Ruthelle Frank, Civil Rights Worker, Dies at 89

Ruthelle Regina Frank, (August 21, 1927 - June 4, 2017)

Ruthelle Frank lived in the tiny village of Brokaw in northern Wisconsin. She led a life as a public servant and a public intellectual.

Ms. Frank died this week at 89, (Wisconsin Rapids Daily Tribune).

The last six years Ruthelle Frank has been the co-plaintiff in the major federal voting rights case, Frank v. Walker, still being litigated at the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, (Wisconsin Public Radio, ACLU,).

On March 9, 2012, I had the pleasure to speak with Ruthelle Frank by phone in Brokaw, (Mal Contends), following rightwing attacks against Dane County Judge David Flanagan and Dane County Judge Richard G. Niess after the judges had ordered injunctions of Wisconsin Republicans' photo voter ID law, litigated simultaneously in state court, (The Capital Times, League of Women Voters of Wisconsin v. Walker, Milwaukee Branch of the NAACP v. Walker,).

Said Frank, in a previously published piece in Mal Contends:

'I have been living here 83 years; everybody knows me. We [Brokaw] have 194 people. I maybe could have voted last month illegally,' Frank said. 'I wasn't allowed to vote legally though, because I didn't have a valid Wisconsin ID.'
 
'My motto is: You don't use what you have, you lose it. But I have never seen treatment like this, what is going on,' said Frank. 'I'm fighting for everyone who has lost his [voting] rights. This isn't right, it's just plain crazy. Just because we're old, and can't get around like we're young doesn't mean we're stupid and can't think and shouldn't be able to vote.'

Asked about GOP criticism of Dane County Judge David Flanagan's temporary injunction barring implementation of the voter ID law while having signed a recall Walker petition, Frank said, 'as far as I'm concerned, he has an opinion about Scott Walker and he [Flanagan] has to live his own life, you're not supposed to speak what you believe in?'

Frank whose story was broken by Robert Mentzer last year in the Wausau Daily Herald, sang the praises of old-school journalism, singling out Mentzer.

'I called up Bob Mentzer of the Wausau Daily Herald and told him what was going on; and he just said, 'he's driving over,'' said Frank.

As the state and federal law suits against voter ID laws across the country continue, Frank said she is optimistic and ready for the fight.

'We're going to make it, we're are not going to crawl under a rock. I'm talked to people from California, Washington and even had a relative in Florida call me after seeing me on [Rachel Maddow]. Keep writing and thank you for spreading the story,' Frank said.

Ruthelle Frank, (1927-2017), lived her life and fought for her rights and those of her fellow Wisconsinites with whom Ms. Frank felt she gave a common effort.

Republicans Got What They Want in Wisc DMV Clerks Deciding Who Votes; Fight's Not Over

Thank you Ruthelle Frank and Eddie Lee Holloway Jr.
for sticking up for our rights in 2011 and beyond, (ACLU)

Wisconsin Republicans frustrated, confused and blocked voters: Mission Accomplished

Wisconsin is better than North Carolina in voting rights, but that's nothing to brag about.

For the some 300,000 registered voters without a Republican-approved voting ID, Wisconsin voting rights activists face a situation where DMV clerks, intrepid students of the Constitution, are making value decisions about who gets to vote.

The result and Republican Party objective is voter confusion, frustration and obstruction.

Writes EPWisco this weekend: "We hope DMV now following correct rules - u should be able to get ID w/whatever docs u have. Let us and @VoteRiders @votermolly know [if] u can't[.]"

From February 2015, consider the unthinkable state of affairs (also seen from 2011) we face today, we did not get here by accident:

[from 2015] If Republicans and Scott Walker get their way, [they did], DMV clerks will make the decision on whether 10,000s of Wisconsin citizens get to vote, exercising the clerks' "discretion in a constitutionally sufficient manner." [Frank v. Walker, p.36]

Election law expert, Rick Hasen [in 2015], says Wisconsin voting right activists make a persuasive case for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the Wisconsin photo voter ID case, Ruthelle Frank v. Scott Walker and League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) of Wisconsin v. Barland.

Hasen notes the timing and disposition of the Wisconsin voting rights case facing the U.S. presidential elections next year, and the five-to-five split of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit pitting Judge Easterbrook's opinion with Judge Richard Posner's.

"This case comes to the Court with an extensive trial record, an exhaustive district court decision, and a pair of diametrically opposed Seventh Circuit opinions by Judges Easterbrook and Posner." [p.11 of 2015 Reply Brief]

If the Supreme Court does not grant cert, the GOP-passed bill signed into law by Scott Walker would become effective.

From Wisconsin voting rights activists' Reply Brief filed [in 2015]:

...The district court identified other problems with the saving construction [by the Wisconsin Supreme Court]. A voter applying for photo ID “must still provide ‘[w]hatever documentation is available which states the person’s name and date of birth,’ and then the [DMV] administrator, in his or her discretion, may accept or reject ‘such extraordinary proof of name and date of birth.’” App. 197a (quoting Wis. Admin. Code § Trans. 102.15(3)(b), (c)). To guide DMV clerks, the Wisconsin Supreme Court offered this cryptic instruction: ‘the administrator, or his or her designee, shall exercise his or her discretion in a constitutionally sufficient manner.’” Id. (quoting NAAC, 851 N.W.2d at 279). It is unthinkable that the right to vote could depend on the “constitutionally sufficient” exercise of discretion by a DMV clerk. See Louisiana v. United States, 380 U.S. 145, 153 (1965) (voting rights “cannot be obliterated by the use of laws ... which leave the voting fate of a citizen to the passing whim or impulse of an individual registrar”).  [p. 14]

Repulsive work by Republicans and bureaucrats.

