|
|
disenfranchisement 
Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 10:54:06 AM EDT
|
(The Rogers Law needs to go, and here's why. - promoted by rich)
X-posted at Dailykos, please reccommend. In 2000 political attention turned to Florida as the decision for president remained to be resolved. In a state run by Bush family members and loyalists, tales of voter purging and other underhanded tactics revealed the willingness of Republicans to act clandestinely to ensure their victory by denying the vote to Democratic leaning groups.
But one year before in the state of Michigan one legislator introduced and passed a new law guaranteed to disenfranchise and dissuade a group of heavy Democratic voters from democracy. His work in disenfranchising voters would lead to his winning a seat in Congress.
That legislator was State Senator, now Congressmen, Mike Rogers of Michigan's 8th district. And the group he successfully disenfranchised was the young voters at Michigan State University, which is located in his district, and every other residential college and university in Michigan.
|
|
There's More...
:: (9
Comments, 1215 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Mon May 26, 2008 at 20:44:26 PM EDT
|
|
Lanny Davis layed out a compromise on the issue of Michigan and Florida in a piece on the Politico. He starts with two neutral principles which the Rules & Bylaws Committee members ought to use as a guide. The legal principle supporting that solution is pretty simple. In U.S. contract law, the party breaching a contract usually has the right to "cure" the violation during the term of the contract. But if the other party stands in the way of that cure, the breaching party cannot be further sanctioned — and certainly, as a matter of fairness, the party preventing the cure should not stand to benefit.
According to Davis, this is what happened in 2008 to Michigan and Florida: both states violated party rules, but by March of 2008 were willing to "cure" (hold new primaries and raise money to pay for them).
DNC Chairman Howard Dean said at the time that such revotes were permissible and would bring Michigan and Florida back into compliance. And there was precedent: In 1996, Delaware Democrats held a party caucus earlier than the permissible date, resulting in a rule violation. But state Democrats were allowed to hold another caucus later on and were then found to be back in compliance.
|
|
There's More...
:: (14
Comments, 459 words in story)
|
|
Thu May 08, 2008 at 15:33:18 PM EDT
|
|
In a letter addressed to Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. Hillary Clinton asks the Illinois Senator to join her in working towards a "fair and quick resolution" to the Michigan and Florida questions. Sen. Clinton writes that simply seating the delegaitons is enough enough, and that "[t]he people of these great states, like the people who have voted and are to vote in other states, must have a voice in selecting our party's nominee." One of the foremost principles of our party is that citizens be allowed to vote and that those votes be counted. That principle is not currently being applied to the nearly 2.5 million people who voted in primaries in Florida and Michigan. Whoever emerges as the Democratic nominee will be hamstrung in the general election if a fair and quick resolution is not reached that ensures that the voices of these voters are heard. Our commitment now to this goal could be the difference between winning and losing in November.
The Obama campaign has not immediately responded to Sen. Clinton's letter. Full text of the letter below the fold.
|
|
There's More...
:: (20
Comments, 454 words in story)
|
|
Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 18:24:28 PM EDT
|
 I was in East Los Angeles on Super Tuesday when the non-partisan election reform organization Why Tuesday? interviewed Dolores Huerta, one of my personal heroes. Huerta, a human rights activist, community organizer, and co-founder (with Cesar E. Chavez) of the United Farm Workers, talked about the need for serious voter reform to ensure that every voice is heard in our democracy. Dolores Huerta has spent her life fighting the good fight, empowering people of color and other marginalized groups to organize and push for change. It was in that spirit that today hundreds of Latinos--organized by the United Latin American Citizens—protested outside of the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, DC. Latinos came from Orlando, Tampa, Miami, Jacksonville, and beyond to express their outrage at their disenfranchisement “This is a civil liberties issue – not a campaign or candidate issue,” said Jose Fernandez, president of the Democratic Hispanic Caucus of Florida, speaking to the crowd… Another speaker was Anita de Palma, 66, of Clearwater, Fla. She is a past Florida director of the League of United Latin American Citizens… “This is our heritage!” said de Palma, referring to the right to vote and have that vote count. “Our forefathers fought for it, our father’s fought for it, and I’ll be damned if we are going to let it get away from us now!” And she’s right. Julian Bond, the chairman of the NAACP, has said that this selective disenfranchisement could remind voters of America’s “sordid history of racially discriminatory primaries." And it does. The overriding consensus on MichiganLiberal is to tell the 2 million voters who voted in Michigan and Florida "tough luck," and to blame the MI and FL party leadership. "Tough luck" is what African-Americans were told when they failed literacy tests. "Tough luck" is what African-Americans were told when they weren't able to pass the "grandfather tests" in the days before the Voting Rights Act. "Tough luck" is what my grandparents were told when they tried to buy a house, only to discover there was a "whites only" clause in the deed. "Tough luck" is what my mother and her black neighbors were told when they wanted to swim in the Los Angeles city pool on "whites only" days. And "tough luck" is what people of color hear time and time again when whites overlook us for the job, promition, or recognition we've earned.
