Former Employee Identifies Voting Rights Head As ‘Both The Cause And Effect’ Of DoJ Politicization
Former Employee Identifies Voting Rights Head As ‘Both The Cause And Effect’ Of DoJ Politicization
Today, the Justice Department’s controversial Voting Rights section chief John Tanner testified to the House Subcommittee on Civil Rights. He offered an anemic apology for his comments that minorities “die first” before becoming elderly, and are therefore not as affected by voter ID laws. He said the comments “do not in any way accurately reflect my career of devotion to enforcing federal laws designed to assure fair and equal access to the ballot.”
Yet after Tanner’s testimony, Toby Moore, a former Voting Rights section employee, testified that Tanner’s remarks “are a fair example of Tanner’s approach to the facts, the truth, and the law.” Moore also said that Tanner “is both the cause and the effect of the politicizing of the Civil Rights Division” and that the voting rights section was “a wounded institution”:
John Tanner is both the cause and the effect of the politicizing of the Civil Rights Division, and should not be allowed to hide behind a career status which he has abjured by his actions.
Until someone in the department, in this administration or the next, admits to the mistakes of the past several years and restores credible leadership, the voting section of the Civil Rights Division will remain a wounded institution. How long will the Department of Justice tolerate chronic mismanagement simply to save face?
Watch it:
One of Tanner’s most controversial acts as Voting Rights chief surrounded his approval of a 2005 Georgia law requiring voters to show photo identification to vote, a law a federal judge compared to a Jim Crow-era poll tax. Today Moore called it a “discriminatory” and “nasty piece of legislation” that included “draconian restrictions.”
Under the Bush administration, the Civil Rights division, of which the Voting Rights section is a part, has undergone “a sea change,” shifting from its traditional focus of protecting minority voting rights to bringing cases alleging reverse discrimination against whites. The section “has notably shirked its legal responsibility to protect voting rights,” former Voting Rights section head Joseph Rich wrote last March.
Transcript:
TOBY MOORE: I had a very friendly relationship with John Tanner for most of the time I worked with and for him and speaking publicly about internal DoJ deliberations is not something I do lightly. Nonetheless, I hope my experience at the ground level of voting rights enforcement may be of some value to you in your oversight duties.
Mr. Tanner’s public comments earlier this month in Georgia and California could be overlooked if they were merely off-the-cuff remarks. Unfortunately for minority voters and unfortunately for the Department of Justice, the comments are actually a fair example of Tanner’s approach to the facts, the truth, and the law. Broad generalizations, deliberate misuse of statistics and casual supposition, in my experience, were preferred over the analytical rigor, impartiality, and scrupulous attention to detail that had marked the work of the section prior to Tanner taking control in 2005.
This decline and the myriad other problems that have developed in the section over the past several years are a direct result of the actions of political appointees such as Hans Von Spakovsky and Bradley Schlozman. It has left behind a demoralized section, a growing list of lost court cases, and a severely diminished public trust in federal voting rights enforcement.
While my written testimony discusses problems with other matters, including enforcement of Section 203 and the Ohio investigation of 2004, in the interest of time I will focus here on the Georgia ID investigation.
While it is not my intent to debate the merits of voter ID laws, I would like to point out that even by the standards of subsequent voter ID laws, the Georgia law of 2005 was a nasty piece of legislation. No state endeavoring to pass voter ID law now is considering the kind of draconian restrictions the DOJ endorsed in Georgia in August 2005, restrictions that President Carter and Secretary Baker explicitly labeled as discriminatory when I worked for the Carter-Baker commission at American University. Personally I think the issue is overblown on both sides, but clearly history, as well as the federal and state courts, will record that the 2005 Georgia voter ID law, pre-cleared by the Department of Justice, was a discriminatory one. [...]
John Tanner is both the cause and the effect of the politicizing of the Civil Rights Division, and should not be allowed to hide behind a career status which he has abjured by his actions. Until someone in the department, in this administration or the next, admits to the mistakes of the past several years and restores credible leadership, the voting section of the Civil Rights Division will remain a wounded institution. How long will the Department of Justice tolerate chronic mismanagement simply to save face?
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
It still baffles me why any American would be against a law that requires every American to show proof they are a citizen. How can any Dem or Republicans be against that?
October 30th, 2007 at 5:20 pmYet another card is falling from this house… It may take 5-10 years, but many of the criminal dealings of the Bush administration will come to light.
I still have faith in America and the Constitution.
Just don’t think that replacing one criminal (Bush) with another (Billary) will make any difference.