Fight Against Republican Voter Obstruction Continues

Fighting Republican efforts to "to disenfranchise voters likely to vote for the political party that does not control the state government," (Richard Posner, Frank v. Walker).

Since 2011 Wisconsin Republicans have engineered mandatory photo voter ID and dozens of other election laws to obstruct as many non-Republican voters as possible.

This is an imperfect method of voter obstruction, but one which demonstrably is used to suppress the total number of voters likely to cast non-Republican votes.

Voting rights advocates are pursuing many actions against Republican voter obstruction laws enacted across the country by Republican-led states to achieve desired electoral outcomes for a favored political party, the Republican Party.

One action pursued by voting rights workers is in the federal court system, in which voting rights attorneys make legal claims under the Fourteenth Amendment and Section Two of the Voting Rights Act.

North Carolina

On June 21 in North Carolina, a federal judicial panel in the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, heard oral argument in North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP; Emanuel Baptist Church; Covenant Presbyterian Chruch; Barbee Chapel Missionary Baptist Church, Inc.; Rosanell Eaton; Armentia Eaton; Carolyn Coleman; Jocelyn Ferguson-Kelly; Faith Jackson; Mary Perry; and Maria Teresa Unger Palmer v. Patrick Lloyd McCrory, et al (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55712).

The voting rights plaintiffs challenge North Carolina's Republican-enacted voter suppression law, North Carolina House Bill 589 (2013), a comprehensive voter obstruction effort composed of many of the voter obstruction initiatives used in Wisconsin, Texas and other Republican-led states.

The North Carolina case is fast-tracked.

Gov. McCrory is an anti-voting rights Republican governor working to stop minority and college-aged voters from voting in an effort to consolidate Republican political control of North Carolina.

Voting rights advocates are watching North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP v.
Patrick Lloyd McCrory to gauge the federal courts' inclination to uphold Fourteenth Amendment claims of liberty and Due Process against incursions by Republican-led states.

North Carolina has a sordid and violent racist history of lynchings, beatings, Jim Crow laws and other liberty-destroying practices aimed at black citizens which leave minority populations particularly vulnerable to voter obstruction efforts.

Now, Latinos and college-aged voters join blacks in being targeted for exclusion from voting by Republican voter obstruction laws in North Carolina.

Anna Baldwin, an attorney with the Voting Section, Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Dept of Justice, argued on June 21 the "cumulative" consequence of numerous North Carolina Republican voter obstruction provisions has both the intent and effect of obstruction of minority and college-aged voters in North Carolina.

Other voting rights attorneys arguing the case, (16-1468), before the federal panel include Penda Hair and Allison Riggs who spoke to the discriminatory intent and effect of North Carolina's voter obstruction law.

Three voting rights cases were ordered consolidated for trial in 2015: North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP v. McCrory; League of Women Voters v. North Carolina and United States of America v. North Carolina.

Earlier this year Republican U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder allowed the North Carolina obstruction laws to take effect.

The federal panel hearing the case is composed of federal judges: Diana Gribbon Motz, James A. Wynn Jr., and Henry F. Floyd.

Wisconsin cases before the federal courts are One Wisconsin Institute v. Nichol (U.S. District Court of the Western District of Wisconsin (Case 15-cv-324)) and Frank v. Walker.

As with North Carolina, Wisconsin Republicans are hostile to minority and college-aged citizens who vote against Republicans.

Voting Rights Advocates: "Unthinkable" DMV Clerks Decide Constitutionality of Voters

If Republicans and Scott Walker get their way, DMV clerks will make the decision on whether 10,000s of Wisconsin citizens get to vote, exercising the clerks' "discretion in a constitutionally sufficient manner." [Frank v. Walker, p.36]

Election law expert, Rick Hasen, says Wisconsin voting right activists make a persuasive case for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the Wisconsin photo voter ID case, Ruthelle Frank v. Scott Walker and League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) of Wisconsin v. Barland.

Hasen notes the timing and disposition of the Wisconsin voting rights case facing the U.S. presidential elections next year, and the five-to-five split of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit pitting Judge Easterbrook's opinion with Judge Richard Posner's.

"This case comes to the Court with an extensive trial record, an exhaustive district court decision, and a pair of diametrically opposed Seventh Circuit opinions by Judges Easterbrook and Posner." [p.11 of Reply Brief]

If the Supreme Court does not grant cert, the GOP-passed bill signed into law by Scott Walker would become effective.

From Wisconsin voting rights activists' Reply Brief filed today:

...The district court identified other problems with the saving construction [by the Wisconsin Supreme Court]. A voter applying for photo ID “must still provide ‘[w]hatever documentation is available which states the person’s name and date of birth,’ and then the [DMV] administrator, in his or her discretion, may accept or reject ‘such extraordinary proof of name and date of birth.’” App. 197a (quoting Wis. Admin. Code § Trans. 102.15(3)(b), (c)). To guide DMV clerks, the Wisconsin Supreme Court offered “this cryptic instruction: ‘the administrator, or his or her designee, shall exercise his or her discretion in a constitutionally sufficient manner.’” Id. (quoting NAAC, 851 N.W.2d at 279). It is unthinkable that the right to vote could depend on the “constitutionally sufficient” exercise of discretion by a DMV clerk. See Louisiana v. United States, 380 U.S. 145, 153 (1965) (voting rights “cannot be obliterated by the use of laws ... which leave the voting fate of a citizen to the passing whim or impulse of an individual registrar”).  [p. 14]

GOP Dirty Tricks Is the Only Way Forward for Scott Walker

Have not read am empirical study but asserting corrupt public officials tend to ally themselves with political groups employing dishonest, illegal and dirty trick seems a truism.

Coming off legal defeats obstructing disfavored citizens from voting, the Republican Party of Wisconsin that used the now-blocked voter ID law as "a mere fig leaf for efforts to disenfranchise voters likely to vote for the political party that does not control the state government," the prediction that dirty tricks including harassment and interference with a voters' effort to vote are coming is the safest bet in politics.

