Saturday, January 22, 2011

Kansas Secretary of State Kobach responds to arguments against Voter ID Bill; calls them "ridiculous"


Last Wednesday, members of the Kansas Voter Coalition traveled to Topeka to speak out against the proposed Voter ID bill. Speakers included Kari Ann Rinker from the Kansas Chapter of the National Organization for Women, Ernestine Kreihbel - President of the Kansas League of Women Voters,  Holly Weatherford from the Kansas ACLU, and Kevin Myles from the Kansas State NAACP.

During the press conference, we (NAACP) raised the issue of Voter Caging and how that might be facilitated by this bill. Caging is an illegal voter suppression tactic that involves the challenging of voter qualifications on the basis of address and database discrepancies.

This is hardly a stretch, considering in December of 2007, then Chairman of the Kansas Republican Party, Kris Kobach sent out an email to his supporters that was forwarded to some members of the press and reported in more than a dozen online publications. In this email, it was reported that then Party Chairman Kobach bragged that, "Our voter identification system is up and running giving us the capability to effectively mobilize voters and turn them out to vote on Election Day. To date, the Kansas GOP has identified and caged more voters in the last 11 months than the previous two years!"

Secretary Kobach responded to reports of the Press Conference by saying that opponents should 'read the bill' and that our allegations were ridiculous.

To be clear, we are not opposed to efforts to ensure the integrity of our voting system in principle, we are opposed to the specific plans that the Secretary has put forth. In brief, I will highlight a few of the major issues with this proposal, then contrast the proposal against some simple low cost reforms that would accomplish the same goal.

  • The Current System is secure: According to Secretary Kobach, there have been 80 reports of voter fraud in Kansas over the last 10 years. But of those 80 reports, only 3 have been successfully prosecuted. That means that more than 96% of the cases reported in Kansas were investigated and deemed to be unfounded. In fact, there has been only 1 successful prosecution in the last 6 years and that person wasn't even an immigrant. In fact, the previous two Secretaries of State, one Democrat and one Republican, have each stated publicly that voter fraud is not a real issue in Kansas. 
  • Photo ID laws are ineffective: Photo ID laws are designed to protect against one very specific type of voter fraud, and that's Voter Impersonation. You have people produce a photo ID so that the officials can visually verify that the person is who they say they are and is not an identity thief. Kansas has NEVER prosecuted a voter impersonation case. The odds against an illegal immigrant coming into the country, then assuming some else's identity, then going to polls to vote under their name (after having mastered their signature), and risking arrest and prosecution if the person they're impersonating has already voted, are astronomical. The most common form of voter fraud is when a person votes multiple times. BUT, If a person were to try and vote multiple times, there is NOTHING in this current proposal that would change or strengthen any part of our system that would detect or preclude that type of fraud. In fact, we would still be reliant on the safeguards currently in place to deal with that scenario. Safeguards that have already proven secure - as evidenced by that fact that there is no plan to change them. All this bill would do is increase the penalties. 
  • The Cost: The Secretary has not publicly come out and discussed the costs of his proposal. But the State of Missouri has a law on it's books that is similar to what we are facing and I have obtained a copy of their fiscal note. Implementation cost the State of Missouri nearly 6 million dollars in the first year with costs near 4 million for each of the next two years! CLICK HERE to download a copy so you can see it for yourself. At a time when we have a $550,000,000 budget deficit, the Secretary would have us spend upwards of ten million dollars to strengthen a system that has already proved secure and to protect it against a nearly impossible hypothetical situation.
  • Voter Suppression/Reduction in Voter Turnout: This one should concern people the most. For while we should be concerned if even a single fraudulent vote is cast, we should be even more concerned if even a single legal voter is disenfranchised. And that is because voting is considered one of our most fundamental constitutional rights. No law, no tariff, and no ordinance should ever be imposed that would deprive any American citizen of the franchise. But in all of the states where they have Voter ID bills on the books, they each experience reductions in Voter turn-out. Why? Consider the provisions in this proposed bill. Door to door canvasing and traditional get-out-the-vote activities, practices which date back more than a hundred years, would be virtually eliminated. The Secretary's proposed bill requires that an Election Officer certify a persons immigration status at the time of registration. Now that's not particularly onerous, but the trick is the bill specifies that their status must be confirmed by submission of the actual drivers license (in person) or by a photo-copy of their license. Now that same information could be obtained if that person submitted the driver license number - but that would not be allowed under the Secretary's proposal. The language in Section 7, KSA 2010, Supp. 25-2309 subparagraphs L through Q (new additions to the statute) would disallow the submission of a driver's license number and would require a photo copy of the card.  Which would mean that if a group or organization wanted to set up a table to register people to vote at a fair or a community forum, the prospective voters would have to have brought a photo copy of their license with them or they couldn't be registered!  Also consider that the bill states that ALL voters will now show their drivers license at the polling place, and that if their is a discrepancy between their driver's license and the information contained in the Voter Registration records (such as an address change), you would only be able to vote on a provisional ballot unless you had a copy of your utility bill there with you. In the States with these laws on the books, they find that many people, after standing in line to vote, then finding out that they can't, simply can't or don't go home and come back to stand in line again with more paperwork and documentation. Their votes are just lost. BTW - the act of disqualifying voters based technical discrepancies such as address changes is known as caging, which is technically illegal, but would be permissible under this proposal.

