On November 3, 1998 Washington State Voters Ended "Racial Quotas" and "Reverse Discrimination". Washington State's I-200 Restored the Constitution for Non-Minorities! |
 |
|
As of January 2004, Gov. Gary Locke is attempting to reintroduce quotas, wants to "tweak" I-200 to allow race, gender and ethnicity to be used in college and university admissions.
ARCHIVES UPDATED May 5, 1999: Initiative 200, also known as the "Washington State Civil Rights Initiative", is now the law in Washington State! On Tuesday, Nov. 3, 1998, Washington State Voters told their State in no uncertain terms that they will no longer tolerate "reverse discrimination" and racial quotas! Washington has become the second State whose voters have outlawed racial preferences! Be sure to see I-200 Archives -- 1999, 1998 stories about resistance. And the donor of an illegal, secret $50,000 donation to fight I-200 was finally revealed in April 1999! Text of "Washington State Civil Rights Initiative"
The Washington State ballot initiative known as Initiative 200 (I-200) sought to end racial preferences, quotas and reverse discrimination by any government entity in Washington State. In other words, I-200 prohibits the State of Washington from hiring, promotion, and contracting decisions which are based on racial criteria. Just like the original, unamended Civil Rights Act of 1964 intended. Just as the U.S. Constitution intended. According to Associated Press, as reported in Oregon Live on 8/10/98, prior to the Nov. 1998 election, the poll results in Washington State were as follows:
64% of voters are in favor of I-200 The vocal and wealthy opponents of the initiative included NAACP, ACLU, and, of course, Big Business in Seattle were all rending their clothes and crying that I-200 would end "Affirmative Action". That’s not even close to accurate. Washington State’s I-200 was actually modeled on the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which outlawed racial and gender discrimination. Like California’s Prop. 209, Washington’s I-200 seeks only to restore constitutional protections against racial discrimination against ANY race at the state level. (Note 1: ACLU tried and failed a particularly dishonest tactic to derail the Washington State Civil Rights Initiative. ACLU tried the "Houston Strategy", as it is known among the supporters of racial quotas, and it is as simple as it is dishonest. The "Houston Strategy" seeks to get the courts, or the legislature, or the applicable ruling body, to change the language on any ballot initiative which seeks to end racial quotas and preferences to state that the initiative actually seeks to end "Affirmative Action". Which, of course, is absolutely false and misleading in the Washington I-200 Initiative: The I-200 ballot initiative sought only to end quotas and preferences! It left in place any Affirmative Action and/or Outreach programs which do not use racial categories. Fortunately, Washington's Thurston County Superior Court Judge Berschauer saw through the ACLU's sham lawsuit and ruled that the original ballot language of I-200 accurately reflected the initiative's sole purpose to end racial preferences and racial quotas. He refused to allow ACLU to mis-represent this important Constitutional issue to the voters!) (Be sure to also see: Houston Civil Rights Initiative for a detailed expose of the dishonest practice of re-wording ballot language in order to help defeat the ballot!) I-200, the Washington State Civil Rights Initiative, was a simple exercise of democracy: put the question to the voters and live with the democratic result. Analysis: The largest corporations in Washington State include members of the aerospace industry, the defense contracting industry, the financial services industries, software and technology firms (including Microsoft), and large law firms. These institutions were anxious to preserve their "good will" with the state and federal regulators and contracting agencies, and the businesses which derive their incomes directly and indirectly from the government! They were not about to support I-200 since the use of quotas and preferences is such a sacred cow among government agencies and procurement officers. Quick Review of the I-200 Opposition: (a) The Local, State, and Federal Governments. Face it, gov't agencies are populated by "career bureaucrats" whose main job is to keep their job! For the most part they were NOT about to question the "racial quotas" required by their gov't employer! Remember also that the rulings and decisions these career bureaucrats made every day carried the weight of law, and the law (before I-200) was "racial quotas". (We weren't allowed to vote on that "law", though, were we?) These tax-supported bureaucrats continue to have a huge amount of financial and political influence over the voting behavior of the "private sector" (businesses) and the "private citizen" (employees of those businesses). (b) The aerospace, defense, software and technology industries are significant employers in this region and they are heavily regulated by the government INCLUDING federal and state requirements that these industries practice racial quotas and preferences! Remember that Bill Lann Lee and the Clinton Justice Department hold a "sword of Damocles" over these employers! Lee and the Justice Department have a well-established track record of strong-arming non-compliant employers into hiring the right numbers of the right racial groups! The not-so-veiled threat: "Mess with our quotas, and we will tie you up for YEARS in court, and that will be VERY bad for your business." (c) The financial services industries (banks, investment firms, and insurance companies) ALSO are heavily regulated by the local, state and federal governments and, in this part of the world, these firms ALSO depend in substantial part on business derived from government, either directly or indirectly. Here's a short list of companies and organizations that formally weighed in against I-200.
If you supported I-200, you are urged to boycott these businesses and organizations. For example, if you have bank deposits or loans with a branch of U.S. Bank (any branch, in any state!), it is recommended that you transfer your accounts to a bank that believes in equal treatment for all regardless of race! And let the bank President know why you are moving your accounts! Who supported I-200? As of September 1998, (before the vote) 64% of Washington State voters supported I-200! These supporters are individual citizens (individual voters who are the only legitimate owners of this state!) who recognize that the Constitution itself prohibits racial quotas and preferences, and they believe that their democratic representation has been denied them on this issue. These citizens clearly see that up until this time they have never been allowed to vote directly on whether their State and Local Governments should be allowed to practice "reverse discrimination" and/or to enforce "racial quotas". These are the voter-citizens who overwhelmingly voted in favor of I-200 this November in Washington State. According to the American Civil Rights Coalition, support for I-200 was surprisingly widespread among unexpected constituencies:
Be sure to see Jan. 26, 2004 update: Gov. Gary Locke is attempting to reintroduce quotas, wants to "tweak" I-200! END: I-200 MAIN Archives |
Use your Browser's BACK button, or make another selection:
Washington I-200 MAIN Archives |
Jan.
29, 2004: |
I-200 More
Archives: 1999, 1998 Stories |
