Archive for Jessica Peck Corry
According to a CBS4/Rocky Mountain News poll, 53 percent of registered Colorado voters support Amendment 46, which would put state and local governments out of the skin color business. (Source)
I suspect those who say they don’t support it don’t understand the issue. Amendment 46 will not end affirmative action, which doesn’t involve discrimination and preferential treatment. The measure would bar the government from treating people differently based on race and sex.
The Colorado Civil Rights Initiative’s Jessica Peck Corry told CBS4, “The time has come for the government to stop picking winners and losers based on race and gender. Colorado is a progressive state dedicated to equal opportunity and our equal opportunity programs should reflect that commitment.”
Melissa Hart, co-chair of No on Amendment 46, argues that the measure “uses language evocative of the civil rights movement, but it actually is an anti-civil rights measure,” yet she calls Ward Connerly a “carpetbagger,” language evocative of anti-Reconstructionists! On the civil rights movement point, she’s correct. The very thing black Americans fought against back then is still being done today, this time in favor of blacks and in the name of skin deep-only diversity. Government-sanctioned racial discrimination must be eliminated, no matter which group benefits.
Carpetbaggers, you may remember from history books, is a derisive term southerners gave to northerners who ventured below the Mason-Dixon line after the Civil War to establish order and to help freed slaves. By calling Connerly a carpetbagger, Hart intends to evoke similar derision. It’s ironic that she uses the language of people who not only wanted to keep blacks in bondage, but also wanted to keep the country divided. She’s so strongly opposed to Amendment 46 that she co-opts the language of pro-slavery southerners?
How progressive of you, Ms. Hart.
Addendum: Steven Willborn, dean of the University of Nebraska College of Law, called Roger Clegg an “outside agitator” for daring to study the law school’s admission policies. Outside agitators is what southerners call northerners who traveled south to help break down Jim Crow during the civil rights movement. Hmmm…I’m beginning to see a pattern.
Filed under: Amendment 46, CoCRI, Jessica Peck Corry | |Comments off
One of the ways preference proponents rally opposition to measures like Amendment 46 is to use emotion-laden rhetoric.
“This anti-affirmative action measure will end summer science camp for girls!”
What Amendment 46 would do is prevent public funds from being used to sponsor events and support policies that discriminate against and grant preferential treatment to people based on race and sex. In that regard, Amendment 46 would prevent the use of tax dollars to grant preferential treatment to girls in summer science camp programs.
As Colorado Civil Rights Initiative president Jessica Peck Corry says, “The programs can still go on, they just can’t grant preferential treatment if they take state tax dollars.” (Rocky Truth Patrol)
Preferences proponent Melissa Hart, a University of Colorado law school faculty member, said: “If you say it has to be gender neutral or it can’t get public funding, either way, you’re eliminating the original program.”
If the program depends on tax dollars, Hart is correct. If the program ends, so be it. The point is that the government should not be using public funds to discriminate against people based on race or sex for any reason, not even to fund a summer science program for members of an underrepresented group.
I’m 99 percent certain, however, that plenty of private donors are more than willing to fund such programs.
(Photo source: Sally Ride Science Camps)
Filed under: Amendment 46, Jessica Peck Corry | |Comments off
*Update below*
The Colorado Civil Rights Initiative’s Jessica Peck Corry makes the case in the Denver Post that it’s time to end government discrimination and preferential treatment. A vote for Amendment 46 is a vote for equality.
Amendment 46 will eliminate government preferences based on factors like race and sex and open outreach to individuals with disadvantages, regardless of race or sex. Corry writes:
“Voters should support Amendment 46 because fairness and equality dictate that our affirmative-action efforts — designed initially to fight the effects of discrimination — don’t discriminate. If we want to promote diversity, we must lay to rest the false notion that diversity is tied to our biology and not our own unique life experiences.”
There’s also a false notion that women and minorities can’t succeed without preferential treatment. As Corry notes, admission rates for the University of California system have increased at seven of its nine campuses since Proposition 209 became law in 1996, and over half of UC undergraduates are women. Proposition 209 has not stopped qualified women and minorities from gaining admission.
Taking economic disadvantage into consideration is preferable to factoring in skin color and sex in admissions decisions. Colorado voters have a chance to make sure their state is barred from discriminating.
For those whose recollection is faulty, here’s an excerpt of Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964:
No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
Update: A commenter to Corry’s op-ed writes:
“I’m an African American law student. I scored a 174 out of 180 on my LSAT and entered law school with a 3.95 GPA. I am in the top 20% of my class and yet I’m STILL ASKED how I got admitted. The question is usually framed around a comment such as ‘how did you get in when my friend/sister/brother/cousin/dog groomer’ couldn’t. My simple answer is that I outperformed them. The doubts linger, nevertheless.
“In my opinion, eliminating programs that give people a reason to doubt minority academic achievement is a good thing. Admissions should be merit based, period.”
Filed under: Amendment 46, Jessica Peck Corry | |Comments off
Ward Connerly, American Hero – The Hoover Institution’s Peter Robinson does a fine job capturing the essence of the man behind the effort to eliminate preferences in government hiring, contracting, and admissions across the country. I reviewed Connerly’s biography, Creating Equal: My Fight Against Race Preferences, a number of years ago, so I’m familiar with why he decided to take up a shield and fight the giant called the professional civil rights industry. For those who haven’t read the book, check it out. And read Robinson’s article. (Forbes)
Confusion of Terms – Once again, a reporter confuses the terms “affirmative action” and “race preferences.” Affirmative action, as conceived, isn’t what state ballot initiatives seek to eliminate. It is the practice of considering factors like race and sex in government hiring, contracting, and admissions decisions. Taxpayer-funded institutions may continue casting a wider net to reach out to qualified minorities. But hiring or admitting someone because of skin color or sex – discriminatory.
Says Jessica Peck Corry, director of the Colorado Civil Rights Initative: “I don’t want to live in a country that says because you were born with the wrong biology, we’re going to exclude you from these programs.” (Grand Junction Free Press)
Bigotry on Both Sides – Gary Bauer, president of American Values, points out in Politico that race is often used as a fall-back position, an excuse, a reason to explain why a black candidate may do poorly in the polls. If Barack Obama loses, conventional wisdom says, it’s because he’s black. As Bauer notes, many will vote for Obama because he’s black. But there’s nothing provocative about that spin.
Keep in mind that bigotry is no respecter of political parties. About seven years ago, Thomas V. “Mike” Miller, Democratic president of the Maryland Senate, called black Republican Michael Steele an “Uncle Tom.” I have never read or heard any black liberal condemn Miller. Republicans like Ward Connerly and Clarence Thomas have also had to deal with liberal bigotry.
One day soon, perhaps racial considerations will be a thing of the past. But first, Americans must revoke the government’s authority to prefer one race of people over another. (Politico)
Filed under: Jessica Peck Corry, Ward Connerly | |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
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
||
