This does not necessarily mean abandoning the goals of antidiscrimination and equal opportunity. A case could be made that we have asked affirmative action programs to bear too much practical and symbolic weight that we have neglected other ways of fighting discrimination, and relied excessively on affirmative action at the expense of a broader equal opportunity agenda.

Still, we must acknowledge that there are permanent impediments to realizing the dream of equal opportunity limitations not just of resources and will, but stemming also from values deeply rooted in the ethos of liberal democracy. Achieving fully equal opportunity would require equalizing all factors that affect the development of talents. As philosophers since Plato have observed, this would imply (among other things) highly intrusive and coercive government action to correct for the differential impact of such variables as family background and culture. The history of the affirmative action debate confirms that we can neither avoid nor fully erase the tension between equal opportunity and personal liberty.

In that light, I would suggest some policy options, based on legal and social realities, to take us beyond the current system and the ensuing debate.

1. Alter current federal programs to conform with recent Supreme Court decisions. This would require the elimination of quotas, set-asides, racially exclusive programs and those with pure diversity rationales. A range of preference programs would probably survive this test.

2. Screen out programs where the burdens of racial and ethnic classifications are borne too heavily by specific individuals. This would mean, at a minimum, prohibiting race- conscious firings or reductions-in-force.

3. Restrict affirmative action programs to "opportunity- enhancing assistance." Under this option, efforts such as race- conscious outreach and recruiting, compensatory education and training before and after recruitment, technical assistance and mentoring would continue. Racial and ethnic preferences would be discontinued along with quotas and set-asides.

4. Use the test of class as either a substitute for, or supplement to, race and ethnicity. Class disadvantage restricts the ability of many young people to attain equal formal credentials and qualifications for employment and higher education.

5. Return to the original understanding of affirmative action as transitional rather than permanent. One version of this option would be to establish fixed phase-out or termination dates for affirmative action programs. Another version would establish time limits and mandatory public review prior to reauthorization of these programs.

6. Distinguish between social goods that are more like opportunities (such as higher education) and those that are more like results (government contracts). Under this approach, the more controversial affirmative action tools such as preferences would be reserved for social goods that expand opportunity.

7. Re-examine and revise standards of merit. Standards of merit should be defined relative to the capacity for high-quality future performance. It is not necessarily "preferential" treatment for universities to be open to the possibility that a young person from public housing with average test scores may have demonstrated as much potential for success as has a suburbanite with higher test scores.

8. Strengthen enforcement of discrimination statutes. The number of job discrimination cases and complaints reportedly has soared this decade. Bolster the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and other U.S. Government agencies, and significantly increase penalties for discrimination.

9. Intensify efforts towards equal opportunity. The full equal opportunity agenda is tremendously challenging, encompassing a wide variety of programs and goals. In addition to continuing parenting education, child care, Head Start, reform of public education, college loans, advanced technical training, job search and job linkage, and the promotion of entrepreneurship and home ownership, a new equal opportunity agenda might aim at strengthening the institutions of civil society within minority communities. One suggestion: The creation of a National Endowment for Black America that could receive capital contributions for a variety of social and cultural organizations, and foster both nonprofit and business entrepreneurship.

   ----------

   William A. Galston is director of the Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy at the University of Maryland School of Public Affairs. The Institute was established in 1976 to conduct research into the values and concepts that underlie public policy. This article was excerpted from the Report from the Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy, Winter/Spring 1997,  pp. 2-9.