Even though Proposition 54 was defeated in Tuesday’s
recall election by a wide margin, University of California Regent
Ward Connerly, the man who introduced the initiative, said he will
try to revive the issue by introducing a rewritten version of the
proposition in the future.
Proposition 54, also known as the Racial Privacy Initiative,
would have prohibited most collection of racial data by the state.
Concerns arose over its effect on health care and education.
Connerly, author of the initiative and head of the American
Civil Rights Coalition, issued a statement following the election
results, saying even though the proposition failed this election
cycle, he planned to reintroduce a similar but differently worded
initiative in two or three years.
“We didn’t lose because people didn’t believe
in a colorblind government. We lost because voters had their doubts
about the effect of (Proposition) 54 on their health,”
Connerly said.
Many health organizations, such as the California Nurses
Association and the American Heart Association, took a strong stand
against the initiative, and backers said a new proposition would be
written with the help of a large number of health
professionals.
“I am not aware of the particulars of the new proposition,
but I do know that several health officials agreed to sit down with
(Ward Connerly) and craft the new initiative,” said Diane
Schachterle, a spokeswoman for the American Civil Rights
Coalition.
Spokespeople for the American Heart Association and the
California Nurses’ Association said they would have to look
at the rewritten initiative before deciding on a stance.
“(I) can’t predict the future. We would have to take
a look at it before deciding on a course of action,” said
Carl Bloice, a spokesman for the California Nurses Association.
But Bloice was quick to point out that even if health
organizations support a newly crafted proposition, there are
several other groups who would surely oppose it despite different
wording.
“I am not certain that just by addressing health concerns,
(Connerly) would eliminate opposition. “¦ If he doesn’t
address education, there would still be opposition,” Bloice
said.
Schachterle said the proposition’s defeat was caused by a
difference in spending.
“The opposition simply outspent us 40 to one and cast
enough of a haze on the initiative to get people to doubt
it,” Schachterle said, referring to the roughly $4 million
that gubernatorial hopeful Lt. Gov Cruz Bustamante spent on the
“No on Prop. 54″ advertising campaign.
The months leading up to the election saw both sides of the
issue spending large sums of money on advertising, debates and
public appearances, but with 99.8 percent of precincts reporting
Wednesday, 64 percent of California voters had decided against the
initiative.
But education and not health is the No. 1 concern for third-year
classics student Josephine Kong, who voted against the proposition
and said she would not vote in favor of another even if Connerly
changed the language.
“This proposition would hurt students, and as long as it
would have a negative effect on education, I would vote against
it,” she said.
She added that no matter what changes Connerly would institute,
the proposition would remain fundamentally the same.
Carrie Spector, a spokeswoman for the American Academy of
Pediatrics, said her organization is also firm in its
opposition.
“Under no circumstances can we imagine supporting an
initiative at all similar to Proposition 54,” Spector
said.
Schachterle, however, is confident that with new phrasing,
California voters would eventually pass the initiative.
“We’ll come back with a clarified initiative so that
people can have reason to vote yes,” she said.