August, 23 2016, 10:30am EDT

Civil and Human Rights Coalition Calls for More International Election Monitors in U.S. Presidential Election
WASHINGTON
In advance of the first presidential election in 50 years without a fully operable Voting Rights Act (VRA), an American civil rights group is urging the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to expand its election monitoring mission in the United States and to target resources to states where voter discrimination and intimidation is most likely.
In a letter sent to the OSCE from The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the group explains that, "A confluence of factors has made the right to vote more vulnerable to racial discrimination than at any time in recent history. The need for additional election observers is paramount. The unprecedented weakening of the Voting Rights Act has led to a tidal wave of voter discrimination efforts nationwide and has required the United States to drastically scale back its own election monitoring program. In addition, a leading presidential candidate who has made the demonization of racial, ethnic, and religious minorities a hallmark of his campaign has recently urged supporters to challenge voters at polling sites nationwide."
The OSCE is an international multi-lateral organization that sends election monitors to its participating countries, including the United States. The OSCE has sent observers to every presidential election since 2002 and intends to send 500 observers for 2016.
In addition to expanding its mission, the group is urging the OSCE "to target its resources to states that have adopted discriminatory restrictions or will likely see enhanced voter intimidation efforts, including places like Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Alabama, Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, North Dakota, and Texas.
"The right to vote is more vulnerable now than at any time in the past 50 years," said Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. "Additional monitors can never replace what we lost when the VRA was gutted but we have to use every possible means to ensure the integrity of this election isn't compromised by racial discrimination and intimidation. We now have to fight in the courts and at ballot box for every voter and even our nation's best and most well-organized efforts will not meet the demand we're confronted with. Congress needs to restore the VRA immediately."
The letter is copied below.
August 20, 2016
Michael Georg Link, Director
Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights/
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
Warsaw, Poland
Dear Director Link:
On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, an organization committed to ensuring civil rights, including voting rights, for all Americans, we commend the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) for observing the 2016 election in the United States, as it has done in the previous three presidential election cycles.
We write now to emphasize that the OSCE's plans to monitor the upcoming U.S. presidential election will be more essential than ever before and to encourage the OSCE to greatly expand its election monitoring mission in the United States for this election.
A confluence of factors has made the right to vote more vulnerable to racial discrimination than at any time in recent history. The need for additional election observers is paramount. The unprecedented weakening of the Voting Rights Act has led to a tidal wave of voter discrimination efforts nationwide and has required the United States to drastically scale back its own election monitoring program. In addition, a leading presidential candidate who has made the demonization of racial, ethnic, and religious minorities a hallmark of his campaign has recently urged supporters to challenge voters at polling sites nationwide.[i]
This will be the first presidential election in 50 years without the full protections of the Voting Rights Act. Because of that, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) will not be able to send objective election monitors to protect the rights of voters in the vast majority of places that were once covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.[ii] This means that in the states and localities most likely to enact laws and procedures to disenfranchise voters of color, our federal government will be unable to monitor its own election, making your work even more critical.
Election monitoring is an important component of our democratic process and serves as an additional means of protecting the rights of those who are most likely to be disenfranchised and least able to advocate for their right to vote. But the Department of Justice has determined that the Supreme Court's 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder invalidated the part of the Voting Rights Act that authorized it to send election monitors.
In the 2004 general election, the Department of Justice sent 1,463 federal observers to monitor 55 elections in 30 jurisdictions in 14 different states. Because of the Shelby decision, there will be virtually no election observers deployed in 2016.[iii]
According to a Democracy Journal column by a former Department of Justice official,[iv] "There are countless examples of the federal observer program being used to protect voters from racial discrimination at the polls," including:
- In 2012, federal observers monitoring an election in Shelby County, Alabama--the jurisdiction that sued to be removed from VRA preclearance in Shelby County v. Holder--documented the closing of doors on African-American voters before the voting hours were over, as well as voting officials using racial epithets to describe voters.
- That same year, observers were sent to Alameda and Riverside counties in California to gather information regarding reports of serious failures to provide language assistance to voters who needed it.
- In 2011, a federal court relied on observer reports to conclude that Sandoval County, New Mexico, had effectively disenfranchised members of the Keres tribe.
- In 2010, during the early voting period in Harris County, Texas, federal observers documented intimidation and harassment targeting Latino and African-American voters by an organized, well-funded Texas-based organization with clear partisan electoral goals.
Because of the Shelby decision, none of these instances of voter discrimination would likely be prevented or stopped in 2016.
The 2016 presidential campaign has seen a resurgence of bigoted rhetoric against racial, ethnic, and religious minorities, and a former leader of a violent White supremacist hate group, the Ku Klux Klan, is a candidate for the U.S. Senate.
Now a presidential candidate -- who has made demonizing minorities a central part of his campaign strategy -- is encouraging his supporters to challenge voters at polls in "certain sections" of Pennsylvania, an apparent reference to 59 mostly African-American precincts.[v] Efforts at voter intimidation stemming back to the mid-1970s resulted in a federal court banning the Republican Party from engaging in challenge and intimidation efforts aimed at voters of color.[vi]
Non-governmental civil rights and voting rights organizations will also monitor the election where possible, but even the most well-funded and well-organized efforts can't replace the loss of federal election observers or combat a nationwide effort to intimidate voters of color. Voters of color need every possible protection available to them to ensure they can register and cast a ballot. Your ability to shine an international spotlight on this situation is an important component of that protection.
A nationwide litigation effort since the Shelby decision has sought to blunt the tidal wave of voter discrimination laws that were enacted by states and cities. Recent court victories turning back a few of these laws have proven that these efforts are widespread, require massive investments of time and money to litigate, and intentionally discriminate against voters of color. It took years of litigation to strike down intentionally discriminatory laws, meaning countless voters have already been denied the right to cast ballots in the 2014 mid-term election and in this year's presidential primaries. And efforts to ensure that local election officials are complying with those court orders is one important aspect of election observation.
But for every discriminatory statewide law that can be litigated for years, there are countless city, county, and school board changes to voting districts, precinct locations, poll hours, early voting, and new barriers to registering and voting that will never be challenged in court.
Accordingly, we urge the OSCE to greatly expand its election monitoring program in the United States and to target its resources to states that have adopted discriminatory restrictions or will likely see enhanced voter intimidation efforts, including places like Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Alabama, Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, North Dakota, and Texas.
We welcome the opportunity to work with the OSCE Election Observation Mission and its international monitors to ensure a free and fair election in the United States. We are available to meet with you and your team at your earliest convenience.
Cc:
Katarzyna Jarosiewicz-Wargan, First Deputy Director of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
Alexander Shlyk, Head of the Elections Department of ODIHR
Richard Lappin, Deputy Head of the Elections Department of ODIHR
Sincerely,
Wade Henderson, President & CEO
Nancy Zirkin, Executive Vice President
[i] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/13/how-donald-trumps-bizarre-voter-watch-effort-could-get-the-gop-in-trouble/
[v] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/12/donald-trump-says-hell-only-lose-pennsylvania-where-hes-down-9-points-is-if-cheating-goes-on/
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights is a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 200 national organizations to promote and protect the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States. Through advocacy and outreach to targeted constituencies, The Leadership Conference works toward the goal of a more open and just society - an America as good as its ideals.
(202) 466-3311LATEST NEWS
'Unconscionable': Outrage as GOP Farm Bill Omits Plan to Delay Looming Food Aid Disaster
"The harm unfolding across the country is already far greater than many anticipated," warned one expert.
Jun 24, 2026
Senate Republicans unveiled annual farm legislation this week that would do nothing to address the worsening nationwide hunger crisis spurred by President Donald Trump and the GOP's unprecedented assault on federal food aid.
The draft bill introduced Tuesday by Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), the chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, omits a Democratic proposal to delay a provision of the 2025 Republican budget law that will require states to pay a share of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for the first time in the program's history, while also increasing states' share of administrative costs. State leaders have warned of massive budgetary impacts that could result in even deeper cuts to food aid—and potentially force states to withdraw from the SNAP program entirely.
Ty Jones Cox, vice president for food assistance at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), said it was "unconscionable" for Republicans to do nothing in the face of large-scale loss of food aid—including among children—and a looming budgetary disaster for states across the country.
"The harm unfolding across the country is already far greater than many anticipated, with more than 4 million people losing SNAP through March," Cox said in a statement Tuesday. "Even more people will lose the vital food assistance they need to afford groceries unless Congress immediately delays HR 1’s unprecedented shift of significant new SNAP costs to states."
