Email a Friend

Digg

While the presidential election tops everyone's minds for the November ballot, five states also have to make decisions on affirmative action. If longtime affirmative-action foe Ward Connerly has his way, voters will ban it in public employment, contracting and education, just as they've done in California, Washington state, and most recently, Michigan. In that state, civil-rights groups are still trying to fight in court to get the new amendment struck from the state's constitution.

Why do we need affirmative action? We still don't have a level playing field. Read this timely and provocative affirmative-action roundtable in the April 2007 issue of DiversityInc magazine, featuring participants in both camps, including affirmative-action foe Ward Connerly, University of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman, DiversityInc Partner and Cofounder Luke Visconti, former NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Director Counsel Ted Shaw and others.

As you'll see, Connerly is of the mindset of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who voted last summer to strike down voluntary school-integration programs in two states, and comedian Bill Cosby. All of these Black men advocate a "colorblind society."

But we're not there yet. Affirmative action is a tool to achieve equality--a means to an end, not an end in and of itself, according to Visconti and other affirmative-action proponents. Studies consistently indicate that diversity enhances learning environments (educational, workplace and other settings), without which our country may suffer from loss of innovation. Still, rampant inequality exists in all levels of society, and those who are born into lower classes or who suffer stereotypes and ridicule from birth because of their race/ethnicity or gender have limited scope of opportunity. 

Affirmative action benefits white students too. Read Affirmative Action 'Saved My Life' (And I'm White) to learn why. Learn all about the deceptively named "Super Tuesday for Equal Rights" campaign and read about who's leading each of the state campaigns here. The campaigns in each state are called "Civil Rights Initiatives," but the impact of the proposals would be opposite the professed intent.

5 States Weigh Affirmative Action

Here's what you need to know about the battles in each state. Depending on population, anti-affirmative-action representatives need to get about 90,000 to 230,000 signatories on petitions in each state by May 3 to get the proposals on the ballots. We'll give you weekly updates on the campaigns and tell you how you can help. Here's a list of civil-rights organizations in every state that you can contact to get your voice heard. We give direct links to the organizations in five states currently fighting affirmative-action battles below.

1. Missouri: Most of the controversy has focused on this state so far, where Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan and Attorney General Jay Nixon tried to change the ballot language to better represent the impact and intent of the proposed legislation. After a legal setback against these efforts, a group of business, labor and civil-rights organizations joined together in mid-February to help the fight against Connerly. Kansas City Chamber of Commerce President Peter Levi told KBIA that the proposed affirmative-action ban would severely harm area business and economy, and that the ban's proponents misrepresent the impact of affirmative action.

Contact the Missouri Commission on Human Rights to get involved.

2. Oklahoma: Petitioners in this state already claim to have enough signatures to get their anti-affirmative-action proposal on the state ballot in November, reports The Chronicle of Higher Education, but a local group called All Working to Achieve and Keep Equality and BAMN, a Michigan-based affirmative-action group, plans to challenge the legitimacy of the petition, reports Tulsa World. These groups claim Connerly's representatives mislead voters and used faulty means to acquire the necessary number of names for the petition, which are the same methods by which Connerly's campaign allegedly secured enough signatures in Michigan, where voters went on to ban affirmative action last November. Will this time be different? 

Contact the Oklahoma Human Rights Commission to get involved.

3. Nebraska: Student groups at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln are banding together to fight Connerly's agenda in their state and others. Their group, which represents students of all races/ethnicities, genders and orientations, is called "Students United for Nebraska," and members stood outside Monday to protest Connerly's proposal. The University of Nebraska Board of Regents also unanimously oppose the proposal because of the devastating impact it would have on universities' efforts to diversify campuses and on scholarships for students of color, women's commissions and recruitment efforts targeted to traditionally disadvantaged populations.

"I worry as much about the symbolism as the petition itself," University of Nebraska-Lincoln Chancellor Harvey Perlman told the JournalStar.com. "It sends a message that Nebraskans don't care about diversity."

Contact the Nebraska Equal Opportunity Commission to get involved.

4. Arizona: Back in November, Internet articles and blogs suggested that the proposed affirmative-action ban wasn't a sure thing with these voters, citing the state's rejection of a statewide same-sex-marriage ban in 2006 (Arizona was the only state to do this). But Connerly's recent emphasis on undocumented immigration may play a role in this state. His cronies already are courting voters in grocery stores, malls, libraries and other public areas to get them to sign a petition to get his proposed affirmative-action ban on the ballot in November, reports ASU Web Devil.  

Contact the Arizona Civil Rights Division of the Attorney General's office to get involved.

5. Colorado: Connerly's campaign in this state is "under construction," according to the campaign's web site, but students and professors already are engaging in affirmative-action debate. Panelists engaged in a two-hour discussion at the University of Colorado Boulder Law School last week to talk about the pros and cons of affirmative action, the proposals on the state's ballot in November and what the school is doing to promote diversity. At least there's a discussion. The state has a history of upholding affirmative-action legislation, most recently in 2003, when a federal appeals court ruled in favor of the City of Denver, which ensured 12 percent and 16 percent of its construction contracts went to women- and minority-owned businesses, respectively.

More Affirmative Action >>