People -
Yesterday (Tuesday, 7/19/05) I attended the rally in Lansing in
support of Affirmative Action in Michigan and I also attended and
helped to monitor the proceedings of the Michigan Board of Canvassers
in its consideration of the request by the so-called Michigan Civil
Rights Initiative (MCRI) to approve its petition and thereby proceed
to having its anti-Affirmative Action constitutional amendment
proposal placed on the November 2006 state ballot. The fact that the
vote stalled is likely more the result of the fact that there were
only four members of the board present, 2 Republicans and 2 Democrats,
and with the exception of the final of 7 (6?) motions, all votes taken
were stalemated at 2 for and 2 against. As such, the petition request
was simply not approved to go forward. The Board also did not approve
a motion to conduct an investigation into what is alleged to be
fraudulent and deceptive practices, basically because it was argued by
the Deputy General Attorney present that the Board does not have such
authority. What happens next, at least legally, is that both sides
will go to the State Appeals Court for a ruling. Of course, the MCRI
is hoping for a repeat of their last so-called success when their
appeal was approved, albeit too late for the amendment proposal to be
placed on the November 2004 ballot. Those who were in attendance
yesterday supporting the continued support of Affirmative Action in
Michigan included attorneys and spokespersons representing the lead
group, "Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and
Immigration Rights, and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary"
(usually shortened to just BAMN), the national NAACP and its local
branches from Detroit, Macomb County and Flint, the Michigan
Legislative Black Caucus and Operation King's Dream. Of course, there
were tons of folks from BAMN, including 10, yes TEN, busloads of
Detroit high school and some college students, as well a small but
credible contingency from the Flint community. (By the way, the
students are truly carrying this fight on their young backs as they
rally and carry banners and chant our cause! It is again as it was in
the 50s, 60s and 70s when the youth carried a great deal of the burden
of protesting inequities. There were a few of us "veterans" in the
rally, but we were few.)
The original intent of the pro-Affirmative Action groups was to have
the Board of Canvassers to call for an investigation and hold public
hearings to investigate what we contend are fraudulent and deceptive
practices by the MCRI in promoting its cause and especially in
collecting its signatures. Considerable evidence was submitted by our
attorneys that demonstrated significant instances of unethical
practices, including evidence of one petition solicitor in Detroit who
was proven to have "DIED" in 1999. There were also reports of recently
paroled ex-convicts being pressed into service as petition circulators
who were threatened with parole violation, and thus being returned to
prison, if they did not accept this "job" to collect signatures. And
of course, we noted with considerable passion, the MCRI has
purposefully initiated a racist driven attack by concentrating their
petition drives and deceptive practices in cities and areas where
African Americans predominate in the population. Although there was no
success in getting a ruling that the Board of Canvassers would conduct
an investigation, there was a significant, if minor victory that gives
us yet another opportunity to continue our intervention and movement
to kill this twisted initiative. At the conclusion of the final vote
to block the petition failed, which had been proposed by Board member
Doyle O'Connor and supported by member Paul Mitchell (the 2
Democrats), a counter "plan" was announced by the Republican member
(Lyn Bankes) who had abstained from an earlier vote to approve the
petition. Member Lyn Bankes announced that she feels there are too
many questions and possible instances of problems in the petition and
thus she would immediately prepare and send a formal letter to the
House and Senate requesting that the legislature, which does have the
authority to conduct investigations, to take on this responsibility.
Democrat Member Doyle O'Connor asked if he could co-sign that letter,
in effect, making the request a bipartisan request from the Board of
Canvasser, which frankly, in my judgment, will carry considerably more
weight. I have asked member O'Connor to provide me with a copy of that
letter, which I hope to make public (with permission) if and when I
receive it.
This Board stalled over every single motion made, as partially covered
in the pasted in story below, however, from my perspective there was a
great deal more going on in that meeting room on the fifth floor of
the House Building in Lansing yesterday. This was not simply a
consideration of whether a petition was appropriately worded (we
contend that it was purposely deceptive and confusing), or whether
signatures were ethically collected (we contend that they were
fraudulently collected in significant numbers), or even if there is a
right to petition for a constitutional amendment (all agree that this
is an appropriate approach). To my way of thinking, this is truly
about the rights of the people and the responsibilities and
accountability of those who we elect to SERVE us. The Board of
Canvassers seems to be inadequately charged with authority. It seems
only permitted to approve or disapprove the FORM of a petition, and
not whether the wording and content is clear or deceptive. There
seems to be NO means to protect the people from fraudulent and
deceptive practices in preparing petitions, circulating such petitions
for signatures, and the deliberate misleading of people and tricking
folks into signing petitions. The MCRI and its attorneys seemed to
have argued that the Board must only consider the "FORM" of the
petition and can not, by law, question anything else. The Attorney
General and the Deputy AG who attended this Board of Canvassers
meeting, clearly seem to agree with the MCRI's interpretation. I ask:
Who stands FOR the people?! (By the way, I was informed that the
Secretary of State has this responsibility. Hmmm, former Secretary of
State Candace Miller approved the petition text as appropriate. This
is the same Candace Miller who is now a Michigan Representative to
Congress and who has announced likely plans to run against Granholm
for the governorship of Michigan. We need to remember her history when
we enter the voting booth if she is successful in getting on the
ballot next year or for any office she runs for.)
If members Bankes and O'Connor do send their letter to the legislature
and that body takes it up for consideration, THEN we will have the
opportunity to tell our representatives and senators HOW we wish to be
represented.
(For further information from BAMN, please visit their website:
http://bamn.com/index2.asp)
Tendaji
Board stalls affirmative action petition
By Dawson Bell and Chris Christoff -- Free Press Staff Writers
Detroit Free Press -- July 20, 2005
Backers of a proposed state ban on the use of race and gender in
public hiring and university admissions are headed back to court,
after a state elections panel Tuesday failed to approve their
petitions which sought to place the issue before voters in Nov. 2006.
Only one member of the four-person Board of State Canvassers voted to
certify the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative proposal, despite the
submission of more than 500,000 signatures collected earlier this
year.
The group needs the signatures of 317,757 registered voters to qualify
the so-called anti-affirmative action amendment for the ballot.
Secretary of State elections staff estimated they had collected more
than 450,000 signatures.
But the other board members said they were uncomfortable over
allegations the MCRI petition circulators had misled a significant
number of those who signed the petition.
The hearing and two overflow offices were jammed with supporters and
opponents of the amendment.
Jennifer Gratz, executive director of MCRI and one of the plaintiffs
in the University of Michigan admissions cases that ignited the
affirmative action debate, said she wasn't surprised by Tuesday's
action. MCRI will seek a court order to reverse the board almost
immediately, she said.
Gratz called allegations of fraud unfounded.
Opponents called for an investigation, charging that the ballot drive
targeted black voters and convinced them to sign the petitions by
telling them the ballot issue would preserve affirmative action
programs.
In fact, the ballot proposal would prohibit affirmative action
programs based on race, gender or national origin.
"There's no way you can get black people to sign a petition against
affirmative action without lies and deceit," Johnathon Crutcher, a
junior at Detroit's Cody High School, told the board Tuesday.
The opponents cited 122 petition signatures from nine cities with
large black populations.
Theirs were among a random sample of 500 signatures state election
officials used to determine whether there are enough valid signatures
out of the 500,000 collected.
George Washington, attorney for By Any Means Necessary, a group
strongly opposed to the initiative, said his group contacted about
two-thirds of the 122 petition signers, and all were black. He said
the sampling indicates that as many as 25%of those who signed the
petitions were deceived.
"We didn't find a single black person who signed this who knew what
they were signing," Washington said. "They were told by those who
circulated the petitions that it would help affirmative action."
Ruthie Stevenson, president of the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People's Macomb County branch and an opponent
of the petition drive, said she was approached by an MCRI petitioner
who, not knowing who she was, told her that the NAACP and Ruthie
Stevenson support the ballot initiative.
"I told him I'm Ruthie Stevenson, and I am not in favor of this
deplorable petition," she said.
But leaders of the petition drives said they, too, interviewed black
voters who signed the petitions who told them they knew exactly what
they were signing.
Attorney Stephen Safranek, testifying for the MCRI, said the petition
drive had collected such an overabundance of signatures that a
challenge is futile, and that opponents were attempting to delay and
mire the ballot drive in controversy.
Much of the six hours of debate focused on whether the board has the
authority to conduct an investigation -- with subpoena power -- into
possible misrepresentation by petition circulators.
Attorney General Mike Cox issued an opinion that the board does not
have such authority, but Democratic board member Doyle O'Connor
repeatedly disputed Cox's ruling.
Republican board member Lyn Bankes abstained on the final vote to
certify the petitions, saying there were too many doubts about the
validity of signatures.
Bankes, a former state representative, said she will ask the
Legislature to investigate charges that black voters were lied to
about the intent of the ballot issue.
The trip to court will be a return for all parties. Last year, a
challenge to the proposed amendment ultimately was resolved in favor
of MCRI, but too late to collect signatures for the 2004 election.
Deputy Attorney General Gary Gordon told the board Tuesday that the
limits on the board spelled out in Cox's opinion were "not a close
call" legally.
The board's jurisdiction is clear and is limited to questions about
the form of petitions and whether signers were registered voters, he
said.
Contact DAWSON BELL at 313-222-6604 or [log in to unmask]
Copyright © 2005 Detroit Free Press Inc.
|