Now if the goal is truly to ensure that only legally registered voters are allowed to participate in our elections, we could easily accomplish that goal without spending $10,000,000.00, without disenfranchising anyone, and without consenting to the power-grab requested by the Secretary of State who has requested new prosecution powers in his nearly 40 page bill. If this is really about securing our elections, consider these easy alternatives:

  • The State could require the inclusion of a full drivers license number on all registration applications, and require voters to produce their voter registration cards, which are produced and distributed by the SOS after verifying immigration status, at the polls.(no additional costs, no caging, and no reduction in registrations or turn-out)
  • The State could enforce the National Voter Registration Act and register people when the receive their Driver Licenses, then there would be no discrepancies between databases - no caging, and no loss of turn out.

What truly is ridiculous is that we are being asked to spend millions of tax-payer dollars, at a time when we are operating with a $550,000,000 budget shortfall, to implement a voter impersonation prevention program, despite the fact that we've never actually prosecuted anybody for voter impersonation. And that we are being asked to simultaneously consolidate brand new powers into the Secretary of State's Office despite the fact that we have no shortage of Attorneys in Topeka and that there is no reason why the Attorney General's office could not continue to perform its statutory role and function without the assistance of Mr. Kobach. And it is also ridiculous that the bill would hamper voter canvassing and get out the vote activities, and result in some legally registered voters being offered provisional ballots or being turned away at the polls, yet the Secretary and his supporters are incredulous when presented with the obvious implications of the language that they are publicly supporting. And it is truly ridiculous that we could easily secure our elections without the cost or risk of disenfranchising anyone yet the Secretary and his supporters continue the ruse, claiming that this bloated 40 page, multi-million dollar monstrosity is in our best interest.

Read more...

Video: KMyles and Sec of State Blowbach Voter ID debate Pt.2


Read more...

Monday, January 17, 2011

We need more than a King Day...


Today is the day set aside to mark and to celebrate the birth of the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. It is a day rife with significance for even a cursory examination of Dr. King's life and legacy displays a touchstone of faith in action, courageous protest, and scholarship...

But we must be careful to not allow King as 'symbol' to outweigh or overshadow King's 'substance'. For Dr. King was, at his best, a soldier... An exemplary and incredibly gifted soldier. Not the first, nor the last, but one who took his place among the thousands who have stood up against ignorance, inequity, and intolerance, and waged peace with his very life. 

His life was an action. His legacy was his work. His words were and remain powerful, not because they were simply well chosen, but rather because they described the act of creating freedom - the act that he dedicated his life to...

So it is important that as we honor King, that we not honor his words while neglecting his work. For if I were a farmer, who had dedicated my life to tilling the soil, planting, and harvesting, so that my family and community could eat. If I were to pass away, I would hope that I not be honored by people telling tales about the great crops I had once grown, or telling stories about how wonderfully they once ate, or singing hymns about what a wonderful farmer I once was... I hope that I would be honored by those who loved me and who believed in the worth and significance of my actions, picking up my hoe and rake, and continuing the work that I started.

And that is why today I say we need more than a King 'Day', we need a King 'Commitment'. A commitment that transcends the fleeting recognition that the "struggle continues". A commitment that is larger than the annual recitations of the I have a Dream speech. A commitment that compels us, in whatever way our time and circumstances allows, to do something inconvenient that will help somebody. To stand up and right just one wrong. To speak up one time, when it would be so much easier to simply remain silent.  To offer encouragement to one youth who is going down the wrong path. Or simply to help somebody keep the faith, when the weight of the world starts weighing them down.

