In a democracy that can only boast that 71 percent of its citizens are registered and able to exercise their civic duty in any given election, access to the franchise is crucial. For decades, millions of citizens have relied on either voter registration drives or government agencies to help them get on the voter rolls. Today, however, private voter registration drives are under attack, while some states are ignoring their responsibilities to reach unregistered citizens. If community-based drives are prevented from helping Americans get registered, and government agencies won't help them, then who will?
In several states, elected officials and partisan groups are intent on stifling the proven effectiveness of voter registration drives run by private individuals and organizations. Despite the partisan-spun "scandals" that come with third-party voter registration drives, they are undeniably effective in reaching large portions of the population.
"According to the 2008 CPS, nearly 9 million citizens [or 8 percent] reported having registered 'at a voter registration drive,'" wrote Doug Hess and Jody Herman in Project Vote report, Representational Bias in the 2008 Electorate. "This likely seriously undercounts the total impact of voter registration drives, however, as 9.4 million citizens (another 8 percent) reported that they registered 'at a school, hospital, or on campus'-all locations where voter registration drives are often conducted by civic organizations and student groups."
Another 9.7 million registered to vote through mail-in voter registration applications, many of whom presumably received these applications from voter drives or organizations that distributed the forms through the postal or electronic mail.
Voter registration drives are protected as a form of free speech under the First Amendment, as well as provisions under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (which directly protects and encourages community-run voter registration drives as the law's primary purpose is to ensure more citizens are registered to vote). Yet lawmakers and election officials in states like Nevada are looking to regulate and criminalize voter registration drives so thoroughly, that they can create a "chilling effect on community-based voter registration, causing many organizations to curtail or cease their voter registration efforts."
The following charts are from a HuffPo article by Michael P. McDonald, Associate Professor, George Mason University, "A Late Democratic Early Voting Surge in Nevada". Clark County is home to Las Vegas. Washoe is home to Reno:
There are no tallies of early voters since last weekend in Nevada. But Clark County represents about half the votes in Nevada, and Washoe is the second-largest county. Consequently, McDonald notes:
As of last Saturday, the state reported more registered Republicans had voted early in-person. Unless something dramatic is happening in counties where we do not have early voter party registration numbers reported on a daily basis, when the state reports the final statewide partisan registration among early voters, more registered Democrats will have voted in-person early in Nevada.
This late up-tick may signal that Dems will turn out more strongly on election day as well, and assuming that likely voter models do not reflect this, Reid is likely to outperform his polling as well. Whether this is so, and whether it's characteristic of other races as well, we'll only know after the election. But it definitely makes things a lot harder to predict going into the last 48 hours before the election.
Our projection says that Republicans are favorites in 231 House races, which would reflect a net gain of 52 seats.
But suppose that our forecast is biased against the Democrats by one point across the country as a whole, perhaps because pollsters are overestimating the enthusiasm gap very slightly. Just one point. Well, there are 6 seats in which we have the Republican candidate projected to win by less than 1 full point (it might be a very long election night, by the way). If Democrats hold those 6 seats, the projected Republican gains would be down to 46.
Now suppose that the forecast understates Democratic support by 2 points. There are 8 seats in which we project the Republican candidate to win by a margin of between 1 and 2 points; now these would also be wiped off the board. Now the Republican gains would be reduced to just 38 seats - and the Democrats would hold the House, 218-217!
The woman gunning for Sen. Harry Reid's (D-NV) job doesn't believe that autism exists.
Yes, you heard right. Sharron Angle believes that the neurodevelopmental disorder know to medical science as "autism" is actually a government-backed hoax to redistribute wealth from hardworking health insurers to pesky kids and their greedy parents.
Angle was caught on tape promising to abolish mandatory insurance coverage for autism. "Everything that they want to throw at us is covered under 'autism'," Angle told the American Association of Underwriters this summer, tracing scare quotes with her fingers as she said "autism."
Care2's Kristina Chew, the mother of a 13-year-old boy with autism, responds to Angle's airy dismissal:
...By saying that you don't think there should be health care for autism, I take it that you don't think that children, and individuals, with disabilities are in need of such things-living with their families and in their communities, healthy and safe, being loved and cared for? Being treated as we would all like to be?
The fact that Angle opposes mandated coverage for private insurers should concern voters, especially since she wants to privatize all government health care programs. In other words, Angle wants to turn health care over to the private sector and stamp out public competition. And yet, Angle's campaign admits that the candidate and her husband receive both government health care and a Civil Service pension, according to Eric Kleefeld of TPM. If Angle is so morally opposed to government health care, she should set an example by declining the coverage.
