Green Party Watch

Green Party Watch
America's #1 Source for Green Party News & Views!
Showing posts with label DIG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DIG. Show all posts

Monday, April 24, 2017

PLAINTIFF'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT AND IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ COMBINED OPPOSITION*

ASA GORDON, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) Case 1:16-cv-02458-RJL ) NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND ) RECORDS ADMINISTRATION, et al. ) ) Defendants ) _______________________________

"..This Case or Controversies arises out of the ministerial legal duties of the defendant National Archives and Records Administration’s (NARA) Office of the Federal Register (OFR) required by law to perform certain functions relating to the Electoral College. NARA acting pursuant to 3 U.S.C. 6, 11, 12, and 13, creates legal rights to "ensure" the constitutional integrity of "Certificates of Votes", including by its publication of "Provisions of the Constitution and United States Code relating to Presidential Elections" an enforceable right to receive truthful information concerning the electoral process that automatically creates standing if these rights are violated. “[t]he actual or threatened injury required by Art. III may exist solely by virtue of ‘statutes creating legal rights, the invasion of which creates standing….’ ” Warth v. Seldin, supra, at 500, 95 S.Ct., at 2205, quoting Linda R.S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 617, n. 3, 93 S.Ct. 1146, 1148, n. 3, 35 L.Ed.2d 536 (1973). Furthermore, Defendants' have not contested arguments rasied in Plaintiff's Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for leave to File Amended Complaint. _______________________________ * Case 1:16-cv-02458-RJL _ Document 17 ..."  Click here to view

Affidavit of Asa Gordon, Exe. Dir. DIG...

 Duly sworn, under oath, I Asa Gordon make the following statement:
 I am a co-founder and Executive Director of the Douglass Institute of
Government(DIG). I am a resident of the District of Columbia and a registered voter of
this jurisdiction.
 In mid November of 2000, associates of co-founder of DIG Lawrence Douglass Jamison,esq (dec.)
from across the country, and in particular from the States of Georgia and Florida, made inquiries of
DIG as to what redress or penalties were available to citizens with respect to disenfranchisement in
Florida's 2000 Presidential elections under the Constitution of the United States. Particular inquiries
were made of DIG when it was reported in the media that the Florida legislature had threatened to
select the Florida presidential electors without regard for state or federal court guidelines. In
consultation with Jamison we made several inquiries of local officials, professors of law, civil rights
organizations and attorneys as to what course may be undertaken to lodge a grievance for infringement
on the constitutional right of suffrage and what related information may be readily available to the
public. From these inquiries we were led to reference Government web pages on the Presidential
election process maintained by the National Archives and Records Administrations' (NARA) Office of
the Federal Register (OFR). We passed this information on to those who had made inquiries of DIG
without review at that time.
By late December of 2000, after a later review, I became aware that the OFR had posted at their web
site on the electoral college an Internet reference link to a particular document, Relevant Provisions of
the U.S. Constitution and Federal Law: under the heading General Information. This Internet reference
seriously misinforms the general public of their electoral rights. At this same web site, under the
heading State Resources, the OFR provided a link to Letter from the Archivist to Governors. I became
aware that the flawed document at the agency web site is published in pamphlet form "for use by the
Executives and Electors of the several States in the performance of their duties in connection with
Presidential Electors." See Amended Complaint at ¶8. Before I had made these discoveries I
mistakenly used the OFR internet links to pass their flawed document on to my associates in November
of 2000.
As a consequence of my lectures over the last decade and a half on behalf of DIG and as Secretary
General of the United States Colored Troops chartered by the African American Civil War Museum
Freedom foundation on the post Civil War Reconstruction Era in U.S. history, I became cognizant of
the fact that the OFR had committed a serious error in judgment in the publication of their pamphlet
entitled "Provisions of the Constitution and United States Code relating to Presidential Elections" by
their exclusion of the second section of the fourteenth amendment. To my dismay, I later learned that
local officials, professors of law, civil rights organizations, Internet web sites on electoral rights, law
libraries, Government documents libraries, and attorneys practicing Civil Rights law are profoundly
influenced by this inaccurate OFR source. This misinformation was, in fact, a major cause for the
ignorance and disbelief that many local officials, professors of law, civil rights organizations and
attorneys displayed in response to my personal herculean efforts to bring general public and
professional awareness to this missing provision of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution.
 At the Federal Register Main Page ( http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/) the OFR proclaimed
"OFR plays an important role in: The Electoral College",
(http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/electoral_college/electoral_college.html). The OFR also
declared:
"Our Mission
The Office of the Federal Register (OFR) informs citizens of their rights and obligations by
providing ready access to the official text of Federal laws, Presidential documents,
administrative regulations and notices, and descriptions of Federal organizations, programs
and activities."
 At the Electoral College Link), the OFR declared:
"U. S. Electoral College
The Office of the Federal Register coordinates the functions of the Electoral College on
behalf of the Archivist of the United States, the States, the Congress, and the American
People. ..."
In fulfillment of their declared mission, the OFR has produced "Provisions of the Constitution
and United States Code relating to Presidential Elections" as General Information within the zone of
interest of all citizens. This document is posted on the Internet by the OFR and is broadly linked to and
reproduced at numerous public Internet sites. This document has also been reproduced in pamphlet
form for public dissemination by the Superintendent of Documents as Gov. Doc. No. AE 2.102:P
92/2000 for acquisition by public and academic libraries pursuant to the Federal Register Act
44U.S.C.15. & 1CFR2. Thus actual injury to a broadly misinformed citizenry has been realized and
threatens to be perpetuated unabated.
I have informed NARA and the DC Secretary of State of the error in OFRs' judgment to exclude
from the pamphlet "Provisions of the Constitution and United States Code relating to Presidential
Elections" that portion of the Constitution that pertains more directly to voting rights of individuals and
the penalty for disregarding those rights".
 NARA belittles my effort as a member of that class of misinformed and targeted citizens who
has chosen to exercise his obligation to safeguard his rights once realized. Acting under the purview of
the Federal Register Act 44U.S.C.15;1CFR2, NARA has exacted actual injury upon me directly by
asserting they have no obligation to correct any wrongful editorial judgment identified by me in
fulfillment of their stated mission to inform me of my electoral rights, nor or they obligated to correct
any wrongful editorial judgment that threatens injury to my electoral rights by misinformed officials
who rely on NARA for guidance in protecting my electoral rights. Thus the injury I have suffered is
both actual and threatened by the only agency that has the statutory authority and responsibility to
correct this case or controversy.

I affix my signature hereto.
______________________________________
Asa Gordon, PRO SE
Executive Director and Founder
Douglass Institute of Government
digasa@aol.com 

Monday, October 29, 2012

Green Papers: Diverse Views from a Green Perspective

Green Papers: Diverse Views from a Green Perspective

The GOP’s Neo-Redemptionist Electoral College

November 11 | Posted by admin | Electoral College, Green Party, National Politics
Electoral Quotas for a White Majority
by Asa Gordon



REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS are intent on establishing a neo-Redemptionist Electoral College that will only reflect the majority will of white people as “[T]he Republican Party becomes more and more a white folks’ party”. (“The GOP is trying to rig the electoral college,” Harold Meyerson, Washington Post, Sept. 21, 2011).

The original politics of Redemption was to to reclaim the South for white Democratic, one-party rule in the U.S. South following the First Reconstruction of the 1860s. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redemption_(United_States_history)]. The GOP’s neo-Redemptionist Electoral College would claim the Nation for white Republican, one-party rule in the U.S. from the Second Reconstruction of the 1960s.

The Republican party has demonstrated that it can unambiguously embrace a white partisan majority that represents a national minority, whereas the Democratic party has proved to be ambivalent in embracing a national majority that embraces the collective will of non-white minorities.

The Washington Post’s recent cynical editorial (“A cynical GOP move, If you can’t win the election, change the rules,” Oct. 16, 2011) on the GOP’s “Rigging the Electoral College” declares:
“State [Pennsylvania] Senate Majority Leader Dominic F. Pileggi (R) has introduced a bill that would shift Pennsylvania from a winner-take-all system to one that awards electoral votes by congressional district, as Maine and Nebraska do. Mr. Pileggi and other supporters of the switch say that a district-based approach better reflects the will of all of Pennsylvania’s voters. ”
What the supporters fail to say, and what the Washington Post editorial fails to report, is that the switch to a district-based approach best reflects the will of not all but a specific subset of Pennsylvania’s voters: those who are white.

In the 2008 Presidential election, Barack Obama, with about 55 percent of the popular vote, was awarded all of Pennsylvania’s 21 electoral votes under the “Winner-take-all” rule. John McCain, with about 45 percent of Pennsylvania’s popular vote, was awarded zero. Supporters of the Pileggi District plan pose the question, how can a system that ignores nearly half the votes cast by the state’s residents be considered fair? The GOP has posed the right question, but presents the wrong answer.

