[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 14]
[House]
[Pages 18853-18858]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS AND THE PENDING ELECTION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bishop of Utah). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 7, 2003, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee) is recognized for half the time to midnight, or 43 
minutes.
  MS. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I stand this evening to 
continue the Congressional Black Caucus Special Orders and discussion 
with our colleagues on the pending election that will be held this year 
on November 2, 2004; to speak to my colleagues about the absolute 
imperative need to educate America and to be able to be diligent on 
what we fear to be episodes of attempts to suppress voting all over the 
Nation.
  As I listened to my colleagues who preceded me on the floor of the 
House, I believe it is important to share some thoughts about the 
dilemma we find ourselves in. It may even be the engine behind the 
selection on November 2, 2004.
  All of us have recognized the bravery and the valiant efforts, 
sacrifices that have been made by our friends and neighbors who find 
themselves in Afghanistan and Iraq. In my community alone, it is not 
only the enlisted personnel but it is likewise the Texas National 
Guard, the Reservists and many, many civilians.
  We came to where we are today on different pathways. Some of us voted 
to authorize the authority to go to war, and many of us, such as 
myself, were adamant that this was the wrong direction to take. In the 
course of this debate, none of us, however, have taken to the task of 
criticizing or not recognizing the valor of our troops. And tonight I 
continue that position, to respect them and thank them, and to 
apologize to those families and to offer them sympathy, for those 
families whose brave men and women have already lost their lives.
  One thing about this Nation is that we are eager to rise to the 
occasion to defend this Nation's honor. We were eager to defend America 
after the horrific tragedy of 9/11. And as I began, I started out by 
speaking to the question of voter suppression and the rights of voters, 
and I wanted to mention the tragedies in Iraq, as I have mentioned the 
tragedy on 9/11, because I think it all comes to the point of the 
American people finally making the decision of the direction they want 
this Nation to go.
  In the last 48 hours or a week ago some 80-plus people were killed in 
Baghdad. There is no doubt that in the last weekend it was one of the 
bloodiest weekends that we have experienced. We know that three 
hostages were held. We know that Americans were held. We know that 
families in America today are mourning the loss of their loved ones who 
were beheaded in the last 48 hours.
  We also knows that this administration, the Secretary of Defense, and 
those responsible for the policy of this war, or the lack of policy, 
have not offered one solution, one suggestion of how we can return from 
Iraq with honor. There is suggestion, of course, that there will be an 
election in Iraq in January and one pending in Afghanistan. We took 
away the resources from Afghanistan and the support for President 
Karzai to be distracted by a war directed and called for by this 
administration which today we find out was on a truly false basis. That 
is why this election is one of extreme importance. As many have said, 
it may be the most historic election, the most important election of 
our lifetime.
  So I think it begs the question that we can come on the floor and pay 
tribute to those brave young men and women, but we have to tell the 
truth. There is a complete disaster in Iraq. There is complete pillage 
and murder and brutality and violence and explosions and loss of life 
and continued loss of life of those who we have sent to be on the front 
lines and who have been willing to take the oath to stand up and defend 
America.
  Whose obligation is it? It is those of us who were elected. The 
President of the United States has to stand before the American people 
with a solution that will allow our men and women to return with honor. 
They have to in fact recognize that there must be action. In the 
President's remarks to the United Nations I did not hear a response to 
Senator Kerry's very provocative and important and instructive and 
meaningful statement on yesterday morning about solutions, calling 
together all of the allies that were in New York to help assist them or 
help to have assistance in working with Iraq, provide better training 
for Iraqi security forces, provide benefits to the Iraqi people, allow 
more Iraqi people to in fact engage in the rebuilding of Iraq, and as 
well ensure that democratic elections can be held next year. Actions, a 
statement of actions.
  I bring this to the attention of my colleagues because the 
Congressional Black Caucus has been consistent in asking for some 
orderly response to a war that was called on the basis of weapons of 
mass destruction, called on the basis of imminent threat to the United 
States, called on the basis of a connection to al Qaeda, none of which 
are true. We simply asked for the truth. And so we continue with that 
message and we build on it because as we move towards the elections, we 
are likewise concerned with the people of the United States, and it is 
our commitment to ensure because this election is so important and it 
will be the telling story of how we move forward in Iraq, Afghanistan, 
North Korea, Indonesia, and the war on terror. We cannot afford for one 
single vote to be lost.
  As I mentioned, the speech that was given by Senator Kerry, I perused 
some of the newspapers today because when we speak about voter 
suppression, many times it is thought that we speak about one group 
versus another. Yes, the Voter Rights Act of 1965 covered Southern 
States and protects the rights of African Americans and Hispanics in 
protecting them from being denied the right to vote. I might say that 
even with those laws, we had a tumultuous time in 2004. But I thought I 
would just show to my colleagues why I am standing here today, standing 
against voter suppression for any American.
  As I read the Wall Street Journal, I am looking at both Alina and 
Paul Shipman, and the article talks about the anatomy of a hospital 
bill. There are people spending $29,000 because they do not have any 
insurance. That is what is going on in America, and that is why this 
election is so very important.
  Or maybe we want to read the Los Angeles Times and look at a picture 
that shows somewhat of traffic congestion that is all over America 
because we need more transportation dollars and resources to improve 
our mobility. We need dollars to fix our bridges, to support our rail 
and our bus and our airplanes and our airports and our neighborhoods 
where there is extreme noise from our airports. We need dollars 
invested in America.
  Then I show this last picture of Marita Michael, who testified in 
Washington, D.C. against the effort by this Congress to repeal the 
assault weapons ban in D.C. after she lost her young beloved son of 15 
years old by gunshot.

