To understand the importance of Proposition 54 — the Ward Connerly-sponsored California ballot initiative that would prohibit state, local and other public bodies, including colleges and universities, from collecting information on individuals by race, ethnicity, color or national origin — we need only to consider whether it’s valuable to know any of the following information:

*As of 2000, the life expectancy for White men was 74.8 years, for Black men it was 68.2 years. For White women, it was 80 years and Black women, it was 74.9 years;

*Also in 2000, White voter registration reached 65.7 percent, down from 71.7 percent in 1966. Over that same period, Black voter registration increased slightly from 60.2 percent to 63.6 percent;

* Approximately 50 percent of Blacks and 60 percent of Hispanics live in a county where levels of two or more pollutants exceed government standards;

* In 2001, African-American men accounted for 43 percent of all HIV cases reported among men. Black women represented 64 percent of the HIV cases reported among women;

* Asthma is 26 percent more prevalent in Black children than Whites;

* The leading causes of death for African-Americans between 1980 and 1998 were heart disease, cancer and stroke;

* Approximately one of every three Black males born in 2001 will go to prison at some point in his lifetime;

* Approximately 47 percent of all Blacks who receive Social Security benefits of any kind receive either disability or survivor benefits. By contrast, only 28 percent of Whites receive this category of benefits;

* A total of 1,063,732 individuals legally migrated to the United States in fiscal 2002. Of those, 65 percent settled in six states: California, New York, Florida, Texas, New Jersey and Illinois;

* Among children three to 17 years old, 77 percent of non-Hispanic Whites and 72 percent of Asians and Pacific Islanders live in households with computers. Only 43 percent of Black children and 37 percent of Hispanics live in homes that have computers;

* The high school graduation rates for African-Americans increased from 24.8 percent in 1962 to 79.2 percent in 2002. During that same period, the White graduation rate grew from 48.7 percent to 88.7 percent.

The aforementioned statistics are included in the National Urban League Institute for Opportunity and Equality fact book, which traces Black progress from the 1963 March on Washington to today.

If Ward Connerly’s ballot initiative passes on Tuesday and if it is extended to other states and the federal government, there would be no way for us to know any of the information cited above because such collection would be illegal. And that’s the fallacy in Connerly’s approach. He wrongfully argues that in order to create his version of a colorblind utopia, we should simply stop collecting any information that identifies a person by race or national origin. What Connerly fails to see is that statistics, however unpleasant, allow us to identify problems that need to be addressed.

For example, the only reason we know that there is a problem of racial profiling is because race-specific data has been collected and analyzed by law enforcement agencies. On a stretch of Interstate 95 just north of Baltimore, 17.5 percent of the traffic violators were African-Americans, yet 70 percent of those searched by Maryland State Police were Black.

A similar problem existed in Florida. The Orlando Sentinel videotaped traffic stops and discovered that although Black motorists made up less than 10 percent of the traffic, they were 70 percent of people stopped on I-95.

Without being able to look at racial differences, the National Criminal Justice Commission would not have been able to report in 1995 that while African-Americans made up 12 percent of the U.S. population and 13 percent of all monthly drug users, they represented 74 percent of those sentenced to prison for drug possession.

Even more important, we would not be able to investigate racially-based hate crimes because law enforcement officials would be prohibited from collecting race-specific information.

In short, Connerly’s ballot proposal is counterproductive. And that’s why groups that represent police officers, educators, public health and civil rights oppose Proposition 54.

Ward Connerly was chief sponsor of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action initiative that was passed in 1996 by California voters. Now, even a conservative U.S. Supreme Court disagrees, ruling that affirmative action is legally permissible.

When Connerly attempted to spread his Proposition 209 fever to other states, he was unsuccessful and sent packing. This measure should be defeated Tuesday so that Connerly will not be able to pack his bags for yet another ill-suited road show.