Allison Kasic

As the Olympics kick off this Friday, all eyes are firmly set on one athlete: Michael Phelps. Not only does Phelps have the chance to win a record eight gold medals in a single Olympics, he is also practically assured of passing Jenny Thompson’s mark of twelve career medals to become the most decorated Olympic athlete in American history. Not bad for a 23 year old.

Luckily for Team USA, Phelps isn’t the only star in the swimming pool. In the few events that Phelps doesn’t swim, the United States will be represented by world class swimmers such as Aaron Piersol and Brendan Hansen. And, of course, the women’s team has stars of its own, including Katie Hoff and Natalie Coughlin, who are expected to take home multiple medals.

With Team USA poised for greatness in Beijing, one might assume that the state of swimming is strong on college campuses. After all, many of America’s Olympic swimmers are either college students or train on college campuses. But such an assumption would only be half right.

Like many women’s sports, women’s swimming has thrived on campus in the post-Title IX era. Only 3,038 women competed at the Division I level in 1981. By 2004 that number was up to 4,899—a 61.25% increase. Such an increase is no doubt a positive development. Unfortunately, men’s swimming is a different story. Only 3,568 men competed at the Division I level in 2004, down from a 1984 high of 4,372—a -18.39% decline. It’s not just the men who don’t have the opportunity to compete who suffer when these programs are cut; women swimmers also lose their teammates, training partners, and biggest supporters.

Why have so many men’s swimming teams been cut? A primary reason is Title IX. Title IX supporters will tell you that the statute makes no requirements for gender quotas; it simply bans sex discrimination in schools receiving federal financial assistance. Yet the trouble lies in how Title IX has been interpreted by bureaucrats and the court system.

In 1979, a Policy Interpretation from the newly formed Office of Civil Rights outlined the infamous “three-prong test,” allowing schools different options to comply with Title IX. While three options were presented, only one option—proportionality—provided a quantitative measure that could shield schools from Title IX lawsuits. It is no surprise then that colleges overwhelmingly seek to achieve compliance through proportionality.

Allison Kasic

Allison Kasic is the director of R. Gaull Silberman Center for Collegiate Studies at the Independent Women's Forum.
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Allison Kasic's column. Sign up today and receive daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.