Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Rights and Liberties

Ward Connerly Using Deceptive 'Civil Rights' Initiatives to Ban Affirmative Action

By Katherine Spillar, Ms. Magazine. Posted March 5, 2008.


Ward Connerly has been well-compensated by the construction industry for his leadership of the anti-affirmative action crusade.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Twelve years have passed since Ward Connerly, a Republican businessman, emerged as the public face of the deceptively named "California Civil Rights Initiative" or Proposition 209, a state constitutional initiative designed to ban affirmative action for women and minorities in public employment, public education and public contracting.

Recruited by campaign organizers, Connerly had the perfect resume for the job: a political pedigree as a regent of the University of California, which automatically focused the debate on education; close ties to large Republican donors; and his race. Better that an African-American man waged battle against affirmative action, not the two white male professors credited with authoring Proposition 209 or the white men who would profit from it.

The passage of Proposition 209 was a critical victory in the ongoing nationwide attack on affirmative action for women and minorities. Now, in what he is calling "Super Tuesday for Equal Rights," Connerly is leading simultaneous efforts in five states to qualify ballot measures for the November election, each claiming to prohibit "discrimination" and "preferential treatment."

These deceptively named "civil rights" initiatives in Missouri, Colorado, Arizona, Nebraska and Oklahoma are actually designed to ban affirmative action for women and minorities in public employment, public education and public contracting. But if Connerly and the initiatives' other proponents have their way, the term "affirmative action" will not appear on the ballot or be talked about in the campaign -- that's because most voters support the concept. The debate will instead focus on whether "unqualified" minorities are admitted to public colleges and universities over "more qualified" (i.e., white) students.

What has never been widely reported in the coverage of Connerly's campaigns are his ties to the large public works contractors and construction industry organizations that stand to benefit tremendously from eliminating programs that help level the playing field for women- and minority-owned businesses. Connerly, in fact, has spent virtually his entire career consulting -- and, through his firm Connerly & Associates, lobbying -- for the "good 'ole boys" in the building and construction industry.

Why have the contractors long opposed affirmative action and come out full swing against it? The simple answer is money. Nationally, hundreds of billions of dollars annually are doled out by the federal, state and local governments to private companies for the purchase of goods and services, including the building of roads and freeways, schools, universities, airports and prisons. Affirmative action helps ensure women- and minority-owned businesses get a fair shake in the bidding.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: women, minorities, affirmative action, special interests, wade connerly

Katherine Spillar is the executive editor of Ms. Magazine. Jennifer Hahn and Mary Moore contributed writing and reporting to the full article.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Observer
Posted by: davy on Mar 5, 2008 4:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Another great American. Deary me, what have we become??

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Observer Posted by: creswell
CONNERLY AS A MINORITY CONTRACTOR
Posted by: bbfmail on Mar 5, 2008 5:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
An old article about how Connerly got his start!!!

http://www.sfgate.com/

cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1995/05/08/MN79160.DTL
&hw=ward+connerly+contracts&sn=001&sc=1000%20

University of California Regent Ward Connerly, a prominent black critic of affirmative action, received more than $1 million in state business during the past six years by signing up as a minority contractor, state records show.

The business contracts raise questions about Connerly's statements in recent months that he does not use his race to help his business. In February, he told Newsweek magazine that being defined as an `affirmative action` businessman was as degrading as having to drink from `colored only` water fountains as a boy in Louisiana.

Connerly has gained national attention for his controversial proposal to eliminate affirmative action at all UC campuses. He is a longtime friend and close ally of Governor Wilson, whose challenge of affirmative action is expected to be a cornerstone of his presidential campaign.

As a successful black businessman who endured segregation while growing up, Connerly has been praised by some as a courageous individual who helped bring the issue of affirmative action to the forefront.

But a check of state records shows that Connerly repeatedly enlisted as a minority contractor with the state Energy Commission -- securing contracts for his Sacramento consulting firm without having competitive bidding.

By certifying with the commission's special race-based program, Connerly helped guarantee his firm three separate contracts to carry out energy conservation training -- one for $1.1 million in 1989, a second for $105,227 in 1992, and another for $35,000 in 1994, according to the records.


The contracts were filed under the name of California Building Officials, an association that lists Connerly as its sole agent. The return address on the contracts is the same as Connerly's firm, Connerly & Associates.

Connerly, in an interview, acknowledged that his firm participated in the `repugnant' race-based program, but he denied that it was affirmative action. Instead, he characterized the program as a `policy that requires that every contract . . . include participation of at least 15 percent of minority businesses and 5 percent of women.'

`The point is,' Connerly said, `I don't wear my race on my sleeve. I don't try to benefit from it. I have never, ever in my life tried to take advantage of my race to get a benefit.'

Wilson appointed Connerly to the UC Regents in 1993 after the governor came under pressure to diversify the board. Until then, Connerly was relatively unknown to the public.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Really?!?
Posted by: mainspark on Mar 5, 2008 6:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Why have the contractors long opposed affirmative action and come out full swing against it? The simple answer is money.

Although it's in a different context, a quote from Mike Lupica's book, Mad As Hell, seems to be appropriate here, too.

"When they say it's not about the money, it's always about the money."

Yep, works here, too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Affirmative action, does it work?
Posted by: Swedish liberal on Mar 5, 2008 7:04 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have no problem wiht the concept of Affirmative action if it works and if the person or the bid is of equal status.

