Press conference tomorrow to denounce fake Taxpayers group opposing the propositions

Beware of fake taxpayer group pushing left-wing agenda

Sign from fake taxpayer groupJoin us for a news conference this Friday, October 1
Dear AZ Taxpayer,
Please let your friends and neighbors know that a fake taxpayer organization, the “Arizona Taxpayers Association,” has been created to defend Big Government policies in the November 2 ballot proposition battles. The group (if it can even be called a group), which has been set up by Democratic political consultant Bob Grossfeld and labor union officer Jim McLaughlin, opposes several propositions that will actually BENEFIT Arizona taxpayers, producers, and consumers, and increase our freedom.
The so-called Arizona Taxpayers Association has no members and no history of ever lobbying on behalf of taxpayers, and appears to have been operating in possible violation of Arizona campaign finance laws (the organization placed campaign signs but apparently did not file with the Secretary of State prior to conducting its political activities, as required by Arizona law). A photo of one of the signs is posted at http://www.aztaxpayers.org, under What’s New.
Three of the propositions opposed by Grossfeld and McLaughlin and their fake organization are especially vital to the future well-being of Arizona taxpayers, producers, and consumers:
Prop 106 – The Arizona Health Care Freedom Act
Prop 107 – The Arizona Civil Rights Initiative
Prop 113 – Save Our Secret Ballot
In order to expose this leftist sham perpetrated by Grossfeld and McLaughlin, the Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP Arizona) is holding a news conference this Friday, October 1, at 11:30 am, at the Goldwater Institute, at 500 E. Coronado Road (one block north of McDowell, just west of 7th Street).
AFP Arizona, which has served the taxpayers of Arizona since 2007, grew out of the Arizona Federation of Taxpayers Associations (AFTA), which served from 1980 to 2007, producing an annual “Friend of the Taxpayer” legislative scorecard every year from 1984 to 2006. Representing the “old guard” of AFTA at Friday’s news conference will be former AFTA chairmen Rep. Rick Murphy (R-Peoria) and Mr. Bob Burges. Also present will be spokespersons representing several of the propositions attacked by the fake organization.
Please support your REAL Arizona taxpayer watchdog, Americans for Prosperity. AFP Arizona asks all of its members to invest at least $10 a year in our efforts. You can invest in AFP Arizona by clicking on the Contribute button in the upper righthand corner of our homepage,http://www.aztaxpayers.org. Or, you can send checks to:
Americans for Prosperity, AZ
One East Camelback Road, Suite 550
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Thank you so much for all you do to fight for the Arizona taxpayer!
For Liberty, Tom
Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity
www.aztaxpayers.org
tjenney@afphq.org
(602) 478-0146

Read more: http://americansforprosperity.org/092910-beware-fake-taxpayer-group-pushing-big-government-agenda#ixzz1137azWyy

Arizona Republic endorses Prop. 107

Affirmative action no longer useful

Sept. 30, 2010
The Arizona Republic


Affirmative action was a catch-up plan, adding extra opportunity where it had been missing in education and the workplace. The time was going to come when affirmative action was no longer necessary.


That time is now.


Voters should approve Proposition 107, which would amend the Arizona Constitution to ban affirmative-action programs in public employment, public education or public contracting.


Affirmative action has reached the point where its drawbacks outweigh its advantages. We need to stop putting a well-intended thumb on the scale.


Setting exact quotas for minorities and women in every category of job - as has been done at some universities - is just ludicrous.


Minorities and women can find that their achievements are shadowed by the assumption that they got an extra leg up through affirmative action.


Our changing world means that the group benefiting from affirmative action can suddenly change. While public universities used to make an effort to include women, the enrollment ratios have reversed so much that some are now discriminating in favor of men.


The last presidential election showed that being an African-American is no barrier to reaching the pinnacle of power in the United States.


The best way to make sure every Arizonan has access to a level playing field is to get rid of affirmative action with a "yes" vote on Proposition 107.

Yes on 107 Campaign Challenges U of A President to Sacrifice his Position for “Diversity”

University of Arizona President Robert Shelton stated in a recent interview with the Arizona Daily Star that he opposes Proposition 107, which would ban race and gender preferences in government, including in higher education. Mr. Shelton further stated that, if 107 is adopted by voters, he “will not back off one bit” from the university’s efforts to promote “diversity” and recruit more women and minorities.

