• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

So Proposition 54? Anyone come up with a reason for a yes vote?

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,824
0
76
Anyone ever come up with a good reason for voting yes on that?



 

Shortcut

Golden Member
Jul 24, 2003
1,107
0
0
Originally posted by: flavio
Anyone ever come up with a good reason for voting yes on that?
Ward Connerly's still working on it. We'll see what kind of finely-dressed "reasoning" he'll come up with soon...
 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,824
0
76
C'mon...I know some people here said they voted yes on it. Now come tell us what you were thinking.
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
because the state should treat each of it's citizens equally when it comes to race, and it's clear that california cannot accomplish that without some help. It's a shame it got defeated, I've been looking for reasons why someone would have voted no. They want to keep their newfound advantages, I assume.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,491
3,252
126
No. Poor Ward just can't get used to being black. He's should get a skin change operation. He's a white guy born in a black body. I got mine now you get yours.
 

b0mbrman

Lifer
Jun 1, 2001
29,471
1
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
what is prop 54?
Summary Prepared by the State Attorney General:
Amends Constitution to prohibit state and local governments from using race, ethnicity, color, or national origin to classify current or prospective students, contractors or employees in public educationk,contracting, or employment operations. Does not prohibit classification by sex.

Prohibition also covers persons subject to other operations of government unless Legislature finds compelling state interest, authorizes by two-thirds of each house, and Governor approves.

"Classifying" defined as separating, sorting, or organizing persons of personal data. Exemptions include: law enforcement descriptions, prisoner and undercover assignments; actions taken to maintain federal funding.
 

b0mbrman

Lifer
Jun 1, 2001
29,471
1
0
Originally posted by: flavio
Anyone ever come up with a good reason for voting yes on that?
Funny, I'd think it hard to find reasons to have voted no...

I, for one, would love to return four years from now to a state that didn't care about race...
 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,824
0
76
Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Originally posted by: flavio
Anyone ever come up with a good reason for voting yes on that?
Funny, I'd think it hard to find reasons to have voted no...

I, for one, would love to return four years from now to a state that didn't care about race...
Prop 54 would make it illegal for health professionals to collect data about race or ethnic origin to provide appropriate test for patients. Diseases like Sickle Cell and Tay-Sachs affect people of specific ethnic origins so doctors need to do targeted testing.

It also contains a section which allows the police to use racial information to solve crimes, but keeps the state from collecting racial profiling data. Nice eh?

You can find some more reasons here:

Eliminates public health efforts that save lives, undermines accountability in school reform, hinders law enforcement efforts, and wipes out civil rights enforcement.

Who tricked you into thinking this was good?
 

imported_Tomato

Diamond Member
Sep 11, 2002
7,608
0
0
Originally posted by: Lucky
because the state should treat each of it's citizens equally when it comes to race, and it's clear that california cannot accomplish that without some help. It's a shame it got defeated, I've been looking for reasons why someone would have voted no. They want to keep their newfound advantages, I assume.
"Because" does not mean "will".

We don't live in a perfect society, and we never will. Therefore, we shouldn't pass laws that would only be effective in an ideal world.
 

Linflas

Lifer
Jan 30, 2001
15,388
73
91
So it was bad to collect race data in the south to use against blacks but it is ok to collect race data today to use against whites? Sorry double standards just baffle me.
 

imported_Tomato

Diamond Member
Sep 11, 2002
7,608
0
0
Originally posted by: Linflas
So it was bad to collect race data in the south to use against blacks but it is ok to collect race data today to use against whites? Sorry double standards just baffle me.
And your lack of reading comprehension baffles me.

Example:

Prop 54 would make it illegal for health professionals to collect data about race or ethnic origin to provide appropriate test for patients. Diseases like Sickle Cell and Tay-Sachs affect people of specific ethnic origins so doctors need to do targeted testing.
 

Linflas

Lifer
Jan 30, 2001
15,388
73
91
Originally posted by: Dezign
Originally posted by: Linflas
So it was bad to collect race data in the south to use against blacks but it is ok to collect race data today to use against whites? Sorry double standards just baffle me.
And your lack of reading comprehension baffles me.

Example:

Prop 54 would make it illegal for health professionals to collect data about race or ethnic origin to provide appropriate test for patients. Diseases like Sickle Cell and Tay-Sachs affect people of specific ethnic origins so doctors need to do targeted testing.
Summary Prepared by the State Attorney General:
Amends Constitution to prohibit state and local governments from using race, ethnicity, color, or national origin to classify current or prospective students, contractors or employees in public educationk,contracting, or employment operations. Does not prohibit classification by sex.

