#disinfranchising the Black Voter | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

reasoningdaily · 1 year

Text

elda Morgan had a happy life in Washington, D.C. She was married, had three children and had a wonderful husband who allowed her to stay home with the children. It was a dream come true until that knock on the door.

“It was a Saturday morning. I’ll never forget it. It was the police. They had a warrant for my husband’s arrest. He went peacefully and that was as shocking as the police at my door. He was an accountant and made bad decisions with someone else’s money,” she told The Final Call.

“He got five to 10 years for embezzlement. It was the worst times of our lives. I was a stay-at-home mom, happy to take my children back and forth to school. My husband’s incarceration dramatically reduced our income. I had to get a job. We had to move from our house into an apartment. I had to get social services, food from the church down the street and clothes from the thrift store.”

One of the rarely considered horrors of mass incarceration is how it strips wealth from already economically marginalized families and widens the racial wealth gap. The United States has more people locked up per capita than most countries in the world, according to the Sentencing Project. Mass incarceration creates financial burdens on families.

A recent report by the Center for American Progress (CAP) documented a link between criminal-justice interactions and household wealth. The report found:

· Households with a currently or previously incarcerated family member have about 50 percent less wealth than households not affected by incarceration, on average.

· Households with criminal legal interactions face more obstacles to saving and end up deeper in debt.

· Households affected by incarceration have fewer chances for longer-term wealth building.

“America’s failed experiment with mass incarceration and overcriminalization has now bared long-term consequences detrimental to the economy as a whole, as it has become a significant driver of poverty and racial equality,” said Akua Amaning, director of Criminal Justice Reform at CAP.

“There is not just a single fix. In order to dramatically reduce the footprint of mass incarceration, begin to close America’s racial wealth gap and reform the nation’s broken criminal legal system, a comprehensive set of policy changes must be embraced by policymakers and actors in the criminal justice system.” 

Finding employment opportunities when released from incarceration is also a challenge. Joel Caston went to jail for murder when he was 18. He was incarcerated for 27 years and underwent a transformation. He changed his life, became a mentor and was educated. When he was released, he looked forward to starting over.

“I am a middle-aged guy. I’m a dad, I’m a grandfather—I have two grandchildren. I have gray hair at my temples. I don’t think like that 18-year-old guy that once had a mindset that I completely reject. I have changed. I am deeply remorseful. … I have a proven track record of rehabilitation and demonstrated remorse. Individuals like myself, they deserve an opportunity to present a colorful argument of why they deserve their freedom,” he said when he was released.

However, the opportunity to begin anew is easier said than done.

“A criminal history prevents an individual from advancing forward in the workspace, in the labor market. You’re relegated to blue-collar work that doesn’t require you to have any specialized skills,” Mr. Caston, now a D.C. mentor, author and activist, told The Final Call. “Mass incarceration has created a caste system that is a pipeline for manual labor. I am not demeaning or speaking ill about blue-collar workers. However, we can’t venture into new dimensions,” he explained.

“We have to answer, ‘have you ever been convicted of a felony’? Once you say ‘yes,’ they say, ‘provide information.’ Whatever you provide, they say, ‘give us explanation.’ When you give an explanation, they say, ‘we can’t hire you.’”

The Prison Policy Initiative is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that produces cutting–edge research to expose the broader harm of mass criminalization. Their research found that formerly incarcerated people are unemployed at a rate of over 27 percent—higher than the total U.S. unemployment rate during any historical period, including the Great Depression.

“Our estimate of the unemployment rate establishes that formerly incarcerated people want to work, but face structural barriers to securing employment, particularly within the period immediately following release. For those who are Black or Hispanic—especially women— status as ‘formerly incarcerated’ reduces their employment chances even more,” according to the Prison Policy Initiative.

“This perpetual labor market punishment creates a counterproductive system of release and poverty, hurting everyone involved: employers, the taxpayers, and certainly formerly incarcerated people looking to break the cycle.”

The report explained that incarceration has long-term, far-reaching negative consequences for the entire household’s chances at building wealth. Stable employment with opportunities for upward mobility makes all the difference in families’ experiences.

The Papillion Foundation was formed in direct response to the mass incarceration of millions of men and women in jails and prisons throughout the United States. Their research found that ex-offenders face:

* states that allow employers to terminate employment of

employees found to have had a prior conviction;

* states that allow employers to deny jobs to people who were simply arrested but never convicted;

* states that allow employers to deny jobs to anyone with a criminal record, regardless of how long ago or the individual’s work history and personal circumstances;

* states that ban some or all people with convictions from being eligible for federally funded public assistance and food stamps.

According to CAP, an estimated 70 million to 100 million Americans—roughly one in three U.S. adults—have an incarceration, conviction, or arrest record, which is a direct consequence of decades of mass incarceration and overcriminalization. Their analysis found that nearly half of the U.S. children now have at least one parent with such a record.

The CAP report concluded that America’s failed criminal legal policies disproportionately harmed Black and Hispanic individuals, families, and communities. Mass incarceration has become an underappreciated driver of the racial wealth gap in America.

Before Chicago’s Cedric 3X Cal was incarcerated, he liked numbers and money. He wanted to be an accountant. Incarceration changed that. When he was released in 2020 after 28 years, finding a job was difficult.

“For a year straight, I was getting hired and fired,” he told The Final Call. “Every time they did a background check. I got fired. I would do good on the next interview and get hired. Days later, ‘I’m sorry, we can’t use you.’”

“To even do Door Dash I had to use an agency because you can’t have a problematic background to do Door Dash or Uber, none of that stuff. I used an agency to get a job delivering. I delivered to a warehouse and they hired me. I’ve been working there for two years.”

Mr. Cal is now married with a family. Employment is crucial. Since being hired, he learned valuable skills and became a certified welder. Despite the challenges, he continues to persevere.

The Nation of Islam’s Prison Reform Ministry has a documented history of redeeming and teaching incarcerated individuals through the Teachings of the Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad and transforming them into model inmates and productive citizens upon their release.

The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan has pointed out that America’s prisons are not meant to reform but that the proven track record of the NOI Prison Reform Ministry can help in rehabilitating and training those who were incarcerated so they can earn a living and support their families which greatly reduces the problem of recidivism.

“When you look at what the Muslims are doing with our prison program, in the midst of you, here again you see a torchlight,” Minister Farrakhan wrote in his book, “A Torchlight for America.”

“Muslims are relatively crime free, and our rate of recidivism is lower than in the main. We respect law and order. Since so many of the inmates are our people, why not let us reform them and help to save some of the taxpayer’s money. Why not let us handle the inmates and lessen the taxpayer’s burden. We can handle the inmates for less than what America is paying now. And better, we can reform our people and make them productive members of society,” he wrote.

But the challenges remain for those who genuinely desire to become assets to their families and communities upon release.

The Center for American Progress report found that Black and Hispanic households with a currently or previously incarcerated family member experience greater financial insecurity than White households affected by incarceration. For example, 29.2 percent of Black households and 26.3 percent of Hispanic households with a currently or previously incarcerated family member could not pay all their bills in 2019. For their White counterparts, the share was 19.1 percent.

“Even when my husband came home, he couldn’t get a job as an accountant,” Mrs. Morgan said. “We suffered for a long time until I could get a better job. Everywhere he went, it was one no after another. They say you paid your debt to society but you keep paying and paying.”

Mr. Caston believes the answer to these problems is expungement.

“We need to have records sealed and criminal histories expunged for incarcerated or formerly incarcerated (individuals) to advance forward. Otherwise, we are literally in the caste system mass incarceration has created,” he said.

The American Bar Association found that nearly nine in 10 employers, four in five landlords, and three in five colleges use background checks to screen for applicants’ criminal records, and one study found that more than 45,000 federal and state statutes and regulations impose disqualifications or disadvantages on individuals with a conviction.

Expungement removes arrests and/or convictions from a person’s criminal record entirely as if they never happened. Even a court or prosecutor cannot view a person’s expunged record. However, sealing a person’s criminal record, in contrast, removes it from public view, but it can still be accessed through a court order.

A growing number of states are adopting “clean slate” laws to automatically expunge and seal records. This is being done due to the many barriers that prevent eligible individuals from clearing their records when filing a petition is required. Ten states including California, New York and Pennsylvania have clean slate legislation that creates an automatic and automated process for expunging or sealing certain eligible criminal records.

#Financial fallout just one of many ripple effects of mass incarceration #Final Call #Prison Industrial Complex #expungement #disinfranchising the Black Voter #prison is taking votes #incarceration prevents repair upon return

4 notes · View notes

ausetkmt · 2 years

Text

Ben & Jerry's Celebrates the Power of Black Voters with Rebrand of Change is Brewing Flavor

National Campaign Kicks Off With a Seven-Week Tour in Georgia Encouraging Fans to Stand Up For Voting Rights and Turn Out for Historic Midterms

ATLANTA, Sept. 20, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- Today, on National Voter Registration Day, Ben & Jerry's, alongside Black Voters Matter, is unveiling a sweet new look and mission to their popular flavor, "Change is Brewing" — a cool combination of cold brew ice cream, marshmallow swirls, and fudge brownies. This rebranded flavor is focused on advancing racial justice through protecting voting rights and encouraging voter turnout ahead of November's midterm elections by connecting voters with the Ben & Jerry's Voter Resource Center.

Black Voters Matter and Ben & Jerry's unveil the Relaunched Change Is Brewing Flavor to Celebrate the Power of Black Voters and Encourage Fans to Stand Up For Voting Rights and Turn Out for Historic Midterms

Ben & Jerry's Celebrates the Power of Black Voters with Rebrand of Change is Brewing Flavor and National Campaign

At the founding of our nation, voting was limited to white, land-owning men. It was only in recent history that all Black people have had the right to vote, and even that was, and still is, a hard-fought right. The Voting Rights Act, landmark civil rights legislation passed in 1965, put important safeguards in place to protect the rights of Black voters. However, the Voting Rights Act was gutted in a 2013 Supreme Court decision that paved the way for a number of states to pass regressive voter suppression laws that make it harder, not easier, for people of color and young people to vote. Many states have since passed regressive voter ID laws, limited mail-in voting, and even limited distribution of water in voting lines.

"It is precisely because of the power of the Black vote that a number of states — all controlled by Republicans — are trying so hard to suppress it,'' said Maroni Minter, US Activism Manager for Ben & Jerry's. "That's why today we are also excited to kick off a seven-week tour of Georgia in partnership with Black Voters Matter to engage voters across the state and connect them with information and tools they need to ensure that their vote is counted and their power is felt. And yes, there will be free ice cream."

The seven-week tour, in conjunction with the Black Voters Matter We Won't Black Down tour, will crisscross the state of Georgia in a Ben & Jerry's Scoop Truck, hosting events and engaging voters in the run-up to the historic midterm election. The tour will visit HBCUs, big cities, and rural communities in partnership with Black Voters Matter, serving up free scoops of the decadent coffee-based flavor that is as delicious as it is inspiring. Black Voters Matter works 365 days a year, in Georgia and beyond, to build power in marginalized, predominantly Black communities. The tour is part of a larger campaign that will use digital and social media channels, radio, newspaper, and outdoor advertising to encourage participation in the midterms and connect people to the Ben & Jerry's Voter Resource Center, a tool that allows voters to check their voter-registration status, register to vote, find their polling place, and identify key election-related dates.

"Mobilizing and community-building with Black voters is mission critical for BVM," said Cliff Albright and LaTosha Brown, co-founders of BVM, in a joint statement. "There are so many pressing national and local issues at the forefront right now from healthcare to housing to basic needs like access to clean water, which we know disproportionately impacts Black communities. While voting is always an exercise in using our power, we know this year that our safety, our health, our freedom is also on the ballot. And change happens when we use our power collectively at the voting booth. We look forward to partnering with Ben & Jerry's while on our tour this fall, which has for so long been a voice for change in our communities, and will continue to do the necessary work of increasing progressive power through movement-building."

The rebranded "Change is Brewing" pint design features the work of Black multi-disciplinary artist Laci Jordan, and builds on her first pint design. "Last year when we launched the Change is Brewing flavor, I imagined my ideal version of the world for Black communities. This year, the new visual reflects what I see as one of the integral pathways to actualizing that world - voting. This artwork underscores how important it is for the Black community to have access to the ballot box and to use our votes to move our communities and each other forward."

The deep, rich coffee flavor in "Change is Brewing" is from BLK & Bold, the first Black-owned, nationally distributed coffee company — 5% of their profits go to programs to provide resources to youth in need. Greyston Bakery — a values-led supplier and longtime Ben & Jerry's partner known for their groundbreaking Open Hiring program — provides the scrumptious fudge brownies. A portion of the proceeds from the sale of Change is Brewing will go to Black Voters Matter to support their work.

To check your voter registration, eligibility status, and to pledge and make a plan to vote, visit action.benjerry.com/vote and then treat yourself to a pint of our new "Change is Brewing" to celebrate (in stores soon).

About Ben & Jerry's

Ben & Jerry's is an aspiring social justice company that believes in a greater calling than simply making and selling the world's best ice cream. The company produces a wide variety of super-premium ice cream and Non-Dairy/vegan desserts using high-quality ingredients and lots of big chunks and swirls. As a certified B Corp, Ben & Jerry's incorporates its vision of Linked Prosperity into its business practices via values-led sourcing initiatives when purchasing ingredients. Ben & Jerry's is distributed in more than 35 countries in supermarkets, grocery stores, convenience stores, franchised Scoop Shops, and via on-demand delivery services. Ben & Jerry's, a Vermont corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of Unilever, operates its business on a three-part Mission Statement emphasizing product quality; a fair financial return; and social, racial, and environmental injustice around the globe. The Ben & Jerry's Foundation, guided by Ben & Jerry's employees, granted $3.4MM in 2020 to support progressive, justice-focused grassroots organizing around the country. For up-to-date information, visit benjerry.com.

About Black Voters Matter

Black Voters Matter, a 501c4, and Capacity Building Institute, a 501c3, are dedicated to expanding Black voter engagement and increasing progressive power through movement-building and engagement. Working with grassroots organizations, specifically in key states in the South, BVM seeks to increase voter registration and turnout, advocate for policies to expand voting rights/access, and help develop infrastructure where little or none exists to support a power-building movement that keeps Black voters and their issues at the forefront of our election process.

For more information, please visit https://www.blackvotersmatterfund.org/

Ben & Jerry's relaunches Change Is Brewing flavor to target regressive voting practices and ensure all have an equal vote.

#Ben & Jerry's Celebrates the Power of Black Voters with Rebrand of Change is Brewing Flavor #Ben and Jerrys #Black Votes Matter #Change is Brewing Flavor #civil rights in america #voting rights in america #Black Lives Matter #voter disinfranchisement #Black Voters Matter Bus Tour

17 notes · View notes

reasoningdaily · 7 months

Text

Disinfranchisement Laws - in america

#Disinfranchisement Laws - in america #voting rights #Black Voters #civil rights

29 notes · View notes

ausetkmt · 2 years

Text

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was incensed. Late last year, the state’s Republican legislature had drawn congressional maps that largely kept districts intact, leaving the GOP with only a modest electoral advantage.

DeSantis threw out the legislature’s work and redrew Florida’s congressional districts, making them far more favorable to Republicans. The plan was so aggressive that the Republican-controlled legislature balked and fought DeSantis for months. The governor overruled lawmakers and pushed his map through.

DeSantis' office has publicly stressed that partisan considerations played no role and that partisan operatives were not involved in the new map.

A ProPublica examination of how that map was drawn — and who helped decide its new boundaries — reveals a much different origin story. The new details show that the governor’s office appears to have misled the public and the state legislature and may also have violated Florida law.

DeSantis aides worked behind the scenes with an attorney who serves as the national GOP’s top redistricting lawyer and other consultants tied to the national party apparatus, according to records and interviews.

Florida’s constitution was amended in 2010 to prohibit partisan-driven redistricting, a landmark effort in the growing movement to end gerrymandering as an inescapable feature of American politics.

Barbara Pariente, a former chief justice of the state Supreme Court who retired in 2019, told ProPublica that DeSantis’ collaboration with people connected to the national GOP would constitute “significant evidence of a violation of the constitutional amendment.”

“If that evidence was offered in a trial, the fact that DeSantis was getting input from someone working with the Republican Party and who’s also working in other states — that would be very powerful,” said Pariente, who was appointed to the Supreme Court by Democrat Lawton Chiles.

A meeting invite obtained by ProPublica shows that on Jan. 5, top DeSantis aides had a “Florida Redistricting Kick-off Call” with out-of-state operatives. Those outsiders had also been working with states across the country to help the Republican Party create a favorable election map. In the days after the call, the key GOP law firm working for DeSantis logged dozens of hours on the effort, invoices show. The firm has since billed the state more than $450,000 for its work on redistricting.

A week and a half after the call, DeSantis unveiled his new map. No Florida governor had ever pushed their own district lines before. His plan wiped away half of the state’s Black-dominated congressional districts, dramatically curtailing Black voting power in America’s largest swing state.

One of the districts, held by Democrat Al Lawson, had been created by the Florida Supreme Court just seven years before. Stretching along a swath of north Florida once dominated by tobacco and cotton plantations, it had drawn together Black communities largely populated by the descendants of sharecroppers and slaves. DeSantis shattered it, breaking the district into four pieces. He then tucked each fragment away in a majority-white, heavily Republican district.

DeSantis Broke Up Black-Dominated District and Put Its Pieces Into 4 Majority-White Districts Credit: Source: Redistricting Data Hub, IPUMS NHGIS

DeSantis’ strong-arming of his Republican allies was covered extensively by the Florida press. But until now, little has emerged about how the governor crafted his bold move and who his office worked with. To reconstruct DeSantis’ groundbreaking undertaking, ProPublica interviewed dozens of consultants, legislators and political operatives and reviewed thousands of pages of documents obtained through public records requests and from the nonpartisan watchdog group American Oversight.

DeSantis’ office did not respond to detailed questions for this story.

“Florida’s Governor fought for a legal map — unlike the gerrymandered plan the Governor rightly vetoed,” Adam Kincaid, executive director of the National Republican Redistricting Trust, whose top lawyer was hired by DeSantis’ office, said in an email to ProPublica. “If Governor DeSantis retained some of the best redistricting lawyers and experts in the country to advise him then that speaks to the good judgment of the Governor, not some alleged partisan motive.”

In four years as governor, DeSantis has championed an array of controversial policies and repeatedly used his power to punish his political opponents. A presumptive candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, he has often made moves that seemed tailored to attract headlines, such as his recent stunt sending migrants to Martha’s Vineyard. But it’s the governor’s less flashy commandeering of the redistricting process that may ultimately have the most long-lasting consequences.

Analysts predict that DeSantis’ map will give the GOP four more members of Congress from Florida, the largest gain by either party in any state. If the forecasts hold, Republicans will win 20 of Florida’s 28 seats in the upcoming midterms — meaning that Republicans would control more than 70% of the House delegation in a state where Trump won just over half of the vote.

The reverberations of DeSantis’ effort could go beyond Florida in another way. His erasure of Lawson’s seat broke long-held norms and invited racial discrimination lawsuits, experts said. Six political scientists and law professors who study voting rights told ProPublica it’s the first instance they’re aware of where a state so thoroughly dismantled a Black-dominated district. If the governor prevails against suits challenging his map, he will have forged a path for Republicans all over the country to take aim at Black-held districts.

Al Lawson’s district, now wiped away by DeSantis, had been created in response to an earlier episode of surreptitious gerrymandering in Florida.

Twelve years ago, Florida became one of the first states to outlaw partisan gerrymandering. Through a ballot initiative that passed with 63% of the vote, Florida citizens enshrined the so-called Fair Districts amendment in the state constitution. The amendment prohibited drawing maps with “the intent to favor or disfavor a political party.” It also created new protections for minority communities, in a state that’s 17% Black, forming a backstop as the U.S. Supreme Court chipped away at the federal Voting Rights Act.

Josiah Walls was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives from Florida in 1870

Thanks to distorted maps, Florida did not elect a second Black representative to Congress until 1992. That year, a federal court created three plurality-Black districts in Florida — and then three Black politicians won seats in the U.S. House.

After the Fair Districts amendment became law in 2010, state legislators promised to conduct what one called “the most transparent, open, and interactive redistricting process in America.” Policymakers went on tour across the state, hosting public hearings where their constituents could learn about the legislature’s decision-making and voice their concerns.

The hearings also served a more nefarious purpose, a judge would later rule. They were instrumental in what state circuit judge Terry Lewis described as “a conspiracy to influence and manipulate the Legislature into a violation of its constitutional duty.”

For months, a team of state-level Republican operatives worked in secret to craft maps that favored the GOP, coordinating with both statehouse leadership and the Republican National Committee. Then they recruited civilians to attend the hearings and submit the maps as their own.

An email detailed the advice the operatives gave their recruits. “Do NOT identify oneself orally or in writing,” it read, “as a part of the Republican party. It is more than OK to represent oneself as just a citizen.”

It took years of litigation for the details of the scheme to come to light. But in 2015, the Florida Supreme Court responded with force. In a series of rulings that ultimately rejected the Republicans’ efforts, the court laid out the stringent new requirements under Fair Districts, making clear that partisan “practices that have been acceptable in the past” were now illegal in the state of Florida.

After ruling that the legislature’s process was unconstitutional, the court threw out the Republicans’ congressional district lines and imposed a map of their own. That is how Lawson’s district came to be.

The amendment took on even greater significance in 2019, when the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling on redistricting.

The court’s decision in Rucho v. Common Cause barred federal court challenges to partisan gerrymanders. Writing for the 5-4 majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said it was not an issue for the federal judiciary to decide, but emphasized the ruling did not “condemn complaints about districting to echo into a void.”

In fact, the issue was being actively addressed at the state level, Roberts wrote. He cited Florida’s amendment and one of Pariente’s opinions. Responding to liberal justices who wanted to reject Rucho’s map as an unconstitutional gerrymander, Roberts wrote they could not because “there is no ‘Fair Districts Amendment’ to the Federal Constitution.”

In 2021, state legislative leaders were more careful.

The senate instructed its members to “insulate themselves from partisan-funded organizations” and others who might harbor partisan motivations, reminding legislators that a court could see conversations with outsiders as evidence of unconstitutional intent. The legislature imposed stringent transparency requirements, like publishing emails that it received from constituents. And they ordered their staff to base their decisions exclusively on the criteria “adopted by the citizens of Florida.”

The Senate leadership “explained to us at the beginning of the session that because of what happened last cycle, everything had to go through the process,” Sen. Joe Gruters, who is also chairman of the Florida Republican Party, told ProPublica.

In November, the state senate proposed maps that largely stuck to the status quo. Analysts predicted they would give Republicans 16 seats in Congress and Democrats 12.

DeSantis wasn’t satisfied. “The governor’s office was very pissed off about the map. They thought it was weak,” said a well-connected Florida Republican, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so he could be candid. “They thought it was ridiculous to not even try to make it as advantageous as possible.”

In early January, DeSantis’ deputy chief of staff, Alex Kelly, was quietly assigned to oversee a small team that would devise an alternative proposal, according to Kelly’s later testimony.

State employees often spend years preparing for the redistricting process — time that DeSantis did not have. As Kelly and his colleagues set to work, they brought in critical help from the D.C. suburbs: Jason Torchinsky, a Republican election attorney and one of the leading GOP strategists for redistricting nationwide.

On Jan. 5, Kelly and two other top DeSantis aides had the redistricting “kick-off call,” according to the meeting invite, which was provided to ProPublica by American Oversight. The invitation included Torchinsky and another guest from out of state: Thomas Bryan, a redistricting specialist.

In an interview with ProPublica, Bryan explained the connection between the national Republican Party and his work with DeSantis. “There’s a core group of attorneys that works with the party and then they work with specific states,” he said. “It’s not a coincidence that I worked on Texas, Florida, Virginia, Kansas, Michigan, Alabama.”

A top partner at a conservative law firm, Torchinsky has represented the RNC, the Republican Party of Florida and many of America’s most influential right-wing groups, such as the Koch network’s Americans for Prosperity.

He also occupies a central role in the Republican Party’s efforts to swing Congress in its favor in 2022. Torchinsky is the general counsel and senior advisor to the National Republican Redistricting Trust, the entity the Republican National Committee helped set up to manage the party’s redistricting operations.

The NRRT boasts millions of dollars in funding and a roster of prominent advisors that includes Mike Pompeo and Karl Rove. Earlier this year, Kincaid, the trust’s executive director, summarized its objective bluntly: “Take vulnerable incumbents off the board, go on offense and create an opportunity to take and hold the House for the decade.”

In a statement to ProPublica, Kincaid said that the trust is one of Torchinsky’s many clients and that the lawyer’s work in Florida was separate: “When I would ask Jason what was happening in Florida, he would tell me his conversations were privileged.” Kincaid added that he personally did not speak with anyone in the DeSantis administration “during this redistricting cycle.”

Torchinsky held repeated meetings with DeSantis’ team as the group crafted maps and navigated the ensuing political battles, according to documents obtained by ProPublica. And he brought in other operatives who’d worked around the country in priority states for the national GOP.

A week after the kickoff meeting, Torchinsky scheduled a Zoom call between Kelly, Bryan and a second consultant, Adam Foltz.

Foltz and Bryan arrived in Florida just as they were becoming go-to mapmakers for the GOP. They appeared together in multiple states where the NRRT was directly involved last year, generating controversy in their wake.

In Texas, Foltz, Bryan and the NRRT’s leader, Kincaid, all worked behind the scenes helping draw maps, court records show. After they finished, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the state of Texas, contending that the map violated the Voting Rights Act and illegally diluted Black and Latino votes. The case is still pending.

In a statement, Kincaid said Foltz and Bryan are not partisan operatives and “the Virginia Supreme Court erred” in rejecting them. He also downplayed his own relationship to the consultants, saying they are not “employees or retained consultants” for his group.

“Adam and Tom are two of the best political demographers in the country,” Kincaid wrote. “It would only make sense that states looking for redistricting experts would retain them.”

Until last year, Foltz had spent his entire career working in Wisconsin politics, on state GOP campaigns and for Republican state legislators, according to court records. He was introduced to redistricting a decade ago when he spent months helping craft maps that became notoriously effective Republican gerrymanders. When he testified under oath that partisanship played no role in the Wisconsin process, a three-judge panel dismissed his claim as “almost laughable.”

Bryan was also a new figure on the national stage. Before 2020, he was a “bit player” in the redistricting industry, he said, running a small consulting company based in Virginia. He’d drawn maps for school districts and for local elections, but never for Congress, and he held a second job in consumer analytics at a large tobacco conglomerate.

“In 2020, my phone started going off the hook, with states either asking to retain me as an expert or to actually draw the lines,” Bryan told ProPublica. “I get phone calls from random places, and I’m on the phone with a governor.” While he mostly worked with Republicans, he was also retained by Illinois Democrats this cycle, according to court records.

According to Kelly’s subsequent testimony, Foltz drew the map himself.

“I was completely blindsided,” said Rep. Geraldine Thompson, a Democrat on the House redistricting committee. “That is the purview of the legislature.”

Foltz declined an interview when reached by phone and did not respond to subsequent requests for comment. Kelly and Torchinsky, who went on to defend DeSantis in a lawsuit against the redistricting, did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

The House redistricting subcommittee later brought Kelly in to answer questions about DeSantis’ proposals. Before the deputy chief of staff testified, the Democrats’ ranking member moved to place him under oath. Republican legislators blocked the committee from swearing Kelly in.

In his opening statement, Kelly took pains to emphasize that the governor’s office colored within the lines of the Florida constitution.

“I can confirm that I've had no discussions with any political consultant,” he testified. “No partisan operative. No political party official.”

This appears to have been misleading. By the time he testified, Kelly had been personally invited to at least five calls to discuss redistricting with Torchinsky, Bryan or Foltz, records show.

Kelly mentioned Foltz only briefly in his testimony. Torchinsky and Bryan’s names didn’t come up.

DeSantis holds as much sway in Tallahassee as any governor in recent memory. But even after he publicly weighed in with a map of his own, Republicans in the legislature didn’t bow down. The state Senate refused to even consider the governor’s version. In late January, they passed their original plan.

DeSantis’ aides argued that Lawson’s district was an “unconstitutional gerrymander,” extending recent precedent that limits states’ ability to deliberately protect Black voting power.

Florida Republicans were skeptical. House Speaker Chris Sprowls told reporters that DeSantis was relying on a “novel legal argument” that lawmakers were unlikely to adopt.

On Feb. 11, DeSantis ratcheted up the pressure. He held a press conference reiterating his opposition to Lawson’s district. He vowed to veto any map that left it intact. But he still needed to win over Republican policymakers. Again, DeSantis’ top aides turned to Torchinsky.

In February, Torchinsky helped DeSantis’ staff pick out an expert witness to sell the governor’s vision to the legislature, according to emails provided to ProPublica by American Oversight. Once the group chose an expert, Torchinsky had a call with him in advance of his appearance.

With a deadline to prepare for the November midterms looming, the legislature moved toward compromise. In early March, it passed a new bill that was much closer to DeSantis’ version — but still kept a Democrat-leaning district with a large Black population in North Florida.

The governor’s attempts at persuasion were over.

On Mar. 28, Foltz and Kelly had another call, along with a partner at Torchinsky’s law firm. The next day, DeSantis vetoed the compromise plan.

Democrats were outraged; many Republicans were shocked. “A veto of a bill as significant as that was definitely surprising,” Gruters, the state senator and chair of the Florida GOP, told ProPublica.

Kelly soon submitted a slightly modified version of Foltz’s map to the legislature. This time, the legislature took DeSantis’ proposal and ran with it.

On Apr. 20, Rep. Thomas Leek, the Republican chair of the House redistricting committee, formally presented DeSantis’ plan before the general assembly. When his colleagues asked him who the governor’s staff consulted while drawing the map, Leek told them that he didn’t know.

The legislature had required everyone submitting a map to file a disclosure form listing the “name of every person(s), group(s), or organization(s) you collaborated with.” Kelly left the form blank.

The legislature voted on party lines and passed DeSantis’ proposal the next day. Anticipating litigation, they also allocated $1 million to defend the map in court.

Before DeSantis even signed the bill into law, a coalition of advocacy groups filed a lawsuit challenging the map in state court.

They soon scored a major victory. Circuit Court Judge J. Layne Smith, a DeSantis appointee, imposed a temporary injunction that would keep Lawson’s district intact through the midterm elections.

“This case is one of fundamental public importance, involving fundamental constitutional rights,” Smith wrote. His ruling cited the lengthy history of Black voter suppression in North Florida and across the state.

That victory was short-lived. Torchinsky’s firm quickly filed an appeal on DeSantis’ behalf. Then, in a unanimous decision in late May, the appellate court allowed DeSantis’ map to move ahead.

The higher court’s opinion was authored by Adam Tanenbaum, a familiar face in Tallahassee. Until DeSantis appointed him to the court in 2019, Tanenbaum was the Florida House’s general counsel, and before that he was general counsel to the Florida Department of State — both of which were parties to the case.

The very day Tanenbaum issued the opinion, he completed an application to fill a vacancy on the Florida Supreme Court, records show. In Florida, Supreme Court justices are appointed by the governor, in this case DeSantis.

Tanenbaum was not chosen for the position. He didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The broader case is still pending and is expected to eventually be decided by the state supreme court. Every justice on Florida’s supreme court was appointed by Republicans. The majority of them were chosen by DeSantis.

The deeply conservative body has already demonstrated its willingness to overturn precedent that’s only a few years old. DeSantis’ senior aides have indicated they hope it will do so here.

During his public testimony, Kelly was asked how Lawson’s district could be unconstitutional when it was recently created by Florida’s highest court.

Kelly responded tersely: “The court got it wrong.”

#florida #florida Black Voters #Florida disinfranchised Black Voters #desantis #gop lies #gerimandering #republicans are liars #florida supreme court #Al Lawson #Black life in florida #BlackVotes Matter #Black Voters Matter #Black Voting Matters

9 notes · View notes

ausetkmt · 2 years

Text

youtube

The Black Vote Matters the most in 2022

this is why Black Communities are expected to have record turn outs. Please take a moment and watch this video on why politicians need to protect Black Votes and Black Voters from the gop gerimandering movement.

Redistricting is only a ploy to divest minorities of votes - Vote in 2022 Like Your Life Depends On It, because quite frankly it does

#the Black Vote Matters the most in 2022 #Black Votes Matter #Black Voters Matter #2022 elections #voting rights #minority vote disinfranchisement #remove the gop in 22

7 notes · View notes

ausetkmt · 1 year

Text

On Tuesday, incumbent Sen. Raphael G. Warnock faces off against Republican challenger Herschel Walker in a Georgia runoff election. While Warnock received more total votes than Walker on Election Day, he didn’t reach the 50 percent threshold mandated by state law, forcing a final runoff between the top two candidates.

The runoff provision marked the culmination of nearly a decade of efforts to revise Georgia’s election procedures in response to federal government mandates to end Jim Crow racial segregation and Black voter disfranchisement. Beginning in 1954 with Brown v. Board of Education, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned racial segregation in public schools, while Congress passed two federal civil rights acts, in 1957 and 1960, seeking to protect the right to vote. Civil rights activists took advantage of these changes and held voter registration drives and registered voting-age Black citizens. It worked. The proportion of Black voters enrolled to vote in Georgia had soared to 44 percent in 1964, up from 29 percent in 1960.

In 1963, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered another blow to maintaining white supremacy by overthrowing Georgia’s unique county unit system of representation that had laid the foundation for rural domination of the state legislature and restricted Black political influence. Codified in 1917, the county unit system gave each of Georgia’s 159 counties twice as many unit votes as it had representatives in the lower State House. This allowed 121 rural counties to control nearly 60 percent of the unit votes even though they represented only 32 percent of the state’s population. This ultimately disadvantaged cities such as Atlanta that contained the bulk of registered Black voters. Both the arch-segregationist governor Eugene Talmadge and one of his moderate-segregationist successors Carl Sanders agreed that the county unit system kept Georgia government “conservative … and [kept] liberals and radicals from taking over.”

In response to all of these changes in the mid-20th century, Georgia political officials devised ways to evade or minimize such challenges to white racial domination. That included Denmark Groover of Macon, a prominent lawmaker and staunch white supremacist, who mounted a campaign for a majority-vote proposal in local and statewide elections.

Here was the idea. Most elections in Georgia featured multiple White candidates running in a winner-take-all, plurality election. That meant that even though only 40 percent of Black Georgians were registered to vote, their support increasingly could prove decisive for one White candidate or another. Groover wanted to avoid that. So his proposal required that if no contender received a majority of the vote, then there would be a runoff election between the two top vote-getters. Groover envisioned that if a Black-endorsed candidate made it to the runoff, then the majority-White electorate would rally around the other candidate. Thus, with the county unit system struck down and given the perceived danger posed by the plurality system, Groover favored a majority-vote provision that “would again provide protection” from rising African American political influence.

In 1964, Groover’s runoff bill passed the state legislature handily, and Sanders signed it into law. His willingness to support it exposed how widespread the desire to maintain White control over Georgia’s government was. Unlike Groover, Sanders was a moderate segregationist. As a state senator, he supported measures to evade the Supreme Court’s Brown decision and affirmed his loyalty to the “Southern way of life” and Georgia’s “sovereign states’ rights,” slogans wielded in the campaign to maintain racial segregation. He parted company, however, with politicians such as Groover by refraining from stirring up racial antagonism in his speeches and promising to preserve segregation through lawful means.

The election law signed by Sanders also contained a literacy test, which had long been a feature of state politics designed to thwart Black Georgians from registering to vote. The substance of the exam had been revised throughout the years. The new law established a 20-question standardized literacy exam for voter registration and required a passing grade of 15 correct answers. One of the act’s strongest legislative supporters summed up the reasoning behind its adoption, insisting it would continue to ensure that “illiterate [B]lack voters don’t get on the registration lists.” Actually, literacy for African Americans made little difference in passing the test, as biased White registrars determined who successfully met the requirements.

The adoption of the majority-vote, runoff requirement along with the literacy test clearly reflected Georgia’s pervasive racism and White leaders’ intention to keep themselves in power. Despite the passage of the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act and the abolition of literacy tests, Georgia has maintained the majority-vote system to dilute Black voting power along with other voter suppression measures that target Black voters. Although civil rights groups have launched legal challenges to these discriminatory laws, they currently remain in effect.

Still, the Voting Rights Act has reshaped Georgia politics. Progress has come despite the 2013 Supreme Court decision in Shelby v. Holder, which eviscerated key sections of the statute. Even so, while the decision provided states like Georgia new opportunities for reducing Black voter participation, Black voters still now constitute approximately one-third of the statewide electorate. Black candidates have also chalked up significant victories for the U.S. Senate, Congress, state legislature and mayor of major cities such as Atlanta. This spectacular transformation brings us to the current moment in the runoff race between Warnock and Walker.

Even Denmark Groover could not have anticipated such sweeping political changes. He could not have foreseen that today, two Black candidates are competing against each other in a runoff election for U.S. Senate — a mechanism that he hoped would keep even White candidates who appealed to Black voters from power. He would have been no less surprised that one of those candidates, Warnock, had narrowly defeated his White opponent, Kelly Loeffler, in a runoff election in 2021.

However, the racial effect of the majority-vote, runoff election requirement persist in 2022. White voters will be the deciding factor in the outcome of the runoff election between two Black contenders, just as Georgia’s political leaders intended in 1964. If Walker — who is expected to receive greater White support — defeats Warnock, he can thank Denmark Groover and Carl Sanders, who designed Georgia’s electoral system to allow White voters the final say on who governs the state.

#Georgia #Run Off Elections and Racism #stolen votes #voter disinfranchisement #The racist origins of Georgia’s runoff elections #Racism in Elections #Georgia Senate Run Off 2022 #Raphael Warnock #Black Votes Matter #Black Voters Matter #Black Senators #Black Elections Matter

4 notes · View notes

reasoningdaily · 1 year

Text

US APARTHEID 2023- HELLO MISSISSIPPI WE WATCHING YOU: Mississippi GOP passes ‘apartheid’ bill to create unelected courts system in majority-Black capital of Jackson

Mississippi’s Republican-controlled House voted on Tuesday to create a separate court system composed of unelected leaders and an expanded police force in the capital of Jackson.

The proposal, HB 1020, has been put forth by its GOP backers as a measure to increase public safety and reduce backlogs in the courts, but local leaders have argued the measure is a power grab from the state’s largely conservative, white legislature against the majority Black population of Jackson.

“Only in Mississippi would we have a bill like this … where we say solving the problem requires removing the vote from Black people,” Rep Ed Blackmon, a Democrat, said at the legislature on Tuesday.

He added that the measure, which would allow state officials to appoint judges and prosecutors instead of the usual local process of electing them, wouldn’t do anything to reduce crime.

"I notice that this bill does not address part of the problem, which is lack of funding at that crime lab. You’re blaming Jackson because they can’t process their cases fast enough because the crime lab is not operating at capacity because we won’t give them the money," he added.

Last week, Chokwe Antar Lumumba, the mayor of Jackson, said HB 1020 "reminds me of apartheid."

The Jackson City Council, including the sole Republican present, Ashby Foote, voted on Saturday for a resolution opposing the bill, according to the Mississippi Clarion Ledger.

Rep Trey Lamar, a Republican from Senatobia, 175 miles outside of Jackson, defended the bill on Tuesday, saying it would make the capital safer.

"I don’t know what you’ve heard, I’ll say that, but this bill is designed to help make our capital city of Mississippi a safer city,” he said. “This bill is designed to assist the court system of Hinds County, not to hinder it. It is designed to add to our judicial resources in Hinds County, not to take away. To help, not to hurt.”

The capital has indeed struggled with public safety.

According to a 2022 report from the state auditor, Mississippi has had the highest homicide rate of any state in the country since 2018, with more homicides per capita in Jackson than any other major metropolitan area in the country in 2021.

The state, like numerous other cities, has also struggled with what community residents argue is excessive police force.

Last month, family members of Jaylen Lewis, who was killed by police last fall during a traffic stop, called for a federal investigation into the Capitol Police, who would get millions in new funding under HB 1020.

Few details have been released about the shooting, but the officers involved are on administrative leave and the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation is probing the case

As WLBT reports, the Capitol Police have fired on civilians four times in the last five months, more than any other Mississippi law enforcement agency in the last year.

#mississippi #mississippi 2023 #systemic racism #voter disinfranchisement #unelected courts #Mississippi GOP passes ‘apartheid’ bill to create unelected courts system in majority-Black capital of Jackson #Jackson Mississippi

2 notes · View notes

reasoningdaily · 1 year

Text

BLACK VOTES DON'T MATTER IN MISSISSIPPI 2023 - NEW JIM CROW IN EFFECT: 'Only in Mississippi': White representatives vote to create white-appointed court system for Blackest city in America

A white supermajority of the Mississippi House voted after an intense, four-plus hour debate to create a separate court system and an expanded police force within the city of Jackson — the Blackest city in America — that would be appointed completely by white state officials.

If House Bill 1020 becomes law later this session, the white chief justice of the Mississippi Supreme Court would appoint two judges to oversee a new district within the city — one that includes all of the city’s majority-white neighborhoods, among other areas. The white state attorney general would appoint four prosecutors, a court clerk, and four public defenders for the new district. The white state public safety commissioner would oversee an expanded Capitol Police force, run currently by a white chief.

The appointments by state officials would occur in lieu of judges and prosecutors being elected by the local residents of Jackson and Hinds County — as is the case in every other municipality and county in the state.

Mississippi’s capital city is 80% Black and home to a higher percentage of Black residents than any major American city. Mississippi’s Legislature is thoroughly controlled by white Republicans, who have redrawn districts over the past 30 years to ensure they can pass any bill without a single Democratic vote. Every legislative Republican is white, and most Democrats are Black.

After thorough and passionate dissent from Black members of the House, the bill passed 76-38 Tuesday primarily along party lines. Two Black member of the House — Rep. Cedric Burnett, a Democrat from Tunica, and Angela Cockerham, an independent from Magnolia — voted for the measure. All but one lawmaker representing the city of Jackson — Rep. Shanda Yates, a white independent — opposed the bill.

“Only in Mississippi would we have a bill like this … where we say solving the problem requires removing the vote from Black people,” Rep. Ed Blackmon, a Democrat from Canton, said while pleading with his colleagues to oppose the measure.

READ MORE: Hinds County forces unite against bill to create unelected judicial district, expanded police force

For most of the debate, Jackson Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba — who has been publicly chided by the white Republicans who lead the Legislature — looked down on the House chamber from the gallery. Lumumba accused the Legislature earlier this year of practicing “plantation politics” in terms of its treatment of Jackson, and of the bill that passed Tuesday, he said: “It reminds me of apartheid.”

Hinds County Circuit Judge Adrienne Wooten, who served in the House before being elected judge and would be one of the existing judges to lose jurisdiction under this House proposal, also watched the debate.

Public Safety Commissioner Sean Tindell, who oversees the Capitol Police, watched a portion of the debate from the House gallery, chuckling at times when Democrats made impassioned points about the bill. Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann, the only statewide elected official who owns a house in Jackson, walked onto the House floor shortly before the final vote.

Rep. Blackmon, a civil rights leader who has a decades-long history of championing voting issues, equated the current legislation to the Jim Crow-era 1890 Constitution that was written to strip voting rights from Black Mississippians.

“This is just like the 1890 Constitution all over again,” Blackmon said from the floor. “We are doing exactly what they said they were doing back then: ‘Helping those people because they can’t govern themselves.'”

The bill was authored by Rep. Trey Lamar, a Republican whose hometown of Senatobia is 172 miles north of Jackson. It was sent to Lamar’s committee by Speaker Philip Gunn instead of a House Judiciary Committee, where similar legislation normally would be heard.

“This bill is designed to make our capital city of Jackson, Mississippi, a safer place,” Lamar said, citing numerous news sources who have covered Jackson’s high crime rates. Dwelling on a long backlog of Hinds County court cases, Lamar said the bill was designed to “help not hinder the (Hinds County) court system.”

“My constituents want to feel safe when they come here,” Lamar said, adding the capital city belonged to all the citizens of the state. “Where I am coming from with this bill is to help the citizens of Jackson and Hinds County.”

Many House members who represent Jackson on Tuesday said they were never consulted by House leadership about the bill. Several times during the debate, they pointed out that Republican leaders have never proposed increasing the number of elected judges to address a backlog of cases or increasing state funding to assist an overloaded Jackson Police Department.

In earlier sessions, the Legislature created the Capitol Complex Improvement District, which covers much of the downtown, including the state government office complex and other areas of Jackson. The bill would extend the existing district south to Highway 80, north to County Line Road, west to State Street and east to the Pearl River. Between 40,000 and 50,000 people live within the area.

Opponents of the legislation, dozens of whom have protested at the Capitol several days this year, accused the authors of carving out mostly white, affluent areas of the city to be put in the new district.

The bill would double the funding for the district to $20 million in order to increase the size of the existing Capitol Police force, which has received broad criticism from Jacksonians for shooting several people in recent months with little accountability.

The new court system laid out in House Bill 1020 is estimated to cost $1.6 million annually.

Democratic members of the House said if they wanted to help with the crime problem, the Legislature could increase the number of elected judges in Hinds County. Blackmon said Hinds County was provided four judges in 1992 when a major redistricting occurred, and that number has not increased since then even as the caseload for the four judges has exploded.

In addition, Blackmon said the number of assistant prosecuting attorneys could be increased within Hinds County. In Lamar’s bill, the prosecuting of cases within the district would be conducted by attorneys in the office of Attorney General Lynn Fitch, who is white.

Blackmon said the bill was “about a land grab,” not about fighting crime. He said other municipalities in the state had higher crime rates than Jackson. Blackmon asked why the bill would give the appointed judges the authority to hear civil cases that had nothing to do with crime.

“When Jackson becomes the No. 1 place for murder, we have a problem,” Lamar responded, highlighting the city’s long backlog of court cases. Several Democrats, during the debate, pointed out that the state of Mississippi’s crime lab has a lengthy backlog, as well, adding to the difficult in closing cases in Hinds County.

Lamar said the Mississippi Constitution gives the Legislature the authority to create “inferior courts,” as the Capitol Complex system would be. The decisions of the appointed judges can be appealed to Hinds County Circuit Court.

Democrats offered seven amendments, including one to make the judges elected. All were defeated primarily along partisan and racial lines.

“We are not incompetent,” said Rep. Chris Bell, D-Jackson. “Our judges are not incompetent.”

An amendment offered by Rep. Cheikh Taylor, D-Starkville, to require the Capitol Police to wear body cameras was approved. Lamar voiced support for the amendment.

Much of the debate centered around the issue of creating a court where the Black majority in Hinds County would not be allowed to vote on judges.

One amendment that was defeated would require the appointed judges to come from Hinds County. Lamar said by allowing the judges to come from areas other than Hinds County would ensure “the best and brightest” could serve. Black legislators said the comment implied that he judges and other court staff could not be found within the Black majority population of Hinds County.

When asked why he could not add more elected judges to Hinds County rather than appointing judges to the new district, Lamar said, “This is the bill that is before the body.”

#Jackson Mississippi #jackson 2023 #'Only in Mississippi': White representatives vote to create white-appointed court system for Blackest city in America #Black voters disinfranchised #unelected courts #white supremacy #systemic racism #Hinds county

1 note · View note