Did you know?
According to ACLU, about 6,000 Muslims have been arrested since 9/11 in America on suspicion of terrorism and none has been convicted of any crime.
Only 1 Senator – Russ Feingold (D-WI) – out of 100 voted against the USA PATRIOT Act.
Our government smuggles out arrested Muslims from America to foreign countries to be interrogated and tortured under an initiative called Extraordinary Rendition.
Many states now are trying to make immigration enforcement a part of the responsibility of local police and law enforcement agencies. This will increase profiling against Muslim American even more regular and will make even citizens victims of harassments.
What’s at stake for the Muslim Americans in 2006?
Given the one party control (Republican) over the White House, the Congress and the Senate, and the large number of seats up for election, 2006 is a crucial year. It will determine the course of politics in America for at least the next 2 to 6 years.
There are many important issues which will be deeply impacted by this election. Some of the major ones are:
Civil liberties: With the enactment of the USA PATRIOT Act and other measures, civil liberties of all Americans – and particularly of Muslims – have been greatly curtailed. While all Muslim Americans support the need for security, the current legislators and administrators have gone well beyond what is effective or necessary for security. It’s imperative for you to know the candidates and vote for those who will support preservation of civil liberties of all people in America.
Immigration: While everyone agrees that the immigration laws need to be reformed, many legislators have used the issue to wage their own anti-immigrant war – particularly against the Muslims. Some of the legislators have openly used this to attack Muslims in America.
Foreign policy: American foreign policy conducted by the current administration has targeted many Muslim countries, while weakening the American position in the world community. Many of these policies have had disastrous consequences on millions of people worldwide.
There are many other issues like health care, education, etc., which impact Muslim Americans and in which the community must have active interest.
The only way we can make a difference on these issues for the next few years is by registering to vote and voting on November 7.
The 2006 Legislators – the Senate and the Congress
Every member of the US Congress is elected to office for a 2-year term – once during the time of the Presidential Election and once in the middle of the Presidential term. The latter is sometime called the Mid-term Election. 2006 is Mid-term Election will be held on November 7.
Senators, on the other hand, are elected for 6-year terms and may be up for re-election either during the Presidential Election of the Mid-term Election year.
The 110th Congress, which will be elected this year, will consist of 435 members. In the 109th Congress, Republicans held 232 seats, Democrats held 201 seats, with 1 Independent.
The Senate is currently composed of 55 Republicans, who have been in the majority since 2003, 44 Democrats, and 1 Democratic-leaning Independent (former Republican Jim Jeffords of Vermont). Jeffords is retiring and his seat is one of the 33 seats being contested. Of the other 32 contested seats, 17 are held by Democrats and 15 are held by Republicans. To control 51 seat majority, Democrats would need a net gain of 7 seats. Republicans need to hold only 50 seats after the election to have a majority, because the Vice President breaks all tie votes in his role as President of the Senate. On the other hand, to gain a "working majority" of 60 members – the number of votes required to break a filibuster – Republicans would need a net gain of 5 seats.
Also at stake are 36 Governor’s elections. Currently, 22 of the seats up for election are held by Republicans and 14 by Democrats.
The USA PATRIOT Act
The Associated Press, September 5, 2002
At the wake of 9/11, the USA PATRIOT Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) swept away many rights guaranteed by the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Creation of the Homeland Security Department and the Homeland Security Act reinforced the attack on civil liberties. Now we hear grumbling of the ominous Domestic Security Enhancement Act – a further enhancement of the USA PATRIOT Act!
Some of the fundamental changes to Americans' legal rights by the Bush administration and the USA Patriot Act following the terror attacks:
- FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION: Government may monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity to assist terror investigation.
- FREEDOM OF INFORMATION: Government has closed once-public immigration hearings, has secretly detained hundreds of people without charges, and has encouraged bureaucrats to resist public records requests.
- FREEDOM OF SPEECH: Government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone that the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation.
- RIGHT TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION: Government may monitor federal prison jailhouse conversations between attorneys and clients, and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes.
- FREEDOM FROM UNREASONABLE SEARCHES: Government may search and seize Americans' papers and effects without probable cause to assist terror investigation.
- RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL: Government may jail Americans indefinitely without a trial.
- RIGHT TO LIBERTY: Americans may be jailed without being charged or being able to confront witnesses against them.
Chicago TRIBUNE Findings
Published November 16, 2003
Since Sept. 11, 2001:
- 83,310: Number of foreign visitors from 24 predominantly Muslim nations who registered with the government after U.S. Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft required them to do so.
- 13,740: Number of those 83,310 who were ordered into deportation proceedings.
- 0: Number who were publicly charged with terrorism, although officials say a few have terrorism connections.
Profiling illegal immigrants in the U.S.
- Since the Sept. 11 attacks, authorities have increasingly focused on nationality in immigration enforcement. Deportation orders have increased markedly for unauthorized immigrants from 24 predominantly Muslim countries while those from other nations face no extra scrutiny.
- Increase in deportation orders higher for Muslim countries
- Comparing the two-year period after Sept. 11, 2001, to the two-year period before:
- 2 percent of unauthorized immigrants are from 24 predominantly Muslim nations, which saw a +31.4% rise in deportation orders since Sept. 11
- 98 percent of unauthorized immigrants are from other countries, which saw a +3.4% rise in deportation orders since Sept. 11.
Introduction to Federal Voting Rights Laws
The Voting Rights Act, adopted initially in 1965 and extended in 1970, 1975, and 1982, is generally considered the most successful piece of civil rights legislation ever adopted by the United States Congress. The Act codifies and effectuates the 15th Amendment's permanent guarantee that, throughout the nation, no person shall be denied the right to vote on account of race or color. In addition, the Act contains several special provisions that impose even more stringent requirements in certain jurisdictions throughout the country…
Read more… http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/intro/intro.htm
Beyond the Voting Rights Act:
Why We Need a Constitutional Right to Vote
By Jeff Milchen
August 8, 2005
As thousands of civil rights advocates celebrated the 40th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in Atlanta last weekend, most media coverage conveyed the Act's importance in protecting minorities' political rights. Yet many of those same stories helped perpetuate a dangerous illusion by asserting that a right to vote is guaranteed by the 15th Amendment.
The trouble is the Supreme Court doesn't see it that way.
In its 2000 ruling, Alexander v Mineta, the Court decided the 600,000 or so (mostly black) residents of Washington D.C. have no legal recourse for their complete lack of voting representation in Congress (they have one “representative” in the House who can speak, but cannot vote). The Court affirmed the district court's interpretation that our Constitution "does not protect the right of all citizens to vote, but rather the right of all qualified citizens to vote.” And it's state legislatures that wield the power to decide who is “qualified.”
As a result, voting is not a right, but a privilege granted or withheld at the discretion of local and state governments.
Yes, our Constitution explicitly prohibits discrimination in granting the franchise based on a person's race, sex, or (adult) age via the 15th, 19th, and 26th Amendments, but those protections are like a house with no foundation. States and other governments can and do disenfranchise individuals and groups of citizens, and so long as they do it without provable bias, it's entirely legal.
Washington, D.C. residents are not the only victims. Without an affirmative right to vote, Americans repeatedly are disenfranchised or otherwise deprived of their political voice and denied a legal basis for retrieving it.
Just months after the Alexander decision, a 5-4 Court majority in Bush v. Gore denied Florida citizens a right to ensure their votes were counted, saying "the individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote [for presidential electors]." Tens of thousands of Floridians who were purged wrongly from the voting rolls were denied recourse against Republican state officials who, in the name of preventing felons from voting, disenfranchised them.
The Bush v. Gore ruling also meant Florida 's legislators could have followed through on their threats to simply disregarded citizens' votes and choose electors themselves.
Our lack of a right to vote also weakens legal arguments for challenging anti-democratic structures that routinely prevent citizens in several states from enjoying a choice other than Democrats or Republicans at the polls. Georgia, for example, has institutionalized a two-party duopoly, devoid of outside competition, by requiring independent or "third party" candidates for U.S. Representative to gather signatures from 5% of registered voters, a feat not accomplished since before the VRA.
Worse, Georgia and Indiana recently passed laws requiring government photo identification to vote, despite an absence of evidence that people are impersonating others at the voting booth. Georgia 's law must first be approved by the Department of Justice under a provision of the VRA (expiring in 2007 unless renewed by Congress) requiring jurisdictions "with a history of discrimination” to gain approval from the DOJ before changing voting laws.
If these laws take effect, a disproportionate number of minority, poor and elderly people who lack ID will be dissuaded from voting. This is exactly the kind of discriminatory scheme the VRA was created to stop, but so long as voting is a state-granted privilege rather than a right, courts are likely to let the law stand.
While we speak of “spreading democracy” globally, the U.S. is one of just 11 nations among 120 or so constitutional democracies that fail to guarantee a right to vote in their constitutions.
Although many constitutional scholars reject the Supreme Court's reasoning in denying such a right, blaming the justices will not solve our problem. It's time we caught up with our own rhetoric by amending our Constitution to transform a right to vote from myth to reality.
Jeff Milchen directs ReclaimDemocracy.org , an organization working to revitalize American democracy and restore citizen authority over corporations.
Resources
Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002
To establish a program to provide funds to States to replace punch card voting systems, to establish the Election Assistance Commission to assist in the administration of Federal elections and to otherwise provide assistance with the administration of certain Federal election laws and programs, to establish minimum election administration standards for States and units of local government with responsibility for the administration of Federal elections, and for other purposes. <<NOTE: Oct. 29, 2002 - [H.R. 3295]>>
Read more… http://www.fec.gov/hava/hava.htm |