Andy Kroll of Mother Jones has more on Angle's record: She once told impregnated rape victims to buck up and make "lemons out of lemonade" by bearing their attacker's child. Angle also denounced people on unemployment insurance as "spoiled."
Food vs. health care
It may soon get even harder for poor families to make ends meet. The Senate is poised to slash the extra food stamp benefits in the stimulus before they expire. The Senate already raided $6.7 billion from the the so-called "food stamp cookie jar" to bail out Medicaid and save teachers' jobs at the state level. Now they want to take even more money to fund the child nutrition bill.
The cuts would fund a marginal improvement in school lunches, notes Monica Potts of TAPPED. That's all well and good, but why provide slightly better weekday lunches if the poorest children get less at every other meal?
Annie Lowery of the Washington Independent interviews anti-hunger activist Joel Berg about the cuts. Berg says that if the cuts go through, families will have to make do with considerably less than the current $4.50 per person per day. He notes that Congress wants to cut food stamp benefits in the face of rising food prices.
When families make do with less, healthy foods like fruits and vegetables will be the first casualty. Berg argues that it is economically short-sighted to prematurely terminate one of the most efficient economic stimuli in the entire stimulus package:
And we know that we aren't only feeding people. We come at this from a moral position, a nutritional position, and an economic recovery position. This cut is so insane from an economic position as well - we know food stamps are the most effect form of stimulus. The jury is still out on parts of the stimulus - but the jury isn't out on food stamps. It was a 1,000 percent, beyond home run grand slam success, if you'll excuse me mixing metaphors. The money went to people who needed it, rapidly, and without a lot of bureaucracy.
In the Progressive, Ruth Conniff has a personal take on the politics of improving school lunches. Her kids' school got a USDA Fresh Fruits and Vegetables grant to introduce more local produce into school meals.
"Bridalplasty"
The laws of Reality TV: 1) The most important thing in life is to be very beautiful so that a man will want to marry you; 2) You have until your wedding day to make yourself look like someone else.
The E! network is launching a new reality show in which brides-to-be receive free cosmetic surgery to make them look acceptable for their Special Day, as Stephanie Hallett reports at Ms. blog. Hallett notes that armchair psychiatrists are already diagnosing the contestants with Body Dysmorphic Disorder, a condition that causes sufferers to become obsessed with imagined physical imperfections.
Hallett also argues that competitive plastic surgery shows like Bridalplasty and The Swan are dramatic exaggerations. Labeling the contestants as "sick" or "crazy" implies that they are limited-edition freaks, not individuals on the extreme end of a continuum of self-loathing that affects most women.
Ectopic pregnancy
Anti-choicers have already attacked hormonal birth control as crypto-abortion. Their next target may be lifesaving surgery for a deadly complication of pregnancy. At RH Reality Check, Lon Newman writes about a young woman that survived a life threatening ectopic pregnancy.
An ectopic pregnancy occurs when a fertilized egg takes root outside the uterus, nearly always in a fallopian tube. Tubal pregnancies are among the deadliest gynecological emergencies because the woman can rapidly bleed to death if the tube ruptures. Obviously, once a fertilized egg takes root outside the uterus, there is no chance that it will survive. However, some anti-choice extremists still maintain that treating ectopic pregnancies is a kind of abortion.
One of the ectopic pregnancy survivor's friends actually told her that she should have respected "God's will" and refused lifesaving surgery. "I have had friends who said that I should have 'gone with God's will,' imposing their beliefs on my will to live," the woman said.
Some friend.
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about health care by members of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. Visit the Pulse for a complete list of articles on health care reform, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, environment, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit, The Mulch, and The Diaspora. This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets.
I'm starting to think that Harry Reid just might be able to pull it off and keep his office. Watch this report from Reno TV station KTVN about Republican candidate Sue Lowden's "Chickens For Checkups".
>
This is what local Nevada voters are watching. And this is the Republican who is leading the field in the Republican primary to run against Reid! I think the rest of them are running to her right. Harry might just pull it off.
Here is something to remember about the coming midterm elections: we're talking about Republicans. Right now, polls look bad for Democrats because people don't have the stark choice in front of their faces. But come November they are going to be reminded of just who we're talking about here. We're talking about the people who wrecked the economy, started the Iraq war, let the people of New Orleans down and left office with a $1.4 trillion budget deficit.