Just one thing - then another...

And if we each do that, we will all be one giant step closer to rebuilding the 'beloved community' that Dr. King gave his life for...

Read more...

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Video: XtraNormal video of KMyles and Sec of State Blowbach on the Kansas Voter ID Bill


Read more...

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

What does the term "Highly Qualified" mean to you?


The federal definition of a "Highly Qualified" teacher has been one who is: fully certified and/or licensed by the state; holds at least a bachelor's degree from a four-year institution; and demonstrates competence in each core academic subject area in which the teacher teaches.

That is important to note because the NCLB Act required that all teachers of core academic subjects working in Title I schools or programs hired after the first day of the 2002-03 school year be "Highly Qualified" by the end of the 2005/2006 school year.

The goal was to move us away from the all too common phenomena where the children with the greatest academic needs were taught by those with the least experience and conversely those with the greatest academic advantages were taught by the most senior and most seasoned teachers. It was supposed to end the era of concentrating new and inexperienced teachers in high minority and low SES schools.

But an obscure bit of language was inserted into last weeks Omnibus Spending bill... You know the one that extended unemployment and tax cuts that everyone heralded as some great compromise...

This language, not germane to the spending bill itself and seriously under-reported... This language changes the definition of a Highly Qualified Teacher to now include INTERNS!!!

excerpted from HR3082

“Sec. 163. (a) A ‘highly qualified teacher’ includes a teacher who meets the requirements in 34 CFR 200.56(a)(2)(ii), as published in the Federal Register on December 2, 2002.

“(b) This provision is effective on the date of enactment of this provision through the end of the 2012–2013 academic year.

Forgive me for going out into the weeds, but you need to understand what just happened...

 CFR 200.56 defines the term "Highly Qualified Teacher" as used in Federal Legislation. It reads:

200.56 - Definition of “highly qualified teacher.”
To be a highly qualified teacher, a teacher covered under 200.55 must meet the requirements in paragraph (a) and either paragraph (b) or (c) of this section.

(a) In general. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(3) of this section, a teacher covered under 200.55 must (i) Have obtained full State certification as a teacher, which may include certification obtained through alternative routes to certification; or (ii)(A) Have passed the State teacher licensing examination; and (B) Hold a license to teach in the State.

(2) A teacher meets the requirement in paragraph (a)(1) of this section if the teacher (i) Has fulfilled the State's certification and licensure requirements applicable to the years of experience the teacher possesses; or (ii) Is participating in an alternative route to certification program under which (A) The teacher (1) Receives high-quality professional development that is sustained, intensive, and classroom-focused in order to have a positive and lasting impact on classroom instruction, before and while teaching; (2) Participates in a program of intensive supervision that consists of structured guidance and regular ongoing support for teachers or a teacher mentoring program; (3) Assumes functions as a teacher only for a specified period of time not to exceed three years; and (4) Demonstrates satisfactory progress toward full certification as prescribed by the State; and (B) The State ensures, through its certification and licensure process, that the provisions in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section are met.

(3) A teacher teaching in a public charter school in a State must meet the certification and licensure requirements, if any, contained in the State's charter school law.

(4) If a teacher has had certification or licensure requirements waived on an emergency, temporary, or provisional basis, the teacher is not highly qualified.

(b) Teachers new to the profession. A teacher covered under 200.55 who is new to the profession also must (1) Hold at least a bachelor's degree; and (2) At the public elementary school level, demonstrate, by passing a rigorous State test (which may consist of passing a State certification or licensing test), subject knowledge and teaching skills in reading/language arts, writing, mathematics, and other areas of the basic elementary school curriculum; or (3) At the public middle and high school levels, demonstrate a high level of competency by (i) Passing a rigorous State test in each academic subject in which the teacher teaches (which may consist of passing a State certification or licensing test in each of these subjects); or (ii) Successfully completing in each academic subject in which the teacher teaches (A) An undergraduate major; (B) A graduate degree; (C) Coursework equivalent to an undergraduate major; or (D) Advanced certification or credentialing.

(c) Teachers not new to the profession. A teacher covered under 200.55 who is not new to the profession also must (1) Hold at least a bachelor's degree; and (2)(i) Meet the applicable requirements in paragraph (b)(2) or (3) of this section; or (ii) Based on a high, objective, uniform State standard of evaluation in accordance with section 9101(23)(C)(ii) of the ESEA, demonstrate competency in each academic subject in which the teacher teaches.


