September, 19 2017, 03:15pm EDT
![The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights](https://assets.rbl.ms/32012617/origin.png)
Civil and Human Rights Coalition to Testify on Voting Rights Before the Senate Democratic Policy and Communications Committee Hearing
Vanita Gupta, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, is scheduled to testify today before the Senate Democratic Policy and Communications Committee hearing titled, "Voting Rights Under Fire: Democratic Ideas to Protect and Strengthen Americans' Constitutional Right to Vote."
WASHINGTON
Vanita Gupta, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, is scheduled to testify today before the Senate Democratic Policy and Communications Committee hearing titled, "Voting Rights Under Fire: Democratic Ideas to Protect and Strengthen Americans' Constitutional Right to Vote."
"The integrity of our democracy depends on ensuring that every eligible voter can meaningfully participate in the electoral process," said Gupta. "The right to vote is fundamental to the attainment and preservation of every other civil right. It is essential to our democracy. Indeed, it is the language of our democracy. We have fought epic battles to secure the right to vote and to eliminate barriers to voting - the poll taxes, literacy tests, and brutal physical intimidation that marred our nation's history. Sadly, our voting rights battles are not a distant relic. Efforts to restrict the vote are all too alive today."
The hearing, which starts at 3 PM ET, will be livestreamed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJcrOTutdkk
Gupta's full statement is pasted below and is also available here:
STATEMENT OF VANITA GUPTA, PRESIDENT AND CEO
THE LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS
DPCC FORUM ON VOTING RIGHTS
SEPTEMBER 19, 2017
Thank you to Senator Stabenow and the DPCC for inviting me to speak to you today. I am honored to be here. My name is Vanita Gupta and I am the president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition of more than 200 national organizations. We were founded 67 years ago and have coordinated national lobbying efforts on behalf of every major civil rights law since 1957, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and subsequent reauthorizations. Before I began working at the Leadership Conference, I was head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division during the last 2 1/2 years of the Obama Administration, and I oversaw the federal government's voting rights work.
The integrity of our democracy depends on ensuring that every eligible voter can meaningfully participate in the electoral process. The right to vote is fundamental to the attainment and preservation of every other civil right. It is essential to our democracy. Indeed, it is the language of our democracy. We have fought epic battles to secure the right to vote and to eliminate barriers to voting - the poll taxes, literacy tests, and brutal physical intimidation that marred our nation's history. Sadly, our voting rights battles are not a distant relic. Efforts to restrict the vote are all too alive today.
Voting Rights Under Assault
Voting rights in America are under assault, plain and simple. The most devastating blow to voting rights in the modern era occurred in 2013 when, in the Shelby County v. Holder case, five justices of the Supreme Court struck down the most powerful provision of the Voting Rights Act: the preclearance system. This system had empowered the Justice Department for half a century to block discriminatory voting restrictions in states and localities with the most troubling histories of discrimination, before they were able to do any damage. The Shelby County decision dramatically weakened the federal government's ability to prevent unlawful attempts to disenfranchise, harass, and intimidate American citizens as they attempt to exercise their most basic right as Americans.
The Shelby County decision emboldened states to pass voter suppression laws, such as those requiring photo identification, cutting back on early voting hours, and eliminating same-day registration. Literally within hours of the Shelby County decision, Texas implemented a strict photo ID law which had previously been blocked by the Justice Department because of its racial impact. The day after Shelby County, Republican state legislators in North Carolina announced plans to enact a massive election law, and they requested data on the use, by race, of a number of voting practices. Upon receipt of the race data, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted legislation that restricted voting and registration in five different ways, all of which disproportionately affected African Americans.
Thankfully, federal courts struck down the Texas and North Carolina laws because the evidence showed that these states had engaged in intentional race discrimination in passing their voting restrictions. In striking down the North Carolina law in July 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit described the law as "the most restrictive voting law North Carolina has seen since the era of Jim Crow" with provisions that "target African Americans with almost surgical precision." In fact, there have been findings of intentional discrimination in at least 10 voting rights decisions since Shelby County. Although these laws were successfully challenged in court, this litigation is extremely time and resource-intensive. And by the time such laws were invalidated, elections had occurred and hundreds of thousands of voters had been disenfranchised. And despite many litigation victories, the vast majority of voting restrictions are still in effect. Today, 34 states in America - nearly 70% - have voter ID laws.
