Voting Rights and Political Access with Dr. Carol Anderson

Dr. Carol Anderson is the Robert W. Woodruff Professor of African American Studies at Emory University. She's the author of several award-winning books, including Eyes off the Prize, The United Nations and the African American Struggle for Human Rights, 1944-1955, the New York Times bestseller White Rage, The Unspoken Truth of our Racial Divide. And her research has garnered fellowships from the American Council of Learned Societies for the Ford Foundation, National Humanities Center, Harvard University's Charles Warren Center, and the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation. She earned her PhD in history from the Ohio State University.

We can read more about her bio because it is much longer and even more profound, obviously, than I mentioned here, so there is a link. And yes, go Buckeyes. I love that. And so just want to also note that tonight's focus for Dr. Anderson is going to be engaging us in a scholarly exploration of her extraordinary research and the enlightening details and illuminating details that she shares in her most recent book One Person, No Vote, How Voter Suppression is Destroying our Democracy. Without further ado, Dr. Anderson.

Thank you so much. I'm so glad to be here. And I'm really glad to work through this issue of democracy and the right to vote. And thank you so much, Facing History & Ourselves.

And thank you so much, teachers, for the work you do. You do what I call the heavy lifting of democracy. And so I just can't give you enough of my thanks for that work that you do with our students.

I want to talk about the right to vote. And I'm going to start off with a story because I've got tons of them. I'm going to start off with the-- in 1946, there was a man named Maceo Snipes.

And he was a veteran. He had fought in World War II, a Black man. And he had come home to Georgia. And there was a gubernatorial election going on at the time. And Maceo Snipes was determined to vote.

When he went to go vote in Taylor County, Georgia, there was a sign over the door. "The first Negro that votes, that will be the last thing he ever does." Maceo was like, "Shh, I fought fascist. What you got?" And so he went in and he cast his ballot. He was the only Black person to vote in Taylor County, Georgia, in 1946.

Well, a few days later, there was a knock on his door. And Maceo goes to the door. And there's a white man there who's like, "Could you come out?" And so Maceo steps out on his porch, and then there are three additional white men. And there was a firing squad.

And he heard, "Chk-chk." And then they unloaded their rifles into him. He fell on the porch just bleeding, bleeding. His mother ran outside, saw her baby just riddled with bullets. And she dragged him to the only hospital, which was a whites-only hospital in Taylor County, Georgia.

And because it was a whites-only hospital, they put him in basically a closet. And he was there for like six hours before he got any medical attention. It took him days to die, but Maceo Snipes died. And the message was clear. "You vote, you die. You vote, you die. You vote, you die."

And that's how we often think about disenfranchisement and Jim Crow, the kind of physical violence that just annihilates Black folk. But I want us to think through what I call bureaucratic violence. Bureaucratic violence has wiped out millions upon millions of American citizens right to vote. And I'm going to start with Mississippi in 1890.

In 1890, Mississippi launched what was called the Mississippi Plan. And what was driving that-- Mississippi said, "We have so much corruption at the ballot box, so we have got to purify the ballot box. We have got to get rid of corruption at the ballot box. We've got all of this voter fraud."

They really did. They really did not. But they had identified voter fraud as coming from its Black population, because there were more Black men registered to vote in Mississippi than there were white men. And that kind of racial imbalance threatened the kind of power structure that white Mississippi had in place.

And because you had poor Blacks working with poor whites to try to change the system, to try to be more equitable, to try to create a space where you had quality education, where you had labor rights, where if you worked, you got paid. I mean, something really just stunning and shocking. And so you had the power structure looking up saying, oh, we can't have this. And we've got to stop all of this voter fraud, voter fraud, voter fraud.

But there was this thing called the 15th Amendment that came out of the Civil War during Reconstruction. And the 15th Amendment said, "The right to vote shall not be abridged on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." So how do you write a law saying "we don't want Black folk to vote" without writing a law saying "we don't want Black folk to vote"?

Mississippi said, "Oh, we got this. We've got this." So what they did was they used the legacies of slavery and made the legacies of slavery the access to the ballot box. What do I mean by legacies? Like the poll tax. And they made it all sound so reasonable. That is also one of the tricks-- voter fraud and then making the policy seem reasonable.

The poll tax. The poll tax says you have to pay a nominal fee in order to be able to vote because elections are expensive. You have to have people who are taking the ballots. You have to have people who are counting the ballots. You have to have a place where people are going to vote. I mean, all of that costs money. So if you really believed in democracy, you would be willing to pay a small fee.

