This file contains archived live captions of the Black History Month event held at the FEC on February 21, 2023. This file is not a transcript of the meeting, and it has not been reviewed for accuracy or approved by the Federal Election Commission.



I already said a welcoming remark, but for everyone in the virtual world, we will do this all over again. I said, happy Mardi Gras, everybody. We're already to celebrate. If you're not with us today, you are missing out. Happy Mardi Gras to you as well. Let's start off with saying good afternoon to everyone. It's a great pleasure to welcome you to the Federal election commission and election assistance commission second animal celebration of Black history month. In addition to agency employees, we have guests in the audience, virtual and in-person. A very healthy and person number, I am happy to say, I think over 100 people. Thank you all for your attendance as well. We have individuals from federal agencies, universities and law centers, as well as members of the election bar. I also want to send a special thank you to the Commissioner of the FEC , who is here with us today, and also the Commissioner from the EAC. Thank you for taking the time out of your schedule to participate with us today. We are here to celebrate the dynamic world that African Americans have contributed to the development and ongoing progress of this country. Our focus for today is a discussion of black history in democracy . It is often said democracy is an ongoing process or cover, the democratic process has not always been easily accessible to the diverse population. Diversity is a fact in our country. It is a lovely fact about our country. But diversity in all corners is not automatic or guaranteed. I believe it is essential for elected governing bodies to reflect the diversity of the nation. To do so, this requires a consistent prayer commitment and effort from those empowered to oversee and administer the electoral process to ensure the right to vote, and all the opportunities for running for federal office, are protected and available to all Americans. I'm proud to highlight steps that the FEC has taken to strengthen our democracy and protect the integrity of the campaign-finance process.  I look around because so many of you have been involved with this. Thank you for that. Approving regulations that will require disclaimers on a broader set of communications. Therefore, providing transparency to all members of the public about money used in federal elections. And this is an ongoing action, we are now working on the consideration of potential rulemaking to revise regulations for candidate salary. Thus, potentially drawing more diverse candidates to federal elections. I am proud to say that this year, as we highlight black history, we're also highlighting the work this agency is doing to take the necessary steps to uphold the integrity of our mission. Thank you. We are going to follow immediately to have remarks by our principal deputy, Assistant Attorney General. Let me allow you to get some background on this dynamic woman. She is currently on leave from the University of Michigan law school where she served as principal deputy assistant attorney general in the civil rights division at the Department of Justice. The second-highest leadership position within the civil rights commission. Before joining Michigan, she was a Henry Rutgers professor and scholar at Rutgers University. She was an award-winning scholar, she teaches and writes about constitutional law and civil rights in leading law reviews. Her commentary has appeared in the near times, as well as in the Washington Post, among other national news outlets. She has served on the national board of the American Constitution Society and the board of New Jersey Institute for social justice, and is the founder director of the inclusion project at Rutgers. Before joining the faculty, she was director of litigation at the NAACP legal Defense and educational fund and supervised a nationwide litigation program, including advocacy and several cases. An honors graduate of Harvard Law school and Yale, she also holds a master degree in public policy from the Harvard Kennedy school of Government. She served for judge Robert Carter in the southern district of New York. She is a member of the American Law Institute. In 2016, Rutgers University reported appointed her to the Henry Rutgers professor in recognition of her scholarship, teaching and service. In 2021, she was named the finding director of Rutgers University Institute for the global racial justice. It is also worthy to highlight that she was a member the presidential commission on the Supreme Court of the United States. She participated in bipartisan working groups with the American Law Institute to ask for possible reforms. 
 If we can play the video, please. 
 Good afternoon. Thank you for the privilege of speaking with you today as part of your celebration of Black history. In preparation for this event, I have been thinking about what it has taken to secure the right to vote for black people in this country. In the courageous leadership of people, known and unknown, who have faced untold dangers just for seeking to participate in our democracy, as well as the challenges we still face. I was thinking, in particular, about Fannie Lou Hamer, who cofounded, along with Ella Baker and Bob Moses, the Mississippi freedom Democratic Party. In 1964, as you may know, the Democratic national convention refused to see the Mississippi freedom Democratic Party at the DNC in Atlantic City. Fannie Lou Hamer appeared before the DNC credentials committee to protest the decision. I want to share what she said to the committee. She began by describing the threats against her life. She recounted several incidents, including one that happened on June 9, 1963. She and others had attended a voter registration workshop, and as they were returning to Mississippi, they were arrested and taken to the county jail, where they were beaten mercilessly. She said she could hear the looks of the betimes and the screams of the people in the sales next to her. She was then taken from her cell and forced to lie down on a bunk bed on her face. She was then beaten on her head with a blackjack. When she began to scream, she was told to be quiet. She then said something else when she appeared before the credentials committee. All of this happened, she said, because black people, in daring to register to vote, had sought to become "first-class citizens." I was struck by her use of that phrase, first-class citizens. What she meant, of course, is that one cannot fully enjoy the rights of citizenship without the right to vote. That is because the right to vote is preservative of all rights. Voting is the gateway to freedom, and to participation in American life on an equal footing. It is the gateway to having a voice in government. It is a gateway to power, and to self-determination. In his book, the right to vote, the contested history of democracy in the United States, Alexander case are describes a common assumption that Democratic Party stress is inevitable. That the expansion of democratic political rights is our destiny. Yet we have to remember what it took to begin to realize the promise of freedom. Three amendments to the Constitution. The 13th amendment, which abolished slavery, the 14th amendment, guaranteeing citizenship, and the 15th amendment, which allowed black men to vote. As you know, black women were not allowed to vote until the 19th amendment was ratified in 1920. Even these constitutional protections were not enough. State and local governments adopted new practices and