Women's Voices, Women Vote

During five election cycles, I have worked with the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition where I co-directed targeted voter registration campaigns and 'get out the vote' efforts to the African American community. I have also had the great privelege of serving on the Board of Directors of Women's Voices, Women Vote -- a non profit, non partisan organization whose mission is registering underrepresented Americans, primarily, unmarried women.

I am also a voter. And in this election, I am supporting Barack Obama, whom I've known and worked with for years. I am also an elected delegate to the Democratic Convention for Barack Obama.

Given my candidate preference and my background and associations in voter registration efforts, I can say with great conviction, there was no effort to suppress or confuse African American voters, or any other voters in the state of North Carolina by Women's Voices, Women Vote.

I have seen up close the work of Women's Voices. Women Vote and know well the commitment, passion and leadership our organization has shown in helping make the voices of unmarried women and other underrepresented voters heard. There may have been mistakes made in this particular registration drive in North Carolina, but Women's Voices, Women Vote's motives were not malicious or intended in any way to confuse voters. Ironically, just the opposite. I know the staff is making every effort to right the situation.

By William McNary, President of USAction, Co-Executive Director Citizen Action/Illinois and Board Member of Women's Voices, Women Vote

Comments

[pointus]

The president of ACORN has come out in support of WVWV.
that's good enough for me.

[politricking]

NPR is on it.

1. Page Gardner, founder and president
Connections: Served as as deputy politcal director for Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign and presidential transition team.
Donations: $4,200 to Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign in 2005; $2,500 to HillPAC in 2006.

2. Joe Goode, executive director
Connections: Pollster for Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign.

3. Micheal Lux, board member
Connections: Worked on Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign, and later served as his special
asst. for public liaison.
Donations: $2,500 to Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign in 2000-2001; $1,000 to HillPAC in 2002.

4. Mimi Mager, board member
Connections: Member of the Clinton-Gore transition team; founding member of Emily's List, which
supports Hillary.
Donations: $2,000 to Hillary Clinton in 2007.

5. John Podesta, board member
Connections: Former chief of staff for President Clinton.
Donations: $2,300 to Hillary Clinton in 2007; $1,000 to HillPAC in 2001; $2,000 to Hillary's Senate
campaign in 2000.

6. Hal Malchow, leadership team
Connections: Hillary Clinton's campaign owes Malchow's firm, MSHC Partners, nearly $1 million for
printing expenses.
Donations: $2,000 to Hillary's Senate campaign in 1999-2000 and $2,100 in 2005.

7. Pat Griffin, leadership team
Connections: Former top advisor to President Clinton; served as asst. to the president for legislative affairs.
Donations: $4,600 to Hillary Clinton in 2007; $3,000 to Clinton from 2000-2005.

8. Maggie Williams, leadership team
Connections: Current campaign manager for Hillary Clinton, and many other ties to the Clintons.
Donations: $4,600 to Hillary Clinton in 2007.

[V4Vigilance]

Sorry Mr. McNary, given all the complaints in all the other states, the political pros running this org, and the budget and expertise they have at their disposal to get things right...

THIS STILL DOESN'T PASS THE SMELL TEST.

OBAMA 08

[sfbayani]

If the organization runs afoul of the law - state or federal -
then, its leadership should be called to task and punished.
including the organization.

Just having this nasty feeling - this could have happened
in a third world country - but the USA?

[erykah]

Far too long there has been a concerted effort to suppress the black vote whenever there was an election in which the black vote mattered. This is far too suspicous. Given the closeness of the NC primary, I cannot give these folks the benefit of the doubt. Sorry.

[shimane]

Interesting thread and issue.

The interesting story, at least for me, as head of the National Political Do Not Contact Registry (StopPoliticalCalls.org) a non-partisan, non-profit org working to reduce robo calls is this:

- Non-profits are exempt from the robocalling law.
- Politicians are exempt from the robocalling law.

It is interesting that the AG is going after WVWV for violating the law, but they are not going after other non-profit organizations that may also be violating the law.

The calls violated the law according to the AG's press release:

"The calls violated state law by failing to disclose who sponsored the call and failing to offer the organization"s contact information to get the calls to stop."

