Archive for September, 2008
The AP is reporting that Democratic governor Bill Ritter plans to announce his opposition to Amendment 46, which would amend the state constitution to ban government preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin. Shocking, yes?
In March, the Secretary of State determined that the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative submitted enough signatures to appear on the November ballot.
We’ll link to Ritter’s statement when it’s available.
Filed under: Amendment 46, CoCRI | |Comments off
Just as I long for people to stop using the term “African American” to describe black Americans, most of whom never set foot on the continent, I want people to stop using the term “affirmative action” to describe race preferences.
Dahlia Lithwick, writing for Newsweek, uses the term affirmative action throughout her 865-word article about Justice Clarence Thomas and vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin to describe race preferences, a policy whereby certain ethnic minority groups are given preferential treatment over other groups. She notes that Justice Thomas opposes race preferences, despite “benefiting” from the practice. In his autobiography, My Grandfather’s Son, Thomas wrote about the stigma of race preferences, the same sort of stigma Palin must be facing.
Thomas received preferential treatment based on the color of his skin, as I and many other blacks have received. Was Palin chosen partly because she was a woman? Most likely. It’s reasonable to perceive recipients of preferential treatment as less qualified until proven otherwise. It’s not fair, but the goal is not to change people’s minds about those hired/admitted under preferences. The goal is to eliminate preferences and allow individuals to compete with the entire pool of applicants, so that no one is stigmatized for being assessed based on lowered standards.
Filed under: Gov. Sarah Palin, Justice Clarence Thomas | |Comments off
A group of people claimed signature gatherers misled citizens into signing the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative (CoCRI), also known as Amendment 46. Some accused the campaign of tricking people into believing they were signing a petition to keep preferences instead of dismantling them. Venita Vinson said a signature gatherer asked her to sign a petition for “affirmative action.” (Source)
Last Friday an administrative law judge, who said the complainants didn’t supply enough details, threw out those claims.
CoCRI director said, “Given the lack of evidence presented by our opposition, the court did the right thing by dismissing all of the complaints. We will continue to fight with vigor any and all false allegations against Amendment 46.”
In March, the Colorado Secretary of State determined that CoCRI submitted enough signatures to appear on the November ballot. Earlier this month, the secretary announced that Initiative 82, which would preserve race and sex preferences in government hiring, contracting, and admissions, will not appear on the November ballot.
Filed under: CoCRI, Jessica Peck Corry | |Comments off
In a 2004 study called A Systemic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools (PDF), University of California law professor Richard Sander posited that law school race-based preferences result in fewer black lawyers, because blacks admitted under these conditions are placed in schools that exceed their levels of preparation. As a result, they failed the bar exam at higher rates.
In 2007, Sander asked the State Bar’s Committee of Bar Examiners for historical data on past bar exams, and the committee refused. Sander asked the state’s highest court to compel the committee to release the data. Last week the court denied his request and said he should refile in the appropriate court, citing privacy concerns. (Law.com)
We’ll post a PDF copy of the opinion when it’s available.
Filed under: Judiciary, Richard Sander, UC | |Comments off
Earlier this month, the Colorado Secretary of State announced that Initiative 82, which would preserve race and sex preferences in government hiring, contracting, and admissions, will not appear on the November ballot.
As you may recall, the secretary determined in March that the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative (CoCRI) submitted enough signatures to appear on the November ballot. CoCRI, known as Amendment 46, reads: “The state shall not discriminate against or grant preferential treatment to any group or individual on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public contracting, or public education.”
CoCRI director Jessica Peck Corry said, “We know that signature gathering campaigns are very difficult, but given the fact that this campaign was designed to confuse voters, we’re extremely pleased with the result.”
The Durango Herald Online features a story on race in the upcoming election as it pertains to preferences. People interviewed in the article include those who support Amendment 46. Proponent Kate Melvin said, “We’re saddling women and minorities with the notion that without assistance, they can’t get the job.”
