The Truth About George - Civil Rights and the Constitution

Civil Rights and the Constitution

No Child Left Behind Act Invades Family Privacy
Buried deep within Bush's highly touted No Child Left Behind Act is a provision that requires public high schools to hand over private student information to military recruiters. This provision allows minor students to be recruited at home by telephone calls, mail and personal visits. If a school does not comply, it risks losing vital federal education funds. This provision, known as section 9528, was inserted with almost no debate into the No Child Left Behind Act by newly-elected Rep. David Vitter of Louisiana, who learned from the Pentagon that many public schools had strict privacy policies protecting student information from being released to any outside parties, thus preventing aggressive military recruiting. Under Section 9528, the only way to keep children's contact information from military recruiters, is for parents to submit an "opt-out" letter in writing to the school district's superintendent.
Sources: No Child Left Behind Act, SEC. 9528. ARMED FORCES RECRUITER ACCESS TO STUDENTS AND STUDENT RECRUITING INFORMATION; Leave My Child Alone! A Family Privacy Campaign to Protect Our High School Students From Unwanted Military Recruiting

Bush Approved Record Number of Secret Searches
On April 1, 2005, the Bush administration disclosed that it approved a record number of warrants for secret wiretaps and searches on U.S. citizens in 2004. More than 1,700 warrants were approved last year, with only a small fraction producing information worth public notice.
Source: Associated Press Worldstream, "U.S. Court Approved Record Number of Terror Warrants Last Year", Mark Sherman, April 1, 2005.

Responding to Right-Wing Pressure, Bush Renews Call to Write Discrimination into the Constitution
In the 2005 State of the Union address on Feb. 2, Bush called for a constitutional ban on gay marriage, only weeks after saying in a January Washington Post interview that there was no need to keep pushing the issue, with the Defense of Marriage Act still in place. Bush reversed his position, presumably after groups of ultra-conservative supporters applied pressure.
Sources: Washington Post, "Excerpts from Bush Interview," Jan. 16, 2005; Washington Post, "Bush Upsets Some Supporters; President Urged to Press Ban on Same-Sex Marriage," Jim VandeHei and Michael A. Fletcher, Jan. 19, 2005"; "State of the Union," President Bush, Feb. 2, 2005; New York Times, "President Discusses Issues with Black Leaders," Elisabeth Bumiller, Jan. 25, 2005.

Bush Appoints Affirmative Action Critic and Opponent of Title IX to Head the U.S. Civil Rights Commission
Early in Dec. 2004, Bush named Gerald Reynolds, an outspoken critic of affirmative action, to take over as head of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission. The announcement reportedly came as a bit of a surprise to the former chair, Mary Frances Berry, who had planned on working until her contract expired at the end of Jan. 2005. Berry's relationship with the president had been terse throughout his first term. About a week before Reynolds' appointment was announced, the commission issued a report stating Bush "failed to exhibit leadership on pressing civil rights issues." In 2001, Reynolds, who has publicly referred to affirmative action as the "big lie," was nominated, but never confirmed, to head the Education Department's Office of Civil Rights. During his tenure at the Education Department, Reynolds tried to undercut Title IX (equal education for women and girls) policies, complaining that the law led to cuts in men's athletic programs. He also refused to investigate statistical disparities between boys and girls in high school vocational education programs. Former co-workers of Reynolds have reportedly said they would not be surprised to see him challenge affirmative action or reevaluate the Voting Rights Act, a landmark civil rights law that is up for renewal in 2007.
Sources: United Press International, "Change Presaged in Civil Rights," Marie Horrigan, Dec. 8, 2004; Kansas City Star, "KC Lawyer to Lead U.S. Rights Panel," Matt Stearns, Dec. 8, 2004; Knight Ridder, "Bush Replacing Civil Rights Commission Chair with Ideologues," Clarence Lusane, Dec. 15, 2004.

