SAN FRANCISCO “”mdash; The University of California Board of
Regents voted overwhelmingly to oppose a controversial initiative
sponsored by its own Ward Connerly, marking a defeat for a regent
who has spent much of his term fighting race and gender preferences
at the university.
The board voted 15-2-1 to oppose the Classification by Race,
Ethnicity, Color, or National Origin initiative Thursday. Regents
Ward Connerly, one of the sponsors of CRECNO, and Peter Preuss
voted against the resolution. Regent John Moores was the only
abstention.
CRECNO ““ formerly known as the Racial Privacy Initiative
““ will be on the March 2004 ballot. If passed, CRECNO would
prohibit the state from collecting racial information on state
employees and students of state institutions, including the UC.
Bruce Darling, the senior vice president of university affairs
said CRECNO would “adversely affect” the
university’s mission to reach diverse populations and to
provide education and research, especially in regard to financial
aid, outreach programs, admissions, and faculty and staff
employment.
However, Connerly ““ who was greeted by a number of boos
from the mostly anti-CRECNO audience ““ argued that race is a
“suspect method of classification.”
He added that because he believed the university’s
admissions policies and outreach programs were failing, the
university needed to try a new “colorblind”
approach.
“Would you continue to run your business with the same
business plan that had failed for the last 30 years?” he
asked.
But many of the regents echoed Darling’s concern that
restrictions on the gathering of racial data would cripple the
university’s ability to do research and the
university’s reputation which is based on such research.
Lieutenant Gov. Cruz Bustamante ““ a strong opponent of
CRECNO ““ said medical data the university gathers relies
heavily on race information in order to be effective. One example
would be being able to identify blacks as especially vulnerable to
sickle cell anemia.
“This is about identifying those who are at risk and
providing them with the information they can use to save or extend
their lives,” he said.
But Connerly said a clause in the initiative would exclude
medical-related issues and that a two-thirds vote by the
legislature would allow it to eliminate any additional fields.
There was some debate among the regents as to whether they
should even be discussing such a politically charged issue as
CRECNO, and some regents felt the discussion of such
“politicized” issues depreciated the value of the
university and of the board.
“I am absolutely baffled why we would take our valuable
time and the resources of the university and this vote will not
matter at all,” said Regent George Marcus. “We will not
decide this issue.”
But others felt it was entirely appropriate to tackle the issue
and that a strong stance on CRECNO must be taken.
“This is not a time for the UC Regents to play ostrich and
stick your head in the sand,” said State Superintendent of
Public Instruction Jack O’Connell, who sits on the board by
nature of his position.
Marcus received limited support for his introductions of an
alternate proposal to shelve the CRECNO issue for an indefinite
time period, but he was defeated in the voting session.
About 50 to 60 students from UC Berkeley, UC Santa Barbara, and
UC Riverside turned out to the meeting. The students spoke to the
regents during the public comment period, applauded regents who
spoke against CRECNO, and loudly hissed at regents who did not.
The students argued that CRECNO would cripple the diversity of
the student body and hamper outreach programs.
Second-year Berkeley student Peter Gee ““ who is involved
with outreach programs ““ said Berkeley increased its
applicant pool by 4,000 because of its inclusion of racial
data.
“Without this data, we wouldn’t be able to do that
kind of work,” he said.
When the regents voted to come out against CRECNO, students
greeted the announcement with thunderous cheers. Fernando Ramirez,
a second-year political sciences student at Santa Barbara and an
organizer of the protest, said student turnout played a big role in
the decision.
It remains to be seen what sort of effect the regents’
decision will have on CRECNO and how it will influence California
voters.
Regent Judith Hopkinson said voters should remember all the
ramifications of CRECNO come ballot time in 2004.
“I hope that when they (vote), the impact on the
University of California factors into their decision,” she
said.
However, Connerly dismissed the effects of the regents’
decision.
“One should not attach a bit of importance to what the
regents did. It’s high theatre and politicians show up, but
at the end of the day it doesn’t matter,” he said.
Connerly added that the effect students have on CRECNO matters
more in the voting booth than it does in the picket lines.
“Students often don’t vote. They protest, but they
don’t vote,” he said.