pass new laws to limit the effectiveness of the right through apportionment, redistricting, in the structures of representation. It took the determination of countless people who risk their lives, their jobs, they are personal well-being to make these constitutional promises real. It took Letty Sunday, -- bloody Sunday, 1965 in Selma, Alabama. On that fateful day, 600 peaceful protesters, led by then 25-year-old John Lewis, were attacked and beaten by state troopers. These attacks would be televised around the world and the country, leading to demonstrations in 80 cities across the nation. Two days later, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. led more than 2000 marchers across the bridge. And then, are March 15, President Lyndon Johnson called for voting reform. There is no issue a states rights or national rights, Johnson said, there is is only the struggle for human rights. We have already waited 100 years and more, and the time for waiting is gone. On August 4 of that year, the 1965 voting rights act was passed, and it was at that point we began to see meaningful progress. That progress was due, in large part, to section 5, the voting rights act preclearance provision. That provision was the guardrail that prevented racial discrimination in voting from taking root and from infecting our democratic system and spreading across it. As we know, unfortunately, that provision, in a serious blow to voting rights and racial justice, was hollowed out by the Supreme Court decision in Shelby County versus Holder in 2013. I know I do not need to tell you that we are in challenging times, that the right to vote, and that our democracy is under stress. Protection of the right to vote is crucial for our country. I can assure you that it is one of the top priorities for the Department of Justice, and that the voting team in the civil rights division is fighting every day to protect our democracy under federal voting rights laws that Congress has authorized the department to enforce. We are committed to ensuring that all eligible voters can cast a vote, that all lawful votes are counted and that every voter has access to accurate election information. Since 2021, the division has filed lawsuits under federal voting rights statutes to challenge statewide redistricting plans in Texas and voting legislation in Georgia and the state of Arizona. We have worked to make sure local elections are free and fair by guarding against voter intimidation at the polls. We protect the rights of military and overseas voters and voters with disabilities, as well as voters who speak different languages. We have participated in voting rights cases in the Supreme Court, the Courts of Appeals, and district courts. In the 2022 midterms, the division monitored elections around the country for compliance with federal voting rights laws. Unfortunately, as mentioned earlier, we're still fighting without her most powerful and effective enforcement mechanism, the preclearance provision of the voting rights act. But we are committed to using all of the remaining tools that are still available, including section 2 of the voting rights act. And of course, we support any effort by Congress to fill the void left by the Supreme Court ruling in Shelby County to help safeguard the most basic right of American citizenship. Thank you for your time and attention today, and thank you for all you are doing to safeguard and protect our democracy. 
 Always been a little help. [ Laughter ]  I would like to thank Commissioner Shana Broussard for hosting this event. I would also like to recognize for being here. I would also like to thank the panelists and everyone for joining us today to discuss black history. And the future of our democracy. Before we start the panel discussion, I would like to take a few moments to recognize Black history month. As chairman of the only federal agency solely devoted to the administration of -- I'm still little torn up on this. Solely on election administration, this month serves as a powerful reminder of the civil rights and freedoms black Americans have fought for. This includes the pivotal right to vote. Former U.S. representative and civil rights leader John Lewis once said, governments and corporations do not live, they have no power or capacity in and of themselves. All authority comes from the consent of the government and the satisfaction of the customers. Last year I had the honor of walking across the Edmund Pettis Bridge. This is one of the reasons I'm choking up a little bit. It was so powerful. The year before that, as chairman, Commissioner Loveland went across there. I am sure you felt the same sort of things I did while crossing that bridge. It is really hard to imagine that we lived in a world where people were denied the right to vote simply because of the color of their skin. Hopefully, we will be moving forward to ensure that those rights are restored under certain things the assistant attorney general talked about. I am here today because of the work of the late John Lewis and Martin Luther King Jr., and others who broke down racial barriers in the United States and fought for those rights to vote. At the EAC, we support state and local election officials to improve security and accessibility, voting for black Americans and all eligible voters no matter the race, age, disability, or any additional language needs. This includes having poll workers reflect the diversity of their community. Every American should be able to vote privately and independently. The EAC is committed to working with state and local election officials, which are all to ensure all eligible Americans have full and equal access to the voting booth and confidence of the fairness of the election process. I would like to welcome our panel, the speakers for today's event. To my left is Spencer Overton, research professor at GW Law school and percent of the joint Center for political and economic studies, specializing in election law and the future of multiracial democracy. Previously he served in the Obama administration as the Prince will deputy assistant attorney general of legal policy where he worked in the key role of the implementation of policies related to military and overseas voters, the environment act, the national registration act, voting rights act, and responded to the U.S. Supreme Court decision of citizens United. April recently completed a six-year term as a missionary on the U.S. commission on civil rights as part of the NAACP legal Defense and education fund. Debo Adegbile argued two of the most significant civil rights  cases and decades before the U.S. Supreme Court. These include Northwest -- bear with me. District number one versus Holder and Shelby County versus Holder. Foes involve civil right challenges to the Civil Rights Act. He is currently a partner in the government regulatory litigation group at Wilmer Yale law firm and chairs the antidiscrimination practice. Yael Bromberg  is the constitutional rights attorney with 20 years of experience in civil rights organizing, advocacy, and campaigns. The docket includes election law, voting rights, free-speech, ethics, civil rights, and labor cases and projects. She is a principal at Bromberg law LLC and serves as special counsel and strategic advisor for the Andrew Goodman foundation, a national organization with over 25 dedicate -- 25 states dedicated to democracy. She is a legal scholar of the 26 amendment and lecturer at Rutgers law school, where she teaches election law and supervises students of cases and projects at the international human rights clinic. The panel will now begin with questions from the commissioners. 
