Fight Connerly's Information Ban!

Action Alert Tell-a-Friend What's At Stake Contact Alert Creator Other Actions

Proposition 54, sponsored by Ward Connerly, seeks to ban the use of data on race or ethnicity by California governments. Efforts to address disparities in health and education and the enforcement of basic civil rights laws will be drastically hindered. Proposition 54 will be on the special election recall ballot, which is set for October 7.

How can you help?

1. Tell us you're voting NO. We need to identify thousands of NO voters before October 7.

2. Spread the word. Share this action with your friends and family.

Sample Letter for Campaign

Subject: You can count on me to say NO to Proposition 54

Dear [ Decision Maker ] ,

I am a registered voter in California, and I intend to vote NO on Proposition 54, the dangerous, deceptive, and irresponsible INFORMATION BAN.

Please: 1. Send me updates as the campaign unfolds. 2. Remind me to vote on October 7. 3. Let me know about other ways to help defeat this misguided initiative.

Sincerely,

Campaign Launched:
August 07, 2003

Background Information

4 Reasons to Vote NO on Proposition 54

1. Proposition 54 will undermine accountability in school reform.

The California Public Schools Accountability Act of 1999 is the state’s central school reform program. It requires schools to set goals for student achievement and it demands accountability by instituting testing to measure achievement.

Racial data is a central part of the evaluation process. It allows schools to determine whether some groups are improving more than others and it allows schools to target resources for the best overall improvement. Without this measurement data, school reform would be stripped of accountability.

2. Proposition 54 will eliminate public health programs that save lives.

Public health prevention resources are targeted by race because some health problems affect different races disproportionately, and because cultural differences make different prevention approaches more effective with different groups. For instance:

Contra Costa health officials noted that African American women had a lower rate of detection of breast cancer than white women. Through targeted outreach, the county achieved its goal of equalizing the rate of detection between African Americans and whites. This preventative approach saves lives and taxpayer dollars.
California state programs for teen pregnancy prevention credit dramatic drops in teen pregnancy to targeted programs which communicate differently to different groups of young people. Prevention ads to Latinas are different than to white women because they respond to different media messages in different ways. These prevention approaches, which would not be allowed under PROP. 54, prevent teen pregnancies and save taxpayers millions of dollars.
Similar racial data is used in preventing tobacco use, HIV/AIDS and obesity just to name a few examples.

Read an open letter signed by the California Medical Association and other groups concerned about public health in California.

3. Proposition 54 will hinder law enforcement efforts.

Hate crimes, racial profiling mitigation and community policing all rely on racial data of police officers, suspects and victims to carry out laws. Understanding and addressing hate crime patterns and racial profiling patterns are only possible if we have accurate information.

4. Proposition 54 will wipe out civil rights enforcement.

Without racial data, victims of discrimination in state employment or contracting won’t be able to address patterns of racial discrimination. This initiative makes discrimination protections impossible to enforce. That’s why even Prop. 209 author Tom Wood opposes the measure.

This is the web site of the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California and the ACLU Foundation of Southern California.
Learn more about the distinction between these two components of the ACLU. Copyright 2006 The ACLU of Southern California.