If the racial privacy initiative (Proposition 54 on the Oct. 7 ballot) wins voter approval, educators will have to resort to hunches in the effort to make sure educational opportunities are equitable.
|
|
|
Participants at CTA's Summer Institute got training in ways to combat measures like Connerly's racial privacy initiative. Practicing their new-found skills are Saundra Martin from Centralia.... |
Since gathering race-related statistical information would no longer be allowed, recognizing areas that need work would be more difficult and targeting solutions to problems would be next to impossible.
CTA is urging teachers to vote no on Prop. 54, which would prevent the state from collecting or analyzing information about race, national origin or ethnicity. The initiative, which was scheduled to appear on the March 2004 ballot, is now included on the ballot for the recall election Oct. 7.
University of California Regent Ward Connerly, author of the Prop. 209 ban on affirmative action in California, is now going a step further, attempting to ban the gathering of information for research and public policy purposes. Under his new proposal, gathering information by "race, ethnicity, color or national origin in the operation of public education, public contracting or public employment" would be forbidden. There are a few exemptions, but they are vaguely worded and leave many unanswered questions.
|
|
|
....Erik Kaeding from Fremont, Michelle Robnett-Hoath from Norwalk, Tammy Myers and Heather Lee, both from Franklin McKinley |
Prop. 54 would undermine school reform, accountability and equity. The basis for state and federal school reform is the ability to follow student achievement via a number of characteristics, including race, to make sure achievement is improving for all students. This initiative would make it impossible to determine whether the achievement gap in test scores is narrowing, whether students are getting equal help and resources, or whether all racial and ethnic groups have an equal opportunity to compete for advanced placement courses or college admission. This initiative would force schools to adopt a one-size-fits-all approach to education.
Prop. 54 would endanger the health and safety of all communities. Public health agencies target their efforts because they have limited resources. For example, African American women are targets for breast cancer screening outreach because they have lower than average rates of early detection. Without the ability to sort and separate individuals on the basis of race, public health dollars will be wasted, and efforts to fight and prevent disease will be less effective. The state collects data on teen risks ranging from truancy to sexually transmitted diseases. Without the ability to track race data, prevention resources could not be targeted to the most at-risk teens. According to the California Medical Association and 40 other health organizations opposing the initiative, Prop. 54 would significantly harm public health.
|
|
|
....Gil Vega from Fontana, Thuy Thu Tran from Hawthorne, C.J. Friedman from Chino and Kristen Burke from Santa Maria |
Prop. 54 would make it impossible to protect all Californians against discrimination. Racial quotas and preferences are already illegal in California, but discrimination still exists. We need to monitor and track information that helps identify discrimination and protects people from it.
Prop. 54 would make it more difficult to prosecute hate crimes and prevent racial profiling. The state Department of Justice could no longer require local police to collect data on victims and suspects, which is used to help solve crimes. Law enforcement groups, the Anti-Defamation League and the Asian Law Alliance are opposing Prop. 54.
"It doesn't make sense to ban the gathering of data that is used for important purposes," says CTA President Barbara E. Kerr. "This constitutional amendment is poorly written. If we care about our students, we will work to defeat it. It threatens our health, our safety and our ability to educate our students."
