Affirmative Action Battle Brewing

[Double A]

Affirmative Action Battle Brewing

Posted: Feb 20, 2008 09:46 PM


There's a brewing ballot battle over affirmative action. Thousands of Oklahomans signed-on to an effort to end affirmative action in the state. Opponents say some of them were misled and other signatures are out-right fraud. News On 6's Ashli Sims reports now they're taking the battle to court.

Petition supporters are waiting on their day in court, the Oklahoma Supreme Court. The justices will decide if the petition makes it on the ballot. But, opponents say the court fight is just beginning.

Thousands lent their name to this initiative petition, but some say they had no idea what they were really signing.

"There was voter fraud from start to finish," said attorney Shanta Driver.

The Oklahoma Civil Rights Initiative is an arm of the American Civil Rights Institute, started by Ward Connerly. Connerly was behind California's push to end affirmative action. His Oklahoma group gathered thousands of signatures. Opponents claim some folks who signed the petition were misled by circulators.

"And I said, 'What is it about?" And she said, 'Oh, it's to protect civil rights and to protect people from discrimination. And I said, 'Oh, it's right up my alley,'" said David Bernstein with the Jewish Federation of Tulsa.

The petition does say it's against discrimination, but it also says it would end preferences for racial minorities and women. Bernstein says he asked for more information.

"She said I don't have any information here and I said, 'all right let's get to the car. And we'll sign it.' And I signed it and my wife signed it. And, I'll regret it as long as I live," added David Bernstein with the Jewish Federation of Tulsa.

And, Bernstein wasn't the only one who says he wasn't clear on what he was signing.

"A person that I knew, a person that we had even been in business together approached me and said, 'I'm circulating this petition and this will be real good for the community," said Pleas Thompson with the Tulsa NAACP.

Pleas Thompson is the president of the local chapter of the NAACP. He admits he didn't read the petition, but he's joining dozens who want to fight it.

"The language of the petition was misleading and confusing," said attorney Shanta Driver.

http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=7902552

[cannon_fodder]

quote:The petition does say it's against discrimination, but it also says it would end preferences for racial minorities and women.

Fixed her statement for her.  

A preference to one group is inherently discrimination against another group.  By preferring minorities you are, by necessity, showing a preference AGAINST the majority (whites).  So how is showing a preference against someone based on race not discrimination?

Otherwise there never was discrimination in the South, it was just a preference against blacks.

Argue that it is justified for whatever reason you like, but don't pretend that "preference" to a group based on skin color is not discrimination to other groups.  
- - -

And, FYI, don't sign something if you don't understand it.  Unless the language was patently misleading (I have no found the petition) too damn bad.  It's not like they wouldn't be able to find the requisite number of signatories in Oklahoma anyway - so just avoid the legal battle and go get some more.

[edit] After re-reading this stuck out to me:

quote:Pleas Thompson is the president of the local chapter of the NAACP.  He admits he didn't read the petition, but he's joining dozens who want to fight it.

He was told it would be good for the community so he signed without reading.  Now he wants to fight it?  Yay for leadership.  I'm going to see if I can get him to take over my student loans ... sign here sir, it will be good for the community.
[/edit]

[FOTD]

David Bernstein is a stand up quality person who can openly admit he made a mistake. If he says this petition is bad, that's all I need to know to say this initiative should be defeated.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

quote:The petition does say it's against discrimination, but it also says it would end preferences for racial minorities and women.

Fixed her statement for her.  

A preference to one group is inherently discrimination against another group.  By preferring minorities you are, by necessity, showing a preference AGAINST the majority (whites).  So how is showing a preference against someone based on race not discrimination?

Otherwise there never was discrimination in the South, it was just a preference against blacks.

Argue that it is justified for whatever reason you like, but don't pretend that "preference" to a group based on skin color is not discrimination to other groups.  
- - -

And, FYI, don't sign something if you don't understand it.  Unless the language was patently misleading (I have no found the petition) too damn bad.  It's not like they wouldn't be able to find the requisite number of signatories in Oklahoma anyway - so just avoid the legal battle and go get some more.

[edit] After re-reading this stuck out to me:

quote:Pleas Thompson is the president of the local chapter of the NAACP.  He admits he didn't read the petition, but he's joining dozens who want to fight it.