So excuse me if I think we've had enough of "tough luck." A few weeks back, I posted about a rally a grasroots "activist" organized in Lansing to raise awareness about the disenfranchisement of Michigan's voters. I also posted about some Michigan and Florida union workers who protested at DNC headquarters. And although proud of both efforts, the question that lingers in the back of my mind (and in the minds of many of the other people of color I talk to) is why are the rest of our brothers and sisters in the Michigan Democratic Party remaining silent when the votes of hundreds of thousands of are hanging in the balance? We ask ourselves, "Where is their outrage?"
|
|
There's More...
:: (20
Comments, 552 words in story)
|
|
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 19:05:09 PM EDT
|
|
I thought this was a pretty entertaining part of this afternoon's Associated Press story on this Saturday's congressional district meetings: The 15 congressional district meetings could get raucous. Obama, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and two other candidates pulled their names from the ballot, forcing their supporters to vote for Uncommitted. About 450 people have registered to run for the 36 delegate and 2 alternate spots set aside for those who backed Uncommitted. Brewer says the vast majority are Obama supporters, but he expects the competition to win a spot will be intense. "People feel very passionately about their candidates, and I expect we're going to see a lot of passionate campaigns on Saturday," he said. About 450 people also applied to run for 47 delegate and 13 alternate spots that will go to Clinton supporters, but the Clinton campaign has reduced the list to around 150 people, Brewer said. About 21,000 party members are eligible to vote at Saturday's district conventions.
Its especially encouraging for me, a Hillary Clinton supporter, to see that, despite not having any formal organization in the state (like Michiganders for Obama), there was a fairly equal number of applicants for spots for "Uncommitted" and Hillary Clinton. I can't help but to assume that the Obama campaign will benefit from its geographical closeness this Saturday. From what I hear from my Obama-supporting friends in Grand Rapids, the competition could be described as "intense." I know in California, the Obama campaign slashed over half of his delegates to the congressional district conventions, until public pressure (and a fierce reaction from the netroots) caused Axelrod & Plouffe to reverse their decision at the last minute. There was a lot of speculation about whether the Obama campaign made a coordinated effort to eliminate anti-war activists and members of the netroots as a way of controlling the tone of the meetings. But others have contended that it was less of an effort to cut bloggers and hardcore activists, and more of a way for the Obama campaign to ensure that its big donors were rewarded with a spot at the convention. We'll see how this Saturday turns out, any predictions? I know that I plan to be watching this all unfold at Creston High School in Grand Rapids.
|
|
Discuss
:: (13
Comments)
|
|
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 14:20:03 PM EDT
|
|
Earlier this week I was contacted by a woman who introduced herself by saying she had never done anything "activist" before, but after hearing about a protest of the DNC in Florida, had decided to organize one here in Michigan. I'm pasting the flyer for the event below: On January 15, 2008, nearly 600,000 Michigan Democrats went to the polls to make their voices heard in the Democratic Presidential primary. The popular vote in Florida and Michigan has been counted, certified by election officials in each state, and officially tallied by the secretary of state in each state. Our votes cannot be ignored. We will not be disenfranchised. The DNC’s refusal to count our votes and seat our delegates according to the ballots cast on January 15 compromises our civil liberties and our voting rights. This decision affects the rights of ALL Michigan residents regardless of political affiliation. Michigan, let your voice be heard. Join together in a grassroots effort to ensure voting privileges and protect the right to vote for future generations. - Demand that our votes be counted and delegates seated based on the Jan. 15 poll results or that a new Michigan primary take place.
- Demand that the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee take the necessary steps to ensure the voices of the people of Michigan are heard and its delegates are seated at the Democratic convention this summer.
Where: Michigan State Capitol Building, Lansing, Mi.When: Thursday, April 17, 2008 Time: 12:00 PM Michigan matters! Preserve Democracy. Our votes cannot be ignored! For more information go to http://www.hillaryclinton.com/actioncenter/event/view/?id=11862 click on Events, or contact Buffysmomplus3@Gmail.com
|
|
Discuss
:: (2
Comments)
|
|
Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 14:15:03 PM EDT
|
|
According to The Politico's Ben Smith, there are 50-60 Michigan and Florida union members picketing at the DNC headquarters. They're complaining that the DNC's refusal to seat Florida and Michigan delagates will prevent dozens of union members who are delegates from attending the convention, and they want DNC Chairman Howard Dean to resolve the dispute.
