The Legacy Faction

     "To those of you who received honors, awards, and distinctions, I say, 'Well done'. And to the C students, I say you too can be president of the United States"


    These were the words of former president of the United States, George W. Bush, at a 2001 commencement speech at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut (the entire speech can be seen here). For those of you who did not understand his humor in the first place, President George W. Bush was admitted to Yale because of his legacy status and political connections. Once at Yale George W. Bush received less than stellar grades earning the title as a "C Student". I found it shocking that not only did he get into Yale because of legacy status and political connections, but once there the former president of the United States, he who made the decisions necessary to run our country, received unsatisfactory grades in college. He is not the only famous politician with this type of academic track record, in my Junior Theme book entitled The Price of Admission by Daniel Golden I discovered another shocking quote from Massachusetts senator John Kerry. According to Daniel Golden, John Kerry was also a Yale legacy and when asked by the Boston Globe about his four D's during freshman year Kerry responded, "I always told my dad that D stood for Distinction". I understand that excellent grades in college do not necessarily correspond with excellent political careers, but I find it disturbing that these work ethics are joked about by these politicians. 


   Politicians are only a small portion of those blessed by legacy status. Having large sums of money to donate and simply just being one of many family members also qualifies you as a legacy. What Golden tries to prove is that not only are too many slots in admissions being taken by these legacies, but that, "Legacy preference also provides affluent families with a form of insurance against a decline in educational status from one generation to the next". Golden emphasizes the idea of "Status" and how it is important for wealthy families to maintain that social rank by having their children go to the most prestigious universities. Another key idea Golden emphasizes is "insurance" and how the performance of these legacy students is not what's most important, but rather the fact that just by attending these prestigious universities they are gaining connections and reputation for the future.


    What is most important to note are the students that these legacy cases are replacing. Because highly selective colleges boast such tough standards, nearly all applicants have outstanding credentials, with the exception of a majority of the legacy cases. At The University Notre Dame in South Bend, Indiana nearly 1 out of every 4 students is a legacy. At a school where the acceptance rate is between 28-30 percent according to their website, that is a large number of slots set aside for legacies. Similarly, only 1 out of every 10 kids gets accepted into Harvard, one of the nations most prestigious schools. With so many applicants boasting such rigorous academics and extracurriculars, it is a huge sacrifice to the student body to admit a legacy with far less stellar credentials.
To what extent should Legacy preference be limited, if at all?
What truly is the purpose of admitting Legacies?

   

"The Times They are A-Changin'"

     If you have not heard already from the countless advertisements, one of the greatest traditions in golf begins this Thursday, April 5, 2012. The Masters has been around since 1934 when Horton Smith walked away with the first "Green Jacket". This historic event is filled with several cherished traditions that have survived to this day despite Don DeLillo's belief that the so called "real thing" and tradition no longer exist. The tournaments honorary starters, lifetime exemptions for winners, the beautiful Azaleas in full bloom and Magnolia Lane, The Champions Dinner, and of course the most well known of all the Green Jacket given to the winner of the tournament are all examples of these revered traditions. There is, however, one tradition that many fans were oblivious to until now. Every year Augusta Golf Club, host of the Masters and an all men's club, bestows memberships upon the CEO's of the corporate sponsors of the event. This hasn't been a problem up until now, and the reason for this controversy is that the IBM CEO, Ginni Rometty, is a woman.

      It makes perfect sense that this has not been a problem up until now considering only 2.4% of woman make up Fortune 500 CEO's (source), but now that one has attained the CEO position of IBM, a Masters Corporate sponsor, there is great debate over whether this tradition is to be "broken". In an article on the issue from Abc News Martha Burk, former chair of the Nation Council of Women's Organizations, said in response to the debate that IBM has to "draw a line in the sand" saying, "We're either going to pull our sponsorship and membership and any ancillary activities we support with the tournament, or the club is going to have to honor our CEO the way they have in the past". Unfortunately there hasn't been any information on where the debate is headed in terms of where Augusta stands, but clearly this can be seen as discrimination against women. Burk has a point when she notes that Rometty deserves to be treated as every other CEO has been treated in the past.

      Bob Dylan, one of the most influential musicians of all time, said it correctly when he stated in one his songs, "As the present now/ Will later be past... For the times they are a-changin". Although historically the Augusta Golf Club is all male, due to the change in times and gender equality there is no escaping the inevitable alteration of this rule.

Should Augusta Golf Club bestow membership upon Ginni Rometty even though she is a woman?
To what extent should traditions be protected?