It has been heartbreaking for me to witness the Sessions Justice Department embrace the vote suppression agenda and retreat from that agency's commitment to aggressive voting rights enforcement. In February, the Sessions Justice Department reversed its longstanding litigation position that the Texas voter ID was intentionally racially discriminatory. In June, the Civil Rights Division's voting section sent a letter to 44 states forcing them to provide extensive voter information on how they maintain their voter rolls, in what appears to be a prelude to a voter purge. And in August, the Sessions Justice Department filed a brief with the Supreme Court in the case of Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, arguing that it should be easier for states to remove registered voters from their rolls - reversing not only its long-held legal interpretation, but also the position we had taken in the lower courts in that exact case.
And then we have President Trump's so-called Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, which was ostensibly set up to justify the President's absurd allegation that millions of people voted illegally in the 2016 election. Of course, the real reason the commission was created was to restrict the right to vote in America. Working hand-in-hand with other civil rights organizations, the Leadership Conference has mounted a nationwide effort to challenge this sham commission. The fact that the commission is led by Vice President Pence and the discredited Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach tells you all you need to know about its agenda. Secretary Kobach and other commission members have built their careers trying to restrict voting rights in America.
The committee's opening salvo - an effort to create a national database of sensitive voter information for the first time in U.S. history - should alarm any American who values privacy, security, and the integrity of our elections. Sadly, in response to the commission's unprecedented data request, thousands of voters throughout the country have canceled their registrations. In this way, the commission's voter suppression impact has already begun. The commission has met twice - most recently last week in New Hampshire - and has served as a platform for conspiracy theorists and vote suppression advocates. Commission member Hans von Spakovsky was recently identified as the sender of an email to Attorney General Sessions urging that no Democrats or "mainstream" Republicans be permitted to serve on the commission. It is deeply troubling that Mr. von Spakovsky remains a member of this commission and that the commission was created in the first place. We have urged Congress to deny any appropriations to this sham commission, and we appreciate the efforts that Leader Schumer, Senator Booker, and many of you have undertaken to promote that strategy.
Affirmative Agenda for Strengthening Voting Rights in America
Of course, it is not enough just to play defense. And it is not enough to rely on the courts. Although there have been recent voting rights victories in federal court, we cannot count on the courts - not with the types of judges President Trump is putting up.
We must put forward an affirmative legislative voting rights agenda as well. The Voting Rights Advancement Act (VRAA) is the centerpiece of that agenda. This bill would effectively overturn the Shelby County decision and create a new coverage formula - one that we believe will pass Supreme Court muster - and restore Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to its full and proper strength. We strongly support this bill - introduced by Senator Leahy - and I commend all of you who have cosponsored it. There are 46 Senate cosponsors; unfortunately, none are Republicans. In 2015, House Judiciary Committee Chair Bob Goodlatte said he would not hold a hearing on Voting Rights Act legislation and stated: "We are certainly willing to look at any new evidence of discrimination if there is a need to take any measures. But at this point, we have not seen that." In light of the fact that there have been findings of intentional discrimination by states or localities in at least 10 federal court decisions, congressional hearings on the Voting Rights Act are long overdue.
We also support the Voter Empowerment Act, which has been introduced by Senator Gillibrand in the Senate and civil rights icon Congressman John Lewis in the House. This comprehensive legislation would dramatically enhance the right to vote. Among other things, the bill would require a minimum of 15 days of early voting in federal elections, permit same-day voter registration, count all provisional ballots, prohibit voter caging practices, ensure equal allocation of polling place resources, modernize our voter registration system by making it available online, and restore the voting rights of formerly incarcerated people.
On this last issue, there is an important stand-alone bill that we strongly support: the Democracy Restoration Act, which has been championed by Senator Cardin. This bill would restore voting rights in federal elections to formerly incarcerated people who are living and working in our communities. Nearly six million American citizens are denied the right to vote because they have a past criminal conviction. Felon disenfranchisement laws are rooted in the post-Civil War era and were used to prevent freed slaves from voting, and these laws still have a significant racial impact. About one of every 13 African Americans in this country are denied the right to vote by criminal disenfranchisement laws. Congressional action is needed to restore voting rights in federal elections to the millions of Americans who have been released from incarceration, but continue to be denied their ability to fully participate in civic life.
We also support a fair, accurate, and fully funded 2020 census, which is among the most significant civil rights issues facing the country today. Census data ensure fair, proportionate voting representation for all Americans. Federal funding for key programs, such as education, health care, and rural broadband access, is determined by census data, and this is crucial in helping federal agencies monitor discrimination. Congress must oversee census planning and allocate enough money to ensure that the 2020 Census counts everyone fairly and accurately, including historically undercounted population groups. This means that Congress must ensure a sufficient funding ramp-up for the 2020 Census, by allocating more funds for the Census Bureau than the administration proposed. It will also be critical for the administration to nominate a highly qualified and widely respected professional to serve as the next Director of the Census Bureau and for the Senate to swiftly confirm that individual.