The reality is that there are more than likely several campaigns and other non-profit organizations that are "failing to disclose who sponsored the call" and "failing to offer the org's contact information to get the calls to stop".

In fact, I know of no political campaign at the national level that offers voters a way to opt out of further calls.

Why is the AG not going after other organizations?

Is it because this is a political hot potato?

Shaun Dakin
CEO and Founder
StopPoliticalCalls.org
The National Political Do Not Contact Registry
http://www.stoppoliticalcalls.org

[ncvoter]

Kevin Farmer who got the call:
"The follow-up call from WVWV ...was designed for one purpose and one purpose alone: to sow confusion and suppress the vote.

I look at it this way. As a poster on another site noted when they posted the script for one of WVWV's radio/tv ads, they clearly know how to construct an informative and effective ad piece. Now let's look at what they did for this robo-call: an organization whose stated mission is registering single women to vote, an organization that notes, on its web site, the sponsorship of several noted female celebrities, this organization did not send out an informative, inspiring ("Hey ladies, it's time for women to stand up and be counted!") call using the voice of Christine Lahti or Julia Louis-Dreyfuss (a couple of their celebrity sponsors). Oh no, they sent out a dull, obscure, and mis-informative call using the voice of.......some guy named Lamont Williams.

... I've done robo calls, both the targeting and the scripts, and I would never in a million years use a call like the one I received to reach the audience WVWV claim they were trying to reach, and their organization is one helluva lot more sophisticated than ours.

I'm sorry, but claims of incompetence just do not cover this at all. In my opinion, this was malfeasance, pure and simple."
http://southernstudies.org/facingsouth/2008/05/local-democratic-leader-who-received.asp

[patrice37]

Yes, I see the commitment and passion at work: Commitment to hijacking the nomination for the Clintons by any means necessary.

[Reddogtcb]

We are supposed to take the word of a board member? LIke you couldn't just say that you are for Obama and then vote for Clinton when you get the chance. Please... Don't waste our time.

[U4IA]

Mr. McNary~

Who is Lamont Williams, and if he is a fictitious character, why was this name, and the voice of a black man, used? Answer these questions and maybe we can feel more certain that the rest of this story isn't a bunch of fiction.

[IsobelDeBrujah]

"There may have been mistakes made in this particular registration drive in North Carolina, but Women's Voices, Women Vote's motives were not malicious or intended in any way to confuse voters. Ironically, just the opposite. I know the staff is making every effort to right the situation."

A mistake would have been giving voters misinformation in one state one time. Continuing to give voters misinformation in many states, over and over is not a mistake. It is, at best, gross disregard for the ethics and stated function of WWW and at worst a deliberate attempt to disseminate false voter information. WWW has been, "making every effort to right the situation" for months. When is the situation going to be rectified?

[loislane88]

After Hillary gets the nomination - that's when they will stop making mistakes. The timing for all of these so-called mistakes is very suspect.

[Nommo]

What I wanna know, is if he is any relation to Lamont Sanford?

[LAJonathan]

Mr. McNary, how on earth would you ever be subjected to the organization being used, internally to disenfranchise voters? All it takes is one person to ask for help and the other to execute it. Sorry, but this whole thing smells like something and its not lavender.

[tstamp]

Mr. McNary: Either you are being disengenuous, or you have been duped. I'm not sure which makes you look worse.

[ChiGuy]

Knowing what I do of the recent history of WVWV, and having read many of the comments here, all I'll take the time to say is...what a bunch of garbage.

I you believe what you wrote, then you sir, have been conned.
But my guess is that you know full well the recent actions of the organization were slanted to favor...the WOMAN running for president.

It is obvious also from reading the comments and from my own reaction, that your post has had the opposite effect of its intent. People are now more skeptical than when they first began reading your words with an open mind.

[PorkBelly]

Nobody is buying this line. Too many individual elements in play to just be an error or a coincidence.

Who benefits?

[ched]

Oregon? Oops, sorry, won't happen again. Virginia? Oops, sorry, won't happen again.
Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona? Same, same same.
Sorry, buddy, the "oops" excuse doesn't work more than once, especially for a GOTV organization, Looks like your Clinton supporter friends at Women's Vote were using their resources to suppress minority votes. Of course, you have to claim that it must have been an innocent mistake, since otherwise you'd be admitting to knowing about it, or at least not paying attention.
Waiting for the other shoe to drop.

[jsarbee2]

I'm sorry sir, but if I am to take you at your word, you were being duped as a member of this board. An organization that is doing legitimate work does not rack up the number of complaints WVWV has and completely fail to remedy any of the issues that cause people to say they are being misleading and attempting to suppress the vote. One or two complaints might be excused as incompetence. Eleven demonstrates that there is criminal malfeasance. I do wonder when you were asked to join this board and whether the invitation was made in recognition of the overwhelming presence of Clinton supporters and former staff members at all levels of the organization. Your presence and post here today seem an effort at plausible deniability but an ineffective one at best.

I've served on boards before and I know that in most organizations, there are one or two people running the show while the rest sit back and rubber stamp the agenda that is put before them. Is the atmosphere at WVWV different from the norm? Do you take an active day to day role in the decisions that are made and strategy discussions? If you do, and you thought this GOTV campaign was well planned and executed, then you are not doing the due diligence required of you as a board member.

[Obamamo]

With all due respect sir, I think you have been bamboozled. I also believe you are just being courteous to the HilLiar"s Campaign and deep down you know the purpose of these generated phone calls. The intent from this confusion on the part of Women's Voices is to STEAL the nomination from Obama. If I believe that they had no ill intentions then I should believe that HilLiar misspoke about the Bosnia LIE.

[juliatours]

I'm sorry, but 11 complaints? With numerous high profile names in leadership positions?
How is this allowed to go on?

[standard]

You say, "Given my candidate preference and my background and associations in voter registration efforts, I can say with great conviction, there was no effort to suppress or confuse African American voters, or any other voters in the state of North Carolina by Women's Voices, Women Vote."

I have no reason to doubt your sincerity. However, what was reported was such an "effort". You apparently meant to say "no intention". Even so, your candidate preference, background, associations, conviction and sincerity are all irrelevant. None of them qualifies you to offer evidence on the facts in the specific matter in North Carolina. All they can do is help you form a personal opinion: a guess.

I wonder, as a general matter, what competent legal counsel would ordinarily advise a client who is considering making a gratuitous, indelible public statement about an alleged instance of election fraud--or of any other crime. My guess? He or she would tell the client, "Say nothing!"

[Softnsweet]

Get out of here! We know the deal! You guys think we are crazy. They using a AA person here and Hillary just did an in North Carolina and Indiana using Maya Angelou's indorsement.

[Siren]

quotes from Sarah Johnson

WVWV spokeswoman is quoted on Feb 9th saying:

http://hamptonroads.com/...

Sarah Johnson, communications director for the organization, said Friday that not including information about the source of the voter registration effort was "absolutely an accidental omission."
She said the group was changing its nationwide phone alerts to make clear who is coordinating the effort.

and then Sarah Johnson is quoted again today, April 30:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmem...

But that practice would stop, she said. "This not identifying ourselves on the call, that's not something that is going to continue as we move forward. Our phone calls in the future will correct any confusion about the calls." When I asked if there had been any particular strategy behind not identifying the group as making the calls, she said no.

So from a promise Feb 9 to change the illegal practice of hiding your groups id from voters, a practice polling groups do not like if they are doing legit business, to yet another statement of apology April 30th for the same thing and you want people to think this group has nothing to hide. if WVWV had nothing to hide, it should have freely given its identity to voters. It refused to do so when called on it by a reporter Feb 9th. This is done when a companhy WANTS to hide its identity because they know they are engaging in caging.

[Jezreel]

OK. But why did WVWV have to be outed by Facing South? Why didn't they just come forward without an investigation? Your organization is a 501(c)3 corporation, like the League of Women's Voters. Why not just identify yourselves during the robo calls? Were they trying to deliberately mislead AA voters by using an ethnically sounding name?

And finally, every AA and most whites know that the oldest trick in the book is to use an AA as a cover when you're trying to hide race based politics, so tell us more about Lamont Williams?

[Jezreel]

OK. But why did WVWV have to be outed by Facing South? Why didn't they just come forward without an investigation? Your organization is a 501(c)3 corporation, like the League of Women's Voters. Why not just identify yourselves during the robo calls? Were they trying t