CPA HOME  |  SEARCH ARCHIVE  |  CURRENT EDITION

ALTERNATIVES
Newsletter of the Center for Policy Alternatives

 

 


Anti-Affirmative Action Measures Spread

Anti-affirmative action measures continue to sweep the country, thanks to a well-organized campaign to miseducate the public on the benefits and purposes of the policy. Opponents link affirmative action with race-based quotas and systems of preferential treatments, obscuring the program’s goal of providing all underrepresented and qualified individuals equal opportunity for jobs and education and ignoring the profound impact such policies continue to have on opportunities for women.

Recent debate on affirmative action has focused on race, but affirmative action is a key strategy to help women gain a foothold in business and education sectors dominated by men. The economic future of this nation depends on making women full economic players, and legislative activity this session against affirmative action will hamper our economic growth by not affording women the same economic opportunities men already enjoy.

Since the 1996 passage of California’s Proposition 209, nearly 20 states considered anti-affirmative action measures. Only one, Washington state’s Initiative 200, passed. Opponents of affirmative action see the passage of I-200 as confirmation that the public is ready to end affirmative action.

During the 1999 session, five states—Michigan, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas—have introduced anti-affirmative action legislation. Missouri’s SB 43 targets firefighters and law enforcement officers; others aim to eliminate all affirmative action programs in the state. Other states that have introduced anti-affirmative action legislation since 1997 are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio and Oklahoma.

More ballot initiatives in 2000 will surely follow these legislative attacks. Ward Connerly, architect of California’s Proposition 209, announced plans to introduce a similar initiative in Florida in November 2000.

Proponents of affirmative action have some call to celebrate, however. New York’s four pro-affirmative action bills were referred to committee. Meanwhile, broad coalitions of women leaders, minority organizations, business and labor are coming together to battle key upcoming ballot initiatives.

  May 1999
  Vol. 7, No. 4
 
ALTERNATIVES

Alternatives is a publication of the Center for Policy Alternatives – a nonpartisan progressive public policy and leadership development center serving state legislators, state policy organizations, and state grassroots leaders. Alternatives is indexed in Urban Affairs Abstracts. ISSN #1070-3047

Tim McFeeley,
Executive Director
Jane Gruenebaum,
Chief Operating Officer
Linda Tarr-Whelan,
Board Chair

STATE NETWORKS
Diallo Brooks,
Southeast Director
Bettye Jo Pakulis,
Northeast Director
Jesse Romero,
Southwest Director
John Freeman,
Midwest Consultant
Jewel James,
State Networks Manager

POLICY/COMMUNICATIONS
Bernie Horn,
Senior Director, Policy & Communications
Kirsten Lindquist,
Assoc. Director, Policy
Liz Cattaneo,
Assoc. Dir., Communications
Star Wilbraham,
Communications Assistant
Rachel Balick,
Intern
PROGRAM INITIATIVES
Jen Ray,
Senior Director, Program Initiatives
Helen Gonzales,
Senior Manager, Work and Family Investment
John Wilcox,
Senior Manager, Technology Policy
Jennifer Woolley,
Senior Manager, Women and the Economy Program
Christine Broderick,
Intern, Women and the Economy
LEADERSHIP
Carolina Zumaran-Jones,
Director, Eleanor Roosevelt Global Leadership Institute & Flemming Fellows Leadership Institute
Maura Hutchens,
Manager, ERGLI & FFLI
Meredith Gurwith,
Intern, ERGLI
Rebecca Valerin,
Intern, FFLI
ADMINISTRATION/FINANCE
Maxine G. Somerville,
Senior Director of Administration and Human Resources
Tom Gilmer,
Chief Financial Officer
Chantel McCloud,
Manager, Payroll & A/P
John Wilcox,
General Counsel
Shawn Hayden,
Office Manager
DEVELOPMENT
Chris Rutledge,
Associate Director of Development

CPA HOME  |  SEARCH ARCHIVE  |  CURRENT EDITION