Anderson@Large

Virginia is for Haters of Voting Rights

The tourism slogan of the Old Dominion is “Virginia is for Lovers.”

In the former capital of the Confederacy, there is no love for voters who lack government-issued photo ID. The Washington Post reports:

 A Republican bill that imposes identity requirements for voting in Virginia passed the Senate on Monday thanks to Republican Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling’s tie-breaking vote.

[…]

The voter ID bill generated bitter opposition from Democrats, particularly African-American senators who said it was akin to Jim Crow-era efforts to suppress black votes in a battleground state bracing for bruising presidential and senatorial campaigns.

Virginia state Sen. Henry Marsh, said:

This is one more barrier beyond those that have been erected over the years. When I first voted, I had to pay $5 for a poll tax. There were blank registration forms used at the time I registered to vote, so they gave you a blank piece of paper and you had to fill out the questions and the answers.

Sen. Yvonne B. Miller added:

I’m old enough to remember Virginia’s inglorious voting history. This is called chilling the vote. There are reasons that people give that may make it for some Virginians. It does not make it with me. Although I won’t change any person’s mind, I will say to you that this is another day of shame for Virginia.

That shameful history notwithstanding, Republicans are writing laws that block access to the ballot box. Meanwhile, voting rights advocates are writing reports.

The calvary is not coming. It's time to wake up and help voters without an official photo ID get ready. With Election Day eight months away, they need help navigating the application process. Many can't do it alone.

The Struggle Continues

As Black History Month winds down and the 47th anniversary of “Bloody Sunday” is on the horizon, the assault on the right to vote continues. MSNBC reports:

In an election year dominated by battles over health care mandates, tax rates, and rising gasoline prices, it’s the mechanics of voting – and who’ll get to vote in November – that’s getting full-time attention from state legislators, election lawyers, and judges.

In the latest example, the Virginia state Senate is headed for a vote Friday on a new voter identification requirement – one more indication that the voter ID controversy will keep boiling in legislatures and in the courts right up to Election Day.

These new voter ID laws are being proposed almost exclusively by Republican legislators and governors in states throughout the nation, spawning both litigation and angry rhetoric from Democrats.

Florida Rep. Frederica Wilson told MSNBC:

All of a sudden after the 2008 election, these (voter ID laws) miraculously appear. Why? Because we have a black president in the White House and it is to stop all of the people of color from … coming out to vote, because they (the proponents of voter ID laws) know who they are targeting …

Indeed, we do know. The struggle continues.

Voter ID and Race

There are “dog whistles.” And then there’s this.

Dan McGrath, executive director of TakeAction Minnesota, said the We Want Voter ID is using “race and not-so-subtle racism to feed a public perception of fear”:

These images are racial profiling of voters at its ugliest, designed to drive fear and racial division throughout Minnesota in order to help pass a photo ID amendment at the legislature and on the fall ballot. They’re wrong and they should be removed from public view immediately.

Although voter ID remains a solution in search of a problem, voter ID laws are being introduced across the country. USA Today reports:

Thirty-one states have voter identification laws, including eight — Alabama, Kansas, Mississippi, Rhode Island,South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin — that were enacted or toughened last year.

[…]

Laws requiring voters to show identification at the polls have been around since 1970, but they are becoming more numerous and stringent. Once a voter registration card or utility bill sufficed. Now a growing number of laws require voters to show picture IDs.

The proliferation of strict photo ID laws begs the question: Why?

UPDATE: A day after being called out for its racial stereotypes, We Want Voter ID changed its web banner.

Happy Presidents' Day

Cost of Freedom App Demo Day

On Valentine's Day, I participated in a panel discussion on how advocacy groups, civil rights organizations and ordinary citizens are using social media to protect the right to vote.

I did a demo of the Cost of Freedom web app.

And a live demo of the text app.

In the coming weeks, I will chronicle the Cost of Freedom Project as we prepare to launch on April 4. In the meantime, I want to share an excerpt from a post written by Brittany Papalia, an intern with the National Women’s Law Center:

Faye Anderson stole the attention of the attendees with colorful commentary and excitement on how she was going to keep these laws from passing, saying “I don’t like to fight, but I don’t like to back down from a fight either.”

That's true. Or as I like to say, if you don't want no mess, don't start no mess.

Papalia notes that strict voter ID requirements have a disparate impact on women:

So how do these new laws affect women? Well, if 34% of women lack proof of citizenship, then that may make attaining a photo ID more difficult since most DMV’s require some sort of proof, typically a birth certificate. Not to mention women who get married and change their last name and address! If their state is following a stricter system, then they will be unable to change their address at the poll without proof of their new address. As Faye Anderson joked, “she finally put a ring on it, but she can’t find the damn license!”

While voter ID is no joke, to motivate citizens to get in the arena, voting rights advocates must move beyond studying and talking about the problem.

To get involved with the Cost of Freedom Project, powered by We the People, please visit us at Facebook.com/CostofFreedom.

Happy Valentine's Day

If you love democracy, please view the livestream of a panel discussion on social media and voter ID TODAY from 3pm to 5pm EST. I will demo the Cost of Freedom App. You can join the conversation via Twitter using the hashtag #CAPVoterID.

For info about the Cost of Freedom Project, visit us at Facebook.com/CostofFreedom.

Wells Fargo, Fraudsters and Tainted Money

For preachers and some civil rights organizations, including the NAACP and the National Urban League, no money is tainted. For them, the only thing wrong with tainted money is there t'aint enough.

But enough is enough.

Today, the Justice Department announced a $25 billion agreement with the five largest mortgage servicers: Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Financial (formerly GMAC). Attorney General Eric Holder said:

This agreement – the largest joint federal-state settlement ever obtained – is the result of unprecedented coordination among enforcement agencies throughout the government. It holds mortgage servicers accountable for abusive practices and requires them to commit more than $20 billion towards financial relief for consumers. As a result, struggling homeowners throughout the country will benefit from reduced principals and refinancing of their loans. The agreement also requires substantial changes in how servicers do business, which will help to ensure the abuses of the past are not repeated.

Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller added:

This monitored agreement holds the banks accountable, it provides badly needed relief to homeowners, and it transforms the mortgage servicing industry so now homeowners will be protected and treated fairly.

In his remarks on the landmark housing settlement, President Obama said:

By now, it’s well known that millions of Americans who did the right thing and the responsible thing – shopped for a house, secured a mortgage that they could afford, made their payments on time – were, nevertheless, hurt badly by the irresponsible actions of others: by lenders who sold loans to people who couldn’t afford them; by buyers who knew they couldn’t afford them; by speculators who were looking to make a quick buck; by banks that took risky mortgages, packaged them up, and traded them off for large profits.

The NAACP and the National Urban League trade their credibility, such as it is, for sponsorship by banks that engaged in discriminatory and fraudulent lending practices. Pariah corporations have long sponsored civil rights organizations to buy their silence.

It's up to the rest of us to make some noise. Hey, Ben Jealous, how's your “partnership” with Wells Fargo working out?