Now, the point of this is that hundreds of years of unpaid labor created a massive disparity in terms of access to income. So that nominal fee wasn't so nominal. What it amounted to was 2% to 6% of a Mississippi farm family's annual income to be able to vote. Paying 2% to 6% of your annual income to be able to vote, that is not nominal. I mean, just begin to think about what that means.

The other piece that they had that sounded, again, reasonable was they said, we want people who are voting who understand what our policies are, what our rules are, what our governing philosophy is, what we value. So we don't think it's too much to ask that they can read a piece of the constitution. And that they can not only read it, but they can tell us what it says.

Now, again, during slavery, literacy was absolutely forbidden for African Americans. They could be killed. They could be tortured if they showed that they knew how to read. And then coming out of the Civil War, the school systems were absolutely unequitable.

And so when the state creates a requirement that you be able to read at a certain level, so you can read a legal document, but does not provide the resources for you to be able to read a legal document, it is designed to disenfranchise. And it did.

And there were other components of the Mississippi Plan. But those two major ones led to-- in 1890, when the Mississippi Plan began, there were 190,000 African American men registered to vote. Two years later, there were only 8,600. The Mississippi Plan was doing exactly what it was designed to do.

And when the other states saw this and when the US Supreme Court blessed the Mississippi Plan on high in a decision called the Williams Decision in 1898, basically saying that the literacy test and the poll tax did not violate the 15th Amendment because everybody had to read and everybody had to pay. No, they didn't. The way that this thing operated, it was racially determined.

But when the Supreme Court blessed it on high, the other states ran with it and started changing their constitution and implementing massive disenfranchisement policies against their Black population. And so by the time we got to 1942, when the US is fighting Nazis, only 3% of African Americans in the South were registered to vote, 3%. And this is an area where something close to 90% of African Americans in the United States lived in the South.

And so when you only have 3% registered to vote, you get the power of what bureaucratic violence can do. And what that also led to in the 1942 midterms, when states are choosing who their congressmen are going to be, who their US senators are going to be, the voter turnout rate in the poll tax states in the South was only 7%. Imagine, 7% choosing federal officials, 7% voter turnout rate. That is the power of disenfranchisement, because it was also sending the signal to whites in those areas that voting didn't matter. This thing was already rigged.

Coming out of the Second World War, you had these Black veterans, like Maceo Snipes, who knew that they were fighting for democracy. They were fighting against the fascists. They were fighting against the Nazis. And they were determined to get some of that democracy for themselves. They saw that 3% as being absolutely untenable.

And so they began to organize and mobilize. This is what we know of as the civil rights movement. You had these veterans like Medgar Evers, Hosea Williams, Reverend L. Francis Griffin, who were on the front lines, just pushing, pushing to break the boundaries of Jim Crow and to make sure that human dignity and equality was part and parcel of the way that the United States of America, the world's greatest democracy, actually lived into its mantra, lived into its aspirations.

And one of the cataclysms that happened, one of the major efforts that happened, was on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in 1965. And remember, that's where you have 600 nonviolent protesters who are marching, going to march from Selma to Montgomery, to symbolically put the casket of Jimmie Lee Jackson, who was killed by the police during a protest, voting rights protest, to symbolically carry his casket and put it on the doorstep of Governor George Wallace.

So as these nonviolent protesters are crossing the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they are met by Alabama State Patrol. And they're also met by Sheriff Jim Clark and his deputies. And Sheriff Jim Clark and his deputies are on horseback with bull whips.

That cataclysm was so horrific that when you're seeing the people being trampled, when you see children running for their lives, when you see tear gas being just shot into these nonviolent protesters, people being choked, people being knocked out-- ABC News was there filming, filming, filming. And it was so horrific that the movie of the week-- back in the day when we had movie of the week on ABC, they cut into their movie of the week Judgment at Nuremberg to show that footage from the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

It shocked the nation, because this was a nation that said it believed in democracy. And so seeing what was happening to Black folks who just wanted to vote-- because in Selma, in Dallas County, only 0.7% of African Americans were registered to vote in Dallas County. That is so un-American. And so that cataclysm on the Edmund Pettus Bridge would eventually lead to the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was landmark legislation, because what it did was it said those jurisdictions that have a history of discrimination-- and they had some benchmarks to define what that history of discrimination would look like. Before they implement any other voting law, they have to get it approved first by the US Department of Justice or by the federal courts in DC.

