Proposal 2: A look from both sides
While it may not be a presidential election year, the 2006 November ballot holds plenty of action. I’m not referring to the gubernatorial election, though the race for governor has continued to be a close race. I am talking about Proposal 2, known as the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, which if passed would ban public agencies and universities from granting preferential treatment based on race or sex in hiring, awarding contracts or granting admissions.
Proposal 2 has been deemed the most controversial proposal on the ballot. The controversy began because the issue was not raised by a Michigan resident, but by a non-Michigan resident, Ward Connerly, from California. Then, there was cause for concern that Michigan residents were misled as they signed petitions in support of the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative. But there is no question now that the proposal is on the ballot, and all Michigan residents have a chance to have their voice heard on the issue this November 7.
Granted, if passed, this proposal will affect only public organizations, funded by taxpayer dollars, in their hiring, admissions or contracting efforts. But stop for a minute and think about how many public services you have used, or schools you have attended or corporations you have worked with that are funded by the public sector. How would your experience look if affirmative action based on sex and race were banned? Different? Or the same?
An interesting point that both sides of the proposal make is that affirmative action, especially based on race or sex, needs to end one day. Those for Proposal 2 believe that time is now. Those against Proposal 2 believe that time is further into the future.
Michigan voters, we need to ask ourselves: are we ready? Have we grown up? Or are we still in our teenage years as a state, willing to fiddle with independence and explore the outcome? Will passage of this proposal force more organizations to compete for the best workers? Will passage of this proposal force workers to truly be the best they can be? Or will it instead push us back 30 years?
While many believe that the government should set an example, should it lead in that example, or should it follow?
On November 7 – YOU decide.
October 12th, 2006 at 10:06 am
Although, proponents of Proposal 2 will lead you to believe that the passing of this Proposal will only ban organizations from granting preferential treatment on the basis of race or sex which in there minds will lead to a fairer society, this proposal would end so much more - if passed. Proposal 2 has unintended consequences that will roll the progress Michigan has made back 50 years. Women and minorities will be hurt the most if Proposal 2 is passed. This is not a black and white issue — it\’s a people issue. We must think about the future of our daughters, sisters and the other women in lives. Women and minorities have had the toughest battle in the country to gain equal access. If passed, Proposal 2 would take that away. Passing an initiative like Proposal 2 would mean that we have eliminated all forms of discrimination have been erased in this country and that the playing field has been leveled for all citizens. In a time when women make .67 cents per every dollar earned by men and people are still being denied access because of gender, race, etc., we still need Affirmative Action.