Dr. Allen also previously served as Dean and Professor at James Madison College, MSU.

You, along with Barbara Grutter, the plaintiff in Grutter v Bollinger, are pulling together a group of Michiganians to facilitate statewide conversations on the question of affirmative action. Why that, and why now?

Allen: Michiganians will vote in November 2006 on the ballot initiative to amend the state constitution to ban preferences in state and local government and in universities.  By the time that vote comes, nothing is more important than that citizens in Michigan have a fair opportunity to decide for themselves what the right thing to do is in this case.  Ms Grutter and I are determined to provide a fair and open discussion of the issue of affirmative action preferences.

How do you plan on going about that? What will your approach be to achieve those conversations?

Allen: Our approach is direct: we will organize public forums throughout the state, in which the most knowledgeable people in the state will present both sides of the issue.  We have organized Toward A Fair Michigan as a non-profit, charitable education trust that will solicit funds to finance this undertaking.  No corner of Michigan will be left unexplored; no citizen will be left uninformed.

I understand that you both personally support the Michigan Civil Rights ballot initiative to amend the Michigan constitution to prohibit preferences. If so, why sponsor speakers opposed to your position and go so far as to facilitate their participation at public events?

Allen: We both believe that justice in this case requires barring preferences; we don't believe that our belief is the measure of what the public should decide.  We believe the public needs a fair opportunity to consider every side of the issue and to make up its own mind about what is right and wrong, just and unjust.  By recruiting experts in the legal and social history of affirmative action to carry their messages throughout the state, we believe that we will be facilitating just such an open deliberation as will produce the best public decision.  We have faith that it will agree with us, but we have even greater faith that it will eventuate in something good, whether it agrees with us or not.

Tell me a little bit more about the organization Toward A Fair Michigan.

Allen: As I indicated, Toward A Fair Michigan is a non-profit, charitable, educational trust.  Its task is to construct the civic forum within which the citizens of Michigan will deliberate Michigan's future.  We will accomplish this by enabling communities to unite in common deliberation.  We will provide the educational tools and opportunities that will assure that no one in Michigan who goes to the polls in November 2006 will be able to say, "I didn't have the chance to know" what was involved.  Moreover, we want to revive those arts and practices and citizenship that depend upon open and candid expressions of opinion in the public square.  No one should be intimidated or otherwise deflected from stating fully what he believes; and everyone should receive the respect from fellow citizens extending a fair hearing.  We think democracy is the message.  The people who are bearing the message, those behind Toward A Fair Michigan, are just such citizens as all the other Michiganians.  We begin with the special relationship that Barbara Grutter had, in being the plaintiff in the University of Michigan affirmative action case, Grutter v Bollinger, and the special experience that I have had, as a former member and chair of the United States Commission on Civil Rights.  The other members are diverse professionals with no less commitment to Jeffersonian openness than we have, and a glance at their biographical profiles will reveal their long-standing civic engagement.  Toward A Fair Michigan is an independent, non-profit, charitable activity; it is not a political committee and it has no connection with any of the political committees engaged in the fight over the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative.

TAFM lists a number of programs on its website focused on "citizenship." Why?

Allen: We believe that recent years have witnessed the troubling growth of practices that discourage citizens from participating fully and freely expressing themselves.  Our focus on citizenship is to highlight their role as the most important role in sustaining self-government.

You are a new organization. What is your primary focus over the first one - two years?

Allen: Priority number one for TAFM: open up the dialogue on affirmative action preferences and invite everyone to enter in.  For that reason, we shall sponsor public forums, distribute guides for local groups to organize inclusive discussions, and prepare literature that serves to inform citizens of the options that they must consider.  Next in order, we will seek to foster training opportunities that will encourage citizens to continue such reliance upon democratic openness long after the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative has been finished.

You state on the website that "in matters of equal opportunity what we need at this hour is far more a consensus upon the fundamental grounds of decision than a decision itself." What do you mean by that?

Allen: Where do you stand?  On the principles of American liberty, as expressed in the Declaration of Independence? On the footing of an equality that recognizes every single person's right of self-government and the right to be treated fairly?  We believe in a society that is fair to every person and in which no innocent pays the penalty for another's wrong doing.  Those are the fundamental grounds of decision, and it is more important to know what Michigan citizens think about those things than whether some policy or scheme might or might not succeed in its goals.  We would like to see everyone decide first, how important equality is, before they attempt to decide whether they can afford to sacrifice the equality of some for the benefit of others.