The biggest surprise of this campaign season?
For me, it's that John Kerry is proving to be a better surrogate than Bill Clinton.
Today, John Kerry steps up for the right to vote.
And he's taking this show to Nevada.
Senator Kerry's words, below the fold.
Senator Kerry blogs his take over the Nevada voting lawsuit over at the Talking Points Memo cafe.
For too many years, American politics has been divided between two types of people: those who want more people to vote, and those who want fewer people to vote. Just last week, the Bush-packed Supreme Court heard oral arguments about the kind of law we’ve become all too familiar with these last years: an Indiana law putting more roadblocks in the way of people who simply want to vote. (Talk about a not so subtle reminder of why some of us filibustered Sam Alito’s nomination two years ago this month.)
Well, it’s troubling to me that now we see another kind of effort to keep people from voting in Nevada. But this time, it’s not the Republicans trying to limit the vote, it’s a fight within our own Party.
And this is what galls so many. A lawsuit to make it easier for other workers to vote would be understandable? An 11th hour suit to PREVENT people from voting? Unconscionable.
Every Democratic Presidential campaign should condemn this effort in a heartbeat. This is just plain and simple a matter of principle not politics; the Party that marched alongside Dr. King and stood up with President Kennedy to open the schoolhouse doors in Alabama needs to be the Party of enfranchisement not disenfranchisement in Nevada this Saturday. Some convictions are just too important to be bent and broken to try and tip a few votes this way or that.
Here are the details. Last March, the Nevada Democratic Party came together and put together the rules of the caucus. Because of the high number of casino workers in Las Vegas, and because those workers have to work on weekends, the Democrats of Nevada decided to have special, at-large caucus sites in certain select areas (like right on the Vegas Strip) to give those working people a chance to make their voices heard. The Culinary Workers Union, who represents the workers, celebrated the move.
Suddenly, a mere days before the caucus, we now see a lawsuit to shut down those at-large sites and deny the casino workers their right to vote. Three of the plaintiffs voted for the very plan they’re now trying to block – reasonable people have guessed they’re changing their minds presumably because just a few days ago the Culinary Workers Union endorsed Barack Obama.
Here’s the bottom line. I understand people gut it out to win on Election Day. But certain tactics make victory pyrrhic – empty – hollow – and it’s not worth winning if you lose what really counts in the process. And you know what, if the Culinary Workers had backed someone besides my choice in this race - Barack Obama - I’d still say it’s right for every candidate to make sure these workers get to vote.
Whether it’s scrubbing African-Americans from the voting rolls, challenging the registrations of people with Hispanic surnames, or not providing enough voting machines in the neighborhoods of working families, the right-wing has spent years denying people the right to vote in the pursuit of raw political gain. All this time, Democrats have stood up for the rights of all people to cast their votes. We need to remain that kind of Party -- voter suppression is wrong, all the time, anywhere.
Open the caucus sites, and let people vote.
After what happened in Florida in 2000, the last thing any good Democrat should get anywhere near is an attempt to suppress the vote. Somethings are more important than a candidate. Or a party. Joe Biden's best line from this campaign season was, in my opinion, "some things are worth losing elections over." The right to vote, for which generations have fought and bled, is certainly in that class.
Senator Kerry, being Net savvy,
responds in the comments section. He expounds on his immediate plans, the issue of voting rights, and Barack Obama's record on this core democratic and Democratic value:
I have to fly to Nevada in a bit here, but I wanted to answer this question. I see a lot of the others have been answered pretty well by other commenters.
First off, thank you for the kind words.
Now to your question, in this case, of course, it's state law. That's one of the under-appreciated aspects of the voting problem; our Constitution gives great leeway to each state to set their own voting procedures. The main check on these states is the Supreme Court, which, unfortunately, now has people like Sam Alito on it (a person Barack and I and others tried to block with a filibuster, by the way).
So the number one thing we need to do is restore the balance of the judiciary away from the reactionary judges we currently have. We also need to ensure that no citizen who is registered to vote is stipped from exercising their rights. Dangerous voter ID laws that disenfranchise low income voters are being considered by the court as we speak – I hope they will chose the right path but all signs point to a disastrous decision. Keeping people from the polls is simply Unamerican.
In the Senate Barack introduced a bill, which I am an original co-sponsor, to criminalize voter intimidation. We can’t go back to the days of poll taxes and road blocks. I also support abolishing the disgraceful practice of "voter caging" where voter rolls are purged of registered voters simply because correspondence is returned from their address. This is a back handed way of trying to disenfranchise voters and that is why I am a co-sponsor of the Caging Prohibition Act which Sheldon Whitehouse has introduced (a great freshman Senator by the way.)
I am also proud to stand with Barack in placing holds on the nomination of Hans Van Spakovsky – an unacceptable nominee to the Federal Election Commission (FEC). Spakovsky was the head of the inept Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department and was the architect of several voter suppression efforts. He is another example of how politicized the Justice Department has become and is unfit to serve on the FEC. It is my hope that we will be able to vote on the other commission nominees separately and have an up or down vote on his nomination. However, Republicans refuse to allow us to confirm the other nominees, even one of their own – instead they insist that the pending nominations be voted en mass because they know Spakovsky would not be supported by the full Senate. This essentially renders the FEC powerless at the beginning of the election year because they need 4 confirmed commissioners to vote for any regulations to be passed. It is vitally important that we have a functioning FEC during this election and I hope that the leadership on both sides can come to an agreement.
If you won't stand up for the right to vote, you don't stand on principle. John Kerry is standing tall.
And he'll be doing it in Nevada.