California wants to amend its Constitution so it can discriminate by race and sex

[Metaphor]

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politic...-asking-voters-whether-to-repeal-15331604.php

SACRAMENTO — California lawmakers advanced a constitutional amendment Wednesday to overturn Proposition 209, the affirmative action ban approved by state voters in the 1990s that critics say perpetuates inequality for women and people of color.

By a vote of 58-9, the Assembly passed ACA5, which would strip language from the state Constitution prohibiting the consideration of race and sex in public education, employment and contracting.

It is the first major step toward rescinding the law, a decision that would ultimately be left to California voters. If approved in the Senate by a two-thirds vote by June 25, the measure will appear on the November ballot, giving the state a chance to weigh in on the issue for the first time in a generation. Voters could repeal Prop. 209 by a simple majority.

Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, the San Diego Democrat who is carrying ACA5, said mass uprisings in recent weeks against police brutality and systemic racism have shown that new solutions are needed to address the discrimination that remains in many communities.

“As we look around the world, we see there is an urgent cry — an urgent cry for change,” Weber said on the Assembly floor. After 25 years of quantitative and qualitative data, we see that race-neutral solutions cannot fix problems steeped in race.”


The ban on affirmative action has been part of the California Constitution for almost a quarter-century. Championed by then-Gov. Pete Wilson as he launched an unsuccessful bid for the Republican nomination for president, Prop. 209 passed in 1996 with nearly 55% of the vote. It pushed the state into what supporters hailed as a new era of equal opportunity under the law, where Californians would be judged only by their merit. Critics argue the law has instead been devastating for women and people of color — curtailing efforts to diversify university campuses, police departments and school workforces, and costing small businesses owned by women and people of color billions of dollars in public contracts.

The 'cost' here is the cost of not getting preferential treatment. Of course, the public got a benefit--of getting the best service for the best price.

Several legislators said Wednesday that they were the beneficiaries of affirmative action policies, opportunities that they said had been denied to younger generations because the state could not directly address the unequal circumstances in which they were born.

Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, credited affirmative action for her admission to Stanford University and a master’s program at Georgetown University. In school, she said, teachers had lower expectations for her than her white peers.

Gonzalez admits she got preferential treatment in getting admitted, and then blames people for having lower expectations of her. The mind boggles at the cognitive athletics affirmative action supporters are capable of.

“We can’t create colorblindness, and it doesn’t exist,” she said.
But opponents argue that instead of leveling the playing field, ACA5 would promote prejudice by allowing universities, schools and government agencies to use race or sex in their admissions criteria, hiring and procurement decisions.

 

[Derec]

Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, the San Diego Democrat who is carrying ACA5, said mass uprisings in recent weeks against police brutality and systemic racism have shown that new solutions are needed to address the discrimination that remains in many communities.

Wrong. Shirley Weber and other proponents of racial preferences WANT to discriminate on the basis of race and gender, not end it.
They want to allow preferred groups to get into California universities with lesser grades and scores compared to non-preferred groups.
Also, women are something like 60% of college students. But because they are not a majority of all majors, feminists feel it's unfair not to discriminate in favor of women.

 

[Lumpenproletariat]

the need for equality and fairness to the disadvantaged

Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, the San Diego Democrat who is carrying ACA5, said mass uprisings in recent weeks against police brutality and systemic racism have shown that new solutions are needed to address the discrimination that remains in many communities.

Wrong. Shirley Weber and other proponents of racial preferences WANT to discriminate on the basis of race and gender, not end it.
They want to allow preferred groups to get into California universities with lesser grades and scores compared to non-preferred groups.
Also, women are something like 60% of college students. But because they are not a majority of all majors, feminists feel it's unfair not to discriminate in favor of women.

Another group they need to discriminate in favor of is non-Chinese/non-Asian students applying at the universities.

The Asian students have an unfair advantage over us non-Asians, because they're smarter, which isn't fair to the rest of us, so we need to be protected against them and impose higher requirements on them, or impose quotas to prevent them from getting an unequal number of slots in our universities.

Let's take to the streets and protest, and start a riot and smash windows and loot the stores until the powers-that-be respond to this need to protect us from this invasion of our universities by people who have this unfair advantage over us.

crybabies-of-the-world unite!