Senators Move to Restore Pre-Clearance in Voters Right Act

Photo by  Heather Rousseau for the Roanoke Times

*

Rev. Sylvia Ball of Roanoke's Sweet Union Baptist Church (left) and Rev. Leslie Watson Malachi, director of African American Religious Affairs with People for the American Way joined  others in Elmwood park for a three-hour rally calling on Republican House Judiciary Committee Bob Goodlatte, to update (and preserve) the pre-clearance formula of the Voters Right law, struck down two years ago in the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder.


“Hold a hearing, Mr. Chairman,” Brenda Hale, president of the Roanoke Branch NAACP, urged Goodlatte. “You’ll hear the evidence.”

The previous day, Dems Tim Kaine and Mark Warner co-sponsored Patrick Leahy's Senate bill S.1659 seeking to restore the pre-clearance provision. The bill establishes a “rolling” trigger so only states with recent records of discrimination would be targeted and expands the authority of the courts to order that troubled jurisdictions be put under pre-clearance.

Upon its introduction, Senator Leahy explained the rationale for the bill:

Mr. President, this year marks the 50th anniversaries of the March from Selma to Montgomery and the passage of the landmark Voting Rights Act. Passage of the Voting Rights Act was the result of the blood, sweat, and tears of so many brave Americans who marched for justice--and the decades-long work of countless other men and women committed to seeing our country live up to its promise of equality and justice for all. Their actions transformed our Nation. On this 50th anniversary year, we pay special tribute to their legacy, but there is still work to be done. Each generation must contribute to the fight for equality. Each of us must answer the call to move this Nation toward a more perfect union.

In the coming weeks there will be continued celebrations of the passage of the original Voting Rights Act. Unfortunately, two years ago, the Supreme Court voted to dismantle a core piece of that vital legislation. In Shelby County v. Holder, five Republican-appointed justices on the Supreme Court drove a stake through the heart of the Voting Rights Act. Under Section 5 of the Act, the Federal government has the authority to examine and prevent racially discriminatory voting changes from being enacted before those changes disenfranchise voters in covered jurisdictions. By striking down the coverage formula that determined which States and jurisdictions were subject to Federal review, the Court effectively gutted Section 5. And in holding that the formula was based on outdated information, the Roberts Court disregarded thousands of pages of testimony and evidence from nearly 20 congressional hearings held when the law was reauthorized in 2006.
Within weeks of the Supreme Court's devastating ruling, Republican governors and State legislatures exploited the Shelby County decision. Several States with a documented history of racial discrimination in voting implemented sweeping laws that disproportionately suppressed the voting rights of minorities, the elderly, and young people.

For example, Texas immediately implemented the most restrictive photo identification law in the country. Although, a Federal judge found the law to be an ``unconstitutional poll tax'' that could disenfranchise up to 600,000 voters and disproportionately impact African Americans and Latinos, the law was allowed to disenfranchise voters this past election.

In North Carolina, the Republican legislature and Republican governor passed a far-reaching bill that restricted its citizens' right to vote. The bill cut early voting down from 17 days to 10 days, eliminated teenagers' ability to preregister before their 18th birthday, and eliminated same day voter registration. It also enacted a strict photo identification requirement, which is currently being challenged in court.

These are just a few of the numerous discriminatory voting restrictions that have been enacted since Shelby County was decided. We cannot sit by as the fundamental right to vote is systematically undermined. We must not retreat from our commitment to civil rights and the great accomplishments we celebrate this year. As my friend Congressman John Lewis has stated, voting ``is the most powerful, nonviolent tool we have to create a more perfect union.''

Lose your house, lose your vote?

September 10, the Michigan Messenger reported on its telephone interview with Macomb County Republican party chairman James Carabelli regarding "election challengers."

We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses.

Today Democracy now has an interview with Jefferson Morley, National Editorial Director of the Center for Independent Media, which sponsors the Messenger.

WSJ: Ohio Republican Election Tacts: "Nothing is off the table."

On September 5, the current Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, Democrat, issued a directive that undeliverable mail was not sufficient to remove voters from the rolls saying she considered the 2006 law unconstitutional and also that every challenged voter must be notified and given a chance to attend a hearing before Election Day.

