BIPARTISAN HOUSE COALITION PRESSES CLAPPER FOR INFORMATION ON PHONE & EMAIL SURVEILLANCE

Washington, DC – Today, a bipartisan group of ten members of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee—including Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), and former Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), wrote to the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to memorialize the Director’s commitment to provide a detailed look at how the government’s phone and email surveillance affects United States citizens.  The intelligence community has promised to provide a public estimate of that impact “early enough to inform the debate” on surveillance reform in the next Congress, with a target date of January 2017.

The letter was signed by Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Darrell E. Issa (R-CA), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Ted Poe (R-TX), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-GA), Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Ted Deutch (D-FL), Suzan K. DelBene (D-WA) and David N. Cicilline (D-RI).

U.S. House Bipartisan Coalition Letter To National Intelligence Director James Clapper for Phone & Email Su... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Americans deserve better than the Electoral College

By John Conyers, Jr.

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

With the Electoral College electors scheduled to meet Monday   to  formally elect Donald Trump as our 45th president, it is time that we reconsider whether a political compromise approved in 1787 bears any principled or practical reason for being today.

Several serious concerns were raised at a forum I organized earlier this month about the Electoral College featuring leading experts in history, constitutional law and political science. Most obviously, we learned that the Electoral College is anti-democratic. Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton has so far received more than 2.8 million more popular votes than  Trump — the largest divergence between the popular and electoral votes in history. This is the second time there has been a divergence between the popular vote and the Electoral College in the last five elections, and the fifth time since 1824.

We also learned that the Electoral College is rooted in slavery.  At our forum, Yale law professor Akhil Amar explained, slave states opposed direct elections for President because “in a direct election system, the North would outnumber the South, whose many slaves . . . could not vote.  But the Electoral College . . . instead let each southern state count its slaves, albeit with a two-fifths discount, in computing its share of the overall count.”

Our forum also made clear that many of the arguments in defense of the Electoral College are anachronistic. Electoral College defenders argue that it serves to check the passions of ordinary voters, pointing to Alexander Hamilton’s view in “The Federalist Papers,” that the Electoral College would help ensure “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.”

However, the Electoral College does not formally meet to deliberate about who should be president.  The general public does not even know the electors’ identities, and the Electoral College’s choice for president has largely been reduced to mere formality. Members of the Electoral College are party loyalists who are subject to various state laws, some of which prohibit them from even exercising independent judgment.  This is why, notwithstanding recent protestations concerning the impact of Russian hacking during the election season, over time there have been very few faithless electors, and none that have decided an election’s outcome.

Rather than protect small-population states and rural areas from domination by large- population states and urban areas, the current system encourages candidates to overlook a majority of states and focus nearly all their campaign efforts on the small number of so-called swing states.  In 2016, for instance, both major-party candidates largely bypassed three of the four largest states by population during the campaign.  They also skipped 12 of the 13 smallest states, from “Blue” Rhode Island to “Red” Wyoming.

Finally, some Electoral College defenders argue that direct elections for president could lead to messy nationwide vote recounts. Our experience in Florida in 2000, and Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin this year, have taught us that statewide recounts under differing and confusing rules bring neither clarity nor finality to our electoral process. By contrast, a national popular vote is historically far more likely to establish a clear winner, avoiding the necessity of recounts altogether.

Many voters have told me that the political obstacles to reform are insurmountable, with a constitutional amendment requiring a two-thirds vote in the House and Senate and ratification by three-quarters of the states. The fact that in 1969 I was one of 338 members of the House of Representatives who voted on a bipartisan basis to amend the Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College shows under the right circumstances the political will for reform can exist. However, other options are available, with 11 states accounting for 165 electoral votes having already entered an interstate compact to cast their electoral votes for the national popular vote winner. Legislation to enter the compact has been recently passed by at least one legislative chamber in four more states, potentially bringing us even closer to the 270 vote threshold needed for the interstate agreement to kick in.

The Supreme Court has long held that the “conception of political equality from the Declaration of Independence, to Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, to the 15th, 17th, and 19th Amendments can only mean one thing — one person, one vote.”