 Thank you for the introduction, and thank you to the panelists for being here today. We will take the questions where Chairman Hicks and myself will present questions to the panelists. We will rotate to get a chance to get everyone involved in the discussion. The first question I will present will be to our in person panelists. My question is, your recent work in scholarship focuses on the future multiracial democracy. I would like you to please tell us the defining aspects of multiracial democracy, and can you provide examples? 
 Thanks so much, Commissioner. Commissioner Hicks, thank you. Commissioner Weintraub -- [ Indiscernible ]  chairwoman [ Indiscernible ]  this is really special for me to be here. In 2008 I did -- I both chaired the EAC commission, and then I also transitioned to the FEC  transition group. It is really great to be here interacting with each agency. This field of multiracial democracy, it is really nascent. We're really just getting started. I just organize a panel [ Indiscernible ] in January.  We will do one with the American political science Association in L.A. in September talking to different funders as well in terms of philanthropy. I don't think there is a shared understanding right now of multiracial democracy. You know, many academics aren't focused on multiracial democracy. Some aren't acknowledging race and that it exists. Some who are focused on race are thinking about how we defend past historical gains, as opposed to thinking about the future. I think we have to think about multiracial democracy, because I think it recognizes this centrality of race, but also how we allow individuals to navigate themselves in terms of democracy. There are folks who are making great contributions right now, but generally, they are not connected to one another. [ Indiscernible ] at Johns Hopkins, for example. He claims that all of the democracies in the world  have either been very homogenous or they have maintained an unfair racial or religious hierarchy. His note is that there has never been truly a real multiracial democracy, and our challenges how we have a democracy that is both diverse and facilitates equality. [ Indiscernible ] at George Mason University is a political scientist.  She has noted, her studies have shown that recent demographic change has fueled a rise in what she calls white identity politics where it is not racial animus that is motivating folks, but an identity in terms of demographic change, self-interest. So a group of folks, for example, who are very much about preserving Social Security and Medicare, but not Medicaid. The notion is, it is not that I don't like Latino people, it is, I am supportive of some restrictions in immigration because I have a memory of how the nation was when I grew up, and I'm attracted to that, and that is meaningful to me. So what is the role to the extent that this identity is intensifying? What is its role in terms of the future here. There is work being done. If the Supreme Court in an upcoming case pulls back on section 2, you know, what is the role of single member winner take all districts in terms of ensuring minority representation, and will there be an opening to talk about different alternative road systems, at least on the local level. A lot of this work is in its infancy . It is not just the U.S. issue. We look at India in terms of religion, Brazil, Europe with immigration. There are some questions about multiracial democracy. Certainly we have some unique challenges based on our culture, but we can really lead the way in terms of how democracy navigates a diverse population. I think that is the next step, and I am excited about that. I obviously am also excited about being here with Debo and Yael. 
  Not me? [ Laughter ]  
 I started off with you. You were the number one person. 
 Just kidding. Thank you for the explanation on multiracial democracy. I think we have heard so much about the term, and it's always good to get a definition. We can see you have a passion for this. Can you also explain, in your career, what brought you to this field at this specific time? Is it the current events? 
 I think it is what is happening in the world and what is next. I'm shifty right now from the think tank back to GW. The notion of an academic is, what is emerging? What is the big challenge that is basic as here? Obviously, when we talk about the cultural anxiety, we mentioned election to nihilism and a lack of confidence in democracy. Also, tech platforms and disinformation in the fragmentation and polarization associated with that. Also, the incapacity of many of our institutions to actually grapple with these challenges. They were never really set up to facilitate multiracial democracy. States, obviously, have enacted some voting restrictions over the last few years. More than in the past. We obviously had a round of redistricting. There are questions there. the Senate was unable to move forward in terms of voting reforms, including updating the voting rights act and some other reforms. And then, we talked about the courts and some of the challenges we may see. The institutions were not designed to facilitate multiracial democracy. So what is it we need to set up. What are the systems we need to set up here? It is not just a black versus white thinker people of color versus white thing. L.A., there are some nasty things that were said that were completely inappropriate, but at its base, it is how different groups share power and representation in the multiracial democracy. That is definitely there. big questions, how should the law regulate tech platforms so that we can, on one hand, respect identity . It is great when people connect with each other and identify it will community, but how do we do that without devolving into tribalism and extreme fragmentation and polarization? How do we squarely address that? Also, in a country with no majority racial group, what is the role of white identity politics and a vibrant multiracial democracy? I don't think we can just say that, you know, white folks can have a voice or something like that, but what is a way to be constructive in terms of a multiracial democracy? Division in the past has been this white supremacy model, and I don't think any of us want that in terms of moving forward. So how do we grapple with that? Also, obviously, if money is unevenly distributed among different communities, what does that mean in terms of democracy, and what should the role of resources be in terms of democracy? These are big questions we need answers to. 
 Exactly. I will turn it over to Chairman Hicks. 
 Debo, you recently  finish her term on the commission of civil rights. Can reflect on your time with the commission? What are you proud of, and how we build on that progress? 
 Thanks so much for having me. It's good to be with all of you again on this important month on this important panel talking about these issues in context with so many thoughtful leaders who work on them every day. My time on you a civil rights commission, in some ways, I think of it in three pieces. I think about the past, the people, and the policy. The path is important to me because I learned the importance of centrality of the U.S. civil rights commission in federal civil rights in the United States for my mentor, the late great Higginbotham served on the civil rights commission at a time when I was a baby lawyer just out of law school. Jug Higginbotham served for many years. He was appointed by President Clinton. As I was thinking about wanting to dig more deeply into civil rights, I was preparing to go to the U.S. civil rights commission to be his special assistant as a young lawyer. Unfortunately, judge Higginbotham passed away at that time. And so, my opportunity to join the U.S. civil rights commission passed with him in that moment, but he lit a spark and was the person who first introduced me to the voting rights act meant devoting litigation, to redistricting, litigation of which Spencer has already spoken and that [ Indiscernible ] has mentioned . As well, the principal deputy. Judge Higginbotham open my eyes to that world and helped me engage in that work and put the commission on my radar. Ultimately when I joined the commission, during pre-pandemic times when we used to meet live, I sat right across from his photo. His photo was sort of watching over me. I would commend some of his books on race in the law in America. He wrote a book called in a matter of color and another one, shades of freedom. Both are very instructive about how the law of race in America has shaped our country. In any event, that was the past, learning about it from Higginbotham, and many years later finding myself in a different seat to follow in some small way in his path. The people are also very important. Both the colleagues I served with, but perhaps even more importantly, the people that come before the commission to explain how civil rights issues, concerns, and challenges are being expressed and felt in every part of the country. And the commission sits and invites witnesses, once we identify are topics, we invite witnesses from all over the country to come before the commission and to explain different issues, weather be an issue in the area of voting, in the area of education, and in the area of law enforcement. We did important work in the area of fees and fines, and how those effect communities. We took a look at the FEMA hurricane response and whether there were disparities looking at the hurricane responses for hurricanes that hit both Puerto Rico and areas in Texas. And so, the interesting thing about digging in with the people is that it animates the civil rights challenges and creates an urgency to focus lawmakers and law enforcers on the key issues of the day. One of the panels that was most moving to me was a panel on hate crimes and the experience of folks are having with hate crimes. There were many panelists that came to talk about how these issues, unfortunately, continue to afflict our society, how people are targeted because of who they are and nothing else, and the testimony of these witnesses was very compelling. It was heartbreaking, and both the witnesses, the commissioners and everybody that attended the hearing were visibly moved among the witnesses that day were the mother of Heather Heyer, who was killed in Charlottesville, conveying her experience about the pain and the whole that senseless violence that took her daughter has left for her. There was a young man who came to testify from the Pacific Northwest, Michael Fisher. He had the fortune of being on a commuter bus or train in the Oregon area on a day where an extremist person set upon a Muslim woman who was wearing traditional dress. Three people rose to defend the woman, a recent college graduate, a person who we later learned was a progressive person by orientation, a middle-aged man who leaned in his views as being more on the conservative side, and Micah Fisher, a young man who has some differences, and each of these three men rose to protect the woman, but the attacker had a weapon, and he killed the first two men on that subway. He badly injured Micah Fisher, who bears the scars of that attack. These three men all rose, regardless of their political ideology, how they feel about America, because they were Americans, and because this person was being targeted, this woman was being targeted on public transportation because of who she was. The three men rose to defend her and try to divert the hostility. Unfortunately, two of them paid with their lives and Micah Fisher continues to bear the scars of his bravery. Hearing him testify, witnessing the trauma of that event, tells us about the distance we still have to go. It picks up the theme from the thoughtful remarks from Elise Boddie, that the progress in the United States is not always  ever inevitably fell word, but there are ebbs and flows, and democracy is an active sport that requires us to be attentive to it and to put our shoulder against the grindstone, to continue to push it forward lest we fall back. And having the experience of seeing these people testify about their experiences was important. Finally, on the policy, among the big reports we did was a report on voting. Certainly, we do reports on other issues. The commission is not an enforcement agency. It's an agency created as part of the 1957 Civil Rights Act, and what the commission is charged with doing is gathering evidence, issuing reports so that Congress and the president can have a sense of where things are in the area of civil rights, and to assess whether there is a need for more tools, enhanced tools, refined tools to attack the civil rights issues of the day, and to engage in that work, together with commissioners, with different perspectives of ideology and experience and background to listen to the witnesses, sometimes to travel to the people to do hearings on the road, to meet people where they are. These are all things that dramatically expanded my I'm understanding of civil rights in America. It gave me a new sense of urgency and a sense of the continuity of the challenges we have worked to overcome. And frankly, it enhanced my passion to keep doing the work. The last part of your question was, how do I keep going forward on this? I view this as my life's work. Every year we pay taxes, which is part of my contribution to the government, but I also like to pay a democracy tax through my labor. The union can be more perfect, but only become so if many of us are working diligently to make it so. I have had the great fortune to be the son of two immigrants from the continents of Europe and Africa, from Ireland and Nigeria, both of whom, may parents were the eldest of six kids who came to America was a dream, and I was their first son. My mom had only a sixth grade education, my dad would go on to achieve a PhD. By virtue of the opportunity this country has given me, I am a lawyer who has the ability, the commitment, the platform and the voice to try and help America work to perfect the union, and that is some of the work I commit myself to, and that I hope to continue to work on with all of you. Thanks so much again for having me today. It will be great to be in dialogue with you. 
 We will bring in our other guest to this. Their interesting things we just talked about about working together to move forward. That leads us to the next panelist,  Yael Bromberg.  
 She will pop up on the screen as soon as she speaks. 
 The question I have, and I was really interested in this, is a little bit of a background. Everybody has heard me talk about my undergraduate and in HBCU. One of the unique things that Dillard has done, it was the first HBCU to establish a Jewish black coalition. The long-term president of Dillard University marched with Martin Luther King. This was a unique accomplishment in New Orleans, to create an organization that would build this intersectionality between these two diverse cultures. I'm proud to say that the program lasted for 20 years, and then what happens is that progress moves forward, and it can move backwards. But it is moving forward again. In January this year, the University relaunch the program. Leading into that, I wanted to see if you could talk to us about the strong ties historically between the Jewish and black communities. Not to mention, they are intersectionality. It is against the civil rights during the second reconstruction. Can you tell us about what examples that inspire your work and scholarship today? 
 Good afternoon. Thank you, Commissioner. It is really an honor to be able to join all of you today. Apologies for joining virtually. Thank you for your leadership and the leadership of the other commissioners and the co-panelists for fighting for better democracy for all of us. I think that is the lesson we have to learn from the first reconstruction, the second reconstruction, and whether we are in the midst of a third reconstruction remains to be seen. In the second reconstruction, we saw incredible acts of courage, solidarity, sacrifice, and dreaming. Just one example, and maybe before even give the example, I will offer a little bit of a personal anecdote. Like Debo, I am a first generation  naturalized American. My parents are immigrants here from the former Soviet Union, Lithuania. I am Israeli-American, born in Brazil. My grandparents went through the Holocaust. They went through prison camps in Siberia, simply due to their identity. That was considered legal by those countries. The question is about what we accept as legal norms today in America is very much up for grabs as we are reforming the reality we wish to exist and be in. This informs the way in which we can reflect, also, or at least the way I reflect, on what occurred during the second reconstruction. As just one example a solidarity building, on June 21, 1964, three young men, a black Christian, and to two white from the north, all in their early 20s were part of a southern pilgrimage of more than 1000 young Americans from across the country that joined with thousands of black Mississippians to disrupt Jim Crow and register African-American voters. On their first day in Mississippi, they were adopted and murdered by a gang of two? -- Abducted and murdered by Ku Klux Klan members. To the coverups by white supremacist, including the deputy, chief Deputy sure of it took 44 days to find their bodies and another one that 41 years to hold the lead perpetrators accountable. They shook a nation. A month after the murder committed Civil Rights Act of 1964 was finally signed, and he the traditional period in 1964 of what we consider to be second reconstruction. When we came together, led by youth with multigenerational support, to manifest the rights in the Constitution that have been ratified a century earlier. Year later, civil rights worker linked arms in Selma, Alabama, led by John Lewis, then the chair of the student nonviolent coronation committee. Again, violence was brought to the fore. Violence was forecasted to television sets that were now standard in living rooms across America. The urgency of the moment again was made clear, and the then languishing voting rights act was finally introduced less than three weeks later. I think the question that has come up through the prior comments is, do we need political -- do we need physical violence to overcome political violence? Is there another way we can go about this that reframes the experiences that we had to bear following the original sin of slavery? I find a lot of hope today in terms of intersectionality and multigenerational cross coalition building looking at young people. They were part and parcel of the civil rights movement during second reconstruction. It was HBCU students who catalyzed the desegregation movement through the South, to manifest the untold promise of Brown versus Board of Education. The catalyzed the formation, and they were leading the movements of the day, the movements for women's rights, for native rights, et cetera, just to name a few. And finally, in 1971, they turn to themselves. That is why I considered the 26 amendment, which lowers the voting age to 18 and outlaws age discrimination with regard to access to the ballot as an integral part and natural expansion of the second reconstruction, because they turn to themselves and in a record time the nation understood the value and power that young people bring to protecting democracy. This is all a part of -- the 26 amendment was ratified 51 years ago, the quick is a memo to be ratified in United States history due to the cross partisan support, the near unanimous support, for the idea that young people are critical to protecting democracy. That continues to hold true today. I look forward to sharing those stories with you, but the power of coalition building, working together, what is called political minorities. How did the political minorities come together and express what actually is there majority power to overcome the tyranny of the majority? The young people come I find, especially when I work with them across the country, when I examine the unique ways in which their access to the ballot is suppressed, undermined, or simply not activated, they are the canaries in the coal mine. Especially the young people that come from the HBCUs. This is a changing demographic. The idea of these multiracial democracies. We are increasingly going to be a multiracial democracy. We can only look to, for example, the under 18 population across the country, if you look at the map, from California through the southern states, and up the East Coast, the under 18 proportion, the next group of voters to inherit the franchise, 50% or more are nonwhite. When you zero in on certain states, you find that those populations also make up the majority of the undergraduate and graduate populations. In that way, I know the canary in the coal mine has traditionally been used to look at the disenfranchisement of black voters specifically, but when we look to young voters and young diverse voters, we start to see the unique ways in which voter suppression or voter non-activation directly impacts them. It opens up a whole different type of dialogue around the type a democracy that we wish to live in. I will end on this note, what I found really unique and powerful about working with young people is that this is a cross partisan. Just like the 26 amendment. Young people are across partisanship. Their participation is beyond partisanship. That is where I find a lot of power and hope. 
