Archive for Ward Connerly
The American Civil Rights Institute’s Ward Connerly will speak at a luncheon in Arizona on Tuesday, August 31, 2010 at 11:30 a.m. at the Prescott Resort.
The Republican Women of Prescott invited Connerly to talk about racial neutrality in government and other topics. In November, Arizona voters will vote yes or no on Proposition 107, which would amend the state constitution to bar their government from discriminating against or granting preferences to individuals based on race in government employment, education, or contracting.
“We are thrilled to be having such a well-known author and patriot to be our guest speaker in August,” group president Kay Harlan said. “The public is always invited, and we hope many from our community will attend Mr. Connerly’s timely message on current race relations in the United States, especially since Arizona will be voting on Prop. 107 this November.”
Follow this link for more information and to RSVP.
Filed under: AzCRI, Ward Connerly | |Comments off
The American Civil Rights Institute’s Ward Connerly was quoted in a story about the diversity of transfer students to the University of California at San Diego (UCSD). From San Diego Union-Tribune:
UCSD is set to receive a “record number” of transfer students mostly from community colleges, which will increase “diversity” on campus. The director of admissions said “we” don’t factor race into admissions decisions but “recognize that the community college population has a natural diversity…diverse by race, age, income…”
She’s correct on that note, and wouldn’t it be wonderful if diversity of many factors—age, income, geography—were as important to admissions committees as skin color? An excerpt:
“The 2010-11 transfer class will have 82 percent more African Americans that last year, 43 percent more Mexican Americans, 52 percent more Latinos and 75 percent more Native Americans…The number of underrepresented minorities is also up significantly in the freshman class, though not as dramatically as among transfers.”
Connerly, who believes UC should be focusing on community colleges, said “I would say it complies with 209 and I would say it is good educational policy.”
Filed under: Diversity, UC, Ward Connerly | |1 Comment
Michelle Malkin quoted the American Civil Rights Institute’s Ward Connerly in a recent column about that nasty business with the NAACP accusing the tea party movement of racism:
“The NAACP is a laughingstock…The group no longer represents the best interests of oppressed minorities, but the thin-skinned whims of the black elite and the ravenous appetite of the Nanny State. Establishment civil rights leaders now use their once-compelling moral authority to hector, bully and shake down corporate and political targets.
”As Ward Connerly, the truly maverick opponent of government racial preferences who is black, wrote recently, ‘the NAACP is not so much a civil-rights organization as it is a trade association with clear links to the Democratic Party, despite the claim of its chairman that the NAACP has always been non-partisan.’ Such a statement doesn’t pass the giggle test. The NAACP uses the plight of poor black people as a fig leaf to hide its true agenda of promoting policies that benefit their dues-paying members, not black people in general or poor black people in particular.’”
The NAACP is part of what I call the civil rights industry, dedicated to searching for “racism” under every rock and opposing policies that actually would help lower-income blacks become more self-reliant. For example, the NAACP opposes the use of taxpayers’ dollars to pay for school vouchers for families seeking a better education for their children. The organization would rather families “contribute” their hard-earned money to government schools run by the teachers union, arms of the Democratic party.
Malkin also mentioned Kenneth Gladney, a black conservative, beaten by union henchmen and called an Uncle Tom by so-called civil rights leaders.
Filed under: Ward Connerly | |Comments off
Racial preferences opponents David Lehrer and Joe Hicks co-authored an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, titled, “UC proves Prop. 209’s point.”
“As proponents of Proposition 209 in 1996, we could only have hoped that the ‘underrepresented’ minorities at the center of the debate would ultimately be admitted to the UC — without preferences — in numbers approximating their rate of admission with the benefit of preferences. Our argument then, as now, was that granting preferences on the basis of race and ethnicity was wrong and that, ultimately, in a bias-free environment, students would figure out what had to be done and would qualify for admission on their merits. That argument was right.
“Here are the facts: The number of minority admissions to the University of California for this fall — without the benefit of preferences — exceeds that of 1996, in absolute numbers and, more important, as a percentage of all “admits.” The numbers are, in almost every category, quite staggering.