Those who oppose the amendment say it would “end valuable programs” that help women and minorities in college programs like science and engineering. Typically, so-called affirmative action supporters misconstrue the meaning of the term.
There is nothing wrong with reaching out to a wide variety of people for hiring and admissions. That is affirmative action. It is wrong to implement a different standard (read: lower) of evaluation for women and minorities. That is preferential treatment.
Filed under: Amendment 46, CoCRI, Jessica Peck Corry | |Comments off
Michael Nietzel, president of Missouri State University, released his annual campus report for 2008, and one of his proposals is to “promote ethnic diversity” on campus. (Source)
Ethnic diversity is not an unworthy goal, but when efforts to increase diversity involve discriminating against one ethnic group in favor of another (and lowering standards for one group and not others) is most unworthy, not to mention against the law.
It’s unfortunate that the Missouri Civil Rights Initiative (MoCRI) had to suspend in May its campaign to add anti-preferences language to the November ballot. MoCRI collected over 170,000 signatures from Missouri voters in fewer than four months, but time ran out. The process was delayed by a legal challenge over ballot language and other obstacles. After the court decision, only 113 days remained to collect signatures.
MoCRI director Tim Asher said that with “the May 4th deadline looming, our only options were to abandon the effort, begin at once, or wait for the court of appeals to render a decision.”
The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, which was delayed by legal challenges, finally passed with 58 percent of the vote in 2006. Let’s hope we’ll say the same about MoCRI one day.
Filed under: Diversity, MCRI, MoCRI, Tim Asher | |Comments off
Here’s a newsflash: a new AP-Yahoo News online poll shows that blacks and whites hold different views on race. Whites and blacks generally don’t agree on how much prejudice exists and where the fault lies.
It didn’t take a poll to determine that. Blacks and whites will always hold different views on race relations. According to the poll, 57 percent of blacks said “a lot” of racial discrimination exists, and only 10 percent of whites said the same. Over a third of whites said “most” or “all” racial tension is caused by blacks, and only three percent of blacks said the same.
What does this poll, with a sample of over 2,200, reveal about race relations in America? To answer the question, it would have been helpful to define the terms. What does racial discrimination look like? Examples from both sides would expose and provide insight into people’s beliefs about prejudice and discrimination. Some blacks may consider a funny look to be racial prejudice. Others might perceive being passed over for promotion discrimination, when in fact race had nothing to do with it.
This country has a long history of racial tension, and it’s not surprising that blacks and whites don’t and probably will never see eye to eye on certain issues. One way to ease tension, in my view, is to remove racial references from government policy and from public debate. In other words, government policy and laws should be race-neutral and references to race kept to a minimum.
Blacks and whites don’t have to agree on how much prejudice exists and whose fault it is. Does it really matter? What matters is protecting the rights of all citizens regardless of race. Both sides should be in full agreement on this issue.
Filed under: Polls | |Comments off
Signature blockers, also known as petition blockers, thrive on preventing citizens from reading and signing petitions for state ballot initiatives. Tactics range from talking over signature takers to insulting them to following them around, and worse.
The Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, & Immigration Rights and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) is an expert in signature blocking.
Max McPhail, director of the Arizona Civil Rights Initiative (AzCRI), which recently failed, talked about what happened to him at one petition gathering effort. BAMN blockers accused him of being a self-hater. McPhail is a racial minority, and in the eyes of those who believe blacks should be held to lower standards, any minority who disagrees must hate himself. McPhail told Capitol Media Services that a new initiative campaign to end preferences in government hiring, contracting, and admissions will begin in Arizona after the November election.
Signature blocking is an egregious and unethical effort to keep citizens from exercising their rights as citizens. Perversely, blockers really think they’re protecting citizens. That’s true only if you consider people sheeple, blindly following the pack without the intelligence to make informed decisions about what they believe. BAMN chairperson Shanta Driver said this about the failure of AzCRI:
“BAMN’s fraud-blockers prevented Connerly from obtaining petition signatures by lying to qualified voters about the aim and effect of the initiative, so he was forced to resort to outright forgery and fraud.”
