MUST READ: Republican Justice Department Plays Politics with Americans Right to Vote
August 3, 2006
An editorial in today's New York Times outlines how the Bush Justice Department is playing partisan politics again with the enforcement of voting rights and election law. Yesterday, a federal judge, appointed by President Bush, stripped Alabama's Democratic Secretary of State of very important duties in "a one-sided proceeding that felt a lot like a kangaroo court," giving them to the Republican governor prior to both being up for re-election. This extraordinary, partisan step against a Democrat stands in stark contrast to the Justice Department's "forgiving approach" when dealing with Republican Secretaries of State. Despite President Bush's signing of the Voting Rights Reauthorization just last week, this action is part of his administration's troubling pattern of putting its desire to influence elections ahead of the need to protect the voting rights of all Americans.
Strong-Arming the Vote
Editorial
The New York Times
August 3, 2006
"President Bush's Justice Department has been criticized for letting partisanship guide its work on voting and elections. And party politics certainly appears to have been a driving force in a legal maneuver it just pulled off in Alabama, where it persuaded a federal judge to take important election powers away from the Democratic secretary of state and give them to a Republican governor. The Justice Department says it is trying to enforce the election law, but that is unconvincing. There are plenty of ways to enforce the law without creating the impression that it is tilting the electoral landscape in favor of Republicans...
"Sadly, a federal judge agreed yesterday to do just that, in a one-sided proceeding that felt a lot like a kangaroo court... The Justice Department's request to shift Ms. Worley's powers to Governor Riley is extraordinary. Normally, the government would seek an order telling a state official what to do, or it would ask to have a nonpartisan person appointed as a special master. And the Justice Department's aggressive stance stands in stark contrast to the forgiving approach it has taken to Republican secretaries of state. After Katherine Harris removed eligible voters from the rolls in Florida in 2000, and Kenneth Blackwell tried to block eligible people from registering in Ohio in 2004, the Justice Department made no effort to limit their powers. Controlling the voting rolls can yield important advantages, as Ms. Harris proved in 2000. The Justice Department's actions in Alabama appear to be less about enforcing the law than about wresting control of the voter rolls from the opposition party, and making a Democratic secretary of state who is up for re-election in a few months look bad...
"It would not be the first time the Bush Justice Department seemed to play party politics with elections. Political appointees approved the pro-Republican Congressional redistricting plan in Texas and a voter ID law in Georgia, despite objections from staff lawyers that the plans violated the Voting Rights Act. The Justice Department has enormous power over state elections. It is important that this power be used in a way that appears - and is - nonpartisan. Undercutting a Democratic secretary of state, and taking the extraordinary step of handing her powers to a Republican governor, meets neither test. The Justice Department is giving the impression that it is less concerned that elections be lawful and fair than that they come out a particular way."
To read the entire New York Times editorial, please click here.
