• Anti-Affirmative Legislation Stalled in House Judiciary
• Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Rollback Also Stymied
• Houston Ballot Language Change Key to Winning
• Civil Rights Nominee Challenged

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

• White House Hate Crimes Conference Set

REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS

• President Vetoes D & X Abortion Ban; Issue Slated for '98 Elections

REMINDER

• Affirmative Action Activists to Strategize

• List of All Updates
• Look up legislation on Thomas
• Sign up for the NOW Action Alert list
• Contact your Senators
• Contact your Representatives

The refusal of the Supreme Court on November 3rd to hear the challenge brought by affirmative action supporters against California's Proposition 209 ban on affirmative action in state employment, education and contracts was a serious setback and advocates feared that this would buttress the opposition's campaign. Political intelligence has it that the anti-affirmative action campaign will be brought to a high pitch for next year's election season.

H.R. 1909, sponsored by Rep. Charles Canady (R-FL) and in the Senate (S. 950) by Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), would prevent any employers or educational institutions from taking any action which would constitute a "preference" for one group over another. So extreme is the bill that it prevents any remedies for proven patterns of discrimination and would undo entirely Executive Order 11246 which has helped open doors for people of color and late another Executive Order affecting women in federal contracting. Some analysts also believe that the legislation, if passed, would prevent federal agencies from entering into consent decrees even in instances of proven, intentional discrimination. Critics note that the effect of H.R. 1909 is to wipe out thirty years of bipartisan federal civil rights enforcement policies.

NOW and other civil rights groups have also decried to Congress the following consequences of H.R. 1909/S. 950:

• effectively overturns the Supreme Court's 1995 Adarand Constructors v. Pena decision because the legislation would prohibit even those federal programs that would survive the "strict scrutiny" standard set by the Court;
• rejects the longstanding principle established by the Supreme Court in Bakke that race could be considered among a number of factors in affirmative action programs;
• eviscerates every Supreme Court decision authorizing the courts' use of proper affirmative action to remedy past discrimination by the federal government; and
• makes it virtually impossible for federal agencies to ensure that persons of both sexes and of all races and national origins are able to participate fully in the benefits of federal programs.

A massive grassroots campaign will be required next year to prevent passage of the Canady-McConnell legislation and to stave off several pending ballot measures, including ones in Florida and Washington state. NOW activists are encouraged to prepare for 1998 by attending the training noted below and by educating chapter members and other community leaders and activists on the importance of protecting affirmative action programs.

"The City of Houston 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 and public contracting."

Houston Mayor Bob Lanier and the city council changed the wording to more exactly describe what the ballot initiative was attempting to accomplish. The language change was as follows:

"Shall the Charter of the City of Houston be amended to end the use of Affirmative Action for women and minorities in the operation of the City of Houston employment and contracting, including ending the current program and any similar programs in the future."

Lee, the son of Chinese immigrants, is the western regional counsel for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and has a distinguished record in negotiating legal settlements with employers to resolve patterns of sex and race discrimination. He attended Yale on a scholarship and earned a law degree at Columbia University Law School in 1974. The nominee has also served as adjunct professor of political science at Fordham University and was a volunteer attorney for the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund. Lee also served with the Center for Law in the Public Interest in California where he was supervising attorney for civil rights litigation for five years. Lee has authored briefs in many U.S. Supreme Court cases and has presented oral arguments before seven U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal.

The Senate Judiciary Committee was expected to split evenly on the question of his nomination when the committee meets in the first week of November. Republican Senator Arlen Specter (PA) is predicted to join the eight Democratic members (Leahy -VT, Kennedy - MA, Biden - DE, Kohl - WI, Feinstein - CA, Feingold - WI, Durbin - IL, Torricelli - NJ) in supporting the nominee and advocates were hoping to find an extra vote to break the tie.

If Congress stays in session past its November 7th target date for early adjournment, there may be a floor vote scheduled. Again, it is expected that this vote may fall along party lines, but a few moderate Republicans may support the Lee confirmation.

Costs to attend are moderate: meeting registration is $100 with $75 registration for activists who are staying at the Meany Center (fees include 3 meals and all receptions) where the room rates range from $95 to $125. Registration can be made by calling 202-466-3311.