Tag Archives: elections

Dead People Have Donated Nearly $600K to Campaigns Since 2009

Mother Jones

Yes, dead people contribute to political campaigns. No, they’re not zombies. USA Today reports:

The dead can’t vote, but they can give money to politicians.

Thirty-two people listed on federal campaign records as “deceased” have contributed more than $586,000 to congressional and presidential candidates and political parties since Jan. 1, 2009.

This isn’t a scandal or weird error. Federal campaign rules allow Americans to make political candidates or committees the beneficiaries of their estates. (Dead people can also leave their money to charities, for instance.) According to the USA Today analysis of FEC filings, 32 dead people contributed the nearly $600,000 to presidential and congressional candidates and committees. The Democratic National Committee received $245,176 of the zombie cash, $163,200 went to the Libertarian Party, $96,329 went to the Green Party, $31,203 went to the Obama Victory Fund, and $25,000 went to the National Committee for an Effective Congress.

Currently, there is a case pending before a federal appellate court in Washington, DC, that seeks to overturn limits on political contributions from dead donors. (Limits on contributions are supposed to help curb political corruption, whether the money comes from breathing person or a deceased individual’s estate.) The case involves a man who left more than $217,000 to the Libertarian National Committee in 2007. “A dead person can’t corrupt someone,” Alan Gura, attorney for the Libertarian Party, argued. The fight over zombie campaign cash continues.

h/t Political Wire

More:

Dead People Have Donated Nearly $600K to Campaigns Since 2009

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Dead People Have Donated Nearly $600K to Campaigns Since 2009

"Green Billionaire" Launches Big-Money Blitz Against Virginia GOPer

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Tom Steyer, the former hedge fund manager turned climate activist and big-spending political player, already has one notch in his belt, helping elect Massachusetts’ Ed Markey to the US Senate earlier this year. Now he’s aiming for notch No. 2: pummeling Republican Ken Cuccinelli and electing Cuccinelli’s opponent, Democrat Terry McAuliffe, Virginia’s next governor.

Politico reports that Steyer’s super-PAC, NextGen Climate Action, will run its first wave of TV ads in Virginia this week. NextGen and its consultants are also laying the groundwork for a statewide get-out-the-vote effort this fall targeting Virginians who care about the climate. GOTV efforts are especially important in this year’s Virginia gubernatorial race because it is an off-year election and the year after a presidential race. Voters are following politics less closely, and turnout is expected to be low.

That Steyer would choose the Cuccinelli-McAuliffe race as his next target is no surprise. Cuccinelli, who is currently the state attorney general, is one of the loudest members of the GOP’s chorus of climate change deniers. He has frequently attacked the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to curb greenhouse gases, and he led a witch hunt into the research of prominent climate scientist Michael Mann, a professor at Penn State University.

If Steyer’s goal is to use his wealth and today’s lax campaign finance rules to force candidates to discuss climate change and to oust those candidates who don’t take it seriously, then attacking Cuccinelli is a no-brainer. “I would say there’s a very clear choice on this topic between these two candidates, and I think the citizens of Virginia deserve to understand both what the truth is and what the implications of that are,” Steyer told Politico.

Here’s more on Steyer’s big Virginia blitz:

While Steyer’s first overt move in Virginia comes in the form of paid television advertising, he told Politico repeatedly that he views get-out-the-vote efforts as a better overall investment, along with digital advertising and other, less-traditional independent expenditure methods.

“Our going-in assumption is that the bulk of what we’re doing is field—is enabling the citizens to literally speak to each other,” Steyer said. Referring to the Prop. 39 fight, he explained: “Our sense in California was that technology enabled a lot of viewers to just skip our ads.”

He added on a wry note: “The other thing that’s true, as I’m sure you know, is the traditional way for consultants to get paid is through a percentage of the TV buy…So it’s like you say, you know, ‘There’s a flood in Afghanistan.’ And they’ll say, ‘We need a bigger TV buy.'”