Without congressional action, the SNAP cost-shifting provision of the Republican budget law will take effect on October 1, 2027. Survey data released this month shows that nearly 30% of US state governments believe they could be forced to narrow SNAP eligibility to cope with the new costs, which are expected to average $218 million per state. Eleven percent of states "identified withdrawing from SNAP as a potential risk," according to the poll conducted by the American Public Human Services Association.
It really seems like it should be a bigger deal that 11% of states who responded to this survey identified *withdrawing from SNAP entirely* as a potential risk of the massive cost shift that's about to hit state budgets thanks to H.R. 1. https://t.co/RbsY9LNdLv pic.twitter.com/TKOQIIK0ci
— Katie Bergh (@Katie_Bergh) June 23, 2026
Crystal FitzSimons, president of the Food Research & Action Center, said Tuesday that the Republican farm bill "ignores the needs of tens of millions of people, including families with children, older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans, who are finding it increasingly difficult to put food on the table."
"By shifting program costs to states, expanding time limits, and putting a cap on future benefit adjustments, HR 1 has undermined SNAP, the stability of families, communities, and local economies, and weakened state budgets," FitzSimons warned. "The SNAP benefit cost shift to states and increase in states’ administrative costs will force states to make impossible choices: reduce education funding, delay infrastructure investments, cut public health programs, constrain Medicaid spending, raise taxes, or reduce access to SNAP itself."
Senate Republicans unveiled their farm legislation amid a growing hunger and affordability crisis that experts say is directly attributable to Trump-GOP policies, from blanket tariffs to the war on Iran to SNAP cuts that the new bill—like the House version—does nothing to reverse.
Survey data released Tuesday by the No Kid Hungry campaign found that 55% of low-income families with children have had to cut back on groceries recently to make ends meet. The poll also found that 90% of families surveyed reported that they "would have to cut back significantly on food" if they lost SNAP benefits.
"Rising prices are making it harder for families to afford basic necessities," George Kelemen, senior vice president of the No Kid Hungry campaign, said in a statement. "That’s why SNAP’s grocery benefit, which helps feed about 40 million Americans including nearly 16 million children, is a vital support for helping them put food on the table."
"This SNAP crisis is too dangerous to ignore," Kelemen added. "Reasonable steps must be included in this farm bill to delay the cost-sharing until states have the time they need to implement all the complex changes handed to them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Experts Fear Trump Has Turned Reflecting Pool Into a 'Giant Duck Death Trap'
"Instead of letting this administration’s bizarre boondoggle keep killing innocent ducks, I hope the Fish and Wildlife Service steps in to do its job," said one critic.
Jun 24, 2026
President Donald Trump's disastrous $14 million renovation of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool may be turning deadly for local wildlife.
Shortly after three ducks were discovered dead in or near the pool, The Washington Post spoke on Monday with animal experts who expressed concern that the waterfowl could have fallen ill due to either the assorted chemicals that have been dumped into the pool in recent weeks or the potentially toxic cyanobacteria that can be found in algae blooms.
A separate investigation published by the Post last week found that “algae levels spiked days after Trump’s renovation" of the pool was completed and reached their highest level in at least five years.
Additionally, multiple news outlets have documented blue material installed in the pool peeling off and floating to the surface of the water.
April Linton, president of City Wildlife, told the Post that she's worried the ducks "could have had exposure to the Reflecting Pool," which "could be something related to peeling paint or algae."
The Center for Biological Diversity on Tuesday called on the US Fish and Wildlife Service to conduct an investigation to determine whether the president's pricey pool renovation was responsible for the ducks' passing.
The center also noted that, if someone is found to be responsible for the ducks' deaths, they could be charged criminally under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Tara Zuardo, senior campaigner at the Center for Biological Diversity, said that Trump's pool renovations killing the ducks would match a pattern of actions that are "cruel, stupid, and selfish."
"Wasting taxpayer money turning the reflecting pool into a giant duck death trap just in time for America’s 250th birthday party is as Trump as it gets," Zuardo said. “Instead of letting this administration’s bizarre boondoggle keep killing innocent ducks, I hope the Fish and Wildlife Service steps in to do its job and protect America’s wildlife."
Trump has tried to blame any problems with the pool renovations on left-wing saboteurs, whom he alleged sliced up the pool with "knives" in "the dark of night."
But according to a Tuesday report in The New York Times, internal government documents show that National Park Service workers had discovered problems with the pool's renovations just days after their completion and weeks before any supposed vandalism of the project had occurred.
Among other things, the Times reported, the workers observed "holes, cracks, and peeling caulking in parts of the pool, along with cuts in sections of the foam," even as Trump was personally crowing about the quality of renovations.
"I’m very good at building things and constructing things," Trump said on June 15, six days after issues with the Reflecting Pool were first documented by workers.
A video posted by meteorologist Chris Gloninger in a Wednesday social media post showed members of the National Guard, whom Trump deployed in Washington, DC against the wishes of local residents last year, patrolling the pool and asking visiting children to stop putting their hands into the pool waters.
The President of the United States deployed the National Guard… to stop kids from splashing in the reflecting pool.
Not the troops' fault…they follow orders.
But what the fu*k are we doing here? pic.twitter.com/5PFlEDiTvj
— Chris Gloninger, CCM, CBM (@ChrisGloninger) June 24, 2026
"Not the troops' fault... they follow orders," Gloninger commented. "But what the fuck are we doing here?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump Discovers Gas Price Gouging, Democrats Offer a Solution: Tax Big Oil
"Mr. President: I have a windfall excess profits bill you could support," said one Democratic senator.
Jun 24, 2026
President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he has directed the US Department of Justice to investigate fossil fuel companies for not lowering gasoline prices as the cost of oil declines amid the prospect of an end to the Iran War.
"The big Oil Companies are not dropping their price at the pump commensurate with the sharply lower prices they are paying for Oil. Those prices are dropping like a rock! In other words, customers are being 'gouged,'" Trump said on his Truth Social network.
"I have instructed the DOJ to immediately start looking into this," he added. "Gasoline prices better start going down a lot faster than what I’m seeing!"
While benchmark West Texas Intermediate and Brent Crude oil prices have fallen to their lowest levels since Trump launched the illegal US-Israeli war of choice on Iran on February 28, the average price for a gallon of unleaded gasoline in the United States was $3.93 per gallon on Wednesday, around one-third higher than it was the day before the war started but down from a high of $4.52 a month ago, according to the American Automobile Association.
"The price of fuel is not only a national security issue, it impacts the wallet of every American," an unnamed Trump administration official told ABC News on Wednesday following the president's post. "We will always commit to ensuring affordability in this nation."
Responding to Trump's post, US Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) noted on social media that he has a solution for Big Oil price gouging.
In March, Whitehouse and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) reintroduced the Big Oil Windfall Profits Tax Act “to curb profiteering by oil companies and provide Americans relief at the gas pump.”
The legislation—which only applies to large oil companies—would impose a per-barrel tax “equal to 50% of the difference between the current price per barrel of oil and the average price per barrel last year, when big oil companies were already earning large profits.”
Democrats in both chambers of Congress have also called for the prosecution of corporations that use the war as a pretext for price gouging.
Polling has shown that Americans largely support a tax on Big Oil windfall profits, which, according to The Guardian, amounted to $23 billion in the first month of the war alone—or $30 million per hour.
NEW: As Americans face rising oil costs, Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner has released an energy plan aiming to “End Big Oil Price Gouging.”We find voters support key elements of the plan, including an oil windfall tax to freeze or lower electricity rates.
[image or embed]
— Data for Progress (@dataforprogress.org) June 18, 2026 at 11:49 AM
Trump has been a staunch supporter of fossil fuel companies. While running for reelection on a "drill, baby, drill" energy platform, he reportedly promised Big Oil executives that he would eviscerate climate regulations enacted by the Biden administration if they gave $1 billion to his campaign.
Fossil fuel interests spent nearly $450 million during the 2024 election cycle on campaign contributions, lobbying, and efforts supporting Republican causes and candidates, including Trump.
As pump prices soared and Americans suffered amid Trump's war, the president—who promised gas under $2 a gallon and no new wars—said that “when oil prices go up, we make a lot of money."
Last week, the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy estimated that Americans have paid nearly $54 billion extra for gas and fuel—more than $400 per household—than they would have if the war never happened.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


