By Sharayah Lane
Special To The Medium
A bill that would repeal I-200, the vote-passed initiative that effectively banned affirmative action for public institutions in the state, was dead on arrival at the state Legislature this session.
House Bill 2822 would repeal the controversial initiative that voters approved in 1998 and reinstate mandatory anti-discriminatory practices for public institutions in Washington state, but it did not move past the House Capital Budget Committee.
I-200 was passed 1996 and “prohibits governments from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to individuals or groups based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin.”
This legislative session Rep. Sharon Tomiko Santos, D-Seattle, said she introduced HB 2822 in order to restore the fair treatment of underserved groups in public employment, education and contracting.
“There was a lot of misunderstanding at the public forum wherever I went about what I-200 was intending to do. It was promoted as an idea to eliminate preferential treatment of certain groups,” Tomiko Santos testified at the committee’s public hearing on Feb. 2.
“What ended up happening was that it eliminated all the programs that helped to equalize the social and economic inequities that have existed in our society for decades,” added Santos.
Rev. Carl Livingston is an avid supporter of Affirmative Action and has fought for the repeal of I-200 since it was first implemented. In riveting testimony at the hearing, he provided legislators with a range of reasons why they should support HB 2822.
Citing studies, such as the FBI’s 2011 report showing that Washington is in the top 10 states for incarceration of Blacks per capita, he says the state has a serious problem with institutional racism in the state of Washington.
He also discussed studies on affirmative action that have shown it to be beneficial to all members of society.
The Port of Seattle also released a statement acknowledging the setbacks of discrimination and voted unanimously in support for HB 2822
The port’s statement said it “seeks to further open public contracting to all disadvantaged businesses, which will allow the Port to continue to advance its mission of supporting middle-class job growth and ensuring that growing prosperity in the Puget Sound region is shared by all communities equally.”
After Livingston’s presentation, and in spite of all the research presented, members of the committee seemed to be unconvinced.
Rep. Maureen Walsh, R-College Place, asked, “How do we know it’s just not worse performance on the Black contractors’ part versus the white contractors?”
Rep. Darek Stanford, D-Mountlake Terrace, reminded that I-200 was an initiative raised and voted on by the people. It was a democratic process that should not be overridden by the state.
Livingston reminded Stanford that sometimes, democratic processes don’t work for minority groups and asked Walsh that if people of color can’t even get the contracts to begin with then how can their performance be deemed inferior.
Rep. Linda Kochmar, R-Federal Way, expressed her dismay at the continued need for a bill of this nature.
“I’m very sorry that we have to run a bill like this,” Kochmar said . “I really thought that we were a progressive state and that we were pretty darn good about making sure that we had equal distribution and that equality was very prevalent in this state, so I’m very sorry that we’ve had to run this bill.”
Yet and still, the bill never made it past the committee.
Livingston shared his own belief that affirmative action was never truly outlawed for all people under I-200, only a select few.
“We have not outlawed affirmative action, we decided that we would protect affirmative action for groups that are mainly White,” said Livingston.
“We have affirmative action for veterans,” Livingston continued. “We have affirmative action for those with disabilities. But for the group that fought for it, that suffered for it, that all throughout the 50s and 60s did all it could to push for it, we took it away.”
The public hearing in Olympia included eight people who testified in favor of the bill and 15 who showed up in support but did not testify. Students from the University of Washington’s Evans School of Public Policy and Governance brought a full text testimony in favor of the bill signed by 50 of their classmates.
Ariana Taylor-Stanley, who is a graduate student at the Evans School, shared her frustration with the lack of diversity in her classes and program.
“I-200 has been a big barrier for our work and a challenge for our institution and for my education as well. Our student body doesn’t reflect the community that we as future public leaders being trained to serve,” said Taylor-Stanley.
No one present testified in opposition to the bill.
The inaction on the bill remains somewhat of a mystery. With no direct opposition at the committee hearing and such an outpouring of support of the bill from the community, the committee members’ decision to not vote on the bill and move it forward through the house doesn’t make sense.
Though the bill did not move out of committee this year, Livingston remains hopeful for next year’s session.
“We’ve got to get ready to rally so that next year this can stop,” he said. “This feels like a loss, but we haven’t had this happen in 15 years. Sometimes you have to prime the pump and get the victory later.”
