NYT: (Bush Justice Dept.) Strong-Arming the Vote

Strong-Arming the Vote

Published: August 3, 2006

President Bush’s Justice Department has been criticized for letting partisanship guide its work on voting and elections. And party politics certainly appears to have been a driving force in a legal maneuver it just pulled off in Alabama, where it persuaded a federal judge to take important election powers away from the Democratic secretary of state and give them to a Republican governor. The Justice Department says it is trying to enforce the election law, but that is unconvincing. There are plenty of ways to enforce the law without creating the impression that it is tilting the electoral landscape in favor of Republicans.

Snip...

Sadly, a federal judge agreed yesterday to do just that, in a one-sided proceeding that felt a lot like a kangaroo court. The Justice Department and the Alabama attorney general, Troy King, both argued that Governor Riley should control the voter database. Mr. King, a Republican, was appointed to his job by Governor Riley after serving as his legal adviser, and when Ms. Worley realized that Mr. King would not represent her interests, she asked him to let her hire a lawyer to argue her side. He refused. The Alabama Democratic Party tried to intervene in the case, so it could argue against giving control of the voter rolls to the governor. The judge, who was recently named to the bench by President Bush, would not let the Democrats in.

Snip...

Controlling the voting rolls can yield important advantages, as Ms. Harris proved in 2000. The Justice Department’s actions in Alabama appear to be less about enforcing the law than about wresting control of the voter rolls from the opposition party, and making a Democratic secretary of state who is up for re-election in a few months look bad.

Snip...

The Justice Department has enormous power over state elections. It is important that this power be used in a way that appears — and is — nonpartisan. Undercutting a Democratic secretary of state, and taking the extraordinary step of handing her powers to a Republican governor, meets neither test. The Justice Department is giving the impression that it is less concerned that elections be lawful and fair than that they come out a particular way.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/03/opinion/edit-1-thu.html

Thu Jul 27, 10:34 AM ET

President Bush, left, laughs as he returns a folder and pen to Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (news, bio, voting record), D-Texas, right, after he signed the Voting Rights Act of in a ceremony on the South Lawn of the White House, Thursday, July 27, 2006 in Washington. Behind Bush are Rep. Danny Davis (news, bio, voting record), D-Il., far left, and Rep. Katherine Harris (news, bio, voting record), R-Fla. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

Elections officials want speedy resolution in Texas redistricting case

By Associated Press
Thursday, August 3, 2006 - Updated: 07:26 AM EST

AUSTIN, Texas - With an election just around the corner, a three-judge federal panel was set Thursday to hear arguments about how to redraw southwest Texas congressional districts to restore minority voting power.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that a huge southwest district violates the Voting Rights Act because the power of the minority vote was diminished when concentrations of Hispanics were split into two districts.

It is unclear when the three-judge panel may issue a decision, but Texas elections officials say a ruling by Monday is necessary for changes to go into effect for the Nov. 7 election.

Snip...

The ruling was the result of a lawsuit against the state filed by Democrats and several groups of minority rights activists. The GOP-controlled Legislature redrew the map in 2003 to put more Republicans in office. The high court upheld most of the map, drawn by state Republicans in 2003, but ruled that the district now represented by Rep. Henry Bonilla, R-San Antonio, is unconstitutional.

more...

http://news.bostonherald.com/national/view.bg?articleid=151238