Civil Rights

America is not yet a post-racial society

The election of President Barack Obama is heralded by many as a triumphant leap into a new post-racial America, in which the scars of centuries-old racial wounds have healed and equal opportunity flourishes. But the truth is, we still have a long way to go.

It’s 2009 and race still matters. Race affects the type of education you receive, the type of neighborhood in which you live, the likelihood that you or someone you know will be incarcerated, and even the extent to which your community is being affected by the current economic crisis.

As ACLU Senior Staff Attorney Reginald Shuford notes in his law review article, "Why Affirmative Action Remains Essential in the Age of Obama" (.pdf), black men without criminal records are no more likely than white men with criminal records to get a job. Another study illustrates that job applicants with “black-sounding” names are less likely to get a favorable response to their resumes than those with “white-sounding” names.


President Obama: Withdraw citizen reporting program

A troubling new citizen reporting program is being launched at the White House -– targeting those who oppose President Obama’s health care plan –- a program that can only stifle constitutionally-protected free speech.

In an official White House release posted by the White House Director of New Media, Macon Phillips claims that “[t]here is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there” both on the web and floating around in chain emails. Phillips states that “[s]ince we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to”


Selective service provides a model for improved voter registration

There’s a good reason why people are familiar with the Selective Service: When men living in the United States turn eighteen, they’re not simply granted the privileges of being of age; they also become obligated to register for the draft.  And, as any of-age American male can attest, the Selective Service -- the agency charged with registration – does its job well.  The Service keeps records on approximately 17 million men between the ages of 18-25 (95% of the target population), and it regularly updates its registrant list to ensure that it has up-to-date information. But the agency is less remarkable for what it does than how it does it. As a new Brennan Center report suggests, the Service provides a model for modernizing another system that impacts newly-minted eighteen year olds -– voter registration.

The report’s author, Laura Seago, notes that nearly three-quarters of Selective Service registration data is collected through file-sharing with other federal agencies, notably the Department of Labor, US Citizenship and Immigration Services, and the DMV, which accounts for two-thirds of automatic registration. Additionally, anybody who submits a FAFSA  (Free Application for Federal Student Aid) is automatically entered into the database, which substantially increases the likelihood that men will register, knowingly or not. Strikingly, few people actually initiate the registration process themselves; less than a third of the applicants did so in 2008.   As Seago notes, “more than 60 percent of Selective Service-eligible men were automatically registered when they interacted with other government agencies.” In other words, if you’re in the right demographic, the Selective Service might not be on your radar, but you’re most likely on theirs.

Setting the record straight on warrantless wiretapping program (Sen. Dianne Feinstein)

For the past three and a half years there has been a major debate over the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program. This program, which involved the surveillance of communications between Americans and people outside of the country, began shortly after September 11.

It was brought to public light in December 2005, was the subject of legislation in 2007 and 2008, and was described in a report written by five Inspectors General released last month. On Monday, former Central Intelligence Agency and NSA Director Michael Hayden wrote an op-ed in the New York Times concerning the "value and legality" of the warrantless surveillance program. I have a different perspective.

General Hayden wrote that the surveillance activities were lawful and had "been consistently deemed lawful by the Justice Department." This is misleading, because until Congress passed the Protect America Act in 2007, these surveillance activities (acknowledged by President Bush in 2005) were conducted outside of the governing law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). That was done despite a provision in law that specifically stated FISA was to be the "exclusive means" by which electronic surveillance could be done for foreign intelligence purposes.


A new mission to deliver increased value to the industry and consumers

Over the course of the last year, the financial industry has been focused on staying one step ahead of the curve-–looking forward to the next great opportunity not only for our own interests, but those of the consumers we work with each day building a lifetime of trust.

Today, the industry faces a critical moment, one that requires a reinvigorated approach. As the industry has evolved, so have our needs and goals. To help better serve the financial industry's growing priorities and to help chart a successful course for our continued advancement, NAVA has undergone a complete rebranding–-becoming the Insured Retirement Institute (IRI).

Stop the Fairness Doctrine from censoring American airwaves (Rep. Mike Pence)

Congressman Greg Walden and I have offered an amendment to the Financial Services Appropriations Bill. This amendment would prevent any funding to the FCC from being used to either reinstate the "Fairness Doctrine" or enact proposed broadcast localism regulations during the next fiscal year.

The American people cherish freedom, especially freedom of speech and of the press. That was why President Reagan repealed the so-called Fairness Doctrine back in 1987. For more than four decades, the federal government actually regulated the content of American talk radio and the chilling effect of this regulation was undeniable.

Ending the "widow penalty" (Sen. Bill Nelson)

Just a few weeks ago I met with several women here in Washington, who were caught in a hole in our immigration laws I’ve been working to close, commonly called the widow penalty. In the country legally, they were married to an American and on their way to permanent residency when the unthinkable happened, their spouse died. On top of their heartbreak, these women also face the fear of deportation and leaving behind their spouses’ families, and in some cases, their own American-born children.

Under the current law, a foreigner must be married to an American for at least two years before becoming eligible for legal residency. If the American spouse dies before then, the surviving spouse may be deported—a situation that affects hundreds of widows and widowers.

Conspiracy of silence about Roe v. Wade at confirmation hearings

When Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor appears before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week, she is all but certain to be asked, and to answer, questions about many of the high-profile cases the Court has decided in recent decades. If past hearings are prologue, these will include questions about Brown v. Board of Education (school desegregation) and Griswold v. Connecticut (access to contraception and the right to privacy).

This makes sense. As many commentators have noted, questions about past cases can tell us much about a nominee’s understanding of current jurisprudence and her approach to legal interpretation. (It is not, however, necessarily an auger for future decisions. Most recent nominees, for example, have agreed that Brown was correctly decided, although they went on to curtail its impact in the 2007 case Parents Involved in Community. Schools v. Seattle School Dist. No. 1.)

Time to fix problems for military voters (Sen. Ben Nelson)

Yesterday, I joined my colleagues Senator Chuck Schumer and Senator Saxby Chambliss to introduce the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act, which will ensure that all ballots cast by US troops deployed overseas are counted in upcoming elections. The MOVE Act sets minimum, uniform standards to ensure that members of the military and overseas voters have a process that works, allows them time to vote, and provides for contingencies if the regular absentee voting process fails.

Study after study has shown problems with the voting system for military and overseas voters as it stands.  A Rules Committee survey last May of seven key states showed that as many as one in four ballots cast by military voters went uncounted in last year’s presidential election.  In a 2009 survey by the Overseas Vote Foundation, more than half of overseas and military respondents tried to vote but failed to do so because they either received a late ballot or never received a ballot at all. 

Gay and lesbian federal employees' partners deserve benefits (Sen. Joe Lieberman)

The nation recently took a long-overdue step forward in the fight for equal rights when President Obama signed a presidential memorandum that puts gay and lesbian federal employees on more equitable footing with their heterosexual co-workers. Partners of gay and lesbian federal employees will now have access to medical centers abroad and can be added to long-term care insurance, while gay and lesbian federal employees will be able to take leave to care for their partners, without fear of job loss.

But current law does not allow the President to confer all of the benefits to gay and lesbian federal employees and their partners that other federal employees and their spouses receive.