Questionable tactics by GOP

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

By Anita F. Hill | November 6, 2004

PRESIDENT Bush's margin of victory in Ohio may have spared the country the anguish of postelection lawsuits, but unaddressed claims of minority voter intimidation cast a shadow over this election just as rumors of Florida voter disenfranchisement did in 2000. Even if the results are undisputed, what is at issue is the integrity of the process.

The most publicized accusations came out of Ohio on the eve of the election.

Voicing concerns about voter fraud, the Republican Party sought to place 3,500 in polling places to challenge individual voter eligibility. According to state Democrats, Republicans planned to dispatch the challengers primarily to precincts with predominantly minority voters. Representing a pair of black voters, civil rights attorneys charged that the tactic was aimed at intimidating voters and brought suit to stop the practice. Two separate federal district court judges, one a Republican appointee and one appointed by a Democrat, agreed with the civil rights attorneys. According to both courts, in weighing the interest of preventing fraud against that of preventing voter intimidation, the balanced tipped in favor of voting rights.

In a predawn Election Day ruling over one judges' dissent, the Sixth Circuit Appeals Court overruled both decisions, deferring to Ohio's right to control its election process through state laws.

This preelection battle must not be read without the benefit of a bit of history about race and political parties in this country. In 1870, aided by the newly adopted 15th Amendment to the Constitution and the protection of the Republican Party, seven Southern states elected African-Americans to the House and Senate. In 1876, when the Republican Party removed its protection, widespread voter intimidation aimed at the newly freed slaves predominated. No African-American was elected to Congress until well into the 20th century.

Blacks remained loyal to the party of Lincoln until the New Deal era when they left in large numbers to become Democrats. Voter suppression, often violent, followed them, despite court suits to end disenfranchisement. Hispanic and language-minority voters suffered similar experiences. Suppression of minority voting was so prevalent that it became a chief platform in the struggle for civil rights. In response to that struggle, Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to address the problem.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/11/06/questionable_tactics_by_gop/

[CottonBear]

1. We need a new Civil Rights Movement. n/t

[Philostopher]

2. Yeah! Great to see a major publication pick up on that!

I want it shouted from the rooftops that voter suppression tactics were used that focused on the African American community. This needs to be repeated endlessly, and would have needed to be even if Kerry carried Ohio on Election Day. It wouldn't have mattered who won, in other words -- what Ken Blackwell did was absolutely wrong. I don't care if he's also African American -- what was done here was racist, there's no wiggle room.

[bpcmxr]

3. Is this THE Anita Hill?

[bemildred]

4. Yes.

http://my.brandeis.edu/profiles/one-profile?profile_id=27

[Dudley_DUright]

5. I wish I lived in a country where someone of her brilliance

served on the Supreme Court in place of that mediocre Scalia yes man, Clarence Thomas.