What you don't know about Civil Rights CAN hurt you...

"Civil Rights" is not the name of a movement...

"Civil Rights" is not a type of organization..."Civil Rights" is not a method of protest...

Civil 'Rights' are the rights and privileges guaranteed by law to all citizens of the United States. The Civil Rights movement was an organized and protracted effort to ensure that the rights guaranteed by law were equally extended to all Americans. Civil Rights Organizations were those groups who worked to ensure the fair and equal application of the laws, foremost among them being the 14th amendment to the Constitution which reads in part:
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."In its truest sense, the struggle over civil rights has never really abated. That's because Civil 'Rights' are, in essence, matters of law; and the laws from which they derive are dynamic. Their meanings and applications are subject to change with each interpretation. By Stare Decisis - as courts render new decisions, their precedent becomes the new practice, so a law that you wrote or read yesterday, could be interpreted to mean something completely different next year. And when you factor in the role of politics and how federal appointments to District Courts are often made along political and ideological lines, you come to realize that our Civil 'Rights' are extremely fragile.

We as activists must not only concern ourselves with securing Civil Rights for all Americans, but we must be equally focused upon protecting those Civil Rights that now exist. Because on any given Monday a court decision, a ballot initiative, or a legal appeal could change the law or its application and strip away a right you had previously taken for granted.Which brings me to Gross vs FBL Financial Services Inc

Jack Gross went to work at FBL Financial Services back in 1987. He worked his way through the ranks, and by 1999 he had been named the Claims Administration Vice President. A couple years later, Jack's job title and duties began to change. He noticed that the duties and responsibilities that he once had, were being shifted to a younger employee. In 2003 Jack noted that his position as "Claims Project Coordinator" lacked a real job description or clearly defined duties, but his younger co-worker had all but assumed the functional equivalent of his old position.In 2004 Jack Gross sued FBL Financial Services for Age Discrimination. The trial lasted a mere 5 days and Jack Gross prevailed. The jury found that Jack Gross proved, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he was demoted and his age was a motivating factor in the demotion decision. They awarded him $46,945.00 for lost compensation.Not surprisingly, FBL appealed.... They filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari, informally referred to as a "Cert Petition" with the Supreme Court. A Cert Petition is a formal request for the Supreme Court to review the decision of a lower court. The Supreme Court granted the Writ of Certiorari and on June 18th, Justice Thomas rendered the 5-4 decision of the court which held that: A plaintiff bringing an Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) disparate-treatment claim must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that age was the "but-for" cause of the challenged adverse employment action. The burden of persuasion does not shift to the employer to show that it would have taken the action regardless of age, even when a plaintiff has produced some evidence that age was one motivating factor in that decision. In a nutshell, the Supreme Court reversed the lower courts decision in favor of Jack Gross, and also put forward a new legal standard for ruling in Age Discrimination cases. The conservative majority on the court (Thomas, Scalia, Alito, Roberts, and Kennedy) ruled that a plaintiff in an age discrimination case must not only prove that age was "A" motivating factor in an adverse employment action or decision; they must prove that age was "THE" motivating factor. And unless or until the plaintiff can present direct evidence of the employer's primary personal motivations, the employer should not be required to prove anything. With the writ of Certiorari, the case was remanded back to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals for retrial. And yesterday, the 8th Circuit Court issued a new ruling in favor of FBL Financial Services... The preponderance of the evidence still shows that FBL Services was considering Jack Gross' age when deciding to demote him, but as of yesterday morning, that no longer meets the legal standard of an Age Discrimination Claim. You see, protection from discrimination or adverse employment actions on the basis of ones age is still a 'Civil Right', but is is now a right guaranteed in a law that is virtually impossible to assert. I said all of that to say this... Our Civil Rights are fragile. Like the picture above, these Rights are like a candle in the wind. If we are not vigilant, if we do not safeguard and protect them, they will be lost...The courts have been busy chipping away at them, bit by bit, for a number of years. We must remember that the protections and safeguards that we fought so hard to secure in the 50's and 60's are not promised to our children. Whether or not they are passed on to the next generation will depend on what we do today. Because on any given Monday, things can change... just like yesterday morning.
The ACLU and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights call for reform at the US Commission on Civil Rights