John Peterson has the story.

Richard Posner's Extraordinary Move to Sound the Alarm on GOP Voter Obstruction

Update: Republicans are not so certain about voters; enacting voter obstruction laws wherever they hold a majority, secure in the knowledge that federal Republican judges will reside in the Republican legislatures' "fact-free cocoon in which to lodge the federal judiciary." (Posner, Frank v. Walker; p. 26)
 ---
"Posner's dissent includes a devastating response to virtually every false and/or disingenuous rightwing argument/talking point ever put forth in support of Photo ID voting restrictions, describing them as "a mere fig leaf for efforts to disenfranchise voters likely to vote for the political party that does not control the state government." (Brad Friedman)
---
On the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit known for its intellectual bulk, judges such as Easterbrook, Wood and Posner stand out.

What makes the public intellectual Richard Posner stand out more is this academic appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1981 has grown as a jurist, and now stands as a bulwark against the oppression the judiciary can inflict upon American citizens.

Posner as a sitting judge has taken the extraordinary step of requesting a rehearing on behalf of the five judges dissenting from Judge Easterbrook’s appalling opinion in Frank v. Walker.

The rehearing failed five-to-five.

The October 10 dissent authored by Posner is scathing and is certain to be noted when voting rights advocates take their consolidated cases to the US Supreme Court where a granting of cert is expected within 90 days.

Notes Posner:

The Practitioner’s Handbook for Appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit states that 'en banc rehearing is authorized without a party’s invitation. A member of the court may ask for a vote on whether to rehear a case en banc.' I asked for a vote on whether to rehear the appeals en banc. The judges have voted, the vote was a 5 to 5 tie, and as a result rehearing en banc has been denied. We—the five who voted to grant rehearing en banc—believe that the decision to allow the panel’s opinion reversing the district court to stand, without consideration of the case by the full court, is a serious mistake.

Posner presents myriad arguments eviscerating the Easterbrook opinion, and as an example notes one bizarre element in Easterbrook's opinion that dismissed social scientific evidence introduced at federal trial last year because the evidence was published in the Harvard Law Review, a fact noted earlier this week by Rick Hasen.

Easterbrook refers to Judge Lynn Adelman, writing in his decision and order issuing a permanent injunction on April 29, 2014:

[O]ne of the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses, Barry Burden, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, testified that the available empirical evidence indicates that photo ID requirements have no effect on confidence or trust in the electoral process. He described a study conducted by Stephen Ansolabehere and Nathaniel Persily and published in the Harvard Law Review which looked at the relationship between photo ID laws and voter confidence in the electoral process. See Stephen Ansolabehere and Nathaniel Persily, Vote Fraud in the Eye of the Beholder: The Role of Public Opinion in the Challenge to Voter Identification Requirements,121 Harv. L. Rev. 1737, 1756 (2008). Burden explained that this study employed multivariate analysis of survey data and found “zero relationship” between voter ID laws and a person’s level of trust or confidence in the electoral process. (p.18)

No relationship between voter ID laws and public confidence, the main argument advanced by Republicans in defense of their voter obstruction project after the occurrence of in-person voter fraud assertions by the Wisconsin DoJ were conceded not to exist during the 2013 trial in federal court.

This study is dismissed by Easterbrook.

Writes Posner:

"The panel opinion dismisses the Ansolabehere and Persily article on the ground that because it was published in the Harvard Law Review, it was not peer-reviewed. So much for law reviews. (And what about Supreme Court opinions? They’re not peer-reviewed either.)"

Posner goes on, as careful as Easterbrook is reckless in Easterbrook's "fact-free cocoon."

Concludes Posner:

"To conclude, the case against a law requiring a photo ID as a condition of a registered voter’s being permitted to vote that is as strict as Wisconsin’s law is compelling. The law should be invalidated; at the very least, with the court split evenly in so important a case and the panel opinion so riven with weaknesses, the case should be reheard en banc."

No-Voter ID Ruling Is Bodyshot to Scott Walker, Win for Wisconsin Voters

NO VOTER ID NEEDED to VOTE

Update II: Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen won't clarify statement asserting Wisconsin will "have voter ID on election day," (Hall, Wisconsin State Journal) mostly likely because the corrupt partisan is already bordering on the edge of a process for a contempt citation.

Update: Despite the six-to-three decision by the US Supreme Court blocking voter ID in Wisconsin, Wisconsin's corrupt attorney general, J.B. Van Hollen, says "We will be exploring alternatives to address the Court's concern and have voter ID on election day." (Bolin, WKOW) One wonders if Van Hollen actually read the Court's order reinstating the "permanent injunction" of Wisconsin's photo voter ID law.
---
Constitutional scholars and voting rights attorneys contacted the last few weeks described the Sept. 12 order (and the supporting appellate opinions) reinstating (for 27 days it turns out) Wisconsin's photo voter ID law as disingenuous, unconscionable and unconstitutional.

The legal case against courts' changing election law close to (indeed after Wisconsin's election had begun) is a "no-brainer" (Hasen) and air-tight.

So why would Scott Walker and Wisconsin Attorney General go to extraordinary lengths to get a judicial imprimatur to implement the Voter ID law after our election had begun?

Because, as Scott Walker through Van Hollen's DoJ, conceded in the federal trial last year some 300,000 Wisconsin citizens lack the restrictive range of photo voter IDs needed to vote.

Enough of those 300,000 voters don't vote and Scott Walker wins reelection.

Walker and the Republicans likely will not pay a price for blocking registered voters from voting, unless the targeted voters follow the advice of a friend from Door county: Never give up.

