DOCSLIB.ORG

The Case for Restoring and Updating the Voting Rights Act

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Case for Restoring and Updating the Voting Rights Act The Case for Restoring and Updating the Voting Rights Act A Report of the American Civil Liberties Union 2019 Submitted for the Record in Support of the Voting Rights Advancement Act, H.R. 4, in the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary November 8, 2019 For further information, please contact Sonia Gill, Senior Legislative Counsel, at [email protected]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Sonia K. Gill, Senior Legislative Counsel, National Political Advocacy Department Dale Ho, Director, Voting Rights Project Adriel I. Cepeda Derieux, Staff Attorney, Voting Rights Project Kristen Lee, Policy Analyst, National Political Advocacy Department Marc Alexander Ault, Legal Intern, Voting Rights Project The authors thank the ACLU attorneys and staff who contributed to this report: Laughlin McDonald, Katherine Palm, Alora Thomas-Lundborg, Sophia Lin Lakin, Theresa J. Lee, Lila Carpenter, Amanda L. Scott, Juan Diaz, and Kelly M. Hernández. The ACLU extends special thanks to the law firm Sidley Austin, LLP, for the assistance provided in drafting this report, in particular Stacy Gulledge, Kelley Conaty, Joselle Albracht, Jacqueline Cooper, Angela Daniel, John Stribling, Daniel Driscoll, Sean Damm, Ellen Heighten, Jackson Long, Amy Steurer, Robert Charles Davidson, Brett Reamer, Natali Wyson, John Wisse, Whitney Price, Crystal Clark, Lindsay Guevara, Joelle Coachman, and Mark Herzog. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction………………………………………………………………………………. 1 I. Historical overview ......................................................................................... 6 a. Reconstruction and post-Reconstruction b. Congressional efforts to address voting discrimination prior to 1965 c. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 d. Voting Rights Act amendments and reauthorizations: 1970-1982 e. The 2006 reauthorization II. Congressional authority to remedy racial discrimination in voting after Shelby County ................................................................................................. 20 a. Supreme Court review of the Voting Rights Act prior to Shelby County b. Current burdens, current needs, and the equal sovereignty principle announced in Northwest Austin and Shelby County c. Reconciling Shelby County with existing Supreme Court precedent upholding the Voting Rights Act d. Congressional power under the Elections Clause III. Hostility to minority political participation persists at levels that justify a restored and updated Voting Rights Act ...................................................... 31 a. Current indicia of discrimination b. The public lacks effective tools to enforce their rights under the Constitution and federal law IV. Solutions in the Voting Rights Advancement Act: blocking discriminatory voting changes before they impact voters ..................................................... 47 a. Preclearance for risky actors and risky behavior b. Congress should enact a more protective preliminary injunction standard c. Notice and transparency provisions Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 54 Appendix .................................................................................................................... 55 Introduction With approximately eight million members, activists, and supporters, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is a nationwide organization that advances its mission of defending the principles of liberty and equality embodied in our Constitution and civil rights laws. For nearly 100 years, the ACLU has been our nation’s guardian of liberty, working in the courts, legislatures, and communities to defend and preserve the Constitution and laws of the United States. The ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, established in 1965, the same year the Voting Rights Act was enacted, has filed more than 300 lawsuits to enforce the provisions of our country’s voting laws and Constitution. The goal of the Voting Rights Project is to ensure that all Americans have access to the franchise and can participate in the political process on an equal basis. The Voting Rights Project has historically focused much of its work on combating efforts targeting the political rights of minority voters, who continue to face grave threats to their voting rights. In addition to our work in the courts, the ACLU’s Washington Legislative Office has led the ACLU’s efforts to develop and strengthen federal laws protecting the right to vote for decades. In 2015, the ACLU launched its National Political Advocacy Department, and, through our work so far, has launched a 50-state campaign to protect and expand access to the ballot nationwide. More than a century ago, the Supreme Court famously described the right to vote as the one right that is preservative of all others.1 We are not truly free without self- government, which requires a vibrant participatory democracy where there is fair and equal representation for everyone. The right to vote is an essential act of self- determination—indispensable to the promise of “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” Yet since our nation’s founding, racial and ethnic minorities have fought pernicious efforts to block them from political representation. After the Civil War and Reconstruction period—when newly emancipated Black men were, for a brief period, able to exercise political rights and hold elected office—more than a hundred years of state-sanctioned voting discrimination followed, which prohibited Blacks and other minority groups from political participation.2 By the turn of the twentieth 1 Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886). 2 African Americans did not possess the right to vote prior to the Civil War. With the ratification of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments in 1868 and 1870, African Americans and others were granted the right to vote free from racial discrimination, U.S. CONST. amend XV, § 1; see U.S. CONST. amend. XIV, § 1, and both amendments gave Congress express power to enforce the amendments with appropriate legislation. U.S. CONST. amend. XIV, § 5; U.S. CONST. amend XV, § 2. But after a brief period of federal enforcement action following the Civil War, Congress and the executive branch abandoned those efforts. For the next hundred years, Southern states undertook sweeping efforts to disenfranchise African Americans and other minority voters by continuing to enact procedural barriers and discriminatory prerequisites to voting, such as literary tests, and through state- sanctioned violence. See ALEXANDER KEYSSAR, THE RIGHT TO VOTE: THE CONTESTED HISTORY OF DEMOCRACY IN THE UNITED STATES 69-93 (Basic Books 2000); see also Section I infra for more on the 1 century, official and systematic attempts to block people from voting based on their race or ethnicity had greatly intensified. Many whites feared the exercise of political power by minority voters, and ideologies of racial hierarchy were popular concepts undergirding the structure of numerous state constitutions and for entrenching white supremacy.3 Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act in 1965 after trying and failing for almost a century to remedy the affliction of racial discrimination in the voting process and the failure to dismantle state-sanctioned disenfranchisement of African Americans in particular.4 The most powerful enforcement tool in the Voting Rights Act is the federal preclearance process, established by Section 5. It requires states and political subdivisions with the worst records of voting discrimination to federally “preclear” voting changes, either administratively with the Attorney General or through a declaratory judgment action in federal court. Section 4(b) of the Act established the criteria identifying jurisdictions that would be subject to preclearance, i.e. the “coverage formula.” Section 5 requires covered jurisdictions to demonstrate that a proposed voting change does not have a discriminatory purpose or effect before the change can be enforced. Since its enactment in 1965, Section 5 has had the greatest impact in dismantling voting discrimination of any congressional action, successfully blocking more than 1,000 instances of discriminatory election rules advanced by state and local officials that would have weakened minority voting power or blocked minority voters from casting a ballot altogether.5 Section 5 also served as a strong deterrent against countless discriminatory voting changes from going forward.6 Because of its effectiveness, Congress reauthorized Section 5 four times, most recently in 2006.7 At historical background leading up to the ratification of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and adoption of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. 3 Many of these state constitutional provisions remain today and continue to lock in unequal representation and political conditions. See, e.g., Evidence of Current and Ongoing Voting Discrimination: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 116th Cong. (2019) (testimony of Derrick Johnson, President, NAACP, discussing historical context of provision in the Mississippi Constitution requiring majority vote requirement for both the state’s popular vote and state House districts for any statewide office and resulting exclusion of successful Black candidates for statewide office); JEFF MANZA AND CHRISTOPHER UGGEN, LOCKED OUT: FELON DISENFRANCHISEMENT AND AMERICAN DEMOCRACY 59-66 (Oxford Univ. Press 2008) (discussing racial origins of felon disenfranchisement rules and finding clear correlation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico
    Case 1:20-cv-01289-MV-JHR Document 12 Filed 12/22/20 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC., Plaintiff, Case No. 1:20-cv-01289-MV v. MAGGIE TOULOUSE OLIVER, in her official capacity as Secretary of State of New Mexico, the ELECTORS of NEW MEXICO and the STATE CANVASSING BOARD OF NEW MEXICO, Defendants. THE DNC’S MOTION TO INTERVENE AS DEFENDANTS AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24, the DNC Services Corporation/Democratic National Committee (the “DNC”) files this Motion to Intervene in this action as a matter of right or, alternatively, to permissively intervene. The DNC has conferred with counsel for Defendants, who have no objection to this Motion. The DNC has also conferred with counsel for Plaintiff, and Plaintiff has not yet taken a position on this Motion. In support of its Motion to Intervene, the DNC respectfully submits the following: Case 1:20-cv-01289-MV-JHR Document 12 Filed 12/22/20 Page 2 of 17 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 II. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................ 2 III. ARGUMENT ...................................................................................................................... 4 A. The DNC is entitled to intervene as of right. .........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • G Reen Pa G Es
    Save Our Democracy: Support the Green Party! The Green Party is unique because we reject corporate money. We believe that our values — your values — of peace, GREEN PAGES ecological wisdom, democracy and social justice should be The Newspaper of the Green Party of the United States guiding public policy. We are fully funded by real people (not corporations) like you. The Green Party’s success also serves the larger cause Vol. 19, No. 2 • Fall 2017 of multi-party democracy and independent politics in s e t the United States. I strongly believe in citizen lobbying a t and activism, but it must be coupled with electoral S d strategies and strong candidates. Com pared to other e Utah Greens t i organizations, the Green Party is relatively small, and n U so I know that every dollar I contribute has an enor - e S h t mous impact. I always give to the Green Party first and then to other wor - f E o Reboot, Make thy causes. — John Andrews y t r G 3 a 1 I can’t sit by and see wrongs and not do P 0 A n anything. I couldn’t justify having a kid if I e 0 e 2 P r wasn’t going to try and fix the world. When Ballot G C I’m around my Green friends, I feel like e 5 D h N 7 t there’s hope. Green values encompass n f 0 o o 5 E everything that’s important, and give us t n See story page 4 7 g o i an avenue to fix the problems in our soci - x E n t i a o h ety.
    [Show full text]
  • National Convention
    How to Become a State & National Delegate Presented by Adi Ben-Yehoshua Indiana Democratic Party Data Director What this training will cover State Convention National Convention Representation and Next Steps What happens at State Who makes up our delegation Diversity Goals What you should be doing now What our delegation will strive Convention and how to become and how to become a National to prepare to run to be a to look like a State Delegate Delegate delegate Helpful Information National Convention 2020 Page indems.org -> Events -> National Convention 2020 State Convention 2020 Page indems.org -> Events -> State Convention Adi Ben-Yehoshua [email protected] State Convention 2020 Indiana Democratic State Convention June 13, 2020 Indiana Convention Center What Happens at State Convention Congressional District Constituency Caucus Convention General Session Meetings Meetings Committee Meetings Voting, speeches by Contact IDP to have Credentials Adoption of candidates, official caucus meeting Rules Platform and district business scheduled Resolutions Resolutions Where voting on Nomination of district-level Lieutenant National Delegates Governor and takes place Attorney General Other Things at State Convention Hoosier Hospitality Dinner IYD After Party Speeches Vendors Current Night before Right after HH Will have area for officeholders, convention, highly Dinner, highly vendors for candidates for recommend recommend campaigns office, special guests Becoming a State Convention Delegate What does a State Delegate do? Vote on Vote on Vote on
    [Show full text]
  • Precinct Committeeperson and Activist Handbook & Resource Guide
    Precinct Committeeperson and Activist Handbook & Resource Guide Precinct Committeeperson /Volunteer: County and Precinct: 110 W Washington St. Suite 1110 East Indianapolis, IN 46204 Ph: (317) 231-7100 Fax: (317) 231-7129 www.indems.org [email protected] Paid for by the Indiana Democratic Party, www.indems.org, John Zody, Chair. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. Table of Contents Chapters 1. This Handbook & Resource Guide: General Overview of the Handbook 2. What It Means To Be A Democrat: Party Values and Space for Candidate Materials 3. The Basics: The Precinct, Party Organization, Job Description, Essential Functions, Election Year Responsibilities, Qualifications, Becoming a Precinct Committeeperson, Term of Office and Privileges 4. Getting Started: Know Your Precinct, Know Your Precinct Demographics, Know Your Neighbors, Know Your Local Election Laws, Know the Issues and Know the Party Organization 5. Effective Canvassing: Canvassing, The Importance of Canvassing, Recruiting Volunteers, Neighborhood / Block Captains, Providing Service, Canvassing Tools and Tips, Canvassing Techniques: Walking, Calling and House Parties and Reading the Voters 6. Registering Voters: Voter Registration Tips, Frequently Asked Questions: Voter Registration, Increasing Democratic Registration and Voting Information 7. Candidate Support: Supporting Candidates, Qualifying, Campaigning: Walking, Calling, Emailing, House Parties, Fundraising, Publicity, Other Ways You Can Help, Ballot Issues and Non-Partisan Races 8. Winning Elections: Field Efforts and Teamwork, Absentee Voting, Get Out The Vote and Frequently Asked Questions: Voting 9. Recruiting Volunteers: The Importance of Volunteers, Phone Other Democrats, Approaching Volunteers, Handling Volunteers and Recruiting Tips 10. Other Opportunities for Involvement: List of Other Opportunities, Overall Precinct Committeeperson Duties 11. Important Contact Information: State Party Headquarters, Your County Party, Your District Party, State Elected Officials, District, County, City Elected Officials 12.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Rules of the Indiana Democratic Party
    February 2021 Rules of the Indiana Democratic Party PLEASE NOTE: In December 2020, the State Central Committee passed two supplemental rules regarding reorganization that can be found in the accompanying 2021 Reorganization Guide on the IDP website where these rules are found. Those should be viewed in conjunction with these rules when planning for 2021 Reorganization meetings. These supplemental rules relate (generally) to timing of county reorganization meetings and proxies at county reorganization meetings. 1 February 2021 Table of Contents Page Rules 3 I. Party Structure 3 Rule 1. Party Composition 3 II. Party Governance 3 Rule 2. Applicability of Rules 3 Rule 3. State Committee Authority Over Rules 3 Rule 4. Adoption of Supplemental Rules 3 Rule 5. Rule Conflicts Between Committees 3 Rule 6. Rules of Order 3 Rule 7. Acceptance of Rules 4 III. Membership & Party office 4 Rule 8. Eligibility for Membership & Party offices 4 IV. Statements of Principle 4 Rule 9. Gender Equality 4 Rule 10. Party Access 5 V. Party Committees 5 Rule 11. Precinct Committees 7 Rule 12. Town or city committees 8 Rule 13. County Committees 13 Rule 14. District Committees 15 Rule 15. State Committee 19 Rule 16. National Committee 20 VI. The State Convention 20 Rule 17. State Convention 23 VII. Vacancies 23 Rule 18. Candidate and Elected Officeholder Vacancies 30 VIII. Removal 30 Rule 19. Removal of Party Officers 34 IX. Controversies 34 Rule 20. Controversies 35 X. Miscellaneous Provisions 35 Rule 21. Proxies 36 Rule 22. Quorum and Voting 36 Rule 23. Secret Ballots 36 Rule 24. Changes of office Provided in writing 36 Rule 25.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Rights and the Primary Election of 1964 in Indiana: the Wallace Challenge* Matthew E
    Civil Rights and the Primary Election of 1964 in Indiana: The Wallace Challenge* Matthew E. Welsh** In the spring of 1964 Democratic Governor George Corley Wallace of Alabama announced that he was going to campaign for the presidency of the United States, opposing President Lyndon B. Johnson, also a Democrat. Wallace had become a national figure by defying the United States Supreme Court in refusing admission of Negro students to the University of Ala- bama, and his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomi- nation had obvious overtones of racial intolerance which I found most disturbing. Indiana had come a long way since the adoption of its Constitution of 1851, Article XI11 of which barred Negroes and mulattoes from entering the state. At that time blacks already living in the state, many of whom had been born here, were not regarded as citizens. They could neither vote nor hold public office. They could not serve on juries or in the militia, and they were barred from public schools.' Article XI11 was voided by the Indiana Supreme Court in 1866. The General Assembly authorized school integration in 1877, prohibited discrimination in enjoyment of public accommodations in 1885, and in 1963 created the Indiana Civil Rights Commission with broad pow- ers and an adequate budget.2 The record also disclosed, how- ever, that the statewide referendum in 1936 approving amend- ment of the Constitution to permit Negroes to be members of * This article is an account of the 1964 primary election in Indiana as experienced and remembered by one of the major participants in the campaign.
    [Show full text]
  • General Election TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3 7Am – 8Pm
    General Election TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3 7am – 8pm 2020 Nonpartisan Voter INDEX Congressional District Map .......... 2 General Information ...........3, 35-38 U.S. Senate ..................................4-5 Guide The League of Women Voters of Michigan would like to U.S. Representative thank the following organizations for their financial (Dist. 1-14) .................................6-23 support to enable production of this Voter Guide: State Board of Education ........24-25 University of Michigan ...........26-27 Contributors to the League of Women Voters® Michigan State University .......28-29 of Michigan Education Fund Wayne State University ...........30-31 Supreme Court ........................32-33 Court of Appeals ..........................33 Ballot Proposals ...........................34 Clip & Take to the Polls ...............40 Celebrating Updated Candidate Information - Plus 100 Years Michigan State Legislative Candidates, Local Races, Ballot Proposals of Women’s is available online at VOTE411.org. Suffrage Also see www.LWVMI.ORG for additional election information. for most women 2 H LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF MICHIGAN 2020 NONPARTISAN VOTER GUIDE ® 1 4 2 5 10 3 8 6 7 11 9 14 Congressional 13 District Map 12 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF MICHIGAN 2020 NONPARTISAN VOTER GUIDE ® H 3 About This Guide Voting The League of Women Voters of Michigan contacted candidates for biographi- Voting in Michigan has never been easier. Voters have options. For more cal information and answers to questions on issues. The answers are printed as submitted and have not been edited, except for necessary cutting when replies information, see page 37. exceed the stated character limitations or violated content guidelines. Spelling and grammar were not corrected. If the candidate did not reply by the required Voting Early by Absentee Ballot date for publication, the words “Did not respond in time for inclusion” appear No excuse is needed.
    [Show full text]
  • Politics Indiana
    Politics Indiana V14 N44 Tuesday, June 24, 2008 JLT labors under the unity facade UAW, Schellinger don’t join Jill’s Convention confab By RYAN NEES INDIANAPOLIS - Jill Long Thompson has work still to do with the party faithful, who at the state convention Saturday appeared more swept by the candidacy of Barack Obama and even the muted appearances by the Hoosier Congressional delegation than of Indiana’s first female gubernato- rial nominee. And behind the scenes, the machinery of the Democratic establishment still appears to be exacting upon her nothing short of malicious ven- geance. The candidate was met with polite ap- plause as she toured district and interest group caucus meetings, but skepticism persisted especially amongst the roughly half of the party that supported her opponent in Indiana’s May primary. That unease was punctuated dramatically by the UAW’s refusal to endorse her candidacy the morning of the conven- tion, a move that appeared designed to rain on the nominee’s parade. Jill Long Thompson listens to her brother talk about her life and candidacy The UAW’s support provided vital to archi- just prior to taking the stage Saturday at the Indiana Democratic Conven- tect Jim Schellinger’s primary tion. (HPI Photo by Brian A. Howey) campaign, which received See Page 4 Back home again with Jill By BRIAN A. HOWEY NASHVILLE, Ind. - In the Hoosier brand of guber- natorial politics, home is where the heart is. We remember Frank O’Bannon talking about his “wired” barn down near Corydon. In January 2005, Mitch Daniels talked about an “These days many politicians Amish-style barn raising.
    [Show full text]
  • Why the People Are So Damn Angry New Economic Realities Putting the ‘American Dream’ out of Reach of the Middle Class by BRIAN A
    V21, 39 Thursday, June 9, 2016 Why the people are so damn angry New economic realities putting the ‘American Dream’ out of reach of the middle class By BRIAN A. HOWEY MICHIGAN CITY, Ind. – Ameri- cans and Hoosiers are angry. They are seeking political retribution. They are finding Republican presidential nomi- nee Donald Trump as the answer. But the critical question that has remained largely unanswered is why? Why are We the People so pissed off? Appearing at two events in Angry Donald Trump supporters confront U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz in Marion on the eve of the Elkhart last week, President Barack Indiana primary on May 2 Obama laid out the template for the doesn’t always yield the wisest decision making. sizzling anger that is fueling one of the most unpredict- At the Lerner Theater in Elkhart, PBS moderator able political climates in modern times. And Prof. Robert J. Gwen Ifill listened as Obama made what Howey Politics In- Gordon of Northwestern University, a macroeconomist and diana called an “economic victory lap,” where the president economic historian, supplies an array of data that helps reminded the Republican-dominated county that the 20% understand why the political decisions of 2016 are almost Continued on page 4 certainly being framed in the context of an emotion which Party of Lincoln stained By BRIAN A. HOWEY INDIANAPOLIS – On May 17, 1860, the Repub- lican convention campaign team of native son Abraham Lincoln met with the Indiana and Pennsylvania delega- tions in Chicago. What emerged hours later was that the Hoosier delegation would vote “Oh, look at my African-Ameri- as a solid bloc for the president who would go on to become the can over here.
    [Show full text]
  • Governor Previews Legislative Goals Pence Will Focus on Jobs and Education by BRIAN A
    V19, N13 Thursday, Nov. 14, 2013 Governor previews legislative goals Pence will focus on jobs and education By BRIAN A. HOWEY INDIANAPOLIS – Gov. Mike Pence’s second Indiana Gen- eral Assembly agenda will feature legislation on jobs and education. In an exclusive interview with Howey Politics Indiana on Wednesday, Pence held a stuffed manila folder he said contained much of his agenda. “I could tell you everything, but then I’d have to kill you,” he joked. Pence said he would unveil more details in early December when he gives what he calls “a major address that will outline our agenda.” But, he added, “I can tell you in very broad strokes a couple of things. My focus is going to be on jobs and schools. We’re going to continue to drive toward the six office 10 months ago, the Roadmap has had a prominent goals in our Roadmap for Indiana and our advanced poli- station in his Statehouse office on an easel. cies about that.” The priorities include: The Pence “Roadmap” began as a 2012 campaign 1.) Increasing private sector employment: As brochure outlining his policy priorities. But since he took Continued on page 3 Pence will seek reelection By BRIAN A. HOWEY INDIANAPOLIS – Gov. Mike Pence plans to seek a second term in 2016, with senior administration officials dousing any notion of a potential presidential run. “Gov. Pence, through his newly “Follow the money,” a senior Pence administration official told Howey Politics Indiana on created education agency, the Wednesday. Center for Education and Career While Pence has a national political action committee that could raise fed- Innovation, is undermining the eral election money, the source told exceptional work done every day by HPI that all of the governor’s fundrais- ing activity is related to his Indiana the Department of Education.” gubernatorial campaign.
    [Show full text]
  • The Howey Political Report Is Published by Newslink Ination, Indiana Sen
    Thursday, March 11, 2004 Volume 10, Number 29 Page 1 of 10 he Rating Bayh’s odds T for Kerry’s ticket Howey Key question: Could he carry Indiana? By BRIAN A. HOWEY in Indianapolis and MARK SCHOEFF JR. in Washington Arianna Huffington has written to U.S. Sen. John Political Kerry telling him to forget Evan Bayh. University of Virginia Prof. Larry Sabato said that Al Gore would have won in 2000 if Bayh had been on the ticket. The Hill gives Report Bayh 4:1 odds of making the cut, best on its list. In the race for the Democratic vice presidential nom- The Howey Political Report is published by NewsLink ination, Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh ranks high on the buzz list Inc. Founded in 1994, The Howey Political Report is in Washington. “I'd put him in the top half-dozen. He's on an independent, non-partisan newsletter analyzing the political process in Indiana. virtually every top 10 list,” said Joe Romer, a capital denizen who's worked in Hoosier Democratic politics for 35 years. Brian A. Howey, publisher “Bayh is a very capable guy. He's got a great resume. On Mark Schoeff Jr., Washington writer balance, he brings huge assets to the ticket.” Jack E. Howey, editor Romer's list of Bayh's strengths include a moderate voting record, executive experience as governor, a telegenic, The Howey Political Report Office: 317-254-1533 PO Box 40265 Fax: 317-968-0487 articulate demeanor, security policy background developed Indianapolis, IN 46240-0265 Mobile: 317-506-0883 through his positions on the Senate Armed Services and [email protected] Intelligence committees, the regional balance he would pro- www.howeypolitics.com vide for Kerry, his clean record and his relative youth.
    [Show full text]
  • INDIANA's 1988 GUBERNATORIAL RESIDENCY CHALLENGE Joseph
    INDIANA’S 1988 GUBERNATORIAL RESIDENCY CHALLENGE Joseph Hadden Hogsett Submitted to the faculty of the University Graduate School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in the Department of History Indiana University June 2007 Accepted by the Faculty, Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. Robert G. Barrows, Ph.D., Chair Elizabeth Brand Monroe, Ph.D. Master’s Thesis Committee William A. Blomquist, Ph.D. ii Dedicated to the memory of my colleague and friend, Jon D. Krahulik iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I take this opportunity to thank the people who helped make this paper possible. Dr. Robert G. Barrows served as my seminar professor, my mentor and the Chair of this thesis committee. Many other graduate students have acknowledged his sound advice, his guidance, his editing and his sense of humor. All of those also apply here. In my case, however, above all, I owe him a debt of gratitude for patience. This paper began as a concept in his seminar in the spring of 2002, but was not finished for five years. Even if Dr. Barrows had known then how flawed and distracted the author would prove to be, I am convinced he still would have agreed to chair the project. His patience is a gift. I also acknowledge the advice offered unconditionally by the committee’s other members, Dr. Elizabeth Brand Monroe and Dr. William A. Blomquist. Though they, like Dr. Barrows, possessed sufficient probable cause to notify authorities of a “missing person”, both exercised incredible restraint and, in so doing, no doubt violated some antiquainted canon of academic protocol.
    [Show full text]