Opinion
Countering Voter Suppression Moves
“Challenging People to Shape
a Better Future Now”
B ERNIE F OSTER
Founder/Publisher
B OBBIE D ORE F OSTER
Executive Editor
J ERRY F OSTER
Advertising Manager
L ISA L OVING
News Editor
H ELEN S ILVIS
Multimedia Editor
P ATRICIA I RVIN
D AVID K IDD
Graphic Designer
M ONICA J. F OSTER
Seattle Office Coordinator
J ULIE K EEFE
S USAN F RIED
Photographers
T
he Supreme Court recently
blocked an appeals court
ruling that would have
restored seven days of voting in
Ohio. In just three sentences, the
court reduced voting access for
tens of thousands of Ohioans, in
yet another effort to suppress the
vote. In North Carolina, the
appeals court granted an injunc-
tion to restore same day
registration and out of precinct
voting. It didn’t strike down early
voting restrictions because of time
constraints, but did acknowledge
that reducing early voting is a way
to suppress the vote. If the North
Carolina case goes before the
Supreme Court, the Supreme
Court is likely to lift the injunction
against North Carolina, again
making voting more difficult.
When the Voting Rights Act was
attacked, too many tuned out and
turned off from the details, though
leaders such as Barbara Arnwine
of the Lawyers’ Committee for
Civil Rights Under Law warned
that we would begin to feel the
effects of this legal setback with
various forms of voter suppres-
sion. The Lawyers’ Committee
developed a “map of shame” to
show the many states that had cur-
tailed ballot access. Either more
ID has been required, the days and
times of voting have been
changed, the number of polling
places has been reduced, or other
B ENNETT
C OLLEGE
Julianne
Malveaux
barriers have been introduced to
curtail voter access. Those who
would suppress the vote in 2014
have put those who advocate bal-
lot fairness on notice. This year
marks the first step toward a sup-
pressed or stolen 2016 presidential
election.
The stakes are high, both now
and in 2016. Presently, Democrats
ber 4 (and in the weeks before,
with early voting).
President Obama’s effectiveness
has been weakened by the John
Boehner Congress that has thwart-
ed the him at every turn. Although
these last two years of the Obama
presidency are lame duck years
where little is likely to get done,
the duck will be not lame, but par-
alyzed, if the Republicans hold
both the House and the Senate.
President Obama’s only powers,
then, will be the executive order
and the veto. It is unlikely that the
minimum wage will be adjusted
upward, or that other economic
fairness matters will be addressed
if Congress is a Republican
stronghold.
This year marks the first step toward
a suppressed or stolen 2016
presidential election
hold the Senate, and provide at
least some help to President
Obama on issues of political and
economic fairness. It is very possi-
ble that Republicans will take the
Senate; it is a foregone conclusion
if people don’t vote this year.
Republicans now hold the House
of Representatives; their presence
is the House is likely to increase
without a strong vote on Novem-
Lots of pro-democracy organi-
zations are working to get out the
vote for the 2014 elections, with
local and state office as important
as federal office. Secretaries of
state, for example, are the chief
elections officers for their state.
As such, they have significant
power around the mechanics of
voting. They can decide to open
more polling places, to have more
(or fewer) voting machines avail-
able, and to manage the details of
voter registration. In Ohio, where
a week of early voting has now
been eliminated, Nina Turner, a
charismatic African American
state legislator with her efforts
clearly focused on justice, is a can-
didate for Secretary of State. Her
election would be an antidote to
voter suppression efforts in Ohio,
and an inspiration for those who
cherish election fairness. Imagine
how different voting conditions
would be if in states like North
Carolina, Florida, and other
“stars” on the Map of Shame had
progressive Secretaries of State.
Voter suppression is not new.
We’ve seen grandfather clauses,
poll taxes, and literacy tests as his-
torical barriers to the vote. Now,
we see a reduction in voter flexi-
bility, with more ID requirements,
fewer early voting days, and
stricter rules about voter registra-
tion. Still, those who would
suppress the vote can do so only if
we allow it by failing to vote.
There are too many important
elections to be decided, like Nina
Turner’s in Ohio, for voters to stay
home.
Julianne Malveaux is a Wash-
ington, D.C.-based economist and
writer. She is President Emerita of
Bennett College for Women in
Greensboro, N.C..
The Skanner Newspaper, established
in October 1975, is a weekly publica-
tion, published each Wednesday by
IMM Publications Inc.,
415 N. Killingsworth St.,
P.O. Box 5455, Portland, OR 97228.
Telephone (503) 285-5555.
E-mail: info@theskanner.com
World Wide Web site:
http://www.theskanner.com
The Skanner is a member of the
National Newspaper Pub lishers Associ-
ation and West Coast Black Pub lishers
Association.
All photos submitted become the
property of The Skanner. We are not re -
spon sible for lost or damaged photos
either solicited or unsolicited.
© 2014 The Skanner. ALL RIGHTS RE SERVED.
REPRODUCTION IN WHOLE OR IN PART
WITHOUT PERMISSION PROHIBITED.
To see The Skanner
News on your smart
phone go to
theskannermobile.com
or scan this QR code
with your app.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Local news
Opinions
Jobs, Bids
Sports
Entertainment
Music reviews
Bulletin board
RSS feeds
The Ebola Case in Dallas: A Blame Game
A
mid heightened concern in
the U.S. about the fero-
cious Ebola disease, two
prominent Republican officehold-
ers last week seized upon the
proper concern over a Liberian
national in Dallas testing positive
for the virulent disease as a chance
to show they think the GOP’s
political cesspool has no bottom.
Both Senator Rand Paul of Ken-
tucky and Rep. Louie Gohmert of
Texas, asserted that the president’s
sending 3,000 troops to West
Africa to aid those nations’ efforts
to contain the spread of the virus
there, was endangering America
itself by exposing these troops to
the virus, which they, in turn,
would spread to other Americans
once they got back to the states.
Paul voiced his concern “about
3,000 soldiers getting back on a
ship. Where is the disease most
transmittable? When you’re in the
close confines on a ship – we all
know about cruises and how they
get these diarrhea viruses that are
transmitted very easily. Can you
imagine if a whole ship of our sol-
diers catch Ebola? I think because
of political correctness, we’re not
really making sound, rational, sci-
entific decisions on this,” Paul told
conservative talk show host Laura
Ingraham.
Paul didn’t specify what “politi-
cal correctness” has to do with the
vital global effort to prevent Ebola
from spreading beyond its current
“hot spots.” When the White
House unveiled its plan last month
to send the troops, it drew wide-
spread agreement in Congress,
including from the GOP’s Senate
Minority
Leader
Mitch
Page 2 The Portland and Seattle Skanner October 8, 2014
L AST
C HANCE
Lee A.
Daniels
McConnell of Kentucky and
Ohio’s John Boehner, the Speaker
of the House.
But then, it’s also nonsensical
that Paul would liken a military
transport ship – undoubtedly oper-
ating under the strictest military
happened. It’s here.”
This, too, is the attempt to score
cheap political points. To say that
Ebola is “here” because one indi-
vidual contracted it out of
300-plus million people in Ameri-
ca, or even just among the
citizenry of Dallas is abominable.
True, we won’t know for another
three weeks – the time for the
Ebola infection in individuals to
manifest itself – if the now-10
people in Dallas government offi-
cials think he might have exposed
to the virus are infected. Nothing
untoward in that regard has sur-
faced so far, and all those people
While they’ve investigated more than
100 suspected Ebola cases in recent
weeks, Duncan’s remains the only
confirmed case
discipline and specially outfitted
for this tour of duty with the most
sophisticated medical facilities
and medicines – to a civilian
cruise ship.
However, Obama-bashers Paul
and Gohmert also got some inter-
esting company. MSNBC talk
show host Chris Matthews seemed
to blame the president for not pre-
venting the Liberian national who
has died from Ebola, Thomas Eric
Duncan, from entering the coun-
try. Matthews contended “that the
president said it would be unlikely
if we had a case in this country.
Unlikely to have even one case …
Well, it’s not the unlikely. It has
are being monitored.
It’s also worth noting what
Matthews did not: that the Ebola
virus actually was first brought
“here” deliberately when the three
American aid workers who had
been working in West Africa to
treat the ill themselves became
infected and were repatriated to
U.S. hospitals for treatment under
the strictest conditions. All have
recovered.
The success of their treatment
and the lack of any evidence that
the Ebola virus escaped those hos-
pitals’ special treatment facilities
is evidence that the Ebola virus is
not in the United States. That
assessment was reaffirmed over
the weekend when doctors deter-
mined that two individuals,
isolated in hospitals in New York
and Washington, D.C. because
they had flu-like symptoms, did
not have the virus. Federal offi-
cials said that while they’ve
investigated more than 100 sus-
pected Ebola cases in recent
weeks, Duncan’s remains the only
confirmed case.
What the Duncan case has
exposed, however, are certain gaps
in the screen of containment gov-
ernments have built to contain the
disease. Of course, one must start
closing the gaps in that screen
where the task is the most crucial:
in the countries of West Africa.
Those nations must do a better job
of screening all those who want to
leave those countries. And airlines
and the U.S. government must
improve screening procedures for
passengers coming to the U.S. In
Texas, the still-unclear initial
response of hospital officials to
Duncan’s emergency-room visit
and the fact that local and state
officials spent days scrambling to
get a hazardous materials team to
disinfect the apartment of Dun-
can’s relatives is clearly a warning
that government officials every-
where must heed.
Tightening these and other parts
of the “screen” against Ebola in
the U.S. and abroad will undoubt-
edly require more U.S. federal aid.
The question for the Ebola-is-here
and it’s-all-Obama’s-fault scream-
ers, and all the rest of us, is are we
willing to back up our talk with
our money?