AFFIRMITIVE-ACTION PLAN IGNORES REALITY

Although government contracts with the lowest bidder have become a way of life in the United States, there are plenty of examples that show cost isn't always the best determining factor. But now a legislative proposal for the nation's massive highway program threatens to produce a congressional showdown that would make low bids secondary to racial and gender preferences.

Billions of dollars are earmarked for spending on highways each year by Congress. The current appropriations bill includes a provision that requires at least 10 percent of that total to go to minority companies or companies owned by women.

The proposal ignores the idea of finding the best company at the best price to build highways, and it also ignores the fact that the mood of the country is definitely against making affirmative action a part of federal spending plans. Californians voted in 1996 to ban race or gender as a factor in state hiring or college admissions. And more than a dozen other states are considering proposals to end state affirmative-action programs.

As U.S. Rep. Charles Canady of Florida puts it: "The politicians in Washington still have not gotten the message from the American people that it's time for us to put an end to the divisive policy of preferences."

The affirmative-action portion of the highway spending bill isn't the only test of civil rights issues likely to come up in Congress this year. President Clinton wants $86 million for enforcing civil rights laws. His choice of Bill Lann Lee for the Justice Department's top civil rights post is up for Senate confirmation -- which was neatly sidestepped by the president last year when he appointed Lee while Congress was in recess. And legislation is pending to bar job discrimination against gays.

The federal government's heavy-handed action over the years on affirmative action was copied in many respects by states that were caught up more in the process than in the quality of the results. More recently, the process has reversed. Now many states are involved in undoing those onerous laws that go under the guise of civil rights but do little to foster fairness in the competitive arena of government contracts.

It looks like instead of having the states copy Washington's move, the federal government will have to take its lessons from the states as voters and state legislators turn the tide of affirmative action.