HungryBlues

Bush tells CBC he's 'unfamiliar' with Voting Rights Act

Where does one begin? Do note the expression on Jesse Jackson, Jr.'s face.
Maybe that says it all... --BG

Bush tells CBC he's 'unfamiliar' with Voting Rights Act

by Roland S. Martin, Chicago Defender
January 27, 2005

President George W. Bush met with the Congressional Black Caucus Wednesday for the first time as a group in nearly four years, but what CBC members said stood out the most was the president's declaration that he was "unfamiliar" with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, one of the most significant pieces of legislation passed in the history of the United States.

At the conclusion of yesterday's 40-minute meeting, Bush - who attended along with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice - was asked by Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-2nd) whether he would support the re-authorization of a portion of the Voting Rights Act that must be approved every 25 years (It will come up for consideration next year).

"I don't know anything about the 1965 Voting Rights Act," Jackson recalled the president saying in an interview with the Chicago Defender.

He said that a hurried Bush went on to say that "when the legislation comes before me, I'll take a look at it, but I don't know about it to comment any more than that, but we will look at it when it comes to us."

"It was so unbelievable to me that as soon as I walked out, I got Frank (Watkins, Jackson's top legislative aide) on the telephone, put (Congresswomen) Maxine (Waters, D-Calif.) and Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), so that I could confirm what he just said is what I heard," Jackson said.

Rep. Bobby Rush (D-1st) said he recalled the president saying he was "unfamiliar" with the Voting Rights Act.

"I was surprised and astounded," Rush told the Defender.

Rep. Danny Davis (D-7th) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) could not be reached for comment.

White House spokesman Allen Abney did not specifically address Bush's statement of being unfamiliar with the Voting Rights Act, but said that "there is a section of the Act that is up for re-authorization in 2006, and the president is firmly committed to protecting voting rights. He indicated today that he would be looking closely at the Act as it comes up for re-authorization and certainly take their concerns into consideration."

According to the description on the Department of Justice's website, the Voting Rights Act is "generally considered the most successful piece of civil rights legislation ever adopted by the United States Congress."

The bill guaranteed that African Americans and any other group would not be denied the right to vote, and put in place provisions to ensure that voting rights would not be trampled on by local and state officials.

Bush's meeting with the CBC was the second of two days of meetings with Black leaders. On Tuesday, he met with more than two dozen pastoral and business leaders, all supporters of the president's policies. A couple of weeks ago Bush sat down with Kweisi Mfume, who had recently announced his resignation as president and CEO of the NAACP.

Rush said Wednesday's meeting was different from the others because he has had a fractious relationship with the CBC, and was dealing with "more knowledgeable people around the different issues that affect the African American community."

"In that room you had 43 individuals whose whole life of activity and endeavor have been around trying to upgrade and uplift the life of Black America," Rush said. "We are elected into the Congress and we know the ins and outs of it and we know the machinations that the administration and the Republicans engage in and so, yea, we weren't wild-eyed and in a state of ecstasy just to meet the president. We came to be about business."

As for Bush's mood, Rush said the president was "cordial" but also "as non-responsive today as he was four years ago to the overall agenda."

"He did become animated around the issue of Darfur (Sudan),"Rush said.

As for Rice, Rush said the new secretary of state said "absolutely nothing. She was just there. For what reason, I'm not sure."

Jackson praised CBC Chairman Mel Watt, D-N.C., for focusing on the disparities facing African Americans in six categories, such as economics, social justice and international issues.

He said Bush mostly nodded his head and took notes, but he was adamant about his opposition to statehood for the District of Columbia, a point raised by Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, who represents the Washington, D.C. area in Congress.

Jackson said Bush thought he was going to bring up the issue again and cut him off, saying, "I'm against statehood. I'm consistent on that and have been consistent on that since I was governor (of Texas)."

------
Photo: From left to right, Rep. Carolyn C. Kilpatrick, D-Mich., Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill., Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., Rep. Charles B. Rangle, D-NY., and Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, Rep. Mel Watt, D-N.C., speak to the media outside the West Wing of the White House following their meeting with President Bush, Wednesday in Washington. AP/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

That's Some Poem

Before today I didn't even know who Etheridge Knight was—which is embarrassing to say as a former doctoral candidate in English and American Literature. Yet another reason to be glad for the blogosphere. I was zipping through my rss feeds this morning and saw one of my newest favorites, Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast, had posted Knight's "The Idea of Ancestry" along with some personal commentary. Follow Yvette's link to the poets.org site and you can also listen to Knight read his poem.

