Discrimination Petition

Coyote · Post by **Coyote** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:33 pm

I just got back from the Post Office where a person was outside obtaining signatures for some discrimination petition to be voted on the next election. Anyone know anything about this?

Post by **Brad** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:39 pm

Coyote wrote:I just got back from the Post Office where a person was outside obtaining signatures for some discrimination petition to be voted on the next election. Anyone know anything about this?

They are trying to repeal affirmative action. They are freaking everywhere with those petitions!

Coyote · Post by **Coyote** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:40 pm

I may have found my answer:

Ban on Affirmative Action Petitions Are Being Circulated in Omaha and Lincoln, Nebraska
The Wording is Such that These Petitions Appear to Be for Affirmative Action but that is False

There is an amendment to Nebraska's Constitution that is being circulated by the "Civil Rights Initiative." This group is not from Nebraska and has brought in paid workers to get the necessary signed petitions to get this amendment on Nebraska's ballot for the November election. The deadline for the petition is July 4. 10 percent of the population has to sign to get it on the ballot. 38 of the counties have to have 5 or more percent of their people sign the petition.

The problem has to do with the idea of no longer granting preferential treatment. This would end affirmative action. Many current programs in Nebraska would be ended because of this. This includes scholarships based on gender and race. When amendments like these were put in place in other states, there was a loss of diversity in their schools.

Nebraskans United Together for Opportunity is a group of concerned citizens that has the backing of many community groups, educational institutions and faith partners. These partners have banded together in order to deal with a proposed ban on affirmative action in Nebraska.

Post by **nebugeater** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:40 pm

Not sure of the details but they were outside the Sarpy Co courthouse a couple of weeks ago when I stopped by to renew some plates. Along with them was a group providing information on why NOT to sign the petition. The nice thing was as I went in and out the two groups were spending 100% of their time debating with each other and not asking people for their signatures!! Not effect use of time at all.

Post by **Brad** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:45 pm

I have seen them at:
1. DMV on 108 and Maple
2. Lowes 78th and Dodge
3. Countryside Village
4. Downtown
5. Rosenblatt

I saw them at one other place. They must be getting paid because they are VERY AGRESSIVE!!!

Post by **nebugeater** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:48 pm

Is this the same group that was in the news in the last day or two for being on private property in Lincoln and being asked to move on. The debate was the private property had public traffic on it. I believe it was ruled that they had to move on. It was in front of some grocery stores I think.

Big E · Post by **Big E** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:51 pm

I got hit up at 11th and Howard the other day.

Wasn't there just an amendment to eliminate out-of-state petition gatherers, or did that not pass?

-Big E

Big E · Post by **Big E** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:56 pm

Do your own research, E:

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=2 ... d=10262103

Omaha.com wrote:State Sen. DiAnna Schimek of Lincoln corraled just enough votes Tuesday to override the governor's veto of a bill to tighten rules for those petitioning to put questions on the ballot.

The vote was 30-17 to override the veto of Legislative Bill 39.

....

The bill will require initiative petition circulators to be at least 18 years old and Nebraska residents. The bill also forbids petition groups from paying circulators for each signature they gather.

....

LB 39 will not take effect in time to affect petition drives seeking to put measures on the 2008 ballot.

Petition drives against affirmative action policies and to allow governments to offer broadband Internet service are being circulated.

Answers that.

-Big E

Coyote · Post by **Coyote** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:26 pm

Nebraskans United Against A Ban on Affirmative Action

Nebraskans United is a group of concerned citizens devoted to protecting Nebraska's Constitution from unnecessary outside attacks. We are also committed to promoting equality, fairness, and diversity in the state of Nebraska. Nebraska business groups, educational instituions, faith groups, grassroots organizations, and individual citizens are part of our team.

Right now in Nebraska, there is a group of paid signature gathers propped up by well financed, out-of- state political groups trying to amend Nebraska’s Constitution with their deceptive tactics and radical agenda.

Learn more about our organization and how you can help protect Nebraska's economic development efforts, our University's tradition of excellence in athletics and academics, and countless other programs that would be at risk if this dangerous initiative is successful.

Who are Nebraskans United?

