est, the General Assembly opposedrnthem.rnAccordingly, the dissenting justicesrnsoundly refused the Chicago Bar Association’srnclaim that the Eight is Enoughrnproposal was not a suitable subject for arncitizen-initiated referendum. JusticernMoses Harrison, with Justices JamesrnHeiple and Benjamin Miller joining himrnin dissenting from the majority opinion,rnwrites, “Section 3 of article XIV reservedrnto the people of this State the right tornadvance this amendment and to vote onrnit. . . . Democracy should be permittedrnto take its course, as the drafters of ourrnconstitution intended. To hold that thernlaw mandates a contrary result is a fictionrnthat venerates the power of our incumbentrnlegislators and demeans the intelligencernof their constituents.” In an editorialrnpublished August 24, the WallrnStreet journal said, “The court’s decisionrnreeks of politics…. Term limits isrnthe fourth initiative affecting the Legislaturernit has removed from the ballot.”rnThe term limit issue needs to be decidedrnat the ballot box. In losing thernright to vote on this referendum, Illinoisrnvoters are losing ownership of theirrngovernment. If this ruling is allowed tornstand, Illinois will not have a governmentrn”of the people, by the people, andrnfor the people.” What we will continuernto have is a government of the incumbents,rnby the lawyers, and for the lobbyists.rn—Pat QuinnrnTreasurer of IllinoisrnJACK K E M P is out, as far as we CaliforniarnCollege Republicans are concerned.rnOn June 18, we overturned ourrnprevious endorsement of Jack Kemp forrnPresident in 1996. This reversal of positionrnhas been two years in the making.rnWhen Kemp was originally endorsedrntwo years ago, it seemed that he was thernunquestionable heir to Ronald Reaganrnand the conservative movement. However,rnas time went on, it became painfullyrnclear that Kemp was becoming morernmoderate in his positions. Kemp has becomerna conservative who will not fight torncut Leviathan’s government spendingrn(evidenced by his tenure at HUD), whornrefuses to combat liberal assaults onrnAmerican culture or acknowledge thatrnthere is a problem with illegal immigration,rnand who endorses an internationalistrnforeign policy that does not considerrnthe national interests of the UnitedrnStates. In other words. Jack Kemp hasrnbecome a “Big Government Conservative.”rnThis is confirmed by his ownrnstatements identifying himself as arn”bleeding-heart conservative” from thern”Lane Kirkland wing of the RepublicanrnParty.”rnThe endorsement of Jack Kemp wasrnrapidly becoming an embarrassment tornthe California College Republicans. Yetrnthe organization’s board of directors didrnnot have the courage to reverse its position.rnTo them, Kemp was still the everpositivernquarterback of the conservatives.rnHowever, the tide changed in 1994. TedrnSoojian, a principled conservative, wasrnelected chairman of the California CollegernRepublicans in April, along with hisrnentire slate of candidates for major office.rnThis paralleled the election of TomrnPauken as chairman of the Texas RepublicanrnParty and the nomination inrnVirginia of Oliver North for UnitedrnStates Senate.rnThe stage was then set for the boardrnof directors meeting on June 18, 1994,rnwhich appropriately took place in OrangernCounty, California. At this meeting,rnthe endorsement of Jack Kemp inrn1996 was formally revoked. During thisrnmeeting, the board decided that wernneed to encourage and express thanks tornthose conservatives who stand for unabashedlyrnconservative positions andrnwho will fight for those positions to thernend.rnPatrick Buchanan fits this descriptionrnperfectly. There is perhaps no conservativernwho has risked as much as Buchananrnto stand for conservative principles.rnHe fought for us in 1992, when no otherrnconservative would. Furthermore, 1992rnwas not a solitary incident. Buchananrnhas repeatedly fought for us since he enteredrnthe conservative movement in hisrn20’s. Patrick Buchanan also representsrnsomething more—a candidate who willrnfight to bring the American Republic torna new golden age of freedom, federalism,rntraditional values, and a foreign policyrnthat puts America first. Therefore, a resolutionrnwas passed stating that “the CaliforniarnCollege Republicans stand fullyrnbehind Pat Buchanan in his endeavorsrnand encourage him to run for the presidencyrnin 1996 to return the Old Right tornits rightful place as a true conservativernmovement.”rnThe California College Republicansrnhave fired a shot heard around thernRepublic. The Republican Party mustrnstand for an agenda of limited government,rntraditional values, and an Americanrninterest-based foreign policy. If thernother states spanning this nation fight forrnthe values that conservatives hold dear,rnthen we can do no less than retake thernRepublican Party and make it once againrnan establishment that our forefathersrnwould be proud of.rn—Corey R. WeberrnRUDOLPH GIULIANL in one of hisrnfirst actions as mayor of New York City,rneliminated a controversial set-aside programrnthat had been instituted in 1991 byrnthe Dinkins administration. Consideringrnthe extent to which the use of quotasrnnow permeates American society, anyrnvictory for the merit system is reason forrncelebration.rnThe policy in question was, if nothingrnelse, a tribute to those who are determinedrnto balkanize people along lines ofrnrace, ethnicity, and gender. It authorizedrnthe awarding of city contracts tornbusinesses owned by—who else?-“womenrnand minorities,” even if their bidsrnwere as much as 10 percent higher thanrnthe lowest bidder. Under this affirmativernaction policy, the city’s goal had been forrnthe politically correct firms to performrn20 percent of its contractual work.rnDuring last year’s mayoral campaign,rnDavid Dinkins frequently pointed outrnthat the policy had increased from 9 torn17 the percentage of city contractsrnawarded to “women and minorities,”rnwowing the sort of folks who keep trackrnof such things. The fact that Mr. Dinkinsrnconsidered this one of his proudestrnaccomplishments as mayor tells you allrnyou need to know about his unlamentedrntenure.rnGiuliani’s executive order was greetedrnwith predictable cries of outrage fromrnthe usual liberal suspects that havernbrought a once-great city almost to itsrnknees. “No small business can competernagainst the giants of the world,” said anrn”incensed” Harriet Michel, president ofrnan outfit called the National MinorityrnSupplier Development Council. Herrncomment raises the question of why thernpolicy’s beneficiaries were not “smallrnbusinesses,” instead of the standardrn”women and minorities.” “Our membersrnare only trying to compete and thisrnwas a way to help,” said Roy A. Hastick,rnpresident of the Caribbean-AmericanrnChamber of Commerce. For the purposesrnof affirmative action, foreign-bornrnblacks are classified as a “minority,” un-rn6/CHRONICLESrnrnrn