 Professor Overton. 
 [ Indiscernible ]  
 I think the very first thing the black community has to do is put together a special HBCU table of graduates from Dillard, Hampton, and Clark -- 
 I say yes. 
 You know, live voters matter, insuring black representation is important, but I really do think that there is more, there is an opportunity to demonstrate some leadership here, not just in terms of reacting in kind of a wackamole way of, okay, these voters are being excluded, how to respond? But how can we be proactive in the envisioning of the democracy we want to see that works for everyone? There is a certain moral authority that comes from black abolitionists in the late 1700s who were calling out the constitutional framers for holding up liberty, and yet maintaining slavery in states like New York. A certain moral authority that comes from those who, obviously, were engaged in the first attempt a multiracial democracy in the aftermath of reconstruction that was ultimately unsuccessful. When we think about, you know, Amelia Robinson and Joe John Lewis crossing the bridge that you talked about, and also, this notion of leaders in identity. The notion of rejecting simply a simulation, or that we can't recognize the humanity of people if they don't fit into a certain [ Indiscernible ]  we have obviously seen that benefit other communities. We talk about immigration and naturalization act of 1965, which benefited so many folks in our country, or recognizing the humanity of people regardless of who they love. Certainly, black leaders and communities have fallen short at times, but there is a certain standing we have to work with others to finish this work. Being proactive, the system that we want, how we get there. I would also just point out, and you know, we have heard versions of this, that -- some version people is a demographics is not destiny. Simply because our country is changing from a demographic standpoint, it doesn't necessarily mean that, inevitably, progress will come. [ Indiscernible ] wrote a book,  he really focused on entrenchment. We do know that sometimes incumbent powers really work to develop systems to entrench themselves. The question here is, how do we resist that? Certainly, I think South Africa is much more advanced than Zimbabwe in terms of the multiracial democracy, but certainly, I don't know that there is perfect equality in a place like South Africa, even though you have demographics which would suggest a different representation balance in terms of meaningful participation in society. So how do we make that transition in a smooth way that allows for real representation, but also -- I don't really look at this -- I love Steve Phillips book, how to win the Civil War, I enjoyed the book, but this can't be this notion of this victory where some group is marginalized. I think is got -- we all have to have a place, a meaningful place, in the future. So how do we do that? Finally, you talk about the bridge. I had the good fortune to go across it on the 50th anniversary with President Obama and John Lewis. The feeling was not, okay, we made it, we have a black president. The feeling was not, okay, we don't need to do anything else in terms of protecting black voting rights. It wasn't even, okay, was the next step in protecting black voting rights? The real feeling in question was, okay, we are here, what is our role? What is our role in terms of this American democracy in the next step? Not just for a black president or John Lewis or black community, but in terms of all Americans. 
 Thank you. The next question. In September 2018, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights issued a report of minority voting rights. Where do you think we are now almost 5 years later and following the 2020 and 2024 general elections? 
