Green Party Watch

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

Tuesday, August 16, 2016

GPUS RacistElectoralReformPlatformPlank








This video is posted in response to requests to provide context for my
comments on the Saturday Morning Program addressing the adoption of the
Green Party platform for 2016, August 6th, at the Green Party National
Presidential Convention, Green 2016, Houston, Texas August 4-7, 2016 in
regards to the Platform Approval of an Electoral Reform plank grounded in a
redemption era legacy to restore white supremacy in the former Confederate
States.

Re:
Green Solutions

1. Electoral reform for a better democracy.
f. Abolish the Electoral College and provide for the direct national
election of the president by Instant Runoff Voting. As a step in that
direction, support National Popular Vote legislation which would guarantee
the Presidency to the Presidential candidate who receives the most popular
votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia), which would take
effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a
majority of the electoral votes -- that is, enough electoral votes to elect
a President(270 of 538).

This platform plank is grounded in neo-redemptionist Supreme Court
decisions in 1892 & 1875 that overturned reconstruction by gutting the
Voting Rights of the formally enslaved pursuant to the Second Section of
the Fourteenth Amendment and reestablished white supremacy throughout the
former rebellious confederate states.

The following corrective electoral reform that honors the Voting Rights
legacy of the United States Colored Troops received a majority of the votes
but was essentially vetoed by the overwhelming disparate votes by the
Greens of California who sponsored the offending platform that dishonors
the legacy of the Reconstruction era White Abolitionists and Civil War
veterans of African descent.

{Rejected} platform amendment with majority support.

f. Abolish the Electoral College and provide for the direct national
election of the president by Instant Runoff Voting. In the interim support
The Malapportionment Penalty MAP initiative to Democratize the Electoral
College by enforcement of "the right to vote" Reconstruction amendment
(Amend. XIV§2 ) that mandates a state's proportional allocation of
presidential electors based on the popular vote split or suffer a
"Reduction of Representation" in the electoral college / members to
congress subject to (2USC§6).

Thanks to all for expressing interest in my concern with the GPUS National
Popular Vote (NPV) Electoral reform platform plank grounded on a
neo-redemptionist Supreme Court ruling that "gutted" the reconstruction
amendment that secured the franchise for the former enslaved of African
descent, and in the restoration of the Malapportionment Penalty (MAP)
alternative reform plank.

Ref.Document's_link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/n8ofqa7p521f8fv/map-greenpagesnation_merged.pdf?
dl=0
PowerPointLink:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/fdho3jpiv0yllag/gpus-
racistplatormplank-video.pptx?dl=0

Historical Contextual WEB site:
THE HISTORICAL LEGACY

The Malapportionment Penalty MAP initiative is to "Democratize the
Electoral College" by enforcement of "the right to vote" Reconstruction
amendment (Amend. XIV§2 ) that mandates a state's proportional allocation
of presidential electors based on the popular vote split or for the state
to suffer a "Reduction of Representation" in the electoral college /
members to congress pursuant to (2USC§6) .
http://asagordon.byethost10.com/MAP_HISTORICAL_PERSPECTIVE.html

The Constitution's Voting Rights Apportionment Formula
The Constitution's malapportionment penalty clause establishes a de jure
apportionment formula that mandates proportional representational redress
for de facto partisan abridgment of voting rights.
http://asagordon.byethost10.com/MAP-formula.pdf

Regards,
Asa Gordon, Chair DC Statehood Green Party Electoral College Task Force
http://asagordon.byethost10.com/ASA.htm

Wednesday, June 1, 2016

MAP initiative to be honored and featured at National Conference for Civil Rights

"At long last, after a decade and a half of advocacy by Asa Gordon and a majority of the Green Party to enforce "the right to vote" Mal-Apportionment Penalty (MAP) clause in Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (Amend. XIV§2), a clause that mandates proportional allocation of elected representatives based on the popular vote split, or for a state to suffer a "Reduction of Representation" pursuant to title 2 section 6 of the United States Code (2USC§6) for any abridgment of citizen voting rights , the MAP initiative (voting rights "Roots") will be honored and featured in a National Conference for Civil Rights activists.

