MEDIA RELEASE - Oct.

27, 2010
We Can! The Equality & Opportunity Committee Against Prop. 107 ● Vince Rabago, Spokesperson ► 602-492-8429
P.O. Box 7841, Tucson, Arizona 85731 ● (520) 270-5390 ● www.defeataz107.org

Prop. 107 Uses Deceptive Language, Tactics, and Out of State Funding: Opponents Call for voters
to reject misleading out-of-state campaign that will cost Arizona jobs and efforts to promote equality.

FIVE REASONS TO REJECT PROP. 107

1) The “Arizona” Civil Rights Initiative is not from Arizona nor based on an Arizona movement.
“The so-called “Arizona” Civil Rights Initiative is deceptive through and through, starting with its
name,” said Delores Grayam, Co-Chair of We Can! The Equality and Opportunity Committee Against
Prop. 107. “Voters need to know this is not a change in law being sought by Arizona voters. Prop. 107
is being funded by big money from out-of-state by a private special interest group based in California.
This is an anti-civil rights initiative that is deceptive and is harmful to the advancement of women.”
“The group funding Prop. 107 is not from Arizona. They should take their out-of-state money and
deceptive tactics and go home,” said Vince Rabago, a former Assistant Attorney General serving as the
Campaign spokesperson for We Can! The Committee for Equality and Opportunity against Prop. 107.

According to reports filed with the Ariz. Sec. of State, the Yes on 107 effort is funded almost entirely
by a private California special interest group, ACRC (American Civil Rights Institute), which has given
more than $100,000.00 to push 107, while less than $250 was given by Arizonans. [Campaign Finance
Reports for Yes on 107; see www.azsos.gov/cfs/PublicReports/2010/5DF73809-A8CD-497D-923D-
C84A7869FD38.pdf; see www.acri.org.] The measure was put on the ballot by the Legislature, not
average citizens, after efforts in 2008 by Ward Connerly, a former California regent, and ACRI, failed
to get a citizen-initiative because not enough Arizonans supported the measure in the petition process.

2) Prop. 107 Deceptively Claims it will End Discrimination, but Discrimination is Already Illegal.
Supporters claim it will end 'reverse' discrimination. It will amend the state constitution, but the fact is
that discrimination is already illegal under state and federal civil rights laws (eg. A.R.S. 41-1463), and
Equal treatment is guaranteed by the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution -14th Amendment.

3) Prop. 107 is Actually an Anti-Civil Rights Law that will Roll Back Equal Opportunity Efforts.
“The supporters don't believe in truth-in-advertising. They should call Prop. 107 the Anti-Civil Rights
Initiative, since they are seeking to end any state programs designed to help women or people of color
make advancements in public education, jobs and business,” said Rabago. “This law will end hard-
fought efforts that resulted from the Civil Rights movement, which wasn't all that long ago.”

4) Prop. 107 Deceptively Urges Voters to End Quotas, But Quotas Do Not Exist in Arizona.
Yes on 107 is using deceptive claims that Arizona uses “quotas” for women or race in public education,
jobs and procurement. Prop. 107 billboards falsely urge voters to end racial preferences and “End
Quotas.” The Yes on 107 group cites the affirmative action “goals” of the University of Arizona to
claim that this proves race is “the deciding factor” in hiring decisions. See www.arizonacri.org. The
problem? Arizona does not use quotas in public jobs, education, or public procurement. The false
claims are just political spin designed to trick voters into voting for the initiative.
“Quota” means a prescribed mandatory number. But this has not stopped Prop. 107 proponents from
falsely claiming that the word “goal” really means “quota” and that you will rarely see the word quota.
See www.arizonacri.org. “The Yes on 107 folks need a Reality Check,” said Rabago. “The reason that
no one uses the word quota in Arizona is very simple ... because quotas are not being used for state or
local hiring, education or contracting. Furthermore, racial quotas in University admissions were made
illegal in the 70s by the Supreme Court in Bakke v. Calfornia. The blatant twisting of language and
reality shows that the Prop. 107 folks will stop at nothing to push their out-of-state political agenda.”

5) WHY ARE PROP. 107 SUPPORTERS LYING? PROP. 107 WILL COST ARIZONA JOBS.

Prop. 107 will cost Arizona jobs and hurt the economy by wiping out women and minority-owned
businesses. California passed their own version of Prop. 107 in 1996 with California Proposition 209.
As non-partisan research proved 10 years later, the effects were catastrophic for women and minority-
owned businesses. Nearly two-thirds of the Woman and Minority Business Enterprises certified with
the California Transportation Department went out of existence. See Free to Compete? Measuring the
Impact of Proposition 209 on Minority Business Enterprises, Executive Summary at pages 2-3 (8/2006)
(available at: www.impact209.org/wp-content/uploads/.../drc_-_free_to_compete.pdf ).

“Prop. 107 is deceptively based on the premise that everyone has reached equality in education, hiring,
and business, but women and people of color are not at the same starting point. The numbers do not lie:
women and people of color lag far behind in business and job advancement. And unfortunately,
discrimination still exists.” said Susy Bravo, a small business owner based in Tucson. “Women and
disadvantaged groups still need a hand to open that door of business opportunity,” added Bravo.

MOMENTUM BUILDS AS ARIZONANS ACROSS THE STATE UNITE AGAINST PROP. 107

On October 12, at a a non-partisan educational forum held in Tucson about the potential impact of
Prop. 107, hosted by the Pima County/Tucson Women's Commission, business and community leaders
alike unanimously blasted Prop. 107 and opposed the measure. Not a single person or group spoke in
favor of Prop. 107. Groups and individuals speaking against the measure included several Southern
Arizona business chambers such as the Tucson Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the Southern Arizona
Black Chamber of Commerce, CEPHAS (Camera de Empresarios Profesionistas y Hispanos de
Arizona), as well as other business and education leaders, elected and community leaders such as Ned
Norris – Chairman of the Tohono O'odham Nation, the Chinese Civil Rights Association, the
Vietnamese Cultural Association, and other individuals, including students.

Today, Oct. 27, the Arizona Students' Association held press conferences at all universities calling for
students to vote against Prop. 107 and educate others. University of Arizona student Jonathan Garcia,
a junior majoring in Public Administration, spoke against the measure as a first-generation, Hispanic
student who plans on becoming the first in his family to graduate. “I've been successful due to the
opportunity of being a U of A Hispanic Alumni Scholar and due to the services of the Chicano/Hispano
Student Affairs office, which will be at risk if Prop. 107 passes. I wouldn’t be where I am today
without that assistance. I couldn’t have done it without their support,” said Garcia. “But Prop. 107 will
only create more barriers to succeed. I hope Arizonans see through the deception and vote No on 107.”

“In short, Prop. 107 is a deceptive out-of-state agenda that will cost Arizona jobs, hurt the economy,
and end local efforts to promote equal opportunity in education, jobs and business,” concluded Rabago.
“Prop. 107 is bad for our communities and bad for our economy. Arizonans need to Vote NO on 107.”
PAID FOR BY We Can! The Equality and Opportunity Committee Against Prop. 107
Page 2