Sioux City Journal.com
September 3, 2008
LINCOLN (AP) -- Supporters of a proposed ban on preferential treatment to minorities and women will essentially get the message they wanted on ballots expected to be read in voting booths across the state.But opponents of the ban can claim at least one small victory that they hope will sway voters in November: A language change approved by a judge could increase awareness among voters that the ban could create more lawsuits."Voters might say 'I don't want to do all of this,"' said J.L. Spray, attorney for the plaintiffs that challenged the ballot language.On Friday, Lancaster County District Court Judge Steven Burns mostly upheld ballot language for the controversial proposal that has ignited a bitter fight between supporters and opponents of the ban.A lawsuit from a University of Nebraska-Lincoln student who is a member of Nebraskans United, a group opposing the proposal, alleged the current wording is misleading and could confuse voters.The language says government entities in the state "shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, individuals or groups based upon race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin" in public hiring, education and contracting.Nebraskans United had wanted voters to be asked if the state constitution should "ban state and local programs designed to improve opportunities for and eliminate discrimination against women and minorities in public education, employment and contracting."Burns essentially kept the original wording proposed by supporters of the ban and approved by Attorney General Jon Bruning. Bruning decides how ballot measures are worded and was the target of the lawsuit.Opponents have said voters wouldn't know by reading the ballot language that they could be voting to get rid of affirmative action. [To read the entire article, go to: http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2008/08/30/news/nebraska/bf6d530cfed4d909862574b50014cf01.txt ]
No comments:
Post a Comment