The proposed wording for a November 2008 ballot initiative banning racial preferences has come under attack by conservative groups in Missouri recently. The ballot is for a proposed amendment to the State Constitution which would read:

“The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting.”

On election day 2008 the voters will be asked to decide wether an amendment should be added to the State Constitution banning all forms of discrimination by the State. The proposed ballot initiative would lead one to believe the exact opposite however. It reads:

“Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:

• ban affirmative action programs designed to eliminate discrimination against; and improve opportunities for woman and minorities in public contracting, employment and education; and
• allow preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin to meet federal program funds eligibility standards as well as preferential treatment for bona fide qualifications based on sex?”

The above wording would have the voter believe he/she is voting on an initiative which would actually promote discrimination against women and minorities, which is obviously not the intent of the amendment. Conservative groups believe the wording of the ballot initiative is intentionally misleading, and have taken the matter to court, alleging the Secretary of State violated State law which mandates such a statement be drawn up “in the form of a question using language neither intentionally argumentative nor likely to create prejudice either for or against the proposed measure.”

Tim Asher, executive director of the Missouri Civil Rights Initiative who filed the lawsuit, said the amendment is being misrepresented because the ballot language tells the public they would be voting to ban programs that protect against discrimination when in fact, the reverse is true — since the proposed constitutional change makes it illegal for state agents to engage in any discrimination on the basis of race, sex or ethnicity.

Shanta Driver, national spokesperson for By Any Means Necessary (BAMN), disagrees with MCRI and is looking at this issue in the terms of equality. “The history of the United States shows there’s been next to no occasion in which voters faced with an opportunity to vote for white privilege or black equality have ever voted for black equality,” Driver said.

It is unfortunate there are those like Shanta Driver out there, still spouting the same racially divisive remarks. The truth about this Constitutional Amendment in Missouri is the exact opposite of what she portrays it as. Only a person who is inherently racist themselves could possibly believe that racial preferences promote “equality”.

Sphere: Related Content

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Constitution, Politics, Racism