Mike Williams, a Florida union member, compared the DNC's refusal to seat the delegates from those two states as similar to when a comoany locks outs striking union employees.
"We're getting locked out," said Williams as he and the other union members pickteted the DNC. Williams estimated that as many as a dozen building trade union members, and 30 union members overall, would be part of the Florida contingent to the Democratic convention
Update: The pickets are members are of the Building and Construction Trades Council, which, to my knowledge, has not yet endorsed a presidential candidate.
|
|
Discuss
:: (3
Comments)
|
|
Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 16:12:07 PM EDT
|
|
This morning, prominent Democratic women from Massachusetts rallied in front of the State House, where "they threatened to withold support for the party nominee if they felt the nominating process has been bankrupted." They called on MA superdelegates (which include Sens. Kerry and Kennedy and Governor Patrick Deval -- all three of whom have endorsed Sen. Barack Obama) to push for both a new primary in Michigan and a commitment to including the Florida delegates by seating those already elected or holding a new primary there, as well. “Without us, there is no party. And if we leave, that wouldn’t be good,” said Senate President Therese Murray, standing at a podium in front of a staircase packed with bold-faced Democratic names. The group circulated a pledge for superdelegates to sign... Attorney Ellen Zucker said the mechanics of campaigning would be harmed by disillusioning a major bloc of the Democratic coalition. “This is the core of the party,” she said. “These are the people who do the work. And their frustration has to be taken seriously.” The rally took place around the same time as a meeting between Florida superdelegates and DNC Chairman Howard Dean, resulting in a joint statement, saying, in part: We are all committed to doing everything we can to ensure that a Florida delegation is seated in Denver. We all agree that whatever the solution, it must have the support of both campaigns... We're committed to working with both campaigns to reach a solution as soon as realistically possible...
Clinton campaign Deputy Communications Director Phil Singer released the following statement in response to the DNC's statement: We have long maintained that pretending the voters of Florida and Michigan don’t exist is not fair in principle and unwise in practice. This morning’s Quinnipiac poll out of Florida reflects the urgent need for Democrats to get behind our effort to count Florida’s voters and seat its delegation. Chairman Dean is clearly committed to seating the Florida delegation and we urge Senator Obama to join us in calling on the rules and bylaws committee to make this a reality.
Singer is referring to the latest Quinnipiac poll which shows Clinton leading John McCain 44-42, while Obama trails by 9 points. (The poll also has Hillary leading McCain in Ohio 48-39, with Obama's lead over McCain is just 1 point.) Full news story after the jump. EDIT: In the original version, I wasn't thinking clearly (blame it on midterms) and put "Michigan" instead of "Massachusetts."
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 195 words in story)
|
|
Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 16:01:59 PM EDT
|
|
Hillary just sent out the following message encouraging Americans to join her in calling for the voices of Michigan and Florida Democrats to be heard. Dear Friend,
It is a bedrock American principle: we are all equal in the voting booth. No matter where you were born or how much money you were born into, no matter the color of your skin or where you worship, your vote deserves to count.
But millions of people in Florida and Michigan who went to the polls aren't being heard. The delegates they elected won't be seated at the Democratic National Convention in Denver this August -- and that's just not fair to those voters.
The people of Michigan and Florida must have a voice in selecting our nominee for president. I have repeatedly called for seating their delegates.
Click here to join me in showing our support for seating Florida and Michigan delegates at the convention.
This is such an important principle, and I appreciate you standing up with me.
Sincerely,
Hillary Rodham Clinton
|
|
Discuss
:: (28
Comments)
|
|
Mon Jan 14, 2008 at 19:39:27 PM EST
|
J. Grho has been busy bashing the idea of an "uncommitted" vote, and puffing her pal Hillary, see, e.g., DetNews,
"She's committed to us. We are going to stand behind someone who stands behind us." , AP via Muskegon Chronicle, "Their choice is to be committed for uncommitted? Or to be committed to someone who has stood for us?" (openly MOCKING "uncommitted" voters like John Conyers!!!)
, and DetNews, Clinton cruising over 'uncommitted' (which despite its title, queries But will she capture a large enough percentage to avoid embarrassment Tuesday? ),
Gov. Jennifer Granholm said this morning at a Clinton rally in Southfield that her candidate "is committed to Michigan."
"Her opponent in this state apparently is 'uncommitted,' which is not an opponent," Granholm told reporters after speaking to 100 Clinton supporters at the Westin Hotel. "That is why we are encouraging voters to get out and vote for Hillary Clinton. She is not uncommitted to Michigan, which the other candidates apparently are."
