However, there is not one single mention of “racial equity” on My-Linh Thai’s own campaign website.  On her campaign home page, the word is “education equity”.  On her campaign issues page, she listed many issues, but no mention of “equity” at all.

So which My-Linh Thai is the true one?  The one she wanted her voters to believe or the one media praised about her.  Or to whom she told the truth about her agenda while campaigning as BSD board member.

Now, Thai has won the reelection, and she is pushing forward her racial equity agenda in full speed. Superintendent Ivan Duran gave a big presentation on racial equity on March 16th.  The school district has a 17 member equity team, and is creating racial equity policies.  And the March 6th board meeting recording clearly showed that Thai was the one behind the entire racial equity policy push with help from Jones and Duran. She even wanted to push for the school board passing of the policy at first reading.

Why?  Because equity is NOT equality. Racial equity == racial quota.  Racial equity is WRONG.  Our own Washington State Civil Rights Act says “The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.”

Thai knew that she could not run a successful campaign promoting racial equity.  Our state law prohibits it,  so she hid the truth from the voters.

We successfully stopped SB 6406, and we will not allow racial equity == quota policy at Bellevue School District.

The post BSD Board My-Linh Thai’s Secret Racial Equity Agenda appeared first on WA Asians For Equality.

Sure enough, the article left out our data that contradict to those who support repeal of I-200 claimed. In our post that Repeal of I-200 Will Hurt Asian Americans in College Education , we listed data directly from UW’s website that one year after the passage of I-200, Asian American students enrollment went up 6%. We also provided data from National Center for Education Statistics that showed postsecondary enrollment closely mirrored racial demographic of general population.  The article left out our data, but quoted a 2006 study co-authored by UW professor Hirschman, and  funded by Andrew Mellon Foundation. Given UW’s long interest in repeal of I-200, and Andrew Mellon Foundation’s many grants to Affirmative Action projects, you’d question the objectivity of the study.

Still, I want to thank Northwest Asian Weekly for at least included our opposition voice, and also cited some of our data such as the ones from Princeton University’s study.

It took almost 3 weeks since I first contact NW Asian Weekly on February 26th and asked them to write an article on SB 6406 till the article finally appeared on the newspaper. Realized that they might publish an article without our voice in it, I sent Ms. Ruth two emails last weekend and urged her to include our voices in the article. Holding this article in my hands, although a bit biased, we trust readers’ judgement.

Update #1: I emailed Ruth regarding the missing data points, and got a polite email from her the next day. She invited us to write a comment and they “would be happy to print it”.

Update #2: Northwest Asian Weekly published our commentary this week.  Below is our commentary sent to Ruth.

“Proponents of repeal of I-200 tried to use the 2006 study to justify their cause. We’d like to add data that were left out in the original article to show that I-200 indeed benefits Asian American community.

According to UW’s own website, one year after the passage of I-200, “Asian American students planning to enroll (in the Fall 1999 freshman class) increased six percent (from 1,109 to 1,176)”. That was despite a slight dip in Asian American application rate in 1999, according to the same 2006 study. In other words, prior to the passage of I-200, UW’s racial quota policy in admission prevented Asian American students from being accepted.

The most recent data from National Center for Education Statistics showed that in 2014, among total postsecondary student population in Washington, 8.96% was Asian, 0.61% was Pacific Islander. During that time, 9.53% of the state’s general population was Asian, 0.66% was Pacific Islander, with other ethnic groups making up the remainder. Proponents’ claim that I-200 hurts AAPI in higher education is groundless. 

Senator Hasegawa called us, who oppose repeal of I-200, “privileged”. On the contrary, we all worked hard to achieve what we have achieved. We believe in education, we believe in merit-based systems that reward hard work. Education empowers our kids to get ahead. We want to fight for the equal education right for all AAPI students. NO repeal of I-200, no racial quota. In our opinion, the law should be reinforced, not repealed.”

The post A Tough Fight Against Media Bias appeared first on WA Asians For Equality.

The post Senator Chase Town Hall Survey appeared first on WA Asians For Equality.

20 years later, in 2018, Washington state legislators quietly introduced bill SB 6406 wanted to repeal I-200.  Last Wednesday morning, we managed to sat down with Mr. Carlson at a Belltown coffee shop to get his thoughts on SB 6406.

Our conversation started with I-200.  “It’s about principle, the most deserving should get the job, the most deserving should get into college. Bringing back a race-based admissions system would be divisive and wrong,” said Mr. Carlson. “Right now, almost 1 out of 4 students at University of Washington are Asian Americans. If I-200 is overthrown, Asian families will likely be the ones most hurt.”

We then told Mr. Carlson that Asian American community was ignored by WA legislators hence not able to testify against the bill at the public hearing. “The other side had the bill prepared and had lined up people to testify. I was the only one who testified against the bill, and that was because I was alerted by a concerned legislator. When politicians try to sneak bills through, they know they are doing something they should not be doing.” said Mr. Carlson. 

We pulled up the computer and discussed SB 6406 and several other bills (SB 6508, HB 2927). The word “Equity” was all over the places. “Equity is not equality. Equity means identity politics.” said Mr. Carlson. “We should be judged as individuals, not as representatives of a particular race, gender or nationality.”

We managed to put a brake on the bill’s passing in February, with grassroots efforts. Some legislators received over 900 emails opposing the bill in less than 48 hours. Our fight for Equal Opportunity for All has just begun. We thank Mr. Carlson for his thoughts and time.

We welcome people that believe our belief to join us to fight for Equal Opportunity for All.  Join Us!

The post Meeting with Mr. John Carlson appeared first on WA Asians For Equality.

source: gallup.com

Gallup previously asked this question as part of its Minority Rights and Relations poll in 2003, 2007 and 2013, and Americans’ views since 2003 have held steady.

When asked to rank a list of nine factors that colleges and universities could consider when making admissions decisions, 63% saying race or ethnicity should not be a factor at all in admissions and only 9% saying that they should be a “major factor.” A majority of people answered the poll said that scores on standardized tests and the types of courses a student takes in high school should weigh heavily.

The post Polls show that “Most in U.S. Oppose Colleges Considering Race in Admissions” appeared first on WA Asians For Equality.

[Troy Chen, a University of Washington student who attended Hasegawa’s event, said, “As a Chinese American, I support Bob who has dedicated his life to minorities and immigrants.” It’s good to see someone running the city with a progressive agenda and core values, Chen said.

“Voting to elect Seattle’s first Asian American mayor to me is an honor,” said Gei Chan. “Bob Hasegawa’s experience shows me he’s ready for the job.”]

Well, I wonder what Chen and Chan will think now knowing that Senator Hasegawa sponsored a bill (SB 6406) that will allow racial quota and preferential treatment in college admission, make it much much tougher for Asian American kids to get into state colleges.

Senator Hasegawa may be a Asian descendant . However, he does not represent Asian Americans. As a matter of fact, he does not care of Asian Americans. When questioned by Senator Mark Miliscia about the bill’s impact on Asian American community, he could not provide a straight answer. He demanded “show me”. Well, Senator Hasegawa, there have been plenty of data showing racial quota hurts Asian American kids’ chance in college and graduate school admission. Where are your data? “Show me”!

The post Senator Bob Hasegawa Owes Asian Americans an answer appeared first on WA Asians For Equality.

[For me, one of the most troubling considerations about Asian discrimination is the tendency to excuse the argument that such discrimination is no big deal in view of the fact that Asians are so dominant, overall, when it comes to university admissions.

This argument, obviously, misses the most important point: The Constitution of the United States guarantees to every individual citizen a number of rights, to which we refer as “civil rights.”]

If you have time, I encourage you to read the entire post. And other posts by Mr. Connerly. He wisely pointed out that “There is no moral outrage because the purpose of this discrimination (discrimination against university applicants identified as “Asian.”) – building diversity – is considered a noble one.  And, when discrimination occurs in the course of what is considered a noble endeavor, definitions invariably change.”

The post A great post on Racial Discrimination Against Asian appeared first on WA Asians For Equality.

Proposition 209 (also known as the California Civil Rights Initiative or CCRI), passed by California voters in November 1996, amended the California Constitution to prohibits the state, local governments, districts, public universities, colleges, and schools, and other government instrumentalities from discriminating against or giving preferential treatment to any individual or group in public employment, public education, or public contracting on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin.

Proposition 209 has been the subject of many lawsuits in state courts since its passage but has withstood legal scrutiny over the years.

Washington State

I-200 – 1998

Michigan

Proposal 2 – 2006

Nebraska

Nebraska Civil Rights Initiative 424 – 2008

Arizona

Proposition 107 – 2010

New Hampshire

House Bill 623 – 2012

Oklahoma

Election Poll – 2012

Florida

Executive Order 99-281 (also known as “One-Florida” Initiative) – 1999

The post States that ban discrimination appeared first on WA Asians For Equality.

“racism is benefitting from a system based on race, so if the system prefers minorities then minorities are racists.”

“Character + capability. Forget color. Your color does not qualify you for anything. Period. You are not better you are not worse–you are just you. Prove yourself, don’t get a pass because of your skin==that’s BS.”

“The article didn’t report on the stunning lack of racial diversity in our own state legislature. Nor did the article mention that all the white legislators in favor of affirmative action have agreed to resign their positions immediately in order to make way for more people of color. Think what a wonderful example they will set with their personal sacrifice in the name of racial justice.”

“It must be OK to be racist as long as it is directed towards people of the right race. Discrimination about to be legally encouraged as long as you’re discriminating against the right people, despite a vote of the citizens calling for equal treatment. Sounds like Progessive Democrats are at it again.”

“Liberals push their racist policies everyday and don’t even realize how destructive they are.

“Everyday we move farther away from true equality where people are judged for their content of character instead of skin color.”

“So, skin color will count for more than merit? Does this mean 70% white sports teams? Oh – this train only goes one direction…”

“Another poorly written and/or biased “article”. Lefties “claim” these laws block discrimination which is not really true.

“I would have titled this “Democracy under attack; people’s right to make law threatened by small minority of State house/senate reps”

“Pretty arrogant of them to try and overturn a law that was voted on. Oh, I forgot that this is Washington. Put it up for a new vote, if you can get enough signatures.”

“Desiring diversity should not give preferential treatment to someone less deserving. No one should be helped or hindered by race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity or any other factor OTHER than qualifications.
All this would do is create division and ill will.”

And the comments went on and on…

The post People are against SB 6406 appeared first on WA Asians For Equality.

Please add #noSB6406 and #waleg hashtag to your SB 6406 tweets

The post Let’s build a hashtag campaign appeared first on WA Asians For Equality.