“Latino students have gone from 15.4% (5,744 students) of freshman undergraduate admissions in 1996 to 23% (14,081) in 2010 (a 145% increase). Asian students have gone from 29.8% (11,085) of the freshman admits to 37.47% (22,877). Native American admits have declined slightly, from 0.9% to 0.8%, but their absolute number increased, from 360 to 531. African American admits have gone from 4% (1,628) to 4.2% (2,624), a modest gain in percentage but nearly a 50% increase in numbers of freshmen admitted.
“The only major category that declined in percentage terms was whites, who went from 44% (16,465) of the freshmen admits to 34% (20,807).”
What accounts for these post-Prop. 209 numbers? Could it be that removing race from the equation puts minorities on notice that grades and scores—and not skin color—will determine their acceptance, and, therefore, attracts minority students with higher qualifications? Perhaps.
As the writers note, racial preferences proponents are under the impression that the percentage of preferred minorities enrolled in colleges must match the percentage of preferred minorities in the state, regardless of SATs, GPAs, and overall achievement. Where did this idea of proportional representation come from?
Filed under: UC, Ward Connerly | |Comments off
Although California’s constitution bars the government from discriminating against or granting preferences to individuals or groups on the basis of race in government employment, education, or contracting, proponents of race-based policies still resist obeying the law.
Last October, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who swore to uphold the constitution, signed into law a bill that directs state departments to award government contracts to the lowest responsible bidder subcontracting 15 percent of the work to minority-owned businesses and five percent to female-owned businesses. The contractor who fails to do so will be rejected, even if he’s the lowest bidder.
The Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) filed suit against the state, alleging that the law violated Article I, Section 31. Ward Connerly, who led the Prop. 209 campaign, was named as a plaintiff. Good news from PLF:
“The tentative ruling (DOC) by the court agreed with all of PLF’s arguments. The Court said that the state could not survive by refusing to enforce statutes that were facially unconstitutional. Furthermore, the Court noted that several of the statutes that we were challenging were not covered by the Court of Appeal’s decision, so there was no possible way that the state could refuse to enforce them, and there was no possible way they could be read in a constitutional way. The Court also rejected the State’s argument that the uncodified section of the Bill indicated the State’s unwillingness to enforce the statutes. The Court noted that such language ‘cannot be used to create a meaning that cannot be found in the unambiguous statutory language itself.’”
Incredibly, the state agreed the quota bill was unconstitutional. The language in the state constitution is plain, but it seems preferences proponents are hoping California voters develop amnesia.
Filed under: Pacific Legal Foundation, Quotas, Ward Connerly | |Comments off
Earlier this year I blogged about the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, and Immigration Rights By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) filing a lawsuit challenging Proposition 209, approved by 54 percent of California voters in 1996. The law bars the state from granting preferences to or discriminating against individuals or groups based on race in government employment, contracting, and education.
BAMN contends, in so many words, that certain racial minorities have a constitutional right to preferential treatment. Among other things, BAMN said Prop. 209 “promised a ‘color-blind’ Constitution. But this was and is a lie…”
The law’s purpose was to create colorblind government policy, not to guarantee equality of outcome. Defying common sense, BAMN compared Prop. 209 to Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), which held that states were permitted to enact laws that separated the races, as long as segregated facilities were “equal.” Plessy permitted racial discrimination. In contrast, Prop. 209 bars the government from such actions.
But why quibble?
The Pacific Legal Foundation (PLE) has issued a call to defend Prop. 209. PLE seeks to intervene in the federal lawsuit.
“Committed supporters with historical ties to Prop. 209 need to be part of this lawsuit,” said PLF lead attorney Sharon Browne. “They must be allowed to intervene because the voters who passed Prop. 209 deserve to be represented, and Prop. 209’s guarantee of equal rights and equal opportunities must be defended credibly and to the max.”
PLE notes that named defendant Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who signed a government contracting racial quota bill last year, has moved to be dismissed from the suit.
“The governor and the regents are trying to backpedal out of defending Prop. 209,” Browne said. “And Attorney General Jerry Brown has already tried to sabotage Prop. 209 by sending a brief to the state Supreme Court calling it unconstitutional.”
The American Civil Rights Institute’s (ACRI) Ward Connerly added: “Every individual in this country – including every student and every university applicant – deserves a full measure of equal treatment, not categorization by race or sex. This is the mandate of Prop. 209, and 14 years after its enactment it is time to move forward and fully embrace that goal.”
