ICYMI: AFJ’s Bradley Whitford in the best campaign ad of 2012

It’s entertaining.  It’s informative.  It’s not even the least bit negative.  You call that a campaign ad?

Actually, yes.  It’s the “West Wing Reunion” video for Bridget Mary McCormack, a candidate for Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court.  Stars include AFJ Board Member Bradley Whitford.

And, by the way, McCormack won.

                                    

AFJ's second term agenda

We are extraordinarily pleased that Barack Obama has been re-elected president of the United States, and we extend to the President our congratulations on his victory.

This is an important moment for our country, Alliance for Justice, and our friends throughout the progressive community, as we unite to accelerate our efforts to foster a fair, just, and free America.

We want you to know that Alliance for Justice is ready and eager to play an active, assertive, and constructive role during the second Obama administration. The president has set ambitious goals for his next four years. And so have we.

Read about our second term agenda at www.afj.org

Why judges matter: Republican-appointed federal appeals court tries to scare away Ohio Voters

On Halloween, a federal appeals court issued a frightening decision that may cause widespread voter disenfranchisement in Ohio. 

At issue: what happens if someone votes in the wrong place because of an error by a poll worker? A district court issued an injunction requiring that those votes be counted.  The appeals court, however, stayed the injunction, meaning that thousands of otherwise-valid votes will not be counted.

The decision came despite the fact that the district court’s factual findings showed that poll-worker error results in thousands of wrong-location ballots in Ohio, either because poll workers affirmatively misdirected voters to the wrong polling location, or because poll workers provided voters with  ballots for the wrong precinct instead of directing voters to the correct polling location. 

Moreover, the appeals court’s decision ignored Ohio election law, which requires poll workers to direct voters to the correct precinct.  Specifically, the Ohio code states that:

if, upon review of the precinct voting location guide using the residential street address provided by the individual, an election official at the polling place at which the individual desires to vote determines that the individual is not eligible to vote in that jurisdiction, the election official shall direct the individual to the polling place for the jurisdiction in which the individual appears to be eligible to vote... [emphasis added]

Given the district court’s factual findings and the actual text of Ohio’s voter laws, you might wonder why there was even a challenge to this injunction in the first place and how any court could come to such a conclusion. 

Well, the motion to stay the injunction was brought by Ohio’s controversial Republican Secretary of State, Jon Husted, and granted by a three-judge panel of conservative judges, two of whom were appointed by President George W. Bush and one of whom was appointed by President George H.W. Bush. 

In short, the decision shows why judges matter, and how past presidents can leave a continuing legacy of voter disenfranchisement.    

AFJ and allies pledge to counter threats to free and fair elections

AFJ is joining with more than 50 other organizations to express our concern about two critical threats to our democratic system: corporate influence in elections and laws and official actions that suppress the vote.  Under the banner “Money Out, Voters In,” we’re issuing this joint statement pledging to fight special interest money in politics and to support the rights of all voters:

Within the next week, citizens in every state will come together to cast their votes for President, Congress, and other state and local offices. The right to cast those votes – to elect leaders who represent us – is at the heart of our democratic system. But this year, that right is in danger.

Our system of fair and free elections is under attack on multiple fronts. The Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United opened the floodgates for special interest money and corporate influence in politics. At the same time, a rash of voter suppression laws in more than 30 states has threatened to make voting difficult, if not impossible, for millions of Americans.

Throughout the history of our nation, powerful politicians and interest groups have tried to block eligible voters from casting a ballot. For much of the twentieth century, they used literacy tests or demanded poll taxes. Today they ask for photo voter ID, or create restrictive voter registration schemes. These laws, combined with the challenge posed by limitless corporate influence, strike at the very core of our democracy.

Our nation’s history has been a journey towards true equality and the promise of a government of, by and for the people. Just as we have overcome many obstacles to achieve that promise, we are now committed to standing up against the pervasive, corrupting influence of an electoral system that auctions offices to the highest bidder and suppresses the vote of millions of Americans.

No matter what happens on November 6th, these threats must be addressed on November 7th and beyond. Together with our allies across the political spectrum, we pledge to fight for the rights of all voters in our nation and to move that much closer to creating a more perfect union. The future of our democracy depends on it.

The full list of organizations joining this effort is available here.

WWII vets fight to ensure voting rights at home

More than four decades ago, as the Vietnam War raged, the campaign for a constitutional amendment to lower the voting age from 21 to 18 was fueled by the slogan “old enough to fight, old enough to vote.”

Now some Americans who fought for their country long ago fear that some veterans could wind up losing their right to vote as a result of voter ID laws.  Veterans are speaking out against such a proposal in Minnesota, where Voter ID is on the ballot in a referendum.

Meanwhile in Texas a federal court struck down a law requiring voters to produce a photo ID.  The court found that the Texas law violates the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965.   But, as Dallas Morning News columnist Wayne Slater discovered “that’s not stopping some poll workers from asking that they show one anyway — and making it difficult if they don’t.”