Prop 54 funding is questioned

[Ernesto]

Caifornia's own "Uncle Tom for hire", Ward Connerly refuses to disclose the donators to his racist ballot initiative campaign. An earlier report indicated that Connerly was paid $750,000 for his services in 2002. http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/ca/election/story/7248131p-8193220c.html

[stopthegop]

1. I agree he should disclose the source of the money...

but how is it 'racist' to stop collecting data and classifying people by race?

[salin]

3. In a very subtle way

it gives appearance of "fairness" in admissions - job applications - etc. Thus the appearance that there is no more need for things like EEOC.

However, names and addresses often give "clues" and are often used in a discrimantory way. Earlier this year a study with researches from the University of Chicago looked at job opportunities based on names. They created parallel (equal) job applicants for a series of jobs - some white and some African American. The intentionally gave the black applicants names that would be likely to be associated with African Americans, and the white applicants names that were stereotypically anglo sounding.

The rate of response (getting a call back - the next step after submitting the resume) was very strongly biased in the direction of the white sounding names.

This does not differ from other studies of the past 5-10 years looking at lending for homeownership patterns (where equal applications with the only difference being race had disequal outcomes from higher/lower rates to the rate of being turned down altogether); other lending patterns, etc.

Thus this proposition sets forth the false veneer that racial equality has been met - or worse than somehow collecting this information suggests that reverse discrimination is a universal situation that needs to be 'fixed'; when in reality real discrimination (though improved over the past 50 years) is still alive and thriving. Think of it as not only a band-aid - but one that actually sticks to the wound - at times infecting the wound and making it worse.

[pw]

4. It's not so subtle

If no data is being collected, then you can have enormous amounts of discrmination going on (just as long as no one actually hangs up a sign saying "No blacks or hispanics need apply") and you won't be able to prove it. Your opponents will say you just have anecdotal evidence, blithely ignoring the fact that they passed a law to prevent real evidence from being collected.

[salin]

5. You are so right

I didn't even think of that. In the eighties and nineties, I believe, there was a shift (by law? statute? or case precedence?) that moved the burden of proof in many discrimination cases from the employer (they would have to bring evidence that their practices were fair) to the person charging discrimination. The higher bar made it very difficult to be able to access the information needed to make the cases. This would make another form of documentable evidence disappear.

[pansypoo53219]

2. why

can't he see what a tool he is?

[Ernesto]

6. Who says he can't see he is a whore?

For $750,000 a year, I think many humans (especially repugs) could easily develop "vision problems". Ask Condie or Clarence Thomas.

[PATRICK]

7. Paying for California Ballot Initiatives

Sponsors or candidates who lose should foot the cost, in keeping with the right wing philosophy on losers paying full cost of civil suits they lose.