NATIONAL BLACK LAW STUDENTS ASSOCIATION - Western Region's - VOTE NO on PROPOSITION 54.

Proposition 54 would prevent access to (CA) public education, public employment contracts, and health care statisistics to track disriminatory trends.

Contact Rea Holmes (PRWEB) August 2, 2003
National Black Law Students Association -- Western Region
Wednesday, July 31, 2003
WESTERN@NBLSA.ORG

LOS ANGELES, CA (PRWEB) July 31, 2003 -- The assault on diversity continues to shake the grounds of California. With the certification of the Governor recall election, comes the July 24, 2003 press release that the Racial Privacy Initiative (RPI) [Proposition 54] will appear on the Recall Election Ballot. Originally, the measure was scheduled for the March 2004 ballot, however this historical re-election, gave Ward Connerly the opportunity to place Prop. 54 on the ballot in less than 70 days.

If passed, Prop. 54 would ban the classification of any individual by race, ethnicity, color or national origin in the operation of public education, contract, or employment." (Sexton, Washington Times 2003) Prop. 54 is designed to be the first moderate step towards building a color-blind government and intended to prevent racial classification. Supporters of Prop. 54 argue that it has reasonable exemptions for medical treatment and research, law enforcement, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) and any classification required for federal funds. For example, the DFEH shall be exempt from this initiative. Also exempt are medical research subjects and patients.

In reality, Prop. 54 would prevent programs in areas such as lead poisoning, teen smoking, and suicide from collecting racial and ethnic data necessary for providing effective and cost-efficient services. Furthermore, information on specific health conditions that affect individuals differently based on race or ethnicity (e.g. breast cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis, AIDS, tuberculosis, prostate cancer, and sickle-cell anemia) could no longer be collected. The exemption for health covers only medical research, not vital statistics. In addition, state and locally funded efforts to test for discrimination in contexts such as rental housing will be barred (the exemption for the DFEH will expire ten (10) years after implementation of Prop. 54; meaning after 2013, statistics regarding racial inequalities in Employment and Housing would no longer be accessible.) Most people are unaware and systematically uneducated on Prop. 54s significance. In essence, it seeks to rid public education, contracts, employment and health care facilities applications of racial classifications which allow researchers to track discriminatory trends." (National Black Law Students Association -- Western Regional Director, Jamon R. Hicks).

Sexton adds, Republicans and Democrats agree that a full vote would attract a more conservative electorate than the one originally set for March." After reviewing word that Prop. 54 would be on the October 7, 2003 ballot, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted four (4) to one (1) to oppose this initiative. The problem with this historic recall election is that it will serve as a smoke screen for potential voters", Hicks explains. Many voters may pass on this election because they do not understand the procedural process behind the recall election. As with Prop. 209, Connerly has craftily marketed Prop. 54 to confuse the voting public by disguising it as another Civil Rights Initiative, when in fact its not!" (NBLSA -- WR Dir., Hicks)

With the majority of the attention on whether Governor Gray Davis will be recalled, and his possible successor (rumored Republican candidates include: Richard Riordan, Bill Simon, and Darrell Issa), Prop. 54 will likely receive less media attention. Ultimately, the public will lose access to debate and dialogue on this controversial topic. We must continue to celebrate and embrace our diversity; not erase diversity! Vote No on Prop. 54!" (NBLSA -- WR Dir., Hicks)