According to a report from Ohio today, a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has asked the ACORN-tainted Ohio Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, to investigation ACORN's voter registration work in the state.
“U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan has formally asked Ohio's secretary of state to look into allegations that ACORN had at least a preliminary plan to back Democrat candidates in key Ohio congressional races in 2008.”
The political plan was described in an October article as “having been scaled back,” and of course, ACORN denied any partisan activity.
“But to some, ACORN's early 13-page plan for the 2008 election reinforces what critics always assumed: The group's goal was never nonpartisan. The political plan and other ACORN documents show that the group was interested not just in helping presidential candidate Barack Obama, whom it urged its members to support, according to post-election Federal Election Commission reports. ACORN also was interested in Congress and the Ohio Statehouse.
"There's no question that ACORN strategized to figure out how its election efforts could maximize the benefit for selected Democratic candidates in the most competitive races," U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa of California told The Plain Dealer. “
An illuminating fact not mentioned in either article is that ACORN prepared political plans for several key battleground states in 2006 and again during the 2007-08 election cycle. As evidenced by the draft plans developed in the Spring of 2006 by the Strategic Writing and Research Department (SWORD) of ACORN Political Operations, these plans were aimed at electing “progressives” and in some cases broke down the Congressional districts by race for maximum targeting. SWORD, which was staffed by Project Vote staff, including myself, worked with ACORN head organizers in FL, MD, MI, MN, OH, PA, and RI to create local documents for the ACORN field staff to implement and present to funders and/or various partner organizations.
A copy of the Maryland and Colorado draft plans from 2006 are available online. Key parts of the plans are the contact and Congressional district sections at the end. For example, in the Maryland plan, it calls for mailings and face to face contact. A screen shot of the type of mailing Marylanders received is shown below.
ACORN used Project Vote staff and computers to create the PowerPoint “Campaign for a New Congress." This PowerPoint was aimed at swaying the Congressional election in Maryland from Albert Wynn to ACORN ally Donna Edwards. Using the final political plan, ACORN canvassed voters and mailed pieces through its affiliate Communities Voting Together.
Communities Voting Together has the same address as the Project Vote office in DC and its address on the screen shot above is the same Elysian Fields address where hundreds of other ACORN entities "reside.
As a 527 group, Communities Voting Together paid over 150,000 to Citizen's Services Inc, and contributed to Wade Rathke's Chief Organizer Fund. Jeff Robinson is listed as the contact for Communities Voting Together and some may remembered Robinson from the 2008 elections (emphasis mine):
"In fact, the Obama campaign paid an ACORN-run organization more than $800,000. In Federal Election Commission required filings, the Obama campaign reported that this money was paid for polling, advance work and event staging. After watchdog scrutiny called this claim into question, the Obama campaign revised its filing and acknowledged that CSI was paid for “get-out-the-vote” projects.
CSI Executive Vice President Jeff Robinson last August told Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reporter David M. Brown that CSI is a 'separate organization entirely' from ACORN. But as Brown reported, CSI has the same office address as ACORN’s national headquarters, ACORN itself described CSI in 2006 as its 'campaign services entity.' Coincidentally, the widely identified “national deputy political director for campaigns and elections” for ACORN is...Jeff Robinson."
ACORN's shell corporations make it easy for a political plan to become a partisan voter registration drive facilitated by thin veiled “partnerships.” The filing reports of Communities Voting Together raise a number of questions, including whether the misspelling of the name on the filing was intentional. The payments to various ACORN entities should give any astute lawmaker pause.
ACORN has been able to claim that it never worked in some recent elections including NY-23, but as this screen shoot illustrates, Communities Voting together was mailing and passing out door knockers in 2006 for Corzine in New Jersey (without a mention of ACORN).
Will ACORN backed officials like Jennifer Brunner (who has her eye on a Senate seat) and officials in Maryland and Colorado take notices of these obvious attempts to elect Democrats, or will they continue to turn a blind eye to ACORN in order to save themselves?
Media Matters continues to try to provide cover for the public flogging ACORN has received as a result of investigative videos which showed ACORN employees giving advice on a number of illegal activities including human trafficking, child prostitution, bank fraud, illegal immigration and tax evasion. Meanwhile, the mainstream media has largely ignored a growing scandal that cannot be contained: ACORN is reportedly closing offices across the country, including the site of the DC undercover videotape..
Also, today another damning ACORN tape was released at Big Government. This time an ACORN member openly confessed to ACORN using non-partisan voter registration to secretly produce Obama votes.
Anyone paying attention knows accusations relating to voter registration fraud, illicit partisan activity and other chicanery often have been made against ACORN, with ACORN either denying all or any ACORN fault. In October of 2008, I testified in Pennsylvania regarding the illegal coordination between Barack Obama's Campaign and ACORN:
“A former staffer for Project Vote, a sister organization of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, testified at a hearing in Pennsylvania on Wednesday that the Obama campaign provided the group with a campaign donor list in late 2007 for their fundraising efforts. The former D.C. staffer, Anita Moncrief, said she still has a copy of what she called the 'development plan' she used to help her identify the maxed-out Obama donors for solicitation. The hearing was part of a lawsuit brought by the GOP seeking information and an injunction against certain ACORN activities in Pennsylvania.
“McCain-Palin campaign manager Rick Davis said in a statement, 'We now know that Barack Obama's campaign was working hand-in-glove with an organization reportedly under investigation by the F.B.I. and in more than a dozen states. In addition to funneling $832,000 to ACORN for get-out-the-vote efforts, the Obama campaign and ACORN have been sharing donor lists, encouraging maxed-out Obama donors to contribute to this unethical organization.'" (emphasis mine).”
The member caught on tape publicized by Big Government is another in a long line of “bad apples” for ACORN. As it becomes harder to hide behind poor minorities, ACORN appears to be on the run. Unfortunately, they are running to the White House. There Barack Obama, ACORN's “inside man,” seems poised to protect ACORN and even strike down its enemies. Andy Stern of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) serves as a close confidant of the President with over 20 visits logged in at the White House (he tops the frequent visitor list). Stern has every reason to expect this sort of access, as he not only funneled many millions of dollars into the Obama campaign, but also aligned with SEIU's sister organization, ACORN, to ensure that Obama was elected.
The screen shot is from an internal ACORN document from 2006. When combined with the admissions of the member, it provides additional proof that ACORN and SEIU - with the help of the Obama presidential campaign - intentionally took government and tax exempt donations through organizations like Project Vote to run a partisan voter registration drive aimed at electing Obama. Both the Federal Elections Commission and the media ignored the Obama donor list that was submitted as evidence in the Pennsylvania case and sworn testimony. But can they ignore the admission of someone saying: “I Am ACORN”?
As President ,Obama has paved the way for ACORN and SEIU to receive stimulus money and ACORN favorites to receive prime appointments to both executive and judicial positions.
Of course, Obama has admitted to limited ties with ACORN. But Americans have witnessed Obama run the country like one big ACORN office and trying to implement ACORN's radical agenda. Apparently being a community organizer is something that - like ACORN - is hard for Obama to shake. In 2001, a group of ACORN protesters broke up a community tenant meeting by shouting the words, “Yes, We Can.” Eight years later, ACORN man Obama rode to victory using the same slogan of those angry protesters.
