TITLE

So-called "Racial Privacy" Initiative Will Fail to Qualify for November 2002 Ballot

Despite Well-Funded Signature Phase, Connerly's Information Ban Is On the Ropes, Say Analysts

http://www.aclunc.org/pressrel/020530-connerly.html

The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

May 30, 2002

SACRAMENTO, CA - There is now no chance of Wilson-appointee Ward Connerly's so-called "Racial Privacy" initiative making it onto the November 2002 ballot, analysts say; they made the determination after receiving news of the dismal 69% projected validity rate reported by Los Angeles County.
This is the second time Connerly's efforts on this initiative have failed to qualify for the targeted ballot.

"What a blow to this already struggling campaign," said David Mermin, a pollster and consultant with Lake Snell Perry Associates. "Given the low approval ratings in early polls - less than a majority, which signals trouble for an initiative - I think you'd have to say this initiative is on the ropes. This latest failure demonstrates more pointedly that despite a very well-funded signature-gathering campaign, voters are skeptical."

With 54 of 58 counties reporting, and just 44,613 outstanding signatures to be evaluated through the random sampling process, analysts say it is now extremely unlikely for Connerly to make the deadline for the November ballot. If the signatures fall below the automatic qualifying threshold, counties must use a much more rigorous and lengthy full-count verification process, which would push past the June 27 deadline for the November ballot. According to the Secretary of State's office, if after the full count the initiative is eventually found to have the requisite 670, 816 valid signatures, it would not appear on the ballot until the next statewide election, in March 2004.

"No one wants an initiative they're backing to falter like this," said Mermin. "An initiative that completely fails to garner public support in its first outing, then comes out in round two with this very anemic performance, which is going to trigger an expensive full-verification process, costing taxpayers millions of additional dollars, raises a red flag to its backers and potential donors. No one bets on a horse with a record like this one, even if you happen to like its name."
The initiative, which would bar public agencies in California from utilizing information that refers to race, ethnicity or national origin, is the brainchild of Ward Connerly, a Pete Wilson appointee to the UC Board of Regents. Opponents argue that the initiative would devastate the state's public health and education programs, and rob the state of information about its progress in rooting out disparities based on ethnicity and race.

While Connerly claims to have broad popular support for his initiative, even he has conceded that the support has failed to materialize, arguing in April that he needs more time to "educate Californians about race."

According to Mermin, that's another sign of weakness.
"It's one thing to tap into people's gut feelings on an issue; it's a completely different and much more difficult challenge to try to tutor an entire state and make them share your idiosyncratic views," said Mermin. "Connerly is right to be concerned."

When Connerly's campaign turned in their signatures in April, Connerly claimed that he deliberately turned in just a portion of the signatures gathered as a strategem to push the qualification and verification process past the June 27th deadline, and so to appear on the March 2004 ballot.

"If this really was a deliberate ploy, it is clear that Connerly is thumbing his nose at voters and playing a costly game in the midst of a budget crisis," said Maria Blanco, National Senior Counsel for MALDEF. "First he refuses to disclose the source of the money for his campaign, and then he sticks Californians with the price for his political gamesmanship."

Opponents of the initiative believe that the extension to the next ballot will prove a decisive factor in the initiative's defeat.

"This second failure to qualify is bad news for Connerly and good news for California," said Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Director of the ACLU of Northern California. "The more voters learn about this deceptive and divisive initiative, the more concerned they become. With extra time to debate the merits of Connerly's irresponsible experiment on the state, I think the voters will deliver a verdict of a resounding 'no.'"
###

The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California
1663 Mission Street, Suite 460, San Francisco, CA 94103
(415) 621-2493