The MacNeil/Lehrer Report; Black Colleges

ROBERT MacNEIL: Good evening. Twenty-five years ago next month, the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed the concept of separate but equal educational opportunities for blacks. Now, a quarter of a century later, many blacks are arguing in favor of almost separate but equal opportunities in one traditional area of Southern education: the black college. The argument has brought five Southern states into direct conflict with the federal government. One, North Carolina, stands to lose $89 million a year in federal funds unless it does more to desegregate its state university system; and tonight we examine why.

We prepared this program earlier, but it was pre-empted by the Pennsylvania nuclear accident. Here, on videotape, is Charlayne Hunter-Gault in Washington.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: At the end of March, North Carolina became the first state to face the withholding of millions of dollars in federal funds because it had not come up with an acceptable plan to desegregate the state university system. Although segregated schools are against the law in practice, in North Carolina most of the schools in the university system are either predominantly white or predominantly black. That means, for example, that of the sixteen colleges and universities in the system eleven have a total enrollment that is ninety-five percent white and five percent black; and five have a total enrollment that is ninety-seven percent black and three percent white.

The impetus for seeking an end to financing dual college systems for blacks and whites stems from the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits U.S. support of segregated activities. But the stepped-up pressure from the federal government stems from a 1970 law suit known as the Adams case. It was filed by the Legal Defense Fund on grounds that taxpayers` money was being used illegally to support segregated schools and colleges. In 1977 a final court decision moved the federal Department of Health, Education and Welfare to establish a set of guidelines. As of now, five of those states have submitted acceptable plans or are in litigation with the government over their plans, and North Carolina is still holding out. Tonight, a look at the ironies, conflicts and costs of desegregating higher education in the South.

The federal Department of Health, Education and Welfare has been acting as a defendant in the Adams case, and its Office of Civil Rights is responsible for enforcing the court-ordered desegregation. David Tatel is its director. Mr. Tatel, what is HEW trying to achieve in North Carolina?

DAVID TATEL: Well, our responsibility in these proceedings is to enforce Title VI, which prohibits discrimination in universities and other recipients of federal funds, and it`s based on the Fourteenth Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Brown. Our responsibility is to make sure that...

HUNTER-GAULT: That is, the Brown decision, which outlawed segregation.

TATEL: Brown versus Board of Education. That`s right, in 1954. And our responsibility in North Carolina, and in all of the other Southern states, is to make sure that those systems are fully desegregated.

And the Department has determined, up till this point, that they are not. The federal court has supported that determination, and the proceedings in North Carolina and in the other states are now aimed at complying with that statute.

HUNTER-GAULT: What would constitute desegregation, in your definition?

TATEL: That`s difficult to say, and it depends entirely on the circumstances of each system. But what we do know is that most of the Southern systems are still segregated. There are white schools that still en roll only white; the black schools are still enrolling only black. There are a few blacks teaching at the white schools or holding administrative positions. And to make matters worse, not only are they still separate systems, but most of these Southern systems are still very much unequal. On a recent tour of North Carolina, for example, we found what we found in most of the other states: that the black schools are still underfinanced, that they have inadequate programs, and that they are not in a position to compete with white schools. It`s the correction of that situation, that separate but unequal system, which would lead us and the state to conclude that it`s desegregated.

HUNTER-GAULT: Desegregation not only in terms of student body but also in terms of faculty and administration and so on.

TATEL: Yes.

HUNTER-GAULT: You threaten a cutoff of $90 million in funds that the state system receives from the federal government. Why?

TATEL: As you`ve already noted, five out of the six states have submitted acceptable desegration plans; North Carolina has not, to date. And under the court order we`re operating under, the Adams court order, our obligation earlier, late last month, was to make a determination with respect to the North Carolina plan and start the administrative proceedings. That`s what Secretary Califano did, although he made it clear that, as he has before, we hope that we`ll still be able to resolve the matter as we did with the other states.

HUNTER-GAULT: When will the cutoff go into effect? How much time do you have?