The university’s diversity goals, which are posted on their website, include hiring specified percentages of women and minorities. These hiring quotas include goals for women to comprise 63% of new Assistant Director Administrators, 73% of Animal Technicians, and 56% of the Faculty in Fine Arts. Goals for minority hires include 53% of General Maintenance positions and 59% of Supervisors in Service/Maintenance.

“President Shelton appears concerned that if Prop. 107 passes, the university won’t be able to put ‘diversity goals’ ahead of ‘most qualified’,” said Proposition 107 campaign chair, Rachel Alexander.  “I bet there’s a woman or a ‘minority’ that meets the minimum
qualifications to be president of the University. I challenge President Shelton to walk his own talk and step down for the sake of ‘diversity’. His $549,400 position could be given to an affirmative action applicant. Or perhaps he believes that discriminating quotas should only apply to other people, but not to him?”

Former AZ Democrat Party chair & union boss behind fake taxpayers association to try and steal election!

Sham nonexistent "Arizona Taxpayers Association" group exposed! Former Arizona Democrat Party chairman Sam Coppersmith and union boss Jim McLaughlin have been caught trying to steal the election! This nonexistent group has put up red signs around Arizona saying vote no on the propositions. In reality, most taxpayer advocacy groups would FAVOR most of the propositions. Click here for the website exposing this fraud.

Service Employees International Union funding anti-Prop. 107 efforts

This comes as no surprise, the unions make money off of unfair racial and gender preferences. The AP article at ABC-15 is below. Also, to clarify something brought up in the article: "Good" affirmative action would not be eliminated, the kind of affirmative action originally envisioned by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That referred to action taken to make sure minorities or women aren't discriminated against, for example, disciplining an employee who was observed overtly discriminating against a woman or minority. It is the bad kind of affirmative action which started showing up after this Act was passed that would be eliminated - race and gender preferences.

PHOENIX - Arizona voters will decide in November whether to ban state and local governments from discrimination or preferential treatment based on race, ethnicity and sex.

The state constitutional amendment doesn't use the term "affirmative action," but there is no disputing that is what Proposition 107 is aimed at eliminating. Such programs generally give preferences to minorities.

The referendum was sent to the Nov. 2 ballot by a vote of the Legislature in 2009 after supporters failed to gather enough signatures to get the measure on the ballot in 2008.

This year's proposed amendment contains exemptions for "bona fide" qualifications based on sex and for a preference or program whose elimination would violate a court order or lead to the loss of federal funds.

That can be a broad exemption, because federal money often comes with requirements that its recipient have some sort of affirmative action plan in place.

The affirmative action ban has for years been pushed nationally by Ward Connerly, a businessman and former California education official. A group he heads, the Sacramento-based American Civil Rights Institute, backed the failed 2008 signature-gathering effort in Arizona and had donated $50,000 so far this month to the Yes on 107! campaign. That's virtually all the funding the group has received.

The Service Employees International Union has given $10,000 to the No on 107 campaign, the majority of its funding so far.

California, Washington, Nebraska and Michigan voters have approved affirmative action bans backed by Connerly. Voters in Colorado rejected one in 2008.

Connerly, who is black, argues that race- and sex-based preferences are no longer needed in America and points to the election of Barack Obama as proof.

Opponents of the measure argue that Arizona eliminated "affirmative action" programs years ago and that the Connerly-backed referendum goes much farther by banning the "equal opportunity" programs that remain. They say those programs generally help people, often women or minorities, who have already qualified but need extra help overcoming disadvantages.

"You shouldn't get into school unless you're qualified to get into college -- everyone agrees," said state Rep. Kyrsten Sinema. "But once you get into college, we have a number of programs at our public universities ... that help people who are already qualified, already admitted to the university, simply succeed in their chosen field."

Connerly disputed Sinema's contention that affirmative action has been outlawed in the state, and said if that was the case her group shouldn't be opposing Proposition 107.

"The reality is that our initiative does not mention affirmative action ... it talks about preferential treatment," Connerly said. "And when the city of Tucson gives a 7 percent bid preference (on contracts) to minorities, that's a preference. And that is against our initiative and it would be outlawed."

Sinema pointed to a program that supports women who are studying science, technology, engineering and math as one that would be cut off from state funding if Proposition 107 became law. Only a quarter of students in those fields are women, and she says it is clear that it is important to provide them extra support to encourage them to complete studies in those fields.

Connerly says that program would still be legal if Proposition 107 passes -- if it admitted men as well as women.

East Valley Tribune article on Prop. 107

Some excerpts from the article -

Voters will decide at the ballot this year if they want to outlaw affirmative action programs and any special programs or preferences for women and minorities.

Proposition 107 would prohibit preferential treatment or discrimination by government on the basis of race, sex or ethnic origin. It would specifically apply to employment, education and contracting.

Proponents say that the language simply reflects the goals of a color-blind society. In fact, Rep. Steve Montenegro, R-Litchfield Park, who sponsored the measure to amend the Arizona Constitution, has invoked the verbiage the 1963 "I Have a Dream" speech of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., who said he looked forward to when "little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

That exception is at the heart of a provision of Tucson City Code which provides eligible firms of minorities which have not received their fair share of contracts an "adjustment" allowing them to bid up to 7 percent more on product or service contracts and still win. And there are procedures to give bonus points to certain firms bidding on professional services.

Montenegro said the affirmative action programs which started out to outlaw discrimination now actually promote it. He said the measure, if approved, would truly create a level playing field, at least in government programs.

Others, however, defend the system of preference points.

In a statement of opposition to Proposition 107, Lea Peterson, president of the Tucson Hispanic Chamber, said studies have shown that firms owned by women and minorities "may lack key procurement business relationships and consequently be left off of preferred vendor lists without such a system."

But five southern Arizona Republican legislators, in their own statement of support, said the aim of the measure is to ensure equal treatment.

"All these government preferences are saying is women, minorities, people of color aren't good enough to create a natural, genuine diversity on the merits," said Sens. Frank Antenori and Al Melvin and Reps. David Gowan, Ted Vogt and David Stevens. "No person should be entitled to ‘special' programs solely based on their race or sex."

The measure contains an exception for any action necessary to maintain eligibility for any federal program if doing otherwise would result in a loss of federal dollars to the state. It also would not apply to any court orders or consent decrees in force if and when the measure is enacted.

Goldwater Institute: New health care law forces affirmative action on medical schools

by Diane Cohen

President Barack Obama’s new health care law doesn’t just radically transform our nation’s medical system; it contains provisions that require discrimination on the basis of race.
It starts at page 516 of the more than 2,000 page law, in a section that allows the Obama administration to give grants and contracts to training hospitals and medical schools. In awarding this federal money, the law requires the administration to give preferences to hospitals and schools based on the racial makeup of their student body. Moreover, hospitals and schools who receive these federal funds must engage in race-based student recruitment as well.

In several letters to Congress, the U.S. Civil Rights Commission called on Congress to reject these discriminatory provisions and consider “proven methods of improving health care outcomes.” But the Civil Rights Commission said forcing medical schools to use race-based admissions policies assumes differences in the health of people from different races are caused by a shortage of doctors from those races. This misdiagnoses the problem, the Commission said, pointing to studies that show health care disparities do not result from a lack of medical professionals of particular races.

Further, the Commission stressed that congressionally-mandated affirmative action is likely to be thrown out as unconstitutional.

Certainly, attracting talented people to medicine is a worthy goal. But individuals should not be singled out and given special benefits based on their race to reach that goal. Likewise, the Obama administration should not force hospitals and schools to recruit students based on race to obtain federal money.


There is something we can do right here in Arizona to ensure equal treatment under the law. The Goldwater Institute is working in federal court to strike down the entire health care bill. Also, Arizona voters will consider Proposition 107 during the Nov. 2 general election. Called the Arizona Civil Rights Initiative, Prop. 107 offers an amendment to the state constitution that forbids race-based policies for any taxpayer-funded agency or program. The citizens of Arizona have the power to say “yes” to equal opportunity for all Arizonans, and “no” to unfair and unlawful policies that focus on anyone’s race or ethnic background.


Diane Cohen is an attorney with the Goldwater Institute Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation.


Learn More:
Goldwater Institute: Coons v. Geithner
Proposition 107: The Arizona Civil Rights Initiative
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: pp. 516-21; 538-551
U.S. Civil Rights Commission: Letters to Congress

AZ Capitol Times coverage

Some excerpts from the article -

Ward Connerly has carved a career, and a reputation, out of striking down affirmative action, starting with university programs in his home state of California. Now Connerly and his American Civil Rights Institute are bringing the fight to Arizona.

Proposition 107 seeks to amend the Arizona Constitution to ban state government and municipalities from giving preferential treatment on the basis of sex, race, color, ethnicity or national origin. This includes everything from state-funded programs that help women and minorities in areas where there is a disparity, such as science education, to hiring quotas in the state university system.

The programs are designed to correct inequities in gender or race, but Connerly thinks they’re just another form of discrimination.

“Why should anybody’s tax money be used to discriminate?” he said. “I wouldn’t want anyone discriminating against me.”

During his tenure as a University of California regent, Connerly took aim at race-based admission preferences and was the public face of a 1996 ballot initiative in which California banned race and gender preferences in state-funded programs and institutions.

Since then, he has led successful efforts in Washington, Michigan and Nebraska to make the practice illegal in state and city hiring and university admissions.

Connerly’s message is underscored by a notion that equal treatment is the essence of civil rights. His Sacramento, Calif.-based American Civil Rights Institute contends that government policies shouldn’t advocate group rights over individual rights.

Connerly said there is a simple solution for these programs the opposition claims would be eliminated. “All they have to do is admit anybody,” he said.

The language of Propositon 107 does exempt “reasonably necessary qualifications based on sex, existing court orders and actions that would result in the loss of federal funds.”

The issue hasn’t attracted much funding to date.

The Yes on 107 committee hasn’t filed any financial reports with the Secretary of State’s Office. Two groups opposing the proposition, Protect Arizona’s Freedom and the Equality and Opportunity Committee, have registered $100 and $1,1111 in income, respectively.

Leon Drolet, campaign manager for Yes On 107, said the proposition will also affect city programs, such as the Minority and Woman-Owned Business Program in Tucson, which provides incentives to certified firms within the county to conduct business with the city.

According to Drolet, those meeting the city’s favored ethnic status in certain categories receive bid preferences of up to 7 percent on contracts.

Bob Barton, project manager for the Office of Equal Opportunity in Tucson, said the city provides preferences when it has identified disparities in three sectors: construction, professional services and goods and services.

The city of Tucson last paid $500,000 in November 2008 a for study that is valid for five years to pinpoint where disparities exist.

Barton added the city has a race- and gender-neutral small business program. He sees Proposition 107 as having very little impact on local Tucson firms because 95 percent qualify for the race- and gender-neutral program.

Drolet also said hiring quotas, or goals, for state jobs would be illegal under the measure. The University of Arizona’s Office of Institutional Equity posts its placement goals for job-specific hiring, with a percentage of hires allocated to be female and a separate percentage to be minorities.

“Many know these policies are unpopular with the public, so they don’t make them easy to find,” Drolet said.

Johnny Cruz, the university’s assistant vice president for communications, said UA isn’t taking an official stance on the proposition but will study the potential “intended and unintended consequences” closely.

Connerly said he’s optimistic Proposition 107 will pass because everyone deserves a fair chance.

“If you believe in the American creed of all people are created equal, how can you oppose this?” he said.

States that have approved ballot measures banning affirmative action programs:

• California
• Washington
• Michigan
• Nebraska

Yes on 107! launches Billboard Blitz!

Arizona motorists are being greeted by a blitz of billboard advertising urging a ‘Yes’ vote on Proposition 107, which would end affirmative action programs that give preferences based on race.

“This highway billboard campaign is designed to make clear to voters what Proposition 107 is, in language that everyday Arizonans understand,” said Rachel Alexander, Chair of the Yes on 107 campaign. “A ‘yes’ vote on Prop. 107 will end affirmative action policies that people know as quotas, race preferences, reverse discrimination and ‘diversity goals’.”

Nine Phoenix-area billboards are carrying a Yes on 107 message. The billboards encourage voters to vote ‘yes’ on ending affirmative action quotas, ending race preferences, and ending reverse discrimination.

“More highway billboards will be lit up with the ‘Yes on 107’ message in the next few weeks,” stated Yes on 107 campaign manager Leon Drolet. “Given the large number of candidates and issues on the ballot, voters need a clear and simple explanation of Proposition 107. That it what this billboard campaign is about.”

Proposition 107 is a proposed state constitutional amendment placed on the November ballot by the Arizona State Legislature that will prohibit the state and local governments from granting preferential treatment to, or discriminating against, any person or group based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in public employment, education or contracting.

Video interview with Jen Gratz of Yes on 107

Center for Equal Opportunity: There is documented affirmative action occurring at Arizona's two law schools

The Center for Equal Opportunity has submitted a well-written ballot argument for the Arizona Secretary of State's publicity pamphlet, citing a study it did which found "extremely heavy weight given to race and ethnicity in admission to Arizona’s two state law schools, at the University of Arizona and Arizona State University." The argument also cites a study Clint Bolick from the Goldwater Institute did exposing where affirmative action is used throughout Arizona government. 

Ahwatukee Foothills News interview with Jen Gratz from Yes on Prop. 107

Some excerpts from the article -

"We should be judging people on their character and their merit and not their skin color or their sex," said Jennifer Gratz, a Prop 107 advocate with the Sacramento-based nonprofit American Civil Rights Coalition.
Gratz, who was in Ahwatukee Foothills this week, entered the national spotlight in the mid-1990s when she sued the University of Michigan based on the claim that she unfairly was denied entry to its law school because of affirmative action policies. In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Gratz's favor, striking down the policy. Since then, she has joined forces with former University of California regent Ward Connerly, who has campaigned for laws banning affirmative action in several states.

The Arizona ballot initiative, locally championed by state Rep. Steve Montenegro (R-Litchfield Park), mirrors policies adopted in states like California, Washington, Florida, Michigan and Nebraska, Gratz said.

If adopted, the law would prohibit the use of affirmative action in public employment, public education and public contracting.

"There are actual programs in this state that discriminate against some to give preference to others. Any programs that do give preference or discriminate based on race or sex would have to be opened up to everyone," Gratz said. "It's the basic argument that the government shouldn't be picking winners and losers based on race or sex."

Gratz said it's better to focus on socio-economic status. Affirmative action policies aren't necessarily targeted to help those in need, she said.

"If there's anyone we're going to help, it should be kids that have struggled and didn't have all the advantages," she said.

Affirmative action policies can have negative effects, such as causing resentment among people who may feel, fairly or not, that they've been discriminated against, Gratz said. Such policies also potentially can foster the perception that individual women and minority members may have benefited from such programs unfairly, even though their achievements were based on merit, she said.

It's important to have racial and gender diversity, but not at the expense of people's right to be treated equally by the government, she said.

Arizona Republic calls out ANOTHER incorrect statement by opponents of Prop. 107

First the Republic called out a claim by the committee against 107 which falsely implied that that legislators had wrongly referred 107 to the ballot. Now they are calling out the Arizona Education Association for falsely claiming that certain programs will be gutted if the initiative passes. The truth is, where similar initiatives have passed in other states, those programs that benefit women and minorities have not been eliminated. 

Law professors say there has never been a challenge to such programs in California.

Although there is a possibility that such programs could face lawsuits if the proposition passes, their fate would ultimately be left up to a judge. There is limited precedent to determine whether such programs violate the law. 

Upward Bound is based on economic status or a student's status as the first in his or her family to go to college, so it likely does not violate the terms of the proposition, law professors say. 

Those professors say that it would be difficult to win a lawsuit against WISE if the program does not exclude male students from its benefits but only actively recruits women. 

What Prop. 207 would eliminate is programs that require certain numbers or percentages of women or minorities in government education, contracting or employment. 

Read the Republic's full analysis.  

Vote in About.com poll on whether you support Prop. 107's ban on affirmative action

So far more people are voting in favor of it.