Knight seems like a figure who belongs in the mix at HungryBlues. The bio says he was a native of Mississippi and a participant in the Black Arts Movement. He therefore overlaps and intersects with all sorts of things over here.

I'm still meaning to write about this other post from Six Impossible Things, but now you've got advance notice to check it out.

Now I've gotta get me a volume of Knight's poems. Thanks, Yvette . . .

Myth Breakers: Facts about Electronic Elections, 2nd Edition

Myth Breakers: Facts about Electronic Elections The second edition
	Still tells the facts ... - Corrects HAVA misconceptions - Describes HAVA-compliant alternatives to DREs - Gives general pricing information - Speaks about myth vs. misinformation ... and now includes ... - Malfunctions from the 2004 General Election - More about testing and certification - Details about software complexities

This is a crucial, concise and clear guide to what is at issue with electronic voting technology—for lay people, activists and election officials alike.

Download (776kb) the pdf file.

Participate in the New Project Myth Breaker to inform election officials, legislators and the media.

Project Myth Breaker is brought to you by VotersUnite!

Audio: Speeches from Rally for the Republic, Faneueil Hall, Boston, MA, Jan 3, 2005

• Robin Weingarten Campaign volunteer in Ohio, CAEF member.
  
• Greg Greenway - One Man, One Woman, One Vote Musician
  
• Fay Morrison Ayer Selectwoman, witness to voter intimidation and touch screen fraud in FL and OH
• Tom Barbera Waltham Elector whose motion asking for the investigation and remedy of election violations was passed unanimously by all twelve Massachusetts Electors
  
• Jeff Taylor Vermont Elector who passed a motion with the other Electors in his state for the investigation and remedy of election violations
• Grace Ross CAEF member, Truth In Elections member.
  
• Sheila Parks Vice Presidential candidate for the Green Party, Historian, Liberal talk show host
• Donna Palermino Activist and Attorney, to speak on the legal aspects of the challenge, member CAEF
• David Lytel Part of  the 2000 & 2004 challenges to Congress against the certification of            Electoral College votes for reasons of election fraud and civil rights violations
• Pat LaMarche Vice Presidential candidate for the Green Party, Historian, Liberal talk show host
• John Bonifaz General Counsel of the National Voting Rights Institute and Co-counsel for Presidential Candidates David Cobb and Michael Badnarik in their demand for a meaningful recount of 2004 in Ohio
• Jonathan Simon Activist and Attorney, Collaborator with Steven Freeman on 2004 exit poll analysis
• Greg Greenway -- offeratory

(from the Coalition Against Election Fraud web site.)

Election Related Items

STATES
• Counties inconsistent in provisional-vote rules Tom Beal (Arizona Daily Star)

About 5 percent of Arizona's voters - 101,536 of them, to be exact - had some trouble voting in the 2004 election, and 27,878 of them had their "provisional" votes thrown out.

•Observations from Orlando Election Fraud Hearing 1/27 (Democratic Underground)

1) In Orange County, many voters in precinct 212 received telephone calls in the days leading up to the election from people who purported to be election employees. Those calls told voters that precinct 212 would be closed on election day and that they should report to precinct 214. In fact, precinct 212 was open and the people who believed the calls had to wait in line at 214 only to learn that 212 was open.

It also was noted that many election employees didn't understand how the new provisional balloting system would work. Various voters also left before voting because queues were excessively long.

2) The second witness was Ms. Marie Palmer, a volunteer with the Florida NAACP for more than forty years. She was an observer at Orange County's Mitchell Center, an early voting site, for twelve of the fourteen days when early voting took place. She noted excessively long queues and too few election employees. After the second day of observing long wait times, she asked the election staff on site why additional voting tables and staff were not allotted. The answer she received was that the office of the Orange County Supervisor of Elections did not anticipate a strong turn-out for the election and nothing could be done. . . .

•Wisconsin G.O.P. Chairman Says Wisconsin May Have Gone to Bush, Continues His Efforts to Distract Nation from Ohio (Nashua Advocate)

OHIO
•As mentioned previously, Ohio Republican Attorney General James Petro has sued the lawyers who filed suit on behalf of Ohio voters to contest the election. Petro is suing for sanctions, including hefty fines. The four lawyers—Robert Fitrakis, Susan Truitt, Cliff Arnebeck and Peter Peckarsky—are mounting a defense that will include presenting massive evidence of election fraud to the court. The lawyers are in urgent need of financial help.

Please go to http://freepress.org/store.php#donate and make a financial contribution to the "Ohio Sanctions Defense Fund".

•Representative John Conyers Asks FBI to Expand Investigation into Clermont, Union, Fulton, Hocking, Monroe, Henry, and Harrison Counties (pdf)
John Conyers asks the FBI to expand its investigation into further incidents in Ohio. Attached to Conyers letter is the FBI January 12 refusal to further investigate or seek prosecution of the Triad vote machine tampering incident in Hocking County. (via Ohio Election Fraud.)

•Ohio recount volunteers allege electoral tampering, legal violations and possible fraud (The Raw Story)

Several volunteer workers in the Ohio recount in Clermont County, Ohio have prepared affidavits alleging serious tampering, violations of state and federal law and possible fraud. They name the Republican chief of Clermont’s Board of Elections Daniel Bare and the head of the Clermont Democratic Party Priscilla O’Donnell as complicit in these acts.

These volunteers, observing the recount on behalf of the Greens, Libertarians and Democrats, assert that during the Dec. 14, 2004 hand recount they noticed stickers covering the Kerry/Edwards oval, whereas the Bush/Cheney oval seemed to be “colored in.”

Some witnesses state that beneath the stickers, the Kerry/Edwards oval was selected. The opti-scan ballots were then fed into the machines after the hand recount.

Allegations of ballot tampering in Ohio – which decided the outcome of the presidential election by some 100,000 votes – find particular resonance in Clermont, one of three Ohio counties which saw the biggest increases in votes for Bush from 2000 to 2004. The other counties were Butler and Warren; Warren County had a lockdown after an alleged terror threat that the FBI later denied.

These counties “increased their support of Bush by only a few percentage points each,” the Cincinnati Enquirer reported Monday. “But in the raw numbers of votes, they made the difference.”

•The Strange Death of American Democracy: Endgame in Ohio Michael Keefer
Good overview of election problems in Ohio with footnotes.

•Eye On Ohio: The Informed Citizen's Guide to the 2004 Election
A more detailed overview of election problems in Ohio. Also well footnoted.

NATION
•US Count Votes Response to Edison/Mitofsky Election System 2004 Report (pdf)

Background
After last November’s presidential election, there were numerous reports of irregularities. Reported
problems included:

• voting machine shortages
• ballots counted and recounted in secret
• lost, discarded, and improperly rejected registration forms and absentee ballots
• touch-screen machines that registered “Bush” when voters pressed “Kerry”
• precincts in which there were more votes recorded than registered voters
• precincts in which the reported participation rate was less than 10%
• high rates of “spoiled” ballots and under-votes in which no choice for president was recorded
• a sworn affidavit by a Florida computer programmer who claims he was hired to develop a voting program with a “back door” mechanism to undetectably alter vote tallies

These problems arise in the context of election systems where un-auditable voting equipment cannot provide assurance that votes are counted as cast. The crucial question is whether these problems were part of a larger pattern. Were these issues collectively of sufficient magnitude to reverse the outcome of the election, or were they isolated incidents, procedurally disturbing but of little overall consequence?

Under such circumstances we must rely on indirect evidence, such as exit polls, to ascertain the overall integrity of the official election results. The 2004 exit poll was conducted by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International on contract with major national press and TV news services, operating collectively as the National Election Pool. Immediately following the election, these polls raised a red flag because they showed that Kerry had won the popular vote by a margin of 3%, while the official tally indicated a Bush victory by 2.5%.

Shortly after the exit poll disparity was noted, the Edison/Mitofsky group took the position that their own projections could not be taken as an indication of error in the official vote count. The theory they put forward to explain the disparity was that more of the Bush voters had declined to be interviewed for the exit polls, while more of the Kerry voters had completed the poll questionnaire. A full report was promised, and last week that report was released.

