Mr. President, Don’t Use the 50th Anniversary of the Voting Rights Act to Divide Americans

Celebrate the Achievement, Black Leadership Group Says

Members of the Project 21 black leadership network are hitting back against President Barack Obama’s use of the 50th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act to divide Americans from one another and to promote a political agenda.

The Voting Rights Act anniversary is a time for celebration, say Project 21 members, who say it was inappropriate for the President to use his speech noting the occasion to falsely accuse his political rivals of “deliberately making it harder for people to vote” and of intentionally passing “laws that aim at disenfranchising our fellow citizens.”

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/08/06/remarks-president-voting-rights-act

In fact, the Project 21 members say, efforts to reduce voter fraud protect the votes of eligible voters from being cancelled out by fraudulent votes, and no less a body than the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality, and arguably even the wisdom, of requiring IDs to vote.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/07-21.pdf [has upheld]

The President claims identity-based voter fraud flat-out “doesn’t happen” – a claim belied by a consistent stream of voter fraud arrests and convictions nationally. (Websites archiving news stories about voter fraud can be found here and here.)

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/08/06/remarks-president-voting-rights-act [claims]

http://www.electionintegritywatch.com/be-informed/news-stories/ [here]

https://www.rnla.org/votefraud.asp [here]

Mayor Daley“President Obama has been in Chicago way too long if he thinks there is no corruption in Chicago or Illinois politics,” said Project 21 founding member Bishop Council Nedd II, Ph.D., Bishop and Rector of St. Alban’s Anglican Church in Pine Grove Mills, PA. Furthermore, Bishop Nedd says, “President Obama is wrong and lying when he claims that too many states are making it too difficult for people to vote. There is no correlation between people being denied the opportunity to vote based on race, and people showing proof of identity as a way of protecting this process and right.”

http://www.nationalcenter.org/bios/P21Speakers_Nedd.html

Indeed, Project 21 members say, the Voting Rights Act was never intended to be used to prohibit commonsense anti-fraud measures.

“The purpose of the Voting Rights Act was to guarantee that all Americans — black or white — living in a given jurisdiction had a say in the selection of elected officials, and thereby influence over the laws and the policies that they are governed by. In other words, the VRA ensured self-government occurred all across the country. The VRA was never about guaranteeing a certain number of seats in the legislature or on the city council,” said Project 21 Co-Chairman Horace Cooper, an attorney and voting rights expert.

http://www.nationalcenter.org/bios/P21Speakers_Cooper.html

“Unfortunately, rather than celebrate these achievements, the White House has chosen to deny these accomplishments and to distort the purposes of the VRA,” Cooper continued. “Focusing more on quotas and racial outcomes, the administration counters the very history and rationale of the VRA. In particular, the President’s singular attack on voter ID, a critical tool for ensuring that bona fide Americans vote in U.S. elections, contradicts the history and consensus regarding the VRA.”

“Maybe President Obama should convene a summit of Americans without valid identification and invite them to the White House for a meeting with him,” added Bishop Nedd, who notes that a lack of ID is actually a humanitarian issue that goes far beyond voting, as IDs are needed to open a bank account, apply for jobs, student loans and/or public assistance, to fly anywhere for job interviews or work, or even to visit the President in the White House. Since the White House is not working to eliminate the need for IDs to participate fully in the economy or to visit our public servants, Bishop Nedd says, the President’s priority should be to make certain every citizen has an ID, not simply to make sure IDs are not needed to vote.

The Project 21 members also wonder why the President seems reluctant to acknowledge that huge progress has been made over the last 50 years.

“In the 50 years since the passage of the Voting Rights Act, America has seen a sea-change in attitudes and opportunity for citizens of all races and backgrounds,” said Horace Cooper. “Today blacks and other minorities have unprecedented ballot access that our grandparents could only have dreamed about. We’ve seen the election of the first President of color elected, along with numerous Senators, Governors and Mayors across the land.”

Furthermore, Cooper says, “During the last two election cycles several states set records for black voter participation — often exceeding the turnout levels for the general population in the process.”

Much has changed, says Bishop Nedd. “My grandfather, who was born in Maysville, South Carolina and died in 1964, never cast a vote in an election his entire life. This happened for a variety of reasons, including the fact that he was not permitted to vote, was discouraged from voting, saw the consequences of attempting to vote and, finally, became used to not voting.”

That’s wrong, but it couldn’t happen today. As we commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, our leaders should join us in celebrating that important fact.

Project 21, a leading voice of black conservatives for over two decades, is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research (http://www.nationalcenter.org). The National Center for Public Policy Research, founded in 1982, is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank.

The Kelly File… Debate Critique

by Bishop Council Nedd

On Monday I was asked if I would be willing to appear on The Kelly File with Megyn Kelly.  I was asked to be on the Friday night show which would be an election critique and recap featuring pundits and regular Americans. I usually hate appearing on any sort of panel discussion.  For evidence of that, one need look no further than my last appearance on Sean Hannity’s show (but we don’t talk about that anymore).

Megyn KellyHowever, doing the Kelly File was enjoyable.  It’s very seldom that I go on television and I feel like there actually is iron sharpening iron.  However, that’s exactly what happened.  It’s usually punditry and sound bites.  I don’t actually recall what was said on the air and what wasn’t, as Megyn encouraged all of us to stay engaged through the breaks and that’s exactly what happened.

She apologized to me for not getting to the issue of faith during our discussion, but I understood.  However, I do hope there are more conversations about the role and importance of faith as we get closer to the election, while attacks on Christianity increase.

It is an important topic.

There are organized individuals in the country that want to rip up every cross by its roots and throw it in a wood pile for burning, be they secularists, atheists or radical Islamists.  I would like to see this crucial matter given more consideration, not just in the political discourse, but in the hearts of everyone who considers themselves a Christian or a person of faith.  In fact, it’s not merely an important topic.  It’s a topic with grave implications.

This is the first story I saw, when I turned on my Computer this morning…

“ISIS kidnaps more Christians. When will we put an end to this madness?”

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/08/07/more-christians-kidnapped-in-syria.html

As the chairman of In God We Trust, I will continue to fight, not just for the right of Christians to exist in America, but to remind people that the bounty of America comes from our creator.

 

Orwell Must Be Laughing in His Grave

“… some of the animals remembered–or thought they remembered–that the Sixth Commandment decreed ‘No animal shall kill any other animal.’ And though no one cared to mention it in the hearing of the pigs or the dogs, it was felt that the killings which had taken place did not square with this.”  George Orwell, Animal Farm, Ch. 8

Policy aside, the Supreme Court of the United States is behaving in the most capricious manner. I understand that most American have no understanding of what our Constitution and the Bill of Rights say, which is why no one is appalled by the whimsy of SCOTUS.

We are truly living in an Orwellian nightmare where his hyperbole is becoming our reality. Big Brother is watching everything we do. Now we have evolved into Animal Farm situation where our post literate culture is fine with the government redefining itself by fiat.

Why is this ok with everyone?  Is our Constitution and the separation of powers just a historical curiosity from America’s past?

 

Supreme Court Ruling in King v. Burwell Means Americans Will Have to Wait Longer for a Free-Market Health Care System

ObamaCare Is Unsustainable as Exchanges Will Eventually Devolve into a Death Spiral
Ruling Also a Blow to the Rule of Law

Washington, D.C. – The Supreme Court’s ruling in King v. Burwell means Americans will have to wait longer for greater liberty in their health care system, said Dr. David Hogberg, senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research.

“The Court has had two chances to stand up for freedom and against ObamaCare and has blown them both,” Dr. Hogberg said. “This won’t change the fight for health care freedom. It will just take more time to move toward a free-market based health care system.”

A ruling in favor of the plaintiffs would have been a great opportunity to start replacing ObamaCare with free-market based policies. Rather, Americans will have to suffer the problems of ObamaCare for the foreseeable future.

Dr. Hogberg notes that the ObamaCare exchanges are already exhibiting signs of a death spiral, where insurance premiums rise precipitously, causing young and healthy people to drop their insurance. This renders the “risk pool” older and sicker, causing premiums to rise again, and the process repeats.

“We’re seeing loads of insurers ask for big premium hikes, at least 20% and in many cases much higher,” said Dr. Hogberg. He recently examined this in a National Policy Analysis entitled “ObamaCare Premium Hikes for 2016–Ignore Them at Your Own Risk.”

“In the end, the exchanges are not sustainable, and free-market based reform of our health care system will be necessary. Today’s Court ruling only delays that,” said Dr. Hogberg.

In the longer term, Congress must adopt policies that repeal ObamaCare and replace it with policies that promote liberty. NCPPR provides an easy-to-access spreadsheet at http://goo.gl/y1ALI2 that summarizes a dozen plans from conservative and libertarian think-tanks and Congressional Republicans offering free-market alternatives to ObamaCare. The spreadsheet explains how each plan treats vital health care policy issues such as tax credits, pre-existing conditions, Medicaid and Health Savings Accounts.

“There are a lot of great ideas out there, from the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute to Rep. Tom Price and the Republican Study Committee,” said Dr. Hogberg. “Unfortunately, most of the media has ignored them, so most Americans are unaware that free-market alternatives to ObamaCare exist.”

While the ruling isn’t a fatal blow to achieving health care freedom, it is a serious blow to the rule of law.

“From here on out, presidents and the bureaucracy can apply the law however they like, even if the law says differently,” said Dr. Hogberg. “As long as they can plausibly claim that Congress intended for the law to say something different, presidents and the bureaucracy will win every time before the Supreme Court.”

David Hogberg is a senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research. He is author of the forthcoming book Medicare’s Victims: How the U.S. Government’s Largest Health Care Program Harms Patients and Impairs Physicians.

The National Center for Public Policy Research, founded in 1982, is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank. Ninety-four percent of its support comes from individuals, less than four percent from foundations, and less than two percent from corporations. It receives over 350,000 individual contributions a year from over 96,000 active recent contributors. Sign up for free issue alerts here.

-30-