Page 2
3 states to consider affirmative action ban
By CHRIS KAHN
Associated Press
August 7, 2008
Page 2 of 2
Opponents in Arizona, Colorado and Nebraska criticize Connerly for billing the initiative drive as a civil rights cause. They say thousands of voters were likely duped into signing petitions because the initiatives were described as a ban on discrimination instead of an attack on programs that help women and minorities.
"If you put things in deceptive terms, like if you say 'We're trying to get civil rights protections for everybody,' then, you know, people say 'yes,'" said Shanta Driver, a lawyer for a Detroit-based affirmative action coalition called By Any Means Necessary. "They don't know those terms mean something completely different."
Driver's group has filed a lawsuit in Arizona seeking an injunction to block state officials from putting the initiative on the ballot. Among other claims, the lawsuit says that homeless people were offered water and food to entice them to circulate and sign the petitions.
In Colorado, initiative opponents filed enough signatures Monday for a competing ballot question that would ban quotas and point systems while preserving support programs for women college students, male nurses and other underrepresented groups. Colorado elections officials are still verifying signatures for that competing initiative.
And in Nebraska, lawyer and GOP presidential delegate David Kramer said he has started challenging the ballot initiative with county elections officials. Kramer said petitioners left signature lists unattended, filled in information for signers and failed to explain the ballot initiative as required by law. His group, Nebraskans United, also has filed a lawsuit challenging the language in the initiative.
"It's misleading," Kramer said. "It talked about what this wouldn't do, instead of talking about the programs it would eliminate."
>> Back -- Page 1 2
3 states to consider affirmative action ban
By CHRIS KAHN
Associated Press
August 7, 2008
Page 2 of 2
Opponents in Arizona, Colorado and Nebraska criticize Connerly for billing the initiative drive as a civil rights cause. They say thousands of voters were likely duped into signing petitions because the initiatives were described as a ban on discrimination instead of an attack on programs that help women and minorities.
"If you put things in deceptive terms, like if you say 'We're trying to get civil rights protections for everybody,' then, you know, people say 'yes,'" said Shanta Driver, a lawyer for a Detroit-based affirmative action coalition called By Any Means Necessary. "They don't know those terms mean something completely different."
Driver's group has filed a lawsuit in Arizona seeking an injunction to block state officials from putting the initiative on the ballot. Among other claims, the lawsuit says that homeless people were offered water and food to entice them to circulate and sign the petitions.
In Colorado, initiative opponents filed enough signatures Monday for a competing ballot question that would ban quotas and point systems while preserving support programs for women college students, male nurses and other underrepresented groups. Colorado elections officials are still verifying signatures for that competing initiative.
And in Nebraska, lawyer and GOP presidential delegate David Kramer said he has started challenging the ballot initiative with county elections officials. Kramer said petitioners left signature lists unattended, filled in information for signers and failed to explain the ballot initiative as required by law. His group, Nebraskans United, also has filed a lawsuit challenging the language in the initiative.
"It's misleading," Kramer said. "It talked about what this wouldn't do, instead of talking about the programs it would eliminate."
>> Back -- Page 1 2