Introduction to the Edison/ Mitofsky Report On January 19, 2005, Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International released a 77-page report on their (p. 3) “analysis of the performance of the exit polls” in the 2004 election. The Edison/Mitofsky reportacknowledges widespread discrepancies between their exit polls and official counts, and admits that the differences were far greater than can be explained by sampling error. The report repeats the assertion (p. 3) that this disparity was “most likely due to Kerry voters participating in the exit polls at a higher rate than Bush voters”, but no evidence is offered to support this conclusion. In fact, data newly released in the report suggests that Bush supporters might have been overrepresented in the exit polls, widening the disparity to be explained. The report gives no consideration to alternative explanations involving election irregularities.

The position taken by the Edison/Mitofsky group is consistent with professional norms and practices. Election survey analysts ordinarily assume that official election results are the objective standard against which their own findings must be weighed, and perhaps found wanting. We admire Edison/Mitofsky’s willingness to find fault with their methods and interview results. However, nothing in their report
demonstrates that such errors could account for the gap between the exit polls and the election results. We consider here the three possible explanations for a discrepancy between the official vote count and exit polls:

1. Statistical sampling error – or chance
2. Inaccurate exit polls – Kerry supporters responded in greater numbers than Bush supporters.
3. Inaccurate election – the voters’ intent was not accurately recorded or counted.

We agree with Edison/Mitofsky that the first possible cause, random statistical sampling error, can be ruled out. The second possible cause, that inaccurate exit polls were biased towards Kerry, is a hypothesis that is compelling only if one dismisses the third, that official election results may have been distorted.

Some Links I Meant To Blog

I've had a lot less time to write these days; thus my amped up news blogging sans commentary. I now have a backlog of items that under other circumstances I would have written about. For now, I'll have to content myself with another digest of recent items of interest. A separate post will follow with election-related items.

•Creeping extremism David Neiwert (American Street)
Racist extremism legitimized by mainstream media and Mississippi state legislators. Two stories for the price of one. The latter story came my way first via the editor at Mississippi Political News Watch, but I didn't get around to blogging it while the news was fresh.

•What I have learned from blogging so far Kim Pearson (Professor Kim's News Notes)
Observations about blogging as a medium. I like analyses like this one, where the writer writes as an insider (one who blogs) but has a view of the inside that is informed by other, contrasting perspectives: Kim is also journalist and a professor of journalism.

•What the rest of the world watched on Inauguration Day Joan Chittister, OSB (National Catholic Reporter, via Corrente)

Here was the other side of the inauguration story. No military bands played for this one. No bulletproof viewing stands could stop the impact of this insight into the glory of force. Here was an America they could no longer understand. The contrast rang cruelly everywhere.

I sat back and looked out the train window myself. Would anybody in the United States be seeing this picture today? Would the United States ever see it, in fact? And if it is printed in the United States, will it also cross the country like wildfire and would people hear the unwritten story under it?

There are 54 million people in Iraq. Over half of them are under the age of 15. Of the over 100,000 civilians dead in this war, then, over half of them are children. We are killing children. The children are our enemy. And we are defeating them.

•Squelching Oversight jesselee (The Stakeholder)

Today, in the House Judiciary Committee and the House Armed Services Committee, John Conyers and Ike Skelton offered amendments allowing the minority party to initiate full hearings, including subpoena power - which is the crucial element lacking in "rump hearings" the likes of which Democrats have held by themselves on issues such as Halliburton and which Senate Leader Reid has promised during this cycle. The refusal of the committees to investigate issues such as Administration legal and ethical lapses in cases like the improper payments from the Department of Education to conservative commentator Armstrong Williams has left a vacuum of accountability that Democrats cannot address without the ability to hold full hearings. This is needed because the Administration has show a complete inability and unwillingness to look into their own legal failings - such as Cheney's involvement with Halliburton no-bid contracts - and the Republican House and Senate have been totally AWOL when it comes to wrongdoing by their own. If we are to have any chance of getting to the bottom of scandal like that involving Armstrong Williams, the under the table payments revealed today to columnist Maggie Gallagher to push Bush's pro-family initiatives, or the fact that more than $88 million of taxpayer funds were expended on Republican propaganda last year, the Democrats must have subpoena power!

