The lawsuit by Demos (an ACORN successor), which resulted in Massachusetts voluntarily taking the unprecedented step of mailing registration forms to almost 500,000 welfare recipients and other steps in welfare offices not required by law, is looking more and more like a pro-Elizabeth Warren set-up.
The Chairwoman of Demos is Warren’s daughter. But Demos says Warren’s daughter was not involved in the decision making. She didn’t need to be, Demos is a big Warren supporter as an organization.
The Washington Free Beacon described the organizational ties back in May:
Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren’s political career has been boosted by her daughter’s connections to left-wing groups, which could damage her standing with independent voters, observers in Massachusetts and outside experts say.
Warren’s daughter, Amelia Warren Tyagi, chairs the George Soros-funded progressive think tank Demos as well as the board of directors of the liberal magazine the American Prospect, which is a “partner publication” to Demos. Both organizations have been extremely supportive of Warren’s political rise and have helped cultivate her image as a champion of the left.
Demos employees include far-left activists, veterans of the Obama and John Edwards presidential campaigns, and a former fellow at George Soros’ Open Society Institute….
Van Jones, 9/11 Truther and founder of Color for Change and Green for All, serves on the Demos Board of Trustees. Demos senior fellow Benjamin Barber was a “longtime adviser to Saif al-Qaddafi,” son of the late Libyan dictator Muammar al-Qaddafi.
George Soros’ Open Society Foundations and Open Society Institute-Brussels provided funding for the organization in 2011.
Demos president Miles Rapoport issued a press release in July 2010 supporting Warren’s bid to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and another in July 2011 praising her “leadership” in designing the CFPB.
“Demos has long been a vocal supporter of Elizabeth Warren and commends her for working tirelessly to set up the CFPB all while defending it from unrelenting and unfounded attacks,” Rapoport wrote.
Rapoport did not mention Elizabeth Warren’s personal ties to Demos in either statement.
The Demos blog celebrated the launch of Warren’s Senate campaign in August 2011, calling her “a figure of rare integrity” and proclaiming, “she and this republic are better served by Warren making the Senate run.”
Demos presented Warren with a “Transforming America” award in 2010 at its 10th anniversary gala.
Elizabeth Warren also promoted her book The Two-Income Trap at a December 2003 event at New York’s Drum Major Institute co-sponsored by Demos.
Demos is attempting to portray this lawsuit as simply part of a broader national effort.
Yet the timing has to be more than coincidental. The best evidence is that the claim that Massachusetts was not in compliance with the so-called Motor Voter law was not even raised by Demos until late last year, after almost all other Democrats had dropped out of the Senate primary race and it was clear that Warren likely would be the nominee.
Even then, as detailed in a March 6, 2012 letter from the Massachusetts Secretary of State which was filed in court (embedded at bottom of post), after meeting with Demos representatives, Massachusetts laid out all the steps it had taken to cure any alleged deficiencies. The state offered to meet with Demos again to address any additional concerns, yet as detailed in the letter, the state heard nothing until Demos filed suit in May.
None of the ultimate remedies agreed to, including the mass mailing, appear to have been raised by Demos prior to the lawsuit. Exhibit A to the court Complaint was Demos’ demand letter from December, in which no demand for a mass mailing was made.
A mass mailing is not even requested in the court Complaint, which simply requested that the Court order the state to provide welfare recipients with an opportunity to register to vote:
(iii) Directing defendants, under a court-approved plan with appropriate mandatory reporting and monitoring requirements, to take all actions necessary to remedy the past and continuing violations of Section 7 of the NVRA, including, without limitation, ensuring that all persons affected by defendants’ violations of Section 7 of the NVRA are provided opportunities to register to vote or to change their voter registration addresses to enable them to vote in the 2012 federal election;
Yet despite the March letter detailing how the state both was in compliance and had addressed the concerns of Demos, the state quickly capitulated to the mass mailing, which news reports indicate never has taken place in any other state in which Demos filed suit.
Rather than allow the case to follow a pre-trial schedule set by the Court which would have allowed the state to defend itself, the state entered into a Joint Motion cancelling the pretrial schedule based on the settlement which included the mass mailing and promotional activities at welfare offices in the fall.
The excuses given by the state for this capitulation don’t make sense. The state asserted to The Boston Globe that the action was taken because of a Court decision:
Daniel Curley, commissioner of the state’s transitional assistance department, said the mailings had nothing to do with partisan politics.
“We’re responding to a court decision,” he said.
That explanation demonstrably is not true. The state agreed to the mass mailing voluntarily as part of a settlement, not because of a Court decision.
What we have here is a pro-Warren organization run by Warren’s daughter and Warren supporters which times a lawsuit to the election cycle only after it is clear that Warren likely will be the nominee, and then convinces Democratic state officials to capitulate without a fight and contrary to the state’s legal position, resulting in unprecedented steps not required by the law to register a group of voters likely favorable to Warren’s big government agenda.
If that doesn’t say set up, nothing does.
Update: Scott Brown demands Elizabeth Warren reimburse taxpayers for voter registration mailings. As it should be. The mass mailing was not required by law and the state should have defended itself since it was on record as being in compliance.