Community Groups

AFL-CIO
ACLU Nebraska
African-American Organization
The Black Family Health &
Wellness Assoc.
Catholic Charities
Charles Drew Health Center
Delta Sigma Theta -- Incorporated
Omaha Alumni Chapter
Family Housing Advisory Services
League of Women Voters Nebraska
Midlands Bar Association
Midlands Industry Liaison Group (ILG)
NAACP
NAACP -Lincoln
Nebraska Federation of Business & Professional Women
Nebraska Appleseed
Neighborhood Center for Greater Omaha
Nebraska State Education Association
Non Profit Association of the Midlands
Omaha Chamber of Commerce
Omaha Archdiocese Social Ministry
Omaha Economic Development Corporation
Omaha Together One Community (OTOC)
Omaha Young Professionals Group
Urban League of Nebraska
Women's Fund of Greater Omaha
YWCA

Educational Institutions

College of Saint Mary's
Creighton University
Metropolitan Community College Board of Governors
Nebraska State Education Association
Omaha Public Schools
State College Board of Trustees
University of Nebraska
UNO
UNMC
UNL
UNK
University of Nebraska Board of Regents
Westside Public Schools

Big E · Post by **Big E** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:26 pm

Somehow I have the feeling the freaky-freaks are just beginning to crawl out of the woodwork. You might find out a lot about your friends in neighbors between now and the election.

-Big E

S33 · Post by **S33** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:56 pm

I saw them at the zoo last weekend. The irony: they were soliciting to a black family, lol. I think we can agree they are paid and some did little research before taking to the streets.

Erik · Post by **Erik** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:58 pm

I never used this word in a sentence, but will now..

I abhor this group and their lack of wit!

gisbuxfan · Post by **gisbuxfan** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:41 pm

I've been hit up twice in Grand Island at Wal Mart by this same group.

Post by **Brad** » Fri Jun 06, 2008 1:57 pm

Nebraska attorney general says property owners can bar petition circulators

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=2 ... d=10352006

MARTHA STODDARD WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER wrote:LINCOLN - Private property owners have a right to bar petition circulators and opponents from their property, Attorney General Jon Bruning concluded today.

Bruning’s office issued a legal opinion about the issue in response to a request by Speaker of the Legislature Mike Flood of Norfolk.

"The law is clear," Bruning said. "Private property owners have a right to restrict who comes on their property."

Both Flood and Bruning have received calls about petition circulators and petition opponents outside of business as the deadline for gathering initiative petition signatures approaches.

Post by **Brad** » Wed Jun 18, 2008 2:01 pm

This petition has been all over the radio and TV the past few days. Carol from KETV did a hidden camera investigation last night after the game. People are feeling that they are being misled about what the petition is for.

ricko · Post by **ricko** » Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:00 pm

This is powerful stuff-----and good journalism.

This petition effort is doomed. False/misleading information given by the petition's activists (or are they just paid employees?) will certainly derail this turkey. Two bucks per signature, huh? Who's bankrolling this thing? Anyone know?

ricko · Post by **ricko** » Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:06 pm

Or is this Connerly guy footing the entire bill?

Coyote · Post by **Coyote** » Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:13 pm

ricko wrote:Or is this Connerly guy footing the entire bill?

I believe it is the umbrella group in California - American Civil Rights Initiative.
I got into an argument with them at the post office this morning that got my blood to the boiling point and stayed for a while to tell others that this is funded by a group from California and is anti-affirmative action. The guy just sat down in resignation - he is only a hired hand trying to make $2 per sig and just waited till I left.

the1wags · Post by **the1wags** » Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:24 pm

I signed it. Who cares? It's just to get it on the ballot.

ricko · Post by **ricko** » Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:41 am

OK, did a little sleuthing on-line and....

Regarding comments made by Kimberle Williams Crenshaw on The Tavis Smiley Show from (air date) April 7, 2008: (this is not a direct verbatim quote)

Ward Connerly is actually a lobbyist for a number of major construction companies who would stand to benefit financially from a rollback in affirmative action laws. So much for ideology.
These firms bankroll his "Civil Rights Initiative" (and I'm sure they reward him handsomely), so this really isn't about unqualified African-Americans, which is the way affirmative action always gets viewed, it's about dollars.

Sometimes, in politics, there's a 'real' motive behind the rhetoric.

Big E · Post by **Big E** » Thu Jun 19, 2008 9:45 am

ricko wrote:Sometimes, in politics, there's a 'real' motive behind the rhetoric.

Sometimes? Try always.

Coyote · Post by **Coyote** » Thu Jun 19, 2008 9:19 pm

[youtube][/youtube]

Swift · Post by **Swift** » Sat Jun 21, 2008 11:59 am

A few weeks ago, someone in the Old Market approached me with this petition. I asked him "what does this do to affirmative action?" and he couldn't tell me, so I didn't sign it. I suspected at the time that this was an anti-affirmative action thing, and now that I know that for sure I'm doubly glad neither my girlfriend nor I signed it.

Coyote · Post by **Coyote** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:39 pm

Petition drive to ban affirmative action faces hard fight

MATTHEW HANSEN WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER wrote:Defenders of current affirmative action policies are trying to disrupt Connerly's group at the outset at it tries to collect enough petition signatures to place the issue on the November ballot. They send "blockers" who videotape petition circulators, document any alleged wrongdoing and discourage people from signing the petitions.

joeglow · Post by **joeglow** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:46 pm

Personally, I don't know how I feel about the issue. Has affirmative action really accomplished anything? If so, then why do we still need it? At what point is it no longer necessary? Is it anti-discrimination? Many of these things are issues I would have to truly look up and research before coming to a conclusion.

Either way, however, I don't see how it is a bad thing to put it on the ballot. If it is not a constitutionally guaranteed right, the people should be able to vote one way or the other.

Post by **Brad** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:59 pm

joeglow wrote:Personally, I don't know how I feel about the issue. Has affirmative action really accomplished anything? If so, then why do we still need it? At what point is it no longer necessary? Is it anti-discrimination? Many of these things are issues I would have to truly look up and research before coming to a conclusion.

Either way, however, I don't see how it is a bad thing to put it on the ballot. If it is not a constitutionally guaranteed right, the people should be able to vote one way or the other.

It effects thing such as scholarships for women too.

ricko · Post by **ricko** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:04 am

Brad is right.

The largest demographic to benefit from affirmative action since its inception has been.........................white women.

If your daughter/sister/mom/aunt/girlfriend/wife has ever received an athletic scholarship, or has been admitted to (or received a scholarship to attend) medical/dental/law/business school, you can thank affirmative action laws for that. As late as the 70's, able women were 'counseled' out of attending graduate professional schools (unless it was in education, nursing or liberal arts) simply based on gender. The conventional wisdom at the time was that women would be taking jobs away from men. It sounds silly now, but this was how the majority of the population thought. I really think that if you had put it 'on the ballot' back then, we'd probably still be dealing with this type of anachronistic discrimination.

AF_Jim · Post by **AF_Jim** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:39 am

They hit me up at Target in Papillion a few weeks ago. I just put down a fake name like I always do.

joeglow · Post by **joeglow** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:57 pm

ricko wrote:Brad is right.

The largest demographic to benefit from affirmative action since its inception has been.........................white women.

If your daughter/sister/mom/aunt/girlfriend/wife has ever received an athletic scholarship, or has been admitted to (or received a scholarship to attend) medical/dental/law/business school, you can thank affirmative action laws for that. As late as the 70's, able women were 'counseled' out of attending graduate professional schools (unless it was in education, nursing or liberal arts) simply based on gender. The conventional wisdom at the time was that women would be taking jobs away from men. It sounds silly now, but this was how the majority of the population thought. I really think that if you had put it 'on the ballot' back then, we'd probably still be dealing with this type of anachronistic discrimination.

-Again, the question is, is it necessary? I know every company I have ever worked does NOT have these policies (affirmitive action) and bends over backwards to hire women and minorities. Why? Because they know this was a neglected market in the past and want to tap into for the current talent and to show that they hire these groups for future hiring purposes. I look at my area of study (accounting) and see that 52% of all college graduates in accounting are women (UNL was right around the same - women were over 50%). I fail to see how women would not go to college and get these degrees unless they could do it at a reduced cost.

Thus, while I honestly have not made up my mind on this issue, I think additional research is needed and see nothing wrong with allowing people to vote on it. I really don't think it is the be-all-end-all that it was when it was first implemented.

joeglow · Post by **joeglow** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:57 pm

AF_Jim wrote:They hit me up at Target in Papillion a few weeks ago. I just put down a fake name like I always do.

While they won't be able to track you, I am pretty sure that is against the law.

Post by **Brad** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 6:43 pm

Opponents of ban on affirmative action object to wording on ballot

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=1 ... d=10392632

MARTHA STODDARD WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER wrote:LINCOLN — Opponents of a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban affirmative action in Nebraska are taking issue with the way Attorney General Jon Bruning described the measure for the ballot.

Nebraskans United filed a complaint in Lancaster County District Court late Monday asking the court to order the use of alternative language, if the proposed measure makes the ballot.

Omaha Forums