Another important funding priority is the Election Assistance Commission (EAC). The EAC was created with bipartisan support following the 2000 election to address widely-recognized problems with our voting systems that created confusion, suppressed voter turnout, and fostered doubt about the fairness of outcomes. These problems included long lines at polling stations, outdated voting technology, and registration practices that prevented lawful voters from being heard. The EAC works in a bipartisan fashion to distribute federal funds to states and municipalities for election administration, and to ensure better elections by conducting research, collecting data, and sharing information. It is a small but critical federal agency to protect and modernize the nation's voting systems.
Finally, I would like to say a word of support for Senator Leahy's Automatic Voter Registration Act. Here is how AVR works: eligible citizens who interact with government agencies are registered to vote unless they decline, and agencies transfer voter registration information electronically to election officials. This creates a seamless process that boosts registration rates, cleans up the voter rolls, and makes voting more convenient. Although there has regrettably been a lack of bipartisan support for AVR in Congress, there has been significant bipartisan support for this idea at the state level. Ten states and the District of Columbia have already approved AVR, and 32 states have introduced AVR proposals this year. Illinois became the latest state to approve automatic registration just last month, when Republican Governor Bruce Rauner signed a bill that the legislature passed unanimously.
Voting rights should transcend partisanship. The Voting Rights Act was passed with both Republican and Democratic support in 1965, and every reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act was signed into law by Republican presidents - Nixon in 1970, Ford in 1975, Reagan in 1982, and Bush in 2006. No matter what policy goals we care most about, we get closer to achieving them through the ballot box. The integrity of our democracy depends on ensuring that every eligible voter can participate in the electoral process.
We appreciate your efforts to expand the right to vote in America, because it is critical that all our citizens have the ability to equally and meaningfully participate in our democracy. The Leadership Conference will be by your side in this urgent fight.
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights is a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 200 national organizations to promote and protect the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States. Through advocacy and outreach to targeted constituencies, The Leadership Conference works toward the goal of a more open and just society - an America as good as its ideals.
(202) 466-3311LATEST NEWS
Critics Warn Manchin-Barrasso Permitting Bill 'Is Taken Straight From Project 2025'
"You thought Project 2025 was just a threat after the election? It's actually happening *right now,*" said one climate campaigner.
Jul 26, 2024
Climate and environmental defenders on this week implored U.S. senators to block a permitting reform bill introduced this week by Sens. Joe Manchin and John Barrasso that one campaigner linked to Project 2025, a conservative coalition's agenda for a far-right overhaul of the federal government.
Common Dreamsreported Monday that Manchin (I-W.Va.) and Barrasso (R-Wyo.)—respectively the chair and ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee—introduced the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024.
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) noted that although the proposal "includes several positive reforms for the accelerated development of transmission projects," it also advocates "limiting opportunities for communities to challenge projects, loosening oversight for drilling and mining projects, extending drilling permits and fast-tracking [liquified natural gas] permits, and several other provisions friendly to fossil fuel giants."
"This dangerous bill doesn't deserve a floor vote."
These are nearly identical policies to what's proposed in Project 2025's Mandate for Leadership. The plan, which was spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, calls for "unleashing all of America's energy resources," including by ending federal restrictions on fossil fuel drilling on public lands; limiting investments in renewable energy; and rolling back environmental permitting restrictions for new oil, gas, and coal projects, including power plants.
While Manchin has been trying—and failing—to pass fossil fuel-friendly permitting reform legislation for years, Brett Hartl, director of public affairs at the Center for Biological Diversity, said that his "Frankenstein legislation is taken straight from Project 2025, and it's the biggest giveaway in decades to the fossil fuel industry."
Hartl said the bill "deprives communities of the power to defend themselves and gives that power to Big Oil by making it harder for communities to challenge polluting projects in court," and "prioritizes the profits of coal barons over public health."
"And it mandates oil and gas extraction in our oceans," he continued. "The insignificant crumbs thrown at renewable energy do nothing to address the climate emergency."
"Monday was the hottest day in recorded history," Hartl noted. "It's shocking that as the climate emergency continues to break records around us, the Senate continues to fast-track the fossil fuel expansion that is killing us. This dangerous bill doesn't deserve a floor vote."
Hartl added that "to preserve a livable planet," Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) "must squash this legislation now."
