The term Preferences was invented as a substitute for targets, goals and quotas because the latter had correctly come to be perceived as negative and discriminatory.

          Group Preferences began appearing in widespread use during the 2000 presidential campaign.  It was invented because preferences had inevitably come to carry the same negative connotations as targets, goals and quotas.  Group Preferences has more than one meaning, depending upon your political party and your audience.

• Neutral Meaning:  Group Preferences literally encompasses all preferences, including race, gender, and ethnicity.   In this context, to refer to group preferences is a convenient shorthand and is easier than saying "racial, gender and ethnic preferences".  This neutral definition is the least common usage of the term.

• Pro-Quota Meaning:  Supporters of quotas like to use Group Preferences because it allows them to specifically avoid referring to race, gender, ethnicity, or veteran's status.  Racial Preferences, for example, evokes a much stronger emotional response than Group Preferences.   In this context, the term is deliberately vague and is intended to convey a positive connotation.  (Similarly, the term Affirmative Action is deliberately misleading and vague.)

• Anti-Quota Meaning:  Opponents of quotas use Group Preferences to mean any program or law which bestows special treatment upon an individual by virtue of his/her membership in a "group" -- in virtually all cases that group is defined by race, gender, or ethnicity.  In this context, the term has a negative connotation because to grant special treatment based upon race, gender or ethnicity is unconstitutional.

See Also:  Official List of Protected Races