http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/news/11509680358970.xml&coll=2 – Judge meets with jurors, offers more instructions in Siegelman case.

http://www.al.com/business/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/business/11509680768970.xml&coll=2 – Former SouthTrust CEO Wallace Malone establishes charitable foundation with $60 million endowment, says 90% of grants will go to Alabama programs.

http://www.al.com/opinion/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/opinion/11509678978970.xml&coll=2 – Editorial applauds decision of Supreme Court to refuse to reconsider prohibition against execution of juveniles in capital offense cases.

http://www.al.com/opinion/birminghamnews/elard.ssf?/base/opinion/1150881669302570.xml&coll=2 – Eddie Lard’s commentary on the impact of Birmingham area elections of legislative and local officials on transit issues.

http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060622/NEWS/606220318/1001 - GOP stalls action to extend Voting Rights Act.

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060622/NEWS/606220315/1012/editorial1 - Editorial praises efforts of Corrections Commissioner to reduce county jail backlog.

FROM TODAY’S ANNISTON STAR:

Speak Out

Speaker’s Stand … Estate tax benefits most Alabamians

By Presdelane Harris
Special to The Star

06-22-2006

Alabama Sens. Richard Shelby and Jeff Sessions recently voted again to abolish the estate tax, our nation’s only tax on great accumulations of inherited wealth. Their concern for the “not-so-least of these” concerns me — especially now that the Senate will vote soon on a huge reduction in the estate tax.

Why is abolishing a tax paid only by multimillionaires and billionaires a national priority right now? Our nation is at war, our federal debt is $8.5 trillion, and we are rebuilding the Gulf Coast.

At a time of war, when many Alabamians have made enormous sacrifices through their service in the military or state National Guard units, another tax break for the superrich is a stark inequality of sacrifice.

Voting for tax cuts is politically easy in Washington. Explaining how you’ll fill the gap is hard. How do our senators plan to replace the $1 trillion in revenue that will be lost in the decade after complete repeal? If they cut spending to pay for this tax cut for billionaires, what programs will be targeted? Most likely it will be the programs that benefit our children, our seniors and our low-income citizens.

Very few people pay the estate tax. According to newly released IRS data, only 278 Alabamians owed any estate tax in 2004 (out of the 46,716 state residents who died the previous year). That’s just 0.6 percent of all Alabama estates. In 2009, under existing law, only estates over $3.5 million for an individual and $7 million for a couple will be subject to the tax. By 2009, only a couple dozen of the wealthiest families in Alabama will pay.

Farming and running a business are hard, and many businesses fail, but not because of the estate tax. If the estate tax is a threat to family farmers or small business owners, as our senators claim, they should name such an entity in Alabama that has been put out of business because of the estate tax. Faceless anecdotes don’t count in this debate anymore. If you’re planning a $1 trillion vote, the people of Alabama deserve to see your evidence.

Sen. Sessions has been vocal in his support for abolishing the so-called “death tax,” cloaking his arguments like he is the protector of the common man. The phrase “death tax” itself is part of the deception. As an African-American, I am puzzled by his claims that abolishing the estate tax is beneficial to African-American entrepreneurs in Alabama. Robert Johnson, the wealthiest African-American man in America, would certainly benefit from repealing the tax. However, many thousands of Alabamians — black and white — would benefit from the services funded by keeping the estate tax.

Sen. Sessions talks about how the estate tax is a form of “double taxation,” but in truth, many of the assets of the estates subject to the tax have never been taxed.

The estate tax raises a lot of money from those people most able to pay. It provides an incentive for wealthy individuals to give to charity, including hospitals, colleges and foundations that serve our communities in Alabama. It causes the rich to care for the “least of these.” The estate tax exemplifies a larger tax fairness principle — those who have paid too much should pay less, and those who have paid too little should pay more.

Both Sens. Shelby and Sessions have repeatedly voted for estate tax repeal. This vote puts them out of step with the majority of citizens in our state.

Presdelane Harris is organizers’ team leader of Alabama Arise.

 

Op-Ed Columns

We still need Voting Rights Act

By Karen K. Narasaki
Progressive Media Project

06-22-2006

Congress should renew the Voting Rights Act. The provisions mandating language assistance for voting are particularly important.

A few members of Congress have challenged the language assistance provisions, which became part of the Voting Rights Act in 1975.

With a few exceptions, immigrants seeking citizenship are required to learn English. However, voting materials can often be confusing and complicated, even for those who speak English as their first language.

Even many native-born citizens have a difficult time navigating complex election materials because of language barriers.

Voters with limited-English skills are American citizens, and like all American citizens, they, too, have a stake in our democracy. They build businesses, work hard to provide for their families, pay taxes and serve in our military. Our country is better served when we ensure they have full access to voting, which is one of the most fundamental acts of citizenship.

Sadly, many American citizens for whom English is a second language continue to face obstacles when participating in the political process. In the last election, monitoring groups documented several instances around the country where hostility and abuse occurred.

In 2005 in Washington state, one man challenged the right to vote of more than 1,000 people with foreign-sounding names. He targeted voters with names that, he said, “have no basis in the English language” or “appear to be from outside the United States,” while omitting voters with names that sounded American-born, like Smith or Powell.

In Bayou La Batre, Ala., when a Vietnamese-American ran for local office, supporters of a white candidate were challenging the eligibility of only Asian-American voters.

And in Boston in 2004, poll workers at one site segregated white voters and minority voters into two separate lines, trying to speed up the voting process.

Federal language assistance provisions could help ensure that all citizens are safeguarded against such discriminatory treatment.

Protections provided under the Voting Rights Act have helped increased voter participation among Asian-Americans, Latinos, American Indians, and Alaskan natives. In San Diego County, Calif., for instance, voter registration among Latinos and Filipinos rose 20 percent within six months after the Department of Justice’s language protection enforcement action in 2004.

Elected officials can then be more responsive — and accountable — to communities’ needs. And officials can become more representative of their constituents. In 2002, Harris County, Texas, was required to offer language assistance to Vietnamese-speaking voters. Just two years later, a multilingualVietnamese-American candidate won a state legislative seat for the first time in Texas.

The enormous benefits of higher voter turnout and participation outweigh the nominal costs to state and local jurisdictions for providing language assistance. According to a 2005 Arizona State University study, a majority of jurisdictions covered by the language provisions reported incurring no additional costs for providing language assistance.

Regardless, there ought not be a price tag on a more inclusive democracy.

The language-assistance provisions expire next year if Congress does not act soon. Congress must reauthorize them to ensure that advances for minority voters are not rolled back.

A healthy democracy depends on maximizing — not impeding — the ability of citizens to cast their ballots.

Karen Narasaki is president of the Washington-based Asian American Justice Center.