The facts behind MCRI and controversial Prop. 2

Tomorrow, Tuesday, November 7, Michigan voters will decide the fate of state affirmative action programs. Proposal 06-2, more commonly known as the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI), is a ballot proposal that, if passed, would bar state and local agencies and state-funded educational institutions from implementing policies that give special consideration to individuals based on their race, gender, ethnicity, or national origin.

MCRI, which also refers to the primary political coalition responsible for placing the state constitutional amendment on the ballot, was organized and primarily funded by Ward Connerly. Ten years ago, Connerly, a California businessman, successfully chaired the campaign for and drafted Proposition 209, which amended the California Constitution to bar affirmative action in education, employment, and contracting for all California state institutions. MCRI is also heavily supported by Jennifer Gratz, who successfully challenged the University of Michigan's undergraduate admission system in the 1990s. MCRI supporters, including Gratz and Connerly, argue that affirmative action policies are discriminatory and that society should treat all individuals the same regardless of race or gender.

In contrast, MCRI opponents argue that affirmative action policies are necessary to "even the playing field" for women and minorities. Additionally, opponents argue that by not allowing Michigan universities and colleges to practice affirmative action, student diversity would be greatly reduced, which would worsen the overall educational experience of all students. Under this line of argument, ethnic and gender diversity improves education by sharpening students' critical thinking skills and exposing them to new ideas and perspectives. This position has also found strong support in corporate America; businesses are particularly interested in hiring graduates educated in diverse settings because of their ability to better consider multiple perspectives.

If Proposal 06-2 passes, it will formally be written into the Michigan Constitution and will apply to all public schools and state and local government agencies. A number of existing state programs would likely become illegal under the amended state Constitution. For example, public university programs that seek to help individuals enter fields in which they are underrepresented would probably become illegal if MCRI were to pass. Programs designed to encourage women to enter math and science disciplines are also likely be halted.

The long-term qualitative and quantitative impacts of a passing Proposal 06-2 are difficult to predict. Although the precise degree is uncertain, Michigan universities and colleges would likely experience a drop in admission for minorities and women. In the years following California's Proposition 209, minority admission offers to state universities and colleges greatly decreased and are currently two-thirds lower than they were in 1995. More notably, many admitted minority students chose not to matriculate because of expectations of reduced diversity.

If the MCRI does not pass, Michigan public schools and government entities would be allowed to continue to consider a person's race, national origin, or gender in hiring, outreach, and admissions. Currently, the consideration of these factors must adhere to strict limits placed on affirmative action policies outlined by the US Supreme Court. In two precedent-setting affirmative action cases, Gratz v. University of Michigan and Grutter v. University of Michigan, the Supreme Court stated that any state sponsored program or policy that considers identity factors must do so in a way that advances a compelling goal and may not solely consider a person's gender, race, or ethnicity. These guidelines prevent programs from offering blatant racial or gender preferences based solely on those factors and actually set a higher bar for compliance than is commonly understood.

There are compelling arguments on both sides of the affirmative action issue, and accordingly Michigan voters appear to be evenly divided going into Tuesday's election. On Election Day, not only will voters have to grapple with the complicated arguments surrounding affirmative action, but they will also have to navigate an arguably ambiguous ballot question.

Somewhat counter-intuitively, a YES vote on Proposal 06-2 will result in a ban of affirmative action programs, while a NO vote protects the programs currently in place. Unfortunately, this is clear only after a close and careful reading of the ballot question. It is expected that a number of voters will be confused by the "Michigan Civil Right Initiative" title and assume that a YES vote is indicative of support for civil rights. Voter ballot confusion is always undesirable, but is particularly unfortunate for such an important constitutional amendment. The fate of Michigan affirmative action programs may just come down to whose constituency is better informed about the wording of the ballot proposal.