The Roving Activist’s Blog

The Supreme Court voted recently to uphold the redistricting efforts of Texas Republicans ruling that it was not unconstitutional to redistrict more than once per decade, nor was it unfair to redistrict in a  manner that would help the party.

However, the Court did rule that a district in Southwestern Texas was redrawn illegally because it was done in a way that hurt Latino voters. The Voting Rights Act of 1982 forbids officials from “diluting” the power of minority voting blocs. Texas lawmakers violated that provision when they shifted 100,000 Latino voters to shore up the reelection prospects of Rep. Henry Bonilla, a Republican who has been unpopular with Latino voters. The Texas Legislature split Webb County, which is 94% Latino, between Bonilla’s 23rd District and a neighboring district.

Let me digress a bit. Folks here in the District should remember Rep. Bonilla. He was the oaf who decided that it would be a great idea to rename 16th Street in Northwest to Ronald Reagan Boulevard. Of course, that didn’t go over well with Washington DC’s mostly minority, overwhelmingly Democrat voters who had no liking for the former prez, and who noted that Reagan already had the Trade Center building, as well as National Airport named for him. Thankfully, Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) put a stop to that infuriating nonsense!

As for the illegal redrawing, this ruling requires the Texas Legislature — or perhaps a panel of judges — to redraw that district, which will force others to be changed.

Now that the Court has ruled on the redistricting issue, its time for those Texas lawmakers who held up the vote to extend the Voting Rights Act to get off their duffs, roll up their sleeves, and get to work. The time for excuses is over! The dirty deed that was done in Webb County is a prime example of why the Voting Rights Act is still needed.

The House decided yesterday to postpone voting on the renewal of the Voting Rights Act, a law from the civil rights era designed to protect African Americans and other minorities from discrimination at the polls. A bill to extend the law for 25 years has support from the White House, top legislative leaders of both parties and a key, GOP-controlled committee that passed it 33 to 1, but Republican lawmakers from Texas objected to certain provisions of the law, notably, the requirement that the state must get permission, or “preclearance,” from the Justice Department or a federal court before making changes to voting standards, practices or procedures.

The rule was aimed at states with a history of discrimination in voting. The original 1965 law targed six states–Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Virginia. Texas, Arizona and Alaska were added in 1975, when the law was expanded to protect people who have limited knowledge of English.

Congressmen form the Southern states feel that there is no more racial discrimination, and believe that if their state must submit to preclearance, all states should be required to do so. Some lawmakers are also seeking an amendment allowing the Justice Department to decide every year whether states need preclearance. That makes sense to me because there are some states like Florida that should be considered for preclearance. Other lawmakers are against that type of amendment because it would inevitably result in several states suing for relief from the provisions while the law hung in the balance.

Another provision objected to was the law’s requirement that jurisdictions print ballots in other languages if 5 percent or more of their voting-age populations have limited English skills. Many congressfolks believe that one must read, write, and speak English in order to be able to vote here in the United States. Some feel that it is the voter’s responsibility to bring an interpreter with them to translate the ballot, rather than printing them in other languages.

Advocates say that the provisions, while appearing to help only immigrants, were also designed to help native-born, U.S. citizens who did not receive adequate schooling in English reading comprehension. Unless the provisions allow for touchscreen machines with screen readers in every polling place, I can understand where the above misunderstanding arises. Not that I’m against printing ballots in other languages in areas where people who speak those languages are 5 percent or more of the population. There are several states where this has already occured, and we’re not just talking Spanish, either. Alaska and Arizona has large populations of Native Americans who do not speak or read English well. California and New York has huge numbers of Chinese and other Asian Americans who aren’t fluent in English. Washington, DC has large numbers of naturalzed citizens from African nations where French is spoken. Yes, English is the official language here, but it must be realized that we are a nation where many languages are spoken, and not everyone learns English at the same pace, so accommodations should be made.

I imagine that we’ll have to wait and see how this is resolved. House Republicans say that they are committed to passing the Voting Rights Act legislation as soon as possible. The Senate has not yet voted, so it will be interesting to see if they will have the same issues as the House Republicans. I’m convinced that they will, but who knows? I’ll keep you posted.

I watched a movie last night called Touch the Top of the World. It was a true story about a guy named Eric who became the first and only blind person to climb and summit Mt. Everest.

While it was a decent movie, it got me to thinking about how the world perceives us folks with disabilities, and what it seems that we must go through to be accepted by society. In the movie, Eric was an athletic youth who became blind in his early teens. Through the support of his parents, he remained in regular public school, joined his high school wrestling team, and discovered rock climbing.

He got a job in a public school, dated and married his colleague, and graduated from climbing rock walls to climbing mountains, eventually leaving teaching to make a career out of mountain climbing, and lecturing and teaching the sport. Of course, you know how this story ends–after conquering Kilimanjaro, McKinley, and a coule of other super high peaks, he is invited to climb Everest with a team of friends, and of course, succeeds.

As I said, the movie was ok, but while watching it, I became somewhat irritated both at society, and at “supercrips”. To be honest, maybe my ire is directed more at society than the folks with disabilities who feel that they must overachieve in order to succeed and to be accepted. After all, I’ve found myself in the same spot sometimes, and if I get mad at fellow folks with disabilities for their super-high achievements, I’ll come off as belittling the talents of people like Eric, Stephen Hawking, Helen Keller, Alma Rudolph, Christopher Reeves, and others. That is not my intention at all!

I guess what ticks me off is that I, and other folks with disabilities have found through much personal experience that society in general has very low expectations of us. Most see us as helpless objects of pity, or as burdens on society. Many can’t bring themselves to see us as human, let alone as regular folks, and get defensive when we express anger at discrimination or maltreatment. They spout suff like, “you’re an angry cripple”,” you’re a radical militant”, or “you want special rights”.

Then, there are the good-hearted, but misinformed people out there who unfortunately, are uncomfortable or self-conscious around us, and feel that they must tread gently, treat us differently, or feel sorry for us because we are “fragile”, and “less fortunate”. They feel that we are “brave”, “courageous”, or “an inspiration” for doing such things as getting out of bed in the morning, or doing your own shopping. Some are amazed to find that some of us use public transportation, have regualr jobs, or attend university. These are the folks who always want to “help” us, or who don’t know what to say to us, so they ask, “may I help you?”

It is no small wonder that having experienced these extremes of behavior, a significant number of us feel that we must not only achieve, but overachieve! It’s not enough to be average, or good, no, we have to be better than all the rest, because we ‘re representing our people, people with disabilities. I know the feeling well. When I was in college, I saw that my classmates had misgivings about me, so I had to not only be a good student, I had to be the best, and I was! The same thing happened on the job. I felt that I was a pioneer, forging a path and making a way for folks with disabilities who would come after me, so I had to be a superstar, lest others think poorly of us. I went on this way for years.

Oddly enough, it was disability rights activists who brought me down to earth. Here I was being a little superstar, yet not fighting for the right to be ordinary, and to do the things that non-disabled folks take for granted. I began to advocate and fight for the right of all folks with disabilities to have the same rights as non-disabled folks–the right to an education, the right to accessible public transportation, the right to live in our communities, and have jobs and families, and the right to participate in the political process. I learned that what I really wanted was for people to see me as an ordinary person just like them, no better and no worse. Best of all, I learned that the greatest heroes are the ordinary folks who do great things for their communities, and who work to make the world a better place for everyone. Those were the best lessons that I could ever learn!

Of course, there will always be “supercrips” out there doing their thing, and sometimes, achieving great fame. So, while you’re out there climbing Mt Humongobiggo, take some time to also advocate for accessible parks and mountain trails. While you’re out touring the country as Mr. or Miss Disabled Superstar, promoting the search for a cure, speak out publicly for a national attendant services program, or the right to equal education, or the right to affordable, accessible, integrated housing. If you’re a disabled politician on the campaign trail shaking hands and asking for votes, advocate for accessible polling places, and voting machines, and support, and get your colleagues to support legislation that helps folks with disabilities. In other words, be an ordinary hero, and with the help of activists and advocates, one day, we won’t have to be supercrips to be appreciated.

Want to hear a story that is outright shameful, but finally has a good ending? Read on! 

Hundreds of Indian Ocean islanders expelled by Britain to make way for a secret U.S. base are rejoicing after winning the right to go home after almost 40 years.

Exiled at the height of the Cold War, the 2,000 Chagossians were dumped hundreds of miles away on the shores of Mauritius and Seychelles to make way for the U.S. airbase on Diego Garcia.

For years they have lived as refugees and been treated as outcasts, but have never forgotten their homeland.

After a protracted legal battle pitting the islanders against the British government, the High Court in London earlier this month said special measures taken by the government to block their return were unlawful.

Islanders previously thought they had won the right to return after a High Court victory in 2000. The court ruled that a 1971 Immigration Ordinance banning people without permits from entering or remaining in the British colony was unlawful. But the Government used the Royal Prerogative to introduce a fresh order in 2004 which continued their exile.

In a damning verdict, two judges condemned as “repugnant” the British Government’s decision to “exile a whole population” from the Indian Ocean on the basis that it was necessary for “peace, order and good government”.

The families, who were forced out of their home in the mid-Sixties and early Seventies, overturned measures introduced by the British Government under the Royal Prerogative to prevent their return.

Richard Gifford, solicitor for the islanders, said: “The British Government has been defeated in its attempt to abolish the right of abode of the islanders after first deporting them in secret 30 years ago.”

Although the families cannot live on the main island of Diego Garcia, which is home to the airbase, lawyers argued that they should be allowed to return to other islands in the Chagos Archipelago.

From what I have been hearing, some of the Chagossians have recently been to their homeland for a visit, and have been encouraged. All of them want and plan to go home as soon as possible. Good luck and Godspeed to all of them!