The ad below is just the starting point for the fun that progressives are going to have with these clowns between now and November. I say fun, but this is dead serious. That's another thing people will be faced with before they vote. These clowns have changed a lot in the time since the 2008 election. They are a lot nastier and extreme and their solution proposals - if any - are much, much farther to the right.
Nevada's top political journalist, Jon Ralston, reports:
In the federal penal code, it is known as "structuring."
And it is a word Sen. John Ensign should remember because it is very likely to be on any indictment with his name on it.
That's what I am told by a reliable source familiar with the deliberations occurring inside the Justice Department as federal authorities in Washington try to do with Ensign what they could not do with former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens: Get their man. Or, because they had Stevens and then lost him because of misconduct, Justice wants to make sure if it goes to the next step with Ensign, the charges stick.
Indictment? Don't mind if I do. (Remember, it was the abysmal Bush DOJ that fumbled the Stevens prosecution.) So what is "structuring?"
Structuring is a broad term that refers to the crime of creating financial transactions to evade reporting requirements - for example, a $96,000 payment to your mistress laundered through a trust controlled by your parents and calling it a "gift" instead of what it obviously was: a severance payment that had to be reported.
Based on the facts already in public domain, it seems there may be enough for an indictment.
Two former federal prosecutors in the past two weeks have said there is enough evidence to indict Ensign. "Just based on what the senator has said himself and what Mr. (Doug) Hampton has said ... under the federal standard of probable cause, there's enough to indict the senator now," ex-prosecutor Stan Hunterton, a well-respected local attorney, said March 19 on "Face to Face." Then, Thursday on the program, Melanie Sloan, the former federal prosecutor who now heads a D.C. watchdog group that has filed several complaints against Ensign, said, "I completely think" Hunterton is right. ...
The department is being very deliberate in assembling a case against Ensign. But Justice has a mountain of documents and e-mails that, combined with the senator's own admissions or statements in e-mails, would seem to amount to a formidable case. And last week's New York Times story, showing how Ensign's contacts with a local company (similar to several other interactions), show how far the senator was willing to go to get Hampton work, mostly while he was employed by ex-Ensign aides who had formed a lobbying/consulting firm. The structure, so to speak, is becoming more transparent all the time.
Beyond Ensign's dire and deserved legal fate, what are the political implications?
If Ensign gets indicted, he will become a national and state nightmare for the GOP. National Democrats will brandish him as a symbol of corruption (they may anyhow) and local Democrats will wrap the junior senator around the GOP Senate nominee's neck, especially because Sue Lowden and Danny Tarkanian foolishly have said they would welcome his support. I wouldn't even be surprised to see Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid directly go after his pal to boost his sagging fortunes. I can hear it now: "Sorry, John. But now you know how Doug Hampton feels - how it feels to be screwed over by your best friend."
Why are the national and state Republicans mute? Cowardice, perhaps? Or is it, as NBC political guru Chuck Todd tweeted Friday, repeating something he previously said on "Face to Face" a couple of weeks ago: "NV/DC GOPers desperate to wait for Gov. Gibbons to be out of office before pushing Ensign out but can they really (http://nyti.ms/91kElt)?"
The Web link in Todd's tweet is to last week's Times story, emphasizing the point that if the Republicans wait too long, their silence could be very costly. And if Ensign gets indicted and no prominent Republican has called for him to resign, there's no way to structure that deal to the GOP's benefit.
Ensign and Washington Republicans can continue to do what they've been doing all along - ignore, ignore, ignore. But they might not be able to run out the clock on Election Day 2010 - still seven months away - before indictments come down. And, as Ralston points out, if the Washington Republican establishment stays mum on all of this, the issue becomes a matter of the entire Party coddling its corrupt members. Hmmmm, Republican Culture of Corruption, where have I heard that before? And that's on top of the already-competitive gubernatorial and Senate races in Nevada, which is also a key 2012 swing state, don't forget. (Lowden's and Tarkanian's poorly thought out statements welcoming Ensign's support will no doubt bite them in the backside if either is the Republican nominee against Majority Leader Harry Reid. The political ad writes itself.)
