As if a wild and uncharted campaign to oust a sitting governor weren't enough, the upcoming California recall election will feature a divisive dose of racial politics as well.
Voters in the nation's most demographically diverse state will soon consider the Racial Privacy Initiative, an effort to ban the state's collection and use of racial and ethnic data that was set for the March 2004 primary election, but will move to the recall ballot because of a wrinkle in election law.
So far, only one in four voters has even heard of the initiative, according to a Field Poll released today. But that is certain to change soon as both sides scramble to prepare over the next 60 to 80 days for a vote they thought was seven months away. Opponents admit they face a tough task in a short time: The poll found an approval ratio of 50 to 29.
Ultimately, it's not clear whether being part of the recall ballot will help or hurt the initiative's chances. What is likely, everyone agrees, is that the issue will prove just as controversial and divisive as previous California measures targeting illegal immigrants, affirmative action and bilingual education.
``If history repeats itself, you can start to expect a polarizing effect along race, class and party lines,'' said poll director Mark DiCamillo.
The initiative is University of California Regent Ward Connerly's latest salvo in his national war against racial preferences. It would bar government from categorizing students, contractors or employees by race, ethnicity, color or national origin, except for medical research, describing prisoners and criminal suspects or when required by federal agencies.
Connerly argues the measure would be another step toward creating a society where race doesn't matter, an effort he began by leading the UC system to ban affirmative action in 1995, then successfully putting anti-affirmative-action measures to voters in California and Washington state.
Opponents say the initiative would hurt efforts to fight discrimination in education, housing, law enforcement and other arenas because it will be more difficult to gauge the problem. It could also hamper efforts to address public health and social issues that disproportionately affect ethnic communities or racial groups.
The poll shows the initiative has the support of half of likely voters, while 29 percent are opposed and 21 percent are undecided. That's not a commanding lead under normal circumstances, where initiatives with much higher support several months before elections have gone on to defeat. But these are far from normal circumstances, political observers say.
The measure qualified last year for the next statewide election, which -- at the time -- was March 2004. But as of Wednesday, the next statewide election is the recall election. A second initiative that would reserve a percentage of the state general fund for infrastructure projects also must be moved from March 2004 to the recall ballot.
Some observers say the special election will favor the Racial Privacy Initiative. Such elections traditionally draw fewer voters, and those who do come out tend to be conservatives, 62 percent of whom favor racial privacy, according to the poll.
But the poll also indicates the fate of the initiative is closely tied to voter turnout in the recall -- something no one can gauge. Supporters of the recall favor the initiative by a 3-to-1 ratio, while those inclined to vote against ousting Davis also oppose racial privacy 42 to 38 percent.
DiCamillo said polling on racial privacy closely mirrors that for Proposition 209, Connerly's 1996 initiative that banned affirmative action in public institutions. While voter opinion varied little according to race early in the election, it became much more polarized among race, class and party lines as the election drew near.
Observers say there will be little time in this election for either side to sway voter opinion. But people on both sides of the initiative are drafting expedited campaign strategies. Barring a successful legal challenge, which most experts consider a long shot, the recall election will occur as early as September.
``Simply, we'll have to speed things up. We'll increase the number of interviews and debates,'' said Diane Schachterle, spokeswoman for the initiative, who said the campaign will have to rely heavily on the news media coverage Connerly regularly draws.
``We will have more difficulty targeting specific communities, showing how the impacts will harm those communities,'' said Richard Hobbs, co-chair of the Santa Clara County Coalition for an Informed California, the local chapter of the statewide coalition opposing racial privacy, which includes labor unions and health-care providers.
But the opposition will count on support from powerful unions, such as the California Teachers Association, which have mobilized members and made large donations to defeat initiatives in the past.