With so much to lose, lawmakers are concerned about the lengths to which Obama will go to in order to protect ACORN. Congressman Steve King of Iowa released a statement today suggesting that a cover-up may be being executed under the guise of an investigation:
“Bob Bauer has a public record of defending Barack Obama’s relationship with ACORN. Bauer has acted as the agent between Obama and ACORN, and now he will be perfectly positioned to be tasked with erasing the tracks between Obama and ACORN. Bauer’s hiring appears to be a tactical maneuver to strategically defend the White House exactly one week after Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell raided ACORN's national headquarters in New Orleans and seized paper records and computer hard drives that may lead to the White House.”
Congressman King has reason to worry. The Democrat-controlled Congress has given ACORN plenty of time and warning to prepare for these “investigations”. In March of this year Michigan Representative John Conyers backed down from a call to investigate ACORN after several witnesses testified about the 2008 elections and ACORN. Portions of my Pennsylvania testimony regarding ACORN's illegal activities in 2008 were read into the record and hundreds of pages of evidence were submitted by GOP Attorney Heather Heidelbaugh. In explaining his flip flop, Conyers cited “the Powers that be.” As the “Age of Obama” unfolds, it's not hard to guess who "the powers" are.
Obama is willing to make small, symbolic concessions like removing ACORN from the Census, but his Justice Department remains oddly complacent with ACORN. The bailout hungry media covered up the Obama/ACORN story and continue to ignore damaging stories like the IRS dropping ACORN from its list of VITA sites.
Mainstream newspapers and online liberal “news” sources appear content to continue to play the “race card” and paint conservatives as obsessed about ACORN because ACORN purported to help the poor. ACORN may be Teflon as long as Obama is in the White House. Charges of tax evasion, child prostitution, voter registration fraud, illegal immigration, bank fraud, etc. may not stick to ACORN.
With 2010 rapidly approaching, a look at ACORN's cookie cutter statements on its voter programs tells us what ACORN plans for America.
Fortunately, Big Government caught one of those “highly trained” ACORN organizers on tape. How many more "bad apples" does it take before it is generally realized that ACORN itself is rotten to the core?
A number of liberal Democrats today are celebrating Democrat Bill Owens' victory over Conservative Doug Hoffman, but these liberals fail to realize that Conservatives are celebrating too. As Barack Obama meddled in local politics across the nation and poured money into obscure districts, Conservatives built upon the resolve that led to the first Tea Party and culminated last night in a lion's roar directed at the GOP party elite. From RedState emphasis mine:
“First, the GOP now must recognize it will either lose without conservatives or will win with conservatives. In 2008, many conservatives sat home instead of voting for John McCain. Now, in NY-23, conservatives rallied and destroyed the Republican candidate the establishment chose.“
Tea Party patriots are tired of Republicans treating them like children at the kids table. Tired of the “there, there” comments as average Americans question their compromises and suspect partnerships. When Republicans cross the aisle and double cross their constituents on Cap and Trade or health care, regular Americans are expected to tend to their families, pay their taxes and take no notice.
However, that simmering resistance reached a boiling point as Republicans used an old “business as usual trick.”
“Meanwhile, the Republicans keep running 'moderates' who prove to be very useful to the Democrats… which keeps the growth of the State bubbling along at Bush levels. The radical nature of the current Administration makes the idea of 'moderate' compromise laughable. What’s the moderate position on freedom-crushing trillion-dollar health care and environmentalist legislation? They’re okay, as long as the Democrats pinky-swear to keep the cost under $800 billion? That’s the kind of promise no politician could keep, even if it was made in earnest. A moderate Republican is someone who lives in a state of perpetual surprise as he ponders the monthly bills for nanny-state government. What’s the point of electing people who are guaranteed to spend the rest of their political careers complaining about how they’ve been played for fools?”
Last night's victory in NY 23 may be sweet for some Democrats, but Obama is not savoring this victory. Exit polling reveal that most voters who rejected local Democrats still supported the president. How much of that support lies in the administration's strong arm tactics? The White House quickly moves with ACORN-like speed to silence its opponents with cries of racism or extremist labels. On the other side of the spectrum, the White House has used the Treasury Department to buy and to maintain support at the local level.
In New York this arrangement was almost executed flawlessly. With Republicans backing the “white friend” of ACORN's Bertha Lewis and big labor/SEIU backing Owens, Obama and the Democrats were guaranteed a friendly vote and if Scozzafava won, they could tout the unprecedented levels of bipartisanship in the age of Obama. In a bold move to continue the consolidation of power by radical Leftists, Obama invested a billion dollars into one Congressional district and ensured that the seat would become available this year.
Doug Hoffman's candidacy was much bigger than him. It signaled the reemergence of the American citizen as “the ruler of the roost” and both parties have taken notice. Some career politicians find the notion of having to answer to “the people” galling, and continue to undermine the will of the people. However, politicians like representatives Steve King of Iowa, Michele Bachmann of Minnesota and of course, Sarah Palin, are continuing to shake up Washington.
The era of change has arrived and it appears that opportunistic politicians are the first thing to go:
“Change is not an open ended mandate or a blank check. Change is a warning to either perform or meet the same fate as the last incumbent. And while Obama was clutching the keys to the kingdom in his dirty little hands, flying endlessly around the world, taking Air Force One on dates and primping and posing for magazine covers; ordinary Americans were losing jobs, families were cutting back, credit card bills piled up, vacations vanished and people came to work every day not knowing if it would be their last. Tonight was a major warning sign to Obama that these Two Americas cannot co-exist forever. And sooner or later Americans will want their White House back from its current lazy and debauched tenants.”
As the nation watches the events in New York's 23rd Congressional district unfold, an appropriate title for this story would be “How to squander money and alienate your base." After the Saturday withdrawal of Republican Dede Scozzfava, the GOP is reeling from a massive insurgency by its conservative base. Of course, the story got stranger as Erick Erickson
“Dede Scozzafava is throwing her support to the Democrat, Bill Owens.
"She and her husband are working with union activists to drive the vote up for the Democrat.
"The Republican Party spent $900,000.00 to help her and this is how she repays them.
"And Pete Sessions, Chairman of the NRCC, and Guy Harrison, Executive Director of the NRCC, still have their jobs and are failing to take responsibility for this disaster, instead blaming conservatives.”
In the GOP there are still some are shaking their heads and wondering what went wrong. The GOP nominated a “moderate” and if she happened to have big labor and ACORN ties, then so be it. For once, the elephant in the room was not the GOP but this blatant, illogical and damaging alliance it had formed with Scozzafava. As the Wall Street journal reports, this relationship would eventually set off a national chain of events:
“Saturday's decision by Republican Dede Scozzafava to drop out of tomorrow's special Congressional election in upstate New York is a potentially big political moment that could help to return the GOP to first principles—or could lead to internecine ruin. Much will depend on how GOP leaders and conservative activists respond.
"Picked by GOP elites without a primary and with a voting record to the left of many Albany Democrats, Ms. Scozzafava faced a revolt by local and national conservatives in favor of businessman Doug Hoffman, who was nominated on the Conservative Party line. The longtime GOP assemblywoman saw herself falling in the polls and yesterday endorsed Democratic lawyer Bill Owens, who could still win the GOP-leaning seat with a plurality.”
Republican liaisons with far left Democrats have already been detrimental to the conservative movement and Scozzafava's ties to ACORN and their “affiliated” Working Families Party was covered extensively in the blogosphere. Top Republicans chose to ignore the corruption right under their nose and to sell out their base by following the Left's mantra to elect “moderates”. These “moderates” tend to be leftists in Republican clothing. Kirsten Gillibrand is an example of a local “moderate” who abandoned her principles and base after being promoted from Congressperson to United States Senator. Republicans like Darrell Issa (who released a damning report on ACORN last July) backed Scozzafava while still pursing ACORN corruption.