So not surprisingly, when Ranking Democrat John Conyers offered this modest proposal in the Judiciary Committee, the Republicans rejected it based on a red herring. Chairman Sensenbrenner claimed it wasn't necessary because Democrats could bring resolutions of inquiry requesting information from the Administration. Yet, when Democrats and Conyers did introduce these resolutions - for example in the wake of the Abu Ghraib torture scandal - the Republicans rejected them as unnecessary. Then, when a motion was presented to the House to initiate an independent inquiry, not a single Republican voted for it, and the search for accountability was squelched - even today, we have not had anything close to a full accounting of that scandal. The Republicans on the Armed Services Committee also rejected a similar amendment offered today by Ranking Democrat Ike Skelton.

•Nice thought Earl Dunovant (Promethus 6)
Yesterday I posted a story about how Black church leaders have united to oppose Bush policies. Earl takes this quote from Rev. Major Lewis Jemison in 2005:

The history of the civil rights movement shows how potent the black church is . . . If we take the time to do what our mothers and fathers have done, we can get things done.

and sets it against this one from Dr. King in 1967:

When a people are mired in oppression, they realize deliverance only when they have accumulated the power to enforce change...

The nettlesome task of Negroes today is to discover how to organize our strength into compelling power so that the government cannot elude our demands. We must develop, from strength, a situation in which the government finds it wise and prudent to collaborate with us. It would be the height of naïveté to wait passively until the administration had somehow been infused with such blessings of good will that it implored us for our programs.

We must frankly acknowledge that in past years our creativity and imagination were not employed in learning how to develop power. We found a method in nonviolent protest that worked, and we employed it enthusiastically. We did not have leisure to probe for a deeper understanding of its laws and lines of development. Although our actions were bold and crowned with successes, they were substantially improvised and spontaneous. They attained the goals set for them but carried the blemishes of inexperience.

You may be surprised by Earl's conclusion.

•Alberto Gonzales and Nazi war criminal Wilhem Keitel agree: Geneva Convention is 'obsolete' Ted Kahl (democrats.com)
The title says it all, but read the whole thing. It will make you squirm.

Some Arguments Against ID Requirements For Voting

(emphasis added)

New York
excerpt from:
http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/voting/20020401/17/728

First, there is the straightforward practical concern. As many as 3 million New York City voters do not have a driver's license. Indeed, 1990 census data showed that less than 50 percent of New York City's voting age residents had a driver's license compared with 91 percent of the state's residents overall. Also, members of minority groups are far less likely to have a driver's license than whites; recently naturalized citizens (and new immigrants from Puerto Rico) are also less likely to have a driver's license. For many of those potential voters, it may also prove onerous for them to have another valid form of identification handy when they go to the polls. This requirement, then, could depress the voting power of New York City and members of minority groups.

Second, application of the identification requirement is likely to create a host of problems. An identification requirement will require poll workers to use their discretion and judgment. More discretion and judgment will be required when the voters use a form of identification other than a driver's license. Unfortunately, poll workers often get the rules wrong. The more complicated the rules, the more likely they will not be applied properly - and this set of rules could seem complicated. A study of New York City's 2001 general election by the New York Public Interest Research Group demonstrated that most poll workers did not know basic rules about where someone should vote if they moved or who could help a disabled person vote. This suggests that poll workers will not be able to apply an identification requirement properly. Under the bill, the first-time voters who fail to provide proper identification should be permitted to vote with an affidavit or paper ballot, with which they sign an affidavit promising that they are who they say they are. But, again, given the reliability of the poll workers, it is quite likely that significant numbers of voters could be wrongly turned away. In fact, New York election lore is full of stories about poll workers who do not know when someone should use such a ballot and denying voters access to such ballots.

The i.d. requirement also creates opportunities for discriminatory treatment. African-Americans have a history of being subjected to special scrutiny at the polling place - as have members of other minority groups and recently naturalized citizens. Stories abounded in Duval County, Florida of African-American voters being asked to show a form of identification - sometimes two - while white voters were allowed to sign in without presenting any i.d. Similarly, a survey conducted by the Asian American Legal Defense Fund found that in the 2001 New York City general election one in six Asian voters was improperly asked to show identification before voting.

Finally, there is no evidence that such a rule is needed. In even the closest elections, there is rarely any evidence of voter fraud at the polls. And, the experience of states with same-day voter registration suggests that identification is not needed to protect against fraud.

