Most major issues that come before voters do so with a pre-vote timeline that is easily determined and well-known. This provides both supporters and opponents the opportunity to plan out the months prior to the vote with speeches, rallies, educational mailings and editorial endorsements, newspaper updates, tv/radio spots, and the like. I can only imagine how frustrating it must be for both sides of the issue on the ballot related to racial issues now that it suddenly will be in front of voters within 2 months, instead of the 7 months everyone had been planning. Both sides must now be in a panic. The opponents of newly numbered Proposition 54 have only just put up a website (and it looks like it was just put up). Incredible. What kind of crazy political climate is all of this?

Now let me address the meat of the subject. It may seem simple and easy to say that we are or must become a "color-blind" society. The first problem is that we are not. The second, and most important problem, is that when we talk about race/ethnicity/background/orientation/gender/etc. there is an important difference in the verbage used and ideas behind fighting for equal treatment and saying things like "we are all the same." That difference is the social aspect. Biologically we're all pretty much the same. Socially, HOWEVER, we all grow up in different worlds-- often based in part upon our race/ethnicity/background/orientation/gender/etc. Those different social worlds effect our chances for education, health care, opportunities, as well as our likelihood for diseases, peer pressures, drug abuse, etc. This doesn't mean to say that anyone's race/etc. is "better" or "suited" for a specific direction. This doesn't mean to say that anyone's race/etc. defines who they are or will be. This does, however, mean to say that there are trends and patterns, based on sociological factors (not physical ones), that can show up among groups. These trends and patterns can then be analyzed. And it's imperative that we analyze these sociological phenomena in order to make our government and public policy work properly.

Let me give you an example. Say, for instance, that we have studied a public health disease (like tuberculosis) and we recognize that the majority of cases for tuberculosis are occuring within the Chinese-American community (just as an example; not based on any data necessarily). This doesn't mean to say that Chinese people are more likely to get tuberculosis, or that based on genetics that they will definitely get TB. This means to say that within the Chinese-American community there is a higher rate for tuberculosis among certain social areas wherein they live. What this information tells us is incredibly important in fighting tuberculosis because then public health officials can specifically target education/information campaigns within the Chinese-American community, print TB-testing information in Chinese, hire Chinese-speaking nurses and outreach workers, and so forth all in the strategic and important fight against a disease that has the possibility of spreading throughout the population. If we are able to address one community's specific concern-- we are all better for it.

Let me give you another example. Say, for instance, we collect data on the number of traffic tickets police officers are giving motorists and find out that, based upon population statistics, there is a much-greater possibility that a ticket will be handed out to an African-American motorist than a White motorist. Does this mean to say that black drivers are worse than white ones? Or does this tell us that police officers may be specifically targeting black neighborhoods or black motorists and not targeting white neighborhoods or perhaps letting white people "get away with it this time with a warning." (Again, this is just an example.) If we collect information, scientific data, along these lines we are able to address an issue that a community feels anecdotally but can't prove. If we find out that the anecdotes give way to a statistical issue, then we can learn from that and address those concerns within the public policy context-- strategic meetings with police officers and community groups, neighborhood watches/patrols, etc.

Proposition 54 will end all collection of data on race/etc. within the state. If we can't know what is happening, how can we address the needs of our populations? Again, humans are the same physically. But we can be and are positively different in many ways. Our diversity is a good thing and is so powerful and useful in making our country great. Difference among populations and peoples provides further opportunities to grow and learn and see. Otherwise we'd all end up being stepford wives or pods from the body snatchers. We thrive on difference.

Our fight for equality and equal rights is not about destroying difference. Our fight for equality and equal rights is about recognizing and honoring everyone's fundamental humanity, our physical similarity, and our individual uniqueness while at the same time accepting and respecting our social differences.

Proposition 54 will rob us of that equality. Proposition 54 will damage our public health, our safety, our education, our communities. Proposition 54 must be defeated on October 7, 2003.