California Civil Rights Initiative Research Articles

From California to Michigan: Race, Rationality, and Neoliberal Governmentality

In this essay, we examine recent developments in battles over race- and gender-based affirmative action across a 10-year period from the California Civil Rights Initiative (1996) to the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (2006). While affirmative action policies have historically been contested within a paradigm of redistribution, our analysis of the Michigan case suggests a new strategic emphasis on disputing the legitimacy of the state's recognition of social difference. Drawing on the work of critical race and critical rhetoric scholars, as well as social theory on citizenship in the post-soul moment, we argue that a neoliberal understanding of difference and neoliberalism's appropriations of multiculturalism have allowed the anti-affirmative action movement in Michigan to avoid racist appeals completely by invoking the neoliberal myth of free, entrepreneurial individuals against a meddling, inefficient, authoritarian state. Further, we find that these shifts have permitted assaults on the positive consideration of gender—a strategy that was not possible when debates were centered over competing claims of racism. Finally, we argue that these strategic adjustments since California have enabled the anti-affirmative action movement to discursively align itself with contemporary neoliberal assaults on a range of social and cultural rights.

An Examination of Federal Highway Administration Awards to Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in California from Fiscal Years 1985 to 2007: The Impact of Implementing and Removing Race- and Gender-Conscious Remedies

For over a decade, California applied race- and gender-conscious remedies for state and federal transportation construction awards. Passed in 1996, Proposition 209 â014 entitled the California Civil Rights Initiative - ended these remedies for all but federal awards. We examined the longitudinal trends for Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) awards from Fiscal Year 1985 through Fiscal Year 2007 to certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs). Regression analyses examined the influence of time on the percentage of awards to DBEs owned by people of color and women of all racial groups. Results indicated increased awards to businesses owned by men of color and white women during the time when race- and gender-conscious remedies were in effect and a reduction when these remedies were removed. After a period of receiving no awards, certified DBEs owned by women of color evidenced a slight increase unaffected by the removal of remedies. Our results suggest that race- and gender-conscious remedies were effective and that their removal reduced the relative level of awards to DBEs.

Affirmative Action at the Crossroads: Colorblind Racism and the Decline of African Americans in Public Contracting

In 1996, Proposition 209 eliminated affirmative action in public education, employment, and contracting. Called the California Civil Rights Initiative, this proposition ended race- and gender-conscious programs designed to increase participation and opportunity in public contracting. Fueled by public discourse on fairness and equal opportunity, Proposition 209 challenged the notion that affirmative action could correct a history of discrimination; and thereby challenged our common understanding of how to enforce a “colorblind” society in which all are free to compete. This article discusses the findings of a 2006 report by the Discrimination Research Center on Proposition 209 and the severe impact it had on the ability of African American businesses to compete for contracts in California's construction industry.

Projected Bodies in David Henry Hwang's M. Butterfly and Golden Gate

It has been barely thirty years since the inception of ethnic studies programs at San Francisco State University in 1968 and Berkeley in 1969, yet movements that seek to dismantle the liberationist energies of the 1960s--whether in the form of reinstating traditional curricula or reversing civil rights policies--are well underway. In California, the passage of Proposition 209 repealed the use of racial quotas in college admissions, resulting in an immediate and drastic reduction in the freshmen enrollment of African American and Hispanic American students at California's major universities. Ward Connerly, who spearheaded the so-called California Civil Rights Initiative, has recently suggested sitting in on ethnic studies courses at Berkeley to determine whether they indeed promote racial and ethnic awareness or in fact foment radical separatism among students. (1) Ironically, Connerly's neoconservative meliorism ignores the brief history of ethnic studies programs, which emerged from the anti-war protest to challenge traditional constructions of American history that elided the contributions of ethnic minorities. This reaction against ethnic studies coincides with the emergence of the newest thing in lit crit/cultural studies: whiteness studies. Whiteness studies purports to denaturalize whiteness by incorporating a constructivist perspective and unmasking the ideological parameters of whiteness: to make visible an invisible norm. The best studies within the genre, such as David Roediger's, suggest how the working class in the nineteenth century constructed itself as white in relation to a racial other, emphasizing the constitutive reliance of the mainstream on the marginal. In this view, the whitening of an ethnicized working class occurs through a master-slave dialectic sustained politically by working-class resistance to pro-abolition alliances and through cultural forms such as blackface minstrelsy. (See Roediger, Wages; Lott, Love; and Ignatiev.) Paradoxically, various genealogies locate the inception of whiteness studies in the very period when challenges to a normative whiteness coalesced: second-wave feminism assumed an arguably self-conscious turn when women of color questioned its white, middle-class perspective (see Frankenberg, White Women 2-3); and, to some extent, the advent of whiteness studies can be attributed to ethnic studies traditionally conceived, which distinguishes the experiences of those ethnic groups subject to racialization, emphasizing the power differentials that obtain among diverse ethnicities in a nation of ethnics. It must be stressed, however, that the cultural nationalist ethos of ethnic studies was very much a response to the racialization--and racist treatment--of ethnic groups based on phenotype. But the prominence of whiteness studies at this historical conjuncture raises as many questions as it answers because in some forms it is disturbingly indistinguishable from mainstream studies and can be readily accommodated to a rubric that, by virtue of reclaiming the margin, recenters whiteness as the primary object of study, along with an attendant realignment of institutional power and resources. (2) But whether we identify its emergence in second-wave feminism's self-conscious swerve, or as a reaction formation to exclusionary ethnic programs, whiteness studies becomes a defence of the status quo when it loses its critical self-consciousness, whether conjoined with feminist, queer, or postcolonial discourses. An analysis of whiteness, however, converges in salutary ways with these very discourses--specifically in the context of paradigms of masquerade, mimicry, and the butch-femme couple--in the work of David Henry Hwang, to which I now turn. Celebrated since its premiere on February 10, 1988 at the National Theatre in Washington D.C., David Henry Hwang's M. Butterfly has been a cynosure for cultural debate on race and sexuality; less well known is Hwang's 1994 screenplay Golden Gate, dismissed in most accounts as a commercial and critical failure. …