So this is what's called preclearance. Preclearance was a game changer, because it meant that you couldn't implement a racially discriminatory law and have a series of elections happening while that racially discriminatory law was in place, while it's going through litigation, because litigation takes years.

The Voting Rights Act was so powerful that in Mississippi in 1962, '63, '64, somewhere in there, that fewer than 6% of African Americans were registered to vote in the state. Fewer than 6% of African Americans in Mississippi were registered to vote.

Two years after the passage of the Voting Rights Act, nearly 60% of African Americans were registered to vote. You're looking at what can be a game changer. And as you can imagine, there was massive pushback, massive pushback. And I detailed this in One Person, No Vote. But I'm going to move us forward into the 21st century.

So we remember the 2000 election. And we remember it for the hanging chads in Florida, Florida's inability to count the votes. But I'm going to direct our attention to St. Louis, Missouri. Because there, you had the County Board of Elections removed almost 50,000 voters from the rolls and didn't tell them. So those folks show up to vote, and their names are nowhere on the rolls.

And so the poll workers then send them down to the Board of Elections to get reregistered. Well, the Board of Elections, as all of these people are pouring in, it was just a hot mess. I mean, a true hot mess. And so folks are there for hours and hours upon hours trying to get back on the rolls so they can vote in the 2000 election.

The Democrats then sued. They sued, saying folks got pulled off of the rolls, and it's not their fault. They need to be able to vote. This is basic. This is fundamental. And the judge agreed and allowed them to keep the polls open until 10 o'clock that night.

Then the Republicans came in and started hollering voter fraud, voter fraud, voter fraud, voter fraud. And they went to a higher judge, and that judge said, "Oh, so they're trying to steal the election?" And Kit Bond and Matt Blunt were like, "Yes. Yes, they're trying to steal the election." And Kit Bond was a US Senator. Matt Blunt was the Secretary of State for Missouri.

And with that lie of voter fraud, that judge shut down the polls at 7:45. But that lie of voter fraud really was a lie. Because what the story was, was that you had all of these dead people voting. You had dogs voting.

And you had people just changing their caps and using addresses on voting on vacant lots and saying that those vacant lots coming in with a New York Yankees cap, voting with an address on that vacant lot and then coming back with a Kansas City Chiefs cap on and then voting with another address on a vacant lot. And so voter fraud, voter fraud, voter fraud. And one of the things about a lie is if you say it enough times, it really begins to gain traction.

Now, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch did an incredible job of investigating these tales of massive rampant voter fraud. And what they found was that, yeah, there was a dog actually registered to vote. His name was Ritzy Meckler. His owners thought it'd be really cute to register their dog to vote.

But there's no evidence that Ritzy cast a ballot, nor did Fido or Lassie or Rin Tin Tin. No dogs voted in that election. In terms of dead people, they couldn't find the dead people that voted. There was no evidence that anybody came out of their graves and cast a ballot. There was not a zombie vote in that election.

And in terms of the vacant lots, the city had not kept up its records. And there were homes built on over 80% of those lots. And so that lie about voter fraud, what they found were that there may have been like four cases of something awry, but none of those cases could have been handled by voter ID.

But that is what became one of the major mantras about we've got to stop all of this massive rampant voter fraud. We've got to have voter ID. And so that lie of voter fraud goes into-- they went into Congress to try to deal with the mess that happened in Florida to re-instill confidence in the American people that their election system was safe and secure and that it functioned.

And so they took the reality of Florida with the lie of voter fraud and put them on the same plane. And so in the Help America Vote Act, you see all of the things to deal with the mess in Florida being put on the same level as the lie of voter fraud. And this is where we get in federal law that states can require voter ID to be able to vote.

We see a couple of states try to go for it. Georgia was one, and Indiana was another one. But it was the election of Barack Obama that was transformative in this push, in this rush, to vote massive rampant voter suppression that we're going to deal with. And part of what happened there is that he had an incredible ground game, bringing in millions and millions of new voters, overwhelmingly African American, young, poor, Latinos, and Asian-Americans, millions upon millions.

And remember, in his election, one of the things that you saw was this-- we have crossed the racial Rubicon. Look at us. Did you see what we just did? We are the United States of America. We just nailed this. Did you see how we just put a Black man in the White House?

