Will Arizona Voters Roll Back Racial Progress With Prop. 107?

Following on the heels of its notorious anti-immigrant law, Arizona is again taking aim at its resident people of color — this time through a seemingly innocuous ballot initiative.

The proposal sounds like this: This state shall not grant preferential treatment to or discriminate against any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

How many of us might support such a statement if we were asked to vote for it? Most of us probably would — it's a disarmingly simple statement that appeals to our common hopes for a race- and gender-equal society. It suggests a dream of a better America, where racism and sexism no longer exist.

Yet a single statement like this one is what has successfully institutionalized racism and discrimination in California. In 1996, voters in California passed a ballot proposition based on these ideas. Since then, black and Latino enrollment in state universities has dwindled. Minority- and female-owned small businesses are less successful. Training programs and scholarships focused at underrepresented minorities have been decimated. (For a full discussion of the impact of this ballot proposition in California, read this report.) Similar efforts have succeeded in drastically reducing opportunities for minorities and women in Michigan and Nebraska, as well.

Who's behind these efforts? A man named Ward Connerly, who founded a group called the American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI) to eliminate affirmative action, state by state. This year, ACRI has set its sights on Arizona, where ballot proposition 107 (quoted above) will be voted on in November.

Affirmative action is probably one of the most hot-button issues in America — chiefly because it's so poorly understood. In fact, affirmative action is based two simple, common-sense ideas:

1. If racial barriers and race-based discrimination don't exist, those who apply to public programs (e.g. state universities) should be admitted at a rate that reflects their overall distribution in the general population. In other words, if 10% of eligible applicants are black (and blacks face no race-based barriers affecting their admission to higher education), 10% of new students should be black.
2. If racial barriers and race-based discrimination do exist (such as unequal access to AP credit classes in inner city, predominantly black schools), applicants should be judged according to the merit they demonstrate, given limited opportunities — not punished in the admissions process because they had unequal access in the classroom.

The first premise is straightforward to demonstrate. As I've blogged before, even when affirmative action still existed in California, black and Latino students were admitted to the University of California system at levels roughly half their state-wide population. Here in Arizona, the same trends still hold true — and that's even with affirmative action policies still in place. Black and Latino communities are profoundly underrepresented at the University of Arizona and at Arizona State University (two of the state's three state universities) compared to state-wide demographics.

It's clear that minority students in Arizona already face race-based barriers and discrimination that discourage pursuit of higher education. And the passage of Proposition 107 will almost certainly reduce the (already low) numbers of black and Hispanic students in the state's schools.

Affirmative action exists to address the reality of racism in this country. It allows admissions committees to consider racial information only when two candidates — equally qualified — are being considered for a single spot. It can't be used to support racial quotas, or to admit unqualified candidates.

And it's been successful, too, helping improve student diversity on college campuses across America. Eliminating such policies in states like California has meant widening already alarming educational and economic gaps. We can't let that happen here in Arizona, where Ward Connerly has promised to bankroll the passage of Proposition 107. (So far, ACRI has donated $31,000 to back the effort, $5,000 of that money which has already gone to pay a website and graphic design company in Phoenix.)

Fortunately, the frontlines against Proposition 107 are already getting laid. Protect Arizona's Freedom — a massive coalition of over 45 local black, Latino and Asian-American groups — recently held a meeting of the minds at the Tucson Southern Arizona Black Chamber of Commerce (TSABCC), and is registering as a ballot proposition committee. Another group, The Equality and Opportunity Committee, has filed with the Secretary of State's office.

"We need a single message that we all [can] be a part of," Clarence Boykins, TSABCC president and a member of Protect Arizona's Freedom's Executive Committee, tells me. Despite the coalition's formidable numbers, as he notes, the group lacks a powerful financial patron like Connerly. Protect America's Freedom's efforts will likely need to depend on small donations from concerned citizens — as Boykins says, "This effort is going to be as grassroots as grassroots can be."

Thankfully, President Obama's election gives some hope that a groundswell of grassroots efforts in Arizona can combat $31,000 of out-of-state money from Ward Connerly's coffers. Even if you don't live in the state, here's how you can get involved:

• Email the campaign co-ordinator for Protect Arizona's Freedom: Sarah Luna at sluna@ikoninc.net to arrange a donation or for information on how to get involved. All help is needed, both inside Arizona and out.
• Join The Equality and Opportunity Committee's Facebook group: "WE CAN! United to Defeat Prop. 107!"
• SHARE this post with all of your friends and family. Use Facebook, Twitter, or email — spread the word about the urgent action needed to defeat Arizona's Proposition 107.

This is your chance to help fight yet another law in the Grand Canyon State that will roll back racial progress. Enough is enough, Arizona. Together, we're drawing a line in the sand.

Photo Credit: freddthompson