Judicial Watch has done it again. It has produced–following a Freedom of Information Act request filed with the United States Department of Justice (DOJ)–documents that suggest extensive coordination and communications between the DOJ Voting Section and former ACORN affiliate Project Vote.

Project Vote appears to be directing DOJ resources toward particular states; is having meetings with DOJ staff; and is even recommending lawyers to work in the Justice Department Voting Section that will oversee the 2012 presidential election.

Project Vote also appears to have played a role in the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal’s administration, which aims to force the state to increase voter registration in welfare agencies and drug treatment offices.

The documents also appear to show that Project Vote receives special access to, and meetings with, DOJ officials. So do other voter fraud-deniers, such as the NAACP Legal Defense Fund; Tova Wang at Demos; and the Brennan Center for Justice. I write about numerous similar instances in my book, Injustice: Exposing the Racial Agenda of the Obama Justice Department.

These activist groups have enjoyed access to the top political appointees at DOJ over voting–including Aaron McCree Lewis, in the Office of the Attorney General; Sam Hirsch, Deputy Associate Attorney General; and Deputy Assistant Attorney General in charge of voting issues, Matthew Colangelo.

Emails obtained by Judicial Watch also suggest that Project Vote was directing complaints to the persons at DOJ responsible for deploying election monitoring resources, urging them to devote resources to races around the country–particularly where Tea Party groups were active in efforts to combat voter fraud. (more…)

In the year that has passed since the Supreme Court decided Citizens United v. FEC, the liberal elites have waged a war against the First Amendment.  Liberal politicians including President Barack Obama and Senator Harry Reid, liberal media corporations like the New York Times, and labor unions have joined together to support restrictions on speech and liberty.

Their proposals for “reform” have fallen flat, in large part because they have been exposed as efforts to chill the Freedom of Speech.  These attacks on the First Amendment have used populist rhetoric in an attempt to silence corporate speech.  These efforts to silence corporations are difficult to reconcile when one sees that the New York Times, a media corporation, published a new proposal for “reform” authored by the founder of a non-profit corporation, aimed at silencing speakers that do not support their liberal world view.

In the April 4, 2011 edition of the New York Times, David Callahan launched an ideological attack on the boogeymen de jour, Charles and David Koch.  Callahan sets the tone of his article by attacking the Koch brothers for “conceal[ing] the recipients of their largess.”  In order to prevent this from occurring, Callahan would “require all nonprofit organizations that engage in political advocacy to reveal their donors.”

While Mr. Callahan alleges the current system can be utilized by the left and the right, he seems particularly offended by David Koch’s support of “ideologically driven organizations like the Cato Institute.”  Callahan argues that such groups should be treated differently from other not-for-profit organizations.

(more…)

“Congress should address the need for both national standards and a more robust enforcing authority.  If not, more decision making will fall to the states,” said Miles Rapoport, President of Dēmos, an umbrella corporation for the myriad of progressive groups attacking our state electoral processes.  Progressives, realizing the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) left much of the implementation to states, began their National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) assault in 2006.

The first battle over compliance with the NVRA occurred in Ohio in 2006.  Coincidentally, the Secretary of State Project (SoSP) focused much of its efforts on seizing the open-seat for Ohio Secretary of State that same year.  Seeing an opportunity to de-legitimize Ohio’s electoral process and to create an atmosphere favorable to a progressive candidate, ACORN filed a suit a little over a month before the 2006 elections.  Sound familiar?  It was the strategy in Michigan in 2004.  But Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell (R) was not going to leave office without a resolute fight in defense of Ohio.

At issue was NVRA § 7: Voter Registration Agencies.  Any state agency providing public assistance received designation as a voter registration agency.  Public assistance agencies were supposed to follow a set of procedures providing mail voter registration, assisting applicants in completion of those forms, and accepting completed voter registration forms.  Each state designates a “chief state election official” to coordinate state responsibilities for compliance with the NVRA.

The procedures for compliance are rather straight-forward, so Project Vote had an easier job alleging non-compliance.  Catch any agency on a day after it has run out of forms.  Seek assistance from any personnel unfamiliar with NVRA requirements.  Find any individual receiving public assistance that has moved, and was formerly registered to vote.  Compare the number of individuals registered in the first year under NVRA to the number of individuals registered now (because every year should see the same amount of people receiving public assistance, the same amount of people unregistered, and they will always be new or moved people, right?)  Send a letter to the chief state election official alleging non-compliance through “scientific” studies.  Demand a plan to remedy violations.  Offer “help” to the state.  Then sue to “protect” the voters (and more importantly, recoup expenses).  Brilliant!

(more…)

Most average Americans know little about the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Some know them as the people in purple shirts that beat up attendees at the town halls this summer.  Some equate them to ACORN, or to the Obama administration.  While there is some truth to all of the above, there is for certain one title that every voting American should be bestowing upon SEIU, and that is the title of “special interest”.

From 2000 to current, SEIU has spent at least $187,500,000 through combined lobbying, PAC and 527s group donations and expenses on candidates and policy issues – nearly 100% of which went to Democrats and to liberal policy initiatives.  Much has been focused on influencing universal health care, as well as other indirectly related health legislation, such as public nutrition, food safety, research, and environmental health – all part of SEIU’s supposed plan for Building a New American Health Care System. Because, in their words, they “will not stop until every man, woman and child has quality, affordable care they can count on.”

So really…why is SEIU so invested in health care?

(more…)

Across America community organizations operate in impoverished, disadvantaged, low-income or minority communities. No matter the phrase used to describe the special interest, a group exists to represent it. Often these organizations initially have good intentions and seek to give back and serve the community in which they operate. When government money, power and influence become part of the equation however, lofty principles tend to fall by the wayside. Other organizations are created to cause chaos and disrupt the system.

The Association for Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) was perceived by many as a well-intended organization, but it appears that the association that Wade Rathke founded was increasingly driven to cause chaos and disrupt the system whenever it could.

BEFORE the Dale Rathke embezzlement finally became last year, John Fund, in “Grapes of Rathke: ACORN, a liberal activist group, comes under scrutiny. About time,” reported: (more…)