It is time that the election of our nation’s president and vice president reflect those principles as well.  The greatest democracy on Earth deserves no less.

To learn more about his new voting rights movement, visit:  http://votingisbeautiful.com

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Newsmakers with Representatives Bob Goodlatte and John Conyers: Community Policing

House Judiciary Committee Chair Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and Ranking Member John Conyers (D-MI) discussed their bipartisan working group examining the use of force by police, aggression toward law enforcement, and public safety concerns. Their policing strategies working group began during the summer of 2016 to address police-community relations and look more widely at police shootings in Dallas, Baton Rouge, and other communities and at police killings of black citizens in Ferguson, Charleston, Baltimore and other communities. The Judiciary Committee officials participated by remote video from Capitol Hill. After the interview, the reporters in the studio discussed their responses with the host. 

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

EMMETT TILL UNSOLVED CIVIL RIGHTS CRIMES REAUTHORIZATION ACT PASSED BY CONGRESS

Washington, DC—During its final session of the 114th Congress, the Senate passed the Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crimes Reauthorization Act of 2016 (S.2854/H.R.5067).  In the Senate, the bill was led by Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO), and Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO).  In the House, original sponsors were Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI). The bill now heads to the President to be signed into law.

BACKGROUND

Before the passage of major civil rights legislation in the 1960s, hundreds of racially suspicious crimes were committed in this country, and few attempts to prosecute them were ever pursued.  Tuskegee Institute once kept a record of verified lynchings in the United States from 1877 to 1950.  The institute documented that nearly 4000 mainly unprosecuted civil rights crimes occurred during that period.  Many American families continue to pass down stories of loss and disappearance even today without knowing the truth about what actually happened to their loved ones. 

PRIMARY GOALS OF THE BILL

The Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crimes Reauthorization Act represents a critical opportunity to right these wrongs committed, primarily against African Americans, but also against people of diverse backgrounds.  In some cases, individuals still remain who were witnesses to these crimes or who can help provide evidence regarding these incidents.  This bill reauthorizes and updates the original legislation that was signed into law in 2008.  It seeks to respond to the concerns of victims' family members and strengthen collaboration between the Justice Department, the FBI, State and local law enforcement, and advocates to pursue these cold cases.  There is a collective goal to seek the truth about this long-standing tragedies and hold the perpetrators and orchestrators of these atrocities accountable.   This reauthorization also seeks to respond to the concerns of advocates regarding the implementation of the original legislation. 

BI-PARTISAN and BI-CAMERAL STATEMENTS OF SUPPORT

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

"As we work to address current questions about racial violence and civil rights, we should be mindful of our history and why so many in the African-American community raise the issue of whether black lives matter.  Passage of the original Emmett Till Act represented a commitment to resolving the unanswered questions from one of the darkest periods in modern American history.  This bipartisan reauthorization represents further investment in our history and will allow the Department of Justice to resolve remaining issues."  Rep. John Conyers, Jr.  - MI

"When this bill was signed into law, family members, academics, historians, lawyers, advocates began working to develop a full accounting for these long-standing, gross human and civil rights atrocities.  The reauthorization passed by Congress is a response to their appeals to make the law a better tool in their quest for justice. We also worked across the aisle and across the Dome to develop a bill that fulfills our promise to remain committed to the pursuit of truth on behalf of victims and their families.  I am very pleased that Congress has passed this legislation and I look forward to the signature of President Barack Obama."  Rep. John Lewis - GA

“I am pleased that this bill is now finally heading to the President’s desk. Investigators can now work to discover the truth and to seek justice under our legal system for the families of these victims. Every American is worthy of the protection of our laws. I want to thank the Till family, Alvin Sykes, Congressman John Lewis, and all of the civil rights activists who helped make this law a reality. Today’s victory is theirs.”  Sen. Richard Burr - NC

 “Too many families suffer from the unsolved murders of their loved ones during the civil rights era without receiving justice.  The way to best serve these families is to provide our Federal government with the tools it needs to investigate these unsolved crimes, and to hopefully, bring some sense of closure for these families.  I thank Congressman Lewis for his tireless work on behalf of the families of these victims of unsolved murders from the civil rights era and I am proud to stand with him on this effort.”   Sen. Patrick Leahy - VT

“This legislation brings justice and closure to the families and communities affected by the heinous acts of violence and hatred that are a stain on our nation’s history. The bill will help us continue the critical work of better investigating and solving these crimes, no matter how long ago they occurred, and I’m thrilled we’ve finally been able to carry it across the finish line.” Sen. Claire McCaskill - MO

“The Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crimes Reauthorization Act sets out to investigate racially-motivated murders. Sadly, there is still more work to be done and it’s important that we reauthorize this bill so that the FBI and DOJ can continue investigating unsolved crimes.”    Sen. Roy Blunt - MO

“As an original cosponsor of the Emmett Till Reauthorization Act, I’m pleased to see my colleagues came together and supported this important bill. This bipartisan legislation will provide for a sustained, well-coordinated effort to investigate and prosecute unsolved civil rights-era crimes. There are hundreds of cold cases from the civil rights era that have never been solved and it is my hope that we are able to bring justice to the victims’ families.”  Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner - WI

MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE LEGISLATION

·         This bill requires the Department of Justice and FBI to consult with civil rights organizations, universities, and other entities that have also been gathering evidence in these cold cases;

·         Provides clearer direction and improved coordination between federal, state, and local law enforcement and the activists, advocates, and academics working on these issues;

·         Strengthens the Department of Justice’s reporting requirements;

·         Expands the time span of cases to be considered by ten years, to include all cases that occurred not later than December 31, 1979;

·         Eliminates the sunset provision in the original bill;

·         Encourages the Department of Justice to review specific closed cases that warrant further investigation;

·         Maintains the previous investigation structure and funding levels; and

·         Clarifies the law’s intent.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS, HOYER, ENGEL, THOMPSON, CUMMINGS, SMITH, & SCHIFF JOINT STATEMENT CALLING FOR A COMPREHENSIVE INVESTIGATION OF RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 ELECTION

Ranking Member, John Conyers, Jr.

Washington, DC – Today, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) joined  Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-MD), House Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Eliot Engel (D-NY), House Homeland Security Committee Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS), House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Elijah Cummings (D-MD), House Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Adam Smith (D-WA), and House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Adam Schiff (D-CA) released the following joint statement in response to news reports about intelligence assessments of Russian interference in the 2016 election, and comments by the House Republican leadership downplaying the need for a thorough investigation:

“All Americans should be deeply concerned by the reports that Russian agencies have interfered with a U.S. election. As Speaker Ryan noted, ‘any foreign intervention in our elections is entirely unacceptable.’

“The first duty of the United States government is to safeguard the American people and the integrity of our free society from attacks by foreign adversaries. Cyberattacks on our political institutions are direct threats to their integrity and are just as menacing as attacks on our economic, physical, and military infrastructure.

“Given the gravity of these unprecedented attacks by a foreign state, we need a congressional investigation that is truly bipartisan, that is comprehensive, that will not be restricted by jurisdictional lines, and that will give the American people a complete and full accounting of what happened consistent with safeguarding our national security.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Says 'Goodbye' To His Friend & Colleague Charlie Rangel From Congress

Yesterday, I spoke to my colleague, my dear friend, my brother Charles Rangel off the House floor as we said our goodbyes. This was truly a bittersweet moment. Charlie and I began our careers in public service as veterans of the Korean War, fighting to defend democracy. After serving in the first truly integrated armed forces, we began on this journey tackling the injustice and inequality plaguing Detroit and New York City. For the last four decades, we have worked together in the U.S. House of Representatives.

As the last two founding members of the Congressional Black Caucus serving in Congress, we have seen our world change, we have seen our country change. I don't want to see him go, but I am encouraged knowing that he will be leaving behind a lasting legacy, decades of great memories, and will be embarking on a new journey in life. Charlie, my friend, your dedication and service to NYC and to this country is unwavering and I will miss you dearly.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: Donald Trump Is the Next Richard Nixon

By John Conyers, Jr.

'Democrats must publicly push for accountability'

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

Nearly four decades ago, former President Nixon told us that “when the President does it, that means it’s not illegal.” Recently, President-elect Donald Trump echoed those comments when he declared, “The president can’t have a conflict of interest,” a statement that disregards all customs and norms of the modern presidency. As someone who has endured numerous undeclared wars, two presidential impeachments, the attacks of 9/11 and passage of the PATRIOT Act, this mindset causes me to fear that our nation may again be veering towards a constitutional crisis, but with far fewer safeguards than we have had in the past.

Trump on his businesses/conflict q's: "The law's totally on my side, the president can't have a conflict of interest."

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) November 22, 2016

As one who experienced the toxic politics of Vietnam and the riots of the 1960’s, I have never witnessed mindless name-calling, insults or demagoguery on the scale or scope of the Trump campaign. Among other things, Trump accused Democrats of “try[ing to] rig the election at the polling booths, where so many cities are corrupt and voter fraud is all too common.” He has intermittently called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” and sought to intimidate the media, promising to “open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.” During the presidential debates, he told Secretary Hillary Clinton that if he wins “you’d be in jail.”

Not only does such “loose cannon” rhetoric divide our nation, but if acted upon is flatly inconsistent with our Constitution and our values. Throwing around reckless and unsubstantiated accusations of election fraud undermines our democracy, the Voting Rights Act and the 15th Amendment. Banning Muslim entry or creating a registry would violate First Amendment freedom of religion. Legislatively targeting news outlets based on their views would abrogate freedom of press. Promising to lock up political opponents upends long-held notions of fairness and due process. And changing your mind about prosecution after the election does not make things better—it just illustrates a continued misunderstanding of the proper role of federal law enforcement.

The potential threat to our democracy comes at a time when our incoming president will have lost the popular vote by more than 2 million votes and many of the controls and safeguards that allowed our nation to weather prior constitutional storms have been severely weakened. One-party control of Washington means tepid oversight of a Republican President. Our independent judiciary is seen as increasingly politicized in the aftermath of Bush v. Gore and the determination by Senate Republicans to deny President Obama the opportunity to fill a Supreme Court vacancy. The media may well be compromised due to President-elect Trump’s continuing efforts to attack, undermine and humiliate his critics.

This set of circumstances means that if and when we face a constitutional crisis—perhaps Trump’s Administration will have taken actions with respect to a foreign government to benefit his financial interests; or his Attorney General will have secretly authorized unlawful torture or surveillance—we will be operating without our usual institutional or structural safety nets.

There will be no Sam Ervin or Peter Rodino to investigate executive misconduct as there was during Watergate. Nor can we expect a Republican in the mold of Howard Baker to step forward (risking a Tea Party primary challenge the next election), or an Attorney General such as Elliot Richardson to resign rather than participate in a White House cover up. And we can only wonder whether there are any more Woodwards or Bernsteins willing to risk their careers or the solvency of their employer by challenging a Trump Administration.

In the absence of subpoena authority, Democrats must publicly push for accountability. We still have the authority to pursue independent investigations by the GAO and Agency Inspectors General. And we will need to hold our own informal forums and issue minority reports documenting the inevitable abuses. Even if we cannot prevent excesses, our job will be to make sure our citizens are fully aware of what is happening and why.

Of course, in the end, it’s the people themselves who have the most important role in safeguarding our constitutional form of government. I witnessed firsthand how the 1963 March on Washington galvanized the civil rights movement and led to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. With the party in power typically losing 30 House seats or more during midterm elections, we can’t lose sight of the fact that a more meaningful legislative check may not be that far away.

I truly hope that we can avoid the constitutional abyss. After all, it was Gerald Ford who appointed the esteemed jurist Edward Levi as Attorney General, helping to restore faith in the Justice Department after the stain of Watergate. And it was George H.W. Bush who began his campaign with race baiting against Willie Horton before eventually signing legislation reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act.

Unfortunately, as of yet, we have seen no such meaningful olive branch from Trump—only more angry and unpresidential tweets, more attacks on the press, appointments of divisive figures such as Steve Bannon, Jeff Sessions and Michael Flynn, and an ongoing risk to our nation’s values.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©