 I think the conversation we have been having since the frame for this question very well. The core idea is that, what we have learned is that democracy is contested. It requires a lot of focus and has required a lot of legal levers and activism on the ground to ensure that votes are available to people, the people are able to exercise their votes, that votes are being diluted. And that has been the story in America. These ebbs and flows. Progress and expansions of democracy, interestingly, very often following more time where citizens -- war time where citizens are called abroad and then come home and want to make sure they fully participate in all the promises of citizenship and being part of our nation at home. That is one of the patterns observed. But then what happens is, when the votes expand and people participate in the vote, there tends to be an effort to try and narrow or push back this expansion of voters. That is consistent with what we have seen. As new coalitions have been expanded, as voters are coming out, Yael spoke about the young voters, multiracial coalitions in someplace  have supportive folks. Some places that have tended to vote one way for a long time has been changing in their direction and their selections. I think the folks have responded in some of these places by trying to restore the previous order, and have treated these new demographic patterns, these new voting patterns, as a threat to the status quo. That is why the erosion of hard fought voting protections, parts of the voting rights act, other efforts to protect voters, changes in voting laws that are designed to make it harder for people to vote, that easier, that is why all of this is coming into sharp relief. I often say that students of democracy have got to acknowledge something, which is that there are two fundamental ways to win elections. One is to mobilize people, to get your message out, to get people excited about your vision and how you aim to lead and to expand the number of people participating and get them out and get more votes on election day. I would like to think of that as the democracy highroad. But there's another path the people sometimes employee in the election context, and that is to look to the voters who might support your adversary to think about ways to put obstacles in their way, to try to demobilize, to try to find ways to make it harder for people to vote or to threaten or deter voters who are trying to participate. This path of demobilization I think of the democracy low red. Road. But will we have to understand is that both can be effective. Both can win elections. What we are in a struggle for in America is to try and have what Elise Boddie called adequate guardrails around our democracy  such that we are oriented and directed towards democracy highroad. Being on the high road does not dictate who wins any particular contest, it's a commitment to compete fairly and to allow the person who is able to persuade a greater number of folks and has the expressed will of the people in their favor, at least for that election season, to serve, and to have an opportunity to carry forward the wishes of a majority in our society. That tension, that reality that we have two roads, the low road of demobilization and the high road of mobilization, that is an ongoing fight in America, and that is why the voting rights act, which is a federal commitment to a minority inclusion principal, to be sure, you heard about the 15th amendment in the great reconstruction amendment, all of which are important, but when Congress passed the Reconstruction amendments, they have provisions of those amendments is said that Congress shall have the power to pass laws to enforce the amendment. That is to say that the structure of the amendments themselves understood that there would be more to do with the voting rights act as an expression of that additional measure that was necessary to effectuate the purposes of the amendment, and it was a unifying minority inclusion principal that said we were going to take participation broadly conceived seriously in America, and that we were going to have protections in place to ensure the some of the old patterns of targeting minority voters and dissuading them from participating, blocking them and deterring them, were not going to be able to take root in the way in which they had in the past. So what we see, and that report was looking at, was that some core provisions of the voting rights act, the Supreme Court has chipped that away. In doing so, the Supreme Court, in a sense, has exposed our democracy to a degree of risk because the work is not complete, the threats remain, the practices continue, and without adequate guardrails, it becomes a more difficult fight. That is not to say that the fight doesn't continue and that we use every available lever to go forward and have the expressed will of the people take root, it just means that without certain legal tools, without certain provisions, it becomes harder fight, a more granular fight. Has to go Hamlet to Hamlet, as it were, to have these fights, and it takes a lot of resources and takes us away from some of the learnings in our constitutional democracy about easier past we can have to protect minority voters, rather than sort of fighting it on a case-by-case method. What I say about the report is, the report stands for the proposition that the Supreme Court ruling in Shelby County took away an important tool, and for that reason, it was a difficult ruling, and one that in my view undefined undermined racial democracy. The other thing the decision did, which is,  perhaps, as important, and this touches on some of the things Yael was speaking about, is sent a signaling effect  -- it had a signaling effect that the federal government was in retreat from the hard-fought minority protection principal. That signaling effect caused folks in lots of places to say, okay, we can take a new shot at marching on the low road of trying to chip away at voters who are trying to express their well. And so, when I look at Shelby County, when I look at the recent elections, what I think about is, it was foreseeable what would happen if the court ruled in that way. Justice Ginsburg made it clear in her dissent when she said, taking down the preclearance provision of the voting rights act is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you're not getting wet. The threats were there, the record was clear, the Congressional record was clear, and yet, the court did what it did. So now, we face the challenges we face, but democracy is an active sport. It takes perseverance . It is and intergenerational fight to perfect the union it. we all have to run our lap. 
 Your recent work and scholarship focuses on youth voting rights and the particular impact of communities of color. Can you tell us about your recent works on campus, and whether those efforts could be scaled at a national level? 
