How a Hickman County nobody made history
In my long years as
a political activist, author, reporter, editor and publisher and syndicated
columnist I’ve been called lots of things, many of them not nice. Forty years
ago I was called a communist and in more recent years a “neo-Nazi” or, as The Tennessean put it, “the extreme of
the extreme.”
That doesn’t disturb
me too much. It just tells me maybe I’ve been doing something right.
In 1968, when I became
state chairman of a disorganized presidential campaign on behalf of Sen. Eugene
McCarthy, the corrupt political machine of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley (who
controlled state politics and is known for getting the graveyard votes for John
Kennedy in 1960 with the Mafia’s help), refused to allow us on the ballot, even
though we had more than enough signatures. So I did what lawyers say to do – I sued
the bastard.
Of course it was
thrown out of court and Richard Nixon won the election and gifted us with
Watergate. But I wasn’t done yet. You see, as one of the candidates for the
Electoral College ticket of McCarthy, I took it all the way to the U.S. Supreme
Court on the argument that Illinois law violated the “one man – one vote”
principal of the U.S. Constitution.
The way it was set
up is that even if we had the nominating signatures of every voter in the state
behind us, if we didn‘t have 100 signatures from Cairo, Illinois (a hotbed of
KKK allegiance) we were denied a place on the ballot. Of course, the State of
Illinois argued that, “Hey, its moot – irrelevant! The election’s over and done
with – get a life!”
Whoa, Bubba, not so
fast! As long as that law is on the books, the same stall and shove it under
the rug tactics can be used over and over and over. As long as a bunch of sharp
lawyers can delay it until after an election, there may never be a fair
election.
Well, the Supreme Court
pondered it and said, “Well, maybe you have something here” and the case of
Moore v. Ogilvie (394 U.S. 814 (1969). No. 620) was on its way. (Richard
Ogilvie, former sheriff of Cook County (Chicago) was elected Illinois governor
in 1968). The case was argued March 27, 1969 and decided May 5, 1969 – long after
the 1968 elections. My Oct. 8, 1968 motion to advance and expedite the hearing
and disposition was denied because Illinois argued there was no way they could
do anything before the Nov. 5 election. But the Supreme Court ruled that:
“But while the 1968 election is
over, the burden which MacDougall v. Green, supra,
allowed to be placed on the nomination of candidates for statewide offices
remains and controls future elections, as long as Illinois maintains her
present system as she has done since 1935. The problem is therefore 'capable of
repetition, yet evading review …. The need for its resolution thus reflects a
continuing controversy in the federal-state area where our 'one man, one vote'
decisions have thrust. We turn then to the merits.
“Today …, 93.4% of the State's
registered voters reside in the 49 most populous counties, and only 6.6% are
resident in the remaining 53 counties. The constitutional argument, however,
remains the same.
“'How then can one person be
given twice or 10 times the voting power of another person in a statewide
election merely because he lives in ar ural area or because he lives in the
smallest rural county? Once the geographical unit for which a representative is
to be chosen is designated, all who participate in the election are to have an
equal vote whatever their race, whatever their sex, whatever their occupation,
whatever their income, and wherever their home may be in that geographical
unit. This is required by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment.' Gray v. Sanders, 372 U.S. 368, 379, 83 S.Ct. 801, 808, 9 L.Ed.2d
821.
“'The right to vote freely for
the candidate of one's choice is of the essence of a democratic society, and
any restrictions on that right strike at the heart of representative
government. And the right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution
of the weight of a citizen's vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting
the free exercise of the franchise.' 377 U.S., at 555, 84 S.Ct., at 1378.
“It, therefore, lacks the
equality to which the exercise of political rights is entitled under the
Fourteenth Amendment.
“MacDougall v. Green is
overruled.”
The vote was an overwhelming 7-2
with Justices Stewart and Harlan dissenting.
This case,
overthrowing a law that had been on the books since 1935, has since been cited
in well over 1,000 cases and in the current controversy over gay marriage and
possible repeal of Roe v. Wade, it rears its head again. In fact, it was used
as the foundation for the original Roe v. Wade decision (1973), as well as in
cases brought by supporters of George Wallace in his presidential campaign and,
more recently, in the explosive Bush v. Gore decision of 2000. In March 2013 Bush
v. Gore was even cited in an election case in Kenya.
So, no matter what
you want to call me, I am proud to have my name on this tiny, tiny footnote to
history because it has served the entire political spectrum, not just liberals
or conservatives.
©2012 by Jim Moore. All rights
reserved.
-30-
you aRE INVITED TO FOLLOW MY BLOG
ReplyDelete