Kevin DeWine, a Republican in the Ohio State House of Representatives had authored the law requiring that a piece of registered mail with election information be sent to every registered voter in the state--with those whose mail is returned required to show id or vote on a provisional ballot. Voting rights groups say the practice amounts to “vote caging” in which legitimate voters are removed from election rolls because their residency is questioned.

According to Politico, while Republicans are complaining, they have not yet decided to file suit. DeWine, deputy chairman of the Ohio Republican Party, told the Wall Street Journal's Amy Merrick (email) for her story today
"nothing is off the table" in terms of election tactics, but he declined to be more specific.

Merrick outlines what happened in the 2004 election in Ohio, when election proactices were controlled by Republican Ohio Secretary of State Blackwell:

the state Republican party used returned mail to challenge the registrations of 35,000 new voters, most of whom lived in urban, heavily Democratic areas.

Not many voters were successfully removed, because "there was so much litigation and public backlash," said Teresa James, a lawyer in Ohio for Project Vote, a nonprofit voter-registration group. But she said some voters likely were intimidated by the challenges and stayed home.

Latest Nomination Dispute Stalls FEC

According to CQ Politics's report of yesterday,

A Senate standoff over nominations to the Federal Election Commission has left the agency unable to implement, much less enforce, the bundling provision in a new lobbying law....Even the approval of additional presidential matching funds -- beyond the $20 million it recently certified for release to qualifying candidates -- will be put on hold [which] could affect the..campaigns of ...Edwards,...Kucinich,McCain and ...Hunter.

According to CQ, von Spakovsky's

nomination standoff marks the first time in 31 years that the FEC has been stalled in executing its responsibility to oversee the campaign finance regulations that guide both congressional and presidential elections. The last time was a two-month period during the 1976 presidential campaign, when the agency put some work on hold until the Supreme Court ruled in Buckley vs. Valeo that the president was responsible for nominating all six commissioners, while the Senate had confirmation authority. Prior to that decision, the White House, the Senate and the House each nominated two commissioners.

After a recess appointment on January 4, 2006, President Bush renominated Hans von Spakovsky,a former assistant attorney general for civil rights whom voting rights groups have criticized for his support of photo identification at the polls. Democratic Sens. Barack Obama of Illinois and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin placed holds on his confirmation and Mitch McConnell responded by refusing to allow confirmation votes on three other nominees.

Before going to Washington, von Spakovsky was a lawyer in private practice and a Republican appointee to the Fulton County Registration and Election Board, which runs elections in Atlanta. He belonged to the Federalist Societyand had also joined the board of advisers of a lesser-known group called the Voting Integrity Project, which Jeffrey Toobin wrote about in the September 20, 2004, New Yorker article, "Poll Position: Is the Justice Department poised to stop voter fraud-or to keep voters from voting?" For updated information, see also "Hans Von Spakovsky: Right choice for FEC Commissioner?" by Adam Lambert, published by ePluribus Media on June 11, 2007 and "FEC Nominee Hans von Spakovsky: A Repeat Offender," posted June 12, 2007 by J. Gerald Hebert at the Capaign Legal Center's blog. On January 4, that organization called on President Bush to withdraw the nomination.

While some conservatives have complained about fraud in elections, a Judge has ruled that the controversial id program amounts to a new poll tax and McClatchy has a whole series of articles about how von Spakovsky's anti-fraud efforts may have served to suppress legitimate voting. . A Brown University study released January 8 found that

requiring voters to present identification at the polls leads to lower levels of political participa-tion. The research also suggests that voter I.D. policies discourage legal immigrants from be-coming citizens. The authors conclude that voter I.D. requirements have a significant political impact, particularly on the Hispanic vote.

For additional information on voter obstables, see the Center for American Progress's report of today.

Of course von Spakovsky's nomination is not the only case of gridlock invoked by Mr. McConnel when the the majority Democrats in Congress want to use their majority. Mr. Bush's determination to submit nominees that are objectionable, rather than than non-confrontational, and his refusal to withdraw them, has resulted in impasses that he has resolved by using his power of recess appointment. Will the {resident wait for another recess and reappoint von Spakovsky?

More to come. The library is closing.

*

Two cool sites:

BigThink.com
Newser