One of the proudest areas of work for the ACLU across the nation over the past several decades has been our efforts to expand the right to vote. In recent years, the ACLU has led the fight against voter suppression efforts, including recent litigation in neighboring Wisconsin to challenge that state’s discriminatory “voter identification” law.

When you go to the polls this year in Illinois—and early voting already is underway—you have the ability to protect the right to vote. A non-partisan question on the Illinois ballot poses a straightforward question to voters. The proposal would amend the Illinois Constitution to explicitly state that no person can be denied the right to register to vote or cast a ballot based on race, color, ethnicity, status as a member of a language minority, sex, sexual orientation or income.
 

The ACLU of Illinois urges you to support this question when you vote in November. And, we hope you will talk with our family members, friends and others in your extended circle about the importance of protecting voting rights today.

A recent New York Times article tells the story of Angelica Valencia, who asked her employer to accommodate her high-risk pregnancy based on her doctor’s orders. Since Ms. Valencia was 39 years old and had miscarried last year, her doctor recommended that she limit work to a full-time eight-hour shift, with no overtime. Even though her co-workers volunteered to handle the lifting and heavy machinery duties, and the busy season at her job was about to end, Ms. Valencia’s employer insisted that she work overtime without restrictions. After she gave her manager a doctor’s note explaining why she needed the accommodation, Ms. Valencia was forced to leave the job where she’d worked for three years.

Although Ms. Valencia works in New York, stories like hers are all too common across the country, including in Illinois. For example, Bene’t Holmes asked her employer, Walmart, for temporary, less physically strenuous duties after she began having trouble lifting 50-pound boxes in her fourth month of pregnancy. Her manager denied the request even though store policy allowed such accommodations for workers with disabilities or on-the-job injuries. One day after her employer refused her accommodation, Bene’t Holmes had a miscarriage.
 

No woman should have to choose between a healthy pregnancy and her job. That’s why Illinois, like New York City, recently passed a law requiring employers to provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant workers, as long as doing so doesn’t cause undue hardship for the employer.

Just as important as passing the law, however, is making sure it’s enforced. Employers and employees have to know about the law for its protections to be effective. New York City’s law, like Illinois’, requires employers to inform their employees about their right to be free from pregnancy discrimination. But Ms. Valencia says her employer never notified her about the law, even though it had already gone into effect. That’s why the ACLU is working in Illinois to make sure that employers and workers are informed about the new law.

If you’ve experienced pregnancy discrimination at work, we want to hear from you. Click here to share your story.

After nearly three decades working in public policy, it remains a mystery the way in which some set priorities. This was reinforced recently at a hearing for the State Task Force on Civic Education. The Task Force, created by the Illinois General Assembly, is charged with reporting back to the legislature by the end of the year on the ways in which Illinois can bolster and strengthen the teaching of civics and government in our public schools.

Illinois, sadly, is one of the states that has no requirement that students take or pass a course on how government operates in order to graduate from high school.

The Task Force has developed a very thoughtful report, one that merits wide attention from the legislature, from educators across Illinois and from the public. As part of finalizing its report, the Task Force is hosting a series of public hearings, inviting advocates, educators and anyone else to share their views on the importance of civic education and the specific recommendations offered by the Task Force. This week's hearing was held at a large, suburban high school in an upper middle class area.

It was encouraging to hear advocates, educators and even students speak about the importance of civic education, and how their lives have been positively affected by involvement in civic education. One man travelled several miles simply to share his view that the State must encourage more education about history, specifically American history.

After a time, a man rose to speak, offering a mild rebuke to the Task Force for not explicitly identifying possible costs for their proposals. Since the Task Force is not suggesting a specific curriculum for civic education (though, they do suggest mandating a civics class as a requirement for high school graduation), the costs would be borne by local school districts if they adopted new, more modern civic education curricula. The speaker -- who also was a member of a school board -- wanted to know "where the money was coming from," noting that it costs thousands of dollars simply to change the text books for a single course.

I do not question that emphasizing civic education in Illinois could incur some additional costs. My question is more direct: why are we not prepared to bear that cost? Interestingly, pulling up to the high school where the hearing was held, it was difficult not to be impressive (dazzled, even) by the carefully manicured lawns on all the athletic fields surrounding the high school. Even as a former high school athlete, it is remarkable that no one ever asks how much we should spend on athletics. Instead, we often are treated to vague notions about how the athletic program serves the entire community (building "pride" we are often told) or that such programs are well-funded because they are part of a local tradition.

As for tradition, I feel a little like paraphrasing Judge Richard Posner when he questioned Wisconsin and Indiana officials supporting the bans on the freedom to marry for gay and lesbian couples in those states -- "Tradition? That is all you have?"

Couldn't one argue that a well-informed, well-educated generation of students might actually do more to serve the entire community? As a simple matter, studies show that students who study government and civic education in high school are far more likely to participate in elections. Yes, they vote. Every couple of years we decry the low voter turnout but then want to question the cost of a simple step that can address the problem.

It remains strange to me how we choose priorities like this without having a real, meaningful conversation. That said, it was hopeful to see the young people from one high school in particular who turned out to speak about how civic education had set them on a path to public involvement. I'd not expect the same thing from football players.

Read Ed Yohnka's testimony (PDF).