TATEL: There`s a limited deferral of funds which goes into effect in about thirty days. That`s a time during which we hope negotiations will develop and proceed. A final termination of funds wouldn`t become effective until after the administrative process has run its route...

HUNTER-GAULT: How long would that take?

TATEL: Oh, that could take a year or two.

HUNTER-GAULT: If the administrative process does run its route, as you put it, does that mean that the entire system would be shut down with the deprivation of that $90 million?

TATEL: No, it would mean that the federal support from HEW would be terminated.

HUNTER-GAULT: How badly would that cripple the system?

TATEL: Well, I don`t know. I think that it amounts to a substantial percentage of the funds the system receives, but certainly not the majority of funds, which are appropriated by the state legislatures.

HUNTER-GAULT: That`s a fairly lengthy process you`ve just described. What would happen in the meantime?

TATEL: In the meantime the administrative proceedings would move along, and we would defer on a very limited basis funds which we thought would aggravate the segregated conditions in the system. 5o on a case by-case basis we would hold up the funding of specified grants.

HUNTER-GAULT: All right; thank you. We`ll come back. Fearing that the desegregation efforts might lead to the demise of their institutions, black college presidents formed a coalition and later asked the court to ensure that black colleges would not be sacrificed in the effort. One member of that group is Jesse Stone, president of the Southern University system in Louisiana. Dr. Stone, do the HEW guidelines threaten black colleges with extinction?

JESSE STONE: I think they do. Our fears are that the same thing will happen to blacks in higher education that happened at the elementary and secondary levels, and if these things do happen then the black stu dents and blacks generally will suffer.

HUNTER-GAULT: Do you feel that the black institutions are more threatened than the white institutions?

STONE: Certainly that is the case because of many reasons, one of which is the white institutions are already better off financially; they are more prestigious institutions in many ways than the predominantly black institutions are; and by many standards many people think that they are better in terms of quality, though I dispute that fact, I disagree with it if you take it across the board.

HUNTER-GAULT: Right. What do you say to the argument that your opposition to the desegregation plan, on its face, appears to be a form of racism?

STONE: Well, that certainly isn`t true. The fact is, however, that America itself has not fully divested itself of racism, and we are still in a period in which black people must look after themselves. We must look after not only our professionals but we must look after our children as well; and we know what happened at the elementary level to our children, we know what happened to our professionals at the elementary and secondary levels, and it is incumbent upon us, I think, to see to it that these things do not happen at the higher levels of education if at all we can do that.

HUNTER-GAULT: What, in summary, are the things that happened that concern you that you don`t want to see repeated?

STONE: Well, one of the main things that happened was that the black schools were generally closed; black schools that had principals found that when the schools were closed these black principals no longer had jobs as principals, they went in as assistant principals in some other schools and things like that. We found that our children, in many instances, were not met with the empathy, sympathy and understanding that were necessary if they were to achieve in the newly desegregated schools.

HUNTER-GAULT: All right. We know the situation in North Carolina; we`ve just been referring to it. What is the situation at the moment in Louisiana with respect to the reception of the guidelines?

STONE: The situation in Louisiana is, as I perceive it, first of all that the fact that you have schools that are predominantly black and some schools that are predominantly white does not mean that Louisiana is to day practicing discrimination or that it is practicing segregation. As a matter of fact, even at the elementary and secondary levels, where many systems have been declared fully unitary by the federal courts holding sessions in the State of Louisiana, we have some schools that are predominantly black and some that are predominantly white. We do believe that there are some vestiges of duality and segregation and discrimination that still remain, and we think that the federal government should be zeroing in on these things. For example, we know that in Louisiana the black institutions have been historically underfunded, and it would seem to me that the federal government might do well if it tried to see to it that these institutions were in fact funded at an appropriate level.

HUNTER-GAULT: I see.

