Displaying results 1 - 25 of 68 for voter suppression. Subscribe to this search
There are three legs to voter suppression in Arizona — so far.
We have now witnessed the national outrage when the referees of a professional football game decided the contest in favor of the wrong team. What will our nation do if the wave of voter suppression laws in Republican-controlled state governments actually keeps millions of voters from choosing their leaders? If the Romney/Ryan ticket actually won the popular vote in states that kept opposition ballots from being cast, will the thin fabric that holds this country together withstand the strain?
The facts about the latest Watergate-like caper are basically the following: The Spanish-language network Univision, known for having a fine record of encouraging voter participation, turned down a paid advertisement from the Republican-backed group "Latinos for Reform."
The Spanish-language message addressing Latinos was, "Don't vote" because the Democratic majority failed to introduce, much less pass, immigration reform.
Robert de Posada, a longtime Republican operative, sometimes spokesman and talking head, was responsible for the $80,000 ad placement.
De Posada was promoting anti-democratic activity, even though he subsequently garbled his message to make it seem like it wasn't a pro-Republican urging but just asking Latinos to not cast ballots. Still, this kind of Halloween trick-or-treat style campaigning is unworthy of any election in the United States.
So where does this anti-democratic mentality come from?
It comes from the Watergate playbook.
Back in 1972, a secret operation by a group calling itself the Brown Mafia, coordinated between Richard Nixon's White House and his reelection committee, and the GOP to leverage Republican support and suppress opposition. Their strategy and how they did it was fully disclosed by the U.S. Senate Watergate Committee looking into campaign activities, and whose revelations led to Nixon's resignation.
A memorandum was uncovered, authored by Alex Armendariz, a staffer at the re-election committee, who advised three ways to win large swatches of the Latino vote, leading to an operation called "The Responsiveness Program."
Step one was manipulating the bureaucracy to offer federal aid to target communities and take credit for it. Step two was to get Hispanics to run as Republicans, who would take credit for Republican activism.
So far, the first was questionable, ethically and legally. The other was reasonable if the parties were unknowing.
Step three discouraged Latinos from voting.
Through grants and contracts, target communities were pinpointed for funds, to create "ambivalence," intending to make it seem there was no candidate worth voting for.
That was done by giving covert money to disaffected groups, like Raza Unida, to run candidates to water down the Democratic vote. All of these activities were extensively documented in my 2003 book, "The Rise of Hispanic Political Power."
Were it not for the U.S. Senate Watergate Committee and its many revelations about the entire enterprise that went by the rubric "Watergate," this miserable episode of our history would have gone unknown and unremembered.
As there were bigger fish (like the "plumbers," the burglars for which Watergate is best remembered), no indictments were brought against the Brown Mafia, although the principal characters left government service, or were shown the door, or became minor, low-level characters in future politics. Of course, some were guiltier than others, some semi-innocent. Nixon even fired the two highest-ranking Latino appointed officials of the time.
Sen. Joseph Montoya of New Mexico, who served on the Watergate committee, called the entire scheme an "incredible insult."
It was that and more.
Jill Ellen Abramson, in The New York Times on Oct 16, is technically correct in saying that the 2010 campaign infractions are legal because secret money contributions are allowed due to the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision. But she is not digging deep enough to connect how covert funding leads to covert anti-democratic activity.
The only reasonable next step -- to nip this hydra again -- is to reopen the Watergate hearings. Have de Posada and his sponsors testify. Make the contributors of the $80,000 come forward.
Witnesses under oath need to face the public, answering committee questions like, "How is the ad not an anti-democratic activity? Do you believe in elections and citizen participation? If they were sincere, why didn't the ad ask ALL voters, not just Hispanics, to refrain from voting? Doesn't suppressing the vote damage our democracy?
To find out exactly what happened, the commission should follow the money.
Jose de la Isla writes a weekly commentary for Hispanic Link News Service. E-mail him at joseisla3@yahoo.com. For more stories visit scrippsnews.com
A Latino civil rights group is asking federal appellate judges to overturn a lower court ruling upholding Arizona's voter ID requirements.
Arizona, already at odds with the federal government and civil-rights groups over immigration, is adding voter ID and the Voting Rights Act to the disputes.
It’s a sunny Thursday afternoon in bustling downtown Tempe, and Tim Pomeroy is relaxed at a coffee shop reading a newspaper. In terms of East Valley politics, he sits at the crossroads — the place where urban liberalism runs head first into suburban conservatism.
It’s a sunny Thursday afternoon in bustling downtown Tempe, and Tim Pomeroy is relaxed at a coffee shop reading a newspaper. In terms of East Valley politics, he sits at the crossroads — the place where urban liberalism runs head first into suburban conservatism.
The media have teed up the issue of voter fraud nicely. On the one hand, we’ve been repeatedly told that, try as they might, no journalists can find any evidence of voter fraud. The local Cronkite Center chimed in with a well-publicized report claiming that voter impersonation, and by extension voter fraud, is pretty much nonexistent.
LAS VEGAS - The message behind a short-lived but highly publicized ad in Nevada was clear: Latinos, stay home.
Election Day holds tremendous importance in our country, not just as the day when we vote our leaders into office, but as the symbolic cornerstone of our democracy. It is a day when all our voices are heard. No matter what you look like, how much money you make, your family’s background, or how old you are, we all have an equal say on Election Day. The openness and fairness of our voting process is what makes America the leading democracy in the world.
In an attempt to alleviate rampant voter fraud discovered in previous elections, the state of Texas passed a new voter ID law in 2011, which the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) brazenly blocked on Monday because it claims the law would disenfranchise minority voters.
Arizona, already at odds with the federal government and civil-rights groups over immigration, is adding voter ID and the Voting Rights Act to the disputes.
This election year and next will define the direction this nation should take for its future. It is imperative, that we the voters correctly choose leadership, not based on the grounds of one’s political loyalty, religion, intolerance, or ignorance of facts, but whose policies best fit our nation. This country hasn’t been this divided since the pre-Civil War era.
The Maricopa County Elections Department plans to spend about $30,000 for television and print ads to correct possible misperceptions among some Spanish-language voters about the date for the Nov. 6 general election.
Good news on the First Amendment front recently came from, of all places, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
With a last minute surge of new voters, record foreclosures uprooting families and a historic presidential election hanging in the balance, hundreds of poll monitors will be in place Tuesday to ensure that everyone who's registered is able to cast a ballot and have it counted.
Efforts by Arizona Republican lawmakers to overhaul the early voting process and fight election fraud have drawn criticism from Democrats and civic groups who fear the proposed changes would limit turnout among the state's growing Hispanic electorate.
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio alleged Thursday that a national community activist organization is using federal and state funds to fight his efforts to enforce immigration law.
Kudos to John McCain! And kudos to the bipartisan group of attorneys general from 22 states and the District of Columbia who recently filed an “unsolicited brief” with the Supreme Court, asking them to “reconsider” it’s decision in the “Citizens United” ruling it handed down in 2010.
Saying they want to promote voter turnout, a Senate panel voted Monday to force cities and other local governments to have their elections only in even-numbered years — and only on two specific days in those years.
“$50.8 million for one player and the Cardinals can’t afford to build their own stadium? I’m not a bit sorry that I voted against them here in Mesa.”
CHICAGO (AP) — Gone are the days when young voters weren't taken seriously. In 2008, they helped propel Barack Obama into the Oval Office, supporting him by a 2-1 margin.
“The snowbirds are returning and so are the unkind, immature, and unrealistic comments by some East Valley residents. Age happens. Just look around at your grandparents.”
Three years ago, in the wake of a new Arizona law aimed at those in the country illegally, tens of thousands converged on the Capitol with a message: Today we march, tomorrow we vote.
Regarding that "scathing" Department of Justice report being used as a club against Sheriff Arpaio, isn't this the Department of Justice, under Eric Holder, who attacked SB1070 before he had even read the bill?
By Mark Scarp, contributing columnist
By Jerry Brown, contributing columnist
Guest Commentary by Bill Richardson
Guest Commentary by Shawn Thiele
By Mark Heller, Tribune
© Copyright 2013, East Valley Tribune, Tempe, AZ. [Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]
A Division of 10/13 Communications