Well, all of that self-congratulatory stuff did not match up with the data, because what that was saying was, look, whites have overcome their concern about a Black man in the White House. No. In fact, the majority of whites have not voted for a Democratic candidate for president since 1964, since the passage of the Civil Rights Act. And the same held true for Barack Obama's election, both in 2008 and 2012. It was that incredible coalition that put him in.

Looking at that coalition, the US Supreme Court then passed, then had a ruling in Shelby County v. Holder, that dismantled the preclearance provision of the Voting Rights Act. And dismantling the preclearance provision, one of the things that you saw, you saw the states that had been under the guise of the Voting Rights Act, under the jurisdiction of the Voting Rights Act. With that thing gone, they just went for it.

Two hours after the passage of the Voting Rights Act, Texas implemented its Voter ID Law. And its Voter ID Law said you must have a government-issued photo ID to be able to vote, but your student ID from a state college or university does not count. But your gun registration card does.

There is a racial disparity in who went to college. So 50% of those in the state's colleges and universities are minorities. 80% of those who hold the gun registration cards are white. And so it is that racial disparity-- just like we were seeing with the Mississippi Plan of 1890, it's that racial disparity that we're going to see continually in these voter suppression laws.

So what you're also seeing is how the party that is homogeneous is the one-- racially homogeneous-- is the one that is working to keep minorities from the ballot box. And those party labels have flipped. What we also saw is in Alabama. In Alabama, Alabama said you must have a government-issued photo ID to vote, but your public housing ID does not count.

Does it get more public than public housing? More government-issued than public housing? But your government-issued public housing ID does not count in order to be able to vote. 71% of those in public housing in Alabama are African American. And the NAACP Legal Defense Fund discerned that for many, it was the only government-issued photo ID that they had.

Then there is the driver's license. Governor Bentley listening to his mistress, and you can't make this up. And so that had to be some real interesting pillow talk. "Baby?" "Yeah, baby?" "You know what I want." "What?" "I want you to close down the Department of Motor Vehicles in the Black Belt counties." "Oh, OK." And that's what he did. Excuse me. That's what he did.

And he did it again under the ruse of fiscal responsibility, saying, well, these-- we've got to balance the state budget. And these facilities really don't get a lot of traffic through there. And so in order to be fiscally responsible, we're going to shut them down. But what that did was it moved the closest DMV 50 miles away from the Black community.

So imagine you don't have a driver's license. Alabama's ranked 48th in the nation in terms of public transportation. How are you supposed to go 50 miles one way and 50 miles back in order to get the driver's license that you need in order to vote? That's how voter ID works.

In North Carolina, it was the same kind of disparities, the same kind of discrepancies, where the Fourth Circuit looked at what North Carolina did with its monster bill and said you have targeted African Americans with almost surgical precision. Part of that targeting is going to deal with early voting. What early voting is designed to do-- it is designed to give a working-class people the ability to vote because they really all can't always get off on that Tuesday in November to be able to cast their ballot. So it gives them a range of time to be able to exercise their rights as American citizens.

What they had figured out was that with early voting is that, if you constrict the days, if you limit the amount of time, you can depress the Black voter turnout. In Indiana-- so this isn't just a southern phenomenon. That's what we have to understand. In Indiana, remember in 2008, Indiana went for Obama. You saw officials going, Lord, how did that happen? How did that happen?

And what they figured out was that you had early voting really happening in Marion County, which is where Indianapolis is. And so the legislature passed a law saying that counties that have more than 325,000 residents can only have one early voting site, only one. Counties that have more-- that have fewer than 325,000, then they can have more early voting sites.

There are only three counties that have more than 325,000 people. The counties that have-- Gary, Indiana, Fort Worth, and Indianapolis, where nearly 70% of the state's Black population lives. And so when you're able to limit in those three counties early voting sites to one early voting site, you're able to create massive, massive decline in Black voter turnout. And that is exactly what happened.

And you have Ohio. Ohio said, we're equitable. So every county gets one early voting site, except every county is not equal. So Cuyahoga County, where Cleveland is, has over 1 million people. Pickaway County, where Circleville is, has about 60,000 people.

So if you have one early voting site for a county that has over a million people and one early voting site for a county that has 60,000, what you're able to do is to create long, untenable lines. And that is exactly what happened. And long lines depress Black voter turnout.

Then there is gerrymandering. And then I want to talk-- and I'm not going to spend a lot of time on gerrymandering. That is where the politicians draw the maps so that they can choose their voters instead of their voters choosing them.

And so you get this really weird configuration where, like in Pennsylvania, Republicans got 49% of the vote. But because of the gerrymandered districts, they won 72% of the seats. And that just violates our sense of the way democracy works. How does 49% of the vote give you 72% of the seats? That is what extreme partisan gerrymandering does.

And it has major implications for things like gun safety legislation, for like reproductive rights. Then there's felony disenfranchisement Felony disenfranchisement says that if you have a criminal record, you cannot vote. And what we had happening in Florida, for instance-- OK, thank you.

What we had happening in Florida, for instance, is that we had-- in 2018, there were 6.1 million Americans who could not vote because of felony conviction. 1.7 million of them were in Florida alone. And 40% of Black men in Florida were not able to vote because of a felony conviction. Over 20% of African American adults were not able to vote because of a felony conviction.

And there was this incredible grounds, grassroots mobilization going. People have served their time. This isn't fair. They need reentry back into society. This isn't fair. And so Amendment 4 was on the ballot, and Amendment 4 passed by over 60% of the vote.

Well, the legislature looked at that and just said, we can't have this. And we need to define what does completion of your sentence mean. And so they said completion of your sentence means that you have paid all of your fines, fees, and court costs. Well, folks, looked up and said, Lord, that looks like a poll tax. That really looks like a poll tax.

And so this thing went up to the court. And the federal court ruled that, no, this was not a poll tax. And Florida did not have to tell people how much they owed. So it was like the worst of the poll tax and the worst of the literacy tests.

Because a part of the literacy test was to say-- so the registrar had the power. So it wasn't always reading the constitution. Questions in Mississippi were like, how many bubbles in a bar of soap? Mr. L, who was part of the village who helped raise me, he came out of Jim Crow, Georgia. His literacy test question was, how high is up?

And so now you have Florida being able to ask folks, basically, How high is up? when people want to pay and they can't pay. So the state is asking them an unanswerable question. And that unanswerable question is their access to the ballot box. That is what disenfranchisement looks like.

And there's also the voter roll purges, but I know my time is running short. But we have to understand that in 2016, that was the first election without the protection of the Voting Rights Act. And so folks were going, well, the reason the election went that way is because Black folks just didn't show up. They just didn't show up.

They didn't show up because they couldn't stand Hillary, because Black folks couldn't stand Hillary because she's like Hillary. And I was like, Lord, the racism and the misogyny in that statement is just profound. But what it ignored was that this was the first presidential election in 50 years without the protection of the Voting Rights Act. And without that protection, Black voter turnout went down by 7%.

And part of what you're seeing now are that grassroots organizations understand that. And they have been mobilizing, mobilizing to, in fact, regain our voting rights. And that's the struggle that's happening right now. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much, Dr. Anderson. I know that we need more time with you to unpack this history, but everything that you've shared is just so illuminating and maybe can feel a little overwhelming. This history is pretty heavy.

And so I wanted to ask, as an educator, which I know you are, and you work with young people, can you tell us more about why you think it's important for teachers to help students understand the history of voting rights and any ways in which they can help young people, both understanding the struggles, but then thinking about what they can do to kind of push up against all of these laws that are suppressing our rights?

Absolutely. So one of the things that I'm really concerned about is breaking really bad narratives. So the bad narrative that Black folks just didn't show up. So it puts that kind of sense of Black culpability in what happened in 2016.

And it wasn't like they just didn't show up. It was like polling places were closed all over in their communities. It was that voter IDs were being put in place, voter IDs that were designed not to be the ones that they had. It's that they were purged from voter rolls repeatedly, just wiped out of voter rolls.

And so understanding that it's not just that Black folks didn't show up. It's that they were targeted with almost surgical precision. And understanding that targeting then helps my students understand, oh, it's not that Black folks don't care about the right to vote. They do care about the right to vote. They were targeted because they care so much. They were targeted for this.

The other thing that I want to deal with is the lie of voter fraud. So Justin Levitt, who was a California law professor, he did a study from 2000 to 2014. He found that there were 1 billion votes cast in the United States. That's almost Carl Sagan-ish, right? Billion votes.

