Historic challenge to the Voting Rights Act

Section 5 of the 1964 Voting Rights Act requires certain covered jurisdictions (mostly but not exclusively in the South) to get the pre-clearance of the federal government before they can make any changes in their voting laws. These changes can range anywhere from voter registration rules to changes in polling locations. It was supposed to be a temporary provision that was to last only five years. Instead, it has been maintained and expanded with each renewal by Congress.

Shelby County in Alabama is one of the covered jurisdictions, since it is part of a state that is a covered jurisdiction based on the current formula used by the U.S. Department of Justice, which is responsible for reviewing compliance. When Congress passed the latest extension of the provisions that sunset in 2006, Shelby County filed suit against the U.S. attorney general as the chief agency in charge of the act’s enforcement.

The lawsuit finally reached its ultimate destination on February 26th of this year: the U.S. Supreme Court. The basic argument Shelby County has put before the court is not that the law is no longer needed, but rather, that the current formula used by the Department of Justice and approved by Congress is unconstitutional, as it violates the 14th and 15th Amendments — basically, the ones which outlaw slavery and give African Americans citizenship and the right to vote. They also enshrined in law the principle of due process and equal protection under the law — laws apply equally to all U.S. citizens with few exceptions, none of which involve race and ethnicity.

Shelby County argued that the “opt out” provisions — those standards which would free a political division such as a state or a subdivision such as a county, city or other governmental district — are based on standards from 1968. They argue that current statistics and realities in the covered jurisdictions have changed greatly in the past 45 years. These statistics come from the government’s own Census Bureau.

Shelby County argues that the provisions of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which has no sunset built in, provide adequate remedies for any cases of discrimination, since it allows for lawsuits by individuals, groups or the U.S. Department of Justice to correct action by state and local governments.

The problem pointed to by the Department of Justice and others opposing Shelby County is that it was and is up to Congress as to determine the special provisions for pre-clearance as still needed and what the standards for “opting out” should be. They note that in the history of the act, many jurisdictions have been able to meet the formula of Section 5. The department also argues that while most pre-clearances are granted, there are enough cases where proposed changes have been blocked to justify the continuation of the pre-clearances.

Based on a transcript of the oral arguments for Shelby County v. Holder, I believe the court will, along the existing 5-4 conservative/liberal line, rule in favor of Shelby County. The court will rule that the disputed formula is unconstitutional but the concept of pre-clearace passes constitutional muster, and it will be up to Congress to fashion a standard that will be acceptable based upon the court’s decision. It will recognize the need for the pre-clearances to remain in covered jurisdictions, but that the realities in those jurisdictions is changing also for the better.


By Jeffery Cassity, guest contributor
Jeffery Cassity is a socially-liberal, fiscally-conservative Anglo male who is involved in his local Latino community. As the widower of a 1st-generation Mexican-American woman, he’s an active (some would say hyperactive) member of the his Council of the League of Latin American Citizens (LULAC).

Mexico’s new education laws: reform or political power play?

On Feb. 26, just days before radical new educational reforms were scheduled to take effect, Elba Esther Gordillo, head of Mexico’s powerful teacher’s union for almost a quarter century, was arrested and charged with embezzling 2 billion pesos (approximately $160 million) from her union during her tenure.

The question that is foremost on everyone’s mind: is this a move by President Enrique Peña Nieto to get rid himself of a leading political opponent, or is it another move to break the power of the teacher’s union nearly monopolistic control of the Mexican educational system and an effort to bring about actual reform?

Mexico is currently ranked last among the members of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), according to the organization’s 2012 report. This is not the result of lack of funding. While the country spends 22 percent of its gross national product on education, with over 80 percent of that going to teachers’ salaries, fewer than half of students graduate high school.
Among OECD countries, only Brazil and Chile have a lower graduation rate.  In testing results for math, science and critical reading skills, only 1 percent of Mexican students post “advanced” results, compared to 18 percent of Canadian students and 10 percent of U.S. students.

So what are the reforms that Sra. Gordillo and her union members oppose?  First, the teachers whose salaries are paid for by the federal government would be hired by the government; no longer would teachers be chosen by the union. The long-standing and well-documented practice of union leadership at the national and local level, choosing who receives appointments based on the payment of bribes and the inheritance of positions from parent to child, would be abolished.  Second, promotion and pay raises would be based upon merit and not whom you know or how loyal you are to the union.  Third, the approximately 1 million Mexican teachers would be subject to an evaluation   system that is current being developed.  Finally, teachers would have to provide proof of qualification to be teachers by taking exams. Under the current system, many teachers lack even a high-school education.

None of these reforms are inconsistent with what most governments around the world do in relationship to their educational systems. Most are basic functions of governments at various levels around the world.

In the past, Sra. Godillo and her union have been partnered with President Peña Nieto’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), until the union moved its support to Calderon’s National Action Party (PAN) following Calderon’s election in 2006.  Many have viewed her arrest and the passage of these reform laws as Peña Nieto’s attempt at revenge against the union. The evidence to date shows that it is a calculated move by the current president to do more than one thing. Peña Nieto realized the changes in the law as a way to wrest control of the educational system from the union and put it in the government’s hands — and also get his revenge on Sra. Godillo and her union for not supporting him.

