Earlier this year, five states - Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska and Oklahoma - had Civil Rights Initiative groups, all headed by California businessman Ward Connerly, pushing for similar proposals to eliminate programs promoting race-, gender- and ethnicity-based affirmative action.
But only Nebraska and Colorado collected enough valid signatures to put Nebraska's Initiative 424 and Colorado's Amendment 46 on the 2008 November ballot.
"Ward Connerly and others looked to Nebraska and figured they might be able to get this on the ballot pretty easily and get another notch on their belt," said David Kramer, a representative for Nebraskans United, a group opposed to the ban in Nebraska.
In all five states, there have been groups in opposition of eliminating affirmative action. Each group claims the initiatives mislead and confuse petition signers.
Connerly argues the language couldn't be clearer and is not misleading at all.
Roger Clegg, president for the Center for Equal Opportunity, said the initiatives speak the truth.
"I'm not from Nebraska, so I'm not going to be voting in the election, but I want the voters to have the facts, and they will make up their own minds," he said.
In all five states, there have been allegations of fraud.
Oklahoma was the first to drop its proposed affirmative action ban, Question 737. In April 2008, backers of Question 737 withdrew the proposed ballot measure due to fraud and irregularities that plagued the petitions submitted.
In May, Missouri was unable to gather enough valid signatures; the same scenario followed in Arizona in late August.
In Nebraska, Nebraskans United takes a firm stance in opposition to Initiative 424's alleged petition fraud and misleading language.
University of Nebraska-Lincoln senior Jeff Hall and Eva Sohl, a 2008 graduate, filed a lawsuit on Sept. 11 challenging the validity of more than 40,000 petition signatures.
During the trial, William Harlak, a petition circulator, testified that he misled voters and didn't follow proper notary rules. Judge Karen Flowers has yet to declare her verdict.
"These kinds of cases are very important and serious, and I'm confident that Judge Flowers wants to make sure whatever her ruling is, that it is very thought out," Kramer said.
Vote No on 46, a Colorado campaign committee, challenged Amendment 46 in courts for the same reasons Nebraskans United did.
Minority groups at the University of Colorado at Boulder held a rally Oct. 22 in opposition of Amendment 46. David Lucero, a CU junior who organized the rally, said he wanted to inform voters of the misleading ballot language.
"I fail to see the logic in removing programs to help increase the diversity when there is not equal representation as it is," Lucero said.
An Oct. 8-12 Quinnipiac University telephone poll of 1,000 likely voters showed Amendment 46 would pass 63 percent to 21 percent. Lucero said he believes Amendment 46 might pass because of the construed language.
No such study has been released in Nebraska.
"I would have voted for it if I didn't know what it would do in practice," Lucero said.
Jessica Peck Corry, the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative executive director, was not able to be reached by phone for comment, but her Web site stated Amendment 46 advocates equal opportunity for everyone.
"Voters should support Amendment 46 because fairness and equality dictate that our affirmative action efforts - designed initially to fight the effects of discrimination - don't discriminate," Corry wrote. " ... If we look to the examples of states that have passed similar initiatives, including California, we see that women and minorities succeed when their inferiority is not presumed by government officials."
Alissaskelton@dailynebraskan.com
Be the first to comment on this article!