Staff Opinions Banned In Voting Rights Cases (WP)

Criticism of Justice Dept.'s Rights Division Grows

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, December 10, 2005; Page A03

The Justice Department has barred staff attorneys from offering recommendations in major Voting Rights Act cases, marking a significant change in the procedures meant to insulate such decisions from politics, congressional aides and current and former employees familiar with the issue said.

Disclosure of the change comes amid growing public criticism of Justice Department decisions to approve Republican-engineered plans in Texas and Georgia that were found to hurt minority voters by career staff attorneys who analyzed the plans. Political appointees overruled staff findings in both cases.

The policy was implemented in the Georgia case, said a Justice employee who, like others interviewed, spoke on condition of anonymity because of fears of retaliation. A staff memo urged rejecting the state's plan to require photo identification at the polls because it would harm black voters.

But under the new policy, the recommendation was stripped out of that document and was not forwarded to higher officials in the Civil Rights Division, several sources familiar with the incident said. <snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/09/AR2005120901894.html

That's a trademark of this administration. Spreading fertilizer.

BTW, no mention of the removal of public accountability on the government for electronic voting machines in the NYT story on the Republican controlled House of Representatives passage of $56 Billion in Tax Cuts.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/08/politics/08cnd-cong.html?ex=1134709200&en=5ae4ce9bef635235&ei=5009&partner=MSN_NYTHOME

How can the public be called apathetic when they are misled by the media, who have an inherent conflict of interest in being owned by corporations that require them to not report facts that are against the interest of corporations?

was the lack of outrage - and the lack of support for the Congressional Black Caucus - in calling for attention to the systematic disenfranchisement of primarily african american voters in Florida. It was like people : Politicians, political strategists, and the general public - were not alarmed in the least that voting rights were being taken away from those who had only really had those rights due to congressional actions only 30-some years earlier. The lack of outcry beyond the CBC - led the public to consider the claims of the CBC as "crybabies" - and not legitimate. I suggest that this paved the way for legislators in some southern states (starting with Texas and Georgia) to recognize that they could now move back towards disenfranchisement - as the public would no longer require (via voting pressure) congress to act. Not to mention that had there been more prolonged efforts per the Florida vote counts in 2000, that even if these actions continued after the SC vote - and thus would not result in overturning the elections... there would be a much more commonly held perception of the bushadmin as not legitimate - making them get off to an even weaker start than they started off with.

On this one - we the public, who did not stand up and put pressure on our congressional representatives to make an issue of systematic voter disenfranchisement, we bare some of the responsibility for the slide backwards that was so legitimized - that these actions by the political side (appointees) of the DOJ could occur - and took so long to come to light.

of how * and gang have perverted the laws and system of the country. Didn't DOJ lawyers have problems with the Gonzalez torture guidelines too? It's like the "Clean Air Act"... complete doublespeak. Are they saying that the DOJ Civil Rights division are no longer allowed to offer recommendations? Isn't that the primary focus of their job? To look into something and then recommend a solution. Who can change this back to the way it was?
kicked

Just after the Bushistas came into power, they basically fired all of the attorneys in the DOJ environmental division and replaced them with their corporate cronies, who months before had been on the defendant side of the table, arguing on the side of energy and petroleum companies and other abusers of the land. Not surprisingly, these same attorneys closed most of the cases the division was prosecuting, claiming that the cases weren't strong enough. I'm surprised that there are still attorneys in the Civil Rights division who arent party hacks.

1. Policy documents are using very selective input, input that favors ideological outcome. The problems with information that resulted in the US going to war appear to be common throughout the government.

2. Yet again, the opinions of subject area experts are discounted and policy is made right over the top of them. Which is to say the Bush admin's war on science actually appears to be part of a much broader assault on competency in public service.

And to the victor go the spoils.

Dems and liberals need to understand this: the conservative junta views elections as war.

Peaceful transition of power is a thing of the past. I think it died in January 1993.

When you look back at the Whitewater investigation, which led to the Vince Foster crap and the Monica crap, you must realize that the goal, all along, was to unseat an elected president.

With the next elections, if we are to be successful in retaking power, we must campaign with that in mind. It IS war to them. And if defeated in election, they will not go quietly in its aftermath.

This should be screamed about all over the MSM!!!!

and that is the explosion in voter registration in minority and low income communities. I was in Ohio and if you had not been asked to register to vote it meant you never left your house. The reason some ACORN voter registration staff turned in fictitious registration forms is because they got bonuses and it actually became hard to find people who were not registered.

We have to fight back in a 2 pronged approach. We have to continue registering and pumping up interest in off year elections. I would like to see implemented a program I call Operation Barber Shop/Beauty Parlor. Barber shops and beauty parlors are perfect in the community, privately owned (no gov't funding) venues for continued voter education awareness. I found these venues to be very supportive and willing to display specially designed campaign literature and voter registration forms. I love MoveOn but it is way too white and they just do not get the ghetto.

Get in those neighborhood shops and let people know that together we can make a difference.

WASHINGTON - Political appointees in the Justice Department have overruled career workers at least three times on high-profile matters, including a Texas redistricting plan backed by the No. 2 leader in the House.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales says that is what appointees are paid for: to consider the advice of professional staff and then exercise their best judgment.

Bush administration critics say the cases fit a pattern of allowing political considerations to trump sound policy.

In two of the three cases, the department gave its blessing to Republican-backed changes to state election laws despite strongly worded and lengthy opinions from the government's civil rights lawyers that the changes unfairly would affect minorities.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/justice_politics

If the political appointees have their minds made up in advance, and don't need the staff attorney's opinions, what do those attorneys do all day? I damn sure think there should be an investigation!


Either taxpayer dollars are being wasted, or the Republicans are trying to hide the politicization of justice.
Or both!

concerned with voter's rights. By the time enough people are mobilized, our ability to change things will be neutered.