FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT PROP. 107
Why is an effort needed to end affirmative action programs that give preference based on race or sex?
Every Arizona resident should be treated equally and fairly by the government. All Arizonans should be given an equal and fair chance to compete for government jobs, contracts or college admission.
What’s the difference between race preferences and taking race into consideration?
There is no difference, but those who support so-called “affirmative action” programs that give preference based on race want you to believe there is a difference. The fact is if race is being considered then one race will be favored and another disfavored, therefore it is a preference to one and discrimination to another.
If the people vote to place this language into the constitution, what will it affect?
It will only affect programs that grant preference or discriminate against anyone on the basis of race, sex, ethnicity, skin color or national origin in three specific areas: public contracting, public employment, and public education.
Would this proposal apply to private companies or organizations?
No. This will only apply to government action in the areas of public education, employment and contracting.
Do preference programs exist in Arizona?
Yes. Examples include: The University of Arizona’s “consideration” of an applicant’s race during the admission process; the cities of Phoenix and Tucson both administer bid preferences when awarding contracts; the Arizona Board of Regents’ direct policy utilizing race preferences in employment. Frankly, if programs that grant preference didn’t exist, why would anyone oppose outlawing them?
Do race-based quotas still exist?
Although you will likely never hear programs described as quotas, the functional equivalent of a quota still exists. When the opposition says that “race is considered” they often also say that there is a “goal,” “target” or a “percentage” in place. “Goals,” “targets” and “percentages” are quotas.
Have similar measures passed in other states?
Yes – it passed in California (1996, 55%-45%), Washington (1998, 59%-41%), Michigan (2006, 58%-42%), and Nebraska (2008, 58%-42%).
Does this mean the state can’t provide advantages for military veterans?
No. Those who have sacrificed to serve our country and protect our freedoms can benefit from policies that may be adopted to advantage them in the context of state contracts, public employment and public education. This would not be a preference based on race, ethnicity or sex, but on public military service regardless of who performed it.