ePluribus Media Community || citizen journalism, for the people, by the people

Civil Rights Commission Discussion

Wed Sep 28, 2005 at 01:09:38 PM EST

See the ePluribus Media article Bush Overloads Civil Rights Commision with GOP members by writer Andrew Brenner. Contributors include: Jill Lehnert. SusanG, Biblio, Sawcielackey, Ron Brynaert, JeninRI and Sue in KY.

A snapshot of Brenner's conclusions:

In December 2004, the Bush administration dodged the legal requirement to have no more than four members of one political party on the US Commission on Civil Rights.

Read it and tell us what do you think. Transparency or Court Packing?

commentary :: :: :: buzz-it!

Civil Rights Commission Discussion | 6 comments (6 topical, 0 hidden)

Thernstrom refers to herself as Republican: 10/04 (5.00 / 1) (#1)

More damning evidence: in an article that she wrote herself, Abigail Thernstrom calls herself a Republican.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005772

CAMPAIGN 2004
Redefining Rights in America
The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights joins the campaign to defeat Bush.
BY ABIGAIL THERNSTROM
Monday, October 18, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT
Among the four Republican appointees to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, naive hope springs eternal. We knew that at some point the commission staff would come out with a draft report on the Bush administration's civil rights record. We didn't realize just how bad it would be. Or rather, we imagined the worst, but it was worse than the worst we imagined.

In the article, Thernstrom refers to the USCCR under Mary Frances Berry's leadership as "ludicrously labeled 'an independent, bipartisan commission on race matters.'" How ironic that two months later, Thernstrom gladly put herself in the same position that she harshly chastised Berry for holding. What a hypocrite.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
by wanderindiana on Thu Sep 29, 2005 at 01:40:01 PM EST

the more things change (5.00 / 1) (#2)

the more they remain the same:

Commissioners on the short end of last week's votes could do little but draw the line against the new interpretations. "Independence is as independence does, not as independence says," complained Carter appointee Mary Frances Berry. "The White House now has, for the first time in the history of this institution, its own Civil Rights Commission, . . . and it's just in time for election year 1984." . . . Ralph G. Neas, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, caIled Reagan's creation "a panel only [presidential counselor] Ed Meese could love. It does not reflect what civil-rights laws say. It reflects what Reagan's policies are." John Shattuck, legislative director for the American Civil Liberties Union, complained that "the president's use of raw executive power to pack the commission symbolizes an administration willing to bend the law at every opportunity to reverse a quarter of a century of bipartisan progress."

[Legislative History from the Thurgood Marshall Library @ U Maryland.]

Based on past attempts to dismantle the Commission, it will again fall to Congress to force change. No relief there it seems until dems regain a majority.

Changing party affiliation is not illegal, but in this case definitely slime-coated.

by rba on Fri Sep 30, 2005 at 10:45:34 AM EST

: BTW (5.00 / 1) (#5)

Nice catch on the 1984 Reagan overloading.
Something else that the article didn't quite point out was that Berry had been appointed by Carter, but also was re-appointed by Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and Clinton. To me, that lends her a little more credibility.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
by wanderindiana on Fri Sep 30, 2005 at 02:15:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
: Agreed. (none / 0) (#3)

At least she changed to independent ... unlike in some areas, where they change to democratic affiliation -- truly wolves in sheep's clothing.

by Cho on Fri Sep 30, 2005 at 10:54:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
: The timing of the change (none / 0) (#4)

What strikes me is that there is no real way to document the change of party affiliation other than by using public statements of the individual and/or statements of the press.
In Thernstrom's case, she herself never publicly came out as an independent before the appointments of Reynolds and Taylor.
If she truly did not change her affiliation until after the appointments, then someone else did violate the federal code regulating the makeup of the commission -- and that someone would be none other than George W. Bush.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
by wanderindiana on Fri Sep 30, 2005 at 02:12:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thernstrom Still Republican: 10/7/2005 (none / 0) (#6)

Abigail Thernstrom's bio page at the USCCR still refers to her as a Republican, even though the page has been updated since this article was written (links to other commissioners' bios have been added to the bottom of the page--these do not appear in the archived versions of Thernstrom's bio page).
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
by wanderindiana on Fri Oct 07, 2005 at 08:32:31 AM EST

Civil Rights Commission Discussion | 6 comments (6 topical, 0 hidden)

Support ePluribus Media -- Support Citizen Powered Journalism!