I am honored to serve as a keynote speaker, to be granted two workshops and invited as a singular conference presenter at the 6th National Civil Rights Conference to present the full scope of the historical and contemporary context for the modern  application of the MAP initiative for voting rights..." 

 I would like to take this opportunity for a personal shout out to those whose support of my efforts in regards to the MAP initiative over the last decade and a half are inestimable: The Late Lawrence Jamison, esquire, Gary Michael Coutin, esquire, Garrine P. Laney, Scott Mclarty, Alexis Scott, Herb & Lenora Foerstel, Netfa Freeman, Diane F. White, Kimberly Wilder, C.R. Gibbs, Lawrence Jackson, Frank Hanrahan, Frank Gordon, Pat LaMarche, Cynthia McKinney, Jabari, Hugh Esco, Morgan Moss, Rick & Michele, John Antrony La Pieta, Herb Gonzales, Jr., George Martin, Paul Pumphrey, David Schwartzman, Dr. Keith D. Parker, Dr. Frank Smith, Brent McMillan, Perry Redd, William Powell Jones, Richard Kreiter, AH American History TV C-Span 3, Carol Gordon."

 - Asa Gordon

6th National Civil Rights Conference
Meridian/Philadelphia, Mississippi

June 19 – 22, 2016
Conference Theme
Rise, Advocate, Educate and Cooperate:
Honoring the Past and Embracing the Future
The National Education and Empowerment Coalition, Inc., the Cities of Philadelphia and Meridian (Mississippi), and the 2016 National Civil Rights Conference Planning Committee cordially invite you to attend the Sixth Annual National Civil Rights Conference.  This exciting and informative conference will be held in Meridian, Mississippi and promises to generate considerable intellectual dialogue and debate, as well as create opportunities to strengthen existing networks and forge new opportunities for professional development and personal growth - see  conference agenda highlights at the following web site http://civilrightsconference.com/ (click on the information tab in upper right corner).
The National Civil Rights Conference will coincide with [1] the Annual Mississippi Civil Rights Memorial Services, an annual event remembering and honoring the three slain civil rights workers (James Earl Chaney, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner) and other Mississippi civil rights movement participants; [2] memorial activities on the grounds of the Historic Mt. Zion United Methodist Church - see attachment # 1; and [3] the Civil Rights and Social Justice Awards presentation - see attachment #2.

The planning committee is very please to share attachment #3 with you,  the keynote speakers and panel discussions.  Please share the attached information with family and friends.


Conference registration information and materials are posted on the above web site.  Contact the planning committee chair (kdparker@civilrightsconference.com) or visit the conference web site for additional conference information.

Sincerely,
Keith D. Parker, Chair







2016 National Civil Rights Conference Planning Committee

Tuesday, December 24, 2013

The Louisiana Green Party is excited about having our own, Asa Gordon as a presenter at our conference....

The Louisiana Green Party is excited about having our own, Asa Gordon as a presenter at our conference.  In order for this to happen we need your help, please vote to approve the expenditure of $500.00 from the Green Party Black Caucus's treasury to cover one round trip ticket and hotel room accommodation for two nights for Asa Gordon.  


Please respond with your questions or vote too this email because this is how we are keeping a tally of the votes.  Please respond with a yes or no vote.

More information about the conference can be found at the following website:

http://www.eventbrite.com/e/green-party-of-louisiana-state-convention-tickets-8548838807

Hotep,

Morgan Moss, JR
Louisiana Green Party Co-Chair

Monday, August 5, 2013

"How Black Civil War Veterans Reconstructed the Union and Established Democracy in America" was presented at the Green Party of the United States 2013 Annual National Meeting

"...On Friday July 26th, 2013, Asa Gordon, Chair of the DC Statehood Green Party Electoral College Task Force and Secretary General of the Sons & Daughters United States Colored Troops, presented a  special version of the signature African American Civil War Memorial  "Historical Voting Rights" Civil War Sesquicentennial Lecture: The USCT Legacy of National Redemption and Democracy ( How Black Civil War Veterans Reconstructed the Union and Established Democracy in America)  during the party's 2013 Annual Meeting in Iowa City, Iowa  at the Iowa Memorial Union, University of Iowa..."

