Proposition
54 debated
By
Jack Schneider
On-line Forty-Niner
Proposition
54, also known as the Racial Privacy Act,
has sparked conflict throughout California.
On
Oct.7, voters will determine whether the
government will continue to have the right
to request racial information.
Last
August, the Long Beach City Council voted
unanimously to reject Proposition 54, saying
it would hinder programs of Long Beach,
especially the education system.
"The
biggest factor it is the liberal college
system, and local college systems,"
Councilor Dan Baker said.
While
opposition remains fierce for Proposition
54, some students feel that racial profiling
remains an undefined issue.
"I
understand that there is data done with
filling out questions on race, "said
Ashley Hamrick, an English graduate student.
"While it may be important, I feel
that it's not necessary, and sometimes I
feel uncomfortable filling them out."
The
backbone behind support for Proposition
54 comes from Ward Connerly, chairman of
the Racial Privacy Initiative campaign.
Connerly
said the initial goal behind the campaign
is, "to take state government out of
the racial classification business, thus
moving us one step closer to a color-blind
government."
Bonnie
Lowenthall, first district councilwoman,
said Connerly is not focusing on the major
issue with a colorblind government.
"The
intent was for the authors to make a colorblind
government, but the truth is they are blind,"
Lowenthall said.
Despite
the beliefs of the city council and the
RPI, Multicultural Center Director James
Manseau-Sauceda said the idea of a colorblind
government has different levels of meaning.
"It
is an interesting term, on one level it
can sound very positive," he said.
"The problem is that reality of American
history is we have been in denial of difference."
With
the upcoming election, Diane Schachterle,
Proposition 54 coordinator, said if the
bill comes into effect, there would be a
transitional time for departments, government
agencies and government to get used to the
Racial Privacy Act.
"Services
would have to be assessed on an individual
needs basis, instead of a group identity,"
Schlachterle said.
Since
the unanimous decision on Proposition 54
from the City Council, Councilor Larua Richardson
said the proposition would cause a division
with the state.
"I
think that it's important for Californians
to have policy to unite us, not divide us,"
Richardson said.
One
of the adverse effects of the Racial Privacy
Act is that certain education programs may
be depleted.
"[The
proposition] would prohibit tracking hate
crimes, and education against hate crimes,"
Lowenthall said.
Between
now and the campaign date, Schachterle said
the RPI is scrambling to make money for
campaign media.
While
supporters may find companies having an
easy transition with the Racial Privacy
Act, the entire premise behind the proposition
is much more complex.
"It's
not about social justice," Manseau-Sauceda
said. "What we have is a more complicated
reality, a so-called race, class and privilege
that is really a mindset."
|
