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.