A FRAUD ON THE PEOPLE OF WASHINGTON STATE: In 1998, Washington voters adopted Initiative 200 (or “I-200”) by a wide margin (58%-42%). Its operative clause states, “The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting.”

These days, like California’s Proposition 209 on which it was based, I-200 is honored only its breach in some areas. But it has been reasonably effective in the area of public contracting in particular.

Now comes the effort to repeal it. Last week the Washington Secretary of State certified for the ballot an initiative (“Initiative 1000” or “I-1000”) which, if passed, will bring back race and sex preferences in public education, public employment, and public contracting. But it does so in a sneaky and fraudulent way. It retains I-200’s operative clause. It even expands it:

“The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin, age, sexual orientation, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or honorably discharged veteran or military status in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.”

But it then defines “preferential treatment” this way:

“‘Preferential treatment’ means the act of using race, sex, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, sexual orientation, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, and honorably discharged veteran or military status as the sole qualifying factor to select a lesser qualified candidate over a more qualified candidate for a public education, public employment, or public contracting opportunity.”

Nobody has ever used race, sex, color, etc., as “the sole qualifying factor” for anything. If race had been the sole qualifying factor in Grutter v. Bollinger, that would have meant that every single African American gets in and no Asian or white does. It’s a ridiculous notion. The point of I-200 is that the listed factors should neither count against a person nor in his or her favor.

Another section of the proposal makes it clear that the original I-200 is being eviscerated:

“Nothing in this section prohibits the state from implementing affirmative action laws, regulations, policies, or procedures such as participation goals or outreach efforts that do not utilize quotas and that do not constitute preferential treatment as defined in this section.” 

If somebody in Washington State wants to give the people of Washington the opportunity to repeal I-200, they should be clear and upfront about it.

Here in California, Proposition 209 is responsible for increasing college GPAs, college graduation rates, and STEM degrees for African Americans.  There is no reason to believe that the same thing didn’t happen under Washington State’s I-200.  It needs to be more more strongly enforced rather than repealed.