Most people are not students of constitutional rights and winning constitutional rights from the majority has always been a struggle; Republicans are hostile to the civil rights movement, and this writer has seen the reaction of white citizens to the sight of a black man voting: Distaste and hostility.

Wisconsin election bureaucracies are too passive and timid to stand up and state the facts about the barriers imposed against voters, to advocate for voters.

Judge Frank Easterbrook of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has shown his true colors, and made up facts out of whole cloth in his deplorable work on behalf of the Republican Party in his hastily released opinion earlier this week.

A man of Easterbrook's gifts employs them for corrupt purposes, unforgivable.

Rick Hasen cautions this morning that Wisconsin should not be too excited that the Court "did the right thing now in the Wisconsin case. But don’t expect them to continue doing the right thing. The Chief [John Roberts] and Justice Kennedy will very likely be with today’s Wisconsin dissenters on the merits down the line."

There is no expectation that privileged elites will keep doing the right thing, and there never has been.
---
For more reaction, here are comments from the ACLU and the Advancement Project, working for the many plaintiffs in Ruthelle Frank v. Scott Walker.

From Dale Ho, director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project: "Today's order puts the brakes on the last-minute disruption and voter chaos created by this law going into effect so close to the election. It will help safeguard the vote for thousands of Wisconsinites as this case makes its way through the courts."

Advancement Project Senior Attorney and Director of Voter Protection, Katherine Culliton-González. - See more at: http://www.advancementproject.org/news/entry/wisconsin-voter-id-law-halted-as-supreme-court-blocks-appeals-court-order#sthash.Xq8O3DBV.dpuf

From Advancement Project Senior Attorney and Director of Voter Protection, Katherine Culliton-González: "While there is zero evidence of voter fraud, Wisconsin’s voter ID law would have risked disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of registered voters if it were allowed to take effect. The Supreme Court was absolutely correct in refusing to fast-track restricting access to the ballot in the upcoming election. Voting is the one time when we are all equal. Whether you’re young or old, rich or poor, Black, White, Latino, Asian or Native American – when we vote, we all have the same say. But this is not the end of the fight. We will keep working to ensure that this law is permanently enjoined, so that all voters can continue to have a voice in our democracy."

Advancement Project Senior Attorney and Director of Voter Protection, Katherine Culliton-González. - See more at: http://www.advancementproject.org/news/entry/wisconsin-voter-id-law-halted-as-supreme-court-blocks-appeals-court-order#sthash.Xq8O3DBV.dpuf

Corrupt AG Van Hollen Wants High Court to Reinstate Voter Obstruction Law

The Blind Leading the Blind - Brueghel

Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen (R) is betting the Wisconsin corporate media will not hammer the Republican Party for Van Hollen's petition to the Wisconsin Supreme Court to stay the two injunctions against the GOP's unconstitutional voter ID law.

It's a safe bet for Van Hollen and the GOP to make.

Denying the fundamental freedom to vote does not bring a high political price, not from the corporate media.

Media

So, we get a Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel piece citing "supporters" (not mentioning supporters are Republicans and Tea Partiers) who point out that the new ID requirement did not produce problems in the one election in which it was operative.

Omitted are the facts that this February 21 election was the Spring primary election, with no statewide races on the ballot, very low turn-out, and an election in which the state Governmental Accountability Board (GAB) did not record the turn-out as only local races were on the ballot, as the GAB confirmed.

"The G.A.B. did not calculate statewide voter turnout for the February 2012 nonpartisan primary because there were no statewide races on the ballot – just local races," e-mailed Reid Magney, public information officer of the Wisconsin GAB.

Consequently, the February election featured turn-outs in the single digits, as mostly die-hard voters cast their votes.

This is the election the GOP argues is evidence that Voter IDs do not obstruct voters. Another GOP talking point is presented by the media to the public unchallenged.

In any event, people were stopped from voting in February such as 84-year-old Ruthell Frank of Brokaw, now a co-plaintiff in the federal case, Frank v. Walker, (Case 11cv1128), U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

Another example of lame media coverage, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel piece omits that the voter ID law was passed in the legislature with only GOP votes, no dissenting GOP votes, no Democratic votes, and that the GOP is pursuing similar voter ID laws in states in which the GOP controls the legislature and governor's office.

Political Culture

And of course the Republican and Tea Parties are openly hostile to the right to vote and pay no discernible price for their efforts at stopping citizens from voting.

In March, Van Hollen admitted that Wisconsin voters would be disfranchised by the GOP's voter ID law, so now his petition to make the law operative (staying the two injunctions) before the November election would in a healthy political culture constitute a high scandal against democracy.

We don't live in a healthy democracy.

United Wisconsin's Lisa Subeck slammed Van Hollen's move:

“Putting politics ahead of the law he is sworn to uphold, Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen is once again moving to disenfranchise as many as 300,000 Wisconsin voters who lack photo ID. Despite two previous court injunctions permanently striking down Wisconsin’s unnecessary and oppressive Voter ID law, today Van Hollen has requested that the Wisconsin Supreme Court immediately lift the orders that prevent the law’s enactment.

Van Hollen’s flagrantly political move comes just a few short months before the November Presidential election. The timing makes his intentions clear. With the selection of Paul Ryan as a vice presidential candidate, Wisconsin is set to be a crucial battleground in the race for President, and Van Hollen is attempting to disenfranchise the hundreds of thousands of seniors, students, minority, and low-income citizens who will be disproportionately impacted by this law. Van Hollen’s latest ploy reeks of political gamesmanship, and the Wisconsin Supreme Court should reject it outright.”

Still, Van Hollen's petition is a stretch. And his effort will likely be refused by the Supreme Court. Too naked a corrupt, partisan exercise even in this unhealthy democracy.

Information on the two state cases, League of Women Voters of Wisconsin v. Walker (Case 11CV4669) and Milwaukee Branch of the NAACP v. Walker (Case 11CV5492) are linked above.

How about Wisconsin Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R)? He championed the 2006 renewal of the Voting Rights Act, passed to stop state voter obstruction efforts.

No, word from Sensenbrenner's office is he would have no comment anymore on state voter obstruction efforts like Wisconsin's.

Two federal trials on the Wisconsin Voter ID law are set for the Spring 2013.

One Wisconsin Now, a civil rights group, released the following:

One Wisconsin Now Executive Director Scot Ross released the following statements upon news Republican Attorney General JB Van Hollen would petition the state Supreme Court to overturn, in advance of the November elections, Circuit Court rulings that the state’s anti-democratic voter identification bill is unconstitutional.

"JB Van Hollen has spent years, and untold tax dollars, unsuccessfully chasing phantom vote impropriety allegations to justify his support for disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of legal voters. He’s either lying about rampant “voter fraud” or he is incompetent at his job. Van Hollen announced he was going to do this at a Romney-Ryan campaign rally and now he’s using his taxpayer financed office to convince the partisan, conservative Supreme Court majority to do the political thing, not the right thing."

In 2008 as GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain’s state chair, in coordination with the Republican Party, he used his office to try to purge hundreds of thousands of legal voters from the rolls. And after a six-year partisan witchhunt, Van Hollen has found no instances of voter impropriety that would have been thwarted by voter identification.

Earlier this summer, it was revealed the Republican National Committee was behind anonymous legal efforts to enact the law. A complaint related to state Rep. Robin Vos (R-Burlington) and his participation in the suit, filed by One Wisconsin Now, is before the state’s Government Accountability Board.

Study: 63,000 eligible voters would be blocked by GOP voter obstruction law

Update: In a continuing and blatant lie, GOP still crying, "voter fraud." This time is in John Lehman (D)-Sen. Van Wanggaard (R) recount. Corporate media plays dumb again; media may not be pretending.

In one county alone.

Plaintiffs in Frank v. Walker, (Case No 2.11-cv-1128), challenging the GOP voter ID act in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin have released social scientific research concluding that Latino and African American eligible voters in Milwaukee County are disproportionally likely not to have Republican-approved voter IDs.

The social scientific findings in the study specifically researching the February 2012 Wisconsin primary present evidence in the federal challenge bolstering the plaintiffs' case in light of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (No 07-21) (2008) upholding an Indiana voter ID law.

The landmark Crawford case is seen by civil rights experts as compelling "future challenges to voter laws [to] be filed with respect to the application of a specific law—after its controversial mandates are already applied in an election," as noted by the Brennan Center, a leading civil rights organization. [See also Justin Levitt's The Truth About Voter Fraud.]

The Crawford case featured a challenge to Indiana's law as unconstitutional on its face, a high legal hurdle that many observers see as a tactical mistake in retrospect as one rationale behind the Crawford ruling is lack people disenfranchised presented in the court record.

With a mountain of evidence demonstrating disenfranchisement, the Frank plaintiffs may end up in the U.S. Supreme Court amid national and state Republican determination to obstruct non-Republican voting citizens.

For more information see Out in the Cold at Age 84: Wisconsin's Ruthelle Frank Fights for Her Right to Vote and the Frank et al v. Walker complaint.
---
From the Pew Center on the States

The battle over voter ID continues, and in Wisconsin, it is being fought in the courtroom. Two (state) judges recently blocked the state’s law requiring photo ID at the polls from taking effect.

Plaintiffs opposing the law in federal court retained researchers to examine the rates of possession of accepted photo ID among the voting eligible population (VEP) and registered voters in Milwaukee County, the state’s most populous county.

Based on survey results, 9.5 percent of the county’s VEP—slightly more than 63,000 eligible voters—and 8.7 percent of registered voters were found to lack the proper ID.

The findings also revealed the rates of inadequate identification were significantly higher than the countywide figure among minorities but lower among white voters:

• 14.9 percent of eligible and 11.3 percent of registered Latinos
• 13.2 percent of eligible and 15.3 percent of registered African-Americans
• 7.4 of eligible and 6.0 percent of registered Whites

The study concludes in part:

....Wisconsin('s) voter ID law, which requires individual to possess an accepted form of photo ID before being granted access to a ballot, disproportionately affects racial and ethnic minorities, the elderly, an those of low socio-economic status. (Barreto, Sanchez. p. 32)

Scott Walker slanders League of Women Voters, Marine and Others

Not good enough to vote, says Scott Walker

It would be nice to read that Scott Walker is accusing civil rights, good government groups and veterans of conspiring to commit voter fraud, and at least be surprised.

Nothing Scott Walker does comes as a surprise anymore.

John Nichols notes Scott Walker says the reason plaintiffs went to court against the Republican Party to secure their right to vote is to perpetuate fraud. Writes Nichols:

Yet Gov. Walker now says: 'I’ve always thought in this state, close elections, presidential elections, it means you probably have to win with at least 53 percent of the vote to account for fraud. One or two points, potentially. ... That’s enough to change the outcome of the election. ... Absolutely. I mean there’s no question why they went to court and fought (to undo) voter ID.'

No evidence cited by Walker. Just slandering Wisconsin citizens, including Marine Ricky Tyrone Lewis who is made of cloth radically different than that which comprises Scott Walker.

Here is a partial list of the plaintiffs [at right of this page] who are challenging the GOP anti-voter impersonation law as unconstitutional:

The League of Women Voters, Common Cause, the NAACP, Voces de la Frontera, Ricky Tyrone Lewis (Marine Corps veteran), 84-year-old Ruthelle Frank, League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) of Wisconsin; Crose Lutheran Church; Milwaukee Area Labor Council, AFL-CIO; and Wisconsin League of Young Voters Education Fund

Wisconsin Judge David Flanagan writes in enjoining the GOP obstruction law as unconstitutional:

[F]orty uncontested affidavits offer a picture of carousel visits to government offices, delay, dysfunctional computer systems, misinformation and significant investment of time to avoid being turned away at the ballot box. This is burdensome, all the more for the elderly and the disabled. . . . Mr. Ricky Tyrone Lewis is 58 years old, a Marine Corps Veteran and a lifelong Milwaukee resident. He was able to offer proof of his honorable discharge but Milwaukee County has been unable to find the record of his birth so he cannot obtain a voter ID card. Ms. Ruthelle Frank, now 84, is a lifelong resident of Brokaw, Wisconsin and a member of her town board since 1996. She has voted in every election over the past 64 years but she does not have a voter ID card. She located her birth certificate but found that her name was misspelled. She was advised to obtain a certified copy of the incorrect birth certificate and try to use that to obtain a voter ID card. . . .


The plaintiffs do not dispute, and the court certainly accepts fully the value of maintaining the accuracy and security of the ballot process. At this point, however, the record is uncontested that recent investigations of vote irregularities, both in the City of Milwaukee and by the Attorney General have produced extremely little evidence of fraud and that which has been uncovered, improper use of absentee ballots and unqualified voters, would not have been prevented by the photo identification requirements of Act 23.

US Justice Department to monitor Tuesday's election in Wisconsin

Ruthelle Frank of Brokaw, Wisconsin fights for
her right to vote against Scott Walker
- Image from the Brad Blog

Update: Wisconsin Supreme Court refuses to take up voter ID cases (April 16, 2012)

If the four GOP justices on the Wisconsin Supreme Court overturn a century of precedent, and the Wisconsin Constitution in voting to uphold the GOP voter ID-voter impersonation bill in Wisconsin, the GOP voter obstruction project still has two federal civil rights cases with which to contend in our state.

The AP reports today that the U.S. Justice Department will monitor Tuesday's election in Wisconsin, "to ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and other federal voting rights laws," in Milwaukee.

The presense of the U.S. Justice Department may very well result in more empirical data that could be used in the two federal cases listed below.

Ruthelle Frank, a co-plaintiff in Frank v. Walker, (Case 11cv1128), U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, was disenfranchised in the February 21 Spring Primary election, missing voting for the first time in 60 years.

She is happy about the U.S. Justice Department invovlement, but remains upset about the voter id law.

As the Voter ID law is now under a permanent injunction pending it appeal to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Ms. Frank of Brokaw, Wisconsin was able to cast her vote absentee in the April 3 Spring and Wisconsin Presidential Preference Election.

Reached by phone this afternoon, Frank said she is optimistic but is still in a fighting mood because of this "disgrace," to "democracy."

"You live in the same house for 83 years, in the same place, and you haven't got a right to vote because of this [voter id] law; it's a little dumb," said Ms. Frank. "I wasn't going to take 'no' for an answer."

Frank notes her story would not likely have gotten out were it not for the efforts of journalist, Robert Mentzer last year who broke the story in the Wausau Daily Herald. "I called up Bob Mentzer of the Wausau Daily Herald and told him what was going on; and he just said, 'he's driving over,'" said Frank in March.

Wisconsin federal court cases

• Frank v. Walker, (Case 11cv1128), U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin 
• Jones et al v. Jones v. Deininger et al (Case 2:12-cv-00185), U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin 

Wisconsin State Cases

• League of Women Voters of Wisconsin v. Walker (Case 11CV4669) - permanent injunction
• Milwaukee Branch of the NAACP v. Walker (Case 11CV5492) - temporary injunction; trial on permanent injunction scheduled for April 16

Wisconsin Constitution, Article III, Section 1
"Every United States citizen age 18 or older who is a resident of an election district in this state is a qualified elector of that district."

Ruthelle Frank Reacts to Recent Voting Rights Developments

Ruthelle Frank of Brokaw, Wisconsin fights for
her right to vote against Scott Walker
- Image from the Brad Blog

Ruthelle Frank missed voting for the first time in 60 years last month.

Ms. Frank was unable to legally vote in the February 21 Spring Primary election, disenfranchised from voting in her local school board election in Brokaw, Wisconsin.

Frank is a co-plaintiff who filed suit in federal court to block Scott Walker's voter ID law saying it unconstitutionally burdens the rights of senior citizens, minorities, homeless veterans and others from voting. [Frank v. Walker, 11cv1128, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin (Milwaukee)]

She is a 84-year-old woman living in Brokaw [and is a member of the Brokaw Village Board] and has been voting since 1948, but would have to pay up to $200 to get a Wisconsin GOP-approved ID.
 
Reached by phone Friday morning, Ms. Frank offered her thoughts on recent developments in the GOP voter obstruction fights.
 
"I have been living here 83 years; everybody knows me. We [Brokaw] have 194 people. I maybe could have voted last month illegally," Frank said. "I wasn't allowed to vote legally though, because I didn't have a valid Wisconsin ID. I didn't vote."
 
As civil rights activists today march from Selma to Montgomery in protest of Alabama's voter ID and anti-immigration laws, Ms. Frank keeps up the fight in Wisconsin.

"My motto is: You don't use what you have, you lose it. But I have never seen treatment like this, what is going on," said Frank. "I'm fighting for everyone who has lost his [voting] rights. This isn't right, it's just plain crazy. Just because we're old, and can't get around like we're young doesn't mean we're stupid and can't think and shouldn't be able to vote."

Asked about GOP criticism of Dane County Judge David Flanagan's temporary injunction barring implementation of the voter ID law while having signed a recall Walker petition, Frank said, "as far as I'm concerned, he has an opinion about Scott Walker and he [Flanagan] has to live his own life, you're not supposed to speak what you believe in?"