Manchin—who has said this will be his last term in office—has been a steadfast supporter of the fossil fuel industry, partly because his family owns a coal company. The senator says his permitting reform bill "will advance American energy once again to bring down prices, create domestic jobs, and allow us to continue in our role as a global energy leader."
However, Allie Rosenbluth, Oil Change International's U.S. manager, warned Thursday that "this bill is yet another dangerous attempt by Sen. Manchin to line the pockets of his fossil fuel donors, sacrificing communities and our climate along the way."
"Don't be fooled: The Energy Permitting Reform Act is another dirty deal to fast-track fossil fuels above all else," she continued. "It would unleash more drilling on federal lands and waters, unnecessarily rush the review of proposed oil and gas export projects, and lift the Biden administration's pause on new LNG exports."
"We urge Congress to reject this proposal and commit to action that protects frontline communities from the impacts of fossil fuel development and the climate crisis," Rosenbluth added.
"Don't be fooled: The Energy Permitting Reform Act is another dirty deal to fast-track fossil fuels above all else."
NRDC managing director of government affairs Alexandra Adams said Wednesday that "this bill is a giveaway for the oil and gas industry that will ramp up drilling and environmental destruction at a time when we need to be putting a hard stop to fossil fuels."
"We cannot afford to roll back so many of our bedrock environmental and community legal protections and offer a blank check to the oil and gas industry," she stressed. "We need new solutions for permitting if we are going to meet our clean energy potential and address the climate challenge. But this is not it."
"This bill would altogether be a leap backward on climate, health, and justice if passed into law," Adams added. "The Senate should reject it and look toward alternative solutions already being considered."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Nothing To Eat': War-Torn Sudan Faces Mass Famine as Military Delays Aid
Both parties in Sudan's civil war are to blame for a looming mass famine, experts say, and the military's blocking of U.N. aid at a border crossing with Chad exacerbates the problem.
Jul 26, 2024
Sudan's military is blocking United Nations aid trucks from entering at a key border crossing, causing severe disruptions in aid in a country that experts fear may be on the brink of one of the worst famines the world has seen in decades, The New York Timesreported Friday.
The border city of Adré in eastern Chad is the main international crossing into the Darfur region of Sudan, but the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), the state's official military, which is engaged in a civil war with a paramilitary group called the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), has refused to issue permits for U.N. trucks to enter there, as it's an RSF-controlled area.
U.S. and international officials have issued increasingly alarmed calls for steady aid access to help feed the millions of severely malnourished people in Darfur and other areas of Sudan.
Last week, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the United States ambassador to the U.N., said that the SAF's obstruction of the border was "completely unacceptable."
Both warring parties in Sudan continue to perpetrate brazen atrocities, including starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. This piece focuses on the SAF's ongoing obstruction of essential aid. The situation is catastrophic. The policy is criminal. https://t.co/FKhqQh3EI9.
— Tom Dannenbaum (@tomdannenbaum) July 26, 2024
The Sudanese who've made it out of the country and into Adré reported dire and unsafe conditions in their home country.
"We had nothing to eat," Bahja Muhakar, a Sudenese mother of three, told the Times after she crossed into Chad, following a harrowing six-day journey from Al-Fashir, a major city in Darfur. She said the family often had to live off of one shared pancake per day.
Another mother, Dahabaya Ibet, said that her 20-month-old boy had to bear witness to his grandfather being shot and killed in front of his eyes when the family home in Darfur was attacked by gunmen late last year.
Now the mothers and their families are refugees in Adré, where 200,000 Sudanese are living in an overcrowded, under-resourced transit camp.
In addition to those that have made it out of the country, there are 11 million people internally displaced within Sudan, most of whom have become displaced since the civil war began in April 2023.
An unnamed senior American official told the Times that the looming famine in Sudan could be as bad as the 2011 famine in Somalia or even the great Ethiopian famine of the 1980s.
In April, Reutersreported that people in Sudan were eating soil and leaves to survive, and The Washington Postcalled it a nation in "chaos," reporting that World Food Program trucks had been "blocked, hijacked, attacked, looted, and detained."
In late June, a coalition of U.N. agencies, aid groups, and governments warned that 755,000 people in Sudan faced famine in the coming months.
The U.S. last week announced $203 million in additional aid to Sudan—part of a $2.1 billion pledge that world leaders made in April, which some countries have not yet delivered on.
Some officials including Thomas-Greenfield, who has dubbed the situation in Sudan "the worst humanitarian crisis in the world," have called for the U.N. Security Council to allow aid delivery into the country even in the absence of SAF approval; it's believed that Russia would veto such a measure.