Log Cabin Republicans Oppose Bush's Re-Election
The Log Cabin Republicans, the largest group for lesbians and gay men in the Republican Party, have decided to oppose Bush's re-election this year due to his support for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. On Sept. 7, the board voted 22-2 against endorsing Bush. The group has criticized Bush in the past for supporting the amendment. "Writing discrimination into our Constitution violates conservative and Republican principles," Executive Director Patrick Guerriero said last February. "This amendment would not strengthen marriage—it would weaken our nation." According to Log Cabin statistics, about 1 million gay men and lesbians voted for Bush in 2000.
Source: Capitol Hill Blue, "Gay Republicans to Bush: You Ain't Our Guy," Staff and Wire Reports, Sept. 8, 2004

Bush Snubs the Nation's Oldest and Largest Civil Rights Group
Julian Bond, chair of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the nation's largest and oldest civil rights group, criticized George W. Bush in July for his refusal to speak at its annual convention. Having declined an invitation to speak for a fourth year in a row, Bush is now the only president since Warren G. Harding who hasn't addressed the NAACP at some point in his administration. Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry, who addressed the NAACP conference on July 15, also criticized Bush's refusal, saying that a president should speak to all people. Bush, campaigning in Pennsylvania in July, said his relationship with NAACP leadership was "basically nonexistent'' and referred to being called "names'' by organization members. (Bond said in June that Bush and other Republicans were part of a "dark underside of American culture.'') While the White House blamed Bush's refusal partly on "hostile rhetoric," Bush accepted an invitation to speak to the Urban League on July 23, where he urged African Americans to consider voting Republican, yet did not mention his opposition to affirmative action.
Sources: "NAACP Head Asks Bush to Rethink Convention Snub," Reuters, The New York Times, July 10, 2004; "John Kerry Addresses NAACP," Voice of America, July 15, 2004; "Bush Opts for Urban League," Knight Ridder News Service, The Bradenton Herald, July 16, 2004; Bush Urges Blacks Not to Back Democrats, AP, Scott Lindlaw, July 23, 2004.

Bush Endorses Anti-Marriage Constitutional Amendment
Vowing to "protect the institution of marriage," Bush publicly joined the right wing's plot to prevent same-sex marriages on Feb 24 by announcing his support of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. In defining marriage explicitly as the union of a man and a woman, the current proposal before Congress uses vague and sweeping language that has the potential to deny not just marriage but also civil unions and domestic partnerships to same-sex couples. Without the legal recognition of marriage, same-sex couples are prevented from benefiting from the over 1,000 federal and state benefits afforded heterosexual married couples. Bush's endorsement follows two landmark decisions affecting equal marriage rights. The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled on Feb. 4 that the state legislature can't offer "civil unions" instead of actual marriage licenses, paving the way for the first ever state-recognized same-sex marriages in U.S. history. And on Feb. 11, San Francisco city officials began issuing official marriage licenses to same-sex couples. On Feb. 18, Bush said he was "troubled" by same-sex marriages: "I have watched carefully what's happening in San Francisco, where licenses were being issued, even though the law states otherwise ... I have consistently stated that I'll support law to protect marriage between a man and a woman."
Read NOW's statement on Bush's endorsement of the anti-marriage amendment.
Sources: White House Office of the Press Secretary, Feb. 24; ABCNews, Feb. 18; Associated Press, Feb. 18

Bush Proposes Second-Class Status for Immigrants
According to the Washington Post, Bush's recently announced "temporary worker" program has been embraced by business groups but condemned as "stingy and impractical" by advocates for immigrants. The Bush program would make the 8 million undocumented immigrants currently in the U.S. eligible for temporary legal status, as long as they are employed. This status would not in most instances lead to obtaining citizenship or even permanent resident status. In fact, Bush asserted that most "temporary workers" would eventually have to leave the U.S. Susan F. Martin, an immigration expert at Georgetown University and former executive director of the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, expressed concern that, "we're going to be creating, under this type of legislation, a large number of basically indentured servants." Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean issued a statement warning that Bush's plan "would create a permanent underclass of service workers with second-class status." The Post went on to say that "business groups, made up of some of Bush's biggest financial backers, welcomed the plan as a way to create a stable work force and alleviate labor shortages for low-wage and dangerous jobs that Americans disdain in agriculture and the hotel, health, restaurant and construction industries." Conversely, labor advocates have warned that Bush's proposal, which requires workers to be sponsored by an employer in order to obtain legal status, would prevent them from complaining about job conditions out of fear of losing their sponsorship and being deported. Additionally, employers could use the threat of recruiting low-wage, legal immigrants against existing U.S. employees, preventing them from seeking better working conditions.
Sources: Washington Post, "Bush Proposes Legal Status for Immigrant Labor," Jan. 8, 2004; "Mexico's Fox Backs Bush Proposal on Immigration," Jan. 13, 2004.