Let us do the math for the 2008 Presidential Election. (The Congressional district data is from the Swing State Project). The math exposes that Pileggi’s District plan does not provide redress for an unfair distribution of Presidential electors that fails to reflect the will of Pennsylvania’s voters, but in fact provides a disproportionate allocation of electors that favors the choice of Pennsylvania’s white electorate. Let us examine what the results would have been for Pennsylvania’s voters if the Pileggi plan had been in effect for the 2008 Presidential Election. Under the Pileggi plan, John McCain would have been granted 11 electoral votes by virtue of winning 11 congressional districts. Indeed, Senator McCain won 3 districts that were represented by Democrats in the House. Obama would have been awarded 8 for the 8 congressional districts he won, plus two for carrying the state’s popular vote for a total of 10. That is, McCain would have been awarded a majority, 52%, of Pennsylvania’s electors as opposed to Obama’s 48%, a clear undemocratic reversal in the allocation of electors compared to Obama’s popular vote victory. Is this fair?

In fact, Pileggi’s District plan disproportionately allocates Pennsylvania’s electors in a manner that exaggerates McCain’ s 51% popular vote majority among Pennsylvania’s white voters. The 2010 census has provided the opportunity for Pennsylvania’s Republican legislature and governor to redraw the district lines to further bias Pennsylvania’s electors to augment the choice of Pennsylvania’s white voters.

Clearly, Pileggi’s plan makes no attempt to redress the electoral college’s bias against popular- vote majorities. Tom Corbett, Pennsylvania’s Republican governor, like other swing states under GOP control, supports the Pileggi plan. Under GOP District plans, Obama could carry Michigan, and Ohio’s popular vote as a result of large concentrations of minorities in urban areas and still lose most of those states’ electoral votes.

Overlooked, (by design) by the GOP lawmakers and in the rigged reporting of the main stream media on this issue is the obvious truth: The fairest apportionment of presidential electors is to allocate them on the basis of a popular vote split within the state as a whole. By this rule the number of electors awarded would have been 12 for Obama and 9 for McCain, a proportional distribution that accurately and fairly reflects the will of all of Pennsylvania’s voters. To overlook this more democratic method of allocating electors that mathematically represent the will of all of the people and instead select a rule that distorts the will of the people in order to allocate electors reflecting the majority choice of one group of white people is racist as a mathematical fact, i.e. the Pileggi plan is a white supremacist plan by intent, design and result. Note that the media often misrepresents the District Plan as a “proportional system.” As we have seen, it is surely not.

“The electoral college, after all, was created out of a compromise so that Southern whites wouldn’t be outvoted by Northerners in the House of Representatives or in presidential elections. The compromise was to tally slaves in apportioning congressional districts among the states, and then award the presidency to the winner of the states’ electoral vote, not of the nationwide popular count.” (“The GOP is trying to rig the electoral college,” Harold Meyerson, Washington Post, Sept. 21, 2011).

The GOP’s Tea Party constitutional “originalist” movement seeks to preserve the legacy of this original racial quota for white minorities through the establishment of a neo-Redemptionist Electoral College.

Asa Gordon, Chair of the DC Statehood Green Party Electoral College Task Force and Executive Director of the Douglass Institute of Government currently has a Civil Action pending in the United States District Court to Democratize the Electoral College. (See http://www.electors.us).

Monday, August 31, 2009

DC: AN OPENING ("significant") VICTORY IN THE GREEN "DEMOCRATIZING THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE" Mal-Apportionment Penalty (MAP) CIVIL ACTION_GORDON v BIDEN

Asa Gordon _Exe.Dir. DIG_Chair DCSGP_ECTF_(202) 635-7926

THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT HAS GRANTED AN EARLY VICTORY TO THE PLAINTIFF IN THE OPENING ROUND OF MOTIONS IN THE DEMOCRATIZING THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE CIVIL ACTION NOW ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
.

"This is a significant accomplishment in your 'Democratizing the Electoral College Civil Action' ... very significant". This is how Attorneys vacationing in Oak Bluffs & Vineyand Haven, Mass responded to a recent report on the United States Court of Appeals Order of Aug, 13th, 2009 denying the United States Justice Department Motion in behalf of the Vice President for a Summary Affirmance of the District Court's Dismissal Order. The US Appeal's court Order supported the plaintiff's reply motion in opposition. The US Court of Appeals has set a schedule (Sept.-Nov.) for the submission of full briefs in the Civil Action GORDON v BIDEN . The plaintiff was in Oak Bluffs to lecture on A Civil Action to Democratize the Electoral College. See: [ http://www.electors.us]. click on events.
To Book Asa Gordon, pro-se plaintiff in GORDON v BIDEN, for a presentation to your organization on the subject "A Civil Action to Democratize the Electoral College" e-mail a request to: Electorsus@aol.com and also to mapxiv2@aol.com. Include MAP in the subject heading. Outside of the Washington metro area, a round-trip train or airfare with a token honoraria is requested. All Pleadings before the US Courts, Essays, Videos, Green PR's, A sample flyer and brief bio is available at the Mal-Apportionment Penalty (MAP) web site [ http://www.electors.us].
Also Reference:

Diane F White FACEBOOK creator and administrator for the cause:
Democratizing the Electoral College
http://apps.facebook.com/causes/343177?m=b317c537

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

DC Statehood Green leader Asa Gordon to speak on 2000 and 2004 voter disenfranchisement and the constitutional remedy



WASHINGTON, DC -- DC Statehood Green Party activist Asa Gordon has been engaged by the Social Action & Leadership School for Activists (SALSA) of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) for the fall term, and will deliver a presentation on "The Constitutional MAP (Mal-Apportionment Penalty) for Voter Disfranchisement."

The presentation will take place Thursday, October 11, 2007, 6:45 to 8:45 pm at the Institute for Policy Studies, 1112 16th Street NW, Suite 600, in Washington, DC.

The Constitutional Mal-Apportionment Penalty for Voter Disfranchisement: On December 12 , 2000, the US Supreme Court cited racial redemptionist era decisions in its Bush v. Gore ruling that the US Constitutional does not guarantee a national right to vote. The proper constitutional response to the electoral abuses in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections is not a passage of a 'right to vote' constitutional amendment, but enforcement of the existing mal-apportionment penalty for the denial or abridgment of a citizen's right to vote as provided in Section 2 of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.


Mr. Gordon's lecture will provide the historical context for recent disfranchisement of voters and will argue that the most effective remedy is the one enacted constitutionally during the Reconstruction Era.

Asa Gordon is the Chair of DC Statehood Green Partys Electoral College Task Force, a member of Delegate Apportionment Committee of the Green Party of the United States <http://www.gp.org>, and a member of the Green Party's Speakers Bureau<http://www.gp.org/speakers>. Mr. Gordon is also the founder and executive director of the Douglass Institute of Government <http://members,aol.com/digasa/dig.htm>. His work includes studies on democratizing the Electoral College, the constitutional penalty for voter

disfranchisement, the 14th Amendment 'right to vote' provision, and Neo-Confederate culture in American politics.

Asa Gordon's work has been recognized by officials such as Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), who, in response to a proposed solution brought forward by Mr. Gordon on the voting rights remedy, said, "This is the most amazing proposition that has ever been brought forward, and if it is accurate, it could change the whole outcome of the voting process in the United States."


Contact information for Asa Gordon: 202-635-7926,
Electorsus@aol.com
Brief bio of Mr. Gordon
http://www.gp.org/speakers/gordonasa.shtml

SALSA and the IPS http://www.hotsalsa.org
202-234-9382, ext. 229, netfa@hotsalsa.org

Information on SALSA lecture classes
http://www.hotsalsa.org/index.php?view=calendar
http://www.hotsalsa.org/index.php?InstructorID=107
http://www.hotsalsa.org/index.php?cid=1000719

MORE INFORMATION

The DC Statehood Green Party
http://www.dcstatehoodgreen.org

~ END ~

12 min video featuring Asa Gordon on MAP Civil Action "Democratizing the Electoral College"

Political Prisoners

August 2, 2007--Imam Jamil Al-Amin has been moved to federal custody!

Correspondence with the commissioner should be put on hold for now, updates will be announced as they occur

Please keep the Imam and his family in your thoughts and prayers


Read the details on his transfer

INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE TO SUPPORT IMAM JAMIL AL-AMIN
(the former H. Rap Brown)
547 West End Pl. SW
ATLANTA, GA. 30310


Real killer confesses--again--to the killing of Kinchen--Atlanta deputy sheriff for whose shooting death Imam Jamil was convicted and sentenced to life in prison! The State refuses to consider his confession, while continuing to keep Imam Jamil wrongfully imprisoned and isolated.


SEE FOR YOURSELF--PHOTOCOPY OF RECENT, FEBRUARY 2007 HANDWRITTEN CONFESSION OF OTIS JACKSON

NEW INFORMATION PROVING INNOCENCE OF JAMIL AL-AMIN!


OnTheWilderSide

OnTheWilderSide
Supporters of progressive activism, Green Party politics, and noncorporate cultural workers.

Blog Archive