Forum calls for social change and an end to voter disenfranchisement

Voter suppression and statewide propositions were some of the topics discussed during the 2012 Election and Social Change forum that took place Wednesday night at the USU Northridge Center.

Activist Rev. James Lawson led panel members Theresa Montano, chicano studies professor, Alberto Retana of Community Coalition and Tanzela Ahmed of the Asian Pacific American Legal Center in a discussion to encourage students to vote.

The panel urged the audience to not only vote, but to spread the word about the election to combat voter disenfranchisement.

Montano stressed the importance of voting no on Proposition 32, which is funded by the Koch brothers to restrict the influence of labor unions, she said.

“Labor unions are the only things protecting public institutions from privatization,” Montano said.

Lawson also stressed the importance of voting no on Proposition 32 and restricting corporations from being able to give themselves tax breaks by silencing unions that organize against corporations.

“The Koch brothers are interested in power and control,” Lawson said.

The panel also discussed Proposition 30, which would raise taxes on those making more than $500,000 a year and prevent “trigger cuts” in funding to CSUs. The proposition would also put money back in students’ pockets, Ahmed said.

“If Prop. 30 fails, the message it sends is that we don’t care about the public good,” Montano said.

With his voice almost at a yell, Retana emphasized that the power to change the country is in the student’s hands, but that it will not happen by simply voting. People must get the apathetic involved and to the polls, he said.

“In 2042, the majority of people in the U.S. will be non-white,” Retana said. “But those numbers don’t mean things will change. The opposition wants a different kind of country. I encourage you to be part of the movement.”

Ahmed also focused on getting people to the polls, explaining that the system subtly suppresses the young by not explaining proper voter registration procedure once someone moves away from home for college.

The panel discussed the alleged voter suppression occurring in battleground states that are now requiring voter ID cards. The new laws, passed in states like Pennsylvania, require people to have state ID cards to vote, which disenfranchises senior citizens, the poor and minorities, Retana said.

The panel agreed that this was a ploy by republicans to hurt President Barack Obama’s chances at reelection.

“It’s not a coincidence that Republican votes are down and Democrat votes are up in those states (enforcing voter ID cards),” Montano said.

The panel showed displeasure with both major political parties, although most of their anger was focused at the Republican party.

“We shouldn’t let our criticism for Obama let us throw our vote away,” Lawson said. “Vote because 310 million people cannot afford a repetition of George W. Bush.”

Josh Khabushani, 20, health promotion major, attended the discussion questioning why his single vote matters in a country he feels is so corrupt at the top. The panel gave him a sense of empowerment and that he could make a difference.

“I still don’t believe that one vote will do anything in the big picture,” Khabushani said. “But I learned that it’s more of a journey to change people’s views and educate on issues.”


Disclaimer: The Daily Sundial is not responsible for comments posted on dailysundial.com. In accordance with the Communications Decency Act of 1996 the Sundial is not liable for the content of comments. By commenting, all persons posting on dailysundial.com have agreed to our comment policy. If a comment does not abide by the comment policy the Sundial reserves the right to delete comments without warning. The Daily Sundial advises persons commenting not to abuse their First Amendment rights, and to avoid comments of hate speech or encouraging violence.

  • http://twitter.com/perspixx perspixx

    Prop 30 is a scam. None of the money will actually go to the schools; it will go to public employee pensions. The increase in the sales tax will cost you more than the $150/semester, and your tuition will still go up anyway.

  • VladLenin

    Liberalism is a disease.

    Rev. Lawson and the other victim merchants are appealing to students who are ill-informed, that requiring an ID is disenfranchising voters. HOGWASH.

    How ’bout the prospect that someone might vote (against your wishes) on your behalf?

    It’s been shown that minorities and elderly vote in larger percentages where voter ID’s have been required.

    An ID is required for just about every aspect of life in 2012 America. The premise that “minorities” can’t get an ID is insulting on its face. Are they suggesting that minorities are not as capable as the rest of society at large?

    Liberalism is rampant on the CSUN campus. The end-result of Liberalism is prevelent in Detroit. Sh*thole.

    Peace Out!

    Vlad

  • David the small-L libertarian

    Wow.  Like a mosquito in a nudist colony, one doesn’t even know where to start. 

    “Voter suppression” is one of the left’s biggest and most obviously flawed straw men.  It’s most commonly associated with states requiring ID to cast a vote to help stop voter fraud.  In this country one needs an ID to do almost everything: obtaining a public benefit; using a credit card; most any over-the-counter banking transaction, even to purchasing a box of Sudafed.  Europe must be a bastion of voter suppression as showing an ID is pretty much the standard.

    “Labor unions are the only things protecting public institutions from privatization,” Montano said.

    So if public employees aren’t unionized the DMV, LAUSD, CSU, UC, et al, will become private?  Sure.

    “The Koch brothers are interested in power and control,” Lawson said.

    Ah, the evil Koch brothers, the left’s favorite evildoers.  Did Lawson have anything to say about public unions’ “power and control”?

    This was a panel of leftists with an agenda and no exchange of ideas.  They all agree and the purpose was to indoctrinate those who attended.  I’d like to know how many of the attendees were students assigned by their professors to attend for class credit.

    • Michelangelo_L

      While voter suppression through requiring ID is certainly exaggerated by the left, it seems to be an actual issue in the deep south. During the summer I met up with a few libertarians from the south and they mentioned how DMVs there were physically placed in such a manner to make it hard for rural people to get their IDs. What strikes me as odd is rural voters tend to vote Republican, relative to their urban counterparts. I haven’t researched too deeply into the subject, but it seems worth looking into.  

      Not that it matters to me beyond as a matter of curiosity. I’ve never understood why anyone would bother going out to vote. The marginal vote doesn’t change much, and the choices given are rarely genuine. Take this presidential election for example; we have Obama vs a RINO from New England that keeps changing his opinion on policies. And those of us in California don’t even have that choice – either one votes for Obama with everyone else or they cast a protest vote. Either way all our electoral votes go to that idiot. Why would anyone wait in line at night, surrounded by Democrats, just to cast a protest vote?

      • David the small-L libertarian

        Assuming it is an issue somehow, somewhere, why not organize to help this small number of people to get IDs instead of organizing against the integrity of the democratic process?

        The reason for other-than-Obama supporters to vote in California is to stand up for one’s idology.  If you just throw up your hands and give up there’s no chance for it ever to change.  No Republican will ever embody my view of whom I want running the government.  Some come close, however: Rep. Tom McClintock, for example.

        • Michelangelo_L

          It is odd isn’t it? You could think that in a digital age it’d be easy to get an ID to everyone. Card printers, digital biometric data machines, etc etc all make checking someone’s background easy to do within a few minutes. 

          What strikes me as really odd though is why there would persist a difficulty in getting IDs in the south. It seems to be a left over from past attempts at disfranchising blacks in the south, but what would be the logic of disfranchising conservative rural people living in a conservative stronghold? Are the state governments in the south so inept in providing basic services? 

top
Take our daily poll!