October 30th, 2007 at 5:23 pmThe voting system has been rigged. I wonder what’s happining with Brittney Spears?
October 30th, 2007 at 5:27 pmTake a good look at Toby Moore he’s white and that’s the American who out number the racist. The Bush Administration has brought the racist group to the White House and appointed them in jobs to bring back the KKK. The good out number the bad and come election day the world will see not all Republicans believe in the KKK leaders of the White House. For those who still don’t believe just look at how the
October 30th, 2007 at 5:29 pmCivil Rights bill was passed and when people of all
colors work together the United States is strong. We
see our troops supporting each other and not
showing racism. Toby is only one of many millions
that will shut the GOP racist down.
On demand? That’s the kind of thing the SS did. This is America. The land of the free. You can’t be free if you can be stopped at random and asked to prove your bona fides. I’d rather risk a few terrorists than to guarantee a police state.
October 30th, 2007 at 5:38 pm“It still baffles me why any American would be against a law that requires every American to show proof they are a citizen. How can any Dem or Republicans be against that?”
Ok, Roger_Roger, how do you plan to prove you’re a citizen?
Only naturalized citizens get proof from the government. Everyone else has to depend on a birth certificate as the underlying proof.
But a birth certificate is just a piece of paper, how is an 87 year old poll worker supposed to judge a fake versus a real?
And what if your perfectly legitimate birth certificate is rejected, then what? Are you okay with being disenfranchised?
Passports? Well, you’ve got to pay for those. Being forced to proffer a passport would be theoretically a “poll tax.”
October 30th, 2007 at 5:41 pmIt still baffles me why any American would be against a law that requires every American to show proof they are a citizen. How can any Dem or Republicans be against that?
Comment by Roger_Roger
Is is not the ID itself, it is the FORM of ID they are requiring. In Georgia, they started out requiring passports or original birth certificates to vote. Passports are expensive for some and require travel to a place to process the application. Original birth certificates can be hard to come by if you were born in a rural environment – such as a farmhouse. My grandfather fought the Germans in WWI and he never had an original birth certificate.
ID is ok, but the solution must adhere to a common and obtainable form of ID. The required form must not be erected to discourage voting by a certain group of American citizens.
October 30th, 2007 at 5:42 pmAmazing. This is where Republicans directly rape our beautiful country and where the media fails to notice.
Voter fraud is a Republican Myth. Pure propaganda. These guys have to go.
October 30th, 2007 at 5:43 pmThe usual Republican mantra in the voter ID area is the same as that for invasion of privacy. Why would anyone object to showing an ID to vote? Why would anyone object to having their homes and papers searched or their conversations recorded if they were doing nothing wrong?
The answers are simple:
1. I object to government intrusion into my life without good cause. There has been no evidence of real voter fraud to justify these special intrusions. Indeed, the voter fraud prosecutions by the Bush administration pretty much prove the opposite.
2. My mother was in an extended care facility before her death. She was in no physical shape to drive. She had no current driver’s license. Obtaining a state ID was problematic both in terms of expense, travel and documentation. I knew many like her. The same is true for many of poor and minority. Indeed, the GA law proved to be very burdensome for most of those who would need to find alternative identification.
3. Other states have required new voter ID laws. They are not uniform and some require residents to go to great lengths to obtain appropriate identification.
4. It well conceded that many more people who lack valid ID but who are valid voters will be locked out of the process than any fantasy fraudulent voters.
However, the Republicans believe that these tactics will impact Democratic voters more than Republican. Classic Republican tactics.
October 30th, 2007 at 5:44 pmIt still baffles me why any American would be against a law that requires every American to show proof they are a citizen. How can any Dem or Republicans be against that?
Comment by Roger_Roger — October 30, 2007 @ 5:20 pm
That’s what happens when it’s 1 group (the horseshit GOP) , always attempting to harass those they perceive to be voting for the other party…….How many complaints have you ever read/heard about from imbecilic GOP backers (are their any other kind?) , that they were accosted and hounded to verify who they were ?
October 30th, 2007 at 5:44 pmMost everyone I know put a thumbprint on file to get a D.L. They should put a fingerprint pad at voting locations and stop this added idiocy. Use whats already on file. Jebus.
October 30th, 2007 at 5:50 pmMost everyone I know put a thumbprint on file to get a D.L. They should put a fingerprint pad at voting locations and stop this added idiocy. Use whats already on file. Jebus.
Comment by Xisithrus — October 30, 2007 @ 5:50 pm
that’s some police state crap. Where is that? and jdc, you’re just a fool, and you know that. comparing apples and Volkswagens. Voting is not picking up event tickets, nor is voting paying by check, moron. Voting is a right, not a choice of currency.
Fascist.
October 30th, 2007 at 5:53 pmI purchased tickets for a major sporting event last week. The fascists made me show ID to pick them up at will call.
I paid for groceries with a check the other day and the fascists made me show my ID.
All of this fascism is driving me crazy.
Impeach Bush.
Comment by j
I know it is hard to keep up, but please try. I’ll make it simple for you: Your examples concerned PRIVATE BUSINESESS. The topic here at TP concerns YOUR GOVERNMENT. They are very different entities, designed for very different reasons.
October 30th, 2007 at 5:54 pmAll of this fascism is driving me crazy.
Impeach Bush.
Comment by jdc — October 30, 2007
Alot of its just because of technology, its easy to steal personal info credit card nummies and such as phishers/hacks do and phone, or web it in, Having ID when you pick up your items is more for your comfort than theirs. I started carrying my passport with me and handing them that, plus it makes the clerk look all confused when handed one, heh. =P
October 30th, 2007 at 5:54 pmThat’s some police state crap. Where is that?
Lemme see… back in 1976 when I turned 16 in Texas. The DPS took thumb prints way back then when you applied for a drivers license. Heck many banks require thumb prints when cashing checks here when cashing a check if you dont have an account with them as well.
October 30th, 2007 at 5:57 pmI’m Canadian so I’m not familiar with the voter validation process in the U.S. Here we get a people walking around doing a census of voters, you’re then added to the voting roll, then you get a voting thingy in the mail that says your name, address etc. & polling station. The day of the vote you show up, show your slip of paper, you’re checked off the list & you vote. You show no I.D. other then that slip of paper. There must be some sort of voter validation in the U.S. right?
October 30th, 2007 at 6:00 pmThere must be some sort of voter validation in the U.S. right?
Comment by Dave C — October 30, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
Yes,we have voter registration. What the Rovians were doing, since Rove was a mailing list guru was send a card to the person on the voter registration rolls with a return receipt [proof of delivery] and if the person had moved they were taken off the roll not because they didn’t have ID but because their ID didnt show that they had moved making the voter registration invalid. [voteer caging] When the person shows up to vote and shows their ID, with a wrong address, they are not allowed to vote.
October 30th, 2007 at 6:08 pmRoger-Dodger, It is because of a long AND CONTINUING history of suppression of voting by minorities by racist thugs, perhaps you can’t understand that either!
October 30th, 2007 at 6:12 pmCheck this out Dave C…Ann ‘caged’ herself.
October 30th, 2007 at 6:17 pmhttp://www.democrats.com/coulter-election-fraud
Anyone else remember when the tinfoil hat club was against the Social Security number because that was the first step towards a national identity card (and the pre-trib rapture folks identified the SS number as the mark of the beast)?
The Tinfoil hats were wrong. The Driver’s License (under the new identification act) has become the national identity card. So there ???!?
Add to this the way the Shrub mis-administration has used every trick in the book to datamine and use questionably obtained information to attack opponents.
October 30th, 2007 at 6:20 pmWhen I bought my house the fascist title company made me show my ID.
Comment by jdc — October 30, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
That’s because the bank owns your house, not you. man, you’re deeply stupid. I’m guessing Republican, private school. And since when is owning property a right? You sink lower into the muck of stupidity with every post, keep it up, soon you’ll disappear altogether, finally bringing some improvement to the world.
October 30th, 2007 at 6:22 pmGoogle ACORN if you want a peek into why we need voter identification.
Comment by jdc — October 30, 2007 @ 6:22 pm
bullshit
October 30th, 2007 at 6:23 pmRepublican, public school and yes owning property is a right. The bank does not own my house. Even when I had a mortgage, the bank still didn’t own my house.
Let me guess progressive liberal, poor and bitter.
Comment by jdc — October 30, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
well, wrong again. The bank owns your house until your mortgage is paid off. The bank will take your house under any number of pretenses, and you can do nothing. So, once again, stupid, you are wrong. As you are so completely wrong about me. You are very good at being wrong; that’s what a lifetime of practice will get you. You poor, deluded fool, living in fantasy-land.
and owning property is not a right. wrong again.
October 30th, 2007 at 6:35 pmHere in Florida we have to show our Drivers License in order to vote. That’s to make sure that your address matches the voter roll and that you are voting in the right place.
My Husband and I had to show our Drivers Licenses when we purchased our house a couple of months ago but that was because the papers had to be notorized and the notary didn’t know us from Adam.