In any partnership, there is compromise. Some compromise is acceptable, but fundamental values should not be compromised. When conservatives align themselves with polar opposites, it always seems that they are doing so because of race considerations or political expediency. During a panel discussion in which I participated on October 23, 2009, Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media asked why Republicans in the Bush administration approved ACORN funding.
John Fund of the Wall Street Journal, replied that Republicans acquiesced with the pretense that these organizations are doing good work and that race is a major factor behind that acquiescence.
While partisanship should not play a role in exposing corruption, when that corruption is rooted in the pay for play politics that tip heavily to the Left, partisanship cannot be ignored. Nonprofit groups have been allowed to run rampant with charitable donations that somehow elect Democrats. To stop this trend, conservatives must become creative and steer clear of situations like the one in the NY 23 with Scozzafava. If such situations are allowed to continue, others will succeed in dividing the GOP from the grassroots conservatives, and thus strengthening the left.
ACORN is a Democrat scandal and it is hard to separate one from the other. Corruption is the overriding theme and it comes mostly from the left. Another particularly odd pairing continues to be the radical reformers of ACORN and top Conservatives and Republicans. The ACORN 8, a group of former ACORN board members, have formed a Scozzafava-like partnership with the Republicans. In attempting to expose ACORN, some appear to have ignored key facts and overlooked a pattern of withholding key information to coincide with opportunistic timing aimed at aiding Democrats. An example of this is the complete removal of two longtime Obama ACORN cronies from a complaint filed with the United States Justice Department last January by the ACORN 8. Madeline Talbott is described by Stanley Kurtz of the National Review Online as “the woman who first drew Obama into an alliance with ACORN.” And Keith Kelleher is Talbott's husband, the Chief Organizer of SEIU Local 880 in Chicago.
Another example of the GOP ignoring the evidence in front of it involves investigative reporting by the National Legal and Policy Center, a group that "promotes ethics in public life through research, investigation, education and legal action." The NLPC uncovered more on ACORN's relationship with Scozzafava. The GOP seems quick to support organizations and people with strong ties to ACORN as long as they technically are not ACORN. Unfortunately for conservatives, the credibility being bestowed on such groups receives little scrutiny beyond the blogosphere and Fox News . Key ACORN opponents have formed relationships of convenience with little thought to the outcome. As the NLPC reports, even the unions are involved:
“The powerful New York City-based health care workers union, Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 1199, also has endorsed Owens. But common sense says that if Mrs. Scozzafava is elected, she effectively will have established a Republican congressional beachhead for ACORN, who would claim its 'bipartisanship.' It's not as if her own party will be against her. Top GOP members sending her checks include House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Minority Whip Eric Cantor (Virginia), National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Pete Sessions (Texas), Rep. Kevin McCarthy (California), Rep. Jeb Hensarling (Texas), and Rep. Peter King (N.Y.).
"How did leading Republicans, some of whom (like Boehner) have been ACORN's toughest critics, come to endorse a candidate with a history of endorsements by its main political front, the Working Families Party?" (emphasis mine).
Good question. In NY 23, the GOP candidate selecters chose to ignore the evidence of Scozzafava's ACORN tainted background. Just as the GOP and Fox have also ignored the clear statement on the ACORN 8's website which does not call for not for full truth, transparency and accountability by ACORN to the American people. Rather, as stated on the ACORN 8 website, they call for "truth, transparency and accountability within ACORN." Apparently in exposing ACORN it certainly does not hurt to have a black face to speak about ACORN corruption. The color of whistleblowers should not be important, but their message should be.
When groups like the ACORN 8 speak to conservatives and tell them that ACORN was a great organization that was “hijacked” by some who had sinister motives, it's believable if no one checks the facts. How can an organization whose founder remained in place for almost 40 years become hijacked? How can ACORN be reformed if the same longtime insiders are the new control group? This fiction must be exposed. Fox has been leading the way on exposing ACORN while other so called respected media outlets like the New York Times, finally admitted to having been continually scooped by Fox. But Fox needs to report all the facts to its viewers instead of promoting the ACORN 8 and wishful thinking.
As TV/Radio host Glenn Beck continues to expose the true subversive nature of ACORN, and Obama's radical roots, he contradicts many of the assertions made by this group of reformers. Though no one ever mentions the distortions on air, one has to wonder if Fox is doing its viewers a disservice by aligning themselves with groups who support Obama' s policy initiatives. As the conservative base mobilizes online, there is a disconnect between then and the so called leaders. The base sprung into action as a subsequent Glenn Beck boycott of advertisers begun by Van Jones and his organization Color of Change attempted to silence Beck and that same base is ready to fight as ACORN attempts to DeFox America.
Those outside of this boycott alliance spread the word on Twitter and Facebook about the Left's attempt to silence Beck, while the ACORN 8 remained largely silent on these issues and others that concern the very people they fundraise and ask to support their efforts. Like the $990,000 the Republicans spent on Scozzafava, conservatives are being asked to foot the bill for a partnership that was never ideologically aligned with theirs. As stated, such partnerships are rarely mutually beneficial for long. While the Left exploits the fears of conservatives on the issues of race, conservatives must be willing to fight back and respond to the blows instead of merely trying to deflect them.
After watching the ACORN prostitution stings, Americans do not see ACORN as serving a noble purpose and one has to wonder what people were doing on the ACORN board for years. Marcel Reid was active in ACORN for nine years and her story that the ACORN board was "ceremonial" does not excuse any board member. She claims to have noticed ACORN corruption only after the embezzlement scandal was publicly reported. As a former employee who started in October of 2005, I was already calling the folks at www.rottenacorn.com by May of 2007.
The question now is whether the GOP can overcome its fear of being labeled "racist" by the left and learn to respond to these attacks. Fear of that seems to be the tipping point for their ultimately disastrous relationships with liberals who wish to keep Democrats in power.
Until and unless we conservatives form our own groups and become more involved in the communities of color, we will find ourselves aligned with every group that sprouts from the ACORN seed. ACORN 8 professes to love ACORN and does not want to see it dismantled, just "reformed. " But ignoring the reality of the radical ACORN 8 potentially opens that door to other alliances with ACORN "insiders" who are willing to offer information in exchange for credibility and a chance to retaliate against the very control group that threw them out.
In Northeast Washington, DC off Minnesota Avenue a neighborhood sits tucked between the entrance ramps to 295 North and South. The four story buildings line a one way street that loops around in a circle. Residents of these buildings call the complex "Paradise." But in reality, this area is another liberal fallout zone. Instead of Nuclear disaster areas like Chernobyl in Russia, liberals in America have created desolate areas where the harm from their bombs (social programs) manifests itself as crime, hopelessness and generational poverty.
In an article written over 20 years ago Time magazine touched upon an issue that seemed epic at the time during the era of crack cocaine:
"...No one seriously thought the inner city could be transformed overnight. But few were cynical enough to envision what actually happened: an entire generation would pass as life in the black ghettos of a rich nation went from bad to almost unimaginably worse.
‘You tell me what went wrong,' asks Jonas Walker, 33, at the end of another long summer's day of hanging out on a street corner in Liberty City, a ghetto north of downtown Miami. ‘We got civil rights, we got welfare,' he says. ‘But look around here.' For emphasis, he kicks at a pile of empty beer cans littering the sidewalk."