He was told it would be good for the community so he signed without reading.  Now he wants to fight it?  Yay for leadership.  I'm going to see if I can get him to take over my student loans ... sign here sir, it will be good for the community.
[/edit]

So people should be able to use a confusing ballot language, lie, mislead, and misrepresent a initiative petition to get it on the ballot? Whether you support Affirmative Action or not, that is the real issue here. This is about the integrity of our initiative petition process and this petition should be invalidated.

[MDepr2007]

I voted for Bush under the same premis[]

I saw it plenty of times and at the top of the sheet you sign is a few paragraphs explaining it breifly. I read it because I couldn't understand why I needed to sign a petiton for something we already have in our lifes.
I didn't finish High School but at least I figured it out , then signed it[^]

[cannon_fodder]

Double A, save your outrage:

quote:I said
Unless the language was patently misleading (I have no found the petition) too damn bad.

Have you seen a copy of this petition such that you can intelligently claim that the language was misleading?  I have not and thus made the above statement.

[jamesrage]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

So people should be able to use a confusing ballot language, lie, mislead, and misrepresent a initiative petition to get it on the ballot? Whether you support Affirmative Action or not, that is the real issue here. This is about the integrity of our initiative petition process and this petition should be invalidated.

What is misleading about a petition ending race and gender based preferences and discrimination?

[Double A]

I hope John doesn't mind me posting this(I couldn't have said it better myself):

THE POLITICAL SCENE
By John M. Wylie II, Editor

ANOTHER INITIATIVE SCANDAL BREWING

Before trials have even started for three individuals charged with felonies in the TABOR initiative petition scandal, another scandal involving out-of-state money and influence is bubbling up in Oklahoma.

This one involves the grossly misnamed Oklahoma Civil Rights Initiative, part of an out-of-state organization that wants to end affirmative action one state at a time but has told those whose signatures it sought that it wanted to improve civil rights protections in Oklahoma.

When this outfit dumped almost two dozen boxes of signed petitions in Secretary of State Susan Savage’s office last month, she made some very troubling discoveries.

She found 92 signatures listing variations of 415 Archer as the address of the registered voter.

When KOTV The News on 6 checked, it found buildings at 415 E. Archer in Tulsa and another at 415 W. Archer. Problem is, neither are residential propertiesâ€"one is a daycare center, the other a warehouse.

Savage called the situation “unprecedented,â€? and said that in some cases circulators listed two addresses â€" one on affidavits swearing that the signatures they collected were genuine; the other when they signed petitions themselves, claiming to be registered voters.

Savage said the law does not allow her to strike those signatures. That hot potato gets dropped in the collective lap of the Oklahoma Supreme Court.

Since circulators gathered only 2,214 more signatures than are required to get the deceptive measure on the ballot, it is likely that challenges there will derail the petition effort.

But it gets worse. The role and funding for Ward Connerly, the California “businessman� who has orchestrated the national drive for these so-called civil rights initiatives, raises deep concerns.

Ms. Magazine reports in its new issue that his effort is actually a front for major contractors nationwide who have been losing business, especially to contracting firms owned by women.

The magazine said Connerly set up two non-profit organizations, put himself in charge, and is reaping huge salary and benefit packages that then allow him to fuel the initiative effort. It suggests the setup may violate federal tax laws.

The last financial report, covering 2006, said Connerly received 66 percent of the non-profits’ revenues, or $1.6 million. Congressmen John Conyers and Charles Rangel have requested an IRS investigation.

A measure introduced by Senator Jeff Rabon and strongly supported by Rep. Jabar Shumate, SB 1913, would begin reforms by requiring the Secretary of State to verify that every signature on an initiative petition is that of a registered voter.

It also would let voters who sign petitions based on misleading information provided by circulators â€" something that triggered widespread complaints in both the TABOR and “civil rightsâ€? petition drives â€" withdraw their signatures.

That’s a good start. So is Attorney General Edmondson’s prosecution of the TABOR three, who have become the darlings of some who claim their First Amendment rights are being violated.

Hogwash. Oklahoma initiative petitions affect only Oklahomans, and the process should be limited to Oklahomans. That should include not only those circulating the petitions but those proposing them.

Until that happens, expect more scandals.

http://www.oologah.net/opinion.html

[waterboy]

It was a stupid petition and confusing to me. I read the first two paragraphs and asked the circulator why this change was necessary since I thought it was already law. He couldn't give me a satisfactory explanation. He gave me a copy of some materials which I never read. I thought it was a bogus operation and reached back to make sure my wallet was there. More important things in life honestly.