October 30th, 2007 at 6:36 pmMust. Not. Feed. Troll.
October 30th, 2007 at 6:40 pmshowing ID to vote isn’t the issue here. it’s placing difficult restrictions on teh ID type in order to deny a certain class of people the right to vote that is the issue. this is what Republicans do: they trash the Constitution and treat American citizens illegally in order to gain the margins that they would otherwise never get, because the country as a whole hates them, and understands that they are greedy, harmful, parasitical, unpatriotic, violent, ignorant, racist, misogynistic homophobes. They HAVE to cheat, or they would cease to exist.
October 30th, 2007 at 6:46 pmComment by jdc — October 30, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
Owning property is not a right.
October 30th, 2007 at 7:01 pmGuess what the Department Of Motor Vehicles wanted to see when I went there to title my car.
The fascists made me show ID.
Comment by jdc
Again, mixing and matching references. Nice try, though.
October 30th, 2007 at 7:03 pmOwning property is not a right.
Comment by Zooey — October 30, 2007 @ 7:01 pm
Well, it is if you go by the Declaration of Independence. It’s one of the unalienable ones, I believe. But then at the time it only applied to white men, so this should be taken with a grain of salt.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:11 pmShowing ID to vote isn’t the issue here. it’s placing difficult restrictions on the ID type in order to deny a certain class of people the right to vote that is the issue.
Comment by Lefty Patriot — October 30, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
Exactly. It’s just Jim Crow laws for the 21st century, with a sprinkle of Know-Nothing xenophobia on top for flavor.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:16 pmWell, it is if you go by the Declaration of Independence. It’s one of the unalienable ones, I believe. But then at the time it only applied to white men, so this should be taken with a grain of salt.
Comment by toasterhead — October 30, 2007 @ 9:11 pm
Okay FINE so Jefferson replaced it with “the pursuit if happiness” in the final draft but nevertheless property rights are a critical part of the Lockesian principles upon which this country was based. And the 5th Amendment guarantees that no individual may be deprived of property without due process of law. So while it may not be an entitlement right in the sense that voting is a right guaranteed to all citizens, the right to the ability to own property is still a protected right.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:37 pm…the right to the ability to own property is still a protected right.
Comment by toasterhead — October 30, 2007 @ 9:37 pm
There ya go. ;)
October 31st, 2007 at 12:04 amAt Comment #1, a troll STOLE this thread. 39 posts, and not a ONE on John Tanner.
The topic, folks, is DoJ politicization by John Tanner, a mole for the Republican Southern Strategy weaseled into the Voting Rights Section as its Chief, to cause MAXIMUM damage to the Voting Rights of ALL minorities, especially people of color.
I have tagged the troll for abuse. Please, Please, Please! Go up to Comment #1 and tag the troll for abuse. Ask that he be removed from the TP site. He DETRACTS from EVERY thread where his troll name appears.
If you feed him, he will do what he has done to this thread.
HE WILL MAKE IT A TROLL-DUNG DUMP!
October 31st, 2007 at 9:46 amReply to Comment #1 by Roger Roger. As usual Roger uses this site to spread the racist bigoted views of people like him and the Republican party. I have no problem with showing ID to vote, but when it is used as a means of discouraging minority voters, then it’s wrong. What are you and your Klan brothers afraid of Roger? Is it the fact that in the next 20 years, whites will no longer be the majority in the US? Or is it the probability that we might elect someone to the Presidency that isn’t a white male? This country isn’t made up of just white males, so why should they continue to have a lock on the Presidency.
What people like you don’t understand is how many black soldiers have died in American Wars fighting for your right to discriminate against them. I fought for your right to hate too, but you think it’s ok to treat me as a third class citizen. Well my racist friend, I’m not going anywhere and people like you might as well get ready to change places with us. You have one of two choices, either start having babies at an alarming rate, or prepare to become a minority. Then we will see how you react to a Latino-Black-Oriental majority in the United States. Your other option is moving out of the country, which you might prefer over living as a minority.
October 31st, 2007 at 12:18 pmShadow, PLEASE don’t feed the troll.
Report him for abuse! It is our ONLY defense against its troll dung!
October 31st, 2007 at 5:04 pmInstead of a troll-led debate on the validity on their righteous view, I wish we could discuss the bravery of Toby Moore and his testimony on a ‘wounded institution.’ He spoke ‘truth to power’ and should be commended for his courage. Takes guts to tell it like it is…
October 31st, 2007 at 6:27 pm