Last night, Governor Jennifer Granholm defeated the far right Republican candidate Dick DeVos and Democrats took control of the Michigan House of Representatives, while at the national level Democrats took control of the House of Representatives, ousted Republican governors in six states, and will possibly gain control of the Senate pending the results of Virginia’s Senate race which was still undecided as of Wednesday night. Following the election results, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announced his resignation. However, these “victories” are overshadowed by the passage of the anti-affirmative action Proposal 2. The anti-affirmative action measure—a product of deception from the beginning when it was named the “Michigan Civil Rights Initiative” and when it attained ballot access due to a “massive campaign of fraud and deceit”—passed by a wide margin of 58% to 42% with Michigan joining two other states—California and Washington—in banning affirmative action.

The passage of Proposal 2 is a significant victory for the right in Michigan and a defeat for people of color living in Michigan. While few organized groups in Michigan supported Proposal 2 and indeed some of the only organizations supporting the proposal were white supremacist organizations such as the Council of Conservative Citizens and the Ku Klux Klan, it is nevertheless a victory for a nationwide right that has long sought to eliminate the gains of the civil rights movement. Ward Connerly and his American Civil Rights Institute, who were the primary financial backers of the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, have long been supported by the organized far right in this country including the Lynne and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Richard Mellon Scaiffe Foundation, and the John M. Olin Foundation. Moreover, Proposal 2’s passage will likely embolden its white supremacist and racist supporters and indeed the proposal is already being discussed positively on racist websites, with the leader of Michigan’s National Socialist Movement favorably weighing in on the passage the anti-affirmative action measure. In the two years leading up to the passage of Proposal 2, white supremacist groups advocated for the passage of the proposal as they clearly understood that it would both send a message to people of color that they are not wanted in the state of Michigan and that its passage would have the concrete effect of eliminating programs designed to assist people of color in overcoming some of the systemic forms of inequality and apartheid in Michigan.

Aside from the likelihood that admissions to universities across the state for people of color will fall as they did in California after the passage of Proposition 187, the vote for Proposal 2 sends a message to people of color that they are not valued as members of society. Instead, people of color were essentially told by this vote to stay in the highly segregated neighborhoods and schools that Michigan is known for as one of the most segregated states in the nation. Exit poll data from the election is quite instructive regarding who supported the proposal, making it clear that it was the white male power structure that supported the ban on affirmative action, with over 60% of white males voting to eliminate affirmative action. Similarly, the proposal set suburban and rural voters—who tend to be white—against people of color, with suburban and rural areas supporting the measure by over 60%. Some of the more interesting numbers:

There are clearly a variety of elements at play in the vote—lack of understanding about what exactly affirmative action does, lack of substantive media coverage, lack of substantive work on this issue from the white “left,” an organized campaign opposed to Proposal 2 that failed in many respects to identify Proposal 2 as a concerted attack on people of color, and a primary focus on the gubernatorial race on the part of many Democratic and progressive activists

The ban will likely now be the subject of a variety of lawsuits due both to uncertainties regarding its reach and as opponents of the ban scramble to find a way to lessen the negative effects of the proposal. Universities across the state will have to begin a process of evaluating outreach programs, scholarships, and grant awards that target people of color or specific genders. K-12 programs that target specific groups based on race or gender will also need to be reworked, removing yet another means of addressing racial inequality in the state’s education system. The University of Michigan has pledged to continue the fight in the courts with University President Mary Sue Coleman stating that there are “serious questions as to whether this initiative is lawful” and that the University will seek the permission of the courts to continue this year’s admissions cycle under current guidelines and will devote legal resources to challenging the measure. The two main opposition groups—One United Michigan and By Any Means Necessary (BAMN)—have not yet publicly announced any steps for continued organizing around affirmative action in Michigan. BAMN has a previously planned December 4 “March on Washington to Save Brown v. Board of Education” to coincide with the Supreme Court’s hearing of arguments in two lawsuits seeking to eliminate measures promoting integration and equal opportunity in education, but has not said anything publicly regarding the passage of Proposal 2. Representatives from One United Michigan have been quoted widely in the media stating that it is now up to Michigan politicians to figure out how to ensure equal opportunity and that there will likely now be a series of lawsuits over the ban.

Along with the passage of Proposal 2, the nationwide “victory” being claimed by many Democrats and “progressives” is also lessened by the passage of a series of rightwing ballot proposals that ban same-sex marriage and make English the official language for governmental purposes. Same-sex marriage bans—one of which was passed in Michigan in 2004—were passed by wide margins in Tuesday’s election. In Tennessee, a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman passed by a margin of 81% to 19%. Similar measures passed across the country, in Wisconsin by 59% to 41% margin, Virginia by 57% to 43%, South Dakota by 52% to 48%, South Carolina by 78% to 22%, Idaho by 63% to 37%, Colorado by 56% to 44%, while votes are still being counted in Arizona on a ballot measure banning same-sex marriage. In Colorado, a measure designed to give same-sex couples the same legal rights as heterosexual married couples was defeated by a margin of 53% to 47%. In Arizona, a measure making English the official language of the state and ending the production of dual-language materials passed by a 74% to 26% margin sending the same message to immigrants living in Arizona that Proposal 2 sent to people of color in Michigan and that same-sex marriage bans send to GBLT people around the country—that they are not wanted.