Wisconsin
excerpt from:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/editorials/mar03/129305.asp

Guess how many verified cases of identification fraud lawmakers cited in advocating a new rule that residents show a Wisconsin driver's license or a state ID card each time they vote? Answer: Zero.

That's right. Backers of the measure noted not a single instance anywhere in Wisconsin in which it was shown that a voter lied about who he or she was in casting a ballot. So the ID rule, approved this month by the Assembly, fixes a problem that lawmakers have failed to show exists.

Well, the rule won't do any harm, right? Wrong: It will do harm. This added step is sure to stop some eligible voters from exercising their franchise. That price is worth paying only if identification fraud amounts to a serious problem in state elections.

Ease of voting has put the state among the leaders in voter turnout - a tradition lawmakers should safeguard. Wisconsin requires proof of residency at the time one registers, not a state ID each time one votes. Right now, only eight states require all residents to show identification on each trip to the polls, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, and only one of those states, South Carolina, mandates the use of driver's licenses or state ID cards. That's company Wisconsin shouldn't keep.

True, for an overwhelming number of residents, the ID requirement would amount to a small or no inconvenience. But for a minority, it could act as a stumbling block to the polls, which should be easily accessible to all eligible voters.

The rule could keep from the polls: newcomers with out-of-state driver's licenses; poor people too consumed with day-to-day existence to take the time to get the proper ID; elderly or disabled people lacking the mobility to conveniently get the required cards; and residents who have misplaced their ID cards or have simply forgotten to bring them to the voting sites.

New Mexico
excerpt from:
http://abqjournal.com/opinion/guest_columns/223359opinion09-15-04.htm

Like most states, New Mexico has never required voter ID. New Mexico's checks on voter fraud include a computerized system that verifies that voters are real, live where they say, and are eligible to vote. Voting twice is a crime, and voters' signatures are in county clerks' records for comparison.

Voter ID requirements have been shown to interfere with balloting by students and by voters who don't: drive; have a utility bill in their name; bring "proper ID" to the polls; or understand the complicated procedure for providing ID to vote absentee.

An ID requirement, particularly one imposed at the last minute, would effectively turn many lawful voters away.

Two weeks ago, despite these facts, Republican Party lawyers concocted a "voter ID" controversy by loudly proclaiming their "shocking discovery" that voter registration groups had filed "at least 3,000 fraudulent registrations in Bernalillo County alone." This provoked the public freakout the Republicans wanted. Their charge, however, turned out to be fabricated. When their lead plaintiff was under oath, he had to admit they had no evidence of fraud. The "3,000 fraudulent registrations" were duplicates, forms with illegible addresses, omitted Social Security numbers, unsigned forms and the like. In other words, just what you would expect among 60,000 new registrations. None were added to the voter rolls, nor could they have resulted in a fraudulent vote. The only arguably "fraudulent" registration apparently was a teenager's prank that would have been routinely screened out during computerized cross-checking of Social Security numbers.

In court, the director of the Bureau of Elections and a county clerk's representative carefully explained how New Mexico's databases eliminate felons, dead people, people who have moved away, and other ineligible voters.

National studies confirm the United States does not have the "voting fraud" problem the Republicans are braying about. What we do have is a pattern of exclusion of lawful voters. This is the ugly picture that emerged in Florida where thousands of black voters were wrongfully denied the vote. It does not take a vivid imagination to know what a requirement for "proper ID" would translate into in Florida or, for that matter, what kind of chaos would reign at New Mexico polls if a last-minute "voter ID" requirement were imposed on thousands of new voters when there is no agreement on what constitutes a valid ID. --snip--
 

So why are the Republicans beating the drum for voter ID for new registrants? The answer is simple. There are more than 120,000 new registrants in New Mexico— 44 percent Democrats, 24 percent Republicans and the rest "Independent" or "Won't Say."

Add to that the fact that ID requirements historically disrupt voting by students, minorities (particularly Native Americans in remote areas), the institutionalized elderly and the poor. These groups (surprise!) tend to vote Democratic. If you think the Republicans would be demanding voter ID if new-voter numbers were reversed, I have a bridge to sell you.

The percentages being what they are, a voter ID requirement would likely shave a couple of points off the Democrats' margin in this swing state. Republicans are about as concerned with "voter fraud" as they are with protecting the spotted owl. They want the chaos and vote suppression they managed in Florida.