 Thank you, Commissioner Hicks. Just as Debo said,  we all have to work in our labs. In my lab, I started to look at what the young people from across the country were telling me. I am trying to identify the patterns in their concerns. Repeatedly, the question about their availability to on-campus polling locations came up. I went in to scratch the surface to try to understand how prolific this issue is. In a preliminary study I found, I actually found that there is an incredible low amount of on-campus polling locations available. This is very challenging to study. This information is not centralized. You have to go one by one to analyze the issue. But when I tracked the availability of the on-campus polling locations with voter turnout of the class, the protected class of voters pursuant to the 26th amendment, what I found was a correlation of 5.3 to 7.39 percentage points in terms of voter turnout. Just for context, that tracks with election day registrations impact on youth turnout, which is the single best remedy identified for engaging them in the franchise. Through this work, I had the honor of representing Bard College, which is in Empire blue state New York. This is an issue that really crosses partisan lines. This is another area in which youth voters and their engagement is something we can all do better on. There a representative the university president, pretty remarkable, alongside students. For three years, separate lawsuits, we thought to bring in on Compass campus voting location. The on-campus location was far more ADA accessible, COVID safe, et cetera. What we found -- we won. Than we did not have to sue again, thankfully. I had wonderful cocounsel in that case. What I found was that our win motivated a change in state law in New York to mandate on-campus polling locations by qualifying colleges and universities across the state of New York. I took that as instructive, along with the other work I have producing nationally, and folding it into a new proposal called the youth voting rights act, which I introduced in July, a comprehensive sweeping effort to try to protect the promises of the 26th amendment. In Florida, and this is also pretty timely, because just a few days ago a new bill was introduced in Texas to ban the availability of on-campus polling locations in the state, but in Florida, we Security win on behalf of the Andrew Goodman foundation and the League of Women Voters of Florida. The Secretary of State had issued a ban on the availability of on-campus polling locations during the early voting period, and we sued, creating new jurisprudence for the 26th amendment in the current era. We are going through a new rejuvenation project. A popular education project about the 26 amendment, because most people don't know what it is. What we found was, when we overturned the span, in just four months before the 2018 election, County clerks brought -- and the colleges work together, to bring polling locations and just those four months onto 12 campuses in Florida. We went back and studied the impact. Will be found was that 60,000 voters availed themselves of this mechanism. And that they traded higher rates among Hispanic and black voters, and that voters across age cohorts actually availed themselves of on-campus polling locations. Leading up to the 2020 election, we were threatened with a potential rollback of early voting on-campus polling locations in Fulton County, Georgia, which we all know is a critical base. We have the young people essentially saving democracy in Georgia twice. The young black youth. In Fulton County, Georgia, this is a question of what [ Indiscernible ]  looks like. Sometimes maybe it is a lack of understanding the rights of this constitutionalize new class of voters a new classification of voters. In Fulton County in 2020, they were going to rollback the availability of early voting on-campus polling locations because of the predominance of HBCUs in Fulton. We mobilize with the basic young people there and offered them advocacy tools and managed to avoid litigation. The young people, they led the way. They advocated and went to their County Board of elections. So this is scalable. This is also very transformative work you put the young people in the position to be democracy practitioners and to craft their realities. We all have to deal with the losses on occasion. Bard College, for 20 years we try to overturn voter suppression, but then we went back and had a huge manifesting win across the state of New York. We have to take the hits and celebrate the winds. This is a huge area of untapped power potential, the need to bring polling locations on campuses. 
 Thank you. What often happens is that the time does not stay on our side with the discussion of democracy. I want to pose one general question to the panel, and whoever can get to the buzzer first gets to answer. Do you have anything you want to specifically respond to or react to that one of your colleagues has said? Again, whoever gets to the buzzer first gets to answer the question. You are all eyeing each other. 
 There is something. It goes with the ongoing discussions we had last year. [ Indiscernible ]  without the efforts of individuals have led to [ Indiscernible ]  sorry, I got reminded about the microphone. It makes me think of as we talk about this a little bit, a personal reflection it. we've all heard about my grandmother. I'm happy to share another story that I talked about last year, but I think it is a reflection of, I had a grandmother [ Indiscernible ]  he was with me every single day. We talk about voting and democracy in the engagement of each one of us, a desire to [ Indiscernible ]  I was struck by [ Indiscernible ]  the simple fact that there are individuals connected to us that did not have access in this area, this area we take for granted. [ Indiscernible ]  my grandmother, the voting rights act of 1965, she was born in 1914 and registered to vote in [ Indiscernible ].  I think about what we talked about today, the hardships she had to encounter, the fear of not only registering, but to show up and casting that vote. These are all the things that democracy, the fear, the struggle, I'm not sure the right word, but we all have to be proud of as citizens that we engaged. It is not likely that we are [ Indiscernible ]  we have to continue to push forward so the general benefit we take for granted [ Indiscernible ]  I can take for granted I am the granddaughter of a woman born in 1914 who had to struggle for voter registration. I still vote in person, because I think that is more fun. [ Indiscernible ]  
 As an outsider here, I just want to say, thank you. There is a lot at stake. Part of it is folks who were before us, but part of it is that this is now inevitable. Authoritarianism is a possibility. Their questions about the rule of law in our democracy. Folks are at the FEC  and EAC play an incredibly important role in terms of our democracy and future. I just want to say, you know, thank you all in terms of what you were doing. I am sure it is not easy. I know folks are on the state and county levels were also playing important roles. You all are playing an essential role in terms of this trajectory of democracy. Hang in there. We look forward to working with you all in the future. 
 I want to thank her panelists for being here today. Thank you to everyone virtually and in the audience today. I would like to introduce the FEC chairperson, and after that, happy Mardi Gras, and I will see you all outside. 
 I am chair of the Federal election commission this year. Take you so much for being here today. I'm so sorry I can't be there with you. Thank you to Commissioner Broussard and Chairman Hicks for convening this event for the second year. Thinking to Spencer Overton, Debo Adegbile, and Yael Bromberg for providing expertise and insights.  Thank you to DEI and operations team for managing logistics today. For me, Black history month is an important time to celebrate, reflect, and most importantly, to listen. Events like this convened by leaders like the commissioner and chairman are opportunities to highlight, listen to and learn from those who are blazing the trail. One overarching goal that motivates me in this work is finding ways to make campaigns and elections more accessible. Commissioner Broussard is leading in the rule-making effort now on candidate salaries. I hope the fruits of those efforts will allow more people to take the giant leap of faith forward and run for office. Elected office is one of the most powerful expressions of public service, we can use the tools we have to make it more accessible. Over the past six months, I've learned a lot about government. Much of an inspiring, and some of it frustrating. But it is events like these that remind me of how much good we can do. Thank you come again, for coming. We look forward to seeing you next year. 
 Thank you. With that, that closes the program. We also want to thank the DEI counsel for the work you have done. Thank you off your attendance. We are past the time is a, but democracy doesn't sleep on time. With all of that, thank you. I would love to talk to outside. [ Event concluded ]