Event Url
http://calendar.uiowa.edu/MasterCalendar/EventDetails.aspx?data=hHr80o3M7J7CFkcDh%2bESZv4EsSc%2fLnzlYEQm8OpsDqOQrdyaETHbQME6r9f9wVsB

Iowa Press citizen
http://search.press-citizen.com/localevents/event/100/28613-African-American-Civil-War-Memorial-Historical-Voting-Rights-Civil-War-Sesquicentennial-LectureEvent Url
http://calendar.uiowa.edu/MasterCalendar/EventDetails.aspx?data=hHr80o3M7J7CFkcDh%2bESZv4EsSc%2fLnzlYEQm8OpsDqOQrdyaETHbQME6r9f9wVsB

Iowa Press citizen
http://search.press-citizen.com/localevents/event/100/28613-African-American-Civil-War-Memorial-Historical-Voting-Rights-Civil-War-Sesquicentennial-Lecture

"...In the aftermath of America's Civil War it was accepted that the union had  been saved, but "The reinauguration of the national authority-reconstruction"  (A. Lincoln) and the establishment of full participatory democracy was still very  much in doubt. The lecture presents ignored historical facts, and reveals the  hidden Civil Rights legacy of how Black Civil War veterans reconstituted the  nation in alignment with the DECLARATION and established the foundation of  citizens' voting rights in the United States of America.

The lecture was adapted  for the 2013_GPUSANM to provide explicit historical progressive  reconstruction era constitutional context for  the "Democratize the Electoral College Civil Action" Gordon et.al. vs Clerk of HOR now pending  in Federal Court. The  lecture demonstrates how voter suppression tactics, "Winner-take-all",  and "Gerrymandered Districts" in national presidential elections violates the electoral mandate of the second section of the Fourteenth Amendment to the constitution  adopted during Reconstruction. The presentation  also exposes that the misguided National Popular Vote (NPV) initiative is grounded in a reactionary redemption era Supreme Court ruling that overturned Reconstruction to reestablish white supremacy, and furthermore explicitly violates the malapportionment clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Green Pages has published a full online article based on this lecture that details the contemporary context of the Federal Civil Action..."



FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Asa Gordon_(202)635-7926
http://www.gp.org/speakers/detail-speakers.php?ID=29
Exe. Dir. Douglass Institute of Government
Sec. Gen. Sons & Daughters United States Colored Troops
Chair DC Statehood Green Party Electoral College Task Force
NASA /GSFC Astrodynamicist (Ret.)

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).

Sunday, October 28, 2012

The PA GOP thought by "Democratizing the Electoral College" they could have put Pennsylvania in play for Romney.






"Some prominent state GOP figures say top party leaders passed on a clear chance to deliver the White House for Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney when they rejected a change to the state’s allocation of Electoral College votes last year..." 

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Southern Congressional Representatives Challenged by Malapportionment Civil Action

Asa Gordon
Now pending before the  United States District Court  is a Civil Action that challenges the Constitutional legitimacy of  several Southern Representatives membership in the 112th Congress of the United States. 

Gordon et al v. Clerk, US House of Representatives, (Case: 1:11-cv-00003) filed Jan. 3rd, 2011 by the Chair of the DC Statehood Green Party Electoral College Task Force, Asa Gordon, seeks to enforce the US Constitution's Malapportionment Penalty (14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, Section 2), which mandates a reduction of a state's presidential electors and congressional representatives ("the basis of representation therein shall be reduced") if "the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States... is denied... or in any way abridged."  

In the civil action cited above, Plaintiffs sought to enjoin the Clerk of the  House of Representatives from recognizing the full slate of Congressional representatives from "unbounded Southern electoral states."  Plaintiffs requested that the Court take judicial notice that Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Texas are "unbound presidential elector states."  These "unbound" electoral states, following the general presidential election of November 4, 2008, allocated their presidential electors on a "winner take all" basis wherein there exists no "winner take all" election statute. These states have in effect disenfranchised the citizens of the state who voted for the presidential electors pledged to any candidate with less than the popular majority vote.

These Southern states in particular, which awarded all of their unbounded presidential electors by "winner take all" provisions not grounded in any state or federal law, have engaged in de-facto disenfranchisement of those electors of the state based on the votes of the states' African-American citizens. The suit sought a temporary restraining order or, in the alternative, a preliminary injunction prohibiting the Clerk from including the full slate of unbounded electoral states' Congressional representatives, which are subject to the malapportionment penalty in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.  

        The Civil Action avers that the Constitution requires  that unbounded  Southern  States allocate their presidential electors in proportion to the popular vote split or suffer the federal statutory mandate to reduce the states' representatives in Congress.  The 'winner take all" allocation of presidential electors triggers the malapportionment penalty of Section 2 of the 14th Amendment (Amend.14§2) as implemented by the "Reduction of representation" federal statute Section 6 of title 2 of the United States Code (2USC§6). The "reduction of representation" statute creates a remedy for the abridgment in the right "to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States." 

        The original intent of the Reconstruction Amendment (Amend.14§2), as implemented by 2USC§6, was to place a ruinous penalty on those former confederate states that would effect "minority vote dilution."  It took over a century to properly enforce section 1 of the 14th Amendment.  Let us not allow another century to pass before enforcing Section 2.

GORDON vs CHENEY/BIDEN  1/28/2008-10 addressed the malapportionment of the Electoral College , now  GORDON et.al. vs CLERK HOR 1/3/2011 addresses the malapportionment of  congress. 

In a letter to John Boehner, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, The DC Statehood Green Party (DCSGP), proposes that the Speaker form a House Committee of Congressional Legitimacy to study and recommend House Rules and procedures to ensure that in this and subsequent sessions of the House that all members to the House are in full compliance with the US Constitution and the US Code . In a companion letter to the Honorable Karen L. Haas, Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, The DC Statehood Green Party requests that the Clerk advise the Party as to how the Office of the Clerk views its responsibility in this matter.  Specifically, the Party seeks information regarding House of Representatives procedures for recognizing House members from any state that may be subject to the Constitutional mandate for a "Reduction of Representation," and legally subject to the requirements of 2 US Code  pursuant to  2USC §6. 

In recent developments two Louisiana voters, filed a Motion to Intervene as co-plaintiffs  with a plea to "permit the Intervenors to adopt the existing pleadings, briefs and legal arguments by Plaintiffs". In response, the Defendant represents to the court that the Defendant "takes no position on the Motion to Intervene as Co-Plaintiffs" taking exception that the Intervenors have not been   “given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute”.

All court pleadings, videos, press releases and essays are available at http://www.electors.us

"Democratize The Electoral College" Published: in the Wednesday, February 17, 2010 edition of the Atlanta Daily World.
http://www.atlantadailyworld.com/articles/2010/02/22/viewpoints/doc4b7afa734a47e762104017.prt
http://www.nomorestolenelections.org/news/gordon_democratize_electoral_college
http://www.democracysquare.org/news/gordon_democratize_electoral_college

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

US Court of Appeals "Sidesteps" the issue of Mal-apportionment

US Court of Appeals "Sidesteps" the issue of Mal-apportionment 
MAP Appellate Court JUDMENT "Lack of Standing"

United States Court of Appeals
DC Circuit
February 1st, 2010
JUDGMENTORDERED and ADJUDGED that the judgment of the district court be affirmed.
...  The plaintiff is not injured by the operation of the five states’ winner-take-all systems because he does not vote in those states  ...  Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the district court dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint for lack of standing.
Note: In March I will file a petition for a panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. The  panel's Judgment  is in Conflict with a Plethora of Supreme Court Decisions on Standing in Minority Vote Dilution Civil Actions, and  presents a question of exceptional importance by leaving the  congressional representatives of the unbounded states in Constitutional limbo. The decision in point of fact is not even a ruling on the actual case of controversy that formed the basis for my original complaint (mal-apportionment in the counting of votes cast not a mal-apportionment in the casting of votes) . Furthermore, the Panel decision without a declaratory order for proportional apportionment of the 2008 presidential electors for the unbounded southern states now places the pending reapportionment in the house of representatives based on the 2010 census in Constitutional  jeopardy. Accordingly this is a petition that will far exceed the standards for a rehearing en banc pursuant to F. R. App. Pr. 35(b)(1)(A)&(B). 


The Green's Civil Action  to "Democratize the Electoral College" has exposed the constitutional vulnerability of the "winner take all" electoral college and has provided the legal blueprint on the basis of this Appellate Court Judgment that any voter of the states in question now have standing to file a constitutional claim to challenge the congressional apportionment of their respective states.

Asa'
Exe. Dir. DIG
Chair DCSGP-ECTF

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

NEW Court Order to Rule on Gordon v. Biden without Oral Argument


On Monday, January 11, 2010 the  court  concluded, on its own motion, that oral argument would not assist the court in the case of Gorden v. Biden.


Asa Gordon's  Oral Argument on Democratizing the Electoral College, a major voting rights civil action  endorsed by the Green Party Black Caucus in 2004, had been scheduled for oral argument in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (No. 09-5142) on Thursday, January 14, 2010.    "...Accordingly, the court will dispose of the appeal without oral argument on the basis of the record and the presentations in the briefs. See Fed. R. App. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j)."


Asa Gordon, chair of the DC Statehood Green Party's Electoral College Task Force and executive director of the Douglass Institute of Government filed this civil action in the US District Court for the District of Columbia (1:08-cv-01294) on July 28, 2008 to protect the rights of presidential electors and the voters they represent. 



Since the debacle of the 2000 presidential election, the DC Statehood Green Party, in partnership with the Douglass Institute of Government, has led the way in educating the general citizenry of their constitutional "right to vote" under the provisions of paragraph two of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (Amend. XIV§2) and statutory code (2U.S.C.§6)

Saturday, January 9, 2010

Green Party Black Caucus (GPBC) Protest Odious Redemptionist-era rulings being invoked by the Department of Justice




The BLACK CAUCUS OF THE GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES (GPBC) in a letter of protest to Attorney General, Eric Holder registered their strong objection that in this case of controversy an Assistant United States Attorney in the Department of Justice in argument before the Appellate Court has invoked odious Redemptionist-era rulings of the Supreme Court that reestablished white supremacy and overturned Reconstruction. A position that denigrates the memory of that provision of the constitution that gave full expression to the founding principle of our nation for which that "band of brothers" of European and African descent "gave the last full measure of devotion" in the United States Civil War.

Asa Gordon's  Oral Argument on Democratizing the Electoral College, a major voting rights civil action  endorsed by the Green Party Black Caucus in 2004, has been scheduled for oral argument in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (No. 09-5142) on Thursday, January 14, 2010.


The civil action, Gordon v. Biden (formerly Gordon v. Cheney), addresses the mal-apportionment of Electoral College votes, voter dilution by race and/or party affiliation with the popular vote misrepresented by the winner-take-all system of allocating electoral votes. The civil action seeks relief against the Vice President who presides over the tabulation of "unbound Southern electoral states" who by practice, unsupported by state or federal statute, traditionally award Presidential Electors on a "winner-take-all basis" in violation of the mal-apportionment penalty clause pursuant to Amend. XIV§2 as implemented by 2U.S.C.§6. All Court Documents, links, Green Party of the United States Press Releases and other materials related to the action are available online at http://www.electors.us.

"This is an unconscionable position to be taken by the Department of Justice under the leadership of an Attorney General of the United States of African descent serving in the Administration of the first President of the United States of African descent", say Black Caucus officials in their letter to Attorney General Eric Holder.

Gordon filed the Democratizing the Electoral College Civil Action on July 28th, 2008, to commemorate the Century and Two Score years anniversary of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

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

Thursday, June 4, 2009

No Regrets for a "choice of words".

by Asa Gordon

Washington DC -We may be certain that due to their rich experience of privilege and denial, white male pundits, be they of liberal or conservative persuasion, will never regret or even acknowledge their own racist "choice of words" when commenting on Supreme Court nominee Sotomayor's 2001 speech.

As a case in point, take the opening paragraph of the front-page Washington Post article headlined "Obama Says Judge Regrets Wording" (Saturday, May 30, 2009). The article's biased "choice of words" presents the phrase "wise Latina" out of the context of Sotomayor's caveat "I would hope" and places the word "often" out of the context of Sotomayor's caveat "more often then not." This provides the pretext for "white male" pundits to charge that Sotomayor's "choice of words" is racist, when in reality the term "racist" better describes their own "choice of words."

A racist would not provide caveats when expounding on racial superiority. A racist does not simply "hope" to make better decisions than would another race. It is presumed that such is the case. For a racist, "a better conclusion" would not be rendered "more often then not." It would be the unavoidable outcome of racial superiority. The institutionalized racism in media reports represents the irrational bias of "white male" pundits that has prevailed over the rational "choice of words" in Sotomayor's 2001 speech.

The Washington Post's selective paraphrase reads as follows:
"President Obama said yesterday that Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor regrets her choice of words in a 2001 speech in which she said a "wise Latina" judge would often make better decisions than a white male."

Sotomayor's "choice of words" in context reads:
"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

It is the ultimate sexism to assert that the experience of women does not offer better insight into the problems of women then does the experience of men, particularly when the statement is qualified by the phrase "more often then not." Similarly, it is the ultimate racism to assert that it is racist to suggest that the experience of the victims of white supremacy, in a nation founded on white male supremacy, may "more often then not" provide better insights into the nature of racism in America and "reach a better conclusion" then what is provided from the experience of being a white male. It is the ultimate racist and sexist mentality to insist that the white male's intellect is so superior that his racially privileged experience is no handicap in rendering justice and that there is no advantage in the experience of women and non-whites when rendering judgments on the issues of sexism or racism in our society. To the white male, any consideration of gender or racial "diversity" is reverse sexism and reverse racism. The political power of this fanciful and irrational racial assault by white male pundits has actually pressured an African-American President to declare that his Latina Supreme Court nominee regrets her "choice of words."

The controversy over the role that life experience offers to judicial insight arose a few years ago over the nomination of Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts. The self-righteous, bi-partisan liberal and conservative media pundits rebuked veteran Civil Rights leaders John Lewis and Wade Henderson for their characterization of the "indisputably qualified conservative" Roberts as a pre- Brown v Board of Education Justice. The media reaction at the time made it clear that many white male pundits, regardless of political persuasion, just didn't get it. Their paternalistic rebukes represented a belief in a race so inherently rational that fairness was assumed even where prejudice was evident. It was such a faith that moved "liberal" Senators Patrick J. Leahy, Herb Kohl, and Russell Feingold to vote for Roberts on "hope" and won the endorsement of the "liberal" Washington Post. Is there any wonder that Plessy v. Ferguson's 1896 ruling ("[I]t is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it") remains this nation's ageless judgment of racial conflict. Yes, media pundits, the pre-Brown/Plessey justices that made the decision to provide judicial cover for legal apartheid in America were all "indisputably qualified conservative" justices who knew they were not racist, that their judgment was not racist, and that the criticism of the blacks of their day was emotionalism.

However, Thurgood Marshal posed a caveat, with respect to Justice Clearence Thomas, as to the danger in giving unwarranted weight to identity "experience" in order to judge a favorable "empathy" in considering the justifiable need for diversity on the Supreme Court. I am concerned that Sotomayor's experience as a prosecutor and corporate lawyer may embody an "empathy" that may prove to be as hostile to the Latina-American community as Justice Thomas proved to be for the African-American community. But in that my experience is that of a African- American, I will rely on the "experience" of the Latina-American community and "hope" they "reach a better conclusion" then we did.

Asa Gordon is the Executive Director of the Douglas Institute of Government in Washington, DC and the Chair of the DC Statehood Green Party Electoral College Task Force.

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