[[Page 18854]]

  This is why this election is so very important, and this is why we 
cannot afford to be denied the right to vote. And as I remind those, 
let me say that this is not a frivolous discussion, because even today 
we are finding out that we are going to have a tough time in this 
election, even in the backdrop of the legislation passed in 2002, the 
Help America Vote Act of 2002, which I will discuss later as I see my 
colleague has joined me, even as we have that legislation or the 
legislation of Senator Dodd in 2001 that would have created the Equal 
Protection of Voting Rights Act of 2001, primarily because we are still 
facing the challenges of an election that can be tampered with.
  Let me cite two or three points as I yield to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson), but I think it is important 
to set the groundwork. The reason why we are on the floor of the House 
is because there are families paying $30,000 for hospitalization 
because they have no health insurance.
  There are people trying to get to work and trying to develop jobs, 
and they are immobilized by traffic conditions that do not allow the 
free ingress and egress because we are stalemated in this Congress 
because so many dollars are going overseas to fight the war in Iraq. 
And there is no solution it appears, no pronouncement from this 
administration, no relief to these families who are longing, no relief 
to these individuals who are serving us, no understanding whether they 
will be able to come home or not.
  Mr. Speaker, I was in the airport over the weekend, and I saw a 
number of our men and women who had come home for some time frame; and 
I stopped to thank them for their service and asked them how long they 
would be home. Some I hoped were coming home for good, but do you know 
what they said to me, Mr. Speaker? We have got 15 days and then we go 
back.

                             {time}   2245

  These are men and women who cannot be told when we are going to have 
a resolution in Iraq, when we are going to transfer, if you will, the 
security aspects of Iraq to the people who should be securing their own 
country.
  No one is suggesting that we cut and run, but we are suggesting that 
there be a statement, a pronouncement that there is a solution and that 
this administration knows the direction in which it goes.
  So, again, this is an important election and just to remind you why 
it is important, why the Voting Rights Act is important and this 
election law is important, because even in the last election in 
Florida, there was the use of armed, plainclothes officers from the 
Florida Department of Law Enforcement to question elderly black voters 
in their homes and senior citizens' homes, the easiest persons to 
intimidate. The incidents were part of a State investigation of voting 
irregularities in the city's March 2003 mayoral election. Let me share 
with you one other aspect.
  This year in Florida the State ordered the implementation of the 
potential felon purge list to remove voters from the rolls. That in 
itself was chilling, in a disturbing echo of the infamous 2000 purge 
which was found to be patently incorrect and egregiously wrong, 
suggesting that people who came to the polls in 2000 were felons when 
they were not.
  In 2000, thousands of eligible voters, particularly African 
Americans, were removed from the rolls. After an outcry of the people 
in Florida and those around the country, the State abandoned the plan, 
after the news media investigations revealed that the 2004 list also 
included thousands of people who were eligible to vote and heavily 
targeted African Americans, while virtually ignoring many other voters.
  Then lastly, Mr. Speaker, this is in a southern State protected by 
the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and 1968. In 2002 in Louisiana, flyers 
were distributed in African American communities telling voters they 
could go to the polls on Tuesday, December 10. Mr. Speaker, they also 
added that if they could not go, they could go this Tuesday, December 
10, excuse me, 3 days after a Senate run-off election was held. Let me 
go over that again. They sent flyers out to tell the African American 
voters that they could vote Tuesday, December 10, which was actually 3 
days past the election date that they should have showed up at. This is 
the kind of underhanded, almost insulting, but really threatening to 
the Constitution, actions that have gone on before by those who would 
want to turn away voters who disagree with them.
  So that is why we stand here today, and I am delighted to yield to 
the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson) who has been 
a strong voice on the issues of voter suppression and a member of the 
Congressional Black Caucus.
  Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for yielding to me and for the 
Caucus for organizing this important discussion on voter intimidation 
and suppression in the United States.
  In a Nation where children are taught at the earliest age that every 
citizen has the right to vote, it would be comforting to know that the 
last vestiges of voter intimidation, oppression and suppression have 
been swept away by the passage and the enforcement of the Voting Rights 
Act of 1965. The facts, however, are discomforting.
  In every national election since reconstruction, in every election 
since the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965, voters, and 
particularly African Americans and other minorities, have faced 
calculated and determined efforts at intimidation and suppression, both 
above and below the Mason Dixon line, from California to Maine to Texas 
to Montana.
  Overt, and often violent, voter participation in the era of Jim Crow 
now has been replaced by more subtle, but often just as intimidating, 
tactics. Gone are the days of poll taxes and literacy tests. Today, 
intimidation, threats, innuendo and deception are often more used to 
discourage voter turnout.
  The list of strategies used by those who wish to suppress or 
intimidate voters is indeed varied and includes the following: 
challenges and threats against individual voters at the polls by armed 
private guards, off duty law enforcement officers, local creditors, 
fake poll monitors and poll workers and managers; signs posted at 
polling places warning of penalties for voter fraud and non-citizen 
voting or illegally urging support for a candidate; poll workers 
assisting voters in filling out their ballots and instructing them on 
how to vote; criminal tampering with voter registration rolls and 
records; flyer and radio advertisements containing false information; 
roadblocks placed near polling places; and internal memos from party 
officials in which the goals of suppressing voter turnout are outlined.
  Mr. Speaker, the overwhelming evidence of widespread voter 
intimidation and suppression in our Nation and the fact that the 
presidential election of 2004 promises to be as close as the 2000 
election, when every vote did count but was not counted, prompted me to 
draft a resolution condemning all efforts to suppress and intimidate 
voters in the United States and affirming that the right to vote is a 
fundamental right of all eligible United States citizens.
  The resolution also urges States to replace decades-old election 
machinery with less error-prone equipment before the November 2004 
national elections. It calls upon all States to institute a moratorium 
on the erection of roadblocks or identity checkpoints designed to 
racially profile or intimidate voters on election day.
  Mr. Speaker, I saw this happening when I was the ambassador to 
Micronesia, thousands of miles away and watching on CNN. I was 
horrified that my country would see on election day these kinds of 
racially-profiled activities that were intended to stop the person of 
color from voting. I was horrified and ashamed.
  My resolution calls upon the Attorney General to vigorously monitor 
and investigate all credible allegations of voter intimidation and 
suppression and to expeditiously prosecute all offenders to the full 
extent of the law.
  Mr. Speaker, all of us here today are very aware of the voter 
irregularities