Particularly as it relates to the 2010 Senate races, the Senate Republican caucus is the Ensign-Vitter caucus. Every Republican incumbent Senator and candidate for U.S. Senate should be asked by their local media if they think hypocritical lawbreakers like John Ensign and David Vitter should resign their seats. They should be forced to call for the ouster of these hypocritical, lawbreaking Republicans or be forced to serve as apologists for them and let the voters decide. Though the media around the country largely may be dropping the ball on their responsibility, it appears federal investigators aren't. The national media that gave a relentless week of news coverage to the Eric Massa absurdity still hasn't fully given the Ensign matter (or the Vitter matter) its due. However, the handing down of indictments, should that come to pass, will be national news and should force the issue for every Republican seeking federal office in 2010.
Several Green candidates have launched campaigns in their states’ races for governor in 2010.
The Green Party of California will have a contested primary election for the gubernatorial race, with Laura Wells and Deacon Alexander competing for the nomination, to be decided on June 8.
In recent years, gubernatorial races in some states have given Green Parties high enough percentages to achieve or maintain ballot status and determine the outcome of the election.
In 2006, Rich Whitney and his fellow Greens overcame an attempt by Gov. Rod Blagojevich to keep the Green Party off the Illinois ballot. Gov. Blagojevich spent about $800,000 to block the Green Party. Mr. Whitney drew over 10% of the vote on Election Day 2006 and will be on the ballot in 2010.
Some Green gubernatorial candidates to watch:
RICH WHITNEY, a civil rights attorney based in Carbondale, is running again for Governor of Illinois. At a time when Illinois is experiencing devastating cuts to education and social services, Mr. Whitney is the only candidate in the race who refuses to accept such cuts as inevitable. He has set forth a comprehensive plan for restoring health to the public sector and fighting for “a full employment economy,” at “a living wage, or better.”
“It may surprise some people to hear a candidate talk about expanding public employment at a time when the media keep pounding into people’s minds the notion that government is ‘too big’ and ‘we can’t afford it.’ We have to recognize that the corporate-dominated media have an agenda and that there is a reason why we have been hearing this propaganda steadily for over 30 years. We also have to realize that when the opinion leaders in the corporate media keep telling us that ‘we’ can’t afford it, what they are really trying to tell us is that ‘they’ – the wealthy owners of corporate America – don’t want to afford it,” said Mr. Whitney.
“They don’t want to pay their fair share of taxes needed to maintain the most basic functions of government. And thus the illusion is created that in the richest, most productive nation in the world, we as a society somehow can’t afford quality public education, quality health care for all, quality employment opportunities for all and decent retirement security for all.”
Rich Whitney proposes creative measures for dealing with the state’s fiscal and economic crises, including creation of a state bank, and imposing what he calls the real “sin” taxes — a financial transactions tax on speculative trading and a fee and dividend system to combat global warming and promote sustainable energy, transportation, and energy efficiency.
JILL STEIN has launched an exciting grassroots campaign that is posing an unprecedented challenge to business as usual in Massachusetts. She is building on the 350,000 votes she received statewide in her race for Secretary of the Commonwealth in 2006. Given the emerging lineup that has her facing three CEO-insider politicians with nearly identical positions on the key issues, the race may actually be won with as little as 26% of the vote. With her 18% in her last statewide election, and the anti-insider fever that’s gripped the state, this could put a win in actual striking distance.
As Dr. Stein explained at a recent gathering, “A government run to benefit lobbyists and insiders has given us double digit unemployment, skyrocketing health care costs, predatory home foreclosures, crumbling schools, unaffordable higher education, counterproductive crime and drug laws, regressive taxes, unending and costly wars, and a climate crisis that threatens our economy. We can do better. It’s time to put solutions on the table that give us a secure green future in which there is both prosperity and justice.”
Since her February 8 kick-off, Dr. Stein has given numerous radio and television interviews and put together a strong campaign team. “Doors are opening as never before for a Green candidate,” Dr. Stein says. “This could be our breakthrough year.”
S. DEACON ALEXANDER is one of two candidates competing for the California Green nomination for governor. A sixty-four year old retired union carpenter, many of Deacon’s ideas for a better society are from his father, bricklayer’s assistant and political activist. As a long-time social advocate and former Black Panther, Deacon Alexander worked to acquit all charges against Angela Davis in 1972 and joined Latino immigrants to fight for Los Angeles’ South Central Farm.
“I run for Governor because Californians must do better. We must educate, not incarcerate. Growing affordable housing and local business are in my plan to invest in basic infrastructure. Abolish the death penalty, the prison industrial complex, racism against immigrants and all people of color. I support jobs which empower our youth, rebuild inner cities, and reduce global warning,” said Mr. Alexander.