The emphasis added in the quote is mine and America's current crisis is interrelated with the plight of urban area. The current situation in America's poor neighborhoods illustrates the perpetuity of this downward spiral.
Johnson's "Great Society" included historic civil rights advances but history has shown that Democrats have a tendency to attach riders to any attempts toward racial progress. Welfare and other social programs like subsidized housing created a dependency on the government that has crippled the ability of these urban areas to survive.
For instance, subsided housing provided by the government - commonly known as the "projects" - sprung up all over America after civil rights advances. Poor minorities were told where to live, how many to a household while the government doled out just enough money to keep some of the building from falling apart. During this same period a number of organizations inspired by the Cloward Pivan Strategy sprang up with the intent to add even more people to the welfare rolls.
"Cloward-Piven is a strategy for forcing political change through orchestrated crisis.
The strategy was first proposed in 1966 by Columbia University political scientists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven as a plan to bankrupt the welfare system and produce radical change. Sometimes known as the 'crisis strategy' or the 'flood-the-rolls,' bankrupt-the-cities strategy," the Cloward-Piven approach called for swamping the welfare rolls with new applicants - more than the system could bear. It was hoped that the resulting economic collapse would lead to political turmoil and ultimately socialism."
As the health care debate rages on across the country, American are waking to the realization that the same people who tested those social programs on minorities and the poor are now poised to unleash their new "test to the system" on a national scale. Bill and Hillary Clinton allowed their activist connections to influence their decisions on the Community Reinvestment Act and Universal Health care in the 90's. Now, the first community organizer to become President has employed strategies and tactics that can be traced to the early organizing of the welfare movement.
If the state of America's urban areas is any indication, most of the money for these so-called social programs never reached the people it was intended to help. This raises the question as to why, after 40 years of attempts to fix one sector of America's population, do liberals think that more failed programs are the answer? The answer may lie in the fact that the opportunity that liberals see on the horizon only comes once in a generation, and they are attempting a drastic social change.
Poverty is big business and a predicate for class warfare intended to perpetuate political power in the masters of that big business. In the current climate special interest groups are writing bills and influencing votes amid a huge liberal spending binge. People have tolerated the blighted urban areas; some lived there, while others drove by. But can America afford a fallout area that covers most of the country? Can we bounce back after the failed public healthcare system joins the graveyard of welfare, social security, cash for clunkers and so many others?
Yesterday's decision by the Supreme Court to reverse Sonia Sotomayor's ruling on the New Haven firefighters case was undoubtedly a blow (albeit, not fatal) to the woman who aspires to sit on the nations' highest court. The Philadelphia Inquirer offers this viewpoint:
“Yesterday's ruling that white New Haven firefighters were unfairly denied promotions because of their race became an instant talking point for foes of Sotomayor. "She was among three appellate judges who had rejected the white firefighters' claim of discrimination. "Conservatives argued that the appellate decision showed her to be a judicial activist who allows biases - particularly her backing of affirmative action policies - to taint her judgment.”
As the article goes on to state, this ruling does not seem to be the death knell for Sotomayor, however the ruling puts a spotlight on one of politics' dirty secrets: Race. Even while Barack Obama and his family occupy the White House, the politics of race has become a double edged sword for the administration.
During his presidential campaign, critics were silenced by the accusation, or fear of the accusation, of being a racist, even as Obama used his background numerous times to debunk claims that he was “not black enough” from minority voters. Often, Republicans, long saddled with the racist label, were stunned into silence by the often vicious attacks from the left.
Another example of racial politics occured during the press conference to announce Judge Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court. While there have been calls from such organizations as the National Council of La Raza to focus on Sotomayor's judicial record, the White House chose to attempt to batter the public with feelings of guilt. There was:
“...the Inspiring Icon of the White House narrative, the Latina born in the Bronx, raised by her widowed mom who sacrificed everything for her daughter. With smarts and guts, Sotomayor graduated from Yale Law School, only to have her impeccable qualifications questioned by a prospective employer who'd been conditioned by race-based government policy to wonder if she'd made it that far only because of her Hispanic heritage.
"She's rightfully a beacon of hope to every Latina mother and daughter, from the Bronx to Chicago's Little Village and on to East L.A. The girls in the neighborhoods can see Sotomayor and aspire to greatness.
"But the other side of the story also speaks to racism. Not the knuckle-dragging kind shrieked by ignorant barbarians. That's easy to condemn, whether the knuckles are white, black or brown.
"Yet there is another kind. The media don't recognize it as racism and instead lard it with virtue, calling it by its Orwellian name: affirmative action. Yet many know it by what it is: government-backed racial preference.”
As an African American mom twenty plus years Sotomayor's junior, I lack the richness of her experiences, but not my own. Few people of color, or even those without a substantial income, do not have some type of compelling story. Poverty transcends race and background and many share a kinship born of struggle. However, that does not mean that special treatment or quotas are in order. Independent Columnist Michael Gaynor sums up this point well.
“It has been reported often that Judge Sotomayor graduated from Princeton College summa cum laude and was an editor of the Yale Law Journal, each a very impressive accomplishment, if achieved on the basis of merit. "But, when Judge Sotomayor called herself 'the perfect affirmative action baby' and claimed inability to define merit, what was she really saying about her fitness to be a Supreme Court Justice? "Did she mean that she was graded and judged less demandingly at Princeton and Yale and that was a good thing that paved her path to America's highest court? "Is she 'perfect' for the position, or necessarily not up to par? "Personally, I prefer to choose professionals, such as surgeons and dentists, based solely on merit. "Likewise, I think that race-based grading and affirmative action Supreme Court Justices appointments are counterproductive indulgences better avoided.”
The inherent racism in the whole approach of the administration regarding nominations and attempts to silence critics have actually done more harm to minorities in general... Read more here.
ACORN’s chief organizer and CEO Bertha Lewis appeared on Bill O’Reilly’s ‘The O’Reilly Factor’ on May 29, 2009 to combat the growing criticism that ACORN is a criminal enterprise that is operating as an arm of the Democrats. Well, a watered down version of Bertha Lewis appeared, for those who are not familiar with her colorful character see Youtube. ACORN spokespersons have never had a problem lying on camera, but under oath is a different story (as witnessed by Karyn Gillette’s swift departure from a courtroom in Pennsylvania back in October of 2008). ACORN National spokesman Scott Levenson and other ACORN spokespersons have defended their actions and blamed rogue employees. During ‘The O’Reilly Factor’, Lewis asserted that she is in charge and that no criminal activity will be tolerated on her watch. Really.
For background, Lewis assumed control over the organization, that is, became Chief Organizer after it was revealed that ACORN’s founder Wade Rathke had covered up the embezzlement of almost $1 million dollars by his brother Dale, ACORN’s longtime chief financial organizer. The embezzlement occurred around December of 2000 and was reported by the New York Times
Just as ACORN happily accepted millions of dollars from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in its campaign to attain general acceptability and political power as well as to use all that money, ACORN hopes to participate in the upcoming census to promote interests beyond helping to conduct the next census: obtaining general acceptability, power AND confidential information.
