November, 29 2010, 10:37am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Dan Beeton, 202-239-1460
International Community Should Reject Haiti's "Sham" Elections, CEPR Co-Director Says
Media, Observers Note Numerous Irregularities
WASHINGTON
Haiti's elections, which were fraught with widespread irregularities and the arbitrary exclusion of political parties, should be rejected by the international community, Mark Weisbrot, Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research said today.
"From the banning of the country's most popular party from the ballot to election day irregularities including numerous reports of ballot stuffing and the disenfranchisement of numerous eligible voters, these elections were an obvious farce from start to finish," Weisbrot said.
Twelve presidential candidates and thousands of demonstrators called for the elections to be canceled on Sunday.
"The international community should reject these elections and affirm support for democratic institutions in Haiti," Weisbrot added. "Otherwise, Haiti could be left with a government that is widely seen as illegitimate."
Weisbrot recommended that Haiti's Provisional Electoral Council (CEP) be replaced so that new elections that would include all eligible political parties, and gain the respect of the population, could be held.
CEPR policy analyst Alex Main was in Haiti to observe what took place on election day, and witnessed numerous irregularities, including what appeared to be a stuffed ballot box at one location. Main noted that turnout appeared low at polling locations he visited, which would be consistent with official voter registration data for some areas. In Cite Soleil, for example - a Fanmi Lavalas party stronghold with a population of around 300,000 -- less than 100,000 people were registered to vote.
"It is clear that the sentiment here is that the international community should have done something to provide for people's basic needs, such as shelter, drinkable water and sanitation, and get some of the other life-threatening conditions -- including the cholera outbreak -- under control, before trying to hold elections," Main said. "The procedural illegitimacy has made this skepticism of the elections even stronger."
The elections were widely decried as unfair long before election day. The CEP's arbitrary exclusion of over a dozen political parties - including the most popular, Fanmi Lavalas - was condemned by 45 members of the U.S. Congress; Senator Richard Lugar, the most influential Republican Senator on foreign affairs; dozens of aid and policy NGO's; and others. Numerous major media outlets including the New York Times, Financial Times, CNN, Reuters, AP, and others reported many instances of irregularities throughout election day, including registered voters whose names did not appear on voter lists and apparent attempts at ballot stuffing. The New York Times reported that less than half of requisite voter registration cards were believed to have been distributed ahead of the elections. Several violent incidents also marred the electoral process, with media reports of at least two people killed on election day.
Main noted that in all of the polling locations he visited around Port-au-Prince and neighboring Carrefour there were people who wished to vote but were unable to do so since they did not appear on voter rolls. Media reports described numerous similar incidents, such as at the polling location for Camp Corail, which houses over 7,500 people yet had only 39 registered names on the voter roll.
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.
(202) 293-5380LATEST NEWS
Senate Dems Demand Explanation After Big Oil Lobbied for 'Giveaways at the Expense of American Families'
The fossil fuel industry spent big to push through a $1 billion provision in the GOP budget bill, which the senators said would allow some oil companies to "pay no federal income taxes whatsoever."
Jun 27, 2025
Four Democratic U.S. senators are demanding an explanation from Big Oil after a $1.1 billion tax loophole was added to the Senate version of the GOP's budget reconciliation megabill.
Letters sent Thursday by Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) called out the CEOs of two oil giants, ConocoPhillips and Ovintiv, which they say "lobbied furiously" for the handout.
The companies, the senators said, "[stand] to benefit tremendously from this provision and ha[ve] spent big to support it—while preserving the many government subsidies for the oil and gas industry already in the tax code."
They asked for the companies to disclose how much they have spent lobbying Republicans for the tax break and how much of a windfall they expect in return.
The provision in question, approved by the Senate Finance Committee last week, would shield many large oil companies from the Inflation Reduction Act's corporate alternative minimum tax, or CAMT. Introduced in 2022, the CAMT requires that companies making more than $1 billion pay 15% of the profits they report to shareholders.
"The rationale for CAMT was simple," the senators said. "For far too long, massive corporations had taken advantage of loopholes in the tax code to avoid paying their fair share, sometimes paying zero federal taxes despite earning billions in profits."
The GOP bill modifies how oil companies are required to report earnings, allowing them to exempt "intangible drilling and development costs," which in turn allows more companies to fall below the $1 billion earnings threshold.
The senators highlighted a 2023 earnings call by Marathon Oil, recently acquired by ConocoPhillips, in which executives said the CAMT was the only income tax they were required to pay.
"If enacted," the senators said, "this provision would reduce or even eliminate tax liabilities for oil and gas companies under CAMT, allowing some to pay no federal income taxes whatsoever."
The letter highlighted lobbying filings by ConocoPhillips and Ovintiv in which they "explicitly prioritize" securing this handout.
Referenced throughout is the aggressive effort to court Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), who wrote the loophole into the Senate bill. According to OpenSecrets, Lankford received more than $546,000 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry—his top source of industry donations—between 2019 and 2024.
The senators described the industry's lobbying as "especially insulting" because "Senate Republicans are trying to pay for this handout with cuts to other programs that would end up raising energy prices for everyday Americans."
The GOP bill would eliminate tax breaks for clean energy that incentivize consumers to purchase electric vehicles and make their homes more energy-efficient, including the home energy-efficiency and residential clean energy credits.
Citing data from Rewiring America, the senators estimated that ditching the two credits would cost the average household up to $2,200 per year in savings on utility bills.
The Center for American Progress projects that eliminating electric vehicle credits would increase demand for gasoline, raising prices by 27 to 35 cents per gallon by 2035. Americans will pay the oil and gas industry "an additional $339 billion for gasoline and $75 billion for electricity by 2035," the May report says.
"Congress should not raise energy prices for working families to deliver handouts to Big Oil," the senators said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Palestinian American Student Who Refused to Stand for Pledge of Allegiance Sues School for Violating Her Rights
Danielle Khalaf was "simply exercising her constitutional right not to partake in the Pledge of Allegiance as a sign of protest" against Israel's U.S.-backed war on Gaza, said one of her attorneys.
Jun 27, 2025
The father of a 14-year-old Michigan student filed a lawsuit in federal court this week against the Plymouth-Canton Community Schools District and one of its teachers for allegedly violating the First Amendment rights of his daughter, who quietly refused to stand for and recite the Pledge of Allegiance in class earlier this year.
Danielle Khalaf, a U.S. citizen of Palestinian descent, opted on three separate occasions in January to remain seated and silent as her classmates recited the Pledge of Allegiance, saying she was protesting the Israeli government's U.S.-backed assault on Gaza.
The lawsuit, backed by the ACLU of Michigan and the Arab American Civil Rights League, alleges that when Khalaf approached her teacher after class to explain why she was not standing and reciting the pledge, the teacher responded, "Since you live in this country and enjoy its freedom, if you don't like it, you should go back to your country."
Khalaf told reporters earlier this year that she "ran out of the room crying," and the lawsuit states that she "suffered extensive emotional and social injuries" stemming from the teacher's conduct. The third time Khalaf declined to stand for and recite the pledge, the teacher "admonished" her in front of the class and told her "she was being disrespectful and that she should be ashamed of herself," according to the complaint.
Nabih Ayad, an attorney for the Arab American Civil Rights League, said in a statement that "it is disturbing that a teacher who is trusted to teach our children would succumb to such insensitivities to one of her students knowing that the student is of Arab Palestinian descent, and knowing of the many deaths overseas in Gaza of family members of Palestinians living in metro Detroit, that she would add insult to injury and call the student out for simply exercising her constitutional right not to partake in the Pledge of Allegiance as a sign of protest."
"That teacher most definitely should have known it is every student's right in this country to not stand for the Pledge of Allegiance regardless of your personal views," said Ayad.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Bank-Funded Senate Republicans Revive Effort to Gut Consumer Protection Agency's Budget
"Senate Republicans will bring to the floor a proposal that slashes the agency's available budget so they can hand out more tax breaks for billionaires and billionaire corporations," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
Jun 27, 2025
Senate Republicans on Thursday moved to revive a plan to dramatically reduce the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's budget after the chamber's parliamentarian determined that an earlier proposal ran afoul of reconciliation rules.
The previous proposal, crafted by Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee, would have zeroed out the CFPB's budget, but the Senate parliamentarian deemed it in violation of the Byrd Rule.
The new attack on the CFPB, unveiled by Senate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott (R-S.C.)—a major recipient of financial industry donations—would cut the agency's budget nearly in half. The proposal still must face scrutiny from the parliamentarian.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee and an architect of the consumer bureau, said in a statement that Democrats would introduce an amendment to strip the proposal from the reconciliation package, noting that the CFPB has "returned $21 billion to scammed American families" since its inception in the wake of the Great Recession.
" Donald Trump and Republicans tried to shut down the CFPB by gutting its entire operating budget to 0%," said Warren. "We fought back and won. Now, Senate Republicans will bring to the floor a proposal that slashes the agency's available budget so they can hand out more tax breaks for billionaires and billionaire corporations."
The CFPB has been a major target of the Trump administration, which has installed an opponent of the agency—Russell Vought—as its acting director, moved to gut the bureau's staff, and effectively halted its enforcement efforts. Since the start of Trump's second term, the CFPB has dropped at least 18 enforcement actions against predatory financial firms.
"Trump is making his corporate backers even richer by letting them swindle you," former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote Thursday.
Research released earlier this week estimates that the Trump administration's assault on the CFPB has already cost Americans $18 billion worth of fees and lost compensation for harms inflicted by law-breaking corporations.
"The increased consumer costs from the CFPB's rollback of regulations on bank fees, wholesale dismissal of cases against banks and other lenders, and the apparent failure to disburse funds intended for harmed borrowers run counter to Trump's campaign pledges to ease the cost of living," Reutersreported Tuesday, citing an analysis by the Student Borrower Protection Center and the Consumer Federation of America.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular