Points of View

---

Privacy Initiative Could Block Some Research

By ERIC R.A.N. SMITH

Although the recall election of Gov. Gray Davis is drawing the lion's share of media attention, voters must answer a second critical question on Oct. 7 as well–whether or not to pass Proposition 54, the racial privacy initiative.

UC Regent Ward Connerly and other initiative supporters argue that Prop. 54 will be a step toward a color-blind society. Its critics argue that it will roll back anti-discrimination laws and make learning about our society's racial problems more difficult. Which side is right?

For university researchers, Prop. 54 would be a major roadblock to data collection in a number of areas. Consider, for example, medical research. Certain diseases are far more common in some racial groups than others. Genetic factors explain some of these differences (e.g., sickle cell anemia), while cultural factors explain others (e.g., tobacco use varies by race). As a result, researchers have long used racial and ethnic categories to help identify and investigate some illnesses.

Prop. 54 includes language allowing medical researchers to gather some racial data, but the language is vague–"otherwise lawful classification of medical research subjects" is exempted–and does not cover all types of medical research.

If a doctor wished to survey people with cancer about factors related to their disease, a question about race could be included. In contrast, if a doctor wished to examine state employment records and death certificates to find out what sorts of people worked with a potentially toxic substance, and how many died from a related type of cancer, no racial data would be available.

Under Prop. 54, that information would never have been collected. As a result, one of the basic methods of medical research–using public records to track diseases and explain their causes–would be sharply curtailed. Clearly affected would be enforcement of workplace health and safety codes.

The language exempting some medical research does not define its terms. Would a sociologist or psychologist be allowed to collect racial data to investigate cultural factors that lead to smoking among students? If Prop. 54 passes, the answer to that question will probably have to be hashed out in court.

In some cases, having racial and ethnic data helps us learn about the problems and do something to fix them. Public records, such as state employment files, have often provided critical evidence that has helped to unravel complex problems and pointed toward legislative solutions.

This is also true in educational research, where some problems are associated with students' family backgrounds. If schools are prevented from collecting any information on race, ethnicity, or national origin, some research efforts will be blocked–and students will suffer for it.

Free inquiry is one of the core missions of universities. And that free inquiry is exactly what Prop. 54 is designed to limit. The racial privacy initiative seeks to create a color-blind society by preventing people from asking about race and ethnicity. If a child is taunted at school because of the color of his skin, passing Prop. 54 will not stop his tormentor. But it will hinder teachers, school officials, and education researchers in their efforts to figure out how to stop the taunting.

This vote is a critical vote for the future of the university community.