Prohibition also covers persons subject to other operations of government unless Legislature finds compelling state interest, authorizes by two-thirds of each house, and Governor approves.

"Classifying" defined as separating, sorting, or organizing persons of personal data. Exemptions include: law enforcement descriptions, prisoner and undercover assignments; actions taken to maintain federal funding.
Bolding added by me. Since we do not have nationalized health care I do not see how this could be stretched to prevent doctors from targeting testing based on known ethnic diseases. If somehow it was stretched to prevent that then all it takes is the legislature to act and the governor to sign. I will ignore the gratuitous insult.
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Originally posted by: flavio
Anyone ever come up with a good reason for voting yes on that?
Funny, I'd think it hard to find reasons to have voted no...

I, for one, would love to return four years from now to a state that didn't care about race...
Prop 54 would make it illegal for health professionals to collect data about race or ethnic origin to provide appropriate test for patients. Diseases like Sickle Cell and Tay-Sachs affect people of specific ethnic origins so doctors need to do targeted testing.

It also contains a section which allows the police to use racial information to solve crimes, but keeps the state from collecting racial profiling data. Nice eh?

You can find some more reasons here:

Eliminates public health efforts that save lives, undermines accountability in school reform, hinders law enforcement efforts, and wipes out civil rights enforcement.
health care is exempt! you have been LIED to!

Clause (f) of the initiative reads, ?Otherwise lawful classification of medical research subjects and patients shall be exempt from this section.?


No person?s health care, or any epidemiological studies that reveal disease patterns, would have been affected by Prop 54. Police and correctional officers may also use racial classifications in the interest of public safety.

"Civil rights enforcement" as you call it is exempt for 10 years and can easily be extened by a 2/3 votes in the states congress if needed.


Law enforcement: PARAGRAPH (g): ?Nothing in this section shall prevent law enforcement officers, which carrying out their law enforcement duties, from describing particular persons in otherwise lawful ways?.? Also it does not require them to not keep the data, it says the state cannot force local and regional authorities to keep it. They can if they want, or not. You are DEAD wrong on every single count of your post.

PARAGRAPH (g), continued: ??Neither the governor, the legislature nor any statewide agency shall require law enforcement officers to maintain records that track individuals on the basis of said classifications, nor shall the governor, the legislature or any statewide agency withhold funding to law enforcement agencies on the basis of the failure to maintain such records.?

PARAGRAPH (h): ?Otherwise lawful assignment of prisoners and undercover law enforcement officers shall be exempt from this section.?

 

Syringer

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
19,333
2
71
People are very ignorant about the issue of prop 54, as they usually are when it comes to political issues..

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/7210532p-8156123c.html

But Diane Schachterle, Connerly's campaign coordinator, said Proposition 54 is not meant to interfere with any health-related issue. The analysis supports that view, she said.

"Although it's not definitive, their best analysis is that, for all intents and purposes, medical data collection will continue," she said.


Prop 54 would be the first step in creating a color blind society, which is definitely something we should all be striving for. Race should not matter in anything.
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Originally posted by: Dezign
Originally posted by: Linflas
So it was bad to collect race data in the south to use against blacks but it is ok to collect race data today to use against whites? Sorry double standards just baffle me.
And your lack of reading comprehension baffles me.

Example:

Prop 54 would make it illegal for health professionals to collect data about race or ethnic origin to provide appropriate test for patients. Diseases like Sickle Cell and Tay-Sachs affect people of specific ethnic origins so doctors need to do targeted testing.
Your lack of public policy comprehension baffles me too! Read what I have posted above and then quote more misguided posters.

 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Clause (f) of the initiative reads, ?Otherwise lawful classification of medical research subjects and patients shall be exempt from this section.?
In the land of post-HIPPA, that's not enough to vouch for the health neutral effect of Prop 54.

Using the statement of Connerly's campaign coordinator is enough to vote "no."
But Diane Schachterle, Connerly's campaign coordinator, said Proposition 54 is not meant to interfere with any health-related issue. The analysis supports that view, she said.

"Although it's not definitive, their best analysis is that, for all intents and purposes, medical data collection will continue," she said.
The first step to a race blind society would be blindness (not a good choice) or a whole lot of miscegenation. There are a myriad of institutions that codify discrimination based on racial legacy. Various race conscious initiatives provide means of mitigating the residual effects of our country's racist past and prejudicial present.

Once this country comes to terms with meeting the basic necessities of equal opportunity (universal healthcare and quality K-12 education) Prop 54 proponents will have something to cheer about. As it stands, Prop 54 was intended to return the balance of benefit to those who were advantaged by our nation's history of discrimination. Even if that was not the intent it was a potential outcome.
 

pheonixstar15

Junior Member
Oct 8, 2003
10
0
0
I voted yes on prop 54. I don't really believe that this issue is about racial privacy I believe it is about affirmative action. California voted for Prop 209 to ban affirmative action but many of the employees of the state blatently disregarded that law http://www.ncpa.org/pd/affirm/pdaa/pdaa33.html . Also the UC system right after the passage of that Prop just happened to change their admission policy to weigh much less heavily on SAT and somewhat less heavily on GPA, so that they could focus on the college essay. (One of the questions on that essay which I took was about overcoming adversity) This was an underhanded way to for the UCs to sneak in affirmative action in spite of the will of California. I percieve Prop 54 as being the best way to stop these rogue California organizations from violating the will of the people they are supposed to represent. (though rumor has it that the UCs will soon be requiring a photo with college applications which would be another loop-hole around prop 54)
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
67,806
2,921
126
Maybe I missed something, but this Proposition only seeks to eliminate the collection of Race based data? It does not address the issue of How the data is to be used?

If the answers to both questions is "Yes", then I don't see how it contributes anything towards a "colour blind society", it seems to contribute to a willful ignorance of potential Racial Issues though.
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
0
0
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Originally posted by: flavio
Anyone ever come up with a good reason for voting yes on that?
Funny, I'd think it hard to find reasons to have voted no...

I, for one, would love to return four years from now to a state that didn't care about race...
Prop 54 would make it illegal for health professionals to collect data about race or ethnic origin to provide appropriate test for patients. Diseases like Sickle Cell and Tay-Sachs affect people of specific ethnic origins so doctors need to do targeted testing.

It also contains a section which allows the police to use racial information to solve crimes, but keeps the state from collecting racial profiling data. Nice eh?

You can find some more reasons here:

Eliminates public health efforts that save lives, undermines accountability in school reform, hinders law enforcement efforts, and wipes out civil rights enforcement.

Who tricked you into thinking this was good?
Local and state governments. How is that "health professionals"? You, a typical liberal, were just scared into voting no by the democrats deceptive tactics.

The bottom line...why is gatheirng data based on race going to affect health professionals' abilities to combat disease? Some races may be statistically slightly more predisposed to a few certain diseases...does that mean we combat the disease differently? Does that mean we only warn certain races about certain diseases?

Seriously...this was an obvious 'yes' unless you're a partisan patsy or easily convinced by actors playing doctors on commercials.
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
0
0
Originally posted by: sandorski
Maybe I missed something, but this Proposition only seeks to eliminate the collection of Race based data? It does not address the issue of How the data is to be used?

If the answers to both questions is "Yes", then I don't see how it contributes anything towards a "colour blind society", it seems to contribute to a willful ignorance of potential Racial Issues though.
Gathering racial data CREATES racial issues.

Hispanics and blacks make less money for the same reason many whites and asians make little money...because they come from households which encourage underachieving. Let's stop saying poverty is a racial issue and start looking at the REAL problems and causes of poverty. As it is, blacks are being told they're poor because they're black. Why the HELL would they try to better their situation when they're being told that changing their income level is about as easy as changing their skin color?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,491
3,252
126
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: sandorski
Maybe I missed something, but this Proposition only seeks to eliminate the collection of Race based data? It does not address the issue of How the data is to be used?

If the answers to both questions is "Yes", then I don't see how it contributes anything towards a "colour blind society", it seems to contribute to a willful ignorance of potential Racial Issues though.
Gathering racial data CREATES racial issues.

Hispanics and blacks make less money for the same reason many whites and asians make little money...because they come from households which encourage underachieving. Let's stop saying poverty is a racial issue and start looking at the REAL problems and causes of poverty. As it is, blacks are being told they're poor because they're black. Why the HELL would they try to better their situation when they're being told that changing their income level is about as easy as changing their skin color?
Oh good, then we can use skin color to direct funds to change their attitude.

 

ASK THE COMMUNITY