STONE: We also know that many of these institutions did not grant higher degrees -- that is, post-baccalaureate degrees -- and it would seem to me that the federal government might do well if it would come to Louisiana and try to enhance these universities by bringing more money into the universities -- that is, the predominantly black universities -- by bringing more money into them, seeing to it that they become full participants in the education enterprise and experience. We don`t think that that`s what the federal government has been doing. The federal government, in most of the states that I know anything about, has been about the business of trying to bring about more facilities on the campuses of the universities, and I don`t think that that`s enhancement.

HUNTER-GAULT: Let me ask you one final question, Dr. Stone. If your institution does receive such funds for enhancement, with the idea in mind from at least the federal government`s standpoint that it will attract more white students, how would you feel about that? Would that dilute your institution in any way?

STONE: Southern University has since 1954 tried to make itself more attractive to white students, but if the government should ever insist that Southern University were just to go out and try to bring into it more white students than we have black students, I think that that certainly would endanger the university, for the reason that we are about seven miles from Louisiana State University, and I don`t think that the State of Louisiana would find sufficient justification for maintaining two predominantly white institutions doing the same thing in the same city. I do think, though, that if we are predominantly black that we do have some responsibilities that are a bit unique and that our role and mission could be different, and we think that it is different today, and uniquely so.

HUNTER-GAULT: Thank you, Dr. Stone; we`ll come back. The National

Association for the Advancement of Colored People has been working with HEW in formulating compromise desegregation plans in North Carolina and Florida. Althea Simmons, formerly Director of Education for the NAACP, is now head of its Washington bureau. Ms. Simmons, where do you come down on the enhancement versus desegregation argument?

ALTHEA SIMMONS: I don`t see it as enhancement versus desegregation; as a matter of fact, what the black institutions need is massive infusions of funds because they have been historically under appropriated. I think that you can have schools desegregated -- we must have schools desegregated -- and you can still fulfill a peculiar mission without being schools that handle only compensatory training. It is our belief that black institutions and predominantly white institutions in near proximity, if they are going to be merged, will then have the input from both blacks and whites that should do something to retain the administrators Dr. Stone is concerned about, to retain black faculty. As a matter of fact, we did work with a group in Louisiana some time ago in reference to trying to do just that in terms of trying to see if we could propose a merger between a predominantly white institution and a predominantly black institution. So that we do not see it as an either/or proposition. And we feel that the traditionally black institutions need to have, for example, programs that are not duplicated; they need to, for example, have more administrators in the predominantly white institutions and vice versa; and that if we`re going to be able to desegregate and to make those black institutions that are now historically black as viable as is the concern evinced by Dr. Stone and others, we`re going to have to put in massive doses of money and try to bring the percentages up, bring the level of the instruction up; in addition to that we`ll have to also see what can be done with reference to desegregating the faculty and the students.

HUNTER-GAULT: Are you saying that you think it`s possible to desegregate these institutions-- the black institutions, that is -- and yet preserve their historic mission as Dr. Stone has outlined it?

SIMMONS: Yes, I think that you can. I think that that can be done, because traditionally, black schools have been the reservoirs of black youngsters who came in from various communities. They were not able to get into hi her-priced schools, let us say. Yet we need to have more scholarship funs, because right now there`s a competition for students in trying to get more black students into white institutions because they can offer more scholarship funds. That`s why we need to enhance the condition of black college. And with enhancement and desegregation, then we`ll be able to fulfill both of those missions.

HUNTER-GAULT: Then you`re not concerned with the fact that enhancement might eventually attract an even greater number, a disproportionate number of white students and would lead to some dilution of the black institutions?

SIMMONS: I believe truly -- NAACP believes -- in desegregation of institutions, and I think that desegregation will be beneficial for both blacks and whites, and that whereas you may get a dilution of students in terms of the school turning from a traditionally all-black institution to now a desegregated institution, that it would be beneficial for both black and white students. And they can still perform that mission.

HUNTER-GAULT: I see. Finally, are you satisfied with the way in

HEW is trying to achieve its goals?

SIMMONS: I would wish that it could go faster, because it has been twenty- five years since Brown versus Board of Education, and we still have dual systems of higher education.