A full five years before I was recruited for ACORN in Washington, DC, I worked for the Census Bureau in Alabama. In 2000, a red Dodge Neon with a number of dints and dings carried me down the back roads of Tuscaloosa County, AL as a Census taker. At 21, this was a great job that worked around my classes, and I spoke to dozens of families as I completed the forms. Operating without a political agenda or propaganda, the interviewees answered questions honestly and let me into their homes and lives. Recent reports indicated that the 2010 Census will not inspire nostalgia of past times or a trust in your fellow community members. As ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) gears up to partner with the Census; it brings a distinctly partisan agenda. Funded by the likes of the Democracy Alliance and The Open Society Institute (both George Soros backed outfits), ACORN and its affiliates have a storied history of behavior that would not seem out of place on an episode of the 'Sopranos'. Though Tony Soprano, has a greater likability factor, but I digress.
Here is an excerpt from ACORN's 2008 GOTV (Get out The Vote) Program:
ACORN 2008 Urban GOTV Plan
"The core of ACORN’s GOTV model is personal door-to-door contact. We know the best way to reach people and deliver a strong message that they will remember is face-to-face on the doors. By doing this we can ID specific voters who have said Yes, and keep track of exactly which voters and households we’ve had contact with."
During Voter Registration drives, ACORN - using money obtained from its 501(c)(3) Project Vote - would use the voter registration cards after attaching propaganda designed to increase membership. ACORN would sign up voters as provisional members and then contact them using information gleaned from the cards to turn the voter into a dues paying member. Data entry of voter information was handled at 34 cents a card after they were shipped to the Brooklyn ACORN office. According to internal documents ACORN had a strategic plan to build is membership off of voter registration drives paid for by donations and government funds
Concept Paper:
Building Organization Off the 2008 Election Cycle
Moving Forward
Now that we’ve grown more experienced in delivering the product (voter reg cards), the discussion in 2007 around designing the 2008 program has taken an interesting and exciting turn: how can we use the voter registration program to build and move mass membership, and build power for our members through campaign victories.
Data management is our Achilles heel. For the OCC [Organizing Call Center] to be effective there needs to be a way to get all VR [voter registration] card/member combos to be data entered within 2-3 days of being collected on the street. If not, the contact goes cold. For this quick turnaround to exist data entry may need to be done locally. It is possible cards could be scanned and emailed to a national data entry provider. Both means have challenges, however working from an electronic list from the get go is key to a successful follow up program.
Once VR cards/membership card responses are entered they can be put into phone lists for OCC workers. Calls should be made within 3-5 days of the contact being made on the street. It has been suggested that each OCC worker should have an electronic list of new registers/members in front of them. This means a computer on every desk of an OCC worker, along with a phone line. As callers make calls they record answers, and suspicious activity, directly into the data. In this way it is easier to generate “yes” lists or appointments for organizers. Also when using a data base, depending on the size of the list, we may want to do mailings, or email blasts. It would also be great to give every name a bar code to swipe them into the data base.
'said that ACORN would primarily be responsible for “mailings and other in-house communications; displaying and/or distributing 2010 Census promotional materials; providing space to train new employees; sponsoring community events to promote participation in the Census; allowing the Census bureau to post ACORN’s name on the 2010 Census Web site; [and] linking 2010 Census Web site to ACORN’s Web site.'
Here is an example of ACORN's mock up for using state issued voter registration cards to gain memberships.
Membership and defrauding the ta payers are minor concerns for ACORN in the grand scheme of their Census work. Not only will ACORN have access to personal information of Americans, but this info may also be distributed to others. As this 2005 document details:
Proposal for a Joint List Acquisition and Enhancement Project
Project Vote proposes the creation of a List Acquisition and Enhancement program that will serve the needs of organizations, both large and small, with a strategic plan to build and maintain statewide voter files in targeted states. The file would be hosted by a non-501c3 entity to allow for maximum usage of the data by progressive organizations. The development of files will include acquisition of voter data, enhancements with demographic and consumer data where appropriate, and the long-term maintenance of the file which gives our organizations a better understanding of the electorate. Building upon the energy and experiences of the 2004 electoral cycle, this project will begin in 2005 with a long-term vision towards 2006, 2008 and beyond.
Another major challenge to be addressed for the creation of a centralized data bank for 501c3, c4 and 527 organizations is the legality of such an entity. Though that question has not been answered, this proposal seeks to build a centralized data bank for 501c3 organizations with the ability to accommodate and interface with other non 501c3 organizations where legally appropriate.
Information is power and the pieces of ACORN's strategic plan are falling into place. A 2005 document details their plans for a progressive majority:
Voter file
In 2005-2006, ACORN plans to partner with other progressive voter engagement organizations to purchase and maintain a common voter file. A common voter file will maximize the resources of the progressive voter outreach community, and enhance ACORN’s work by improving our effectiveness and efficiency.
With a common voter file, ACORN will:
Coordinate voter outreach and mobilization work with other progressive organizations to maximize the power of our resources
Target our voter contact where we will get “the most bang for our buck.”
Build a long-term base of progressive voters by collecting and maintaining information on contacted voters from partnering organizations, and by developing low-propensity voters into habitual voters.
Membership Canvass
With the Membership Canvass, we are looking to build a large base of voters we can move on issues and elections that affect low- and moderate-income people. With a voter file, we will be able to target the neighborhoods we work in more effectively, with a particular eye on those neighborhoods where we can “get the most bang for our buck” – neighborhoods likely to be supportive of our issues, but where extra voter education and mobilization work would have a dramatic impact on turnout in strategically chosen legislative and Congressional races. Using precinct walk lists will enhance the canvass; the canvasser knows if the resident is registered, how often the resident has voted in past elections, the resident’s name, and other demographic data that helps them to tailor the canvass message to the individual. In addition, we will be able to take the voter information gathered from this mass canvass and add it to the voter file, in order to enhance the work of partnering progressive organizations. [emphasis mine]
If there is a chance that ACORN may be working unmonitored in the communities it serves, who is to say that some type of "suspicious" activity might not occur. After all ACORN is being investigated in almost EVERY state that they ran voter registration drives.
ACORN's core work revolves around Census information and that information leads to funding. In a 2007 a former Project Vote/ACORN Political Operations staffer stated:
"Projects for which I have used Census data include: political plans, project goals, and voter registration targets for programs of all sizes: from single geographies to ACORN's national 2008 civic engagement goals. This work required loads of research and analysis – of eligible voting populations per ACORN'sVR traditional constituency, low-income and minority communities. The original research for national targets began with more than 300 geographies; we are continuously focusing our search and have narrowed down our targeting to a potential of closer to 150 counties."
If such data is the core of their programs, could their vested interest in the outcome cloud affect the impartiality?
What is at Stake?
On the surface ACORN appears to be concerned with its members and their well being; staging elaborate acts of civil disobedience for the cameras. However, internally ACORN's agenda is pure political, as this 2006 New Mexico year end report illustrates:
"This will also be the year that Albuquerque has an open seat for mayor. Some of the City Councilors who we help in ’07 may be candidates, and we will play a more significant role in this race. 2010 will, likewise, have an open seat for Governor. We have good relationships with the current, most likely candidates and need to be a player in this race. We need to raise money for our political work for this cycle based on the redistricting that will happen in our state following the 2010 census."
The entire report can be downloaded courtesy of Matthew Harrington here. The Harrington Report will also have the documents referenced in this blog available for viewing by 5/28/09.
ACORN's vested interest in census data and its legislative outcomes can also be seen in a proposal for funding submitted to the Democracy Alliance. Here is an outline from the proposal.
