Prop. 209 Backers Sue Over Voter Pamphlet

Supporters of Proposition 209, the November ballot initiative that targets affirmative action programs in government, filed two lawsuits Monday over language in the state’s official voter pamphlet.

One suit filed in Sacramento County Superior Court against state Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill charges that her official analysis of the measure is misleading.

The complaint says the language used by Hill “perpetuates the myth that Proposition 209 will ban all affirmative action programs.”

Proponents contend that the term “affirmative action” is inappropriate in a description of the initiative since the measure does not target all such programs and since it affects some unrelated areas.

A second lawsuit filed in Sacramento County Superior Court on Monday alleges that opponents of the measure were intentionally misleading when they wrote their argument for the state’s official voter pamphlet.

The suit says the opponents’ argument incorrectly alleges that the measure will prohibit some nondiscriminatory and nonpreferential programs.

“There is . . . a substantial chance this will pass in November,” said a statement from the California Civil Rights Initiative office, which is organizing the campaign for Proposition 209. “If it does, the materials in the ballot pamphlet will become the measure’s legislative history. It is vital that they be accurate.”

The two lawsuits underscore the highly sensitive semantic argument that has developed around Proposition 209, which seeks to end use of ethnicity and gender as factors in government hiring and contracting, both at the state and local level.

Just last week, opponents of the measure filed their own lawsuit about the ballot pamphlet’s language. It charged that Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren’s office failed to be impartial when it wrote the official title and description of Proposition 209.