The billionaire freely acknowledged that he was a newcomer to Virginia, but in a whirlwind tour of Richmond last week, he introduced himself to a number of prominent figures in the state political and clean-energy communities.

Steyer met in Virginia’s capital city Thursday with a collection of climate activists and another group of about 20 energy executives. One of those executives—Mike Healy of Skyline Innovations, who invited Steyer to Richmond in the first place—delivered a letter signed by several colleagues asking that Steyer use his financial firepower in the governor’s race.

The consensus in that meeting, Steyer said, was that the advanced-energy sector could pack a much bigger punch in state politics if it were better organized politically and more deliberate about pushing the message that green policies can translate into jobs. (And, it goes without saying, if a deep-pocketed out-of-state figure would be willing to deliver a nuclear-level strike against a politician like Cuccinelli.)

Continue reading: 

"Green Billionaire" Launches Big-Money Blitz Against Virginia GOPer

Posted in alo, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on "Green Billionaire" Launches Big-Money Blitz Against Virginia GOPer

Supreme Court’s Gutting of Voting Rights Act Unleashes GOP Feeding Frenzy

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

When the Supreme Court recently gutted Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, it did so under the theory that there was little evidence of continuing racial discrimination in the states that were required to get preclearance before changing their voting laws. Congress had rather pointedly disagreed when it renewed the VRA in 2006, but no matter. The Supreme Court knew better.

So how has that theory worked out? Normally we’d have to wait a while to find out. Even Citizens United, which gutted campaign financing law, took a few years before its full effect was obvious. But in this case, a few weeks has been enough. A couple of days ago, the North Carolina Senate voted to approve a draconian set of changes to its voting laws, and there’s not much question that final passage will come shortly. Check out this astonishing list of changes in the bill:

Require voter ID at polling places.
Reduce the early voting period from 17 days to 10 days.
Prohibit counties from extending poll hours by one hour on Election Day even in extraordinary circumstances, such as in response to long lines. (Those in line at closing time would still be allowed to vote.)
Eliminate pre-registration for 16- and 17-year-olds, who currently can register to vote before they turn 18.
Outlaw paid voter registration drives.
Eliminate straight-ticket voting.
Eliminate provisional voting if someone shows up at the wrong precinct.
Allow any registered voter of a county to challenge the eligibility of a voter rather than just a voter of the precinct in which the suspect voter is registered.

Why North Carolina’s Voter ID Bill Might be the Nation’s Worst

In the past, all of this would have required preclearance from the Justice Department, and it almost certainly would have been dead on arrival. But with the end of Section 5 there was nothing left to stop them, so the bill turned into a feeding frenzy of provisions designed to suppress voting among blacks, Hispanics, the poor, and the young. “What’s happening in North Carolina,” said Ed Kilgore, “is the product of a gang of ideologues led and funded by gazillionaire Art Pope who stormed the ramparts of a once-progressive state.”

There is, needless to say, virtually no justification for any of this. “Election integrity” is the stated reason, but examples of voter fraud are vanishingly rare and no one in North Carolina has even bothered to pretend otherwise. They just want to reduce voting among any group that happens to support Democrats. If that means reducing the black and Hispanic vote—something that North Carolina’s own Secretary of State has confirmed will happen—well, you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, can you?

So is there any hope of overturning this law? There’s not much in North Carolina itself. But on Thursday, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the Justice Department would file a suit to halt a new voter ID law in Texas. “My colleagues and I are determined to use every tool at our disposal to stand against such discrimination wherever it is found,” he told an audience in Philadelphia, and a suit to stop North Carolina’s law is likely too. So this is where the fight is headed. Section 5 is dead, and despite some early noises from congressional Republicans about passing a new version, there was never any serious chance of that happening. What’s happening in North Carolina, after all, is part of broad push by the Republican Party itself throughout the country. So now it’s up to the Justice Department to go in after the fact and take these laws to court one by one. The Supreme Court seemed to think this was a perfectly adequate subsititute for preclearance. We’ll soon find out if they were serious when once of these challenges eventually wends its way onto their docket.

From – 

Supreme Court’s Gutting of Voting Rights Act Unleashes GOP Feeding Frenzy

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Supreme Court’s Gutting of Voting Rights Act Unleashes GOP Feeding Frenzy

Why North Carolina’s Voter ID Bill Might be the Nation’s Worst

Mother Jones

For decades, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 required cities, counties and states with histories of discriminatory voting laws to seek federal permission—preclearance, in legal parlance—before changing their election rules. When the Supreme Court invalidated part of the VRA last month, that all changed. The high court’s decision made it easier for jurisdictions with troubled pasts to enact restrictive voting laws. Now North Carolina is set to do just that.

North Carolina’s GOP-led legislature has taken many controversial steps in recent weeks—sneaking anti-abortion measures into a motorcycle safety law and cutting unemployment benefits for 70,000 North Carolinians, to name two. But new revisions (pdf) to a photo ID voting bill, which passed the House in April and is up for a Senate vote today, might take the cake. The revised bill prohibits same-day registration, ends pre-registration for 16- and 17-year-olds, eliminates one week of early voting, prevents counties from extending voting hours due to long lines (often caused by cuts in early voting) or other extraordinary circumstances, scratches college ID cards and other forms of identification from the very short list of acceptable state-issued photo IDs, and outlaws certain types of voter registration drives.

It’s quite possibly the most restrictive voter ID bill in recent years, says Denise Leiberman, senior attorney for Advancement Project, a nonprofit civil rights organization.

“The list of acceptable identification has been whittled away to such a small list, and that’s really what makes it so repressive,” she says. “The list is so small that many, many people in North Carolina aren’t going to have an acceptable ID.”

The bill’s new provisions make it so that, with very few exceptions, a voter needs a valid in-state DMV-issued driver’s license or non-driver’s ID card, a US Military ID card, a veteran’s ID card or a US passport. According to an April 2013 analysis (pdf) of state Board of Elections data by Democracy North Carolina, 34 percent of the state’s registered black voters, the overwhelming majority of whom vote Democrat, do not have state-issued photo ID. The same study found that 55 percent of North Carolina Democrats don’t have state-issued photo ID. Only 21 percent of Republicans have the same problem.

But ask the bill’s Republican proponents, and they’ll say that this isn’t a partisan ploy to suppress voter turnout. It’s all about fraud.

“People need to have confidence in the fact that everyone only votes once, and that their vote matters, and establish integrity in the electoral process,” Sen. Bob Rucho (R-Mecklenburg) told the Associated Press. “I would hope we can pass this bill and re-establish a level of integrity and confidence in the electoral system.

The problem with the GOP’s argument is that this voter fraud crisis is largely a figment of the right’s imagination—or a convenient exaggeration. A Democratic analysis of the last six state elections found just two instances of in-person voter fraud.

Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act used to provide a check on certain jurisdictions—including 40 in North Carolina—that wanted to change election rules. If they wanted to get voting changes approved by the feds, state legislators presiding over Section 5 districts had to structure new laws so they wouldn’t hinder the voting rights of any specific group. If the state legislators passed discriminatory laws, the Justice Department would strike them down and the legislators would have to go back to the drawing board.

With the VRA gutted, it’s open season, Leiberman says: “Unfortunately, I think that states around the country are looking at North Carolina right now—particularly those former Section 5 states—to see just how brazen they can be.”

Continued – 

Why North Carolina’s Voter ID Bill Might be the Nation’s Worst

Posted in FF, GE, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Why North Carolina’s Voter ID Bill Might be the Nation’s Worst

New Cuccinelli Website Defends Virginia’s Anti-Sodomy Law

Mother Jones

Today Virginia gubernatorial candidate and state attorney general Ken Cuccinelli launched a website promoting his effort to enforce the state’s law banning oral and anal sex. “Keep Virginia Children Safe!” the site proclaims. It goes on to argue that the anti-sodomy law Cuccinelli is defending is really an “anti-child predators law” that has kept 90 people on the state’s sex offender registry.

