GEORGE LaNOUE:  “Critical Race Training or Civil Rights Law:  We Can’t Have Both.”

WHAT MAKES AMERICAN CORPORATIONS SO “WOKE”?:  I always assumed it’s because they get pressure from the left, but not from the right.  Whatever the reason, United Airlines decided to endorse Prop 16 on November 3rd  (just before 56% of California voters rejected this wrongheaded effort to authorize the State of California to engage in race and sex discrimination).

As a United Airlines Million Miler, I plan to express my displeasure via .  If you are so inclined, please join me.

PROPOSITION 16 GOES DOWN IN 22 MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF FLAMES: I am happy to report that we have defeated Proposition 16 in California (56% NO/44% YES). Thank you to all Instapundit readers who helped us out by volunteering, contributing or voting!

The YES campaign supporters are now making excuses as to how they could have spent about $22 million (as against our pathetic $1.7 million) and still lost. Their claim is that voters were just confused. But that’s nonsense. Polls have been consistent for decades. Whenever the issue is stated fairly and clearly, opposition to race and sex preferences is overwhelming. All the NO campaign had to do is make sure voters knew what the issue was.

In 2003, 2006, 2013, and 2016, the Gallup has asked the following question of poll respondents:

“Which comes closer to your view about evaluating students for admission into college or university—applicants should be admitted solely on the basis of merit, even if that results in few minority students being admitted (or) an applicant’s racial or ethnic background should be considered to help promote diversity on college campuses, even if that means admitting some minority students who otherwise would not be admitted.”

The responses were consistent: The number of respondents choosing “solely on merit” is always at least twice as great as the number choosing “help promote diversity.” In 2016, it was 70% for “solely on merit” vs. 26% for considering racial or ethnic background.

Note that the question was posed so as to take account of the arguments on both sides. Respondents were alerted to the possibility that without considering race or ethnic background “few minority students” may be admitted. Note also that, if anything, the question is unfair to the “NO on 16” campaign, since most “NO” voters are willing to take into consideration things other than academic achievement (such as low income); they simply oppose using race or ethnicity as the measure of disadvantage.

In 2019, Pew Research conducted a similar poll that focused on employment instead of college admissions. Like the Gallup poll, the Pew poll gave respondents two choices:

“When it comes to decisions about hiring and promotions, companies and organizations should—

… Only take qualifications into account, even if it results in less diversity.

Or …

… Also take race and ethnicity into account in order to increase diversity.”

The results were consistent with the Gallup poll: 74% chose “only take qualifications into account,” while 24% chose “also take race and ethnicity into account.”

This was not because respondents didn’t see any value in racial and ethnic diversity in the workplace. When asked how important it is “for companies and organizations to promote racial and ethnic diversity in their workplace,” 75% said it is either “very important” or “somewhat important.” Only 24% said it was “not too important” or “not at all important.” They did not, however, believe race or ethnicity should be taken into consideration in hiring or promotions.

Pew Research also undertook a poll on the consideration of race and ethnicity in college admissions in 2019. The results were similar to those in the Gallup poll, except they were a little more critical of considering race or ethnicity than the Gallup respondents. Among adults, 73% said race and ethnicity should not be a factor. Majorities of all races and ethnicities agreed. Only 26% of adults said they should be either a major (7%) or a minor (19%) factor.

No wonder Prop 16 failed.

CELEBRITIES PAY $27 MILLION IN FINES & FEES SO 13,000 FLORIDA FELONS CAN VOTE:  In Florida now, ex-convicts must pay whatever fines and fees have been assessed against them before they are eligible to vote again.  But “celebrities” (like Michael Bloomberg and LeBron James) are paying those fines and fees on their behalf.

That’s not exactly charity.  No doubt the ex-convicts themselves would have much rather had been given a job. Or even some new clothes and shoes. The right to vote, while a wonderful thing, is unlikely to be at the top of their list. But benefiting ex-convicts has nothing to do with this.

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights did a report last year on the “collateral consequences of a felony conviction” (with my statement here).  The “collateral consequence” that my progressive colleagues objected to the most was the denial of the right to vote.  How anybody is naive enough to view this behavior as concern for ex-convicts’ welfare is just beyond me.

BIDEN PROMISES TO BRING BACK THE OBAMA-ERA INITIATIVE ON RACIAL DISPARITIES IN SCHOOL DISCIPLINE:  Alas, I thought Alison Somin and I had pretty much proven what a ghastly mistake that initiative was.

“HOW DARE YOU QUESTION MY PATRIOTISM!”:  Remember when that question was on the lips of so many left-of-center elected officials?  It turns out that almost a third of Democrats don’t have a positive view of the United States of America.  By contrast, 95% of Republicans do, according to the poll conducted by YouuGov.

BIG TUNA: This story reminds me of when my Uncle Carroll told me that I just had to come down to the harbor with him. The tuna boats were in, he told me, and they had brought in the biggest tuna anybody had ever seen.

Of course, as a highly sophisticated 12-year-old, I knew that tuna comes in very small cans. I must have believed a “big tuna” was unlikely to be very big or interesting. I went with him from East Boothbay to Boothbay Harbor (Maine) only because my mother would have thought me rude if I’d declined.

But Holy Toledo! The tuna—Atlantic Bluefin—were huge—well over 1000 pounds each. And the tuna fishermen had fascinating stories.

