> Published Friday, July 14, 2000, in the Miami Herald
>
> Justices confirm `no' to Connerly initiative
>
> BY LESLEY CLARK
> lclark at herald.com
>
> TALLAHASSEE -- The state Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a sharply
> worded death blow to Ward Connerly's crusade to put a constitutional
> amendment on the ballot to ban race preferences,
> finding the proposal too broad and its wording misleading to voters.
>
> A spokesman for the California-based businessman, who abandoned his
> campaign in May when it was apparent the court would not act in time to get
> the proposal on the November ballot, said lawyers are reviewing the court's
> opinion. The campaign may try again for November 2002.
>
> But Herb Harmon admitted that the vociferousness of the court's opinion --
> the justices said Connerly's proposal would lead to unforeseen
> ``cataclysmic change'' across the state -- and the fact that three of the
> seven justices issued no rationale for their opinion would make getting any
> ballot language past the court a monumental task.
>
> "They've left us in an extremely difficult position,'' Harmon said.
>
> To get on the ballot, the amendments had to address a single topic and not
> mislead voters. The court found they did neither.
>
> MULTIPLE SUBJECTS
>
> The justices said the proposals dealt with many subjects: barring the
> Legislature from addressing
> discrimination, including stopping it from funding minority scholarships,
> and blocking cities from hiring police officers based on race.
>
> "`It is precisely this sort of `cataclysmic change' that the drafters of
> the single-subject rule labored to
> prevent,'' the court said.
>
> The court also found the language of the ballot question would mislead
> voters, with Justice Leander
> Shaw writing in a separate opinion that the language fails to give voters a
> ``clue of the impact the
> amendments would actually have on government programs promoting social
> harmony and combating discrimination.''
>
> "A constitutional referendum is not a high-stakes poker game where voters
> must guess the sponsors'
> hand by discounting the hype and spin and calculating the odds
> themselves,'' Shaw wrote. "Whenever constitutional rights are in issue,
> accuracy and truthfulness are the hallmarks.''
>
> `ILLUSORY IMPRESSION'
>
> Shaw said that under the language of the proposed amendments, state and
> local governments "would be powerless'' to address discrimination but that
> they give voters the ``illusory impression'' they would be used to stop
> government discrimination.
>
> Connerly's foes were quick to applaud the ruling.
>
> Gov. Jeb Bush, whose controversial plan to overhaul affirmative action in
> the state was launched in
> November to thwart Connerly's drive, called the decision ``good news.''
>
> "Mr. Connerly's ballot initiative would have been unnecessarily divisive
> for Florida,'' Bush said in a
> statement that called his own One Florida Initiative ``the right thing to
> do because it promotes diversity in ways that are fair to all.''
>
> But critics say Bush's plan has already achieved what Connerly wanted.
> Agencies that report to the
> governor have stopped using race and gender in hiring and contracting, and
> an administrative law
> judge Wednesday gave the Board of Regents the go-ahead to scrap the use of
> race and gender in
> university admissions.
>
> ______________________________
>
> Court bars affirmative action from 2000 ballot
>
> The state Supreme Court says proposals to end the policy could mislead
> voters. Ward Connerly calls the ruling "a blow against self-government."
>
> By DIANE RADO
>
> =A9 St. Petersburg Times, published July 14, 2000
>
> TALLAHASSEE -- In sometimes forceful and critical language, the state
> Supreme Court ruled Thursday that proposals to end affirmative action in
> Florida are too broad and misleading to go before voters in November.
>
> The ruling follows 18 months of controversy and turmoil over how Florida
> should address such thorny issues as race-based preferences, diversity and
> reverse discrimination. It also puts off until at least 2002 the push by
> California businessman Ward Connerly to end affirmative action policies in
> state
> and local government in Florida.
>
> The Supreme Court said Thursday that four proposed constitutional
> amendments to end affirmative action were written so broadly that voters
> could unknowingly send Florida down a path of "cataclysmic change."
>
> For example, the Legislature would be prohibited from adopting programs or
> funding scholarships specifically designed for minorities, and the state's
> courts would be "closed, not open, to victims of discrimination who seek
> redress," the justices wrote.
>
> "Limiting legislative authority and redefining courts' remedial powers
> significantly restricts the state's ability to address the effects of past
> and present discriminatory practices," the court said.
>
> In a separate opinion, Justice Leander Shaw used even stronger language,
> saying the amendments were so vague that they gave voters "no clue" of
> their impact on government programs to combat discrimination.
>
> "A constitutional referendum is not a high stakes poker game where voters
> must guess the sponsors' hand by discounting the hype and spin and
> calculating the odds themselves," Shaw wrote. "Whenever constitutional
> rights are at issue, accuracy and truthfulness are the hallmarks. The
> sponsors of an amendment must place all the cards on the table, face up,
> prior to an election. Each voter is entitled to cast a ballot based on the
> full truth."
>
> In a written statement, Connerly harshly criticized the court's decision as
> "a blow against our tradition of self-government."
>
> "I am outraged, as should be the people of Florida, by the deprivation of
> their right to decide on the limits of affirmative action," Connerly said.
> "This ballot review process has been a disgraceful display by an
> overreaching court that aggressively quashed a clear and simple proposition
> to end preferences."
>
> His supporters in Florida said they are disappointed but not deterred.
>
> "We will redraft the language, we will resubmit to voters, we will resubmit
> to the court," said Herb Harmon, a leader in a group called Florida Civil
> Rights Initiative that was working with Connerly.
>
> The Florida Supreme Court reviews all citizen initiatives to make sure they
> are clear to voters. The initiatives must deal with just a single subject
> and the ballot titles and summaries must clearly explain the proposal.
>
> Harmon called Thursday's ruling a "non-opinion," because only three
> justices supported the actual wording: Major Harding, Barbara Pariente and
> Peggy Quince. The four other justices -- Chief Justice Charles Wells,
> Leander Shaw, Harry Lee Anstead and R. Fred Lewis -- concurred in the
> result only.
>
> Attorney Mark Herron, representing a coalition of civil rights and women's
> groups opposed to the amendments, said all seven justices still agreed that
> the proposals should not be on the ballot. "The result of the case is, it's
> over," Herron said.
>
> Gov. Jeb Bush applauded the ruling, calling it "a good thing for our
> state." Rather than a divisive ballot initiative, Bush said, "It is
> appropriate to deal with this issue as we've done it."
>
> As an alternative to Connerly's plan, Bush last fall put forth an
> alternative: a One Florida plan to end race and gender preferences in
> university admissions and state contracting decisions. That plan includes
> guaranteeing state university admission to the top 20 percent of each high
> school class. Earlier this week, an administrative hearing judge rejected
> the state NAACP's challenge to that "Talented 20" plan.
>
> But Bush's solution also has been controversial. In January, two black
> lawmakers staged a 25-hour sit in in the office of Lt. Gov. Frank Brogan,
> and in March, thousands of people marched on the capital to protest One
> Florida.