Cheney Now Supports Bush Ban on Same-Sex Marriage
While Dick Cheney argued during the 2000 presidential campaign that the issue of gay marriage is best left to the states, according to the Denver Post, Cheney now says that "he would support a presidential push to ban same-sex marriage." Back in 2000, in a nationally televised debate with the Democratic vice-presidential candidate Joe Lieberman, Cheney stated, "the fact of the matter is we live in a free society, and freedom means freedom to everybody. And I think that means that people should be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to enter into. It's really no one else's business in terms of trying to regulate or prohibit behavior in that regard." Cheney went on to say that, "I don't think there should necessarily be a federal policy in this area." There already is a federal policy in this area—the Defense of Marriage Act. Cheney is now saying that he is concerned that it "may not stand the test and therefore ... other measures, such as a constitutional amendment" are being examined. When Bush was recently asked about marriage rights for same-sex couples, he said that marriage should recognize only the union of a man and a woman, and that he may back a constitutional amendment or other federal action if the administration's lawyers feel it is necessary. Gay community leaders spoke against Cheney's recent statement, saying that Cheney "follows the line of the party of exclusion" and described the announcement as "election year pandering." Others felt that Cheney's reversal of position was a result of right-wing religious fundamentalists co-opting the Republican party.
Sources: Denver Post, "Cheney Would Support Bush in Ban on Same-Sex Marriage," Jan. 9, 2004; "VP's Gay Marriage Shift Called 'Slap in Face,'" Jan. 12, 2004.

Learn more about the radical right's plan to write discrimination into the Constitution.

Study Finds Bush-Endorsed "Marriage Protection Week" Has Anti-Gay, Not Pro-Marriage Focus
Oct. 12-18, 2003, was declared "Marriage Protection Week" by a coalition of 29 conservative political and religious organizations including: the Christian Coalition, Focus on the Family, National Religious Broadcasters, and Concerned Women for America. On Oct. 3, George W. Bush issued an official proclamation in support of the week. While Bush stated in his proclamation that the week "provides an opportunity to focus our efforts on preserving the sanctity of marriage and on building strong and healthy marriages," a recent study by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) Policy Institute revealed that there was "no focus whatsoever on building strong and healthy marriages." NGLTF Policy Institute goes on to report that all of the publicly announced and suggested activities focused exclusively on the supposed threat to the institution of marriage posed by civil marriage rights for same-sex couples. For example, "Marriage Protection Week" participants were asked to contact their U.S. Senators and Members of Congress to urge them to support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would prohibit the same-sex civil marriages and the extension of benefits to same-sex couples. Sponsoring organizations also provided and urged the use of two model sermons—both of which contained inflammatory anti-gay rhetoric and were completely devoid of any references to building strong marriages. Also as part of the week, elected officials were asked to sign a pledge saying that they would not support even the most basic rights for same-sex couples such as hospital visitation or health insurance coverage. Learn more about same-sex marriage efforts and the attacks these efforts are facing from the radical right.
Sources: Presidential Proclamation, "Marriage Protection Week, 2003," Oct. 3, 2003. National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute, "'Marriage Protection Week' Sponsors: Are They Really Interested in 'Building Strong and Healthy Marriages?'," Oct. 15, 2003.

Bush's Faith-Based Initiative Leads to Taxpayers Funding Discrimination
Further blurring the line between church and state, on Sept. 22 the Bush administration issued four new regulations allowing faith-based institutions to receive federal grants and contracts while discriminating in employment. According to The American-Statesman, the Department of Health and Human Services finalized regulations giving faith-based organizations access to nearly $20 billion in HHS grants, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development will make faith-based groups eligible to compete for $8 billion in HUD grants. Bush opted to implement his initiative through executive orders after being unable to persuade Congress of the initiative. David Noble, executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats, criticizes the regulations as anti-gay. In a Sept. 22 news release Noble states, "as long as Jerry Falwell believes that gays are going to hell, he can receive federal money to discriminate against them.
Sources: St. Louis Post-Dispatch, "Church, State and Bush," Sept. 26, 2003; The American-Statesman, "Faith-based Plans Advance With Little Fanfare," Oct. 3, 2003; Stonewall Democrats, "News Release: NSD Criticizes White House for Issuing Anti-Gay Regulations," Sept. 22, 2003.

Bush Touts Opposition to Marriage Rights for Same-Sex Couples
At a July 30 White House news conference, George Bush announced that he intends to erect legal barriers to gay marriage. "I believe in the sanctity of marriage," Bush told reporters. "I believe a marriage is between a woman and a man, and I think we ought to codify that one way or the other." The White House is reportedly keeping watch on two state court cases in Massachusetts and New Jersey that could legalize same-sex unions, while lawyers are examining legal measures that would ensure that marriage is defined as a heterosexual union. When pressed on his view on homosexuality, Bush replied, "I am mindful that we're all sinners, and I caution those who may try to take the speck out of their neighbor's eye when they've got a log in their own...That doesn't mean that somebody like me needs to compromise on issues such as marriage."
Source: Associated Press, "Bush says he is exploring legal steps to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman," Scott Lindlaw, July 31, 2003

Bush Administration Opposes Amendment Limiting Threats to Civil Liberties
The White House encouraged the Senate to remove an amendment from the defense spending bill that prohibits any research and development for the Terrorism Information Awareness (TIA) program—formerly known as the Total Information Awareness program. According to the Washington Times, the TIA program, which allows authorities to compile and sift through public and private records including details on financial documents, political and religious contributions, health problems, and travel documents, has been widely criticized by privacy advocates as a "supersnooping computer system that threatens civil liberties." The amendment, which ultimately passed the Senate, places restrictions on the implementation on the data-mining computer system that was supposedly designed by the Pentagon to track terrorists.
Sources: Washington Times, "White House Protests Cuts on Terrorist Data: Pentagon-designed Program Draws Wide Criticism as Civil Liberties Threat," Audrey Hudson, July 16, 2003; Washington Post, "Senate Votes to Deny Funding To Computer Surveillance Effort," Joshua Partlow, July 19, 2003

Bush Wants to Allow Federally-Funded Religious Groups to Discriminate Based on Religion and Sexual Orientation
The Washington Post reported that the Bush administration is encouraging Congress to "make it easier for federally funded religious groups to base their hiring decisions on a job candidate's religion and sexual orientation." In urging Congress to make this allowance, Bush is attempting to undermine laws that prohibit federally funded social service programs from discriminating on the basis of age gender, race, or religion. Although no federal law forbids discrimination in hiring on the basis of sexual orientation, some state and local laws to such effect do exist. Bush's position paper outlined a plan that would make federally funded religious groups accountable only to federal laws, and would also exempt them from federal anti-discrimination provisions that otherwise apply to federally funded social service programs.
Sources: Washington Post, "Bush Backs Religious Charities on Hiring: Hill is Urged to Ease Bias Rules on Groups that get U.S. Funds," Mike Allen & Alan Cooperman, June 25, 2003; Planet Out Network, "Bush Calls for Faith-Based Hiring Rights," June 25, 2003

Department of Justice Backtracks on Decision to Ban Annual Gay Pride Event
Several days after reports that the Justice Department would ban an annual Gay Pride Month event from taking place at its headquarters, the Washington Post reported that the event will be allowed, but not with the agency's sponsorship. The New York Times initially reported that the employee event, an annual tradition at the Justice Department since the late 1990's, was prohibited from taking place this year because the White House has not formally recognized Gay Pride Month (despite the official acknowledgment of events such as Leif Erikson Day and Save Your Vision Week). The New York Times further reported that the cancellation may have been prompted by an outcry from conservative groups when Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson spoke at the event last year. In response to reports of the event's cancellation, the New York Times indicated that gay rights leaders claimed that this is the "first time a federal agency has forced the cancellation of a gay pride event." This demonstration of the Bush administration's policy supposedly aimed at not "politicizing people's sexual orientation" has gay rights leaders fearing that other events sponsored by DOJ Pride or the very existence of the group may now be threatened.
Source: New York Times, "Justice Dept. Bans Event by Gay Staff," Eric Lichtblau, June 6, 2003; Washington Post, "Justice to Let Staff Honor Gay Pride," Brian Faler, June 11, 2003

White House Spokesperson Calls Gay-Bashing Senator an "Inclusive Man"
Following Sen. Rick Santorum's, R-Pa., comments equating homosexuality with polygamy and incest, the Bush administration praised Santorum as an "inclusive man." In an interview with the Associated Press, Santorum stated, "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual (gay) sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything." Santorum, who also blamed feminists and liberals for hurting American families, is the third highest-ranking Republican in the Senate leadership.
Sources: San Francisco Chronicle, "Gay Uproar May Not Hurt Senator," Marc Sandalow, April 23, 2003