Once again, as he was in 1996 when voters approved his Proposition 209 ballot measure ending affirmative action in colleges, Ward Connerly finds himself in the eye of a storm over racial issues.
This time, it is with Proposition 54, the Racial Privacy Initiative, that is on the Oct. 7 ballot competing for attention with the recall of Gov. Gray Davis and a field of 135 contenders for governor.

"I can't think about the impact of that," Connerly said in a phone interview. "What we have to do is make our case. The recall could help us with certain voters, hurt us with others."

Connerly is a University of California regent, appointed by former Gov. Pete Wilson, who has dominated the public debate over racial issues in recent years with his measure ending affirmative action programs in admissions and now with the new measure.

Under his proposal, state government agencies would be prohibited from asking the race of people when it comes to education, housing and employment.

"I feel very strongly about this," Connerly said. "I'm of mixed heritage, and I resent having to fill in those boxes on government forms.

"My ancestry is of African-American, Irish, white French and Choctaw. My wife is Irish. My kids are mixed. When I was married in 1962, I distinctly remember the stares we encountered as an interracial couple and how, in some parts of the nation, we were breaking the law."

Connerly said the idea of using race dates back to the Jim Crow era.

"I've always felt it was dehumanizing to take human beings and try to herd them into racial groups," Connerly said. "It's a crude system that began during slavery, continued during segregation and it is still used now even when people are marrying across lines of race, across all backgrounds and are having children. The categories don't make any sense any more. People don't fit into the boxes."

But opponents say the measure presents a threat to minorities in such areas as health care, education and enforcement of anti-discrimination laws.

It has become such a cause that Julian Bond, chairman of the NAACP, came to California last week to organize opposition to the measure.

"This is just another trick by Ward Connerly to fool the public," Bond said.

Elena Stern, spokeswoman for the campaign against the measure, said its passage would have a dramatic impact on public health issues.

Even though it contains a provision exempting medical research, Stern said it does not go far enough in what doctors and scientists say they need to track disease.

"If he meant to exempt all health care it should have been written that way," Stern said. "The exemption is so narrow as to be worthless.

"We know there are certain groups that get certain diseases and we need to be able to track that. Racial classifications do mean something when you're talking about diseases and illnesses. This is not a joke. This information is critical to saving lives."

Stern said the measure is being opposed by many health groups, including the California Medical Association.

Also, she said the measure would impact law-enforcement personnel in being able to determine whether officers are using racial profiling to stop people or to prosecute hate crimes.

Connerly dismisses such arguments as "red herrings, designed to mislead and misinform people."

If changes need to be made, he said, the measure contains a provision allowing a two-thirds vote of the state legislature and approval by the governor to continue collecting the data.

But Stern says getting such a vote is not easy.

"All you need to do is look at the state budget this year on how hard it is to get a two-thirds vote," Stern said.

If there is an area of agreement, it is that both sides say they are striving to see a colorblind society.
"Everyone wants to see that day," Stern said. "But, the reality is that discrimination is out there and affects people every day."