[[Page 18855]]

that took place in Florida during the 2000 election. We are very aware 
that every vote does count and that in 2000 perhaps as little as 600 
votes separated the two presidential candidates.
  We are also aware that many of the votes in Florida were disqualified 
due to antiquated voting machines used predominantly in minority 
neighborhoods. While just 11 percent of Florida's voters are African 
American, more than half of the spoiled ballots, that is, more than 
90,000 of the votes tossed out, were cast by African Americans.
  We are also aware of other unsettling events, one of which was 
conducted by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement in Orlando this 
summer. In that investigation, elderly African American voters were 
visited at their homes by law enforcement officers, curious about their 
voting behavior. Florida officials deny any attempt to intimidate 
voters. However, the Justice Department recently disclosed that it had 
initiated a civil rights investigation into what had occurred in 
Orlando.
  The recent event in Florida follows on the heels of two other well-
publicized events in Florida when in 2001 State officials attempted to 
purge its list of alleged felons, predominantly African Americans, and 
in 2004, when the State again attempted to purge its voter list.
  Mr. Speaker, I, along with my colleagues from the Congressional Black 
Caucus, come to the floor of this House this evening to declare that 
never again will such acts of voter intimidation and suppression be 
used. It is high time for both parties to sign a mutual pledge to 
renounce any and all efforts to suppress the vote in this upcoming 
election.
  The world will be watching our Nation on the eve of November 2. As we 
go into other Nations and the United Nations talking about liberty and 
democracy, we cannot be hypocritical. Not only will the Western world 
be watching, but the non-Western, and particularly the Arab, world will 
be following the election. If we intend to bring liberty to Iraq and 
any other country, we must model that behavior here at home.
  So I want to show the world how democracy should be practiced, not 
how it should not, and as a person whose roots are on the continent of 
Africa, no longer will we be suppressed or intimidated because our 
skins are black.
  I am an American. I have been an American ambassador. I have a right 
to vote, and no one should stop me or mine from exercising that right.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished 
gentlewoman, and I am very honored, as any Member of the Congressional 
Black Caucus and Member of this body, to join the gentlewoman on this 
very important legislation to eliminate voter suppression.
  The gentlewoman's chronicling the indictments of our various election 
systems is very important to educate our colleagues because many times 
it is thought that with the passage of legislation, and as you well 
know, we worked very hard to craft the Help America Vote Act of 2002.
  Mr. Speaker, since this legislation, we are chronicling this list of 
indictments against the various election systems throughout the 
country. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 will be 40-years-old in about 6- 
to 8-months, and look at us. We are standing here talking about voter 
suppression. This is shameful.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague and I want to make sure 
that we are mentioning my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus 
and our chairperson, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) 
because, Mr. Speaker, we are committed to coming to this floor as often 
as it is needed to be able to educate our colleagues and to encourage 
you to join with us in supporting this resolution.
  This resolution should be bipartisan and unanimous. Not one of us 
should be interested in suppressing the votes of someone like Ms. 
Michael who wanted to express herself in Washington, D.C., about the 
assault weapons ban.

                              {time}  2300

  She needs to be able to vote. No one should want to suppress the 
votes of thousands upon thousands of Americans who are stuck in traffic 
because we have not been able to focus on the investment in 
transportation in America. And certainly none of us should want to be 
able to stifle the votes of the 44 million uninsured, who like this 
family, the Shipman family, are paying enormous hospital bills, maybe 
even more than this, $30,000.
  The votes are important, but it makes me very sad when I can cite 
instances that occur today that go back to 1880 and 1910. For example, 
Florida adopted literacy tests, property qualifications, grandfather 
clauses which permitted an individual to vote only if his grandfather 
had thereby excluded the descendants of slaves.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to engage with the gentlewoman from California as 
I put this forward. We are thinking that we have moved beyond this. In 
fact, let me say that one of the good news stories coming out of this 
is that we are going to be prepared. People for the American way, the 
Voters Institute, the NAACP, the National Urban League, and many other 
groups are coming together to say loudly to America that we will not 
tolerate the denial of a vote and a vote not being counted.
  Mr. Speaker, we expect to have some 10,000 or more lawyers, and we 
are recruiting them now. And if it is within the ethical posture, I 
hope those who are listening to my voice and who desire to be part of 
democracy and the privilege of voting and the rights of people voting 
would be in contact with these organizations and the Congressional 
Black Caucus regarding their desires, as legal scholars, to participate 
in protecting the rights of Americans so that votes will not be denied.
  We have the right for provisional voting, Mr. Speaker. Let me tell 
you what is happening. We are intimidating people from using 
provisional voting. Just this weekend we came from Ohio, my good 
friend, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones), a great leader in that 
State, invited some of us in to survey the procedures and to look at 
the opportunities and the structures for voting in Ohio. Lo and behold, 
we had one of their State officials suggesting restrictions on 
provisional voting. We will join with the gentlewoman from Ohio in 
working to ensure that that does not happen. That is not what 
provisional voting says. It says that if you come to a voting booth and 
you believe you have the right to vote, you can sign an affidavit, you 
can provisionally vote, and your vote should be counted. This is 
intimidation, Mr. Speaker, nothing more, nothing less.
  Then we find out, as we visited our men and women in Iraq and 
Afghanistan, and I hear my colleagues saluting them, and I join them in 
doing so, but we know the trouble we had with our military voting in 
2000. Well, I am surprised and concerned that we do not have a clear 
understanding how overseas ballots from our military personnel will get 
to their respective hometowns to be counted.
  Now, I understand, and we are looking into this, that these ballots 
are to be received by the Pentagon. What an intimidating aspect to a 
specialist P4, a person who is simply an enlisted person, doing their 
best, having to know that some officer may have the opportunity to look 
at their vote. Where is the right of privacy?
  So to all those family members who have loved ones in the military, 
you need to be tuned in and ask the questions of your elected persons: 
How will my loved one, my son, my husband, my daughter, my wife, my 
family member's vote be counted and will it be secure?
  Additionally, Florida's current lifetime ban on voting by convicted 
felons, which disenfranchised nearly a third of all black males during 
the 2000 elections, dates back to the reactionary measures implemented 
in the late 19th century. We still have laws today that deny those who 
have done their time, paid their dues, who are denied the right to 
vote. We need a national legislative initiative, as we have ongoing in 
this Congress, to restore the rights of individuals who have paid their 
dues for the crime they have committed,

[[Page 18856]]

and who are committed to being contributing citizens of this Nation. 
How dare we deny them their right to vote, and I hope we are able to 
pass this legislation as soon as possible.
  What about local election officials who use the secret ballot law to 
take advantage of high illiteracy among blacks? Under the guise of 
protecting the integrity of the ballot, the State of Florida barred 
anyone from providing assistance to a voter, even if they could not 
read. Frankly, I think that we are clearly a Nation that has a long way 
to go.
  I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice 
Johnson), who I joined, along with a number of others, I know the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson) did as well, with her 
international experience. We will have international observers, Mr. 
Speaker, and that is no shame to the United States. If we are a 
democracy that we are proud of, then we need international observers to 
affirm the fact that we have lived up to our own obligations, duties 
and values. We should not be denying those individuals who are 
uninsured, people stuck in traffic, who cannot get from a job that 
probably does not pay that much because we have no public 
transportation, a mother who is crying over her deceased son concerned 
about the assault weapons ban. They need to vote November 2nd, 2004, in 
the various early vote methods that areas may have.
  We have a catastrophe here, and I encourage those who are concerned 
about this Constitution to consider voting one of your most precious 
rights. We expect that this century and this election, to be the first 
presidential election fully into the 21st century after the turn of 
this century, this election should set the standard that we are 
prepared for anyone who seeks public office. It should not matter 
whether we agree with their position, whether they are black or white 
or Hispanic, whether they are south Asian or Native American, whatever 
their diversity, we should not undermine voters because of who they are 
and because of who they desire to vote for.
  Mr. Speaker, the election in 2000 was won actually in the popular 
vote by another person. This election cannot have that dichotomy. This 
is a solemn challenge for this House and for the other body. This is a 
solemn challenge for those of us who take an oath of office and rise 
every morning to pledge allegiance to our flag. This is an enormous 
burden that we now have.
  Frankly, Mr. Speaker, I am frightened, because of what the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson) said, a former ambassador, 
when she was not a Member of Congress in that 2000 election and the 
experience that she had. I spent 30 days in Florida after that 
election. I spoke to Floridians, senior citizens who were frustrated by 
the fact that they did not get a chance to vote as they desired. There 
were county officials distorting the ballot that then distorted the 
results of the election. I had disabled persons coming to me after that 
election crying out that we should never have it happen again where a 
disabled person cannot vote in dignity with the privacy that is 
necessary.
  So it is important that we come on the floor almost every night, 
because I do not believe this law, the Help America Vote Act, has 
really been implemented. Ask how many jurisdictions have the technology 
necessary to allow disabled persons to vote privately, Mr. Speaker. I 
want every disabled person to be aware that they can go to their county 
seat right now, whoever is in charge of elections, and demand they be 
able to vote privately and have the kind of procedures in place to do 
so. It is their constitutional right.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I believe that the work we have to do is yet undone; 
disabled persons, senior citizens and, yes, students. Students like the 
ones at Texas Prairie View A&M, who the district attorney told because 
they were students, they could not vote in the jurisdiction where they 
went to school. We are finding this happening all over America. The 
Constitution and the United States Supreme Court confirms that they can 
vote. The 1979 case that governed Prairie View A&M is applicable to 
students all over the country. Students can vote in the place of their 
school residency as long as they vote no place else. Let our voices be 
heard to all election officials who would even attempt to deny college 
students eligible to vote such as they did at Florida A&M, denying them 
the right to vote.
  We believe elections should be guided by four fundamental principles: 
The voting process, particularly the voting systems in the 
administration of elections must be uniform and nondiscriminatory.
  Voters must be able to independently and privately cast and verify 
their ballot. That is number two. That is the one we mentioned with 
respect to the disabled and senior citizens. No one who has a challenge 
of any kind should be intimidated and insulted and disgraced at the 
voting booth.

                             {time}   2310

  Number three, any voting system must comply with national 
certification standards.
  And four, voter confidence and reliability in the electoral process 
must be maintained.
  I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson) for a 
question. She has crafted this resolution dealing with voter 
suppression. She comes from California. Many times we believe that 
these issues are only relegated to the southern States. I would like 
the gentlewoman to share some of the language out of the resolution and 
the final resolve that says we are against voter suppression and 
intimidation because I hope, as we conclude our remarks tonight on the 
floor of the House, that we will be moving this legislation as quickly 
as possible because we cannot have in the 21st century the long shadow 
of Jim Crow. We cannot have the taking away of votes and the 
undercounting of votes.
  Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee), and I appreciate the gentlewoman's passionate expression 
of the right to vote. That undergirds the reason why I introduced a 
resolution.
  I read in the paper last week that there was a gentleman in one of 
the States up north who said we must suppress the black vote because, 
as you know, blacks vote Democrat, and so we must find ways to suppress 
their getting to the polls. I was appalled and shocked that we are 
dealing with something that was outlawed, we thought, by the Voting 
Rights Act of 1965. But we always have to be awakened to the facts and 
realities in which we live, that racism is not dead in this country; it 
just takes a different position, a different posture.
  So despite the gains that we have made in securing our right to vote, 
new roadblocks have been successfully erected, including diluting the 
African-American vote by switching to an at-large election, preventing 
African-Americans from becoming candidates or obtaining office, voter 
fraud, the discriminatory selection of election officials, denying 
African-Americans access to precinct meetings and the harassment and 
outright exclusion of African-Americans from polling places.
  And we know that, prior to the last election, there were notices sent 
out that said if the weather is bad, you do not have to vote on 
November, let us just use the 2nd, but you can vote on December 10. 
These are things that are occurring in today's atmosphere.
  Mr. Speaker, I have put together a series of whereases in this 
resolution. What they do is document progress that has been made. I 
would like to read just one of them: Whereas voters in the United 
States, particularly African-Americans and other minorities, have faced 
calculated and determined efforts at voter intimidation and suppression 
in every national election since the reconstruction era.
  An example of that was a few weeks ago in Florida where names were 
purged, but only names of African-Americans, and the person who was in 
charge, the secretary of state, said that the information gotten from 
the database on the census did not indicate whether Hispanics should be 
purged because they were considered to be white. If you have a Gonzalez 
and a Solis and a Menendez, that might make one

[[Page 18857]]

question whether you have some Hispanics on this list. It is these 
kinds of calculated efforts that we want to do away with, and when I 
get back to my district, I am going to contact my county bar 
association and ask if they will join in our efforts to be sure we have 
attorneys throughout this country who will be ready in a flash to go to 
court when we see these violations of the Voting Rights Act.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted for the 
gentlewoman to make that point. Let me quickly close by first of all 
thanking the gentlewoman and making mention of our chairperson, the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings), and say that all of us are 
going to engage our county bar associations, the bars of the respective 
communities who believe in the justice of voting, to work with us.
  Mr. Speaker, let me say, the reason why, even with Native Americans 
in the South Dakota 2004 primary, they were prevented from voting and 
were challenged because they did not have photo IDs which were not 
required in that State. The State of Arizona is now looking to do that.
  We see there is reason for us to raise up the Constitution on the 
idea of voting, the Voting Rights Act and the very privilege of voting. 
We are in trouble, and the fact we are in trouble, there is a crisis 
and a need for us to surround the Nation with the idea that we will not 
tolerate one single act of voter suppression.
  I ask my colleagues to support enthusiastically the Watson resolution 
against voter suppression. I ask those who are listening to engage 
their county government. And finally, I ask that we look at all of the 
electronic voting machines because we will engage in lawsuits if 
necessary to have a paper trail to protect the votes that will be going 
into those electronic voting machines.
  Today we spoke on voter suppression. We will continue to do so 
because it is the right of the American people. This election must be 
free, and we must stand for freedom, justice and equality.
  Despite significant gains our Nation has made to secure the voting 
rights of all Americans, credible reports of voter intimidation and 
suppression demonstrate that this most fundamental democratic right 
remains a dream deferred for some Americans.
  I have joined my colleague from California, Ms. Watson in introducing 
a resolution condemning all efforts to suppress and intimidate voters 
in the United States.
  This resolution reaffirms that voting is a fundamental right of all 
eligible United States citizens; urges States to replace decades-old 
election machinery with less error-prone equipment before the November 
2004 national elections; calls upon States to institute a moratorium on 
the erection of roadblocks or identity checkpoints designed to racially 
profile or intimidate voters on election day; and calls upon the 
Attorney General to vigorously monitor and investigate all credible 
allegations of voter intimidation and suppression and to expeditiously 
prosecute all offenders to the fullest extent of the law.
  As we all learned during the last national election, each individual 
vote counts. By most accounts, the upcoming presidential election will 
again underscore the importance that votes are counted accurately and 
that every qualified voter is allowed to exercise his or her 
constitutional right.

People for the American Way--Protecting the Integrity and Accessibility 
                      of Voting in 2004 and Beyond


   A Statement of Principles on Voting Systems and Voter Verification

       As the 2004 election approaches, there is significant 
     concern among Americans that our voting system has not been 
     sufficiently protected from a repeat of widespread 
     disenfranchisement. New technologies require election 
     officials to grapple with a complex set of interests, 
     including accessibility for people with disabilities and 
     sufficient security and accountability to prevent elections 
     from being affected by equipment malfunction or tampering.
       The enormous logistical difficulties facing state and local 
     election officials in implementing the Help America Vote Act 
     are compounded by limited resources and a lack of guidance 
     from the federal government.
       Preventing disaster on Election Day will require a public 
     commitment from election officials at all levels of 
     government--especially chief state election officials--as 
     well as the resources to put in place equipment and 
     procedures that will advance and protect the voting rights of 
     all Americans.
       Maintaining the integrity of our electoral process is 
     critical to America's democratic institutions. Providing 
     people with disabilities with the opportunity to vote in an 
     independent and private matter is essential to comply with 
     the moral and legal imperative of equality.
       We are confident that there is a clear way forward that 
     will allow states to achieve both goals to the maximum extent 
     feasible for this year's elections, while encouraging 
     additional advances in technology to fully serve the needs of 
     all voters and election officials in future elections.
       We believe action by election officials should be guided by 
     four fundamental principles:
       1. The voting process, particularly the voting systems and 
     the administration of elections, must be uniform and 
     nondiscriminatory;
       2. Voters must be able to independently and privately cast 
     and verify their ballot;
       3. Any voting system must comply with national 
     certification standards; and
       4. Voter confidence and reliability in the electoral 
     process must be maintained.

  Less than ten weeks before the national elections, potential problems 
with voter registration lists, new and unproven technologies, 
insufficient resources for poll worker training, and inadequate voter 
education are increasingly being scrutinized for their potential to rob 
voters of their right to cast a vote that is counted. These, however, 
are not the only threats to the integrity of the elections, as a report 
released by People For the American Way Foundation and the NAACP makes 
clear.
  The Long Shadow of Jim Crow: Voter Intimidation and Suppression in 
America documents that the vestiges of voter intimidation, oppression 
and suppression were not swept away by the Voting Rights Act or by 
subsequent efforts to enforce it. In fact, deliberate efforts to 
deceive or intimidate voters into staying away from the polls continue 
to emerge in nearly every major election cycle.
  NAACP Board Chairman Julian Bond has been quoted as saying that 
``Minority voters bear the brunt of every form of disenfranchisement, 
including pernicious efforts to keep them away from the polls.''
  ``This report is a reminder that while we are keeping an eye on state 
officials and new voting machines, we cannot relax our vigilance 
against these kinds of direct assaults on voters' rights.''
  Poll taxes, literacy texts and physical violence of the Jim Crow era 
have been replaced by more subtle and creative tactics.
  This summer, Michigan state Rep. John Pappageorge (R-Troy) was quoted 
in the Detroit Free press as saying, ``If we do not suppress the 
Detroit vote, we're going to have a tough time in this election.'' 
African Americans comprise 83% of Detroit's population.
  In Kentucky in July 2004, Black Republican officials joined to ask 
their State GOP party chairman to renounce plans to place ``vote 
challengers'' in African-American precincts during the coming 
elections.
  Most recently, controversy has erupted over the use in the Orlando 
area of armed, plainclothes officers from the Florida Department of Law 
Enforcement (FDLE) to question elderly black voters in their homes as 
part of a state investigation of voting irregularities in the city's 
March 2003 mayoral election. Critics have charged that the tactics used 
by the FDLE have intimidated black voters, which could suppress their 
turnout in this year's elections. Six members of Congress recently 
called on Attorney General John Ashcroft to investigate potential civil 
rights violations in the matter.
  This year in Florida, the state ordered the implementation of a 
``potential felon'' purge list to remove voters from the rolls, in a 
disturbing echo of the infamous 2000 purge, which removed thousands of 
eligible voters, primarily African-Americans, from the rolls. The state 
abandoned the plan after news media investigations revealed that the 
2004 list also included thousands of people who were eligible to vote, 
and heavily targeted African-Americans while virtually ignoring 
Hispanic voters.
  In South Dakota's June 2004 primary, Native American voters were 
prevented from voting after they were challenged to provide photo IDs, 
which they were not required to present under state or federal law.
  Earlier this year in Texas, a local district attorney claimed that 
students at a majority black college were not eligible to vote in the 
county where the school is located. It happened in Waller County--the 
same county where 26 years earlier, a federal court order was required 
to prevent discrimination against the students.
  Last year, voters in African American areas of Philadelphia were 
systematically challenged by men carrying clipboards and driving sedans 
with magnetic signs designed to look like law enforcement insignia.
  The Long Shadow of Jim Crow also reviews the historical roots of 
recent voter intimidation and suppression efforts in the days following

[[Page 18858]]

emancipation, through Reconstruction and the ``Second Reconstruction,'' 
the years immediately following the passage of the Voting Rights Act.
  The 1965 Voting Rights Act was among the crowning achievements of the 
civil rights era, and a defining moment for social justice and 
equality. Yet as The Long Shadow of Jim Crow documents, attempts to 
erode and undermine those victories have never disappeared. Voter 
intimidation is not a relic of the past, but a strategy used with 
disturbing frequency in recent years. Sustaining the promise of the 
civil rights era, and maintaining the dream of equal voting rights for 
every citizen requires constant vigilance, courageous leadership, and 
an active, committed and well-informed citizenry.
  This year, with widespread predictions of a historically close 
national election and an unprecedented wave of new voter registration, 
unscrupulous political operatives may seek any advantage, including 
suppression and intimidation efforts. As in the past, minority voters 
and low-income populations will be the most likely targets of dirty 
tricks at the polls.
  ``Forewarned is forearmed,'' said Bond. ``We are reminding voters, 
election officials, and the media about the kinds of dirty tricks that 
can be expected. We must be prepared to confront and defeat them.''
  Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues on this side of the aisle to take 
heed to the warning of Mr. Bond, for four more years is a very long 
time and could mean the difference between a safe America and continued 
war and costly occupation; money for our children's education and 
failure to utilize affirmative action to bring about equality in 
education; respect for the U.S. Constitution and continually closing 
doors to federal courthouses. Four years could mean a very long time if 
we do not work for change in the administration of our government.

                          ____________________