最新新聞 | 論壇 | 英國新聞 | 美國新聞 | 全球性新聞 | 政治報紙 | Sci技術新聞 | 戰爭&恐怖主義新聞 | 體育新聞 | 多媒體 | 設置主頁

新! RINF書店 | RINF DVD商店

翻譯：

星期二， 2007年7月17日

創造您自己的現實？ 被暴露的下意識秘密 對再不要說謊! 什麼您不應該知道

由 史蒂文Rosenfeld

而狀態忽略法律幫助低收入美國人登記投票，司法部迫使10個狀態清洗他們的選民捲。

狀態福利救濟辦公室全國各地不提供成千上萬低收入美國人機會登記投票，當申請支持公眾協助儘管要求他們的聯邦法律根據對一個最近聯邦投票的註冊報告的分析時如此做，并且說司法部和狀態的專家将責備。

「它是巨大的。 它是另一個區域，管理發生故障我們」，說唐娜Brazile，民主黨全國委員會選舉權學院的椅子，講話司法部國家的選民登記法律的失察。 「他們不推擠狀態認可他們的選民登記責任」。

同時，司法部的投票的部分，在有些狀態強制執行選舉權并且監督競選，迫使10個狀態做更多在2008總統選舉之前清洗選民捲-或去除不合格的選民-，根據信被送到狀態競選官員今年春天。

「我們在2007年4月18日，給北卡羅來納的高級競選官員的信件進行了對每個狀態的總選民登記數字的分析作為公民投票年齡人口的百分比」，寫約翰Tanner，司法部投票的部長。 「我們現在寫不再估計在您的選民登記名單…和人上隨後撤除的變化有權投票」。

辛西亞Magnuson，司法部女發言人，證實在電子郵件相似的信被送了到10個狀態，但沒有列出接收者。 「部門活躍地與所有狀態一起使用遵照我們強制執行法規的所有供應」，她說。

選民名單更新，因為人們移動，死或者丟失他們的權利投票，如果判罪重罪。 但，因為這個過程發生在公開看法外面和，不用章程，它可以是開放的到黨羽惡習或導致不正確結果， 2000年例如在佛羅里達，當超過50,000個選民從選民登記名單時不正確地被去除了。

The contrast of a Justice Department that apparently has not enforced voter registration opportunities for poor people — who tend to vote Democratic — and a department that is pressuring states to more thoroughly trim voter rolls has prompted some voting rights advocates to accuse the agency of selective enforcement and partisan bias.

“I think it’s pretty clear the Justice Department is pursing a partisan agenda to get states to purge voters while ignoring requirements to get states to register voters,” said Michael Slater, deputy director of Project Vote, a national nonprofit specializing in voter registration drives targeting low- and moderate-income families.

Voting Section chief John Tanner did return a telephone call to discuss his office’s priorities and accomplishments. On Monday, July 16, the House Judiciary Committee announced it was postponing a hearing scheduled for Tuesday, July 17 “because the Department refused to make Voting Section chief John Tanner available to testify,” its press release said.

However, Hans A. Von Spakovsky, a former assistant attorney general who served four years as a top Civil Rights Division lawyer overseeing the Voting Rights Section discussed accusations of changing “the enforcement direction of the department” in a June 29, 2007, letter to the Senate Rules Committee. He became a federal elections commissioner in December 2005, and his appointment is under review.

Von Spakovsky’s 18-page letter is a detailed defense of some of the department’s most controversial recent rulings, such as approving a Texas congressional redistricting plan and a Georgia voter I.D. law that later was blocked in court as a violation of the Constitutional amendment barring poll taxes. Nowhere in the often-technical letter is any mention in section 7 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), which is intended to help poor people vote by requiring state welfare agencies to offer the chance to register.

Instead, Von Spakovsky defended an aggressive stance with enforcing the NVRA’s voter purge provisions, which fall under section 8 of the law. “The division could not willfully ignore the list maintenance requirements of the NVRA,” he wrote. “It is the responsibility of DOJ to enforce these laws.”

While the national media has followed the department’s firing of U.S. attorneys who, in some cases, did not pursue voter fraud cases — another priority of longtime GOP lawyer-activists like Von Spakovsky — the department’s oversight of the nation’s voter rolls has mostly gone unnoticed. The potential impact on the 2008 election could be enormous, however, especially if millions of disenfranchised people registered and voted.

A just-released federal voter registration report reveals the stakes. In late June, the Election Assistance Commission issued a biennial voter registration report to Congress for 2005 and 2006. The report found that 16.6 million new registration applications were received by state motor vehicles agencies while only 527,752 applications came from state public assistance offices — a 50 percent drop from 2003-2004. The report also found 13.0 million voters were purged nationwide and 9.9 million were put on “inactive” status, meaning these people have to provide identification before receiving a 2008 ballot.

The potential number of public assistance recipients who could register runs into the millions. According to the Health Resources and Services Administration’s FY 2008 budget, federally subsidized “health centers” will serve an estimated 16.3 million patients, a population where “91 percent are at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level, 64 percent are from racial/ethnic minority groups and 40 percent are uninsured.” This is the same population who typically seek a variety of federally subsidized public assistance, from food stamps to fuel assistance to welfare.

Another indication of how many poor people could register is Tennessee, whose elections are federally supervised. From 2005-2006, Tennessee registered 120,992 people at public assistance offices — nearly a quarter of the national total, the EAC reported. Tennessee registered more voters than the combined totals of welfare office registrations from California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia and Washington.

Karen Lynn Dyson, EAC Research director, said there were several reasons why many states have not made voter registration more available through public assistance agencies. First, the NVRA was passed in 1993, and many state and county election officials have been paying more attention to newer federal election mandates and transitioning to new voting machines. Moreover, many state welfare agencies don’t see voter registration in their job descriptions — despite the federal law. The same factors were also cited by Project Vote’s Michael Slater, who emphasized that low-income people tend to move more often than better-off Americans.

“Our organization exists to correct the problem that voting is skewed toward upper-income folks,” he said. “We are trying to make voting more representative of the population.”

Justice Department spokesperson Cynthia Magnuson cited two department enforcement actions concerning increased voter registration; suing New York in 2004 because its state universities did not “offer voter registration opportunities at those offices serving students with disabilities,” and the department’s 2002 suit against Tennessee, which led to federal oversight of its elections. The New York suit is still pending.

Scott Novakowski, a senior policy analyst at Demos, a centrist public policy group based in New York that has followed this issue for several years, said it was ironic the Justice Department cited Tennessee because that state’s welfare office registrations reveal how many potential voters could be involved if the department enforced the law.

“This is not a lot of numbers until you see Tennessee,” he said. “We have looked at how many people can feasibly get on the rolls and it is enormous. Tennessee is under a court order and is doing it right. If you look at the number of people who go through public assistance offices, in some states it is in the millions.”

The public interest groups that have tracked this issue — Demos, Project Vote, ACORN and the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law — have issued reports citing a steady downward trend in these voter registrations and met with Justice Department officials in 2005 to present their findings and concerns.

“In January 2005, we had a 10-year report, which documented the 59 percent decline from 1995 through 2004,” Novakowski said, adding follow-up letters cited violations from Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Tennessee. “John Conyers (now the House Judiciary Committee chairman) and 29 other representatives asked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to look into this, and there was no response.”

This spring, after learning of Voting Section letters to North Carolina and Kentucky pressuring those states to more aggressively purge their voter lists, the same coalition called on the House and Senate Judiciary committees to investigate the “selective enforcement” of voter registration laws.

“We are concerned that the Justice Department’s Voting Section is ignoring the primary purpose of NVRA to “establish procedures that will increase the number if eligible citizens who register to vote in elections for federal office.”" it wrote in a May 8, 2007, letter. “Instead, the Voting Section is concentrating its NVRA enforcement priority on pressuring states to conduct massive purges of their voter rolls.”

Have Your Say: Bush Government to Poor Voters: We Don’t Want You to Vote
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report here.

RSS TrackBack URL

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Related News

• Will The 2008 Vote Be Fair?
• Uproar: Bush official’s quip on black voters
• Troops Have to Fight for Their Right to Vote
• Postal voting cheats are threat to May elections
• Civil rights groups sue state officials

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 17th, 2007 at 10:06 pm and is filed under Political News . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Loading ...

ADVERTISEMENTS

SITE MAPS

7/7 Activism News Afghanistan Alternative-Energy Art Barack Obama BBC Big-Brother Bilderberg Biometrics Bush CCTV Censorship CIA Climate-Change Cover-Up Cults Culture Database-State David-Hicks David-Ray-Griffin Debt Democrats Demos Drugs Education Entertainment Environmental News EU False-Flag FBI Fraud Free-Speech Freemasons G8 Global-News Global-News Globalization Guantanamo Health-News History ID-Cards Internet Iran Iraq Israel John McCain Law Marches Media News MI5 MI6 Microsoft Military MoD Money Music NASA Neocons New World Order NSA Oil Pakistan Podcast Police-State Political News Propaganda Reviews RFID RINF Rumsfeld Science Science & Technology News Secrecy Security Slavery Space Sports Spy Spying Stephen-Lendman Technology Terrorism Tony-Blair Torture TV UK-News UN USA- USA-News Video Voting war War & Terrorism News Warfare Web Development News White-House Wolfowitz World_News Yahoo
2003 - 2005 Archives | 2005 - 2007 Archives | 2007 - 2008 Archives | Current Archives | Past Version