Arizona conservative bloggers meetup this Saturday with Ward Connerly

Arizona Bloggers – Conservative
Food, Fun, Fabulous conversation

We have the honor of welcoming special guest Ward Connerly, founder and chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute, to this month’s meeting. It will be an honor to welcome him, and I know he will have some good input on Proposition 107


September 18th, 1:00 – 4:30 pm
Sun Up Brewing
(We’ll be in the out building – the Brewers’ Den)
322 E. Camelback Rd.
Phoenix, AZ

I hope many of you will be available to join us.
R.S.V.P. here if you are on Facebook

AZ Republic calls No on 107 campaign out for inaccurate accusation about getting 107 on the ballot

The Arizona Republic has nicely dissected a falsehood the No on 107 campaign is spreading, that legislators wrongly used their positions to put the initiative on the ballot. Well duh, that's how most Arizona initiatives get on the ballot, through the legislature referring them! There is nothing unethical, nor wrong, about Senator Russell Pearce and State Representative Steve Montenegro referring 107 to the ballot. The other way to get an initiative on the ballot is to collect 230,000 signatures. The No on 107 campaign is trying to imply that it was unethical to use the legislative route instead of collecting signatures. Seriously.

Ward Connerly dishes about the accusations that Tea Parties are racist

If I have learned one thing from life, it is that race is the engine that drives the political Left. When all else fails, that segment of America goes to the default position of using race to achieve its objectives. In the courtrooms, on college campuses, and, most especially, in our politics, race is a central theme. Where it does not naturally rise to the surface, there are those who will manufacture and amplify it.

Such is the case with the claims that the “Tea Partiers” are a bunch of racists and that many of them spat upon members of the Congressional Black Caucus and called them “n*****s.”  I am convinced beyond any doubt that all of this is part of the strategic plan being implemented by the Left in its current campaign to remake America.

In a video that has been played repeatedly showing CBC members as they walked past the tea partiers, Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. is seen using his telephone to tape the event. If he had any evidence to corroborate the racial claims, why hasn’t he come forward with his phone by now to settle this matter? I believe we all know the answer.

By their reckless accusations, those who are alleging “racism” without evidence are doing inestimable harm to the social fabric of America.

<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/197441/inestimable-harm/ward-connerly">Read the full article at <i>National Review</i></a>

ASU forum on Prop. 107 only features one side, spreads disinformation

ASU's National Pan Hellenic Council put on a forum to discuss Prop. 107 last week. The Yes on 107 side wasn't given enough advance notice and could not participate. The following video clip released after the event reveals misinformation by the anti-Prop. 107 speakers. They said that Prop. 107 is not about affirmative action, since affirmative action was banned in Arizona in the 1970s. Huh? If so, then why did they then list off a bunch of affirmative action programs that would be cut if the initiative passes? Guess those programs musta missed this alleged chopping block in the 1970s! 

And their accusations that those programs would be cut weren't even accurate. When similar initiatives have passed in other states, those programs have continued, they've just morphed slightly to include everyone - while still keeping their main focus on assisting women or minorities.

It was claimed that Ward Connerly started these initiatives as the result of a grudge over not winning a bid on a California government project years ago. This makes absolutely no sense. Ward is a black man, so the reason he was not awarded the bid was not related to affirmative action. 

One speaker asserted that the purpose of the initiative is to hurt minorities' and women's graduation and retention rates. This claim was just bizarre. Where the initiative has passed, it has increased their success rates. From http://arizonacri.org/Home/MythsOtherResources.aspx

FACT: “If you compare 1995-96 with 1999-01 — a clear before-and-after Prop 209 comparison,” says Sander, a longtime liberal civil rights activist, “you’ll see that, for African-Americans, the 1995 class had a four-year graduation rate of 26%, while the 2001 class had a 52% graduation rate [Hispanics numbers are comparable]. For whites and Asians, it barely changes. This is almost certainly due largely to the reduction of preferences. The five and six-year grad rates for minorities get pretty close to the white rates [within five points], which of course means that differences in academic performance have also narrowed a lot.”
Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/219094/precedents-and-preferences/henry-payne 

Prop 209 has largely worked as advertised, has not adversely affected women, and, most impressively, has benefited minorities by dramatically increasing graduation rates, thus boosting their chance for success in the job market.
Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/219094/precedents-and-preferences/henry-payne

In 2005, Sander cited race preferences for blacks failing the bar exam at four times the rate of whites nationally: “Black students admitted through preferences generally have quite low grades — not because of any racial characteristic, but because the preferences themselves put them at an enormous academic disadvantage.” The perverse result is that “the benefits of attending an elite school have been substantially overrated...job market data suggests that most black lawyers entering the job market would have higher earnings in the absence of preferential admissions, because better grades trump the costs in prestige.”
Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/219094/precedents-and-preferences/henry-payne

Politics on the Rocks anniversary event with Ward Connerly

Politics on the Rocks is proud to announce our 3 Year Anniversary Party on Thursday, September 16th 6:00 PM at the place where it all started Revolver Lounge located at 7316 E. Stetson Drive in Scottsdale, Arizona. To celebrate this milestone in networking, Arizona’s largest Republican & Conservative networking group has decided to buy everyone’s first drink!!! Dj-Mikyl will be performing live and everyone is welcome to attend t…his free event. Bring business cards and come and meet new and exciting politically-minded people. We would like to thank Scottsdale Nights and Revolver Lounge for their support.

After 36 monthly events and thousands of networkers coming to our functions nationally, we are excited to show our appreciation to everyone that has made Politics on the Rocks possible.

We are excited to announce that Ward Connerly will be speaking at our 3 Year Anniversary Party. Ward Connerly, is founder and President of the American Civil Rights Institute – a national, not-for-profit organization aimed at educating the public about the need to move beyond race and, specifically, racial and gender preferences. Mr. Connerly has gained national attention as an outspoken advocate of equal opportunity for all Americans, regardless of race, sex, or ethnic background. r. Connerly has been profiled on 60 Minutes, the cover of Parade magazine, the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Newsweek magazine, and virtually every major news magazine in America. He has also appeared on The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, Crossfire, Hannity & Colmes, Meet the Press, Dateline, NBC Nightly News, CNN, and C-SPAN.

Politics on the Rocks was formed to educate, motivate, and organize like-minded professionals together where they can network, socialize and hear directly from prominent political and business leaders on matters of social, economic and public importance. Recently, Politics on the Rocks was featured in the Arizona Republic. To view this article please click on this link:http://www.azcentral.com/thingstodo/bars/articles/2010/08/23/20100823political-candidates-meet-young-voters-drinks.html

Please invite your friends and welcome them to join our facebook group by sharing the following link: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/group.php?gid=14328535931&ref=ts

Also, join our facebook fan page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Politics-on-the-Rocks/126257510733252?ref=search

Order your Politics on the Rocks merchandise here:http://www.cafepress.com/PoliticsontheRocksMerchandise

We look forward to seeing everyone on September 16th 6:00 PM at Revolver Lounge!

Regards,

Politics on the Rocks National Committee
http://www.PoliticsontheRocks.com/

False information spread by the anti-Prop. 107 opposition

Here is a classic example of how the anti-Civil Rights Initiative radicals are spreading false information in order to try and sway public opinion about the initiative. They are desperate, because polls show that over 80% of Arizonans are in favor of Prop. 107, which would ban race and gender preferences in government contracting, employment and education. 

On the opposition's misnamed "Protect Arizona Freedom" website (should be more accurately named "Protect Arizona Freedom to Discriminate in Government"), they complain that certain types of government programs benefiting women and minorities will be eliminated. Here's one example they list:

Arizona State University Women in Science and Engineering (WISE) program. This program seeks to improve the climate for women in the Fulton School at ASU. Currently, WISE offers many programs to encourage women to pursue academic majors and careers in engineering.

 In reality? From the Yes on 107 website,

WISE, a higher education program, is geared toward women, but it is also open to males. In California, Washington and Michigan, three states that have passed similar initiatives, WISE programs continue to operate.

Unfortunately, the opposition has made it clear in the past that it will use tactics like this to try and defeat the initiative. Stay tuned.

Ward Connerly addresses Prop. 107 at Republican Women of Prescott event

Click here to read about the initiative as discussed with the Republican Women of Prescott, and watch video clips of Ward speaking to the group. The article quotes far left legislator Kyrsten Sinema, who claims that affirmative action does not exist in Arizona. This is inaccurate.

From the Arizona Civil Rights Initiative website -  

FACT: This would be laughable if it wasn’t serious. Proponents of race preferences first lay out all the reasons (even if they may be untrue and/or invalid reasons) as to why they believe “affirmative action” policies that give preference based on race are still necessary today and then are quoted as saying the policies don’t exist. If that’s the case, then why fight to be able to keep discriminatory policies in place? This myth shows that the opposition is disingenuous and will say and do anything to further their agenda. 

Now, go to the the opposition's list of AFFIRMATIVE ACTION programs that they claim would be ended if Prop. 107 passes! (also refuted on the AZCRI website)