Election Assistance Commission: Difference between revisions

Election Assistance Commission (view source)

Revision as of 01:12, 26 January 2025

37 bytes removed , 26 January

m

Text replacement - "Republican Party" to "Republican Party"

CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators

14,662

edits

@@ Line 141: / Line 141: @@
 ==Criticisms==
-Critics have contended that the EAC has responded positively to political pressure from the [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican Party]] and the [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]]. For example, the EAC is said to have overstated the problem of voter fraud, which is often cited by Republicans as a justification for restrictive measures that Democrats charge are intended to prevent qualified Democrats from voting. The EAC Chair denied that there was any political pressure.<ref>{{cite web|last=Fessler|first=Pam|title=Federal Panel on Voter Fraud Scrutinized|publisher=[[National Public Radio]]|date=July 31, 2007|url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12385655|access-date=August 30, 2007}}</ref> Tova Wang, a consultant to the Commission, wrote a detailed account in ''[[The Washington Post]]'' about how her research and that of her Republican co-author had been disregarded or altered by the EAC, to produce a published report "that completely stood our own work on its head." The changes included exaggerating the purported voter fraud issue and omitting references to charges of voter intimidation lodged by Democrats, as well as removing all criticisms of the [[George W. Bush]] administration's Department of Justice that the report had incorporated.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Wang|first=Tova Andrea|title=A Rigged Report on U.S. Voting?| newspaper =[[The Washington Post]]|pages=A21|date=August 30, 2007|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/29/AR2007082901928.html?hpid=opinionsbox1}}</ref>
+Critics have contended that the EAC has responded positively to political pressure from the Republican Party and the [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]]. For example, the EAC is said to have overstated the problem of voter fraud, which is often cited by Republicans as a justification for restrictive measures that Democrats charge are intended to prevent qualified Democrats from voting. The EAC Chair denied that there was any political pressure.<ref>{{cite web|last=Fessler|first=Pam|title=Federal Panel on Voter Fraud Scrutinized|publisher=[[National Public Radio]]|date=July 31, 2007|url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12385655|access-date=August 30, 2007}}</ref> Tova Wang, a consultant to the Commission, wrote a detailed account in ''[[The Washington Post]]'' about how her research and that of her Republican co-author had been disregarded or altered by the EAC, to produce a published report "that completely stood our own work on its head." The changes included exaggerating the purported voter fraud issue and omitting references to charges of voter intimidation lodged by Democrats, as well as removing all criticisms of the [[George W. Bush]] administration's Department of Justice that the report had incorporated.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Wang|first=Tova Andrea|title=A Rigged Report on U.S. Voting?| newspaper =[[The Washington Post]]|pages=A21|date=August 30, 2007|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/29/AR2007082901928.html?hpid=opinionsbox1}}</ref>
 In 2009, the [[United States Office of Special Counsel]] issued a report that found that the EAC engaged in political discrimination in federal hiring against an attorney to fill the General Counsel position because he was a Republican.<ref name="WT-OSC">{{cite news | agency =[[The Washington Times]] | date = December 3, 2009 | author = Amanda Carpenter | url = http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/back-story/2009/dec/03/election-assistance-commision-nixes-job-to-man-bec/ | title = Election Assistance Commission nixes job to man because of GOP affiliation }}</ref> The report was in response to a settlement between the attorney and the EAC, in which the attorney was paid an unspecified amount of money.<ref name="EAC-settlement">{{cite web | url = http://www.eac.gov/assets/1/AssetManager/Evaluation%20Report%20-%20Accessible.pdf | title = Use of Appropriated Funds to Settle a Claim | date = September 2010 | publisher = Election Assistance Commission Office of the Inspector General | access-date = May 30, 2011 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20111020182801/http://www.eac.gov/assets/1/AssetManager/Evaluation%20Report%20-%20Accessible.pdf | archive-date = October 20, 2011 | url-status = dead }}</ref><ref name="EAC-OSC">{{cite web | url = http://www.osc.gov/documents/press/2009/pr09_23.pdf | date = December 2, 2009 | title = Office of Special Counsel Settles Political Discrimination Case  | publisher = [[United States Office of Special Counsel]] | access-date = May 30, 2011 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110928000247/http://www.osc.gov/documents/press/2009/pr09_23.pdf | archive-date = September 28, 2011 | url-status = dead }}</ref>