Driver believes ACRI is defrauding voters, so BAMN’s solution is to resort to preventing those same voters from getting information to make the decision for themselves.
What a proud moment in the history of civil rights!
Check out the YouTube channel EndRacePreferences
Filed under: Blockers | |Comments off
On November 7, 2006, 58 percent of Michigan voters chose to bar the state from using preferences in government hiring, contracting, and admissions. Since then, a number of schools in Michigan have reported dips in minority enrollment.
University of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman claims enrollment at her school has dropped in the wake of Proposal 2. A short time after the initiative passed, Coleman implied the school would circumvent the law and subvert the people’s will by continuing to consider race as an admissions factor.
Grand Valley State University in Allendale, Michigan,
reports that minority enrollment in its incoming freshman class is down 29.6 percent. Vice Provost Lynn Blue said, “Minority enrollment is of the highest importance to Grand Valley, and this trend is of great concern. A great deal of study will go into this.”
Providing a quality education, not reaching a quota of brown faces, strikes me as “of the highest importance,” but racial bean counters have strange priorities.
It was inevitable that minority enrollment would drop once schools stopped putting so much weight on the race of applicants. The question is, why is the dip perceived as inherently bad?
Affirmative action as originally conceived invoked the image of a hiring manager/college recruiter casting his net wider to include a larger and more diverse group of qualified candidates and applicants. It very quickly became racial preferences, which in many cases involves hiring and admitting black candidates whose qualifications are lower relative to those in the general pool. No matter how proponents try to spin it, this is a reality.
Without race preference bar-lowering, black students might be better off. They stand a better chance of excelling and graduating after four years if their qualifications match the school rather than struggling in academic settings for which they are unprepared. With preferences in place, there’s always the assumption that blacks were admitted through a lowered standards track, whether true or not.
College and university administrators seem to care more about having brown faces on admissions brochures than making sure all students receive the quality education they deserve, regardless of color.
Just one woman’s opinion!
Filed under: University of Michigan | |Comments off
I’ve always thought it was strange that minority students pontificate about the so-called value of admitting more people “of color” into colleges and universities for the sake of diversity, but separate themselves into racial “ghettos” as soon as they get there.
Why the separation? Of course, people tend to self-segregate. It’s human nature. But shouldn’t we at least try to rise above our nature and make an effort to be inclusive? Not only would this foster good will and cooperation, in my view, it might improve academic performances all around.
Apparently, such an attitude does improve performances, at least for minority students. The Manhattan Institute’s Heather Mac Donald wrote about a study that posits the same idea. According to the study, published recently in the Journal of College Student Development, participating in so-called diversity functions involving racially segregated groups like MEChA negatively affects the grades of Hispanic science majors. Their grades are significantly lower than Hispanic students who don’t involve themselves with such groups.
What’s going on? According to the study, participating in these race-focused groups separates students from the kind of values it takes to succeed in science. “White” values, such as discipline and persistence, take a back seat to shared values of the group. Obviously, those values don’t foster academic success.
These results don’t bode well for the future, says Mac Donald. Hispanics are projected to be a majority by 2040. The number of Hispanics enrolled in college will double by 2023. Not many will graduate from schools of science and engineering. This demographic shift will affect our country’s technological competitiveness.
Mac Donald suggests schools close every race-focused organization and “turn it into mandated study hall.”
Back to human nature. It’s probably more satisfying for some people to join such groups and complain about perceived racism and persecution than it is to focus on the hard work of studying and performing.
Filed under: Diversity | |Comments off
« Previous Entries||
The AP is reporting that Democratic governor Bill Ritter plans to announce his opposition to Amendment 46, which would amend the state constitution to ban government preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin. Shocking, yes?