The ups and downs of affirmative action preferences

Preface The Origin of Affirmative Action: National Conscience and the Quest for Equality From Individual Rights to Group Preferences: Supreme Court Decisions (Griggs to Metro) One Step Backward and Two Forward Affirmative Action Diversity: A Euphemism for Preferences, Quotas, and Set-Asides Preferences in California Colleges and Universities and Academic Resistance The California Civil Rights Initiative: Proposition 209 The Ending of Affirmative Action Preferences in California: Testing the Constitutional Amendment

Regulating race in the California civil rights initiative: enemies, allies, and alibis

This essay presents an analysis of the California Civil Rights Initiative, a ballot measure that won 54% of the popular vote in November 1996 to end affirmative action in California. Themes within the public campaign organized by supporters of the measure reveal an “individual rights” framing of the issues, an emphasis on racialized “internal enemies”, and the appointment of “allies” within the civil rights movement of the 1960s. The essay analyzes these themes to interrogate the ways in which the policy process operates as an important site for the production of knowledge about affirmative action, Black Americans, and racial history.

Regulating Race in the California Civil Rights Initiative: Enemies, Allies, and Alibis

This essay presents an analysis of the California Civil Rights Initiative, a ballot measure that won 54% of the popular vote in November 1996 to end affirmative action in California. Themes within the public campaign organized by supporters of the measure reveal an “individual rights” framing of the issues, an emphasis on racialized “internal enemies”, and the appointment of “allies” within the civil rights movement of the 1960s. The essay analyzes these themes to interrogate the ways in which the policy process operates as an important site for the production of knowledge about affirmative action, Black Americans, and racial history.

The Color Bind: California's Battle to End Affirmative Action.

Color Bind tells the story of how Glynn Custred and Thomas Wood, two unknown academics, decided to write Proposition 209 in 1992 and thereby set in motion a series of events, far beyond their control, destined to transform the legal, political, and everyday meaning of civil rights for the next generation. Going behind the mass media coverage of the initiative, Lydia Chavez narrates the complex underlying motivations and maneuvering of the people, organizations, and political parties involved in the campaign to end affirmative action in California. For the first time, the role of University of California regent Ward Connerly in the campaign - one largely assigned to public relations - is put into perspective. In the course of the book Chavez also provides a rare behind-the-scenes journalistic account of the complex and fascinating workings of the initiative process. Chavez recreates the post-election climate of 1994, when the California Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI) appeared to be the right-time, right-place vehicle for Governor Pete Wilson and other Republican presidential prospects. President Clinton and the state Democratic Party thought the CCRI would splinter the party and jeopardize the upcoming presidential election. The Republicans, who saw the CCRI as a 'wedge issue' to use against the Democrats, found to their surprise that the initiative was much more divisive in their own party. Updating her text to include the most current material, Chavez deftly delineates the interplay of competing interests around the CCRI, and explains why the opposition was unsuccessful in its strategy to fight the initiative. Her analysis probes the momentous - and national - implications of this state initiative in shaping the future of affirmative action in this country.

Black and right: the bold new voice of black conservatives in America

Acknowledgments Preface Perspectives on Personal Experience No Room at the Inn: Loneliness of the by Clarence Thomas Notes of a Non-Native Son: Third Vision by Robert A. George You Look Like A Democrat by Kathleen M. Bravo Young, Black, and Republican by Stuart De Veaux What Black Conservative Means to Me by Lee Walker Perspectives on Politics Two Visions of Leadership by Brian W. Jones Convervatives: Undercounted by Willie and Gwen Richardson No Need for a Government Handout by Telly Lovelace Educational Devlopment in the Community by Mazhar Ali Awan Prescription of Conservatives by Gary Franks Perspectives on Racism Are You Really a Racist? A Commonsense Quiz by Joseph G. Conti and Brad Stetson My Experience with the California Civil Rights Initiative by Errol Smith Race Confab: An Exercise in Futility by Jesse Peterson Racial Rage: Response to Jesse Peterson by Marivic Francis Are America's Juries Race-Obsessed? by Deroy Murdock Perspectives on Morals Moral Vacuum in American Must Be Filled by Joseph Brown Family and Parental Licensure by Diann Ellen Cameron A Setback is a Setup for a Comeback by Steven Craft Family Values vs. Homosexual Rights: Tradition Collides with an Elite Social Tide by Joseph E. Broadus A Looks at Abortion by Peter Kirsanow Is This the Work of God? Reflections on the Church by Jesse Peterson Diamonds: Discovering the Lessons of Freedom in Thought by Stan Faryna Perspectives on America A Conversation with Shelby Steele by Joseph G. Conti and Brad Stetson An Interview with Ezola Foster by Joseph G. Conti The Sage of South-Central: An Interview with Larry Elder by Brad Stetson Appendix: Media and Organizational Resources for the Study of Conservatism Bibliography About the Editors and Contributors Index

A Case of Gender Discrimination? Benchmarking Gender Discrimination Policies in Public Works

In November 1996, California voters passed the controversial California Civil Rights Initiative (Proposition 209) to abolish race- and gender-preference programs by amending the state constitution. Although the constitutionality of this initiative is being debated in court and the final outcome is still to be decided, the potential impact of such legislation is widespread within the public works agency administration. Historically, public works agencies have developed and defined their workplace protection policies by referencing laws or regulations that were designed to protect employees. However, in the face of initiatives such as Proposition 209, this type of referencing may facilitate gender and/or racial discrimination. This article examines the implications of “incorporation by reference” and alternative methods of effective policy development.

Civil Rights and Racial Preferences: A Legal History of Affirmative Action

Last fall, the voters of California approved the California Civil Rights Initiative, which amends the state constitution to say that public officials shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin.

Is It Sunset Time for Affirmative Action and Set-Aside Programs?

On Nov. 5, 1996, the voters of the state of California passed Proposition 209, the California Civil Rights Initiative, an initiative to amend the state constitution to eliminate state and local government affirmative action programs in public employment, public education, and public contracting. The passage of the initiative does not affect federal programs or requirements, nor does it affect the private sector. The margin of passage was approximately 54% to 46%. The initiative will be contested in the courts and is subject to various future court rulings.

California Civil Rights Initiative

In her letter of 23 August (p. [p. 1031][1]), Lucy Johns repeats the charge that a clause in the California Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI) “drastically dilutes protection against discrimination by gender.” This charge, an effort to defeat the CCRI, is simply untrue. In an open letter to the people of California, 26 of the most distinguished constitutional lawyers in the country, some in favor of and some opposed to the CCRI, were prompted by this charge to go on record as saying so ([1][2]). The letter includes the following statements. > The CCRI is a general ban on a wide range of sex classifications: “The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, 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.” > > But clause (c) says that “Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting bona fide qualifications based on sex which are reasonably necessary to the normal operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.” … > > The [bona fide qualifications] proviso doesn't set up some weak “reasonableness test.” It allows only those sex classifications that pass both the existing California constitutional tests and fit within the very narrow area of bona fide qualifications. And it avoids the problems that a total ban on sex classifications might cause: The law shouldn't, for instance, require that the state let male guards do strip searches of female jail inmates. Likewise, the law shouldn't require high school girls' basketball teams to allow boys to participate. The signers end on the following note. > We welcome honest, thoughtful debate on affirmative action. But we oppose erroneous statements such as those made about clause (c). 1. 1.[↵][3] The complete letter and the names of the signers can be found at World Wide Web site . [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.273.5278.1029d [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1. in text

The Impact of the California Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI) on University and Professional School Admissions and the Implications for the California Economy

Using data from the University of California and results from previously published research on the returns to higher education, this article presents a preliminary evaluation of the impact of ending affirmative action in admissions at a large, publicly funded university. At the undergraduate level, eliminating race as a factor in the admissions process will redistribute African Americans, Mexican Americans, and Native Americans away from the most competitive campuses (UC-Berkeley, UCLA, UC-San Diego) towards the less competitive campuses in the California State University system. This redistribution will lower the returns to schooling for those affected groups and could have a negative impact on the educational environment for all students. Affirmative action will, in the short run, reduce the number of African American, Mexican American, and Native American students admitted and, in the long run, will have an adverse effect on the delivery of legal and health care services to those racial and ethnic groups.

California Civil Rights: Stealth Clause

The description of the so-called California Civil Rights Initiative in Marcia Barinaga's article “Backlash strikes at affirmative action program” (“Maintaining diversity in science,” 29 Mar., p. 1908) does not mention a “stealth clause” (section c) that drastically dilutes protection against discrimination by gender. Discrimination against women and girls would be permitted if “reasonably necessary to the normal operation of public employment, public education or public contracting.” Such discrimination is currently legal only if related to some compelling public purpose, which is a much more stringent criterion. Math programs aimed at girls and counseling, outreach, and support programs aimed at college women, not to mention recruitment and support in the workplace, could all disappear.

Affirmative Action in California: Looking Back, Looking Forward in Public Academe

This article offers an overview of the context and consequences of affirmative action in California with regard to faculty hiring and student admissions for African Americans and other Californians of color. It first outlines the policy's philosophical framework and basic premises. It next reviews the several criticisms that have been lodged against it in the nearly three decades since its implementation. The discussion highlights data indicating that (a) representation of African Americans and other minorities in public postsecondary education increased while affirmative action was in force; and (b) minority representation is certain to decrease in the absence of affirmative action. The problem of the 20th century is the problem of the color line. (DuBois, 1903/1989, p. 10) In the near-century since its first utterance, W. E. B. DuBois's prophecy has proven true. What this visionary critic may not have envisioned, however, was the likelihood that the problem would remain for us to solve in the next millennium. To be sure, at times during this century there have been bright moments for people of color, as evidenced by the emergence of strong leaders who clearly and forcefully articulated the hopes and wisdom of their people, the enactment of civil rights legislation, the increase in the educational levels attained by African American men and women. Yet, as the 20th century comes to a close, the United States is experiencing what amounts to a national retreat from issues of equity. The problem of the color line remains as important to us today as it did when DuBois first wrote those words almost a hundred years ago. Few examples of this are more potent than those pertaining to affirmative action, especially as it relates to matters of faculty hiring and student admissions in academe. In 1995, prior to announcing his decision to run for president, California's Governor Pete Wilson orchestrated a meeting at which the University of California's (UC) Board of Regents decided that the nearly 30 years of affirmative action had impaired rather than improved the quality of teaching and learning at state-supported institutions of higher education. The regents subsequently voted to end the practice as it applied to student admissions in the UC system (Wallace & Lesher, 1995). Then, in 1996, the oxymoronic California Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI) was placed on the state ballot, passing with 54% of the vote. The chief argument of proponents of that measure was that affirmative action did not create an equal playing field for all of California's citizens; that it blocked minorities from being seen as successful on their own merit and resulted in their being perceived as needing a crutch in order to obtain certain positions or status; and that the quality of the state's institutions and businesses depended upon their freedom to hire the best people without consideration of race or gender inequities (Custred & Wood, 1996). Such criticisms formed the scaffolding for a full-scale attack on affirmative action in California. The consequence of the Regents' decision and the CCRI-if the latter's passage is upheld in the courts, where the final decision currently rests-will be that affirmative action, insofar as faculty hiring and admissions at all of California's public institutions of higher learning are concerned, is over. Few battlegrounds have seen more action on both these fronts than those in the state of California. Any policy that has been in existence for a generation deserves investigation and analysis. Contexts change; what worked yesterday may not work today, or perhaps particular aspects of a policy need to change. Thus, the following analysis offers an overview of affirmative action in California and a consideration of the consequences of this policy. It begins by outlining the basic premises of affirmative action and reviewing the several criticisms that have been lodged against those premises. …