HUNTER-GAULT: Fine; thank you. The Institute for Services to Education is a Washington-based research group that looks into issues of importance to minorities in higher education. The director of its Desegregation Policy Studies Unit is Leonard Haynes. Dr. Haynes is the author of several studies analyzing the impact of various desegregation plans on black students and faculty. Dr. Haynes, what does your group feel is best for minority higher education: enhancement, desegregation, or just what?

LEONARD HAYNES: Just to take a different approach, our group feels that we should be concerned about what we call the comprehensive academic planning process. That involves both white institutions and black institutions where they plan to serve the needs of all citizens.

HUNTER-GAULT: Now, how does that work? Would that take place in both separate black institutions and white institutions, or just what?

HAYNES: Well, if you consider the HEW criteria, that is an excellent opportunity for states, particularly their coordinating bodies, to consider the whole issue of comprehensive academic planning. Really, in terms of the law, there are no black and white institutions; these are state schools that belong to the state. And...

HUNTER-GAULT: Are you saying it doesn`t matter where the students are, as long as they have a comprehensive educational plan?

HAYNES: What matters is that the states` institutions are able to offer a very high quality, whether they have a historically black tradition or whether they are white. And if you begin with the question - since we`re talking about black colleges -- what should those colleges look like if they had truly been supported under separate-but-equal, you have to come to the conclusion that the planning process that the state had embarked upon had neglected those schools.

HUNTER-GAULT: So would you be satisfied to leave the university system in North Carolina alone, provided it institutes some kind of quality plan for its various members?

HAYNES: Well, no, they shouldn`t be left alone. I think the issue, if you`re following me, is that these states have not conducted a needs analysis of what it is that higher education should be about in the state. The criteria permit them that opportunity, to not only eliminate the vestiges of duality but to also address the issue of what are their institutions going to do in terms of serving the needs of citizens. And what I`m saying is that black schools ought to have a full partnership in serving the total needs of the state, and not just serving the needs of black students. And of course there is a fear that in the planning process the state coordinating people have tended to assign "remedial roles" to black colleges.

HUNTER-GAULT: All right. In the states where desegregation plans have been put into effect -- I take it you`ve looked at them -- how are they working out?

HAYNES: Well, it`s too early to tell really, because what we have are the plans that have been submitted and accepted; implementation is another issue, and we haven`t gotten to that right now. What`s going on right now in most of the states is that legislatures are reviewing the plans in terms of the monetary aspects and whether or not they`ll be able to fund it, because there`s an enormous cost attached to "desegregating" anything. And our concern, though, I would say that that state has impressed me in terms of its movement; they have only one historically black college there, which is the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff, and they have been able to get from the state not only a commitment but actual implementation of some programs and increases in their budget. So that the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff can in fact be a representative member of the University of Arkansas system.

HUNTER-GAULT: But how about in terms of black colleges generally and desegregation plans? Do you have the same fears and concerns that these plans conceivably could lead to extinction of black institutions of higher learning?

HAYNES: Well, yes -- you know, if one looks at the plans, you`ll notice that the black colleges unfortunately been assigned, as I say, these roles that are remedial. There is a tendency of states to do what I call the comparability test: they compare the black college to the lowest white state institution when they start dealing with the question of duplication of programs, as opposed to what I think the comparison should be, and that is comparing the black college to the flagship institution, because as you know, black colleges were founded to be the flagship institutions for blacks. And the comparison, in terms of enhancement and strengthening, should be the black college being compared to, let`s say, in North Carolina, Winston-Salem State being compared to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill or North Carolina State or East Carolina.

HUNTER-GAULT: All right. Mr. Tatel, let me come back to you with Dr. Stone`s concerns that these guidelines possibly could lead to the extinction of black colleges. What do you say to that?