This means that if you have two equally qualified individuals or bids, you should select the minority.

BUT I am absolutely against using affirmative action in teh way it has been used in Sweden and in the US. That a minority is always guaranteed the position or contract irregardless of copetence and skills.

This later position has thankfully enough been struck down in Europe by the European Court of Human Rights. It should also be struck down in teh USA.

It means that the right to Affirmative action legislation is restricted by the negative anti discrimination rules in the UN charter.

You can use positive discrimination, Affirmative Action, but only if the minority candidate has the same qualifications according to the European Human Rights charter.

This means in reality that in Sweden Affirmative action goes both ways. And it will in the future mean that men will have the right to Affirmative Action in higher education since women today hold some 60 % of University seats and in Sweden it will rise.

But my original question is still unanswered, does Affirmative Action work? Does it enhance minorities chances in getting more and better jobs and bids? There is as far as I can understand no research done on this topic.

Affirmative Action legislation seems to be only an ideological statement and not an effective tool. Personally I find ideological legislation offensive be it socialist or Conservative. I am a liberal which means that all legislation must be put to the test whether the benefits out way the costs. And most important if it gives results, if not the law should be banished.

(The ECHR is the the only court in the world were you the UN declaration of Human Rights has been legislated and whose rulings all member states of the European Union has to follow.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

sad results from this guy's "work" in Michigan
Posted by: otter on Mar 5, 2008 7:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks to misleading wording in the recent Michigan "equal rights" initiative, prospective college students can now get extra points for...being athletes, living in the Upper Peninsula, and some other special circumstances. Just no extra points for being a racial minority or a woman.

Mind you, I have nothing against athletes or Upper Peninsula residents--heck, I used to live in the UP, and I've learned to tolerate high school/college athletes. But what a shame that so many minorities & women are now being left out of college opportunites. Maybe if they all moved to the Upper Peninsula for a few years.... That would certainly shake up the culture just a tad.

I hope other states aren't fooled by misleading rhetoric, and that people will actually examine college entrance policies before deciding to force drastic changes. This organization has really slick, dishonest tactics--don't let them blind you to the fact that your colleges/universities may just be trying to get a student body that reflects the beautiful variety of your state's population.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My take on Affirmative Action
Posted by: rickiey on Mar 5, 2008 7:59 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Feel free to spit your vitriol at me. I'm a white male, and apparrently that means everything was handed to me on a silver platter.

Apparrently growing up in a 3 bedroom trailer (with 8 siblings) in a trailer park that defined the stereotype, was a silver spoon?

All I ask for, is equal opportunity to those who had the same economic disadvantages that I had. I overcame them, managed to gain a relative level of success, and a progressive thinker, and I don't think it had anything due to my color.

As such, I have two thoughts on Affirmative Action:

1. The best way to keep a group of people from becoming successful, is to tell them that they can not become successful on their own, and give them the excuse that it isn't their fault.

2. "I have a dream, that someday all of God's children, will be judged, not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Didn't Michigan State's Law school get around the issue...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Mar 5, 2008 8:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...by re-weighting applicants based on socio-economic status and (to a lesser degree) geographic region, after the high court ordered them to cease racial profiling of their applicants?

Can a similar thing be done elsewhere in education?

Also, affirmative action is also being abused at the local government level. Let me explain how it works:

1. A bid goes out to dig a hole Y feet x Z feet for the purpose of improving city infrastructure.

2. Contractor A calls his Buddy, who owns a cell phone, (maybe) an office, and a construction license, who also happens to be defined by the powers that be as a "minority".

3. Contractor A and his Buddy agree on their cuts, and then send in a bid with Buddy's name as the primary contractor, and Contractor A as the sub-contractor.

4. They get extra preference for the job because Buddy owns a Minority Owned Business (license).

5. Honest people who don't game the system get screwed.

6. Buddy and Contractor A laugh it up at all the dumb schmucks all the way to the bank, at taxpayer's expense.

That's certainly not to say that racial profiling for the purpose of government contracts fails all the time, every time. That is simply to say that like many, many well-meaning government initiatives, these sorts of programs lend themselves towards a lack of oversight. Perhaps not on the order that your Haliburtons/KBR's cry for oversight, but we're speaking at the moment of how the local good ol' boy system operates, and the opportunities that exploiting such programs present for the unscrupulous.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Only Blacks, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders, and Indian/Inuit people are "minorities"
Posted by: billwald on Mar 5, 2008 10:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Snohomish County, WA has a hired a new affirmative action person under a different title. The purpose will be to hire black, Hispanic, Pacific Islanders, and "native" Americans. The ordinance defines only Blacks, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders, and Indian/Inuit people as "minorities." Our Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnam, Seikh, Lao, East Indian, Iraqui, Sudanese . . . are now officially in the white majority. Welcome aboard, you all.

This can be researched at www.heraldnet.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Would The Defenders Of Affirmative Action
Posted by: bcgirl125 on Mar 5, 2008 11:36 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like to be operated on by a surgeon who had been admitted to medical school, and passed with mediocre grades, on the basis of affirmative action? Or defended against a serious criminal charge by a lawyer who got through law school on similar terms?

Just asking.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Affirmative Action is Racist
Posted by: gellero on Mar 6, 2008 1:13 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It discriminates against Jews, East Indians, and Asians.........who are not the 'favored' minorities.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]