Clinton opted not to campaign in Michigan because she made a pledge to uphold the party primary calendar, which is tilted to early races in Iowa and New Hampshire.
There are multiple truth problems with JG's words here, including the fact that, uh, Clinton pledged not to campaign in Michigan (as noted above)! so that Dennis Kucinich, whatever his other problems, is more committed to Michigan than Clinton, cf. George Bullard in DetNews, Re Michigan, at least Kucinich shows up.
As well, like it or not, Gravel and Kucinich are opponents of Clinton, too, so JG is inaccurate by not mentioning them as opponents, mentioning only "uncommitted" as an opponent. (Cheap rhetorical trick?)
Last but not least, Granholm (who USED to say that Michigan Liberal is her favorite blog--is that still true??--, so that she may read here frequently) may have borrowed the "committed/uncommitted" wordplay of yours truly on 1/9/08, "Ironically, then, if you are COMMITTED to change, you may have to vote UNCOMMITTED on 1/15." ...I wonder how much she might owe me for "copyright infringement"! No wonder the writers went on strike...
Now what is really interesting, is Jennifer Granholm's lack of commitment to staying in Michigan herself and doing her job, instead of running off to D.C. with Hillary, if she wins, and then leaving the Michigan mess to her new "Chief Operating Officer" (!! "Michigan Incorporated"??), and to John Cherry, whose, to be blunt, "charisma issues" might prevent him from becoming governor in a normal election.
See Tim Skubick, the "Off the Record" video of his JG interview on 10/12/07, at c. 13:45-15:45 on the video. (Check WKAR if the above link doesn't work) TS asks JG repeatedly if she will pledge not to leave Lansing, and JG refuses again and again to answer, talking about "speculation", dodging the issue, and leaving a deep suspicion about her own commitment to Michigan. (She does say that fixing Michigan should take longer than a year and a half, and that she doesn't want to go to D.C. ...o.k., then why can't she pledge to stay in Lansing? Whom does she think she's fooling??)
Repeatedly refusing to pledge to stay on the job in her own state, throwing (or even subtly massaging...) the election for a pal who can give her a cushy slot in D.C., and taking millions of taxpayers dollars to do it, plus the voter list graft, plus holding the DNC-rulebreaking election even after 4 Dem candidates correctly avoided it, plus Michigan's collapse in general...how committed is politician Granholm to Michigan, or staying in Michigan, or anything? Can she be believed when she mocks "uncommitted" voters like the great John Conyers and says voting Hillary is better?
Probably not. If you vote, vote "uncommitted"...and commit to doing something about Granholm's, Dingell's, Brewer's, Anuzis's, McManus's, and Bishop's noxious dedication to doing the wrong thing re the 1/15 primary, and so many other wrong things as well. Thanks for your commitment to Michigan and to Michigan rank-and-file Democrats!
|
|
Discuss
:: (24
Comments)
|
|
Wed Nov 21, 2007 at 15:44:19 PM EST
|
|
Please, and soon. Whether you make claims in federal court re takings, substantive and/or procedural due process, equal protection, 1st and 8th amendment stuff re making it a misdemeanor for journalists/folks to discuss the voter lists, ...not to mention equities/issues like
1) the county clerks saying they can't get out the absentee ballots on time (disenfranchising our SOLDIERS IN IRAQ, for cripes' sake),
2) the fact that the Democratic vote will be disenfranchised as a whole with a 1/15 primary (since it violates DNC rules and the delegates won't even be counted at the national convention...and there are few candidates on the ballot as well)--and don't forget the implementation challenge to be filed against the MDP for the MDP disenfranchising Michigan Dems!--,
3) the waste of public money on such a primary (as Speaker Andy Dillon has mentioned),
4) the interest in settled, fair decisions and procedures, not rush jobs like the State of Michigan is shoving down people's throats;
or other claims entirely: there may very likely be some powerful way or ways to challenge any arbitrary, capricious, and/or just plain stupid Michigan state government or court decisions recently made. So I hope you challenge, as soon as possible. Even if you're not successful in the end (God forbid), you will at least have educated the public further about the extent to which their government is willing to steal from them, play with their votes (including soldiers' votes from abroad) and silence/criminalize free speech (again, the misdemeanor about discussing voter lists). So, it's more than worth the shot, any way one looks at it. Moreover, you will be giving a great Thanksgiving present to the public by doing so, since someone should be protecting the people of Michigan from thievery, disenfranchisement, and bullying by a shady governmental apparatus. And people will give you thanks for doing it. I know I will. Godspeed! We know you can do it! And have a great Thanksgiving, everybody!!
|
|
Discuss
:: (7
Comments)
|
|
|
|
|
|