For simplicity, the full 2002 Federal definition is presented in red. The Highlighted area is the small subparagraph that NOW constitutes a "Highly Qualified Teacher". So when you read through the text, take note of the fact that the RED text contains the requirements that can now be waived when determining who is "Highly Qualified".

WHAT THIS MEANS is that the same inexperienced and under-qualified teachers that have been concentrated in high minority and low SES schools around the country, CAN NOW STAY in those schools, because rather than actually placing highly qualified teachers in there to help those children most in need, the Government has simply changed the definition of "Highly Qualified" to now include folks who are still IN TRAINING.

This is SHAMEFUL and APPALLING, and every activist and organization that is serious about Education should say so.

Read more...

Sunday, January 2, 2011

The Kansas Voter Coalition to hold Press Conference at the State Capitol on Voter ID

Scan the graphic with your smartphone to add the event to your calendar

The Voter Coalition will hold a Press Conference to voice our opposition and provide information concerning the proposed Voter ID bill.

The Kansas Voter Coalition is made up of the Kansas State NAACP, the Kansas State League of Women Voters, the Kansas Chapter of the National Organization for Women, the Kansas Equality Coalition, the Kansas chapter of the ACLU, the Wichita chapter of Church Women United, the Sedgwick County Council of Elders, the Peace and Social Justice Center, and YOU...

The Kansas Voter Coalition has come together in opposition to the proposed Voter ID Legislation being offered by Secretary of State Kobach. We oppose this legislation on several grounds.

First, of the nearly 10,000,000 votes cast in the last six years throughout the State of Kansas, there have been only six reported cases of Voter Fraud and only 1 was successfully prosecuted. You statistically have a better chance of being stricken twice by lightning than of encountering an genuine act of Voter Fraud in Kansas. What does that mean? It means our system IS WORKING and there is NO concrete evidence to suggest otherwise.

Second, The Indiana Supreme Court has ruled, and Secretary Kobach has suggested, that the only way a Voter ID bill can pass muster, is if the State is willing to provide the ID's free of charge to those who can not afford one. This would require the creation of a new bureaucracy to manage the distribution of Voter ID cards to combat a problem that can not empirically be shown to even exist. As a State we have a $450,000,000 shortfall, so why in the world would we create a new bureaucracy with new salaries and FTE's to monitor and distribute ID cards that the State will foot the bill for, in perpetuity?

Third, there is a hidden government mandate. Each year, hundreds of Seniors reach a point in their lives where they may elect to stop driving. This bill states that even if a Senior decides to stop driving and no longer needs to maintain a current ID, they will be mandated to purchase one if they intend to exercise their Constitutionally guaranteed rights. The only exception would be if they could prove to the new bureaucracy that it would pose a financial hardship; in which case the State would foot the bill.

and lastly but perhaps most profoundly, this bill; a solution to problem whose existence can NOT be demonstrated empirically, would have the likely impact of reducing voter turnout among legal registered voters. In fact recent studies by Brown University and the Brennan center have clearly provided the type of empirical data that this bills proponents lack. In States that have Voter ID Bills on the books, there is a demonstrable reduction in Voter turnout, and that reduction is most profound in the African American community and among Seniors.

Join us as we call on our elected officials to just say NO. We just don't need Secretary Kobach using tax dollars to radically experiment with our electoral system, in an effort to solve a problem that can not be shown to exist.

If you would like to become a part of this effort, you can begin by joining with us on January 19th at the State Capitol Building!

What: The Kansas Voter Coalition hosts a Press Conference to discuss our opposition to the proposed Voter ID Bill
When: January 19th 11:30am - 1:00pm
Where: Room 144 South in the State Capitol Building
Who: This event is open to the public.

Read more...

Saturday, January 1, 2011

The Wichita Branch 2011/2012 Strategic Planning Session set for January 22nd

Scan the graphic with your smartphone to add the event to your calendar

On January 22nd (11:00am - 2:00pm) the Wichita Branch NAACP will hold its annual Strategic Planning session. During this session, we will set priorities and goals for all Branch Committees. The annual Strategic Planning session is open to all active members of the Wichita Branch. The 2011/2012 Strategic Plan will be posted here on the blog once complete.

Read more...

wibiya widget


About This Blog

About This Blog

Jung/Myers Briggs

INTJ - "Mastermind". Introverted intellectual with a preference for finding certainty. A builder of systems and the applier of theoretical models. 2.1% of total population.
Free Jung Personality Test (similar to Myers-Briggs/MBTI)

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP