« Dean qualifies for matching funds | Main | Va. GOP official sentenced »

Michigan Initiative to overturn Grutter

National Review Online has a speech by Ward Connerly announcing the campaign for the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative.

And so today, I am pleased to announce that we, the people hereby assembled including Tom Wood, coauthor of Proposition 209, Valery Pech, plaintiff in the Adarand case, as well as Jennifer Gratz and Barbara Grutter will begin a campaign to place on the November 2004 Ballot what will be commonly known as the "Michigan Civil Rights Act." This initiative will be patterned after the 1964 Civil Rights Act and California's Proposition 209 to prohibit discrimination and preferences in public education, public employment, and public contracting.

Thanks to How Appealing for the link.

Comments

Why stop at Michigan? And why not consider ending it in the private sector altogether?

In college admissions, economic factors should be the only for consideration. And why should Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et. al. be so worried about that? They shouldn't! It's already been lamented upon time after time that african-amercian's are among the poorest in our Nation. And why keep out the other races that are economically disadvantaged, too?

In public contracting and employment, as well as the private sector, affirmative action should be completely unallowed. Employment and advancement should be driven by a person's ability to perform, not by race, gender, age, and so on. It is not right either that the governement dictate how companies should operate in their hiring practices. How can firms be truly competitive and productive if they are not hiring/promoting the best qualified person for any job? I know what I need to do to get ahead and I'm sure minorities do as well - work hard, deliver results that improve the bottom line.

I happen to work with a person at one of the Big Three here in Detroit, who was once a contract employee being considered for permanent employment with Fo--. He has email documentation showing lengthy, wasted time the company had in trying to get the appropriate "diversity" candidate.

Well, there's my two cents - if anyone can prodie me with a link to Connerly's petition so that I may read it in full, I'd be greatful.

Most current job standards were set at the lowest possible standard (if one believes in basic capitalism): white males who had absolutely no competition from any one else under law AND social custom.

All candidates considered for jobs under diversity hiring are qualified. When whites insist on turning the discussion to that of unqualified persons taking jobs from qualified whites, then you know there's a problem, because they're still arguing the premise.

When one takes a holistic view of any job, -- including the Supreme Court, the totality of who a person is and the experiences s/he brings to the table are ALL relevant. That's why Clarence Thomas, as abhorrent as his jurisprudence is, belongs on that court as much as Antonin Scalia, who remains blinded by his own brilliance. They all bring something valuable to the table.

Businesses which take a realistic look at job performance requirements, understand clearly that it is in their best organizational economic interest to hire on a diversity standard. The problem in 2003, is whether they are actually doing it, or merely paying lip service.

Diversity hiring and education is a new model, but resistance is futile: this country WILL begin to reflect it's diversity from the boardroom to the boardwalk. No one wins all the time, but the days in which one fails because of a historical bias which holds that white is right, well, those days of American apartheid are over.