(Cross posted at Democratic Underground.)

UPDATE: More stories.
ARIZONA: Feds OK voter ID rules in Prop. 200
MISSISSIPPI: The Issue of Voter ID Comes Back to the Table
FLORIDA: Voter ID Problems in Florida

Black Baptist leaders put demands to Bush

Groups unite on opposition agenda
by Manya A. Brachear
Tribune staff reporter

January 29, 2005

NASHVILLE -- Leaders of 15 million black Baptists on Friday called on President Bush to pay as much attention to democracy at home as democracy abroad, issuing a list of demands that they say better defines America's moral values.

After an unprecedented assembly of four historically divided Baptist groups, presidents of each denomination declared their opposition to the war in Iraq and to the nomination and expected confirmation of Alberto Gonzales as attorney general.

They also called for a higher minimum wage, discontinuation of recent tax cuts, investment in public education and re authorization of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, some provisions of which are up for review in 2007.

"We have power in terms of black registered voters across the country to impact who sits in the White House," said Rev. Stephen Thurston, president of the 3 million-member National Baptist Convention of America and pastor of the New Covenant Missionary Baptist Church on Chicago's South Side.

Leaders also demanded that Bush stop privatization of prison construction, reinvest in children's health insurance and increase global relief for black nations such as Sudan and Haiti.

During this week's sessions, delegates passed the plate to endow two historically black colleges, fund care for African AIDS victims and provide tsunami relief in Somalia. The money will be distributed from a newly opened bank account shared by the four groups.

The Nashville assembly was the first since 1895, when a number of black Baptist state and regional associations met in Atlanta to form the National Baptist Convention, USA.

Divided by political and philosophical differences, the National Baptist Convention of America was the first to break away in 1915. The Progressive National Baptist Convention emerged in 1961. The National Missionary Baptist Convention of America formed in 1988.

Rev. William Shaw, president of the 7 million-member National Baptist Convention, USA, did not rule out reunification, saying it is up to God's will.

"It is not erased from our thinking," he said. "The Holy Spirit has caused this coming together."

Shaw said an effort to galvanize other African-American denominations is under way. Leaders of other black churches, including the African Methodist Episcopal Church, attended this week's gathering.

Rev. Lewis Baldwin, a Baptist minister and professor of theology and church history at Vanderbilt University, said the joint meeting was the most promising sign of active engagement since the death of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

"Since King passed away, the black church has retreated into reactionary traditions," he said. "Many see a need to reawaken the church to its prophetic mission."

Rev. Major Lewis Jemison, president of the Progressive National Baptist Convention, said the church must take its cues from that era.

"The history of the civil rights movement shows how potent the black church is," Jemison said. "If we take the time to do what our mothers and fathers have done, we can get things done."

Copyright © 2005, Chicago Tribune

The Children of Iraq

My God, what has our government done. . .

(See the rest.)

So Actually Bush's Claims Aren't Even Half True

Over the Martin Luther King holiday weekend I picked up on the Bush interview in which he claimed that Social Security privatization would be good for African Americans because

the life expectancy of African American males is a lot less than other groups and, therefore, if you really think about that, you have people putting money in the system that aren’t — families won’t benefit from the system.

My translation:

In Bush-speak injustice is when people miss the chance to have their pockets lined with cash—as if it's a forgone conclusion that African Americans die younger than white Americans

It turns out that my assessment of Bush's bigotry was much too one dimensional.

First, Mr. Bush's remarks on African-Americans perpetuate a crude misunderstanding about what life expectancy means. It's true that the current life expectancy for black males at birth is only 68.8 years - but that doesn't mean that a black man who has worked all his life can expect to die after collecting only a few years' worth of Social Security benefits. Blacks' low life expectancy is largely due to high death rates in childhood and young adulthood. African-American men who make it to age 65 can expect to live, and collect benefits, for an additional 14.6 years - not that far short of the 16.6-year figure for white men.

Second, the formula determining Social Security benefits is progressive: it provides more benefits, as a percentage of earnings, to low-income workers than to high-income workers. Since African-Americans are paid much less, on average, than whites, this works to their advantage.

Finally, Social Security isn't just a retirement program; it's also a disability insurance program. And blacks are much more likely than whites to receive disability benefits.

That's Paul Krugman. Read the whole thing.