TATEL: Well, I think Dr. Stone`s concerns are very real. And we, under the direction of the court, have tried to draft these standards in a way that protects black colleges. And the major part of them requires the states to strengthen the black colleges by giving them new programs and by giving them adequate funding, by repairing and rebuilding their campuses, and by for the first time really in their histories giving them an opportunity to compete with white institutions.

HUNTER-GAULT: Dr. Stone?

STONE: Yes.

HUNTER-GAULT: Does that make you feel any better?

STONE: Well, I have heard Mr. Tatel say that before, and if I remain skeptical you will understand that it is partially because, not withstanding our nation`s great commitment, a black man still finds it very difficult to become governor in the State of Louisiana or any other state, become a United States Senator, and certainly to aspire to and become President of the United States. And that means, I think, that there`s something fundamentally wrong with this society, and our educational institutions to a large extent reflect what is applicable in the open society.

Now, if this is true, it would seem to me that what we who are black must do is to see to it, or do whatever we can to see to it, that black youngsters do receive the opportunities at the elementary and secondary levels and at the higher levels of education that will put them in good stead in the marketplaces so that they will be able to stand in the marketplaces and compete successfully there. We know that in too many instances black youngsters have gone into the predominantly white institutions and have been forced out; it has been a kind of revolving door experience for them. And we think that the black institutions can provide the impetus, they can provide the training, they can provide the opportunities that many other institutions do not provide. We think it takes more money, and we think that this is what the government should be doing. Now let me ...

HUNTER-GAULT: How about that, Mr. Tatel?

STONE: Let me just say this, too...

HUNTER-GAULT: Well, let me just get one response at a time now. Let me find out from Mr. Tatel, can you ensure the future of black colleges by bringing in more money? Is that part of the plan?

TATEL: It`s certainly part of the plan. And what we have to do here is find a way to make sure that the very important, very fundamental goals of the Fourteenth Amendment and of Brown, which really put this country solidly behind desegregation, can be reconciled with preserving these very valuable institutions in the South. And I am convinced that they can, and I`m convinced that the standards that we have, which call for the strengthening of these schools through additional funds, through better programs and through improved campuses, are the way to do it.

HUNTER-GAULT: All right. Let me just ask you finally -- and Dr. Stone, if you want to incorporate your comments in this -- what do you see as being the ultimate goal in this particular problem? What is the ultimate goal that you would like to see achieved?

STONE: I would think ultimately that race should be eliminated as a factor in education. I think that that is sometime in the future. And for the immediately foreseeable future I think that we must make special efforts to see to it that black youngsters have full access to higher educational opportunities, and I say that they cannot get these opportunities in the white institutions alone.

HUNTER-GAULT: But as you eliminate race, that also brings more, perhaps, white students into your campuses.

STONE: I would that that would be the case, but we think that it would not make any difference at that time.

HUNTER-GAULT: Dr. Simmons? Do you agree with that?

SIMMONS: I think as a matter of fact that the ultimate is to desegregate the schools, to make those schools so attractive, to make the curriculum offerings so good and so diverse that persons would want to go there regardless of race or color. And I think that can be done, but we cannot underscore too much the fact that it cannot be done unless they get sufficient funds to bring the black institutions up to a competitive level.

HUNTER-GAULT: Now, who do you think should determine that amount?

SIMMONS: Well, as a matter of fact, I think -- let`s go back and say even if the state legislature had given the black institutions as much money as they gave the white institutions all along, we wouldn`t have this problem.

HUNTER-GAULT: Fine. Dr. Haynes, I`ve heard your views on that. You agree with Ms. Simmons?

HAYNES: Yeah, and of course I would take that one step further.

HUNTER-GAULT: You`ll have to do it quickly.

HAYNES: We want to provide more and better educational opportunities for blacks.

HUNTER-GAULT: All right; thank you. I`m sorry, we have to leave it there. Dr. Stone in Louisiana, thank you very much. Thank you, Dr. Haynes; thank you, Ms. Simmons, and thank you, Mr. Tatel.

MacNEIL: That`s all for tonight. We`ll be back tomorrow night. I`m Robert MacNeil. Good night.