Out of those 1 billion votes, there were 31 documented cases of voter impersonation fraud, 31 out of 1 billion. So that's like 0.00000000000. That becomes foundational for the lie of massive rampant voter fraud. And so by dismantling those lies, it helps my students be able to then see what's at play.

Why are we seeing these fictions? Why are we seeing these narratives. What are these narratives designed to do? And then how do we counter those narratives? What's our role as engaged citizens in terms of fighting for this democracy, in terms of fighting for the right to vote?

Absolutely, thank you. Absolutely. And then so many good questions here. I would love also if you-- so there's so many concerning things that we're talking about and that it is important for kids to understand that. And we want to empower them. Is there anything that you see hopeful or promising in the possibilities that could strengthen our democracy as we move forward in 2024 and beyond?

Absolutely. One of them is the kind of mobilization I'm seeing with Gen Z, because they understand what's at stake. They are registering to vote. I mean, registering to vote, just registering to vote.

And then their organizations that are out there, that are working on the other components, which is given that the polling places have closed down, how do we get folks to the polls? How do we help folks understand? How do you do an absentee ballot if you're going to do an absentee ballot?

And so where I'm seeing the hope are students on our campuses who are organizing, who are mobilizing, who are registering to vote, who are arguing for polling places on college campuses, because one of the strategies to go against students is to remove the polling places off of college campuses to make them absolutely inaccessible. And so I'm seeing students understanding what's at stake and then mobilizing like nobody's business.

That is exciting to see. Absolutely. And then I'm just curious in the last kind of combo of some questions here. But is there one kind of grand takeaway that you would want to leave us with as we move into looking at some resources on how we actually do this conversation with our young people?

I think one of the things that-- so let me back up. I teach a class called War Crimes and Genocide as well. And we look into the abyss. I mean, we see the horrific things that human beings can do to other human beings. And my students are just like, Lord. And I said, always look because what you will find, there will be somebody who will stand up and say, not on my watch.

And is that power, that courage, that integrity that is consistent throughout history where folks stand up and say, we're not doing this. This is not who we are. I will not be a part of this. And in fact, I will take you down for the horrific stuff you have done.

And so when my students see that, they see that tyranny, that oppression is not preordained. It is not a foregone conclusion. But there are people who consistently fight for humanity, fight for democracy. And where we are right now is a testament to those long, ongoing battles.

We don't have slavery. And that is because we have fought, fought like nobody's business. Women have the right to vote because we have fought like nobody's doggone business. When we look at these battles for democracy, we see that it is a mighty long, hard road. But it is because folks stood up and just said, not on my watch.

And my students were like, yeah, yeah. And so that's where the hope is, is that knowing that in this struggle, it takes basically regular folks standing up, using what resources they have, thinking strategically about what the strengths they have, what are the weaknesses in the Leviathan and then going after the Achilles heel in the Leviathan.

And so part of that what happened during the civil rights movement was the Cold War, because the US was doing, we are the leader of the free world. You can't be the Jim Crow leader of the free world. One of these things is not like the other. So it was like looking at that disparity and really putting the United States on notice that if you say you want to be the leader of the free world, then you cannot have this massive discrimination in the right to vote against your Black population. You simply cannot do this.

Absolutely.

And so that's what I teach my students. Oh, right. In the myth of voter fraud-- in fact, I have an article in a book called Myth America that traces the lie of voter fraud and how it has been deployed and why it has been deployed. So we can see its multiple iterations. So 2020 wasn't the first time. Not at all. Not at all.

And so we do see these echoes of the past coming to full fruition in different ways in the contemporary. So we would love to-- yes, someone is asking for that article. So we do have an area of resources. But Dr. Anderson, if you could share any other resources with us, we'll make sure that everybody gets those in the collection that we share.

OK, we'll do.

Thank you so much for your time and your wisdom and helping us really think through this history more deeply.

Thank you so much. Thank you. This has been wonderful.

Absolutely. And thank you all for your questions. And I am going to-- I think we're about to share our next screen.

Thank you for joining us for this learning opportunity. The resources from this webinar and your certificate of completion can be accessed from the Resource List Collection page shared during this webinar. If you are viewing this webinar live, a brief survey will appear on your screen at the end of this message. Please take a couple of minutes to fill out the survey. We really value your feedback.

We invite you to subscribe to our newsletter at facinghistory.org/subscribe and stay connected with us on social media @facinghistory. Thank you for joining us. And we look forward to seeing you soon at another Facing History professional learning opportunity.