Whitehouse introduces legislation outlawing ‘caging.’
Whitehouse introduces legislation outlawing ‘caging.’
Today Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) introduced the Caging Prohibition Act, a bill which would outlaw a “long-recognized voter suppression tactic which has often been used to target minority voters”:
The Caging Prohibition Act would prohibit challenges to a person’s eligibility to register to vote, or cast a vote, based solely on returned mail or a caging list. The bill would also mandate that anyone who challenges the right of another citizen to vote must set forth the specific grounds for their alleged ineligibility, under penalty of perjury.
In June, Whitehouse requested a DoJ investigation into Tim Griffin, the former Karl Rove protege who was placed as a U.S. attorney in Arkansas, on allegations that he led a “caging” scheme to suppress the votes of African-American servicemembers in Florida.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Frist
November 5th, 2007 at 4:41 pmWow. Read the headline and thought, “Damn, the Bush Admin is finally recognizing the error in there past ways”.
Find out it’s some Dem named Whitehouse. Imagine that.
November 5th, 2007 at 4:41 pmWe had first hand experience with this in Ohio. There were a number of cases in Ohio where people were able to show up and contest the challenge. The Repugs just got loyal party members to sign challenges to the voters based on the caging list results and without any personal knowledge. They just signed complaints without seeing any of the mail or returns.
November 5th, 2007 at 4:41 pmcaging is already illegal… what the hell…. let’s get on with the impeachment of Cheney.
November 5th, 2007 at 4:45 pmHow many 25%ers are going to hear “White House … caging…” and voice their support for “keeping the terrorists in cages”?
November 5th, 2007 at 4:49 pmLet’s see, caging is going to be illegal, Repubs aren’t running the Ohio election machinery anymore, Florida’s going to paper ballots…
Republicans, it’s getting harder and harder for you to steal elections. Bye, bye!
November 5th, 2007 at 4:52 pmIn my thinking, if the Bush administration is legislating something, they must have a way to beat it. They would not create restrictions on their ability to sway and steal an honest election. Something smells about this. The Bush administration would never do something to assist in the common good. Their brains don’t work that way.
November 5th, 2007 at 4:53 pm#4
November 5th, 2007 at 4:54 pmWhile the challenge process is prescribed by law, the use of broad, partisan challenges is controversial. It is not quite illegal. It is illegal to use if racially based as was the case in Florida in 2004 in violation of the federal Voting Rights Act law.
Hi StratRat- I think it was Sen. Whitehouse, not the Whitehouse that introduced the legislation.
November 5th, 2007 at 4:56 pmWhitehouse has a great bill here. I doubt if it will survive a veto though, especially because of adherence to the “Save The Bush Crime Family Act” passed by repubs last year.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:00 pm#8 leftcoast
November 5th, 2007 at 5:04 pmwas afraid of that…. there seems to be much walking around the garbage, kicking it around rather than getting to the root of all the evil and eliminating it altogether.
#11 had enough,
November 5th, 2007 at 5:08 pmI’ve had enough also. The process of government has been destroyed by the formerly controlled repub congress. Our form of government has been tossed to the wind. If Cheney could not make changes to the Constitution he just made sure that congress changed the rules. He is truly satan.
It’ll never fly! And there’s no guts to force the issue.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:11 pmIt’s hard to believe that such obvious partisan targeting isn’t already illegal. I wish Senator Whitehouse the best of luck getting this through, and I am urging both of my senators to support it.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:13 pmComment by Doc Rock — November 5, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
November 5th, 2007 at 5:14 pmHow correct you are. America doesn’t fight for itself. The majority of Americans are oblivious to the rotting away of their freedoms.
Comment by missmolly — November 5, 2007 @ 5:13 pm
November 5th, 2007 at 5:17 pmmissmolly, There will be immediate support from Feinstein, and then she’ll back away. Just as with her Mukasey vote. Congressional Dems are the most weak bunch of blatherers I have ever witnessed in all my years with the party.
Hi StratRat- I think it was Sen. Whitehouse, not the Whitehouse that introduced the legislation.
Comment by leftcoast
Thanks, I noticed that right after I pushed the button…Doh! Color me embarassed.
How you doing? Well, I hope…
November 5th, 2007 at 5:23 pmmissmolly, There will be immediate support from Feinstein, and then she’ll back away. Just as with her Mukasey vote. Congressional Dems are the most weak bunch of blatherers I have ever witnessed in all my years with the party.
Comment by leftcoast — November 5, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
Ah, but if you have Feinstein, you also have Boxer. BOTH my senators are Repubs, and my pleas will most likely fall on deaf ears.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:31 pmmissmolly, I wouldn’t put my faith in Boxer. She is an opportunist, not an actor in faith to the Constitution.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:39 pmCaging is already illegal and no one has been arrested or impeached yet. Another law declaring it illegal again is going to fix that…. yeah right.
I have a bridge to sell you in Minnesota too, just some slight damage from falling down once.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:43 pmWayne, from what I understand caging is not illegal except when racially done, which is a violation of the Voters Right Act. A law is needed.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:47 pmSounds like serious VETO fodder.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:55 pmAren’t these kind of tactics legal already? Maybe our time would be better spent holding people accountable for what they did rather than passing a law that implies it was unclear whether or not it was illegal??? Come on Whitehouse, you know better.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:03 pmWell that should stop them in their tracks!
How about applying laws we already have.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:25 pmWhy can’t Tim Griffin be prosecuted under the Hatch Act?
November 5th, 2007 at 6:46 pm“Why can’t Tim Griffin be prosecuted under the Hatch Act?”
Because Bush’s Justice Department is corrupt.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:55 pmSheldon Whitehouse has earned my respect for that.
November 5th, 2007 at 7:22 pm