YW Urges You to Vote NO on Prop 54 - California

sandra · #1 09-26-2003, 09:34 AM

i just wanted to post the text of the initiative here for members to discuss. for more information, you can visit www.informedcalifornia.org.

out of curiosity, is anyone voting for it?

Proposition 54: Classification by Race, Ethnicity, Color, or National Origin Initiative (CRECNO) Qualified for the October 7th, 2003 ballot.

Prohibition Against Classifying by Race by State and Other Public Entities

Section 32 is added to Article I of the California Constitution as follows:

Sec. 32

(a) The state shall not classify any individual by race, ethnicity, color or national origin in the operation of public education, public contracting or public employment.

(b) The state shall not classify any individual by race, ethnicity, color or national origin in the operation of any other state operations, unless the legislature specifically determines that said classification serves a compelling state interest and approves said classification by a 2/3 majority in both houses of the legislature, and said classification is subsequently approved by the governor.

(c) For purposes of this section, “classifying” by race, ethnicity, color or national origin shall be defined as the act of separating, sorting or organizing by race, ethnicity, color or national origin including, but not limited to, inquiring, profiling, or collecting such data on government forms.

(d) For purposes of subsection (a), “individual” refers to current or prospective students, contractors or employees. For purposes of subsection (b), “individual” refers to persons subject to the state operations referred to in subsection (b).

(e) The Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) shall be exempt from this section with respect to DFEH-conducted classifications in place as of March 5, 2002.

(1) Unless specifically extended by the legislature, this exemption shall expire ten years after the effective date of this measure.

(2) Notwithstanding DFEH’s exemption from this section, DFEH shall not impute a race, color, ethnicity or national origin to any individual.

(f) Otherwise lawful classification of medical research subjects and patients shall be exempt from this section.

(g) Nothing in this section shall prevent law enforcement officers, while carrying out their law enforcement duties, from describing particular persons in otherwise lawful ways. Neither the governor, the legislature nor any statewide agency shall require law enforcement officers to maintain records that track individuals on the basis of said classifications, nor shall the governor, the legislature or any statewide agency withhold funding to law enforcement agencies on the basis of the failure to maintain such records.

(h) Otherwise lawful assignment of prisoners and undercover law enforcement officers shall be exempt from this section.

(i) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting action which must be taken to comply with federal law, or establish or maintain eligibility for any federal program, where ineligibility would result in a loss of federal funds to the state.

(j) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as invalidating any valid consent decree or court order which is in force as of the effective date of this section.

(k) For the purposes of this section, “state” shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the state itself, any city, county, city and county, public university system, including the University of California, California State University, community college district, school district, special district, or any other political subdivision or governmental instrumentality of or within the state.

(l) This section shall become effective January 1, 2005.

(m) This section shall be self-executing. If any part or parts of this section are found to be in conflict with federal law or the United States Constitution, the section shall be implemented to the maximum extent that federal law and the United States Constitution permit. Any provision held invalid shall be severable from the remaining portions of this section.

SunWuKong · #2 09-26-2003, 10:57 AM

i am undecided on how i feel about this. on the one hand, it seems like it's ignoring the obvious problem of racism, on the other hand, it's definitely going to benefit Asian Americans in higher education.

AliBabaIncorporated · #3 09-26-2003, 11:57 AM

I'll probably vote for it. Though I doubt the effect either positive or negative will be very large at all. Those who are determined to find away around it, such as education officials trying to implement affirmative action by stealth, probably won't find themselves facing enough opposition to make a difference.

sandra · #4 09-26-2003, 12:24 PM

here is a bit about the effects of the proposition on healthcare.

MEDICAL AND HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS OPPOSE PROP. 54
Health professionals across state call measure's so-called medical exemption dangerously misleading.

Pledging to do whatever it takes so they can continue to save lives and protect the public health of California, medical and healthcare professionals from across California today vowed to launch a full frontal assault against Proposition 54.

The initiative, sponsored by Ward Connerly, would bar public agencies from compiling or using information about race or ethnicity. The dramatic impact would virtually eliminate statistical information that health care providers need to ensure quality care to all Californians, prevent disease and save lives.

Experts from such groups as the California Medical Association, California Nurses Association, California Primary Care Association, American Cancer Society, California Association of Health Plans, Kaiser Permanente and the UCLA School of Public Health denounce the initiative's so-called medical exemption, which they called dangerously misleading.

"The Connerly exemption is so narrow as to render it meaningless to the protection of public health and the greater good of California," said Dr. Jack Lewin, MD, CEO of the California Medical Association. "What he calls 'medical research subjects and patients' is in reality a miniscule number of people participating in a small number of studies and surveys. The vast majority of vital health information will still be kept out of the hands of the medical professionals who use it to save lives. Voters beware? this measure is bad for your health and this exemption offers you nothing but empty promises."

Virtually every group concerned with the provision of medical and healthcare services has come out in opposition to the measure, including hundreds of doctors, nurses and medical researchers who have never been politically active in the past. Many of them are on the front lines of addressing and treating diseases and illnesses that impact the general public.

"Clinics like the Venice Family Clinic serve a very diverse population," said Susan Fleischman, Medical Director of the Venice Family Clinic and president-elect of the California Primary Care Association. "Statewide, almost 70% of our patients are from communities of color. The one-size-fits-all model has not worked for these communities. While we should all receive care with equal dignity and quality, our needs are not all the same. Our clinics are successful because we utilize data by race and ethnicity to develop specific programs to meet the varying needs of each community no matter the race or ethnicity."

"Information enables public health professionals to target life-saving programs to those who have the greatest risks, those who can benefit the most. We use statistical analyses of such information to track health problems, identify who is most affected by them, and to develop strategies and programs to stop the spread of disease, reduce death rates and improve the health of all communities," said Dr. Rick Brown, a professor at the UCLA School of Public Health and the Director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research

Medical and healthcare professionals also warned of health threats that would be caused by Prop. 54. The warning was issued in a joint statement released today by health officials from Alameda, San Francisco and Santa Clara Counties, and the City of Berkeley. The statement emphasized the "disastrous" impact on health research and treatment.

AngryABCGirl · #5 09-26-2003, 05:38 PM

I sent in my absentee ballot voting No for it yesterday.

sandra · #6 09-26-2003, 06:20 PM

we've been calling people from apalc to inform them about the harms of the rpi initiative.

chinese people didn't seem too receptive - they just wanted to get of the phone. interestingly, korean people - regardless of age - were eager to tell us how horrible they thought the initiative was, and that they'd send it their absentee ballot right away.

perhaps this could be attributed to their experience during the l.a. riots (i.e., they are well aware that discrimination still exists).

AngryABCGirl · #7 09-27-2003, 09:40 AM

QUOTE:

Originally Posted by kasia

we've been calling people from apalc to inform them about the harms of the rpi initiative.

chinese people didn't seem too receptive - they just wanted to get of the phone. interestingly, korean people - regardless of age - were eager to tell us how horrible they thought the initiative was, and that they'd send it their absentee ballot right away.

perhaps this could be attributed to their experience during the l.a. riots (i.e., they are well aware that discrimination still exists).

There's actually been a lot of coverage about Prop 54 on Chinese television, but I don't know what effect it's making at this point. From my experience, Chinese people are generally scared of getting involved in *anything.* It's survival strategy that worked back in the day but screws you in America.

SunWuKong · #8 09-27-2003, 10:57 AM

QUOTE:

Originally Posted by AzNBuffGrL

There's actually been a lot of coverage about Prop 54 on Chinese television, but I don't know what effect it's making at this point. From my experience, Chinese people are generally scared of getting involved in *anything.* It's survival strategy that worked back in the day but screws you in America.

maybe they just don't think it affects them directly in their daily lives.

sandra · #9 09-27-2003, 12:03 PM

YELLOWWORLD urges all to VOTE NO on Proposition 54.

Now that the election is confirmed to proceed on October 7, please take a moment to consider another important item on the ballot: Proposition 54. At the board retreat in January of this year, we agreed to take a position against Propisition 54 and to make it one of our priority issues for the year. The board has participated actively in legal efforts and fundraising efforts to defeat Proposition 54. Here are our reasons:

PROP 54

Prop 54, if passed, will make it illegal for any non-federal public entity in California to collect individual data on race, ethnicity, or national origins in state operations, including public education, contracting and employment.Â Use of such data is then impossible, as one cannot use what does not exist.Â

The initiative purports to make government color-blind.Â But, if passed, it makes government completly blind to realities.
Â
A significant impact of Prop 54 is in the area of health care education and medical research.Â Different ethnic or racial groups enjoy and suffer at sometimes drastically different rates for various diseases; sometimes the factors are behavioral, sometimes they are genetic. Race based statistics help identify, for example, the increasing rate of breast cancer among Asian American women, and allow for targeted outreach. Although there is a stated exception in the intiative for medical researchers, the intiative overlooks the fact that much of the data upon which medical researchers rely is collected from other sources -- the very sources that this initiative seeks to hamstring by preventing them from collecting the data.

The initiative was poorly drafted with circular and missing definitions (as well as very narrow and unclear exemptions).Â This constitutional amendment, if passed, will likely undo the effects of years of legislation and practices aimed at promoting equality in housing, education, law enforcement, government contracting, employment and consumer transactions.Â Without data or statistics by race, ethnicity or national origin, many social ills become difficult to detect let alone to prove, such as hate crime, racial profiling by unethical law enforcement agencies, employment discrimination, biased contract award, and unequal allocation of educational resources.Â The proposition would impinge not only on individualsâ€™ right of equal protection but also their due process right in proving the violations of that right.

Ward Connerly is the main proponent of this initiative. He may wish to hide his race and he may certainly elect not to provide that information on request. I, for one, am extremely proud of my heritage and am happy to declare it at every opportunity. Frankly, I think we should celebrate our racial differences, not hide or ignore them -- so that we are openly inclusive, not covertly exclusive. The misguided Proposition 54 initiative goes beyond that the sociological and would create significant harm and problems for increasing awareness, knowledge and progress in health, education, employment and law enforcement matters.

ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE AGAINST PROP 54

Like APABA, other bar associations, health care professionals and many more have publicly opposed the proposition. The Asian Pacific American Legal Center, is the lead organization in the APA campaign against it. A partial list of Proposition 54 opponents:

American Academy of Pediatrics, California; American Public Health Association; Association of Asian Pacific Community Health Organizations; California Academy of Family Physicians; California Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems; California Medical Association; California Nurses Association; California Primary Care Association; Physicians for Social Responsibility; Asian Law Caucus; Asian Pacific American Bar Association; Asian Pacific American Legal Center; Chinatown Service Center; Filipino Civil Rights Advocate; Hapa Issues Forum; Japanese American Citizens League; Korean Community Center for the East Bay; National Pacific Islander Educator Network; Organization of Chinese Americans; Pan Asian Lawyers of San Diego; South Asian Bar Association; Suthern California Chinese Lawyers Association; Vietnamese American Public Affairs Committee of California.

RECOMMENDATIONS

We recommend that you

Vote against Prop 54;
Inform your friends and families of the adverse impacts of Prop 54;
Support the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, financially or with volunteer assistance (contact Kathay Feng at 213-977-7500)

For more information, please go to www.informedcalifornia.org

sandra · #10 10-01-2003, 09:29 AM

QUOTE: