Tag: MCRI

The subject was a Michigan "LAW OF THE LAND", banning the use of racial preferences in school selection efforts.  Schuette is arguing to sustain the 2006 "Michigan Civil Rights Initiative," a referendum that was overwhelmingly supported with a 58-42% margin. As a reminder, 2006's prop 2 based addition to the state constitution reads:

§ 26 Affirmative action programs.

Sec. 26.

(1) The University of Michigan, Michigan State University, Wayne State University, and any other public college or university, community college, or school district shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

(2) The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

(3) For the purposes of this section "state" includes, but is not necessarily limited to, the state itself, any city, county, any public college, university, or community college, school district, or other political subdivision or governmental instrumentality of or within the State of Michigan not included in sub-section 1.

(4) This section does not prohibit action that must be taken to establish or maintain eligibility for any federal program, if ineligibility would result in a loss of federal funds to the state.

(5) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting bona fide qualifications based on sex that are reasonably necessary to the normal operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

(6) The remedies available for violations of this section shall be the same, regardless of the injured party's race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin, as are otherwise available for violations of Michigan anti-discrimination law.

(7) This section shall be self-executing. If any part or parts of this section are found to be in conflict with the United States Constitution or federal law, the section shall be implemented to the maximum extent that the United States Constitution and federal law permit. Any provision held invalid shall be severable from the remaining portions of this section.

(8) This section applies only to action taken after the effective date of this section.

(9) This section does not invalidate any court order or consent decree that is in force as of the effective date of this section.

History: Add. Init., approved Nov. 7, 2006, Eff. Dec. 23, 2006

I'll let Henry cover this one

Replacing retiring President Mary Sue Coleman offers the University of Michigan a historic opportunity to reboot with an administrator who embraces a 21st century, colorblind admissions policy that is succeeding in states like California. The university's board could signal the new era by including Jennifer Gratz on its presidential search committee.

______________

According to today's Detroit News, The Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati effectively told Michigan Voters to go spin on it, and struck down the MCRI passed overwhelmingly by Michigan Voters back in '06 to combat institutional racism at U of M along with other state institutions.

The case stems from a lawsuit and a string of unsuccessful appeals filed by U of M students and faculty, and a group of ne'er-do-wells known as BAMN.

A copy of the 6th's decision can be read here.

via USA Today

Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana was defeated in the state's Republican primary Tuesday, ending the 36-year career of a GOP elder statesman and handing the Tea Party movement its biggest upset victory so far in the 2012 elections.

Lugar was ousted by State Treasurer Richard Mourdock, whose campaign against the veteran lawmaker was backed by conservative groups including the Tea Party Express, the anti-tax Club for Growth, the National Rifle Association, the Tea Party-aligned Freedom Works, and former Republican Alaska governor Sarah Palin.

Rest here

Fact is, Saul Anuzis once in a while used this forum to broadcast his theme of the day.  Most of us here have understood him to be at least moderately conservative, but the NPV issue, and the recent "dele-gate" scheme which casts a pall on his loyalties.  Is it conservatism, rule of law or the self serving allure of power and money which drives him?  I don't live in his head, so I'll make no absolute statement as to what motivates him, but I've seen enough to know I wouldn't keep him around influencing our party beyond the term he now serves.

But in all fairness, it seems one of our community members and regular poster ought to have his say, right?:

"Part of it is loyalty. Saul and I go back years, long before I had the blog. His brother took me under his wing when I was a rookie in politics back when he was county chair, and IMO one of the best we've had. However the biggest thing is when push comes to shove, Saul will do what he thinks is right."

That's an easy out.  Its like saying "he believes what he thinks."

Sorry RM, if you want to say "he taught me everything I know", I get it.  Maybe even "I like him."

What I would like however, is if you are going to talk about what he thinks is right, then perhaps I would ask, "do you agree?"

Dear Michigan Republican -

For the last 15 years I have been the woman working to end "affirmative action" programs that grant race preferences at the University of Michigan and in all public entities.  In 2003, my lawsuit against UofM went to the US Supreme Court and following that court case I led the victorious Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI/Proposal 2) campaign.

At the time of MCRI, Saul Anuzis was Chairman of the Michigan Republican State Committee (MRSC).  To my surprise,  Saul opposed our effort and worked hard to convince establishment Republicans across the state to oppose our effort, because he claimed it would hurt the Republican Party.

Other media reports also indicate MERC's decision has clearly not derailed the GEO's desire to bring more students into its public employee union. GEO President Samantha Montgomery told Ann Arbor.com on Aug. 8: "This is not the end," and, "we're hoping to continue to keep working with the university to reach a finalized decision."

Montgomery, however, also acknowledges the main problem with her group's efforts: MERC's 1981 declaration that the GSRA's are not public employees. She was cited in AnnArbor.com as saying that the GEO was "still figuring out how graduate student research assistants would be worked into the union... given the (MERC's) ruling that they are not public employees and cannot unionize."

Patrick Wright, director of the Mackinac Center Legal Foundation says the GEO can move ahead with an election. However, any resulting unionization would be non-binding. Therefore, he says the motives behind MERC's cooperation to help the GEO's seemingly stubborn drive to push non-public employees into its union are suspect: "Why is MERC helping with a non-binding election?"

The university is also apparently working with the GEO to eventually hold an election. The GEO's website says the following: "GEO plans to work with the University of Michigan to set the details of the election."

Wright says any election that happens should raise red flags about cost, if nothing else.

"Michigan's ban on using race and gender as a factor in admission to public colleges and universities was overturned today by a federal appeals court, which said the voter-approved measure harms minorities and is unconstitutional.

...

The judges ruled that the law violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment."