Various Direct Links

09 June 2012

Repudiation: Violent Clergy

There are some excellent blogs that cover this topic on an ongoing basis, such as Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, and quite a few atheist blogs.  My purpose is not to attack religion in this post, but to highlight a few examples of religion being used as a cover or an excuse.  So, let's start with the current headlines:

Megachurch Pastor Creflo Dollar is in the news today, arrested for having struck his teenage daughter.
The 15-year-old daughter of megachurch pastor Creflo Dollar told authorities her father choked and punched her, and hit her with his shoe during an argument over whether she could go to a party, according to a police report.
Dollar's 19-year-old daughter corroborated most of her sister's story, but Dollar disputed it, telling a sheriff's deputy he was trying to restrain her when she became disrespectful. When she began to hit back, he wrestled her to the floor and spanked her, according to the police report.
This type of story is not unique to protestant megachurch leaders.  Perhaps the best known ongoing scandal is the Roman Catholic Church cover-up of pedophile priests.
Archbishop Charles Chaput estimates that the Archdiocese of Philadelphia has spent more than $11 million on the ongoing clergy abuse crisis and that does not include the trial of Monsignor William Lynn. Chaput stressed that the money to pay the bills will come from the sale of excess property owned by the archdiocese.
Lest it look like I'm just objecting to Christian organizations, let's look at recent news regarding my faith, Judaism.  In fact, Judaism has its own problem with pedophiles and failure to report them.  The Failed Messiah is a blog that pays attention to problems with the Hassidic movement.
Despite frequent examples of rabbis not reporting abuse and rabbis threatening victims who want to report child sexual abuse to police, [Chabad spokesman Rabbi Yaakov] Behrman thinks the law should not be changed in order to make their non-reporting a crime.
This from a man whose own employer, the Chabad-Lubavitch 'news' service, has not written a word about the massive child sexual abuse scandal rocking Chabad's Australian headquarters. In fact, no one from Chabad's International Headquarters in Brooklyn has said anything to condemn or distance itself from the alleged coverup conducted by its Australian headquarters and the intimidation and harassment of alleged victims by Chabad leaders there. And no one – not Rabbi Yehuda Krinsky, not Rabbi Avrohom Shemtov, not Rabbi Moshe Kotlarsky – have said anything to console or support the alleged victims (of which there are, at this point, at least a dozen vetted by police).
The Chabad community's behavior toward the alleged victims is so offensive that police have condemned it in open court.
There are plentiful examples in other religious communities, but I trust this collection is sufficient to make my point.  Religions are currently being used as places where those who are violent, particularly against children, can hide and can justify their misdeeds.

Many of these same religions have been injecting themselves into politics for the last several election cycles.  The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees that the government will not establish a state religion or interfere with the exercise of religious faith, but numerous churches are endeavoring to see their precepts enshrined into our laws even if their institutions are not explicitly "established".

I'm reaching a point where I am thinking that the tax exemption for religious institutions is no longer appropriate.  No, this is not a suggestion that religious freedom be limited, just that collection plates be taxed like any other business income.

I welcome your thoughts, either in comments below or send me an e-mail at TeacherSome@gmail.com

05 June 2012

5 June 2012: Marriage News Watch, Prop 8 Rehearing Denied



Links:  American Foundation for Equal Rights, Marriage News Watch.

23 January 2012: Marriage News Watch.
30 January 2012: Marriage News Watch.
6 February 2012: Marriage News Watch.
13 February 2012: Marriage News Watch.
20 February 2012: Marriage News Watch.
21 February 2012: Marriage News Watch Special Episode.
27 February 2012: Marriage News Watch.
12 March 2012: Marriage News Watch.
19 March 2012: Marriage News Watch.
26 March 2012: Marriage News Watch.
2 April 2012: Marriage News Watch.
5 April 2012: Marriage News Watch, Surprise Advance.
16 April 2012: Marriage News Watch.
23 April 2012: Marriage News Watch.
30 April 2012: Marriage News Watch.
7 May 2012: Marriage News Watch.
10 May 2012: Marriage News Watch, 2012's Biggest Marriage Milestones So Far.
14 May 2012: Marriage News Watch.
21 May 2012: Marriage News Watch.
28 May 2012: Marriage News Watch.
4 June 2012: Marriage News Watch.

11 June 2012: Marriage News Watch.
18 June 2012: Marriage News Watch.
25 June 2012: Marriage News Watch.
2 July 2012: Marriage News Watch.
10 July 2012: Marriage News Watch.
16 July 2012: Marriage News Watch.

FollowUp 36: Wisconsin Republican Dirty Tricks



Cenk Uygur states many of my views on Governor Walker's dirty tricks (which I have discussed in thirty-six prior posts ... linked at the bottom).  It was never about the Wisconsin state budget, it was always about breaking the unions.  One does not need to be a union member to appreciate that there is a balance by having unions and negotiations.  Here the info from The Young Turks on YouTube.
"Governor Scott Walker is not trying to win the Wisconsin recall election that will be held June 5. He is trying to buy it...Walker's campaign finance disclosure forms reveal that, as of May 21, Walker has raised more than $30 million for the June 5 fight he was forced into when more than 900,000 Wisconsinites petitioned for a new election...".* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down.
*Read more from John Nichols of The Nation: http://www.thenation.com/blog/168201/scott-walker-tries-buy-election-and-state
As Goes Janesville: http://371productions.com/what-we-make/documentaries/as-goes-janesville/
Support The Young Turks by Subscribing http://bit.ly/TYTonYouTube

The link for As Goes Janesville (referring to a small city in Southern Wisconsin) includes a ten minute preview of their documentary which will air this Autumn on public television.

Today is election day in California, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, and South Dakota (all primary elections) and Wisconsin (the big recall election).  If you are curious, there is only one more state left to hold a primary election (Utah will vote on 26 June).  While people in those states should still exercise their civic right to vote, it is particularly important that folks in Wisconsin do so.  For the sake of Democracy, please vote.

If you are a Wisconsinite and you don't know where to vote, here the state website that will find your polling location.  (Seriously?  Are there really Wisconsinites who don't already know this?)

A friend of mine in Madison, Wisconsin writes that there are free cab rides available to the polls:
Union Cab is providing free rides to the polls - visit www.unioncab.com/DemocracyInMotion for full info.
Badger Cab is also giving free rides to voters.
This is what democracy looks like!
My guess is that there is probably a similar opportunity in Milwaukee and maybe even in smaller cities like Eau Claire.  No excuses.  Go vote.

16 November 2011, Original Pedantic Political Ponderings post.
30 November 2011, FollowUp 1.
4 December 2011, FollowUp 2.
11 December 2011, FollowUp 3.
14 December 2011, FollowUp 4.
15 December 2011, FollowUp 5.
30 December 2011, FollowUp 6.
13 January 2012, FollowUp 7.
17 January 2012, FollowUp 8.
25 January 2012, FollowUp 9.
2 February 2012, FollowUp 10.
9 February 2012, FollowUp 11.
12 February 2012, FollowUp 12.
18 February 2012, FollowUp 13.
22 February 2012, FollowUp 14.
6 March 2012, FollowUp 15.
12 March 2012, FollowUp 16.
16 March 2012, FollowUp 17.
30 March 2012, FollowUp 18.
31 March 2012, FollowUp 19.
3 April 2012, FollowUp 20.
4 April 2012, FollowUp 21.
11 April 2012, FollowUp 22.
14 April 2012, FollowUp 23.
17 April 2012, FollowUp 24.
21 April 2012, FollowUp 25.
29 April 2012, FollowUp 26.
2 May 2012, FollowUp 27.
6 May 2012, FollowUp 28.
10 May 2012, FollowUp 29.
13 May 2012, FollowUp 30.
23 May 2012, FollowUp 31.
24 May 2012, FollowUp 32.
30 May 2012, FollowUp 33.
2 June 2012, FollowUp 34.
4 June 2012, FollowUp 35.

04 June 2012

FollowUp 35: Wisconsin Republican Dirty Tricks

Voting begins in Wisconsin recall election in the morning.  Today's Fox News Opinion page featured a column by Arthur Herman of the American Enterprise Institute.  You won't be surprised that I disagree with much of what Mr. Herman has to say.
A lot hinges on whether Wisconsin voters decide to keep Gov. Scott Walker, or put a Democrat in his place who’s heavily backed by public-sector unions, who’ve been fighting a bitter 18-month battle with Walker. What’s happening in Wisconsin is really a battle for everyone’s future -- and whether government employees are our servants or our masters.
Recent polls suggest Walker may survive the recall effort. Certainly Democrat Tom Barrett’s campaign has largely downplayed the issues that led to the recall in the first place, namely raising the contribution Wisconsin public employees make to their health benefits and pensions, and ending compulsory collective bargaining. Everyone is realizing that Walker’s prediction that passing these two provisions would save the Badger State from insolvency, and return power over their government to voters, is coming true.
Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett has not been downplaying the issues that led to the recall.  Mr. Herman is not addressing those issues in a way that makes this clear.  The question of health benefits and pensions is not the problem.  When Governor Walker asked for concessions from the unions, he got them.  The immediate response was not to agree to every request but to sit down at the negotiating table and discuss them.  There were no absolute negatives at first.

The problem comes in that the Governor did not simply ask for financial concessions from every public sector union in Wisconsin (most of which do not affect the state budget), he demanded that the unions give up the right to negotiate for the restoration of these concessions in the future.  That is where the unions said no.

Legislating the end to collective bargaining did not affect the budget as Mr. Herman, parroting Governor Walker, suggests, did not "save the Badger State from insolvency", and did not "return power over government to voters".  Those are all lies.  They are big lies and those lies are at the heart of why Mr. Walker is facing this recall election.
Wisconsinites are funny. They love their individuality and their freedom -- which is why Wisconsin is big on the right to bear arms. But they also pride themselves on being progressive-minded. Wisconsin was the first state to allow public sector unions back in 1959. Wisconsin residents never have been instinctive foes of big government -- that is, until big government began to drain them dry.
While it is certainly true that Wisconsinites love both their individuality and their freedom, Mr. Herman is confusing ideas here again.  The right to bear arms is not under threat by Mayor Barrett, but by Governor Walker's "deer czar".  Wisconsinites are upset because Governor Walker has proposed legislation that is intrusive into the doctor's office.  That kind of government is not welcome.
In 2010 they elected Walker to deal with the issue. Facing a massive $137 million deficit, Walker asked workers like teachers and firefighters to make a tiny increase in the amount they had to pay for their health and future benefits -- less than half what government workers pay on average elsewhere- -- and allow local communities to decide for themselves how much to pay their municipal employees. Otherwise, he said, some 5,500 Wisconsin public jobs would have to go.
Teachers' health benefits had zero effect on the state budget.  Mr. Herman is lying.  Most of what Governor Walker requested was granted by the unions, but the GOP proceeded to kill collective bargaining anyway.  But the big issue is buried here.  Balancing the Wisconsin budget, something that Governor Doyle managed to do after being left with a huge mess by Governors Thompson and McCallum, did not require cutting back on public sector employee costs.  It was only because Governor Walker and the GOP majority legislature gave huge tax cuts to big businesses that cuts in expenditures were needed.  This was a problem that Governor Walker created, not one that he inherited.
The unions screamed no, and pushed back hard. Americans remember the scenes last February, with pro-union demonstrators camping out in the State Capitol, shouting obscenities, scrawling graffiti and trying to intimidate legislators into rejecting any reform that would save their state from fiscal collapse, no matter how tiny. Not very Wisconsin-like behavior. It was, in fact, a preview of Occupy Wall Street -- and, like Occupy Wall Street, it woke up people to what can happen when you hand over power to people who have no stake in your posterity.
Mr. Herman is implying that the unions rejecting cutting back on health benefits and pension benefits.  That is a lie.  The unions "pushed back hard" to the proposal to eliminate collective bargaining.  They did shout and they did occupy the Wisconsin State Capitol building.  But after occupying the Capitol for weeks they did far less damage than Mr. Herman, again parroting Governor Walker, alleges.  But he is correct that this was the real start of the Occupy Movement.
The real problem with unions is that they lock employer and employed in a status quo based on the present. They say to their members, “you’ll be able work at this job for this employer, for these wages -- wages we will fight to raise year after year for every employee, regardless of who’s better at his or her job later on, or whether the company is doing well or not.”
Wrong.  Collective bargaining is about negotiating.  The "status quo" is the starting point for those negotiations, not necessarily the final product.  Of course unions fight for the best pay and benefit package that they can negotiate, but it is a negotiation.  Unions typically don't get all of the benefits that they request and businesses or governments don't get all of the concessions that they request.  If a company isn't negotiating based upon how well they are doing, then they do not have effective negotiators.
The dynamic of economic growth and capitalism, by contrast, is built around the future: anticipating and adapting to changes in the marketplace, incorporating new inventions and technologies to produce more at a lower cost, finding workers who are willing to leave work in an industry that’s unprofitable to go to one that is (just as millions of Americans left dirt poor farms in the 20th century to work in factories and plants).
That is not a contrast to the reality of businesses and unions, only to the caricature that Mr. Herman and the folks at the American Enterprise Institute portray it to be.  Unions negotiate.  I have been part of a union negotiating team where we got most of what we wanted.  Later, in worse economic conditions, I was part of a group advising a union negotiating team where we got far less of what we wanted.  Reality does play a big part in the negotiations and both sides always have to give a little.

Mr. Herman hints here at one of the myths that his organization likes to tell.  "You can't fire a teacher who is not teaching well."  It is a myth.  When a teacher has tenure, that means that the teacher cannot be fired without showing cause.  It is a system that prevents a teacher from approaching retirement and being fired to save money on pension expenses, unless that teacher is failing to do her or his job.
Families, like capitalism, look to the future. How will we pay the mortgage next month and next year? How can we help our kids to get to college? Will they have a better life than their parents? In 2010 Wisconsin families realized that future was about to be crushed under an avalanche of debts and rising taxes. They asked Scott Walker to find a solution, and he did. The unions fought a brighter future for the sake of a disastrous present -- one that even doomed their own jobs -- and lost.
Scott Walker is on tape campaigning and saying that he was not going to go after the unions.  He lied.  Wisconsin was not "about to be crushed under and avalanche of debts and rising taxes" except that Mr. Walker gave tax breaks to those who needed them least.  Unions didn't doom their jobs, the GOP did.
If Wisconsin families win again now in the recall fight, it will send a clear message to state capitals across the country and Washington: The future is important to us. Step up and save it, as Scott Walker did, and we will reward you by keeping you in office. It will also send a clear message to America’s unions: help us to move this country forward or get out of the way. This Tuesday, we are all from Wisconsin.
Wisconsin families win if Governor Walker is removed from office.  Wisconsin has always been a purple state, with give and take between the Republicans and the Democrats.  Under Governor Walker, there was no give and take, he just took.  The balance needs to be restored.

As I write, it is less than twenty-four hours before the polls close in Wisconsin and we learn whether the Republicans or the Democrats did a better job at turning out their voters.  Less than twenty-four hours before we learn whether balance is restored to the Dairy State.  I agree with Mr. Herman that this Tuesday, we are all from Wisconsin.

16 November 2011, Original Pedantic Political Ponderings post.
30 November 2011, FollowUp 1.
4 December 2011, FollowUp 2.
11 December 2011, FollowUp 3.
14 December 2011, FollowUp 4.
15 December 2011, FollowUp 5.
30 December 2011, FollowUp 6.
13 January 2012, FollowUp 7.
17 January 2012, FollowUp 8.
25 January 2012, FollowUp 9.
2 February 2012, FollowUp 10.
9 February 2012, FollowUp 11.
12 February 2012, FollowUp 12.
18 February 2012, FollowUp 13.
22 February 2012, FollowUp 14.
6 March 2012, FollowUp 15.
12 March 2012, FollowUp 16.
16 March 2012, FollowUp 17.
30 March 2012, FollowUp 18.
31 March 2012, FollowUp 19.
3 April 2012, FollowUp 20.
4 April 2012, FollowUp 21.
11 April 2012, FollowUp 22.
14 April 2012, FollowUp 23.
17 April 2012, FollowUp 24.
21 April 2012, FollowUp 25.
29 April 2012, FollowUp 26.
2 May 2012, FollowUp 27.
6 May 2012, FollowUp 28.
10 May 2012, FollowUp 29.
13 May 2012, FollowUp 30.
23 May 2012, FollowUp 31.
24 May 2012, FollowUp 32.
30 May 2012, FollowUp 33.
2 June 2012, FollowUp 34.

5 June 2012, FollowUp 36.

4 June 2012: Marriage News Watch



Links:  American Foundation for Equal Rights, Marriage News Watch.

23 January 2012: Marriage News Watch.
30 January 2012: Marriage News Watch.
6 February 2012: Marriage News Watch.
13 February 2012: Marriage News Watch.
20 February 2012: Marriage News Watch.
21 February 2012: Marriage News Watch Special Episode.
27 February 2012: Marriage News Watch.
12 March 2012: Marriage News Watch.
19 March 2012: Marriage News Watch.
26 March 2012: Marriage News Watch.
2 April 2012: Marriage News Watch.
5 April 2012: Marriage News Watch, Surprise Advance.
16 April 2012: Marriage News Watch.
23 April 2012: Marriage News Watch.
30 April 2012: Marriage News Watch.
7 May 2012: Marriage News Watch.
10 May 2012: Marriage News Watch, 2012's Biggest Marriage Milestones So Far.
14 May 2012: Marriage News Watch.
21 May 2012: Marriage News Watch.
28 May 2012: Marriage News Watch.

5 June 2012: Marriage News Watch, Prop 8 Rehearing Denied.
11 June 2012: Marriage News Watch.
18 June 2012: Marriage News Watch.
25 June 2012: Marriage News Watch.
2 July 2012: Marriage News Watch.
10 July 2012: Marriage News Watch.
16 July 2012: Marriage News Watch.

FollowUp 12: Republican Denial of Climate Change

Cape Hatteras lighthouse being moved inland due to rising sea levels, 2000.
One of the long anticipated results of climate change is change in sea level.  This is understood by scientists and discussed at the website of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Sea level is rising along most of the U.S. coast, and around the world. In the last century, sea level rose 5 to 6 inches more than the global average along the Mid-Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, because coastal lands there are subsiding.
Higher temperatures are expected to further raise sea level by expanding ocean water, melting mountain glaciers and small ice caps, and causing portions of Greenland and the Antarctic ice sheets to melt. The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that the global average sea level will rise between 0.6 and 2 feet (0.18 to 0.59 meters) in the next century (IPCC, 2007).
The range reflects uncertainty about global temperature projections and how rapidly ice sheets will melt or slide into the ocean in response to the warmer temperatures. Furthermore, some processes affecting sea level have long (centuries and longer) time-scales, so that current sea level change is also related to past climate change, and some relevant processes are not determined solely by climate. Climate models, satellite data and hydrographic observations demonstrate that sea level is not rising uniformly around the world. Depending on the region, sea level has risen several times the global mean rise, or has actually fallen (IPCC, 2007). While current model projections indicate substantial variability in future sea level rise at regional and local scales, the IPCC has concluded that the impacts are “virtually certain to be overwhelmingly negative” (IPCC, 2007).
Rising sea levels inundate wetlands and other low-lying lands, erode beaches, intensify flooding, and increase the salinity of rivers, bays, and groundwater tables. Some of these effects may be further compounded by other effects of a changing climate. Additionally, measures that people take to protect private property from rising sea level may have adverse effects on the environment and on public uses of beaches and waterways. Some property owners and state and local governments are already starting to take measures to prepare for the consequences of rising sea level.
Among those Mid-Atlantic states that are expected to be most affected is North Carolina.  But, the House of the North Carolina General Assembly has passed HB 819, legislation that is now under consideration by their Senate, to ban consideration of science in planning for sea level rise.  Here is the germane section of that legislation:
"§ 113A-107.1. Sea-level policy restrictions; calculation of rate of sea-level rise.
(a) No State agency, board, commission, institution, or other public entity thereof shall adopt any rule, policy, or planning guideline addressing sea-level rise, unless authorized to do so under this Article.
(b) No county, municipality, or other local public body shall adopt any rule, ordinance, policy, or planning guideline addressing sea-level rise, unless it is a coastal-area county or is located within a coastal-area county.
(c) No rule, ordinance, policy, or planning guideline that defines the rate of sea-level rise shall be adopted except as provided by this section.
(d) The General Assembly does not intend to mandate the development of sea-level rise policy or rates of sea-level rise. If, however, the Coastal Resources Commission decides to develop rates of sea-level rise, the Commission may do so, but only by instructing the Division of Coastal Management to calculate the rates.
(e) The Division of Coastal Management shall be the only State agency authorized to develop rates of sea-level rise and shall do so only at the request of the Commission. These rates shall only be determined using historical data, and these data shall be limited to the time period following the year 1900. Rates of sea-level rise may be extrapolated linearly to estimate future rates of rise but shall not include scenarios of accelerated rates of sea-level rise. Rates of sea-level rise shall not be one rate for the entire coast but, rather, the Division shall consider separately oceanfront and estuarine shorelines. For oceanfront shorelines, the Division shall use no fewer than the four regions defined in the April 2011 report entitled "North Carolina Beach and Inlet Management Plan" published by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. The oceanfront regions are: Region 1 (Brunswick County), Region 2 (New Hanover, Pender, and Onslow Counties and a portion of Carteret County), Region 3 (a portion of Carteret County and Hyde County), and Region 4 (Dare and Currituck Counties). For estuarine shorelines, the Division shall consider no fewer than two separate regions defined as those north of Cape Lookout and those south of Cape Lookout.
(f) Any State agency, board, commission, institution, or other public entity thereof and any county, municipality, or other local public body that develops a policy addressing sea-level rise that includes a rate of sea-level rise shall use only the rates of sea-level rise developed by the Division of Coastal Management as approved by the Commission. If the Commission has not approved a sea-level rise rate, then the sea-level rise policy shall not use a rate of sea-level rise.
(g) If the Commission chooses to adopt rates of sea-level rise for the coastal area as developed by the Division, all rates shall be adopted as rules that are subject to Chapter 150B of the General Statutes."
I have enlarged and emboldened the sentence which effectively states that modern scientific models may not be considered.  Discussion of this on the blogs at Scientific American is appropriate titled, NC Considers Making Sea Level Rise Illegal.  Perhaps we should get legislation going to outlaw ignorance....

1 October 2011, Original Pedantic Political Ponderings post.
10 October 2011, FollowUp 1.
11 October 2011, FollowUp 2.
17 October 2011, FollowUp 3.
21 October 2011, FollowUp 4.
27 October 2011, FollowUp 5.
30 November 2011, FollowUp 6.
29 January 2012, FollowUp 7.
15 February 2012, FollowUp 8.
18 February 2012, FollowUp 9.
2 March 2012, FollowUp 10.
11 March 2012, FollowUp 11.

03 June 2012

FollowUp 8: Voting Rights

Florida has been in the headlines recently, with Governor Rick Scott ordering a purge of thousands of registered voters from the rolls.  The New York Times Editorial Board weighed in against this blatant attack on Democratic voters.
They have cut back on early voting, tried to stamp out registration drives, and imposed onerous identification requirements. (A federal judge reinstated the registration drives on Thursday.) Now, hoping to gain a new edge, Gov. Rick Scott is trying to clear voter rolls of noncitizens, a menace that only he and a few other Republican governors have been able to detect.
Last year, Mr. Scott ordered the state’s elections division to compare the rolls to the federal Homeland Security Department’s immigration database, a request the federal government sensibly refused. Then, a few weeks ago, the state pressed the Department of Motor Vehicles into comparing the voter rolls to its list of driver’s licenses, which often has out-of-date citizenship information. It came up with nearly 2,700 voters considered suspicious and sent them letters demanding that they produce proof of citizenship within 30 days if they wanted to vote.
The Miami Herald explored the data and found that it is discriminatory.
Miami-Dade is the state’s most-populous county and has the largest foreign-born population. As a result, its residents are most likely to be flagged in a sweep of potential noncitizens.
Hispanics are the state’s largest immigrant group. As a result, they account for 58 percent of those flagged as potential noncitizens, a Miami Herald analysis found. Hispanics make up 13 percent of the state’s 11.3 million active registered voters.
Independent voters and Democrats are the most likely to face being purged from rolls. Republicans and non-Hispanic whites — the backbone of the Republican Party — are the least likely to face removal.
The Justice Department has stepped in.
The U.S. Department of Justice has ordered Florida to halt its effort to purge noncitizens from the voter rolls.
The Justice Department says that Florida's effort appears to violate both the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which protects minorities, and the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, which governs voter purges.
But, Republicans in Florida are determined to continue, despite opposition in every county.
Despite the warning, [Florida Secretary of State] Detzner's representative said on Saturday the state intends to go forward with its campaign. "We have a year-round obligation to ensure the integrity of Florida's elections. We will be responding to (the Justice Department's) concerns next week," Chris Cate wrote in an email to Reuters.
While Florida's state officials continue to champion the plan, its 67 county election supervisors said Friday they will discontinue the effort to purge voters.
Vicki Davis, a Martin County elections supervisor who is also president of the Florida State Association of Supervisors of Elections, told the Palm Beach Post they believe the state data is flawed and that they intend to heed the Justice Department's warning. "There are just too many variables with this entire process at this time for supervisors to continue," Davis said.
Florida is too close for the Republicans to risk a fair election.  This is far from the only place where dirty tricks may sway elections.  Tuesday's recall election in Wisconsin will feature Republican attempts to prevent fraud at predominately Democratic voting locations.
[Wisconsin] Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen plans to dispatch criminal investigators and lawyers to the polls during Tuesday's recall elections to discourage fraud.
Van Hollen, a Republican, plans to deploy teams of special agents and assistant attorney generals across the state, including dispersing seven groups to the polls in Democratic-leaning Milwaukee. He said the agents and attorneys will help local election officials ensure voters comply with state election laws.
When there is real voter fraud, it must be stopped.  Being a minority or not having a driver's license or birth certificate does not constitute fraud.  These attempts to prevent American citizens from voting, these dirty tricks, are unAmerican.

3 October 2011, Original Pedantic Political Ponderings article.
14 October 2011, FollowUp 1.
22 October 2011, FollowUp 2.
6 November, FollowUp 3.
14 November 2011, FollowUp 4.
14 December 2011, FollowUp 5.
8 March 2012, FollowUp 6.
2 April 2012, FollowUp 7.