Abigail Thernstrom had an essay last year in the WSJ on the recent vote in Michigan to prohibit racial preferences by government. Here is a key excerpt:
"Ward Connerly has done it again: A striking 58% of Michigan voters gave the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative a thumbs up; only three counties voted against it.
The language of the MCRI closely tracks California's 1996 Proposition 209, also led by Mr. Connerly. It amends the Michigan Constitution to "ban public institutions from using affirmative-action programs that give preferential treatment to groups or individuals based on their race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin for public employment, education or contracting purposes." The political and business establishments, pressure groups like the AARP, labor-union leaders, religious spokesmen, the professoriat, the major Detroit newspapers--all were opposed to MCRI. But a substantial majority of ordinary voters were thinking for themselves.
Patty Alspach was perhaps a typical supporter. A Democrat, she signed the petition putting the proposition on the ballot. Meanwhile, opponents loudly claimed that the measure was misleading, that voters were being duped, that it should be tossed off the ballot. "I read it," replied Ms. Alpach. "I understood it. I signed it. Now let me vote on it."
....
The modern-day survival of racial preferences depends on sympathetic judges willing to spin dubious arguments and ignore widely available data on the pernicious impact of such preferences. But, this time, the University of Michigan may find itself without judicial recourse. The Supreme Court has never said that universities are constitutionally obligated to institute "diversity" policies. Public universities are funded by taxpayers. And those taxpayers have spoken."
- By the way, the very same Civil Rights Initiative is being proposed in Nebraska and will probably be on the ballot in November of 2008.
No comments:
Post a Comment