It's a sad but true statement that, too often, the fate of ballot initiatives comes down to the right branding.

On a ballot cluttered with referendums and amendments, and in a season where vague and contradictory ads about them run constantly, the key is reducing your initiative to a short, appealing name, one that voters will find no reason to oppose.

Of course, if the name is misleading, that's just a sacrifice on the road to victory. It's hard to think of one more disingenuously named and promoted than the so-called Civil Rights Initiative, listed as Amendment 46.

If approved, the amendment would destroy affirmative action, one of the key tools of the modern civil rights movement. Under the guise of equal treatment under the law, this measure would make it impossible for the state, or state funded educational institutions such as the University of Colorado, from taking reasonable and necessary steps to promote racial equity.

The deceptive name of the amendment takes advantage of the American instinct towards fairness.

Why shouldn't the government treat people equally, regardless of their race?

Simply, because the government has a moral obligation to work proactively for racial equality. Even if you reject completely the idea that government should work for greater equality in society, the obligation exists as a duty to redress harms.

The gaps in educational achievement and economic status between races can be traced, in some significant part, to the immoral past policies and actions of federal and state governments. It cannot be doubted that slavery, segregation and systemic discrimination, all condoned by governmental bodies, made success a virtual impossibility for those affected.

The inequalities that resulted were not ephemeral, but instead were passed down from generation to generation. Since the best predictor of a number socio-economic factors, ranging from education to health care access, is the same factor in one's parents, the consequences of past oppression do not fade with the end of those policies.

Instead, they persist as the root cause of the glaring disparities between minorities and whites.

Support of affirmative action doesn't require radical beliefs, or even a liberal conception of the role of government.

It simply requires two ideas of fair play: first, that the government should clean up its messes and protect the people it has harmed, and second, that people should have a chance to succeed on their own merits, without the legacy of oppression holding them back.

Nathaniel Hedman is a member of the Roosevelt Institution, a new student group at the University of Colorado.