Last month, Cuccinelli appealed to the Supreme Court, after an appeals court ruled that the anti-sodomy law is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court already declared laws banning sodomy unconstitutional in Lawrence v. Texas back in 2003, but Virginia kept its “Crimes Against Nature” law on the books. Cuccinelli has been trying to use that statute to prosecute a man for having oral sex with two teenagers. The AG insists that the law is “an important tool that prosecutors use to put child molesters in jail.”

With the new website, Cuccinelli is trying to put Democratic gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe on the defensive, arguing that he’s “playing politics instead of protecting our children.”

But as I’ve written before, Cuccinelli’s argument will be a tough one to make before the Supreme Court, because it’s basically asking the justices to rule again on an issue they’ve already decided on so that Virginia can keep a legal loophole open:

This specific case deals with a man who was prosecuted under the “Crimes Against Nature” statute for having had oral sex with women, a felony offense under that law. The man in the case, William MacDonald, was in his late 40s when he was charged with having consensual oral sex with two young women who were, at the time, ages 16 and 17. While that might be seen as creepy, in Virginia, the age of consent is 15 years old. It is considered statutory rape—a felony offense—to have sex with anyone under that age. Under state law, an adult can be prosecuted for “causing” delinquency by having sex with someone between the ages of 15 and 18, but that is only a misdemeanor. MacDonald was convicted of such a misdemeanor, and his lawyers aren’t challenging that conviction. But they have challenged—so far, successfully—the state’s attempt to prosecute him for violating the “Crimes Against Nature” law.
Because Virginia still has this anti-sodomy law on the books, the state wants to use it against MacDonald and win a felony conviction. The state, however, couldn’t prosecute him under this statute if he had engaged in vaginal sex. That is, the state is trying to use a loophole in the law that makes oral, but not vaginal, sex a felony in order to go after this guy. The court of appeals determined that MacDonald could not be prosecuted under this law because the US Supreme Court ruled in 2003 that such laws are an unconstitutional “intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual.”

Virginia’s anti-sodomy law may not be a winner with the courts, but Cuccinelli’s new campaign site makes it clear that he thinks it’s a winning issue with voters.

Jump to original: 

New Cuccinelli Website Defends Virginia’s Anti-Sodomy Law

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on New Cuccinelli Website Defends Virginia’s Anti-Sodomy Law

Alison Lundergan Grimes: I Need $26-30 Million to Beat Mitch McConnell

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Alison Lundergan Grimes, the Kentucky Democrat who is challenging Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in next year’s election, is wasting no time beating the bushes for campaign cash. On Saturday, she “wowed” attendees at a Democratic Party private fundraising retreat on Martha’s Vineyard. She’ll need to wow a lot more donors, and fast: McConnell is a master fundraiser, and Grimes will need a whole lot of cash to defeat one of the most powerful Republicans in Congress.

But how much? Between $26 million and $30 million, according to a Democratic strategist who recently spoke with Grimes. Even with Election Day still 17 months away, Grimes has been busy courting DC politicos to raise funds, name-dropping the Clintons in her conversations. Grimes’ father, Jerry, a former director of the Kentucky Democratic Party, is friends with Bill Clinton, who reportedly urged Grimes to run against McConnell. (Grimes spokesman Jonathan Hurst did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)

Even by the standards of today’s big-money politics, Grimes’ $26-30 million target is a staggering sum of money. It’s almost three times more than the average winning Senate race in 2012. Only four Senate candidates—Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, David Dewhurst of Texas, and Linda McMahon of Connecticut—raised more than $26 million during the 2012 election season. And Grimes’ fundraising goal does not include outside groups—super-PACs, dark-money nonprofits, etc. Depending on how competitive the Kentucky race is, tens of millions more in outside money could pour in.

Grimes’ impressive showing at the Martha’s Vineyard event could help donors and party loyalists forget her campaign’s rocky start. Her kick-off event started half an hour late, with no banner or signs even mentioning the US Senate. Instead, an “Alison Lundergan Grimes: Secretary of State” banner hung behind her. A roll of toilet paper propped up one of the microphones she used make her announcement. At the time of her campaign launch, she had no website, no Facebook page, and nowhere for people to donate money.

McConnell, meanwhile, has been in campaign mode since literally the day after the 2012 elections, when he held his first 2014 fundraiser. In the second quarter of 2013, McConnell raised $2.2 million, more than any other Republican running for reelection. His campaign currently has $9.6 million in the bank.

This article is from: 

Alison Lundergan Grimes: I Need $26-30 Million to Beat Mitch McConnell

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Alison Lundergan Grimes: I Need $26-30 Million to Beat Mitch McConnell

Egypt in Turmoil: Images of Bloodshed After Army Fires on Pro-Morsi Protesters

Mother Jones

Before dawn on Monday morning, the Egyptian army opened fire on a crowd of protesters gathered outside the Republican Guard building in Cairo where ousted President Mohamed Morsi may be being held, leaving at least 51 protesters and three soldiers dead. The clash—the deadliest incident since the 2011 revolution that toppled Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak—came as the army moved to clear the days-old sit-in protesting the removal of Morsi last Wednesday. The army has claimed that they were fired upon first; protesters say the army opened fire without cause, just after morning prayers.

The clash left more than 300 wounded and lasted more than three hours, with protesters hurling stones and Molotov cocktails as the military returned fire. Many of the wounded were brought to a field hospital near the Rabaa al-Adaweya Mosque, the site of another pro-Morsi sit-in where more protests reportedly were planned for later Monday. Outside of the emergency wards that have handled the wounded, dozens have lined up to donate blood.

Here are photos from the aftermath of the violence:

Wissam Nassar/ZumaPress

Supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood stand next to the bodies of fellow protesters killed in clashes with Republican Guards forces, at a hospital morgue in Cairo.

Ahmed Asad/ZumaPress

An Egyptian doctor attends to a man who was killed after clashes near Republication Guard headquarters around the Raba El-Adwyia Mosque Square in the Nasr City suburb of Cairo. The Muslim Brotherhood says its members were staging a pro-Morsi sit-in at the barracks, where he is believed to be in detention, when they were fired on. But the army said a ”terrorist group” had tried to storm the barracks.

Ahmed Asad/ZumaPress

An Egyptian doctor holds bullet shell casings after clashes near Republication Guard headquarters around the Raba El-Adwyia Mosque Square in the Nasr City suburb of Cairo.

Wissam Nassar/ZumaPress

Supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood stand next to the bodies of fellow protesters killed in clashes with Republican Guards forces, at a hospital morgue in Cairo.

Amina Ismail

A man checks the list of the dead and injured posted at a hospital treating those wounded in Monday’s clashes between Morsi supporters and the Egyptian Army.

Link:  

Egypt in Turmoil: Images of Bloodshed After Army Fires on Pro-Morsi Protesters

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Egypt in Turmoil: Images of Bloodshed After Army Fires on Pro-Morsi Protesters

“Super-PACs May Be Bad for America, But They’re Very Good for CBS”

Mother Jones

Ask the average American about super-PACs and I’d venture to guess he or she thinks of: those incessant negative political ads during the evening news, something about the Obama-Romney race, or the sheer amount of spending ($7 billion!) during the last election season. (That is, if they even know what a super-PAC is.) For the broadcasting business, though, super-PACs have come to stand for something altogether different: a big, fat payday.

The title of this post refers to something Les Moonves, the CEO of CBS Corporation, said at an entertainment law conference last year. Moonves was understandably over the moon about the rise of super-PACs: In 2012, he explained, the network’s profits were expected to soar by $180 million thanks to political ads.

And it’s not just CBS that’s riding high thanks to political ad spending. TV stations in battleground states are magnets for ad spending, and they’re driving a new wave of consolidation in the broadcast industry, leaving a handful of big media companies well-positioned to reap hundreds of millions during the 2014 midterm elections and, especially, the 2016 presidential race. Just in the past month, the Gannett company bought 20 TV stations for $1.5 billion, and the Tribune Company inked a $2.7 billion deal for 19 stations. Those deals included stations in battleground states.

Washington, DC’s WJLA, owned by the Allbritton media company, the New York Times notes, which serves both the DC and the northern Virginia markets, banked $33 million in ad spending on campaigns and issues last year. Columbus’ WBNS, owned by the Dispatch Broadcast Group, booked $20 million in campaign ad spending out of $50 million in total ad buys. Ad spending was also up at TV stations in Wisconsin and Colorado. Wherever there was a political fight, campaigns and consultants were gobbling up ads. According to the Times, WJLA could by bring in $300 million if the Allbritton media company decided to sell it (which, earlier this year, Allbritton said it planned to do).

So all this political ad spending is making the owners of these stations mighty happy. But someone’s getting the shaft, right? Yep: local viewers and businesses. From the Times:

Analysts say the surge in station consolidation this year has also been driven by low interest rates and by an enormous rise in retransmission fees for stations, which are the equivalent of per-subscriber fees for cable channels like ESPN and MTV. Some stations now earn 40 to 50 cents a month from each cable and satellite subscriber.

But those fees currently account for about 10 percent of station revenue, and even if they double in the next five years, as the research firm SNL Kagan predicts, advertising revenue will remain the most important part of the station business. Thus, political advertising is a lifeline, even if the sheer volume of ads sometimes makes viewers want to hurl the remotes at their sets.

“We get complaints from viewers,” Michael J. Fiorile, the chief executive of WBNS’s owner, the Dispatch Broadcast Group, acknowledged. “The bigger complaints are from regular advertisers who really get pushed off the air.”

“Don’t get me wrong,” he added with a chuckle. “It’s a good problem for us to have.”

There are a number of worries with the escalation of the TV political ad wars and the broadcast industry’s consolidation. For starters, it’s far less likely that TV stations will fact-check super-PAC ads, let alone yank misleading ads off the air, which political analyst Kathleen Hall Jamieson is trying to do with her FlackCheck.org project. (By law, TV stations can’t censor candidates’ ads, but they can vet and reject those of outside groups.) After all, super-PACs and dark-money nonprofits are a cash cow for broadcasters. Why bite the hand that feeds? When the public interest group Free Press analyzed political ads and newscast stories in six TV markets in battleground states, it found “a near-complete station blackout on local reporting about the political ads they aired.”

The consolidation of the TV industry, meanwhile, can result in less local reporting and more shared content between various stations. And the decline in original, local reporting could worsen with more consolidation expected this year. “With the consolidation of ownership there’s generally a decline in the quality in local news,” Free Press’ Tim Karr told the Columbia Journalism Review in May. “It is directly related to the staffing of local newsrooms.”

Read More:  

“Super-PACs May Be Bad for America, But They’re Very Good for CBS”

Posted in alo, FF, Free Press, GE, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on “Super-PACs May Be Bad for America, But They’re Very Good for CBS”

Morsi Is Out: Images From the Egyptian Leader’s Final 48 Hours in Power

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

At 3 p.m. EDT on Wednesday, some 48 hours after the Egyptian military’s deadline for “the people’s action and demands” to receive a response “from all parties,” Egyptian troops deployed across Cairo and President Mohamed Morsi was ousted from power. A year after his democratic election—and two and a half years after a historic uprising brought down longtime leader Hosni Mubarak—Egypt has again plunged into uncertainty. In a televised announcement, General Fattah el-Sisi, the Egyptian defense minister, explained that the constitution would be suspended and the head of the Constitutional Court would become acting president until elections can be organized. “The armed forces will always be out of politics,” he asserted.

In the days preceding Morsi’s removal, throngs of Egyptians took to the streets in protest of the president. The military placed a travel ban on Morsi and leading members of the Muslim Brotherhood, and sent tanks and troops into Cairo, where Morsi supporters had taken to the streets, many armed with homemade shields and clubs. Here is a look at the last 48 hours of the Morsi regime:

Credit Image: ©â&#128;&#139; Amru Salahuddien/Xinhua/ZUMAPRESS.com

An Egyptian family takes part in a rally in front of Al-Qoba presidential palace in Cairo. Now-deposed, Morsi said late Tuesday that there will be no alternative for “constitutional legitimacy.”

â&#128;&#139;

Credit Image: © Li Muzi/Xinhua/ZUMAPRESS.com

Opponents of deposed Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi gather in Tahrir Square.

(Credit Image: © Li Muzi/Xinhua/ZUMAPRESS.com)

A man holds a picture of Egyptian Defense Minister Abdel Fatah al-Sissi near Cairo’s Tahrir Square.

Credit Image: © Amru Salahuddien/Xinhua/ZUMAPRESS.com

An Egyptian woman waves the Egyptian flag and chanting anti-Morsi slogans during an opposition rally in front of Al-Qoba presidential palace in Cairo.

Credit Image: © Ahmed Asad/APA Images/ZUMAPRESS.co

Egyptian police special forces sit on their armored vehicle, protecting a bridge between Tahrir Square and Cairo University, where Muslim Brotherhood supporters gathered. Egypt’s leading democracy advocate, Mohamed El Baradei, and top Muslim and Coptic Christian clerics met Wednesday with the army chief to discuss a political road map for Egypt only hours before a military ultimatum to the Islamist president was set to expire.

Credit Image: ©â&#128;&#139; Ahmed Asad/ZumaPress

Egyptian protesters take part in a protest against President Morsi, in Tahrir Square.

Credit Image: © Ahmed Asad/ZumaPress

Morsi supporters shout slogans during a protest to show support to him in front of Cairo University.â&#128;&#139;

Credit Image: © Denis Vyshinsky/ITAR-TASS/ZUMAPRESS.com

Morsi supporters wear helmets and hold makeshift shields and batons. A spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood, to which Morsi belongs, tweeted that a “full military coup” was under way. As the army deadline passed, cheers echoed in Cairo’s Tahrir Square, where thousands of protesters had gathered.

Credit Image: © Shawkan/NurPhoto/ZUMAPRESS.com

A demonstrator holds a flag while protesting in Tahrir Square against Morsi’s rule. Morsi said a 48-hour ultimatum set by the army “may cause confusion” and vowed to stick to his own plans to resolve the political crisis. The army warned it will intervene if the government and its opponents fail to heed “the will of the people.”

Credit Image: © Shawkan/NurPhoto/ZUMAPRESS.com

Morsi opponents celebrate as they gather at Tahrir Square. The head of Egypt’s armed forces, General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, issued a declaration on Wednesday suspending the constitution and appointing the head of the Constitutional Court as interim head of state, effectively declaring the removal of Morsi.

Visit source: 

Morsi Is Out: Images From the Egyptian Leader’s Final 48 Hours in Power

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Morsi Is Out: Images From the Egyptian Leader’s Final 48 Hours in Power

The Best Lines From Ginsburg’s Dissent on the Voting Rights Act Decision

Mother Jones

More MoJo coverage of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Voting Rights Act


Supreme Court Hands the GOP a Gift for 2014


Supreme Court: The Voting Rights Act Workedâ&#128;&#148;So Now It’s Unconstitutional


Chief Justice Roberts’ Long War Against the Voting Rights Act


This Study Said the South Is More Racist Than the North


Supreme Court Poised to Declare Racism Over


The Best Lines From Ginsburg’s Dissent on the Voting Rights Act Decision

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a fiery dissent to the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision Tuesday striking down the part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that determines which cities, counties, and states need to seek approval from the Department of Justice before changing their voting laws. The provision was designed to focus attention on areas with a history of discrimination. “Hubris is a fit word for today’s demolition of the VRA,” Ginsburg wrote.

Here are five key excerpts from her dissent:

“When confronting the most constitutionally invidious form of discrimination, and the most fundamental right in our democratic system, Congress’ power to act is at its height.”

“Demand for a record of violations equivalent to the one earlier made would expose Congress to a catch-22. If the statute was working, there would be less evidence of discrimination, so opponents might argue that Congress should not be allowed to renew the statute. In contrast, if the statute was not working, there would be plenty of evidence of discrimination, but scant reason to renew a failed regulatory regime.”

“Just as buildings in California have a greater need to be earthquake­ proofed, places where there is greater racial polarization in voting have a greater need for prophylactic measures to prevent purposeful race discrimination.”

“Congress approached the 2006 reauthorization of the VRA with great care and seriousness. The same cannot be said of the Court’s opinion today. The Court makes no genuine attempt to engage with the massive legislative record that Congress assembled. Instead, it relies on increases in voter registration and turnout as if that were the whole story. See supra, at 18–19. Without even identifying a standard of review, the Court dismissively brushes off arguments based on “data from the record,” and declines to enter the “debate about what the record shows”…One would expect more from an opinion striking at the heart of the Nation’s signal piece of civil-rights legislation.”

“Given a record replete with examples of denial or abridgment of a paramount federal right, the Court should have left the matter where it belongs: in Congress’ bailiwick.”

Ginsburg’s dissent also rattled off these eight examples of race-based voter discrimination in recent history:

“In 1995, Mississippi sought to reenact a dual voter registration system, ‘which was initially enacted in 1892 to disenfranchise Black voters,’ and for that reason was struck down by a federal court in 1987.”

“Following the 2000 Census, the City of Albany, Georgia, proposed a redistricting plan that DOJ found to be ‘designed with the purpose to limit and retrogress the increased black voting strength…in the city as a whole.'”

“In 2001, the mayor and all-white five-member Board of Aldermen of Kilmichael, Mississippi, abruptly canceled the town’s election after ‘an unprecedented number’ of AfricanAmerican candidates announced they were running for office. DOJ required an election, and the town elected its first black mayor and three black aldermen.”

“In 2006, the court found that Texas’ attempt to redraw a congressional district to reduce the strength of Latino voters bore ‘the mark of intentional discrimination that could give rise to an equal protection violation,’ and ordered the district redrawn in compliance with the VRA…In response, Texas sought to undermine this Court’s order by curtailing early voting in the district, but was blocked by an action to enforce the §5 pre-clearance requirement.”

“In 2003, after African-Americans won a majority of the seats on the school board for the first time in history, Charleston County, South Carolina, proposed an at-large voting mechanism for the board. The proposal, made without consulting any of the African-American members of the school board, was found to be an ‘exact replica’ of an earlier voting scheme that, a federal court had determined, violated the VRA…DOJ invoked §5 to block the proposal.”

“In 1993, the City of Millen, Georgia, proposed to delay the election in a majority-black district by two years, leaving that district without representation on the city council while the neighboring majority white district would have three representatives…DOJ blocked the proposal. The county then sought to move a polling place from a predominantly black neighborhood in the city to an inaccessible location in a predominantly white neighborhood outside city limits.”

“In 2004, Waller County, Texas, threatened to prosecute two black students after they announced their intention to run for office. The county then attempted to reduce the avail ability of early voting in that election at polling places near a historically black university.”

“In 1990, Dallas County, Alabama, whose county seat is the City of Selma, sought to purge its voter rolls of many black voters. DOJ rejected the purge as discriminatory, noting that it would have disqualified many citizens from voting ‘simply because they failed to pick up or return a voter update form, when there was no valid requirement that they do so.'”

Read the full dissent here.

This article has been revised.

View article: 

The Best Lines From Ginsburg’s Dissent on the Voting Rights Act Decision

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Best Lines From Ginsburg’s Dissent on the Voting Rights Act Decision