Frank whose story was broken by Robert Mentzer last year in the Wausau Daily Herald, sang the praises of old-time journalism, singling out Mentzer.

"I called up Bob Mentzer of the Wausau Daily Herald and told him what was going on; and he just said, 'he's driving over,'" said Frank.

As the state and federal law suits against voter ID laws across the country continue, Frank said she is optimistic and ready for the fight.

"We're going to make it, we're are not going to crawl under a rock. I'm talked to people from California, Washington and even had a relative in Florida call me after seeing me on [Rachel Maddow]. Keep writing and thank you for spreading the story," Frank said.

The GOP Hates People with Whom They Disagree Casting Votes

Ruhelle Frank of Brokaw, Wisconsin fights for her right
to vote in federal court against Scott Walker.
Because of the state’s new voter ID law,
2012 will be the first year Frank can’t vote.

Days after the first election under Wisconsin's new voter ID law Tuesday, a federal complaint need not make a facial (on its face) challenge to Wisconsin's voter obstruction, stop-nonexistent-voter-impersonation-nonsense statute. See the Brennan Center's: "future (federal) challenges to voter laws must be filed with respect to the application of a specific law—after its controversial mandates are already applied in an election."

But it won't mater.

The Wisconsin ID law is so blatantly unconstitutional that I think even the corrupt 4-3 majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court will have to enjoin the law as voting in Wisconsin is extremely well-protected under Wisconsin Constitutional law, and upholding the law would cause GOP justices to look even more foolish than they do now.

So, in both state and federal court, we are looking good.

• In other developments,
•  Brad Friedman chronicles some early reactions from users' point of view of the GOP voter obstruction system in practice.
• The Racine Journal Times reports: "69-year old veteran Gil Paar was shocked when poll workers told him his photo I.D. from the V.A. wasn’t on the accepted list."
•  Eric Kleefeld's Wisconsin Veteran Irate at Voter ID Law: ‘What The F*ck Did I Go in For?’ offers a nice wrap-up.
• And my A Voter ID Reality Overlooked provides background
• Worth a quick look from 2011: Wisconsin Official Instructs Staff Not To Mention Free IDs for Voting

I worked the polls Tuesday as an election inspector, and I had to reject an Army Reserve ID that did not include an expiration date.

- Before getting into revealing how foolish Republicans are on this issue, note that before you vote, you have to register to vote; see Wisconsin Voter Registration Application. To register to vote you need to establish who you are, and where you are (residency) with government and employee IDs, leases, utility bills, bank statements, etc; and if you have a driver’s license you need to register with your driver’s licence. In addition, you need to sign the voter reg. form stating that you are aware that falsification of any information is a Class 1 felony in Wisconsin. That’s before you can vote. … Then, you have to present a GOP-approved ID that Republicans say, is intended to stop rampant voter impersonation at the polls. Not one case of voter impersonation in Wisconsin has been prosecuted going back decades. -

One women left Tuesday before she voted because she felt the registration process was too intrusive, and it is. She had been purged from the voting rolls through a clerical error and so had to re-register.

A election inspector colleague, a Republican, said he didn't believe college and tech students, the elderly and black voters in Milwaukee were denied the right to vote.

I told him about a research report by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Employment and Training Institute showing that over 177,000 elderly persons in Wisconsin aged 65 and older do not possess a driver's license or state photo identification.

"No," he said. They must have IDs to receive "their Social Securty checks," he said triumphantly.

Tell that to 96-year-old Dorothy Cooper and 86-year-old Darwin Spinks (ThinkProgress).

Factually incorrect, but never use facts and logic in speaking to die-hard Republicans—it's not their thing. Should have ignored him.

Ruthelle Frank, 16 co-plaintiffs and the ACLU are filing suit in federal court to block the law saying it unconstitutionally burdens the rights of senior citizens, minorities, homeless veterans and others from voting. [See Frank v. Walker, 11cv1128, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin (Milwaukee)]

Finally, another federal lawsuit against Wisconsin's new voter identification law by the Advancement Project was filed Thursday on behalf of several groups who say it discriminates against African-Americans and Latinos. ... three other lawsuits are all pending. The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin and the Milwaukee branch of the NAACP filed a lawsuit each in Dane County Circuit Court. The American Civil Liberties Union have also filed a federal lawsuit. AP

In closing, this question has not been anwsered: Why didn't Scott Walker get together in 2011 with the League of Women Voters, civil rights groups and other communites of interests and say: We're crafting a Voter ID bill, but we do not want legal voters to be stopped from voting. What can we do stop impersonation at the polls while ensuring the legal voter reflects the uncontroversial Wisconsin constituional doctrine:

"Every one having the constitutional qualifications then, may to go the polls, vested with this franchise, of which no statutory condition precedent can deprive him, because the [Wisconsin] constitution makes him, by force of his present qualifications, a qualified voter at such election."
- [Wis. Const, article III, section 1] Wood v. Baker, 38 Wis. 71: (August 1875)] Wisc. - Wisconsin Supreme Court

84-Year-Old Wisconsin Woman Takes on Scott Walker in Voting Rights Suit

Ruthelle Frank of Brokaw, Wisconsin fights for
her right to vote in federal court against Scott Walker

As State Sen. Jim Holperin (D-Eagle River) proposed legislation stating birth records should be free if needed for a voter I.D. in Wisconsin, an 84-Year-Old woman [and member of the Brokaw, Wisconsin Village Board], who has been voting since 1948, would have to pay up to $200 to vote in the next election under Scott Walker's voter obstruction law in Wisconsin.

Forget it, Scott Walker.