(Photo: ACRI’s Jennifer Gratz of Gratz v. Bollinger hounded by BAMN protesters)
Filed under: Judiciary, Pacific Legal Foundation, Ward Connerly | |Comments off
“Although I am a resident of California, I spend a considerable amount of time in Arizona. In fact, over the past several months, I have commuted to Arizona on an almost weekly basis.
“I have grown to love the state and its people. I find them to be friendly, fair and extraordinarily interested in America’s future.
“As a state that shares a border with Mexico, it is not surprising Arizona has a substantial Hispanic population, and a very significant problem involving illegal immigrants (close to 500,000 by some estimates).
“For decades, Arizona and other border states have urged the federal government to resolve the issue of illegal immigration. When the people of California passed a ballot initiative (Proposition 187) in 1994, to deny public benefits to illegal immigrants, the response was to label the California governor, Pete Wilson, and the electorate as “racists.” When opponents of 187 succeeded in overturning it in the courts, no effort was undertaken by the federal government to address the problems that continued to exist in California as a result of out-of-control growth in illegal immigration. Sixteen years later, California is essentially bankrupt and illegal immigration is a major contributor to that reality. Yet, the federal government continues to demonstrate its ineptness or indifference about solving the issue.
“In recent years, Arizonans have become frustrated, even frightened, as they have watched rapidly escalating growth in the population of illegal immigrants. But, instead of individuals flocking across the border merely in search of jobs to support their families in Mexico, Mexican kidnappers, smugglers, drug cartels and gangs have also invaded Arizona and taken up permanent residency there. The murder of a prominent Arizona rancher on his own property several weeks ago, allegedly by an illegal immigrant, became the trigger for action by the Legislature and the people of that state. In short, many of the people of Arizona do not feel safe in their own homes; and far from “living in the shadows,” as is often said of illegal aliens, the criminal element within that population has become too threatening for the state to simply ignore.”
Read the full article at SonoranNews.com.
Filed under: Ward Connerly | |Comments off
An excerpt of a Minding the Campus article by the American Civil Rights Institute’s Ward Connerly:
“Although my years of service on the University of California (UC) Board of Regents were the most tumultuous years of my life, my pride in the Board and the university that it serves has, until now, never wavered. But, a recent meeting and action by the Board has caused that feeling of pride to diminish.
“At several UC campuses, a variety of incidents occurred several weeks ago that were characterized as creating a ‘toxic’ racial climate for black students. The source of the ‘toxicity’ came in the form of an off-campus party called the ‘Compton Cookout’ and a noose found hanging inside the library at the UCSD campus.
“In a little over a three-week period, racial epithets were allegedly directed at black students at UCSD; and, at other UC campuses, a swastika was carved into a Jewish student’s door and derogatory graffiti was found at the gay and lesbian students’ center.
“These alleged incidents resulted in a delegation of students, faculty members and UC staff attending a meeting of the Board of Regents in late March to complain that the Regents weren’t doing enough to create a climate that nurtures ‘inclusiveness,’ for minorities, such as blacks and gays/lesbians. With no effort to validate the assertions, several regents gushed into a state of apologia, as is customary for university governing board members in such circumstances.
“Somehow, and not surprisingly, the apology fest about ‘campus climate’ veered into the issue of the number of blacks enrolled at all UC campuses. This was familiar terrain for Regent Eddie Island, whose singular focus as a regent seems to be the circumvention of the California Constitution and its prohibition against race preferences.
“The cause of my growing disrespect for the board was the comment by Island that ‘it is our own standards and slavish adherence to grade point averages and SAT scores that have put us in this dilemma.’ He continued, ‘We value those things higher than we value other human qualities that are just as important and that can make a contribution within the UC environment.’
“UC President Mark Yudof chimed in that he would seek changes in admissions policy as well as the creation of scholarships for underrepresented minorities in order to ‘improve diversity.’ Yoduf stated that all UC campuses needed to employ a holistic review – currently employed at UC Berkeley and UCLA – when screening applicants, rather than focusing on SAT scores and grade point averages in making admissions decisions.
“The University of California is regarded, indisputably, as one of our nation’s premier systems of higher education. In virtually every category, one or more of UC’s ten campuses ranks within the top ten nationwide. This has happened precisely because of UC’s ’slavish adherence’ to academic excellence, not because of other so-called ‘human qualities.’
“It is not uncommon for racial incidents and so-called hate crimes to be nothing more than pranks perpetrated by students in search of a little fun after a beer party. Worse, there have been many occasions in which individuals and organizations (who need not even be students) fake incidents of racism and hate to promote their own agenda by getting the attention of the university. Although these stupid and malicious acts can cause a lot of misery for many students, they do not warrant wholesale changes in admissions, apologies by regents for something over which they have little or no control, and pandering to the extent of providing special benefits for ‘minority’ students.”
Read the full article.
Filed under: Ward Connerly | |Comments off
As you may recall, the One Florida Initiative was a reaction to Ward Connerly’s campaign to end government racial preferences in the state 10 years ago. Former Governor Jeb Bush issued an executive order to bar race-based preferences in government hiring, contracting, and admissions.
(Hiring, contracting, and admitting individuals without regard to race seems a reasonable way to eliminate racial discrimination. In fact, civil service tests were implemented to prevent political favoritism or assessments based on other than qualifications. Unfortunately, the country has moved backward. The reality is that the government favors certain applicants based on the color of their skin.)
To avoid backlash from the civil rights industry, Bush created the Talented 20 program as part of One Florida, which guarantees admissions to Florida students graduating in the top 20 percent of their high schools.
Bush’s avoidance tactic failed , because the NAACP complained about the program, concerned that Talented 20 would reduce the numbers of black students. The program would benefit all students, not just blacks, therefore…
The Orlando Sentinel published a story last week about One Florida’s “mixed results.” An excerpt:
In 1999, a bit more than 20 percent of the state’s high-school graduates were black, as were 17.5 percent of university freshmen. By 2008, the last year for which a racial breakdown is available, blacks accounted for 19.5 percent of high-school graduates — but only 14.9 percent of university freshmen.
Similarly, in 1999, Hispanics made up 14.7 percent of high-school graduates and 13.8 percent of university freshmen. By 2008, Hispanics were 21.4 percent of graduates and 19.1 percent of the freshmen class, a wider gap.
By contrast, white and Asian students were overrepresented among college freshmen in 1999 — and still were in 2008, according to the Sentinel’s analysis. For example, white students comprised roughly 60 percent of high-school graduates and university freshmen in 1999; by 2008, they were 54 percent of high-school graduates — and 58 percent of university freshmen.
According to the article, the number of high school graduates increased faster than freshman enrollment. As a result, graduates face more competition. Preferred minority enrollment dropped every year. Therefore, the argument goes, Florida must admit more under-qualified preferred minorities in place of more qualified whites and non-preferred minority Asians.
As I’ve said and written many times, the academic achievement gap is not evidence of racism, structural or otherwise, and provides no justification for discriminating against individuals based on the color of their skin. The focus should be on the other end: encouraging parents and students before school age and at the grade school level to work harder and value education in practice, not just conversation.
Lowering standards for preferred minority underperformance is a sort of perverse reward, don’t you think?
Filed under: Achievement Gap, Ward Connerly | |Comments off
An excerpt of Ward Connerly’s post at the National Review’s The Corner blog:
“The national debate about health-care insurance has underscored one indisputable fact: In every way imaginable — socially, ideologically, culturally, politically, and financially — the American public is profoundly divided. There is one area of division that is starker, more enduring, more contentious, and with greater potential to leave lasting scars than others; and that is the area of race. Each of the other factors of American life intersects with race, thereby compounding its effect upon all Americans.
“If I have learned one thing from life, it is that race is the engine that drives the political Left. When all else fails, that segment of America goes to the default position of using race to achieve its objectives. In the courtrooms, on college campuses, and, most especially, in our politics, race is a central theme. Where it does not naturally rise to the surface, there are those who will manufacture and amplify it.
“Such is the case with the claims that the ‘Tea Partiers’ are a bunch of racists and that many of them spat upon members of the Congressional Black Caucus and called them ‘n*****s.’ I am convinced beyond any doubt that all of this is part of the strategic plan being implemented by the Left in its current campaign to remake America.”
Filed under: Ward Connerly | |Comments off
« Previous Entries||
