Research Concept Paper

Impact209, a statewide coalition to evaluate the impact of California Proposition 209, is seeking
partnerships to pursue research leading to advocacy for a ballot initiative that will reverse Proposition 209
and reinstate affirmative action in California. Sector-based research should evaluate the efficacy of
Proposition 209 in eliminating discrimination, and investigate the links between equal opportunity and the
economic and social prosperity of California.
Introduction
In 1996, Proposition 209 was passed by 54.6% of California voters, banning affirmative action programs
in public education, employment and contracting. Proposition 209 was rejected by a majority of African
American, Latino and Asian American voters, and Californias voting population has become more
diverse since 1996.
Proposition 209 went into effect without significant empirical research on the potential social and
economic effects on California. In 1996 and today, much of the public dialogue over Proposition 209 has
been driven by rhetoric divorced from social science research. Moreover, the state of California has not
assessed the effects of these dramatic policy changes.
Since 1996, some research undertaken by academics and advocacy organizations has evaluated the effects
of ending affirmative action in local public contracting as well as the status of equal access to public
higher education. Based on existing research, our preliminary conclusion is that Proposition 209 has had
substantial negative impact in higher education, employment and contracting. A statewide coalition of
civil rights advocates, organizations who opposed Propositions 209 and 54, academics, scholars and
students began meeting to discuss a ballot initiative to reverse Proposition 209. Among the everwidening coalition are representatives from leading research institutions including The Impact
Fund/Discrimination Research Center, Equal Justice Society, UCLA, UC Berkeley, UC San Diego, UC
Davis, Hastings College of Law, Power PAC, National Economic Development & Law Center, Chinese
for Affirmative Action, The Applied Research Center, the Greenlining Institute, the Lawyers Committee
for Civil Rights, The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California and AGENDA L.A. The
goal of the Coalition is to build on existing organizational structures, knowledge and expertise by
coordinating our research, communication and organizing efforts.
Existing Research
The richest research on the effects of Proposition 209 has been conducted in the context of public
education. The existing studies indicate that despite vigorous efforts to blunt the negative impacts of
Proposition 209, the opportunity gap the difference between underrepresented minorities percentage of
California high school graduates and their percentage of University of California enrollments- had grown
worse over the past decade. Additional research demonstrates similar negative impacts on California's
professional schools. At the same time, the Supreme Court of the United States relied on significant
research to adopt the rationale that classroom and institutional diversity fosters important educational
benefits. Educational researchers have, on balance, found that race-neutral means for achieving diversity
in higher education, such as percentage plans, are inadequate replacements for affirmative action.
Finally, research indicates that ending affirmative action has already begun to have negative impacts on
diversity in the legal profession.
There is less research on the effects of Proposition 209 in public contracting. A 1998 study by Chinese
for Affirmative Action surveyed 68 government agencies across California to find out how they
responded to Proposition 209 and concluded that gains made by minorities and women had "begun to
seriously erode." In 2003, a follow up study assessed the impact of Proposition 209 and subsequent court
decisions on the ability of minority and women business enterprises to compete for public contracts. The

robust study by Chinese for Affirmative Action concluded that opportunities for minorities and women
were severely limited, resulting in declines in total contract dollars awarded to minority and women
business enterprises. Another study by the Discrimination Research Center and Equal Rights Advocates
demonstrated the negative impact of Proposition 209 on women in the construction trades, finding that
after "passage of Proposition 209, the number of women in the construction trades declined, and in many
cases the trend toward increasing representation of women reversed." Finally, a study of disparity,
availability and underutilization of African Americans in Oakland was completed March 2005 by the
Oakland Citizens Committee for Urban Renewal (OCCUR).
While little research has been done to assess the economic costs of ending affirmative action in
California, a large body of research assesses the economic impact of affirmative action programs both
nationally and in California. Nationally, the economic impact of affirmative action programs has been
closely evaluated.
Gaps in Research
Traditional disparity studies should be conducted to evaluate whether Proposition 209 has had the effect
of ending or reducing discrimination in California. Disparity studies could be compared pre- and post209 to identify the most effective policy. Even if no change in disparities can be documented or if
disparities no longer exist since ending affirmative action, research should evaluate the economic, social
and personal impacts nine years after the policy change in order to have a broad understanding of the real
costs of ending affirmative action.
Evaluating the economic impact of ending affirmative action might include financial, efficiency and
performance evaluations of public education, contracting and employment prior to implementation of
Proposition 209 and ten years after 209. Research evaluating whether there are civic harmony and public
confidence benefits to social inclusion could broaden the appeal of a policy restoring affirmative action.
Given that national polls indicate a high percentage of people do not feel they are affected by affirmative
action, to increase understanding and create empathy, qualitative research should be conducted to
document individual and location-specific effects of eliminating affirmative action. After evaluating the
various benefits and impacts, comparisons can be drawn between traditional affirmative action policies
and Proposition 209 that will inform policy advocacy.

Target Research Areas include:

Comprehensive Literature Review of existing research including Opposition's Research further
investigation into individual, social or economic data that the opposition uses or could use to support the
status quo.
Education, K-12 and higher education: applications, admission, enrollment, campus climate, graduation,
brain drain, intellectual benefits of diversity, contribution of higher education to economic well-being of
individuals and California.
Employment, chilling effects on private voluntary and mandatory affirmative action programs;
evaluation of hiring, promotion, advancement in public employment; further research on wage
discrepancies; evaluate the role and importance of cross-cultural competency in public employment,
legal, medical & health fields.
Contracting & Procurement
Comparative rates of MBE/WOB utilization, CA v. national or comparable states; post- 209 comparative
disparity studies; evaluate efficiency costs of repealing MBE and WOB categories; correlative study on

effects of new "small-disadvantaged" and "micro-business" categories; changes in government agency

policies and data-keeping; impact on construction trades including efficiency costs in privatizing data
collection in unions and prime contractors; the number of contracts going to out-of state companies; effect
on employment development in construction trades; use public contracting context to evaluate the
economic efficiency and financial losses for California in decreased entrepreneurship as a result of
disparate lending practices.
Social Impact. Evaluate the residual effects of 209 on areas outside contract, employment and education
such as the criminal justice system. Historical and polling research could comparatively evaluate the
impact of relative social inclusion; identify and articulate whether a relationship exists between social
inclusion and civic harmony; identify and articulate whether a relationship exists between social inclusion
and public confidence in the fairness and integrity of public institutions.
Legal review of challenges to 209 with rulings and justifications; rollback of federal civil rights laws
which limit options to blunt the impact of Proposition 209, evaluate the potential for pursuing litigation
tactics at the same time as a ballot initiative. Such litigation might include a "white preference" cause of
action under the language of Proposition 209.
Search for empirical evidence of reverse discrimination. Even if the case for discrimination against
minorities and women does not turn out to be compelling, the absence of evidence of reverse
discrimination undermines the argument that affirmative action generates unfair preferential treatment of
minorities and women. It may be more plausible to conclude that affirmative action policies have
produced a more level playing field, or at worst do no harm. (Holzer & Neumark, 2002)
Qualitative research on individual and location-specific effects of eliminating affirmative action.