Long time readers of the blog and WNB Newsbrief will note that we've been talking about the ideological shift and politicization of the US Commission on Civil Rights for the last couple years. (See HERE, and HERE, and HERE, and HERE). Through a series of Bush-era politically motivated appointments, the 8-member Commission is now composed of 4 staunch conservatives who are absolutely ideologically opposed to the goals and precepts of the American Civil Rights movement and 2 right-leaning 'quasi-independents'.But at long last, the call for reform is now picking up steam. On November 18th, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights and the ACLU went to the Congress to call for dramatic reform within the agency.The groups called for reforms that would broaden the commission's mandate so that it can better investigate and address civil rights issues and work to strengthen U.S. commitments on human rights. In particular, they are seeking a change in the way that members are appointed to the commission to ensure that commissioners remain independent. Currently, members are appointed by Congress and the president and are not required to undergo a confirmation process.The commission was created with the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957 as an independent fact-finding body charged with investigating and reporting on civil rights and making recommendations to the federal government on how to fix the problems it uncovered. Through its fact-finding work, it helped lay the foundation for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.Over the past few years, however, the commission has taken positions hostile to civil rights issues, such as opposing the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act in 2006, urging the Senate to vote against the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes bill, encouraging the elimination of school desegregation programs, and opposing the Employee Free Choice Act.

Survey---Mar-Saline Branch of the NAACP

Please respond to this 1 minute survey--- click on the link http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=e3AbllHe9XVLQ9_2f3Yo4L5g_3d_3d

WE ARE 100 1909-2009

100 years ago, a small multiracial group of progressive thinkers came together to share a bold dream: An America free of the racial oppression that sullied the soul of our nation. The NAACP was born of that noble vision.The new organization launched a 30-year struggle to end the horror of lynch mobs. Then we fought to reverse the Jim Crow laws, and two decades later, segregation was made illegal. In the 1960's, the NAACP took up the fight for economic and political inclusion... and just a few months ago, an African-American president was elected.I've only been CEO of the NAACP since September, but I want to take this opportunity to thank you -- whether you're a veteran NAACP member who was there during the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, or whether you joined us two years ago to protest the treatment of the young men of the Jena 6.The NAACP has always embraced the impossible. Our triumphs have not been ours alone. Ending lynch mobs against African Americans also ended the horror for White Catholics, the second largest group of lynching victims. Our fight against discrimination helped all disenfranchised members of our country open locked doors and break through barriers of inequity. I want to thank you for all you have done... and all you will do as we recommit to the struggle. Because the journey is not over. Black unemployment is twice that of white Americans. A majority of employers preferred to hire a white criminal than a black man without a criminal record, according to several surveys. African American children disproportionately attend segregated, poor quality schools. Mass incarceration is harming far too many people of color when drug treatment and other approaches would have better outcomes. The health disparities in our communities are well-known. Now as we face our second 100 years, we can begin to see the realization of the vision of a new land where all live in safe communities and law enforcement respects and protects our neighborhoods. A land where all children can blossom in quality schools... where every worker has a fair chance for employment, education and advancement. Because of your idealism, your willingness to dream big dreams, to set big goals... and to do the hard work, the NAACP has changed our country in our lifetime.Join me in celebrating... and in taking the next steps to realize our vision of justice and equality for all. And take a look at this Washington Post story about what your NAACP is doing now.

DECLINE to SIGN 'Ban on Affirmative Action Petition'

The NAACP cannot and absolutely refuses to let anyone defeat the gains of diversity in America. America's national security and American businesses benefit by recruiting men and women from diverse races, ethnicities, and backgrounds. We contend that the government has a “compelling interest” in promoting diversity in education and the workplace. Diversity and racial integration are essential to a smoothly functioning, high quality military. A diverse and racially integrated workforce is essential for US companies to compete in an increasingly global economy. We need diversity because US companies must be able to access a diverse pool of talented students from the best schools so that they can train, promote, and build a high caliber workforce capable of meeting the diverse needs of customers in the global marketplace.

Affirmative Action Programs serves as a remedy for minorities who have systematically been excluded and discriminated against. Preferences should be designed to help and not hinder and implemented when there is a “most compelling reason” or” intermediate scrutiny”. This dynamic is crucial to combat and overcome the persistent, lingering effect, and practice of discrimination toward minority groups in our country. We do not desire “reverse discrimination” which only serves to foster anger, resentment, and stir the flames of racial hatred. Americans favor affirmative actions in the abstract but oppose racial preferences; therefore, America supports Affirmative Action.

Affirmative Action would not be necessary, if a serious commitment to hiring of minorities and women regardless of race, color, sex, physical handicap, national origin, religion, age, disability, or sexual orientation were in effect. If true equal opportunity was afforded to qualified individuals regardless of their race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, age, sex, disability, or sexual orientation and people were promoted to the fullest realization of equal employment opportunity for minorities and women through a fair system, Affirmative Action would not be necessary. If a “fair system” covered all aspects of employment relationships for current employees and future employees, including recruitment, hiring, assignment of duties, promotion, tenure, compensation, selection for training and termination; Affirmative Action Programs would not be needed.



The U.S. Supreme Court has acknowledged that we do not yet have a colorblind society. Therefore, we need affirmative action programs.
What does affirmative action do? It sets up a proactive system that identifies barriers that have kept people out of positions, and it develops a means, a mechanism: for taking those barriers apart and ensuring that qualified women, qualified minorities, qualified blacks, Hispanics, Asians and others, have an opportunity to compete on a level playing field with anyone else; for a job, for a contract, for a seat in public education. That's what affirmative action is all about." If most Americans were color blind, or gender blind, then we would not need these programs. Because of affirmative action business, politics, education and so many other positions, and people in those positions look like all Americans. People ought not forget why this law was adapted in the first place. This should tell the world the whole story and the reasoning behind Affirmative Action Programs. Until there is no discrimination in hiring and politics, we will need affirmative action. When people start telling “half truths” about why these programs are needed, they endorse “hate mongers” and those with other motives. The Anti- Affirmative Action movement is aimed at shutting down much of the progress that's been made over the past few years in terms of employment, public contracting and public education. This is an orchestrated serious, well funded campaign which is an effort to roll back the gains of the last decades, but we shall not be moved.

To work, Affirmative Action must help all races, and create equal opportunity where demographics are reversed and hire the best people qualified. The NAACP stands resolute in support of Affirmative Action Programs and vehemently opposes any attempt to dilute its aims. The NAACP will bring to bear the necessary resources to facilitate the desired outcome, which results in the America our “fore-fathers” longed and many yet search for. We have not arrived, we will not go “backwards” but we are determined to seek new gains. Check our resume.

The Conscience of Saline/Lafayette County - September 23, 2006

Health & Medicine

10 things men must know about prostate cancer By Susan Yara

At the age of 53, Joe DiBlasi, a music composer and producer who had worked with such artists as Frank Sinatra, considered himself a healthy man. He was in great physical shape and ate a fairly typical diet. And, like many men, he avoided seeing doctors...he'd managed to go without a checkup or medical test for 15 years, until his wife, Lisa, decided it was time for an appointment. MSNBC

=========================================================

Judge Strikes Down Missouri Voter ID Requirement

"Law is found to be unconstitutional, and hampers election freedoms"

The NAACP legal team and its partners scored another victory in preserving the right of all Americans to cast an unfettered ballot. Yesterday a judge struck down Missouri's new voter identification law as an unconstitutional infringement on the right to vote.

Circuit Judge Richard Callahan considered two combined lawsuits claiming the requirement that demands voters show a federal or Missouri-issued photo ID at the polls was an unconstitutional burden on voters. The judge agreed, issuing an injunction halting implementation of the law and directed Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan to provide notice of the judgment to eachthe 116e116 election authorities in the state.

Once again the actions of those who would curtail and deny Americans this precious and sacred right has not stood legitimate legal challenge, said NAACP General Counsel Dennis C. Hayes. "We will continue to monitor and forcibly act against such attacks on the rights of all Americans."

Callahan said the requirement is a particularly troublesome to women and the poor because a separate Missouri law requires those obtaining or renewing a driver's license to show they are lawfully in the country, generally with a birth certificate or passport.

Those whose names have changed, such as some married women, also must provide documents verifying those changes. While the voter Identification card would be free, the underlying paperwork has a cost, which the judge found unacceptable. "The Missouri NAACP worked hard to bring attention to this unconstitutional law," said Mary Ratliff, president of the Missouri State Conference-NAACP. "We are pleased that Judge Callahan agreed with us. This law was especially burdensome for low income voters. Striking it down was the right thing to do."

Prior to 2002, voters in the state, like most of the country were generally not required to present any form of identification as a condition of voting. In 2002 the Missouri legislature required that some form of identification be presented, but allowed any one of several forms of ID readily available to virtually all registered voters. Earlier this year, the legislature further revised the election laws and eliminated many of the forms of identification that were previously acceptable and established a strict photo ID requirement essentially allowing only those photo IDs that are dated and issued by the state, its national guard or U.S. military.

In his order, Judge Callahan wrote: "Unlike the photo ID laws in most other states, the Missouri law has few real alternatives to a state issued ID, and places most of the burden on the citizen voter". "The photo ID burden placed on the voter may seem minor or inconsequential to the mainstream of our society", the judge continued. "However for the elderly, the poor, the undereducated, or otherwise disadvantaged, the burden can be great if not insurmountable, and it is those very people outside the mainstream of society who are the least equipped to bear the costs or navigate the many bureaucracies necessary to obtain the required documentation."

The judge noted that the 2006 Missouri Voter Protection Act, of which the photo ID requirement is a part, is unconstitutional and violates MissouriÂ’s own constitution because it: Created impermissible additional qualifications to vote Required the payment of money to vote, in violation of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the state constitution. Violated the prohibition on interference with the "free exercise of the right of suffrage" and requirements that all elections be free and open. Created an undue burden on the fundamental right to vote that is not narrowly tailored to meet a compelling state interest, in violation of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the state constitution.

The NAACP was joined in the suit by Give Missourians a Raise Inc. and six other citizen plaintiffs that filed suit in Cole County Circuit Court.
The NAACP is also opposed to a provision expected to be considered by the U.S. House of Representatives in coming weeks. House Resolution 4844 would require all voters to show some form of federally-approved photo identification before being able to cast their vote by the year 2008. It would also require states to ask for documented proof of citizenship by the year 2010.

This legislation flies in the face of our right, guaranteed by the Constitution as well as the recently reauthorized 1965 Voting Rights Act, which mandates that no state or municipality shall in any way infringe on our right to vote. H.R. 4844 re-creates new obstacles in voting akin to a modern day 'poll-taxÂ' by forcing U.S citizens to pay for government approved ID that many of our most vulnerable citizens do not have or cannot easily obtain to prove their citizenship.

Founded in 1909, the NAACP is the nation's oldest and largest civil rights organization. Its members throughout the United States and the world are the premier advocates for civil rights in their communities, conducting voter mobilization and monitoring equal opportunity in the public and private sectors.

=========================================================

Missouri NAACP Annual State Conference

To: Regional Director, NAACP Missouri Unit

From: Mary A. Ratliff, State Conference President

The Missouri State Annual Conference will be held Friday Starting at 12:00n and Saturday, (September 29-30), 2006 at the Hawthorn Park Hotel, 2431 North Glenstone, Springfield, MO 65803 Ph: (417 - 831-3131) - (Fax: 417 - 831-2582).

Registration begins at 12:00 noon on Friday Adult Registration fee: 30.00. Allouth Registration $30.00All Branches remember to be in good standing your assessments must be current. Your Branch assessments and further conference information will be forth coming from Ms. Willa StSecretary. Wetate Conference Seretary.We need to have every president, every officer and executive Committee member in attendance. This is a very important election year and we have many issues on the table in Missouri.

The National Board has mandated that every conference will have training components as out lined by the board during each State Conference meeting. Presidents Remember, if you are leading and nobody is following, you are not leading, you are just taking a walk. Our State conference meeting should be just as important to us as the National Convention, because WE have the opportunity to influence Our State issues.

The National Youth Director will be attending the Conference, and other National Staffiled to attend. Since we filied the Photo I.D. lawsuit, Hilary could come.

God Bless and hope to see you all in Springfield September 29 and 30th. Mary A. Ratliff, President Missouri State Conference

DRAFT Schedule:

Friday -9/29

• 12:00 Registration begins
• 1 -2.p.m. LConferencelative session (MO St. Conf.)
• 3 - 5 Education Workshop
• 6:00 Soul Food Dinner (the location of the sointernational Ministriesope InternationalMinistries, 901 N. MOospect Ave. Springfield,on the5802. The church sits onthe corner of Central and Prospect, Centrchurch'seast and west, the churchis one block east of the corner of National and Central.)

Program Saturday - 9/30

• 9:a.m. - 3:p.m. YOUTH WORKSHOPS
• 9:a.m - 11 Membership/Branch Administration
• 11 - 12 Health
• 12:00 Luncheon
• 1:00 - 2:30 Criminal Justice
• 2:30 Break
• 2:30 - 4:45 Political Action
• 4:45 - 5: 15 p.m. Legislative Session
• 6:30 Banquet

========================================================

MEMBERSHIP IS POWER! JOIN THE NAACP TODAY. For more information, call your local NAACP branch #4069. @660886.5695 or marshallnaacp@socket.net or visit http://www.naacp.org/

The Conscience of Saline County---Where Knowledge is Power!!!

Hilary O. Shelton, Director NAACP Washington Bureau,

Freedom Fund Banquet Speaker

The Mar-Saline Branch of the NAACP announces its Freedom Fund Banquet. The Banquet is September 2, 2006 in the R. Wilson Brown Room on the campus of Missouri Valley College. The banquet is preceded with a guest of honor reception beginning at 5:30 PM. Tickets to the gala is $30.00.

Hilary O. Shelton, presently serves as Director to the NAACP's Washington Bureau. The Washington Bureau is the Federal legislative and national public policy division of the national civil rights organization. In this capacity, Hilary is responsible for advocating the federal public policy issue agenda of the oldest, largest, and most widely recognized civil rights organization in the United States to the U.S. Government. Hilary's government affairs portfolio includes crucial issues such as affirmative action, equal employment protection, access to quality education, stopping gun violence, ending racial profiling, abolition of the death penalty, access to comprehensive healthcare, voting rights protection, federal sentencing reform and a host of civil rights enforcement, expansion and protection issues.

Prior to serving as director to the NAACP Washington Bureau, Hilary served in the position of Federal Liaison/Assistant Director to the Government Affairs Department of The College Fund/UNCF, formerly known as The United Negro College Fund in Washington, D.C. In this capacity, Hilary worked with Senate and House Members of the U.S. Congress, Federal Agencies and Departments, college and university presidents and faculty members, as well as the White House to secure the survival, growth and educational programming excellence of the 39 private historically black colleges and universities throughout the United States.Prior to working for The College Fund/UNCF.

Hilary served as a Federal Policy Program Director to the 8.5 million-member United Methodist Churches' social justice advocacy agency, The General Board of Church & Society. In this capacity, Hilary advocated for the national and international United Methodist Churches' public policy agenda affecting a wide range of civil rights and civil liberties issues including preserving equal opportunity programs such as affirmative action, securing equal high quality public education for all Americans, guaranteeing greater access to higher education and strengthening our nation's historically Black colleges and universities, abolition of the death penalty, reforming the criminal justice system, voting rights protection and expansion, gun control and a host of other social justice policy concerns.

Hilary serves on a number of national boards of directors including, The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, The Center for Democratic Renewal, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, and the Congressional Black Caucus Institute among many others. Playing an integral role in the crafting and final passage of such crucial federal legislation as the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Hilary was also instrumental in ushering through to passage, The Civil Rights Restoration Act, The Violence Against Women Act, The Hate Crimes Statistics Act, The Native American Free Exercise of Religion Act, The National Voter Registration Act, The National Assault Weapons Ban, The Brady Handgun Law, Reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act, the Help America Vote Act and many other crucial laws and policy measures affecting the quality of our lives and equality in our society.

Hilary has humbly received a number of awards and recognitions for his unwavering dedication to civil rights and the mission and goals of the NAACP. Among the many awards to which he is most grateful for receiving, Mr. Shelton is the proud recipient of the National NAACP Medgar W. Evers Award for Excellence, one of the highest honor presented by the national NAACP for Outstanding Service, Sincere Dedication and Commitment to the Mission of the NAACP, the Israeli Embassy and Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism's 2005 Civil Rights Leadership Award, as well as the Congressional Black Caucus Chairman's Award In Recognition and Appreciation for Dedication, Leadership and Commitment to Advancing the Cause of Civil Rights for All Americans.

Born in St. Louis, Missouri, to a family of 6 brothers and sisters, Hilary holds degrees in political science, communications, and legal studies from Howard University in Washington, D.C., the University of Missouri St. Louis, and Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts, respectively.Hilary presently lives in Washington, D.C., with his wife Paula Young Shelton and their three sons, masters Caleb Wesley, Aaron Joshua, and Noah Ottis Young Shelton.
=======================================================

NAACP CALLS FOR A REAL INCREASE IN THE MINIMUM WAGE

URGES CONGRESS TO PASS THE FAIR MINIMUM WAGE ACT AS SOON AS THEY RETURN TO DC FROM THEIR AUGUST DISTRICT WORK PERIOD

_______________________________________________________
THE ISSUE: Just prior to leaving for their August district work period, the United States Senate defeated, by only 3 votes, an attempt to bring up and pass a flawed minimum wage increase. Specifically, the bill that was being considered would have helped 1.8 million fewer American families than the proposal long supported by the NAACP, and it would have drastically reduced the wages of more than one million tipped workers.

Now we must fight even harder than before for a genuine increase in the minimum wage. It is the utmost of hypocrisy for many Members of Congress to suddenly be in strong support of an increase of the minimum wage, and go so far as to agree that it is long overdue, when it is tied to a tax break for the wealthiest Americans but not support a "clean" minimum wage bill that would help all the workers and families it is intended to help.

A real increase in the federal minimum wage is long overdue. Real wages are actually declining for the first time in more than a decade, while the price of everything from healthcare, gasoline and food are rising rapidly. At the current minimum wage of $5.15 an hour, a worker who works 40 hours a week for 52 weeks a year earns $10,712. This is almost $2,000 below the 2003 poverty level for a family of 2 (a parent and a child).

Currently, 7.5 million American workers earn between $5.15 an hour and $8 an hour; 84% of them are adults over the age of 20. Nearly half of them are married or have children. Over half of them are women, and 60% of them work full time.

The Fair Minimum Wage Act has been introduced in the Senate by Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) (S. 1062) and in the House by Congressman George Miller (D-CA) (H.R. 2429). This legislation would raise the current $5.15 minimum wage by 70 cents six months after enactment (to $5.85 an hour); an additional 70 cents (to $6.55 an hour) a year later, and a final 70 cent increase (to $7.25 an hour) a year after that. This increase will help real workers who work hard to support themselves and their families; ethnic minority Americans make up nearly 40% of those who would benefit from the increase.

We must pass the Fair Minimum Wage Act now. No one who works hard for a living should be forced to exist well below the poverty level. Please click here to view the entire Action Alert.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS IMPORTANT MATTER!!! If you have any questions, call Hilary Shelton at the Washington Bureau at (202) 463-2940.
=========================================================

Voter Suppression in Missouri
Published: NY Times August 10, 2006

Missouri is the latest front in the Republican Party's campaign to use photo ID requirements to suppress voting. The Republican legislators who pushed through Missouri's ID law earlier this year said they wanted to deter fraud, but that claim falls apart on close inspection. Missouri's new ID rules and similar ones adopted last year in Indiana and Georgia are intended to deter voting by blacks, poor people and other groups that are less likely to have driver's licenses. Georgia's law has been blocked by the courts, and the others should be too.

Even before Missouri passed its new law, it had tougher ID requirements than many states. Voters were required, with limited exceptions, to bring ID with them to the polls, but university ID cards, bank statements mailed to a voter's address, and similar documents were acceptable. The new law requires a government-issued photo ID, which as many as 200,000 Missourians do not have.

Missourians who have driver's licenses will have little trouble voting, but many who do not will have to go to considerable trouble to get special ID's. The supporting documents needed to get these, like birth certificates, often have fees attached, so some Missourians will have to pay to keep voting. It is likely that many people will not jump all of the bureaucratic hurdles to get the special ID, and will become ineligible to vote.

Not coincidentally, groups that are more likely to vote against the Republicans who passed the ID law will be most disadvantaged. Advocates for blacks, the elderly and the disabled say that those groups are less likely than the average Missourian to have driver's licenses, and most likely to lose their right to vote. In close elections, like the bitterly contested U.S. Senate race now under way in the state, this disenfranchisement could easily make the difference in who wins.

The new law's supporters say its purpose is to deter fraud. But there is little evidence of imposter voting, the sort of fraud that ID laws are aimed at, in Missouri or anywhere else. Groups in Missouri that want to suppress voting have a long history of crying fraud, but investigations by the Justice Department and The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, among others, have refuted such claims in the past. If the Legislature really wanted to deter fraud, it would have focused its efforts on absentee ballots, which are a notorious source of election fraud and are not covered by Missouri's new ID requirements.

Because of the important constitutional issues these laws raise, courts will have the final say. Federal and state judges have already blocked Georgia's ID law from taking effect, and although Indiana's law was upheld earlier this year, that ruling is on appeal. Missouri voting-rights advocates recently filed suit against their state's law.

Unduly onerous voter ID laws violate equal protection, and when voters have to pay to get the ID's, they are an illegal poll tax. They are also an insult to democracy, because their goal is to have elections in which eligible voters are turned away.

========================================================

MEMBERSHIP IS POWER! JOIN THE NAACP TODAY. For more information, call your local NAACP branch #4069. @660886.5695 or marshallnaacp@socket.net or visit http://www.naacp.org/