|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
California recall election: SEP candidate John Christopher
Burton calls for no vote on Proposition 54
By John Christopher Burton
4 October 2003
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
In the October 7 recall election, Californians will have
the opportunity to vote on two ballot initiatives, which, if passed,
would amend the state constitution. The one entitled the Racial
Privacy Initiative, known as Proposition 54, would prohibit
state and local government agencies from recording and collecting
information on the race, ethnicity, color or national origin
of any individual. The ban applies to public education,
public contracting or public employment as well as all other
state operations unless exempted by votes of two thirds of both
houses of the state legislature and approved by the governor.
Limited exemptions are provided for the states Department
of Fair Employment and Housing, for health care providers and
researchers, and for police agencies, but the vague wording of
the exemptions has raised questions as to whether they would have
meaningful application.
We post below the statement on Proposition 54 issued by
John Christopher Burton, a civil rights attorney in Los Angeles
and supporter of the Socialist Equality Party. While opposing
the recall itself, Burton is running as an independent candidate
for governor in the replacement election in order to provide workers
with a socialist alternative to the candidates associated with
the Democratic and Republican parties. He has been endorsed
by the Socialist Equality Party. The statement is also available
in PDF
leaflet format.
I urge a no vote on Proposition 54. Like the recall
election itself, this Racial Privacy Initiative is
inspired and backed by right-wing forces seeking to destroy what
remains of the past social gains of the working class.
The sponsors of Proposition 54 falsely claim that their measure
would promote the goal of a color-blind society. If passed, the
effect would be the opposite. By prohibiting the collection of
data on race, ethnicity and national origin, the most blatant
forms of discrimination in housing, jobs and education would return
to everyday life. With no statistical evidence available, groups
facing discrimination would find themselves without legal recourse.
Proposition 54s backers allege that exemptions provided
in the measure would preserve certain anti-discrimination protections.
But a close reading of the text reveals that the exemptions are
defined in such a way as to have questionable application, at
best.
The medical exemption is limited to research subjects
and patients. It is possible under this wording that important
scientific surveys on how diseases ranging from sickle cell anemia
to heart disease affect different population groups could be shut
down. That is why the California Medical Association and every
other major health organization have declared their opposition
to Proposition 54.
Most noxious of all, the law enforcement exemption
allows police officers to describe individuals by race and other
characteristics in their files, but would prevent the state from
requiring that aggregate arrest and conviction records be kept.
As a civil rights attorney specializing in representing victims
of police misconduct, I am well aware of the impact of racial
profiling by the police. If Proposition 54 were to pass, todays
already inadequate checks on racial profiling would be eliminated.
It would also be virtually impossible to prove racial bias in
sentencing, including the application of the death penalty.
Proposition 54 is designed to block the application of affirmative
action and other programs based on racial preferences. It does
so from a retrograde standpoint and with a veiled appeal to racial
prejudices. In so far as the measures opposition to affirmative
action is not linked to demands for full and equal access of all
young people to quality higher education, it points backward to
an era when all but a handful of minority youth were effectively
denied a chance to attend college.
While opposing Proposition 54, I do not accept affirmative
action or other programs based on racial preferences as a viable
means of defending the interests of workers and young people,
whatever their race or national origin. A basic flaw of affirmative
action is the fact that it accepts the limits of what the corporate
elite and its political representatives are prepared to give in
the way of employment, education and housing opportunities. Under
conditions of sweeping cuts in funding for social needs, including
higher education, any policy that pits one group against another
for dwindling resources assists, either wittingly or unwittingly,
the ruling class in its time-tested strategy of divide and rule.
Affirmative action proceeds, furthermore, from the standpoint
that the basic division in society is race, not class. This is
a false premise, and it carries with it the inevitable result
of white workers and youth, who are not responsible for the oppression
and discrimination of capitalist society, being unfairly deprived
of university slots or other positions to make way for minority
workers and youth. The resulting resentments are seized upon by
right-wingers such as those who have launched Proposition 54.
Far from seeing affirmative action as a threat to its economic
domination and monopoly of political power, the US ruling elite
has institutionalized the policy. It was given its first major
push by the Nixon administration, as part of its advocacy of black
capitalism. It has since been used to promote a small and
privileged layer of blacks and other minorities, who have become
politicians, administrators and corporate executives and no less
loyal defenders of the profit system than their white counterparts.
The benefits of racial preferences have gone overwhelmingly to
such better-off layers, while the vast majority of blacks and
other minorities have seen only a minimal improvement, at best,
in their living standards.
The ruling elite has cynically employed affirmative action
programs to bolster the credibility of its corporate and political
institutions in the eyes of the working class public. The US Supreme
Court admitted as much in its ruling last June upholding affirmative
action. The majority of the justices defended racial preferences
at elite universities on the grounds that such a policy
was necessary to cultivate a set of leaders with legitimacy
in the eyes of the citizenry.
My campaign unequivocally demands full equality of opportunity,
and it further demands the allocation of the financial resources
needed to guarantee every young person access to quality higher
education at no cost, and every worker a secure job at decent
pay.
The interests of white and minority workers and youth are not
in conflict. They are identical. Working people of all races and
nationalities share the same essential needs, and a common enemy.
They face the domination of society by a financial oligarchy that
arrogates to itself the bulk of the wealth produced by the labor
of the working class. The result is obscene levels of wealth at
one pole of society, and economic insecurity and poverty for the
masses at the other pole.
When a single Californian, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, can accumulate
a personal fortune that peaked at $58 billion in 2000$20
billion more than Californias budget deficitit is
obvious that the states budget crisis is not caused by a
lack of wealth, but rather by the shifting of resources into the
pockets of the few at the top.
I am campaigning for a Social Bill of Rights for the working
class that includes the right of all young people to a quality
college education, the right of all families to decent housing,
and the right of all workers to a good job. My program demands
full equality of opportunity, with a rigorous ban on all forms
of discrimination, whether on the basis of race, ethnicity, national
origin, gender or sexual orientation.
This program is eminently realizable. Billions of dollars can
be made available to finance it by freeing the vast resources
of California and the United States as a whole from the grip of
the capitalist elite.
I state directly and openly, however, that the implementation
of this program requires a revolutionary restructuring of the
economy. It requires a united struggle by all workers and youthblack,
Latino, Asian, Native American and whiteagainst big business
and its bought and paid-for politicians of the Republican and
Democratic parties. This struggle cannot be waged within the confines
of California alone, but must embrace workers across the country
and internationally.
The policies I am advocating will foster just such a united
struggle. I urge all workers and young people who agree with this
program to vote for me on October 7 and, more importantly, to
join the Socialist Equality Party and help make it the mass socialist
party of the working class.
See Also:
The John Christopher Burton campaign
and the fight for socialist policies
[3 October 2003]
Socialist Equality Party
statement on the California recall election
Vote no on the California recall. Vote John Christopher
Burton for governor, for a socialist solution to the crisis
Jobs for the unemployed! Billions for education, health care
and housing! US troops out of Iraq!
[30 August 2003]
For more information on news and appearances in the John Christopher
Burton campaign visit www.socialequality.com
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |