Civil & Human Rights

President Obama on immigration reform: ‘Let’s see if we can get it done this year’

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Today, President Obama joined leaders from business, labor, and faith
communities in support of comprehensive immigration reform.

Remarks by the President on Immigration Reform (excerpts):

Today I’m here with leaders from business, from labor, from faith
communities who are united around one goal — finishing the job of
fixing a broken immigration system.

This is not just an idea whose time has come; this is an idea whose
time has been around for years now.  Leaders like all of you have worked
together with Republicans and Democrats in this town in good faith for
years to try to get this done.  And this is the moment when we should be
able to finally get the job done.

* * *

We should pass immigration reform.  It’s good for our economy.  It’s
good for our national security.  It’s good for our people.  And we
should do it this year.

Everybody knows that our current immigration system is broken. 
Across the political spectrum, people understand that.  We’ve known it
for years.  It’s not smart to invite some of the brightest minds from
around the world to study here and then not let them start businesses
here — we send them back to their home countries to start businesses
and create jobs and invent new products someplace else. 

It’s not fair to businesses and middle-class families who play by the
rules when we allow companies that are trying to undercut the rules
work in the shadow economy, to hire folks at lower wages or no benefits,
no overtime, so that somehow they get a competitive edge from breaking
the rules.  That doesn’t make sense. 

It doesn’t make sense to have 11 million people who are in this
country illegally without any incentive or any way for them to come out
of the shadows, get right with the law, meet their responsibilities and
permit their families then to move ahead.  It’s not smart.  It’s not
fair.  It doesn’t make sense.  We have kicked this particular can down
the road for too long. 

Ken ‘Birther’ Bennett wants the non-existent EAC to modify federal voter registration form

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Earlier this week, the Pew Data Dispatch examined The Cost of a Two-Tiered Election in Arizona.

I am guessing that Arizona Secretary of State Ken "Birther" Bennett also read this report, because he has changed his mind about maintaining a dual voter registration system in Arizona. Bennett wants court to mandate modification to federal election forms:

Not willing to maintain a dual registration
system, Secretary of State Ken Bennett wants a court to order the
federal Election Assistance Commission to modify its voter registration
forms to demand proof of citizenship.

In legal filings Wednesday, Bennett said he needs an immediate
order to ensure that Arizona — and Kansas, which is seeking the same
relief — are not denied “their sovereign and constitutional right to
establish and enforce voter qualifications.” Without the order, Bennett
said the state will forced to register "unqualified" voters. [Those who do not submit proof of citizenship under Arizona law.]

* * *

Bennett contends that [a dual voter registration system] will be “unduly burdensome.” So he wants a
federal judge in Kansas who is hearing the case to order the Election
Assistance Commission to add a proof-of-citizenship requirement for the
voter-registration forms it has for Arizona.

And Bennett and Kris Kobach, his Kansas
counterpart, want that to happen soon, seeking a hearing on Nov. 12 or
shortly thereafter.

The Referendum (‘citizens veto’) of the Voter Suppression Act – HB 2305 – headed to the ballot

by

Posted  by AzBlueMeanie:

2305hb11Good job people! Petition signature verification typically has a "bad signature" failure rate in excess of 40 percent. But even with the "strict compliance" standard in effect for a referendum of a legislative act, you managed a signature verification rate in excess of 80 percent! This is unheard of. Give yourself a pat on the back and an "attaboy!"

The Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required) reports Referendum
effort against HB2305 has enough signatures to make the 2014 ballot:

The referendum effort against HB 2305, the
law making sweeping changes to Arizona’s elections, has the necessary
valid signatures to force a referendum election on the law during the
2014 election.

Though three counties are still validating signatures, the effort
already has more than 100,000 signatures validated – well over the
86,405 necessary to force a referendum election.

According to figures provided to by the secretary of state’s office,
5,242 signatures have been deemed valid by county recorders’ offices
across the state. By law, that figure is multiplied by 20 – the
signatures sent to county recorders were a random sample totaling 5
percent of the total – giving the referendum effort 104,840 valid
signatures, far more than the 86,405 needed to put the law on hold until
voters weigh in on the 2014 ballot.

New Mexico Supreme Court hears arguments in Marriage Equality case

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Albuqurque Journal reports on today's arguments before the New Mexico Supreme Court. NM Supreme Court: No immediate ruling on same-sex marriage, but plenty of tough questions:

EqualThe New Mexico Supreme Court has wrapped up a landmark two-hour
hearing on whether gay marriage should be legalized in the state.

Nearly 170 people crammed into the court’s chambers and several
overflow rooms for the hearing, while others had to be turned away due
to a lack of space.

While the state’s highest court did not issue an immediate
ruling on the issue, same-sex marriage advocates said after the hearing
they like their chances.

“I thought it went very well,” said Monica Leaming of
Farmington, who attended the proceedings with her wife, Cecilia Taulbee.
“I’m optimistic about the outcome, because there’s a strong indication
that most New Mexicans support same-sex marriage.”

Meanwhile, gay marriage opponents suggested they would
pursue a statewide election — via a constitutional amendment — on the
issue of gay marriage if the Supreme Court rules to sanction it.

“I think the most important thing here is no matter what
their decision is, the issue will not be settled until the people
speak,” said Sen. Bill Sharer, R-Farmington.

(Update) The GOP war on voting – women are the next bloc of voters targeted

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I flagged this story yesterday, but now we have a real-life example of a woman being disenfranchised of her vote by Texas' voter I.D. law solely because of how her name appears on photo I.D. And she is a judge.

Steve Benen reports When the war on voting meets the war on women:

Rick Hasen flagged a remarkable story
out of Corpus Christi, Texas, where the state’s new voter-ID law –
imposed after the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act – is
causing problems for women who use maiden names or hyphenated names. A
local district court judge experienced the problem first hand.

“What I have used for voter registration and for
identification for the last 52 years was not sufficient yesterday when I
went to vote,” 117th District Court Judge Sandra Watts said.

Watts has voted in every election for the last 49 years. The
name on her driver’s license has remained the same for 52 years, and the
address on her voter registration card or driver’s license hasn’t
changed in more than two decades. So imagine her surprise when she was
told by voting officials that she would have to sign a “voters
affidavit” affirming she was who she said she was.

“Someone looked at that and said, ‘Well, they’re not the same,’” Watts said.