“My gubernatorial campaign is simple. We will go Poor-to-Poor, up and down the State of California . My first act as candidate was on Skid Row in LA with the homeless, the disenfranchised, the down and out. These people have been excluded, denied and rejected for far too long. I pledge to bring them into my campaign for Governor, register them as Greens, and fight for their rights.”
“Both my gubernatorial primary opponent, Green Party candidate Laura Wells, and I fully support Ten Key Values and platform of California Green Party. Our differences lie not in substance, but in our priorities. A party and candidate which put the rights of the least of us first, is one which can proudly represent all Californians.”
LAURA WELLS is also running for the Green Party’s nomination for Governor of California. Ms. Wells ran for State Controller in 2002 and 2006. In 2002, she received over 400,000 votes, the highest vote total of any Green Party partisan statewide race in California.
“I ran as a candidate for State Controller with the motto ‘follow the money’ to understand what’s happened in California. Now it’s time to fix the money,” said Ms. Wells. “Prop 13 was passed in 1978 to keep people, especially seniors, in their homes, but like a bad pharmaceutical, the side effects of the tax policies have been disastrous especially to our younger generations. The Titanic Parties will not touch Prop 13 because likely voters love it, but I am touching it. I sent a valentine saying, ‘Prop 13, I love you, but honey, you’ve got to change!’”
“There are solutions: we can institute a State Bank for California and invest in California not Wall Street. We can have great schools, healthcare, a wonderful environment, and golden job opportunities.”
The Laura Wells campaign has printed 10,000 copies of a newsletter leaflet listing the “13 Ways Prop 13 has been Unlucky for California” on one side and “FAQs: State Bank for California” on the other. The campaign is distributing them at rallies and meetings all over the state. Leafletting began with the March 4 Day of Action, when thousands of students from universities, community colleges, and high schools walked out of class to demand a re-ordering of priorities in the state’s finances.
For more about Prop 13, the State Bank, and other information about Laura Wells and her campaign, visit her web site: http://www.LauraWells.org
DAVID CURTIS is running for Governor of Nevada.
“Fellow Greens have been asking me to run for office for more than five years. I do not enter into this lightly,” said Mr. Curtis. “Extreme economic events of the last two years in Nevada convinced me that I needed to take a more direct role in the leadership of my native state. I am running to help rebuild the Nevada economy. I want to make the state a viable place to live for my family and the citizens of Nevada.”
DENNIS S. SPISAK is the Green Party of Ohio candidate for governor in 2010. Mr. Spisak is running with the goal of bringing renewable energy jobs, single-payer health care for all, and clean fair elections to Ohio.
“I am running for governor because I believe we must send a representative to Columbus who will address the issues facing regular citizens, not lobbyists or corporate PACs. My campaign will focus on the issues that Ohioans care about: affordable health care, economic fairness, quality public education, and bringing renewable energy manufacturing jobs to the state. I am not afraid to call for health care for all Ohioans, economic justice, and nothing less than a renewal of Ohio’s sense of community and promise of equal opportunity for all Ohioans,” said Mr. Spisak.
“The people of Ohio are tired of politics and government controlled by the Democrats and Republicans. They want straight talk and straight answers to the problems facing them and their children. The Green Party has the answers to their problems.”
Hello. If you are a regular reader of this blog then you know that I am openly and proudly Liberal Progressive. Most of the time the things I write are both influenced by politics and intended to advocate for a particular way of thinking on current events. However today although I easily could, I'm not going to do that. The reason being is that the issue I'm going to present is in my opinion much, much too important to play politics with.
The other day Senate majority leader Harry Reid, in attempting to make an emotional appeal on behalf of a bill to extend unemployment benefits said the following,
"Men when they're out of work tend to become abusive. I met with some people while I was home dealing with domestic abuse. It has gotten out of hand. Why? Men don't have jobs. Women don't have jobs either, but women aren't abusive, most of the time. Men, when they're out of work, tend to become abusive. Our domestic crisis shelters in Nevada are jammed."
His concerns are valid and justifiable. But in just one sentence he downplayed, in truth dismissed the experiences of a number of men who are believed to be in the millions. These are men who are survivors of partner abuse.
It finally happened. In case you missed last night's big news, the Nevada Legislature overrode Idiot-in-Chief Jim Gibbons' veto to make comprehensive domestic partnerships into law. Nevada is the first Mountain West state to offer legal recognition for same-sex couples, and is the first non-coastal state to do so by way of the Legislature. Believe me, I'm quite proud of "my other home state" today.