Lesson learned: Highly sophisticated 12-year-olds run the risk of missing out on things.

THE THISTLE IS SHOWING ITS THORNS:  “Soft Totalitarianism Threatens Scotland.”

HEATHER MAC DONALD:  Northwestern University’s president should be commended for standing up to student rioters (but he did help create the climate for their destructive behavior).

UNFORTUNATELY, IT’S NOT SO:  The authors of a new report featured in Washington Post would have us to believe that arrests of African Americans are higher than for other races mainly because cops are biased and African American neighborhoods have historically been “over-policed.”

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights recently made the similar claim that students of all races misbehave in school at equal rates, and that (by implication) disproportionate discipline rates should be blamed on biased teachers. It was easily proven false.

The reasons for arrest/discipline disproportionality are complex and nobody should claim to fully understand the problem.   But the notion that it’s primarily the fault of overzealous police and teachers is off base.

THE EVIDENCE SUGGESTS WE’RE WINNING:  It’s not just the polls that indicate that Proposition 16 will be defeated in California.  As the Wall Street Journal discusses here, the pro-16 folks are accusing us of being white supremacists.  That’s a sure sign they think we’re winning too.

If we do win, it will be important to shout it from the rooftops.  It will be an important reprimand to our “woke” elected leaders, not just in deep-blue California, but across the country.

COLLEGE PRESIDENT FINDS A SPINE:  Praise for Northwestern University’s Morton Schapiro.

CALIFORNIANS!  DON’T FORGET TO VOTE NO ON PROP 16:  Here’s the “NO on Prop 16” social media video that I did.  (Yes, I know.  The camera is a bit too close.  Alas, I’ve reached an age where the camera needs to be in the next county.  But I hope that the message gets through anyway.)

VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 16:  San Francisco Bay area sports teams support discrimination on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity and national origin.  What the heck is the matter with them?

(If you are looking for a place where your donation can make a difference, this is it.  Even if every other election in the country goes badly, defeating Prop 16 will show that Americans don’t support the “woke” agenda.)

SAN DIEGO USED TO BE CONSERVATIVE:  San Diego Unified School District Changes Grading System to “Combat Racism.”   This may be the new thing in public education.

(See also racist school disciplinary policy in the name of “anti-racism.”)

O CANADA:  The faculty board at Queen’s University wants to cancel Canada’s first prime minister (for whom the law school building is currently named).  Professor Bruce Pardy opposes the move and laments the influence “critical theory” is having on Canadian culture more generally.    He writes:  “Henry Kissinger, among others, is credited with the observation that university politics are so vicious precisely because the stakes are so small.  That line is funny only if it is true.  We now know it is dead wrong.”

QUIN HILYER:  Amy Klobuchar is more concerned about hypothetical voter intimidation by conservatives than she was about the very real voter intimidation by New Black Panther Party members that took place in 2008.  Funny how that works.

(If you don’t remember the New Black Panther Party case, my Commissioner Statement on it is here.)

JOHN FUND:  Will Democrats’ silence on court-packing cost them the Senate?

JEFF JACOBY ON PROP 16:  On California’s ballot, an invitation to legalize discrimination.

QUIN HILLYER IN THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER:  Against Quotas?  Help Defeat California’s Prop 16.

MINNESOTA IS A BANANA REPUBLIC:  It seems quite likely that the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office attempted to abuse its COVID19 authority to hassle people trying to put on a program that would criticize the Minnesota Attorney General for his failure to deal with voter fraud issues.

DIVERSITY UBER ALLES:  Things don’t look too great in academic science departments these days.

PAUL MIRENGOFF:  “Please Help Preserve California’s Ban on Discrimination by the State.”

WE’RE AHEAD IN THE POLLS!:  Bill McGurn:  An Anti-Asian Proposition:  An Effort to Undo a California Ban on Racial Discrimination Is Floundering.  (If we can win in deep-blue California, we can stop the momentum of identity politics in America.  More info at No on Prop 16.)

REWARDING THOSE WHO WORK HARDER: Not all stereotypes are true. But the belief that the average Asian American student studies more than their counterparts of other races is correct. Or at the very least, that’s what students’ self-reported data reveal. According to a Brookings scholar, Asian American high school students spend about twice as much time studying as whites (almost 2 hours per day vs. almost one hour per day). As a group, they study more than three times as much as African Americans (who, on average, study a little more than a half hour per day). The amount of time Hispanics spend on studying is, on average, only slightly lower than that spent by whites.

The study found that the differences were not the result having to care for other household members. Working a job affected the numbers only slightly.

Parental education was associated with more time spent studying, but racial gaps persisted even after that factor was taken into account. Income level was also associated with time spent, but not nearly enough to account for the racial gaps.

The report goes out of its way to suggest some possible non-judgmental explanations for these numbers. It mentions the possibility that African American students are not being sufficiently challenged because of teachers’ low expectations or because too few advanced courses are being offered at their schools.

No matter what the explanation, the figures are worth noting. Time on task is hugely important to the success of nearly all kinds of human effort. Academic pursuits are no exception.

During the 1996 campaign for Proposition 209, I twice heard the argument (put forth with apparent earnestness) that race preferences in admission are necessary, because Asian American students study too much and it’s just not fair. When I heard that argument, all I could do was blink my eyes and stare.  Interestingly, that was enough to get the speakers to backpedal.

All this is one more reason for Californians to vote NO on Proposition 16 in November.