So, Ms. Frank, 16 co-plaintiffs and the ACLU are filing suit in federal court to block the law saying it unconstitutionally burdens the rights of senior citizens, minorities, homeless veterans and others from voting. [See Frank v. Walker, 11cv1128, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin (Milwaukee)]

Ms. Frank is asking the Court to find the Voter ID law unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and violative of the Twenty-Fourth Amendment outlawing payment of a poll tax as a precondition to vote.

By Joe Sherman at the ACLU

Out in the Cold at Age 84: Wisconsin’s Ruthelle Frank Fights for Her Right to Vote

Ruthelle Frank, a resident of Brokaw, Wisconsin since her birth in 1927, has none of the accepted forms of photo ID under Wisconsin’s photo ID law which goes into effect at the February primary election. In order to get a state ID card, she needs to prove citizenship, but since she was born at home, she has never had a birth certificate. The state Register of Deeds, however, does have a record of her birth and can produce a birth certificate at a $20 cost. There’s one problem though — her maiden name (Wedepohl) is misspelled in the record. That record can only be amended by legal proceeding, and the combined fees will run Ruthelle potentially upwards of $200. The state will not waive any of these fees, and under the new law, if she cannot obtain a state ID card, Ruthelle will be sent away from the polls.

If you lost all your IDs and personal documents in a fire today, could you prove who you are? What if there was an election coming up and your state required you to present photo ID in order to vote? Could you figure it out in time? Do you know where to go? What forms and documents you need? Do you have the time and money to get it all done?

In Wisconsin, it takes at least 3 types of proof to get a state ID card that can be used to vote. For most people, the combination of required documents is a certified copy of a birth certificate, a Social Security Card, and some proof of residency like a utility bill or government mail. But it takes ID to get ID. And, in some cases, it takes (A) ID and/or money to (B) get the ID required to (C) get the ID you actually need to vote. This obstacle course is leaving eligible voters discouraged and disenfranchised.

Some photo ID proponents have repeatedly argued that the only people who lack photo ID are those who don’t vote anyway. False. Ruthelle, a sitting member of her village board, has voted in every election since 1948, the year in which Truman signed the Marshall Plan and NYC subway fares jumped from 5 to 10 cents. She is a longstanding participant in this democracy. And sadly, her story is in no way unique — every day, eligible voters are finding out that, under current law, they will not be able to vote in 2012 or will face numerous and significant hurdles on the road to making their voice heard. At age 84, Ruthelle is now serving as the lead plaintiff in the ACLU’s constitutional challenge to Wisconsin’s photo ID law. She’s fighting back because she believes no person should have to pay a cent or pass a bureaucracy-navigation test in order to vote. The U.S. Constitution agrees with her.

Ruthelle’s disfranchisement is horrifically unjust, but she’s actually better prepared to deal with this than many voters without accepted photo ID, who are disproportionately low-income, elderly, and/or minority, and disproportionately marginalized. Despite Ruthelle’s physical disability (she is paralyzed on the left side of her body), she has family that can assist her, savings, education, and familiarity with both the electoral process and local government. Consider the eligible Wisconsin voter with few contacts, low or no income or savings, and much less education. Is that person any less a citizen of this country? That voter is at risk of losing his/her voice in Wisconsin and everywhere in the U.S. that photo ID laws have been enacted. But maybe you’d reply that most people have photo ID in America. Well, the Ruthelle Franks of the world want you to know that “most people” isn’t a democracy.

Read more on the fight against voter suppression.

84-Year-Old Wisconsin Woman May Need $200 to Cast Legal Vote

Update: State Senator Jim Holperin (D-Eagle River): Birth record free if needed for voter I.D.; Holperin legislation says

Obstructing an 84-Year-Old Wisconsin Woman?

Jim Crowing African Americans in Milwaukee County?

Really?

Hey, Republican Party, is this what you really want to be in our country?

What's next, guys?

Armed guards at the polls? I mean Ms. Frank does look pretty dangerous.

And to the Civil Rights division of the U.S. Department of Justice, you know: Get off your ass and enforce - I don't know - civil rights?

Via Tanya Somanader at ThinkProgress, and Brad Friedman

Brokaw, Wisconsin - Population 310

For 63 years, Brokaw, Wisconsin [Northern Wisconsin, population-310] native Ruthelle Frank went to the polls to vote. Though paralyzed on her left side since birth, the 84-year-old “fiery woman” voted in every election since 1948 and even got elected herself as a member of the Brokaw Village Board. But because of the state’s new voter ID law, 2012 will be the first year Frank can’t vote. Born after a difficult birth at her home in 1927, Frank never received an official birth certificate. Her mother recorded it in her family Bible and Frank has a certification of baptism from a few months later, along with a Social Security card, a Medicare statement, and a checkbook. But without the official document, she can’t secure the state ID card that the new law requires to vote next year.“It’s really crazy,” she added. “I’ve got all this proof. You mean to tell me that I’m not a U.S. citizen?” But state officials have informed Frank that, because the state Register of Deeds does have a record of her birth, they can issue her a new birth certificate — for a fee. And because of a spelling error, that fee may be as high as $200

Add Frank's to the stories of 96-year old Dorothy Cooper in TN who has voted in every election since woman were granted the right to vote, but who may longer be able to cast her vote on Election Day next year, and 86-year old WWII veteran Darwin Sparks in the same state; along with hundreds of thousands of others who are likely to find themselves unable to cast their legal vote on Election Day next year thanks to new voter suppression laws implemented in about a dozen states by GOP legislatures and governor's since they took control in 2010.

In Wisconsin, where "an estimated 177,399 Wisconsin residents 65 and older do not have a driver’s license or state photo ID — 23 percent of that population", and where Frank may have to pay as much as $200 to cast her legal vote under the GOP's new anti-democratic and anti-Democratic polling place Photo ID restrictions, the non-partisan League of Women Voters has filed suit charging the law to be in violation of the state's constitution, as The BRAD BLOG detailed in October. That case is still pending.