Sudan's civil war has seen a great deal of international interference. Amnesty International on Thursday published an investigatory briefing showing that weapons from Russia, China, Serbia, Turkey, Yemen, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had been identified in the country. And The Guardian on Friday reported that the passports of Emirati citizens had been found among wreckage in Sudan, indicating the UAE may have troops or intelligence officers on the ground, though the UAE denied the accusation.
The International Service for Human Rights on Friday warned that both the SAF and RSF were engaged in wrongful killings and arrests, especially targeted at lawyers, doctors, and activists. The group called for an immediate cease-fire.
The SAF and Sudanese government figures have cast doubt on international experts' claims about famine in the country.
Keep ReadingShow Less
JD Vance Doubles Down on Attack on 'Childless Cat Ladies'
Vance "meant no disrespect to cats, but he did mean to demean women and still holds the view in 2024 that they should be punished for not having children."
Jul 26, 2024
After days of condemnation from critics including actress Jennifer Aniston and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, U.S. Sen. JD Vance was given the opportunity on Thursday to clarify his remarks from 2021 in which he said the Democratic Party was run by "childless cat ladies."
Instead, the Ohio Republican and running mate of former President Donald Trump assured SiriusXM host Megyn Kelly on "The Megyn Kelly Show" that while he has "nothing against cats," he meant what he said in terms of "the substance" of his argument.
Vance made it clear, said Aaron Fritschner, deputy chief of staff for Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), "that he meant no disrespect to cats, but he did mean to demean women and still holds the view in 2024 that they should be punished for not having children."
The comments in question were made by Vance to then-Fox News host Tucker Carlson when Vance was running for the Senate.
Calling out Buttigieg—who, the secretary disclosed this week, was struggling at the time to adopt a child with his husband—and Vice President Kamala Harris, a stepmother of two and the Democratic Party's presumptive presidential nominee, Vance said people without biological children "don't really have a direct stake in" the future of the country and therefore shouldn't hold higher office.
In separate remarks that same year, Vance said parents should "have more power" at the voting booth and that "if you don't have as much of an investment in the future of this country, maybe you shouldn't get nearly the same voice."
He also specifically categorized people who don't have children as "bad" in an interview in 2021, saying the government should "reward the things that we think are good" and "punish the things that we think are bad," with people taxed at a lower rate if they have children.
While a spokesperson for Vance told ABC News that the senator's taxation proposal was "basically no different" than the child tax credit supported by the Democratic Party, Democrats who have pushed for the credit have heralded its proven ability to slash child poverty rates and help families afford groceries, childcare, and other essentials, rather than viewing the tax savings as a way to reward people for procreating.
In his interview with Kelly on Thursday, Vance attempted to pivot away from his own comments, saying his point was to criticize "the Democratic Party for becoming anti-family and anti-child" and claiming without evidence that the Harris campaign had "come out against the child tax credit"—a signature policy of the Biden-Harris administration.
"I'm proud to stand for parents and I hope that parents out there recognize that I'm a guy who wants to fight for you," said Vance. "The Democrats, in the past five, 10 years, Megyn, they have become anti-family. It's built into their policy, it's built into the way they talk about parents and children. I don't think we should back down from it, I think we should be honest about the problem."
Vance and Kelly went on to lament the anxiety "hardcore environmentalists" and progressive lawmakers such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) have expressed about the damage fossil fuel extraction is doing the planet, accusing them of pushing people to forgo having families—but said nothing about Republican policies that have made child-rearing less accessible.
In recent years, the entire Republican caucus in Congress was joined by conservative then-Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia in blocking the extension of the enhanced child tax credit, which had been credited with cutting the national child poverty rate in half. Republicans also allowed a pandemic-era universal school meal program to expire, while several Democratic-led states have passed state-level programs to ensure all children can have meals at school, regardless of their family's income.
Under Republican abortion bans, numerous stories have cropped up of pregnant people who have been forced to carry pregnancies to term despite finding out that their fetuses had fatal abnormalities and would die soon after birth—as have stories of children who were forced to give birth or had to cross state lines in order to get abortion care.
As with his position that nonparents should be "punished" for not having children, "who else does 'pro-child/family' Vance think should 'face consequences and reality' by way of curtailing choices, rights, and freedoms?" asked writer Alheli Picazo. "Women and girls who become pregnant through rape/incest."
University of North Carolina law professor Carissa Byrne Hessick said that one could test "empirically" Vance's claim that Democratic policies are anti-family.
"But I haven't heard the GOP talk much about things that would help my family and my kids," she said, "like reducing childcare and tuition costs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular