"Voting Rights" group goes bye-bye

Slate reports that the American Center for Voting Rights has silently closed up shop.

With no notice and little comment, ACVR—the only prominent nongovernmental organization claiming that voter fraud is a major problem, a problem warranting strict rules such as voter-ID laws—simply stopped appearing at government panels and conferences. Its Web domain name has suddenly expired, its reports are all gone (except where they have been preserved by its opponents), and its general counsel, Mark "Thor" Hearne, has cleansed his résumé of affiliation with the group. Hearne won't speak to the press about ACVR's demise. No other group has taken up the "voter fraud" mantra....

Consisting of little more than a post-office box and some staffers who wrote reports and gave helpful quotes about the pervasive problems of voter fraud to the press, the group identified Democratic cities as hot spots for voter fraud, then pushed the line that "election integrity" required making it harder for people to vote. The group issued reports (PDF) on areas in the country of special concern, areas that coincidentally tended to be presidential battleground states...

ACORN indictments rushed against policy?

Hey, Gonzo, remember how you keep bringing up ACORN to prove Democratic Voter Fraud?

Read this.

But Bradley Schlozman -- the former U.S. Attorney for Kansas City and controversial deputy head at the Civil Rights Division -- broke with the policy. Not only that, but there's evidence that he rushed four indictments to land just before last November's election.

Indeed, timing aside, even Schlozman's decision to pursue the cases at all is questionable in light of established Justice Department practice. Although trumpeted as cases of voter fraud, the cases alleged only registration fraud, and there's no evidence that those registrations were intended to result in actual fraudulent votes. For that reason, other U.S. attorneys have passed on pursuing similar prosecutions. But Schlozman, who'd worked to push voter I.D. laws while in the Civil Rights Division, leapt at the opportunity....

It had been the longstanding practice of the Justice Department not to bring such indictments so close before an election. That's according to Joe Rich, the former head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Section, and a Justice Department manual written by Craig Donsanto, head of the Election Crimes Branch at Justice, which advised that “Federal prosecutors and investigators should be extremely careful to not conduct overt investigations during the pre-election period or while the election is underway.”

Even Alberto Gonzales himself said just two weeks ago that "We have guidance about that, doing those kind of investigations near an election," to be "sensitive about the effect it has on particularly minority participation."

House Approves a Voting Seat for D.C

An excerpt from the Washington Post article on this:

The bill's supporters argued that the District deserves full House representation because its residents pay taxes and serve in the U.S. military. They said a D.C. seat could be created under constitutional provisions giving Congress sweeping powers over the District.

This is true, Congress does have sweeping powers over the district since it is a Federal district. However, the problem is that the Constitution - specifically Article I, Section 2 is pretty clear about Congress members being from states.

So, while fair-minded, the current bill is likely unConstitutional and will get bitch-slapped if it ever comes up at SCOTUS.

There are, however, three ways this could be legally addressed in my mind.

• A Constitutional amendment. This was already tried and failed.
• A referrendum on statehood in D.C. It is passed Congress could admit DC as a new state with Congressional and Senate representation. A little shaky on Constitutional grounds since D.C. is not a territory but likely acceptable.
• Recede D.C. back to Maryland whereupon Maryland gains a couple of new congressional districts. But this, too, would probably require a Constitutional amendment.

But creating a bill because it's "right" and having the Dems prance around in voting rights marches demanding fairness cannt be allowed to usurp the Constitution with good intentions.

Do it the right way, Congress. You're exceeding your authority here. Another one for the veto pen.