During the last few weeks of summer break, I decided to drive up
to Northern California to spend some quality time with my family.
Now, my car isn’t what you would call a finely tuned machine
““ it sputters, gets terrible gas mileage, and breaks down
more than Mariah Carey.
Well, on the way up the Interstate 5, my dashboard instruments
unexpectedly died ““ leaving me clueless about my
ever-escalating speed, and I was soon pulled over by a
not-so-friendly highway patrol officer. Upon receiving my rather
pricey ticket in the mail, I realized for the first time how
important that little speedometer is. It does nothing but report
your speed, but that information keeps you legal and safe.
Now, in the upcoming recall election, Californians will be
voting on Proposition 54 ““ a proposition that, if passed,
would prohibit the state from recording and collecting racial
information, in essence removing one of the instruments the
government uses to combat discrimination.
While losing the ability to track my speed set me back a few
bucks, the cost of Proposition 54 would be much greater. Losing the
capability to track the state’s successes or failures in
regard to racial issues could very well set back the progress
California has made in the fight for racial equality, public
health, and other important issues. This is why Proposition 54 must
be defeated.
Proposition 54 proposes amending the California Constitution to
prohibit the state from collecting racial information. The
proposition calls for Section 32a of the state constitution to
read, “The State shall not classify any individual by race,
ethnicity, color, or national origin in the operation of public
education, public contracting, or public employment.” The
proponents of Proposition 54, the brain child of the controversial
UC Regent Ward Connerly, argue that the collection of racial
information leads to discrimination and injustice.
The Argument in Favor of Proposition 54 in the Official Voter
Information Guide states that, “Throughout history,
government-imposed racial classifications have been used to divide
people. They have been used to set people against each other
“¦ the Nazis knew it when they labeled European Jews a
separate and inferior race.”
And while comparing the collectors of racial statistics (groups
like the UC Admissions Boards or County Health Officials) to the
Nazis is a bit dramatic, on the surface the argument might seem to
make sense. Wouldn’t banning the collection of ethnic
statistics lead to a truly color-blind society? Well, yes it would,
and that’s the problem.
You see, racial statistics are used to prevent the very real
problem of discrimination in education, employment and many other
areas. For example, the ability to compare the racial make-up of
college applicants to the racial make-up of the those accepted
helps ensure that all ethnicities are being treated fairly during
the admissions process. Also, if students from a disadvantaged
national background are having difficulties getting into UCs or
California State Universities, having that information helps
educators fight these problems at an institutional level.
For these reasons and more, the California State Parent-Teacher
Association, the California Teachers Association, the California
Federation of Teachers, the University of California and State
Superintendent of Schools Jack O’Connell all oppose this
initiative.
The ability to collect racial information affects more than just
California’s universities. Health officials use these
statistics to track health trends among different racial groups.
This data can be vital in the fight against diseases. The Argument
Against Proposition 54 in the Official Voter Information Guide
states, “The data tells us that white women are diagnosed
with breast cancer at a higher rate. Asian-Americans are at a
higher risk for Hepatitis-B. Latinos are more likely to die from
complications of diabetes. African-Americans die from heart disease
at a higher rate. This information saves lives.”
Proposition 54 would eliminate information that is beneficial
for the health of all Californians, and that’s why the
California Academy of Family Physicians, the American Academy of
Pediatrics, California Healthcare Association and the California
Association of Public Hospitals all oppose it, according to the
Official Voter Information Guide.
Proposition 54 damages the tools that California uses to combat
disease and discrimination. It is the result of a misguided
attitude towards the role of government and the protection of
racial equality, and it must be defeated in the upcoming election.
Driving without the proper instruments cost me a ticket. Trying to
protect health and equality without the proper information could
cost Californians a whole lot more.
Vote no on Proposition 54, and preserve the tools our state uses
to protect health, equality and so much more.
Ludlow is president of the Bruin Democrats.