According to a 2006 Washington Post article: "Democracy Alliance was formed last year with major backing from billionaires such as financier George Soros and Colorado software entrepreneur Tim Gill. The inspiration, according to founders, was a belief that Democrats became the minority party in part because liberals do not have a well-funded network of policy shops, watchdog groups and training centers for activists equivalent to what has existed for years on the right.
"The election of 2008 will be the most important national election in a generation and presents an unmatched opportunity for progressives to win the White House, build a progressive majority in the House and Senate, pave the way for the post 2010 redistricting struggle, and hold progressive candidates accountable for implementing progressive public policies. The following political plan is designed to mobilize key progressive constituencies in strategic locations in order to capitalize on this opportunity"
ACORN and the Census are a dangerous mix for the American people. Any organization that has a five year plan based on redistricting and manipulating elections should not be allowed to participate in any way with this important process. Zach Polett, ACORN's Political director outlines ACORN's plan to appeal to Soros and SEIU for money slated for political reasons.
Proposed Process for Developing a 5-Year ACORN Political Business Plan
Both to focus the strategic thinking of our political work and to put ourselves in position to attempt to raise the funds to support an ambitious, multi-year political program that grows out of ACORN’s base and strengths, I believe we need a serious, well-argued business plan. On the fundraising side, places we will want to share this business plan include “the millionaires club” (Democracy Alliance), the billionaires (Sandlers’, Soros, etc.), friends and opinion leaders in the voter engagement world (e.g., Frank Smith, John Podesta), SEIU, the voter participation foundations, etc.
Other groups are also preparing such plans. ACT has told us that they are working on theirs. America Votes had a small meeting last week, that ACORN participated in, to start thinking through what its 5-year plan should be, spurred by some interest from Soros in funding it.
Targeting (NOTE that this could either be a separate short section or one part of the methodology section below)
African-American: Major emphasis on voter registration, voter motivation and GOTV. Some parts of this work can be done c3
Hispanic & White Working Class: Key component of the initial voter contact is issue identification and persuasion. More time and money needs to be spent on screening and recording issue and policy priorities to determine message for future communication.
Though major focus of ACORN's work will continue to be in urban communities, both of-color and low-income white, part of ACORN's focus will be in inner-ring suburbs and lower-income and working class areas in exurbs and more rural counties, particularly where they fall in important state legislative or Congressional districts.
States to include are those states ACORN is in that have '06 or '08 key Senate races, are '08 battlegrounds (generally same as '04) and others with important redistricting opportunities.
It is particularly important to expose ACORN's political activities because of its new relationship with the Census Bureau, the agency tasked with compiling the 2010 census. The count of the U.S. population will determine which states gain or lose votes in both the U.S. House and the Electoral College, and which districts get more federal handouts.
American constitutional government cannot survive if the population count is managed and manipulated by organizations with partisan bias. The importance of a fair and accurate count cannot be overestimated because the count can give one party an unfair advantage and control over America for the next decade.
Anita MonCrief is a blogger and writer in Washington, DC. She has worked with the American Bar Association Central European and Eurasian Law Initiative; the International Crisis Group; Grameen Foundation and ACORN. Anita has partnered with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe on their mission to Macedonia as an election observer. In 2005, she joined the Strategic Writing and Research Department of ACORN Political Operations and its affiliate Project Vote. In 2008 Anita came forward to expose the damage that ACORN has done to the impoverished and marginalized communities, as well as its rampant voter fraud. Anita is also a social artist and my works promote social change and poverty eradication. She also blogs at www.anitamoncrief.blogspot.com.
Not surprisingly, the silence surrounding ACORN’s latest antics has continued from the main stream media (MSM). Even after a couple of weeks where the Washington Examiner has run two editorials and Bertha Lewis was caught lying by Lou Dobbs. I was gearing up to write a scathing report on ACORN and the Census when startling new evidence was obtained that directly relates to recent articles about ACORN and their questionable alliances. Some of these partnerships do not meet the standard definition of illegal activity, but in some ways they appear to harm a great deal of people. Funders, board members, ACORN members and tax payers. The question becomes how can one serve ACORN and still maintain their integrity.
Aaron Dorfman is the Executive Director of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP). Its website describes the NCRP as:
“For more than 30 years, the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy has served as the country’s independent watchdog of foundations. Over time, institutional grantmakers, federal and state governments, and individuals have taken our recommendations and turned them into policy, such as our promotion of comprehensive financial reporting for foundations as well as the inclusion of advocacy organizations in the Combined Federal Campaign…”
Our MissionNCRP promotes philanthropy that serves the public good, is responsive to people and communities with the least wealth and opportunity, and is held accountable to the highest standards of integrity and openness.
“Aaron Dorfman is the executive director of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, the nation’s premier philanthropic watchdog organization. Before joining NCRP in 2007, Aaron Dorfman served for 15 years as a community organizer, including ten years as executive director of People Acting for Community Together (PACT) in Miami, Fla. and five years as head organizer for Minneapolis and Miami chapters of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).
Like many of ACORN’s relationships it appears to be fine and a fine example of how community organizers can make a difference, but according to emails recently obtained; Dorfman appears to be working more to protect ACORN’s interests than that of the NCRP.In July of 2008 the New York Times broke a story about the embezzlement of nearly 1 million dollars by Dale Rathke, the brother of ACORN founder Wade Rathke. Dorfman wrote a piece on the scandal:
“As an outrageous breach of the public’s trust, ACORN’s case is a textbook example of horrendously weak governance combined with extremely poor judgment. While the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP) serves primarily as a watchdog of foundations and other grantmaking institutions (not of all nonprofits), this case is certainly worthy of comment due to the scope of the issues involved.In the interest of full disclosure, I should point out that ACORN is a member of NCRP, that I worked for the organization from 1992 to 1997, that a senior ACORN executive served previously on NCRP’s Board of Directors, and that current NCRP board members are executives with foundations that fund extensively ACORN and its affiliates. Additionally, NCRP is currently working on new research that documents the positive impact of policy advocacy, community organizing, and civic engagement, and ACORN’s work will be included in that research.Despite these connections between ACORN and NCRP, it is important to stress that no organization should be arrogantly allowed to take the public’s trust for granted.”
As one can imagine there were some seriously ruffled feathers at ACORN. In a message dated Friday, July 25, 2008 Nathan Henderson James writes:
Subject: RE: for you PR folk, maybe this isn't news to you, i just got it...
Aaron told me it was coming. Overall it's not much different from what other charity watchdog types have said and it says a few of the same things as the Drier/Atlas piece.I did tell him I thought the language was a bit hyperbolic.Overall, while we may not like the piece, politically it strengthens his position with his board, his funder relationships, and his developing ally relationships vis a vis being able to have our back going forward.Nathan
Another message sent the same day goes into further detail:
“Subject: RE: for you PR folk, maybe this isn't news to you, i just got it...
I'm sure that he would listen to any feedback we have on his posting. I also feel that if we point out the inaccuracy and ask him to post a clarification or errata or whatever then he will feel obligated to do so. I think there is value in him hearing from us that parts of us are not feeling so keen about him because of this posting.I do think he has our back and that this posting, which used language that was really over the top on several occasions, was much more like a Senator voting against their bill so they can move to reconsider later when they have the votes. He's positioning himself to be our advocate with people like Marge Tabankin and Garra LaMarche.Also, its a blog, so I think he/NCRP would be open to someone posting a response, if we want to go that route. Nathan
Once again, this information can be construed many different ways and ACORN will try to defend it as internal speculation, but an email from Dorfman (embedded below) clears up any confusion as to what is going on here.
Hey Kevin,
I’m looking forward to our call Wednesday. I have had several recent conversations with funders which have helped me shape the recommendations I will share on the call. I continue to believe that this whole situation can be extremely beneficial to your fundraising efforts.Congratulations on the WSJ press last week, by the way.
On a related note, I wanted to let you know that I have intentionally not driven traffic to the critical blog piece I posted on July 21st. We have a monthly e-news letter that links to all our major work, and the e-news is what drives traffic from our constituents to the blog. We purposely did not include a link to the critical post in our July e-news, which was sent out at the end of the month. My strategy is that I will write a piece soon that says, “wow, look at how effectively ACORN is addressing these problems they faced. the problems were bad, as I noted in my prior post, but now they’re doing everything right to fix it.” Once I’m credibly able to write that piece and post it, I’ll start driving traffic to the positive piece which will only mention the negative piece in passing. If you have comments, criticism or suggestions for me on that front, I’m certainly open to hearing you out.Let me know if you have specific items for the call, other than what’s been mentioned here. --Aaron
What can be gleamed from the conversation is that the NCRP is now participating in crisis PR for ACORN at the expense of its board and funders. Instead of being a watch dog, they have become ACORN lap dogs. Dorfman also shared proprietary NCRP funded information with ACORN.
It was good to speak with you earlier today. I hope the advice I offered will be of use to you.As promised, attached is a list of funders you might want to consider as prospects. It's the nation's top 100 social justice funders as ranked by the percentage of their grant dollars that fit agreed-upon social justice criteria. The definition used to generate this list, although imperfect, is attached. It was established by the Foundation Center a few years ago and is based on NCRP's past work to define social justice philanthropy…As I mentioned on the phone, this list is proprietary and absolutely not for publication or distribution. It is a custom data analysis that NCRP will be using in some future work. I am providing it to you because I value the work of ACORN and its affiliates and because I know I can trust you to ensure it is not distributed beyond a few staff members you consider key to the effort.As we discussed, feel free to reach out again if you think I may have useful information regarding specific funders from whom you hope to seek funding.Best regards,Aaron
P.S. I am also attaching a one-pager about NCRP's project to generate new funder interest in supporting advocacy, community organizing and civic engagement. Our first study site is New Mexico, second will be North Carolina, and we think Minnesota may be third. Lisa Ranghelli is heading up the research on this for us and is in New Mexico this week getting started on the first report. NM ACORN's work will certainly be featured prominently. As this project generates new prospects, we will certainly share those with you, too.
As I have reported in previous blogs about ACORN and the Sandlers, the Ratners, banks, unions, politicians and corporations; these relationships rarely benefit the American people or even ACORN’s own core constituents. Dorfman did write a new article on ACORN a mere three months later entitled It’s time to invest in ACORN again:
It’s time for funders to resume funding ACORN, and to consider major new investments in the organization in the coming year. In times like these, the country needs ACORN back at full strength.I wrote a critical blog posting about ACORN’s embezzlement scandal a few months ago, and I’ve been following the situation ever since. I’ve been extremely impressed with the openness and leadership of Bertha Lewis, their new Interim Chief Organizer and I am convinced that ACORN is systematically addressing the problems that led it into such trouble.Has ACORN fixed everything in 90 days that needed fixing? Of course not. But it’s clear that the organization is committed to solving the problems and they are well on their way to doing so.The most important development is that the organization’s board is much more engaged than it ever was under the leadership of Wade Rathke. When they finally learned about what happened, they took decisive action, and they are now attempting to fulfill their proper roles of governance and oversight. They’ve identified their weaknesses and are seeking training in the areas where they need help. There is still some controversy on the board, and it’s going to be a messy process, to be sure. But my overall assessment is that funders should have confidence that the board is now properly engaged and that the ship is sailing in the right direction.”
Sailing in the right direction? Controversy on the board? If anyone has been following this; the board broke off into two factions with the reformers calling themselves the ACORN 8. They filed a lawsuit against ACORN for complete access to the books and to try and stop them from destroying documents. These same board members had their rights violated when they were kicked off the board without a formal vote or notice and banned from the offices (as CNN reported). I think it is obvious that Dorfman understates the issue in order to deceive the very funders that his group so vigorously serves as a watchdog for. According to the Capital Research Center, some of these policies that seem to favor ACORN have gained public attention:
“A newly released report from the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP) signals the latest step in a continuing war on donors being waged by nonprofit radical advocacy groups with a left-wing political agenda. These groups, representing political activists and special interests, have developed a social theory to justify the claims they make on philanthropists’ money. According to them, philanthropy betrays its highest ideals unless it gives them grants.”
If Congressman Nadler (D-NY) continues with his refusal to call a hearing on ACORN, other “strategic” partnerships will continue to flourish and deceive at the expense of American taxpayers.
Before Bertha Lewis ever kissed Mayor Bloomberg or charmed the world with her YouTube hits and appearances on Lou Dobbs; she was a political force to be reckoned with in New York. Bertha’s reach extended beyond ACORN’s traditional constituency of low income and minorities as a small leftist third party began to emerge in New York during the late 90’s.
Wikipedia describes the Working Families Party (WFP) as:
New York's Working Families Party was first organized in 1998 bya coalition of labor unions, ACORN and other community organizations, members of the now-inactive national New Party, and a variety of public interest groups. The party blends a culture of political organizing with unionism, 1960s idealism, and tactical pragmatism…
As of 2006, the executive director of the WFP is Dan Cantor. The party's Co-Chairs are Sam Williams, UAW Region 9 CAP director; Bertha Lewis, ACORN's executive director; and Bob Master of the Communications Workers of America. The WFP also has a powerful alliance with Dennis Rivera and Local 1199/SEIU (Service Employees International Union). The intensely activist union is known to contribute more than $100,000 a year of the party's $1.4 million annual budget.”
The entry lists the ACORN Brooklyn office as its headquarters and with Bertha Lewis acting as its co-chair, ACORN’s interests seemed to move from being member driven to more financial and political goals .Like most organizations with ACORN roots, the WFP had intricate personnel and financial ties to ACORN National. According to a 2006 report:
“Field operations have been assumed by Clare Crawford for 07, who will be missed in the ACORN Field Operations, but understood the priority and the challenge on this frontier. The integration of the WPF into the COUNCIL and the overall ACORN family of organizations made such a transfer possible, and one recognizes many nam es from ACORN in any stroll through the WFP Empire.”
According to Wikipedia, the WFP takes advantage of:
“New York's electoral fusion laws that allow cross-endorsement of a single candidate by multiple parties. This allows sympathetic voters to support a minor party without feeling like they are "wasting" their vote. Usually, the WFP endorses the Democratic Party candidate, but it has occasionally endorsed Republican Party candidates in Westchester, Nassau, and Erie counties, often as a strategy for spurring bi-partisan action on its policy priorities. The party's sometime-position at the balance of electoral power and the threat of Republican endorsement has allowed it to influence the politics of local Democratic candidates and the state Democratic party. The support of the WFP can even be important in Democratic primaries.”
HOW INFLUENTIAL IS THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY?
New York ACORN has become the model for building power within ACORN across the country. Jon Kest, New York’s head organizer began training staff on the principle of building power after a successful 2006 elections.
In 2006, the WFP claimed several major victories for the Democrats, including a congressional seat that paved the way for Gillibrand’s nomination to the Senate. By endorsing Democratic candidates, the WFP and ACORN were able to form strategic partnerships that would come to ACORN’s aid later.
Over the past several weeks, ACORN has been in the news regarding the startling call by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) for a hearing on ACORN after Heather Heidelbaugh read my testimony into record at a hearing on March 26, 2009. However, “House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) shut down a request by Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) to launch an investigation into ACORN, with Nadler citing not enough “credible evidence” to proceed.” Here is a link to the video that was released in response to this.
Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
Nadler has been a fixture in New York politics since 1992, but may have missed some of the “credible evidence that exists in his own state. He has been cross endorsed by the Democrats and the Working Families Party for years, and does attend WFP sponsored events. During the controversial Atlantic Yards deal, ACORN and Bruce Ratner seemed to divide the city and lead some to question ACORN’s motivations and tactics. In a article written in 2005 called Calling the Question of ACORN, the author Mark Winston Griffith, states:
Last night the "Newshour with Jim Lehrer" rebroadcast a story on the looming development of downtown Brooklyn, which includes the Nets Basketball arena and a dominating, Manhattan-like, Frank Gehry-designed skyline.
Among the interviewees, there was Bertha Lewis, the electrifying spokesperson for Brooklyn-based ACORN, patting herself on the back for getting Forest City Ratner, the developer of this mega-project, to agree to set aside 50% of the proposed residential units as affordable housing.
Although there's no guarantee that Ratner will honor this agreement, I'll leave it to others to argue whether this was a good deal for the residents of the surrounding area. It could end up being, as Bertha indicated, a coup for affordable housing and job seekers. Or it could end up being a cruel and opportunistic selling out of a neighborhood.
This question will continue to be explored intensely for the next few years. But an issue that also deserves public debate is the role that ACORN continues to play in New York City politics and community development. From Bertha's famed spit swapping with Mike Bloomberg, to ACORN's penchant for striking shady, self-profiting, deals with huge corporate interests, ACORN has muddied the idea of community organizing as a process of developing grassroots leadership and building community power.”
Griffith goes on to make a point that is eerily similar to the same charges that members of ACORN’s own board have made in a civil RICO complaint that has been filed in 14 states and DC.
“To assert their legitimacy, ACORN's will point to the thousands of members they have. But if you have ever been to an event organized by ACORN in New York or a meeting with an ACORN organizer, it's hard to see their members as little more than animated props and set pieces in ACORN's elaborate political theater.”
Nadler and the committee received copies of the complaint that was filed by the ACORN 8 this year, but apparently, the ACORN debate was at a fever pitch in New York around 2005. Among the noteworthy figures in New York politics who responded to this post was Chris Owens, candidate for the 11th Congressional District. Owens, an opponent of Atlantic Yards, seems take a pointed jab at ACORN and politicians who have worked with them.
“One would hope, therefore, that the political leadership -- particularly Black leadership -- would be working overtime to use public policy as a counterweight to the housing market. This has not been the case; "development" has gone wild. And, as implied by Mark, many Black -- and white -- elected officials and advocates pride themselves on "cutting the best deal" with developers on a given project.
Elected officials, in particular, feel that they are at the mercy of the next big contributor: that's one more or one less phone call that needs to be made. People power, or "democracy", is not a primary consideration…
There must be faith that things can change when people stand up. There must be laws that create tools for change -- laws that few incumbent elected officials are interested in passing. And there must be a new emphasis on "equality" -- not "equal opportunity" -- as the standard for success from a public policy perspective…
ACORN's leadership knows how to play the game, as does Rev. Sharpton and many others. It is time, however, for the game to change.
Nadler represents the 8th Congressional District, which stretches from Manhattan’s Upper West Side to Brighton Beach in Brooklyn, and includes the Borough Park and Columbia Street waterfront sections of the 39th Council district. He is Chair of the Housing Committee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties Subcommittee of the Housing Judiciary Committee, and the ranking Democrat from New York State on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. With part of Brooklyn as his district, it is almost certain that during his political career that he has heard some bad things about ACORN. Even so, it did not preclude a $500 donation directly to Brooklyn ACORN in 2003.
Interestingly enough Nadler has also received donations from Bruce Ratner and his brother Michael (who has sat on boards and panels with Nadler). As Norman Oder explained in his Atlantic Yards Report, the Ratners and ACORN have quite a lot of negative history with the residents of Brooklyn.
RATNER, BRUCE CNEW YORK,NY 10128
FOREST CITY RATNER
6/20/94
$1,000
Nadler, Jerrold (D)
RATNER, JULIE HNEW YORK,NY 10128
STUDENT
6/20/94
$1,000
Nadler, Jerrold (D)
RATNER, MICHAELNEW YORK,NY 10014
SELF/ATTORNEY
3/16/08
$2,300
Nadler, Jerrold (D)
RATNER, MICHAELNEW YORK,NY 10014
SELF/ATTORNEY
3/16/08
$2,300
Nadler, Jerrold (D)
RATNER, MICHAELNEW YORK,NY 10014
ATTORNEY
6/12/96
$250
Nadler, Jerrold (D)
While signing onto ACORN letters of support and attending ACORN organized events like the much touted Christmas dinner with foreclosure victims,Nadler seems to only see the bright side of ACORN despite FBI investigations and complaints by its own board members of a criminal conspiracy. Nadler’s relationship with the Working Families Party illustrates this. During the 2007-2008 cycles Nadler gave a total of $41,000 to the WFP, and it was listed as transfer of excess campaign funds.
Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
According to ACORN’s own website, Nadler joined with Charles Rangle in supporting the WFP “Take Back Congress” initiative. Here is an excerpt from the letter:
"Everyday we are more confident that Democrats have a historic opportunity to regain majority control in the House this cycle and that with so many competitive races in New York, our state will be the key battleground in this effort. As Dean of our Delegation and your colleague in the Delegation, we write to remind you that we are poised to play a pivotal role by supporting Democratic Congressional candidates across New York. This is not the first time you have been asked to help our Congressional candidates, but today we are urging you to do so by supporting the "Take Back Congress – New York" campaign, an effort of the Working Families Party.
A review of the relationship between ACORN, the WFP and Nadler may indicate why there seems to be a problem with finding credible evidence to proceed with a hearing. In their most recent union, Bertha Lewis and Al Sharpton were able to get a hearing in Nadler’s committee on Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio
Joining Chairman Conyers, a lion of America's Civil Rights Movement, were Immigration Subcommittee Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), Constitution Subcommittee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), and Crime Subcommittee Chairman Bobby Scott (D-Va.), who all called on Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.”
I have to wonder if Bertha still holds Conyers in such high regard? However, judging from the hearing I attended, they still seemed to have one staunch ally in their corner. Even after a group of ACORN board members formed the ACORN 8 to take action against ACORN’s illegal activities and allegations of misconduct across the country; Nadler claims that he can not proceed because the evidence is just not there. Which led one blogger to wonder
“…Isn’t that credible enough for Nadler? Or is he too much in ACORN’s grip that nothing short of a signed and videotaped confession by all of ACORN’s leadership will pique his curiosity about election fraud? Yes, that’s a rhetorical question.”
Nadler summed up his position by adding that: “It’s not our business to say ACORN is terrible or ACORN is wonderful. That’s not a congressional job,” Mr. Nadler said. “The evidence - I’ve listened to it - I think most of it is nonsense. If it’s true, it’s a law enforcement matter.” I may not be a mind reader, but from the credible evidence out there, its seems that Nadler has already made up his mind and ACORN is – wonderful.
Nathan
