> The California Constitution ... prohibits the state from discriminating ... on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin ... This measure would provide that ... the state may use state moneys ... for purposes of increasing the life expectancy of, improving educational outcomes for, or lifting out of poverty specific groups based on race, color, ethnicity, national origin, or marginalized genders, sexes, or sexual orientations.-- https://legiscan.com/CA/text/ACA7/id/2827675
* increasing life expectancy
* improving educational outcomes
* lifting out of poverty
None of these functions of government is hampered by providing them to any citizens that need them, regardless of their race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin. It is unfair to exclude other people from these services on the basis of characteristics that they do not control.
My heretical comment. Any neutral policy that helps white man from a poor low education background will help a black man from the same. Probably even more. My snide thought on why people don't want to pursue such things is those things tend to flatten the class structure. Where policies that try to make the upper class more diverse don't.
'It's totally fair because sometimes the foot in the boot is brown. So quit your bitching'
> None of these functions of government is hampered by providing them to any citizens that need them, regardless of their race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin.
Yes, but they want to provide advantages based on, not regardless of, protected categories.
I'm surprised they're trying to gut/reverse Prop 209 again. Their latest attempt was defeated by a larger margin than the original proposition passed back in the 90s. And this was during the fall of 2020, which would have been about as good a time as any to make an attempt.
Also, with the recent SCOTUS ruling, the state would be more constrained in terms of what it would be allowed to do under the US constitution. It seems like this will end up rallying their opposition and driving Asian voters away from Dems.
I doubt this is anything more than a political messaging A/B test in a friendly media outlet.
It's a presidential election year, and the partisans are doing what they do in every presidential election year: trying every message they've ever run on with the public to see what gets a reaction.
It's not just messaging — it has already passed one of the legislative houses. Seems like an odd move in a presidential election year, since it could easily boost turnout among independents, while angering them.