The theme of equality was central to our nation’s founding, with the declaration that “all men are created equal.” Our country’s history has witnessed the gradual evolution of that core principle from a ruling class that countenanced slavery and subordination toward an egalitarian vision that embraces the inherent equality of all people. We fought a civil war in part to give life to this proposition. It is embodied in our Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under law, and in the other Civil War amendments. And epic social movements of the past two centuries have moved our country, in fits and starts, further still toward the reality of truly equal opportunity. As Abraham Lincoln said of the Founders’ vision:
“They meant to set up a standard maxim for free society, which should be familiar to all, and revered by all; constantly looked to, constantly labored for, and even though never perfectly attained, constantly approximated, and thereby constantly spreading and deepening its influence, and augmenting the happiness and value of life to all people of all colors everywhere.”
It's because of this rich history that recent happenings in Nevada and California are so discouraging. First, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8's ban on same-sex marriage. Meanwhile, this week Nevada Governor Jim Gibbons vetoed a law that would give domestic partners similar rights and benefits to those enjoyed by Nevada married couples.
In a statement (PDF) released by the Governor, he writes: "My disapproval of this bill should not be taken to suggest that domestic partners are in any way undeserving of rights and protections." But this is a canard. As Justice Carlos Moreno, the sole dissenter in this week's California Supreme Court ruling, said:
"Granting same-sex couples all of the rights enjoyed by opposite-sex couples, except the right to call their officially recognized and protected family relationship a marriage, still denies them equal treatment."
He continued to say the ruling "places at risk the state constitutional rights of all disfavored minorities."
Granting gay couples anything but the ability to marriage is fundamentally separate and unequal. These actions in California and Nevada are a troubling trend and particularly discouraging in light of the recent advances in gay rights in so many other states.
Something amazing happened yesterday. Maybe it isn't revolutionary, but hopefully it will be evolutionary. The Commerce & Labor Committee of the Nevada Senate agreed to domestic partnerships (or "DP's"). Unfortunately it's not marriage, but let me explain to you why this is a major step forward for equality in the Mountain West.
After the U.S. Supreme Court upheld one of the country's strictest voter ID laws in April, several states rushed to pass similar bills before the year's end. By December, more than 25 states introduced legislation to require voter ID at the polls. Though none of these bills were successful this year, lawmakers in several states are hoping to revive such restrictive requirements in 2009.
Since July of this year, at least seven states have pre-filed or carried over voter ID legislation for the 2009-2010 sessions, including Nevada, Maryland, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.
(In confluence with Chris's thesis about the growing demographic Democratic base, here's the latest from Project Vote. - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
The United States saw dramatic increases in voting from traditionally underrepresented groups, including minorities and young voters, according to a new analysis released this week by Project Vote. If borne out by systematic analysis of the voter rolls, this change in the electorate is evidence of the power of successful voter registration drives and an indication of the strong inclination of voters to participate in the process when candidates address their issues.
Friday marked the end of the first week of early voting in Nevada. In Clark County, which represented 65% of Nevada's votes in 2004, there have already been exactly 160,000 early votes cast in person, with a striking Democratic advantage. This number shatters 2004's one-week early turnout record of around 102,000.
Of those 160,000 votes, a hair short of 56%--89,554 votes total--were from registered Democrats, while a little less than 28 were cast by registered Republicans--44,607 total votes. That means that during the first week, Democrats outnumbered Republicans with regard to total in-person early voting by a factor of over 2 to 1. We have had 25,839 non-partisan or minor party ballots cast as well.
As history has shown, there is a difference between submitting a voter registration application and finding your name on the rolls when you go to vote. With registration coming to a close, Project Vote is conducting emergency efforts to ensure that no one who wants to vote is left out on Election Day.
Project Vote's Registration Repair Program is an intensive and urgent effort to collect and rectify large numbers of registrations that have been rejected by boards of election. We have been working all over the country to obtain disqualified applications and to contact would-be voters to repair applications with missing or erroneous information.
Last weekend, I was lucky enough to see the state of the race for myself. I traveled to the heart of Battleground Country. Because Nevada's 5 electoral votes are up for grabs and two Nevada Republicans may lose their House seats this fall, I wanted to do something to help. That's why I packed my bags, took some spare change for my favorite slot machines (NOT!), and made sure my family in Henderson had an extra bed for me to crash on.
I went to Vegas, baby, and I'm giving you the full report on what's happening there!
STATE BLOGS
