MEDICAL AND HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS OPPOSE PROP. 54

[nefar559]

http://www.defeat54.org/healthcare.shtml

Health professionals across state call measure's so-called medical exemption dangerously misleading.

Pledging to do whatever it takes so they can continue to save lives and protect the public health of California, medical and healthcare professionals from across California today vowed to launch a full frontal assault against Proposition 54.

The initiative, sponsored by Ward Connerly, would bar public agencies from compiling or using information about race or ethnicity. The dramatic impact would virtually eliminate statistical information that health care providers need to ensure quality care to all Californians, prevent disease and save lives.

Experts from such groups as the California Medical Association, California Nurses Association, California Primary Care Association, American Cancer Society, California Association of Health Plans, Kaiser Permanente and the UCLA School of Public Health denounce the initiative's so-called medical exemption, which they called dangerously misleading.

"The Connerly exemption is so narrow as to render it meaningless to the protection of public health and the greater good of California," said Dr. Jack Lewin, MD, CEO of the California Medical Association. "What he calls 'medical research subjects and patients' is in reality a miniscule number of people participating in a small number of studies and surveys. The vast majority of vital health information will still be kept out of the hands of the medical professionals who use it to save lives. Voters beware? this measure is bad for your health and this exemption offers you nothing but empty promises."

Virtually every group concerned with the provision of medical and healthcare services has come out in opposition to the measure, including hundreds of doctors, nurses and medical researchers who have never been politically active in the past. Many of them are on the front lines of addressing and treating diseases and illnesses that impact the general public.

"Clinics like the Venice Family Clinic serve a very diverse population," said Susan Fleischman, Medical Director of the Venice Family Clinic and president-elect of the California Primary Care Association. "Statewide, almost 70% of our patients are from communities of color. The one-size-fits-all model has not worked for these communities. While we should all receive care with equal dignity and quality, our needs are not all the same. Our clinics are successful because we utilize data by race and ethnicity to develop specific programs to meet the varying needs of each community no matter the race or ethnicity."

"Information enables public health professionals to target life-saving programs to those who have the greatest risks, those who can benefit the most. We use statistical analyses of such information to track health problems, identify who is most affected by them, and to develop strategies and programs to stop the spread of disease, reduce death rates and improve the health of all communities," said Dr. Rick Brown, a professor at the UCLA School of Public Health and the Director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research

Medical and healthcare professionals also warned of health threats that would be caused by Prop. 54. The warning was issued in a joint statement released today by health officials from Alameda, San Francisco and Santa Clara Counties, and the City of Berkeley. The statement emphasized the "disastrous" impact on health research and treatment.

 

[Mcleanhatch]

since you article was completly 1-sided let me post the other side

http://www.racialprivacy.org/content/miscellaneous/misc1.php
THE RACIAL PRIVACY INITIATIVE: WHY I SUPPORT IT AND WHY YOU SHOULD, TOO
By Ward Connerly, Chairman, RPI campaign

The ballot initiative known as the “Racial Privacy Initiative” (RPI), which will appear before California voters in the next statewide election, is a subject of debate for many informed Californians, as it should be. The most salient clause of the initiative reads: “The state shall not classify any individual by race, ethnicity, color or national origin in the operation of public education, public contracting or public employment.”

That sentence makes clear the initiative’s goal: to take state government out of the racial classification business, thus moving us one step closer to a color-blind government.

We, the proponents of RPI, seek a California that is free from government racism and race-conscious decision making. As John F. Kennedy said, “Race has no place in American life or law.” This belief is ever more critical today in view of the rapidly changing ethnic demographics of California—the most diverse state in the Union. The simplistic notion that a transaction between persons of different races must always be a “zero-sum game,” and if one race is up another must be down, is outdated and false. It is morally wrong for government to accept and practice that belief by treating its citizens differently on account of race or skin color.

Furthermore, the very concept of dividing persons by race, born in an era of slavery and nurtured by archaic, racialist Jim Crow policies, cannot withstand logical scrutiny. As our population blends and the lines of race become blurred, eventually the racial categories that many consider “fixed” will collapse of their own weight.

We recognize the need to move towards the future in a moderate fashion, however, and therefore have included several exemptions in the language. For example, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing is exempt for 10 years. Police and correctional officers may use racial classifications in the interest of public safety. Any classifications necessary for federal funds are exempt. Any unforeseen area that needs exemption, and for which there is a compelling public interest, could be so exempted by a simple two-thirds vote of both houses of the California Legislature and the consent of the governor. Over 65 percent of the bills that passed the Legislature last year received over a two-thirds majority. Therefore, this is not an unreasonable requirement if the need is compelling.

And finally, in the interest of public health, we have exempted ALL racial categorizations made by health care and medical professionals. Clause (f) of the initiative reads, “Otherwise lawful classification of medical research subjects and patients shall be exempt from this section.” No person’s health care, or any epidemiological studies that reveal disease patterns, will be affected by RPI.

Some will object to RPI because of a mistaken belief that RPI will eliminate some vast body of “data,” without which California will be plunged into some sort of scientific Dark Ages due to a lack of information. The truth is that because of the medical and other exemptions—not to mention the vast gathering of data by the federal government, most notably the U.S. Census, which would remain untouched—any truly scientific research that requires racial classification data can easily continue. But RPI is about a lot more than mere “data”—much of the racial classification process and the classifications themselves are so arbitrary that the data can hardly be scientific anyway. No, what RPI is really about is freeing Californians’ hearts and minds from the rigid boxes of race. The path of race-conscious decision making that this country has traversed for the last 30 years has simply not improved race relations or unity in America, and we think it’s time to try a new approach in hopes of getting better results.

Take public education. For a generation, education administrators have obsessively focused on the race of every one of its applicants and the racial makeup of every incoming class. It has tailored its message, attention and curriculum based on race and the mantra of diversity. There is no end in sight. And yet, the academic gap between so-called “under-represented minorities” and other students continues to widen. Think if you ran a business this way. Would you continue to use a business plan that had failed to produce results for over 30 years? Not only has the race-conscious paradigm failed, but by focusing too much on race, we instill in students the notion that “under-represented minorities” can’t help but underachieve.

By removing race from the equation we will force our state government to look at actual people and solve real problems, rather than rely on the proxy of race. The feeble quality of education in many schools, particularly those in low-income areas, is indeed a serious concern. But why do educators need to know the race of a fourth-grader who can’t read in order to know that the child must be taught to read? The real answer is that it is easier for state bureaucrats to push papers and collect data than to do the heavy lifting required to fix public education, solve our state budget crisis and mend so many other problems California faces. With so much work necessary to launch our state back onto the path of greatness, the best our elected officials in Sacramento can say is “give us more race data.” That’s criminal. The independent state Legislative Analyst has determined that RPI will save the state at least $10 million. That’s money that can be spent on education, solving our budget crisis, keeping taxes down—a million things more important than race checkboxes.

The California Constitution forbids state government from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to any citizen based on race. Therefore, since government has no reason to classify persons by race, why should it even ask us for the data? Like religion, marital status or sexual orientation, race should become a private matter that is no business of government’s. Think how refreshing it would be to throw out the entire system of checking little boxes.

As the most ethnically diverse state in the Union, California has the most to gain by compelling its government to treat all citizens equally and without regard to race. The latest U.S. Census divides Americans into a whopping 126 different ethnic/racial categories. How many categories should Californians put up with?

 

[nefar559]

since you article was completly 1-sided let me post the other side

http://www.racialprivacy.org/content/miscellaneous/misc1.php
THE RACIAL PRIVACY INITIATIVE: WHY I SUPPORT IT AND WHY YOU SHOULD, TOO
By Ward Connerly, Chairman, RPI campaign

The ballot initiative known as the “Racial Privacy Initiative” (RPI), which will appear before California voters in the next statewide election, is a subject of debate for many informed Californians, as it should be. The most salient clause of the initiative reads: “The state shall not classify any individual by race, ethnicity, color or national origin in the operation of public education, public contracting or public employment.”

That sentence makes clear the initiative’s goal: to take state government out of the racial classification business, thus moving us one step closer to a color-blind government.

We, the proponents of RPI, seek a California that is free from government racism and race-conscious decision making. As John F. Kennedy said, “Race has no place in American life or law.” This belief is ever more critical today in view of the rapidly changing ethnic demographics of California—the most diverse state in the Union. The simplistic notion that a transaction between persons of different races must always be a “zero-sum game,” and if one race is up another must be down, is outdated and false. It is morally wrong for government to accept and practice that belief by treating its citizens differently on account of race or skin color.

Furthermore, the very concept of dividing persons by race, born in an era of slavery and nurtured by archaic, racialist Jim Crow policies, cannot withstand logical scrutiny. As our population blends and the lines of race become blurred, eventually the racial categories that many consider “fixed” will collapse of their own weight.

We recognize the need to move towards the future in a moderate fashion, however, and therefore have included several exemptions in the language. For example, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing is exempt for 10 years. Police and correctional officers may use racial classifications in the interest of public safety. Any classifications necessary for federal funds are exempt. Any unforeseen area that needs exemption, and for which there is a compelling public interest, could be so exempted by a simple two-thirds vote of both houses of the California Legislature and the consent of the governor. Over 65 percent of the bills that passed the Legislature last year received over a two-thirds majority. Therefore, this is not an unreasonable requirement if the need is compelling.

And finally, in the interest of public health, we have exempted ALL racial categorizations made by health care and medical professionals. Clause (f) of the initiative reads, “Otherwise lawful classification of medical research subjects and patients shall be exempt from this section.” No person’s health care, or any epidemiological studies that reveal disease patterns, will be affected by RPI.

Some will object to RPI because of a mistaken belief that RPI will eliminate some vast body of “data,” without which California will be plunged into some sort of scientific Dark Ages due to a lack of information. The truth is that because of the medical and other exemptions—not to mention the vast gathering of data by the federal government, most notably the U.S. Census, which would remain untouched—any truly scientific research that requires racial classification data can easily continue. But RPI is about a lot more than mere “data”—much of the racial classification process and the classifications themselves are so arbitrary that the data can hardly be scientific anyway. No, what RPI is really about is freeing Californians’ hearts and minds from the rigid boxes of race. The path of race-conscious decision making that this country has traversed for the last 30 years has simply not improved race relations or unity in America, and we think it’s time to try a new approach in hopes of getting better results.

Take public education. For a generation, education administrators have obsessively focused on the race of every one of its applicants and the racial makeup of every incoming class. It has tailored its message, attention and curriculum based on race and the mantra of diversity. There is no end in sight. And yet, the academic gap between so-called “under-represented minorities” and other students continues to widen. Think if you ran a business this way. Would you continue to use a business plan that had failed to produce results for over 30 years? Not only has the race-conscious paradigm failed, but by focusing too much on race, we instill in students the notion that “under-represented minorities” can’t help but underachieve.

By removing race from the equation we will force our state government to look at actual people and solve real problems, rather than rely on the proxy of race. The feeble quality of education in many schools, particularly those in low-income areas, is indeed a serious concern. But why do educators need to know the race of a fourth-grader who can’t read in order to know that the child must be taught to read? The real answer is that it is easier for state bureaucrats to push papers and collect data than to do the heavy lifting required to fix public education, solve our state budget crisis and mend so many other problems California faces. With so much work necessary to launch our state back onto the path of greatness, the best our elected officials in Sacramento can say is “give us more race data.” That’s criminal. The independent state Legislative Analyst has determined that RPI will save the state at least $10 million. That’s money that can be spent on education, solving our budget crisis, keeping taxes down—a million things more important than race checkboxes.

The California Constitution forbids state government from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to any citizen based on race. Therefore, since government has no reason to classify persons by race, why should it even ask us for the data? Like religion, marital status or sexual orientation, race should become a private matter that is no business of government’s. Think how refreshing it would be to throw out the entire system of checking little boxes.

As the most ethnically diverse state in the Union, California has the most to gain by compelling its government to treat all citizens equally and without regard to race. The latest U.S. Census divides Americans into a whopping 126 different ethnic/racial categories. How many categories should Californians put up with?

"Experts from such groups as the California Medical Association, California Nurses Association, California Primary Care Association, American Cancer Society, California Association of Health Plans, Kaiser Permanente and the UCLA School of Public Health denounce the initiative's so-called medical exemption, which they called dangerously misleading."

thats all i gotta say, i'm out of this thread

 

[Tooper]

every ethnicity has their own risks as a people,you got to recognize that with health care otherwise your not addressing the problems of those who need it for their different health issues where it's most prominant.

how can you gauge whut people are afflicted with and being treated for and know the risks involved through heraditary and predesposition as a people?

you hear it in the news all the time and they want to change that?

there's no real reason to change it?

 

[Mcleanhatch]

every ethnicity has their own risks as a people,you got to recognize that with health care otherwise your not addressing the problems of those who need it for their different health issues where it's most prominant.

how can you gauge whut people are afflicted with and being treated for and know the risks involved through heraditary and predesposition as a people?

you hear it in the news all the time and they want to change that?

there's no real reason to change it?

Tooper, this law has a medical exemption, this will not effect the collecting of racial data needed to keep the public healthy, this law only seeks to bring to an end the asking of racial data when it pertains to thingsliek eduacation and jobs. her e is teh exact words

"The state shall not classify any individual by race, ethnicity, color or national origin in the operation of public education, public contracting or public employment.”

it also says this

[And finally, in the interest of public health, we have exempted ALL racial categorizations made by health care and medical professionals. Clause (f) of the initiative reads, “Otherwise lawful classification of medical research subjects and patients shall be exempt from this section.” No person’s health care, or any epidemiological studies that reveal disease patterns, will be affected by RPI.]