Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Posted: 5/16/2003 4:23:13 PM EDT
Nice to see that some people get that categorizing people by race is racism and divisive. Too bad everyone else has been brainwashed in this state. [url]http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/05/16/BA178184.DTL[/url] Regents slam race initiative UC board votes to oppose March ballot measure Kelly St. John, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, May 16, 2003 Jumping headfirst into the highly charged arena of race politics, the University of California's Board of Regents voted overwhelmingly Thursday to oppose a ballot measure backed by fellow Regent Ward Connerly to prohibit the state from classifying people by race or ethnicity. The 15-3 vote to take a stand against the measure was an unusual move for UC, which has taken a position on just nine ballot measures in 25 years. It was also a rebuke of Connerly, who eight years ago successfully led an effort to get UC to stop considering race in its admissions practices and later helped win a statewide affirmative action ban. UC President Richard Atkinson asked the board to go on record against the March ballot measure -- dubbed the Racial Privacy Initiative -- out of fear that it might impede basic research and limit the university's ability to gauge the effectiveness of its admissions and outreach efforts. Those arguments resonated with the majority, including Regent Tom Sayles. "We still value diversity," he said. "But if we don't know who our students are, how will we know how we are doing?" The initiative, widely viewed as an extension of Proposition 209, which banned the use of racial preferences in California hiring and university admissions in 1996, would forbid state and local governments from classifying students, contractors or employees by race, ethnicity, color or national origin. It would exempt data collected for medical research, descriptions of prisoners or crime suspects, or cases where the federal government requires that agencies report racial data. The vote followed a two-hour spirited debate which pitted Connerly against several top Democrats who rarely attend regents meetings, including Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson and state education Superintendent Jack O'Connell. Connerly -- who made a point of describing himself as part white, part American Indian, and part black -- noted that 8.4 percent of UC applicants already decline to state their race or ethnicity on university forms. "Racial categorization is a cruel reality to a growing number of individuals who 'decline to state,' who don't want to have to choose between mom and dad for their identity," he said. [b]"Despite the best of intentions, the academic gap between whites and Asians versus blacks and Hispanics continues to widen," he said. "By focusing too much on race, we instill in students the notion that 'underrepresented minorities' can't help but under-achieve. Maybe it's time to stop tracking racial data and just start teaching."[/b] Bustamante countered by calling the initiative an "information ban" that "will hurt people and create tragedy in California." "Doctors and medical researchers might as well be wearing blindfolds" if certain racial data cannot be gathered, he said. "People with my heritage are more likely to be diagnosed with diabetes. HIV kills African Americans 18 times more than other Californians . . . White women have the highest rates of breast cancer. Diseases do not attack all segments of our population equally." One regent, George Marcus, initially said he was "baffled" about why Atkinson had brought the matter before the board, and tried unsuccessfully to postpone the vote indefinitely. O'Connell countered, "This isn't a time where the UC regents can play ostrich." In the end, just Regents Connerly, John Davies and Peter Preuss voted against the resolution, while John Moores abstained. "We'll win at the ballot box next March," Connerly said after the vote. "This was just a speed bump." But the symbolic vote pleased many who filled the audience, including students who hissed at Connerly and snapped their fingers in appreciation of others. UC Berkeley student Mo Kashmiri said he fears passage of the initiative will make it harder to track the progress of the university's efforts to diversify its student body. "As one student of color told me, they already removed our bodies from campus. Now they want to remove the evidence," he said.
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 5:08:31 PM EDT
Bunch of rascists, and morons. They may as well start wearing black sheets!! Connerly is a great man. I'd love to see a video of that debate!! [:D]
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 5:20:28 PM EDT
Anyone ever notice that all those who espouse affirmitive action have never held a real job in their lives? Never once in a warehouse, on a loading dock or driving a truck. Goddamned academic eggheads, they don't have a GD clue about real life. I bet everyone of them got the shit beat out of them in gym class. [}:D]
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 8:24:53 PM EDT
I think that the initiative is a good idea. However, it does need to (and I think that it will) make some necessary exceptions to keep track of race for a few legitimate purposes such as disease rates, health problems, etc., where there in fact can be differences between the races.
Top Top