Racial Preferences and Civil Rights Measure

Re “Dole Can Win on the Coattails of CCRI,” by David Horowitz, Commentary, Sept. 27:

Horowitz underestimates the intelligence of the people of California. We in California will not reject President Clinton and embrace Bob Dole on the basis of a single issue--CCRI. Clinton is in sync with Californians on many other issues--education, job creation, deficit reduction, environment.

Horowitz stated that before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 the government preferentially hired whites. Does he want us to return to that situation? The purpose of affirmative action is not to prefer nonwhites. It is to discontinue the preferential treatment of whites.

ENID V. BLAYLOCK

Lomita

When Horowitz said that “the racial spoils system that Democrats have created is tearing America apart and hurting minorities in the process,” he must have been referring to the spoils system created for whites by Democrats when they ended Reconstruction and imposed Jim Crow. Our racial troubles today, as then, are a direct result of that system of preferences for whites, and affirmative action was implemented to address that legacy of public and private discrimi- nation.

You never hear proponents of CCRI (Prop. 209) acknowledge that discrimination against minorities still exists, nor do you hear them propose any alternative remedies for this discrimination if CCRI passes. Why is this?

It’s because CCRI is about only one thing: divide and conquer. One can tell because the pro-CCRI crew keeps harping on race and never mentions women, who have benefited the most from affirmative action, and will be most affected by CCRI.

MICHAEL A. ESTES

National City

Re “David Duke: Notes on a Debate Card,” Sept. 29:

Peter H. King accurately recognizes that bigots in favor of racial preferences for whites agree with David Duke that racial preferences for nonwhites should be eliminated, and will vote for Prop. 209 because they believe it furthers their bigoted agenda.

But King writes as if these bigots are a significant segment of the proposition’s support. In so doing, King fails to recognize that it is he and other opponents of Prop. 209 who share Duke’s central belief about the use of race by the state.

We all know that Duke’s advocacy of the anti-racial preference principle is a sham; Duke really believes in racial preferences, but for whites. Prop. 209 opponents are in favor of racial preferences for blacks and Hispanics.

Supporters of Prop. 209 don’t care about color as long as the state chooses the best qualified person from a fairly assembled applicant pool. To the vast majority of Prop. 209 supporters, the significant thing about Prop. 209 is that it will prohibit racial preferences for any individuals.

ALLAN J. FAVISH

Tarzana