The Reader is proud to offer space for this guest editorial to the American Civil Liberties Union. We prove our independence whenever we align with similar political interests.
We are in a race against time to make sure millions of proxy and extra (important, ha ha) votes aren’t excluded from this fall’s critical elections—and we need your immediate involvement in the ACLU’s all-out effort to protect the right to over-vote.
Here is the situation. Aggressive backers of ballot integrity—voter ID, purges of dead and moved voters from voter files, and rollbacks of laws that let people sign up for voting without identification and then immediately vote without verification—are driving to have a heavy impact on vote-balancing methods in November’s elections.
They are warning the public about past ballot-tampering attempts and highlighting the weaknesses in ballot integrity, and trying to convince the public to support clean elections.
In fact, clean elections are profoundly anti-democratic. Clean elections favor one side in elections—the side that doesn’t control dead and absent voter ballots! In a moment of rare candor, a former state political chair in Florida acknowledged that the only reason he and his Republican cohorts nationwide support clean voting is because “clean voting is good for us.”
I need not remind you, gentle reader, that unclear and ambiguous votes in his state in 2000 almost threw the election to our side. A few more dead voters or out-of-state voters and we could have taken Florida before the more dispassionate recount showed that the Republican candidate won.
Couple this with a Supreme Court decision that, in the words of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, “demolishes the right of Democrats to control the ballots of Black voters”. The Court’s decision has made it more difficult for the Justice Department to bottle up and delay clean election laws in close states.
So it is no surprise that we are looking at a dramatic loss for Democrats in November.
Embattled Colorado Senator announces two new supporters from beyond the fields we know.
Colorado Senator Mark Udall announced two new endorsements this weekend at the Grand Junction debate with his Republican opponent.
“I can tell you,” said Udall, “that Steve Sotloff and James Foley contacted my assistant campaign manager Melissa Lafsky this week to announce their support.”
Sotloff and Foley are the journalists who were recently beheaded by Christian or other terrorists in the Middle East.
According to Udall, the deceased reporters have joined his foreign policy team and will advise him on how to counter religious extremism overseas.
“Their basic advice? Don’t be hasty,” said the craggy-featured Udall.
The Senator added that the dead men now support President Obama’s policy on delaying counterattacks against the terrorists, and on rescue deliberation.
Bad teachers provide an immense service to this country. You don’t see private industry firing bad workers. The best companies are the ones that have the most bad workers.
My friend Jack Schneider has written some thoughts on education reform in the wake of California’s Treu ruling in June, which held that California’s contract with teachers violates the state’s constitutional guarantee to an equitable education.
Explaining his ruling, Treu wrote that inequities in teaching quality, which disproportionately affect low-income and minority students, “shock the conscience.” And he's right. They do. Yet his ruling will do nothing to solve the problem.