Arizona voters to decide if affirmative action should end
The Associated Press is reporting that “Arizonans will vote next year on a proposed state constitutional amendment to generally prohibit state and local governments from discrimination and preferential treatment based on race, ethnicity and sex.”
AP’s Paul Davenport reports:
The proposed constitutional amendment does not use the words “affirmative action,” but supporters said it would end discrimination and preferential treatment in public education and government employment and contracting.
The measure was championed by California activist Ward Connerly, president of the American Civil Rights Institute, and the Arizona Civil Rights Initiative, a group that circulated petitions trying to get the amendment on the ballot . AP quotes Connerly, avowed critic of affirmative action programs:
“We’re still dividing the American people into these arbitrary groups and making distinctions about them on the basis of how they spell their last name or the color of their skin and where their great-granddaddy came from.”
AP reports that four other states — California, Nebraska, Michigan and Washington — have approved versions put on the ballot through voter petitions. Colorado voters last November became the first in the nation to reject it.
AP reports:
Sen. Rebecca Rios, D-Apache Junction, said she voted against the resolution because some preferences are still needed.
“I don’t think we’re there yet. I think we’ve made tremendous gains, but I think in certain situations there’s still the need for this, whether it’s with women-owned businesses or … certain situations where gains need to be made,” Rios said after the Senate vote.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Steve Parker is the deputy managing editor for news, and oversees the Post-Dispatch's front page. STLtoday's online news editors are on his newsroom team. Parker has been at the paper since September 1980. 
Didn’t Ward Connerly make a similar attempt in Missouri a couple years ago? The St. Louis American did a piece about Connerly kicking off the campaign with a convicted felon by his side, but I can’t find it in their archives.
Joe - (sigh) You missed my point completely. You, in the course of your posts, have made any number of assumptions about me, on the basis of knowing only 3 things about me : my race, my sex, and (admittedly, I missed this one) that I post on these blogs. And, really, you only know one of those for sure, that I post. So, your assumptions are either tainted by race, by sex, or by knowledge of access to computing/internet equipment. Which is it? I don’t assume anything about you from your statements, other than you seem passionately committed to your viewpoint.
Think
Again this has to be said: Affirmative Action is NOT, I repeat, NOT racist. It was a RESPONSE to white racism. Its intent was not to harm, injure, or opress. Why is this so hard to understand?
I have heard the white, “I had to overcome the injustice of AA” argument, and it is ridiculous. Who was being racist towards you? Do you think the white lawmakers who passed AA are being racist towards you? White people are superior to white people? That argument makes absolutely no sense. Maybe these monority people who are promoted above us, or hired over us are more qualified. Maybe they are not, but the interview better. At least with AA, we get the chance to find out.
Paull
Are you really calling AA the most “racist” piece of legislation ever written? That is insane. What about laws passed in the 1890’s requiring literacy tests and poll taxes when registering to vote? Black people were kept out of schools and jobs, so it was tough to read and tough to pay. Or what about the ex-confederate states, by 1910, passing the Jim Crow laws that segregated black people from every aspect of white life, from schools, to buses, to water fountains. I could go on and on. I think you need to get a little perspective.
gov
Thanks for the links to the articles you looked at. I read them, and they were very interesting. All i saw though was the mention of money. i did not catch anything about releasing convicted criminals. Anyway, they were very interesting. Thanks for sharing them. i still think, if done right, reparations could go a long way to heal the racial divide. I guess I do have to agree with you that a quick-fix payout will not work. i like my idea better. it will take longer, but it could work. If I ever run for office, i would have you as an adviser.
perhaps you are right clyde, affirmative action may not be quite racist, although many black racists support it. It is racial discrimination and is all about hiring someone because of their race, not because of their ability.
Yes, I did have to overcome aa to get where I am today. That is a truth that many others have also had to cope with. Perhaps we will see an apology from congress on the harm that they have caused due to this racially discriminating policy.
Yes Clyde I am calling it the most racist piece of legislation ever written. Because while the legislation you talk about was intended to keep a race in their place it didn’t assume you were stupid. Affirmitive Action assumes that you cannot compete mentally on a level playing ground with whites. It assumes that you need an artificial boost in order to get into school or get a job. It assumes you are stupid. And we both know that you are not stupid.
Apparently none of you have ever heard of racism against whites. My daughter in her jr. year of high school with straight A’s was told that she was the lowest rung on the totem pole of college admissions and it would be harder for her than any other group to get into a good college. I suppose all of you AA supporters think that is fair. College apps should not have names or ethic questions, just a number.
Paull
I see where you are coming from on this. However, AA was not written based on the assumption that minorities were stupid, inferior, or unqualified. It was based on the fact that minorities were intelligent, capable, and qualified, and were not being hired by white employers because of their skin tone. it was not in response to minority inferiority, it was based on white folks purposely not hiring minorities based soley on their race.
Think
There are many capable minroity and white people out there. If employers do their due diligence in the hiring process, it would be easy to select qualified minority applicants. I concede to you that all minorities, like all white people, are not always qualified for the job they are hired for. This is the problem of the employer. He can’t pick low hanging fruit just to fill a quota (sorry for the cardinal management language). That is the problem with AA maybe. Instead of hiring the right minority (which is out there) they hire any to fill the mandated need.
PS Paull
The legislation I mentioned did not assume people were stupid, correct you are. It assumed they were less than human. That is much worse.
Centrist
Your daughter does not need to worry. Colleges and universities give full rides to straight A students. Whoever told your daughter that ( I assume it was a counselor/adminstrator from her school) is full of it. Tell her some nut named clyde on a weird blog was a solid c- student in high school and was able to attend Saint Louis University. They did not pay for anything because I was a c- student, but she will be doing just fine if she keeps it up.