The hope of many parents and educational reform groups in Mexico, such as Mexicanos Primero (“Mexicans First”) and the Citizen Coalition for Education, is that President Peña Nieto actually makes good on reforms and creates a quality education system in Mexico that improves the lives of children and puts Mexico on a path for development, bringing the nation into the 21st century.


By guest contributor Jeffery Cassity
Jeffery Cassity is a socially-liberal, fiscally-conservative Anglo male who is involved in his local Latino community. As the widower of a 1st-generation Mexican-American woman, he’s an active (some would say hyperactive) member of the his Council of the League of Latin American Citizens (LULAC).

CALIFORNIA GOP: CAN LATINO VOTERS BE THE KEY TO ITS COMEBACK?

The parting of the ways between the California Republican Party and Latino voters occurred in 1994 with the passage of Proposition 187which was championed by the Party and then-Governor Pete Wilson. Though it was subsequently ruled unconstitutional and litigation regarding it ended in 1999, no Republican candidate with the exception of Arnold Schwarzenegger has won a gubernatorial, senatorial or presidential election since 1994.

Skip forward in time to 2012-2013. Newly-elected GOP State Chair, Jim Brulte, has made the Latino electorate the cornerstone of his six(6) year game plan to turn around the GOP's fortunes in California.

There are at least three problems that exist which could easily stand in the way of this bold plan: first, the California GOP has severe financial and staffing issues; there are internal party issues to resolve, and third, the Latino community has not forgotten or forgiven the bad feelings surrounding Proposition 187.

What is the extent of the financial and staff problems? The California GOP is basically broke. It is a half million dollars, at minimum, in debt. Some sources say it is closer to $800,000. It is down to three(3) full-time employees, two of whom work from home, and it has almost no grassroots organization to speak of.

The party politics? According to Republican consultant, Luis Alvorado, who is also President of Republican National Hispanic Assembly of Greater Los Angeles as he commented in a recent article on the Hispanic news website VOXXI.com, “We're going back to the party of Shogun-type dynasties, where the Tea Party has their coalition, and the moderates have their coalition, and it's going to be a battle to see who comes out on top.”

Latino voters and the CA Republican Party? The numbers speak for themselves. In the 2004 and 2008 Presidential elections, 58% and 67% of Latino voters pulled the lever for the Democratic candidate; in 2012, the figure increased to 71%.

How does the State Chair and the GOP plan to overcome these obstacles? This is a very good question. The problem in answering this beyond the vague generalities offered by the new State Chair about promoting the shared values of conservatives and Latinos is apparently not one that the California GOP is able to answer at this time. Attempts by this writer to get answers from spokesperson, Mark Standriss, has been met with, sadly, indifference. The first scheduled phone interview was blown off by Mr. Standriss. He apparently forgot that we had scheduled the call a few days earlier and was involved in another conference call at the time our phone meeting was scheduled. When I contacted him the next day to follow up, Mr. Standriss had no details of the plan and could not find the contact information for the Party official who was to lead the effort. He did take my email address so he could send me the information “hopefully by morning”. That was Tuesday evening. As of the time of submission for this article on Thursday, there has been NO follow up email.

That pretty much sums-up what I think the California GOP's plan is when it comes to attracting Latino voters: NO FOLLOW UP!

It is this attitude which will doom, in my view, the attempt by California Republicans to rebuild their party in California for years if not decades. The factionalism in the California Party will continue to impede any rebuilding efforts especially when it comes to Latinos. National GOP efforts will be given mouth-service but produce no real changes to aid the winning back of Latinos or other minority voters.

By Being Latino Contributor, Jeffery Cassity Jeffery is a mostly socially-liberal, fiscally-conservative Anglo male who is involved in his local Hispanic community as the widower of a 1st generation Mexican-American woman and his active, some would say hyperactive, membership in the local Council of the League of Latin American Citizens(LULAC).

TROUBLE IN THE HEIGHTS: Come for the Action; Leave with a New Perspective!

Trouble in the Heights is a low-budget independent film set and filmed in the New York City neighborhood of Washington Heights. “It begins one night under the great expanse of the George Washington Bridge. Young Javy and his friend Robbie are two adolescents growing up in the predominantly Dominican neighborhood of New York’s Washington Heights. The boys have no idea what lies ahead when they bury a trash bag stuffed with drug money under the Bridge. What is set in motion is the story of two brothers, Javy and his older brother, Diego, and the thugs who want their money back. A mild-mannered prep cook, older brother and de facto parent, Diego must look danger in the face to protect his small but growing family from a merciless drug kingpin seeking revenge. As fate looms and day becomes night, Diego turns to an old neighborhood friend with shady connections to help him out of this perilous mess. The events of the night ultimately lead him to the decision that will change more lives than just his own.” (Trouble in the Heights Media Kit)

The true worth of the film lies outside the fast-moving action scenes . It lies in the larger message of the film as outlined by its lead actor, Rayniel Rufino(Diego), in a phone interview I had recently with him. The 26 year old Actor/Writer/Rapper offered these unique insights into the bigger picture presented by the film: “While the movie hints at the violent past of Washington Heights, it is foremost a story about doing what is right and fighting for what is right; it is about individuals taking control of their lives and molding their environment to be what they want, not letting their environment mold them into what they are not.”

Both Rayniel and the film's Director/Producer/Writer, Jonathan Ullman, wanted to present a picture of Washington Heights that shows it has grown beyond its less-than-stellar reputation of the past. They wanted to show the vibrancy and richness of Dominican culture that makes up the neighborhood. Rayniel experienced this richness growing up in the area, and Jonathan has discovered it in the time he has been a resident in the Heights over the past five years. Both talk about the 'small town' character of the area where everyone knows everyone and greets each other in a way that most of America would associate with its own idyllic Mayberry-ish history. “I walk down my street every day and continuously meet and greet people I've met in the past few years living here,” Ullman said. “I feel safer walking the streets here, day or night, than when I lived in lower Manhattan.”

This portrayal of everyday life in Washington Heights is a key part of the story of Diego and his younger brother. The dreams, hopes and life of everyday people and families in Washington Heights are played out against the background of the action story of found drug money and the remnants of the neighborhood's 'old guard' of thugs and drug dealers. It is a movie about family, love and commitment that transcends the predominantly Dominican culture of the area and would hit home with every moviegoer.

Trouble in the Heights is currently available on VOD, iTunes, Amazon, Redbox, Blockbuster and Vudu and will be available on DVD at Walmart and other locations starting in May 2013.

By Being Latino Contributor, Jeffery Cassity Jeffery is a mostly socially-liberal, fiscally-conservative Anglo male who is involved in his local Hispanic community as the widower of a 1st generation Mexican-American woman and his active, some would say hyperactive, membership in the local Council of the League of Latin American Citizens(LULAC).

Tememos Un Papa, y es un Latinoamericano?

Days after the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI goes into effective at 8pm on February 28^th, the Princes of the Church, the Cardinals, from around the world will gather at the Vatican to elect from among themselves, the new leader of the Roman Catholic Church, the next successor to Peter as the Vicar of Christ on Earth, the Pope! The one chosen will become the leader of 1.196 billion Catholics in the world. Forty-two percent(42%) of those members reside in Latin America.

Five of the Cardinals from Latin America who will cast votes for the next Pope are considered “Papabili”---potentially electable as Pope. They are, in the order pictured above,: Joao Braz de Aviz from Brazil, Leonardo Sandri from Argentina, Odilio Pedro Scherer from Brazil, Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga from Honduras, and Jaime Lucas Ortega y Alamino from Cuba.

Joao Braz de Aviz, age 65, Brazilian of Portuguese ancestry, former Archbishop of Brasilia. He has been the Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life since 2011. He is noted for an interview in February 2011, one month after assuming his new position, in L'Osservatore Romano that while he opposed the excessesses of Liberation Theology, he “appreciated that liberation theology promoted the preferential option for the poor, which represents the church's sincere and responsible concern for the the vast phenomenon of social exclusion.”

Leonardo Sandri, age 69, Argentian-born son of Italain immigrat parents, formerly Apostolic Nuncio to Venezuela(1997 to 2000) and Mexico(2000) and Substitute for General Affairs, Chief of Staff for the Holy See's Secretariat of State(the third most powerful man in the Vatican after the Pope and the Cardinal Secretary of State)(2000-07). Since 2007 when consecrated a Cardinal, he has been the Prefect of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches. He is seen as a bridge between the Old World and the New World because of his immigrant heritage.

Odilio Pedro Scherer, age 63, Brazilian of German ancestry, Archbishop of Sao Paolo since 2007. He was appointed as one of the first members of the newly-founded Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization in 2011 by Pope Benedict XVI.

Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga, age 70, Honduran, Archbishop of Tegucigalpa since 1993. He is also President of Cartias Internationalis. He is an outspoken critic of capitalism and its excessesses.

Jaime Lucas Ortega y Alamino, age 76, only the second Cuban elevated to Cardinal in the Catholic Church and the Archbishop of Havana in 1981. He is an outspoken critic of communism including the current government in Cuba as well as capitalism. In September 1993 the Cuban Conference of Catholic Bishops, headed by Cardinal Ortega, published the message”El amor todo lo espera”(Love endures all things), a critique of the Cuban Communist government which called for a new direction for the country.

The election of any of these Cardinals would chart an untested course for the Catholic Church which has not seen a non-European Pope since the first one, directly appointed by Jesus Christ himself, Peter who started off life as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee. It would have historic significance for the Church and the World!

By Being Latino Contributor, Jeffery Cassity Jeffery is a mostly socially-liberal, fiscally-conservative Anglo male who is involved in his local Hispanic community as the widower of a 1st generation Mexican-American woman and his active, some would say hyperactive, membership in the local Council of the League of Latin American Citizens(LULAC).