I am amazed! I am really amazed. More accurately, I am really saddened. Here we are in 2013 and the Supreme Court of the United States is seriously discussing cutting back the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The arguments for it? Why, the problem has been solved! Voter discrimination has been eliminated and there is no need for this archaic law today!
I assume that the justices on the court were somewhat conscious of the fact that throughout 2012 there was a determined effort in more than 20 states to adjust voting procedures in a way that it would make it more difficult for some citizens, especially the poor and minorities, to cast their vote. Restrictions on voter ID, scheduling and inconvenient polling places as well as other tricks were used to cut back on the voting of these groups.
It is true that in 2013 the evils present in our system before 1965 have been greatly lessened but that is no reason to go backwards. We still see powerful forces that want to limit voting rights. The Voter Rights Act holds them at bay. Let’s keep it that way.
Share on Facebook
Thanks be to God for a good democracy! One man, one vote. That is our principle, isn’t it? Thanks to the Supreme Court, it is actually the law of the land today but those votes are influenced by the amount of money that you bring to the campaign and dramatic changes have occurred in the last 18 months.
Do you think of Caterpillar Inc., Proctor and Gamble, Cargill Inc. and other large corporations as just being your next door neighbors? The Supreme Court has decided that is just what they are and anything they want to spend in an individual election or all elections is their business. This is a real tragedy.
For over 100 years we have been trying to establish a level playing field in our elections and we were doing rather well until the Supreme Court came down in its decision with Citizens United which says that these enormous corporations, with their millions of dollars to spend on elections, are simply a delightful neighbor that we ought to get to know better.
I am happy to see that a really important organization that is dedicated to working to maintain a just society and fair elections has launched a program to overturn Citizens United by amending the U.S. Constitution. Public Citizen has just released a 72-page report on the damage done since the Citizens United decision was handed down.
Let me share some of the report’s key findings for your reflection:
• Spending by outside groups jumped to $294.2 million in the 2010 election cycle from just $68.9 million in the 2006 cycle. The uncharacteristically high spending in the 2010 election foreshadows the blockbuster spending anticipated in the upcoming 2012 presidential elections;
• Nearly half of the money spent ($138.5 million, or 47.1 percent) came from only 10 groups;
• Groups that did not provide any information about their sources of money collectively spent $135.6 million – 46.1 percent of the total spent by outside groups during the election cycle;
• Two groups formed by Republican strategist Karl Rove combined to spend $38.2 million, more than any single group. Next was the U.S. Chamber of Commerce at $31.2 million; and
• Of 75 congressional contests in which partisan power changed hands, spending by outside groups favored the winning candidate in 60 contests.
Behind these boring figures there is a story that threatens our commitment to just and fair elections. For all of our weaknesses, our country has always had a basic commitment to fairness! We should all be concerned.
Share on Facebook
For some Americans, it was a surprise – even amazing. In 1916, President Woodrow Wilson appointed Louis Brandeis to the United States Supreme Court, the first Jew ever nominated for that position. Prior to that, since the establishment of the Supreme Court in the Constitution at the end of the 18th century, every single member of the court was a white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant male. No one thought anything about it!
The appointment of Brandeis was the first step in recognizing that the court was for all of the American people, not just one segment of our society. Have we gone in the opposite direction? Today there is not a single WASP on the court. Rather there are six Roman Catholics and three Jews. It is a reflection that we have come a long way in terms of recognizing that our political structures should recognize, to a certain degree at least, the demographics of America. Have we gone too far? Shouldn’t there be at least one WASP on the court? Take it easy. I’m not serious.
Share on Facebook
Comments (0) 
Themocracy