[cannon_fodder]

I guess I really need to see a copy of this petition, it wants to add the following language to Oklahoma Constitution:

quote: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.

quote:The Oklahoma Civil Rights Initiative (OkCRI) is dedicated to giving the people of Oklahoma the opportunity to end preferential treatment based on race, gender, ethnicity, or national origin by state or local governments.

Sounds fine to me.  I don't understand what is misleading about that.  Statements that they want to end discrimination and judgment based on race are entirely accurate.   Again, I guess I have to see a copy of the petition.

I called to ask where I could get a copy by only got voice mail:
918-504-4577

[cannon_fodder]

HA!

Found it at the Secretary of State's office.  For all to see, the official filing:
http://www.sos.state.ok.us/documents/Questions/737.pdf

1. The language above is accurate
2. The submission was "replete" with duplicates
3. The signature count of 141,184 EXCLUDES duplicates (per page 6.  Duplicate signatures, names or addresses were counted only once)

So with the exclusions they are still certified ~2500 MORE signatures than they need.  

I guess I don't see what is misleading about that petition at all.  I'm not excluding the fact that people might have pushed the petition fraudulently, I have no idea.  But when you sign a document the signature speaks for itself, the collateral estoppal rule prohibits later arguments that something OTHER THAN what is on the document was represented in normal situations.   That's why you are supposed to actually read it before signing.

The petition as submitted to the Oklahoma Secretary of State:

quote:TO the Honorable Brad Henry, Governor of Oklahoma:  We, the undersigned legal voters of the State of Oklahoma, respectfully order that the following proposed amendment to the Constitution shall be submitted to the legal voters of the State of Oklahoma for their approval or rejection at the regular general election,m to be held on the 4th day of November, 2008 (or such earlier special election as may be called by the Governor) and each for himself says:  I have personally signed this petition; I am a legal voter of the State of Oklahoma; my residence or post office are correctly written after my name.  The time for filing this petition expires ninety days from September 10, 2007.  The question we herewith submit to our fellow voters is:

Shall the following proposed amendment to Article 2 of the Constitution be approved?

Ballot Title

This measure seeks to add a new section to Article 2 of the Oklahoma Constitution.  The new section prohibits discrimination against or granting preference to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, and public contracting by the state of any of its agencies, institutions, or political subdivisions.  The new section will be prohibit qualifications based on sex that are reasonably necessary to the normal operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.  The new section will not prohibit any action necessary to obtain federal funding for the state.  The new section will not conflict with any currently existing court order.  The new section will only apply to actions taken after the section is approved by the people.

Shall this proposal be approved by the people?

For the proposal - YES

Against the proposal 0 NO

A "YES"" vote is a vote in favor of this measure.  A "NO" vote is a vote against this measure.

Be it enacted by the people of Oklahoma that an Amendment to Article 2 of the Oklahoma Constitution by Adding a New Section 36 be Approved:

Article 2, Section 36:

a) 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.

b)  This section shall apply only to action taken after the section's effective date.

c) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting bona fide qualifications based on sex that are reasonably necessary to the normal operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

d) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as invalidating any court order or consent decree that is in force as of the effective date of this section

e) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted  [All the things listed in the introductory paragraph, c_f is tired of typing at this point and wonders why the SOS does not mandate electrinic filing so my PDF reader could scan this in.  All available on page 2 but I'll summarize] [to make the state do anything to lose federal $]

f) ["states" = the state or any political or otherwise funded subdivision of it]
g) [ remedies for discrimination are the same for all races as they are for any other discrimination law]
h) [ standard blue pencil, if any part is against the law it shall be struck and the other sections shall hold]

With all the crap going on about this, has anyone else (Tusla World?) bothered to actually look the damn thing up or is everyone too busy being outraged?  So I can clarify my position by saying UNLESS another document was presented for signatures, I see nothing wrong with the petition.  Expunge all duplicates or otherwise potentially fraudulent signatures but you still have 140,000+ Oklahoman's who signed.

If you signed this document without reading it too damn bad.

If you read "he 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" and subliminally added "except me" at the end of it - too bad.

Someone correct me if this was not the petition in question or if you have some evidence, proof or allegation that something else was presented for signatures.  I'm not that familiar with the ballot access laws but this is the only petition I have found and the above is my take on what I linked to.