by Emil Guillermo
I don’t know about you, but I think I’d rather be an “American Idol” than a Harvard matriculate. But we all know any success takes skill and luck. So, maybe the answer to that affirmative action lawsuit at Harvard is—a lottery?
In the meantime, let’s all sing our praises to Iam Tongi, the young man who put the “NHPI” in AANHPI Month when he became the first Hawaiian-born, Pacific Islander singer to win ABC’s vocal talent contest, “American Idol.”
I was still rooting for 17-year-old Filipino Canadian Tyson Venegas who was eliminated after making the Top Ten and had some face time during the finale.
But it’s the 18-year-old Tongi who’s matriculating into showbiz with a bang.
Tongi, from Kahuku on the North Shore of Oahu, was the top vote-getter in the 21st season of the show, beating out country singer Megan Danielle, 19, from Georgia.
For several weeks, there appeared no way Tongi could lose.
With his size and soulful sound, Tongi seemed reminiscent of another Hawaiian singer, Israel “IZ” Kamakawiwoʻole, a.k.a “Bruddah IZ” Kamakawiwoʻole, who died in 1997, was known around the world for his ukelele version of “Somewhere Over the Rainbow,” which made him a legend.
Tongi’s rival, Megan Danielle, had a gritty southern lilt in her voice reminiscent of a young Dolly Parton. But that wasn’t going to top the second coming of Bruddah IZ.AANHPI singers have come close in the past to be the “American Idol,” with Hawaii’s Filipino American Jasmine Trias finishing in the top three in 2004 and Nepalese American Arthur Gunn finishing second in 2020.
But Tongi broke through in a big way in this year’s competition as he appeared to be the judges’ favorite from the start, delivering emotional renditions of songs like James Blunt’s “Monsters.”In the finale, Tongi did that song again. But this time he was paired with Blunt himself, in a live performance dedicated to Tongi’s late father that left both Tongi and the audience in tears.
That nearly sealed the deal for Tongi, who at just 18 looks ready with the “American Idol” stamp of approval to make a huge splash.
In the aftermath, the rumors spread that the show was rigged. It is an election where people are allowed to vote multiple times. And it doesn’t seem fair when Hawaii must vote in the afternoon when the show is on at 8 pm Eastern. But there’s no way to know unless someone wants to demand a recount. Does someone think that’s worth it besides the runner-up’s friends and relatives?
Just before the finale, Tongi was back on Oahu for the traditional home visit of the finalists. Thousands of people went to Turtle Bay and the North Shore, where Tongi was given an honorary high school diploma from Kahuku High.
A nice gesture. But after winning “American Idol,” Tongi doesn’t even need a diploma from Harvard.
But others do.
Harvard’s record number of Asian Americans
I love the word matriculate. It sounds like it should do more than it does.
But it’s just the easy part after you get admitted—saying if you’re really going to go. Yes or No.
Getting admitted is the hard part.
This year, 56,937 people applied to Harvard and only 1,942 got in. That’s a 3.41% acceptance rate.
On Friday, the college announced 84% said they would matriculate, or actually enroll this fall, about 1630 students.
And about 486 of them are Asian American.
That’s a freshman class that’s 29.8% Asian, two percent higher than the record set last year.
It makes for an odd coincidence. Just as the Supreme Court is set to deliver an opinion by this summer in a lawsuit that claims Harvard’s process discriminates against Asian Americans, the school has produced a class that is more Asian, and more diverse in terms of race and class in its history.
The Black student population is down slightly but is still at 14.1% of the new class. Latinx students are down from 11.9% to 11.1%. Native Americans and Native Hawaiians were at 3.6% and are now at 2.3%.
White students are up from 42.5% to 42.7%. That’s still too close to 50% for my taste.
It doesn’t exactly look like America, with Asians at 29.8% of the class, and more than four times the Asian population in the U.S.But the school has a racial diversity that wasn’t present when I was a student there in the 1970s.
More surprising is the class economic diversity, with Harvard raising the threshold for its zero-cost program. Previously, it was meant for families making $75,000 a year; now, families making less than $85,000 can qualify.
Nearly 24% of this incoming class are from families that qualify.
Make no mistake. Harvard’s no public school. But the school now has a much better mix of class and race than ever before. The fourth-generation legacy still gets in. And so do the wealthy. That’s the affirmative action that needs to be excised.
But the case before the Supreme Court doesn’t really address that aspect.
Is a lottery the answer?
Most observers feel that the court’s 6-3 conservative majority will side with the earnest but duped Asian Americans (mostly Chinese) who claim discrimination.
The ruling could ban affirmative action and force every college in the nation, not just Harvard, into some form of “race-blind admissions.” But how would a race-blind policy improve what Harvard was able to accomplish on its own using race as just one factor among many?
The anti-affirmative action group, Students for Fair Admissions, which claims that Harvard discriminated against Asian Americans, might welcome the race-blind approach, but what if such a change ends up with a school that’s nearly 40% Asian, like some University of California campuses? Of course, the Asian number could go down too.
And what of the representation of other groups? What if Black and Latinx admissions decrease even further and white admissions go back over 50%?That appears to be the Republican Party’s goal in a universe where “diversity” is now considered a dirty word by anti-woke Republicans.
SCOTUS could always affirm the lower court’s ruling that sided with Harvard. But the Supremes seem ready to undo real progress, and that would be a shame.
Maybe they should consider “totally blind,” what I would consider an enlightened lottery. The key: make people qualify for the lottery by grades, then throw them in a cage of numbered ping-pong balls that get picked at random till all the spots are gone.
That eliminates affirmative action for the mostly W&W (the white and wealthy) legacy types. And it acknowledges that in life, there’s more to success than merit.
There’s the matter of pure luck.
I have previously been negative toward any kind of lottery-based admissions. But when dealing with the limited resources doled out in admission to a place like Harvard, how else do you make things “fair”?
Talent wins out most times in life, as in Iam Tongi in “Idol.” But you also need a lot of luck to win. Ditto, Tongi.Let’s see how lucky you are on getting into the college of your choice.
We know how much AAPIs love to gamble.
Just coming to America was a gamble for many of us.
I hope you are one of the 486 Asian Americans planning to enroll in the fall.
But if you’re not matriculating there, perhaps because that’s because you were rejected. Then I hope you’re not planning to sue.
Remember, you were not discriminated against.
Try a different perspective. Of the 1,942 who were originally admitted, 312 people among them said NO to Harvard. Or maybe Harvard was their backup and not their first choice.
Harvard is not planning to sue them for discrimination.
But if you got rejected, you may want to see where those 312 naysayers are going and join the “Just say No to Harvard” club.
You’re a natural. You know “No.”
Just don’t sue.
One time-wasting lawsuit forged by conservative zealots—and fronted by Asian Americans–is one too many.
NOTE: I will talk about this column and other matters on “Emil Amok’s Takeout,” my AAPI micro-talk show. Live @2p Pacific. Livestream on Facebook; my YouTube channel; and Twitter. Catch the recordings on www.amok.com.
EMIL GUILLERMO is a journalist and commentator. A former host of NPR’s “All Things Considered,” he was an editorial board member of the Advertiser and a columnist at the Star-Bulletin.
by Emil Guillermo