(Conservative hostility to democracy is becoming increasingly overt. Project Vote shines a light on the most recent developments that ought to alarm all Americans. - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
Minnesota has some of the most progressive voter registration laws in the country, laws like same day registration and vouching, that are designed to maximize turnout and get as many voices as possible heard on Election Day. Some newly elected members of the Minnesota state legislature, however, have recently announced that they intend to repeal those laws as soon as they take office. These laws, they claim, leave the state vulnerable to voter fraud, so vulnerable they apparently must be repealed immediately, despite their obvious benefits.
Like Don Quixote charging at windmills, believing them to be monsters, these state legislators are gearing up to fight imaginary threats. Voter fraud, contrary to the media perception, is incredibly rare. According to a study by the nonpartisan group Citizens for Election Integrity Minnesota, only twenty-six people were convicted of voter fraud in Minnesota in 2008, all of them convicted felons who are restricted from voting. In other words, less than nine-ten thousandths of one percent of Minnesota voters (.0009 percent), were convicted of voter fraud in 2008. At the national level, a report by Dr. Lorraine Minnite, director of research at Project Vote and former assistant professor of American and urban politics at Barnard College, found that only 24 people were convicted of voter fraud between 2002 and 2005.
So, these state legislatures are trying to repeal laws that make it easier for all Minnesotans to vote, on the off-chance that repealing those laws might discourage some twenty-odd convicted felons from showing up on Election Day. Certainly, what little voter fraud there is should be prevented, but not at the cost of repealing laws that provide tremendous benefits to legitimate voters. In 2004, the six states with same day registration had turnout rates almost 12 percent above the national average, but the newly elected Minnesota legislators are more worried about the two dozen felons who might be voting illegally, than the thousands of legitimate voters who may be prevented from voting at all if these laws are repealed.
If the state legislatures want to fix elections in this country, if they want to protect the sanctity of the democratic process, they should not be focused on the .00009 percent of ineligible citizens who vote illegally--oftentimes unknowingly--due to criminal convictions. Instead, they should focus on reforming current law to allow non-incarcerated felons to automatically regain their right to vote and the 50-plus percent of eligible voters who did not even cast a ballot on Election Day, finding ways to increase turnout, not lower it.
Anthony Balady is a legal intern at Project Vote and second-year student at William & Mary Law School. Mr. Balady also serves as vice president of William & Mary's Election Law Society and editor-in-chief of its election law blog, State of Elections.
(More on the many layers of voter suppression & the war on democracy. - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
Expanding ballot access to all voting-age citizens, particularly the millions who are living and working in our communities with past felony convictions, has been the foundation of many advocates' pleas to make American life equitable. Whether wrapped in an argument to fend against racism, classism, or even "overcriminalization," felon advocates' main issue boils down to preserving the civil rights of every citizen who participates in society, no matter their personal history.
Congress has been paying attention to the federal government's apparent tendency toward "overcriminalization" or "penchant for writing new laws to criminalize conduct that could be addressed with fines or other remedies," that ultimately overfill prisons and unfairly restrict otherwise productive citizens of important rights, such as voting, according to a McClatchy Newspapers report earlier this month.
For example, Abner Schoenwetter, a seafood importer, spent six years in prison for agreeing to purchase lobster tails that violated harvest regulations in Honduras. Now, the 64-year-old Florida man "is a convicted felon with an ailing wife, no job or right to vote and three years of supervised release ahead of him."
"We're talking about people's freedom and the way it affects people's faith in their government or lack thereof. We've got to get this cleaned up," said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) at a hearing in the House Judiciary subcommittee hearing recently.
"Overcriminalization" particularly hurts citizens in states with more restrictive rules on felon disenfranchisement. All but two states restrict convicted felons from voting rights at some point in their sentences, leaving four million citizens voiceless, but "free" in our communities, a disproportionate number belonging African-American or low-income neighborhoods. Earlier this year, Congress attempted to address this issue by setting a federal standard for disenfranchisement rules with the introduction of the Democracy Restoration Act. But, the bill hasn't progressed since March.
Overcriminalization and the lack of a federal standard for disenfranchisement rules exacerbates the criminal justice system's inherent racial and economic biases that affect the quality of life of both the released convicted felons as well as the communities to which they return.
As Congress deliberates over setting a federal standard for restoring the civil rights of released felons, Virginia Governor Robert McDonnell appeared to be creating more roadblocks to the democratic process for felons in his state. However, after much criticism from lawmakers and voting rights groups in the last few days, the governor has backed down; McDonnell now says his new requirement for felons to write an essay outlining their contribution to society in order to restore their voting rights was merely a "draft policy proposal."
With millions of Americans living and working in our communities, but disenfranchised by past felony convictions, Congress has taken the first step to put democracy back on track.
Senseless voting barriers in Virginia elections - including misinformed poll workers and "antiquated election laws" - have hurt Virginians as recently as the Nov. 3 election. Voting rights groups say it does not have to be this way; recently, civil rights groups called out to the state to take the measures necessary to make "voting accessible to as many qualified people as possible."
Hundreds of thousands of former felons may regain their voting rights in two of the country's most restrictive states this year. As predicted last month, disenfranchisement reform is an election issue that is quietly gaining momentum as policymakers in Virginia and Kentucky battle for restoration of voting rights.
Election experts have already worried that the surge of newly registered voters may cause unintentional chaos through long lines and ballot shortages on Election Day. Now there is increased concern that intentional chaos may be caused by partisan forces using something that millions of Americans access every day - the Internet. Although deceiving and disenfranchising voters through political dirty tricks is a staple partisan strategy to influence election results, the Internet may be making it easier and more effective than ever to spread misinformation, according to CNN reporter, Stephanie Busari.
The ACLU has launched a lawsuit in Alabama on behalf of some ex-convicts who have been denied their right to vote by the State. Good for them. I'll say quite simply that no one should be denied the franchise on the basis of any criminal conviction whatsoever, and yes, everyone currently in prison should be able to vote. Denying the franchise has not been demonstrated to be any kind of effective deterrent, punishment or otherwise effective tool in preventing crime or serving any worthwhile societal interest. As such, society has no right to deny someone the vote out of spite, vengeance or whatever basic emotional reasons are employed today. It is a violation of John Stuart Mill's Harm Principle which is a founding basis of what it means to exist in a "free" society. The real story is that denying the franchise to convicts is yet another conservative tactic for shrinking the electorate and creating a false conservative friendly environment.
Alabama does not bar all felons from voting, only those convicted of crimes involving "moral turpitude." In 2003, the civil liberties group says, the State Legislature clearly defined what those crimes are: murder, rape, sodomy, sexual abuse, incest, sexual torture and nine other crimes mainly involving pornography and abuses against children.
At issue in the lawsuit is not the list enacted in law but an expanded "moral turpitude" list developed by the state's attorney general, Troy King, in 2005. That list includes about a dozen additional offenses, most of them nonviolent, and several including the sale of marijuana.
In the aftermath of the presidential primaries, stories of unprecedented voter registration and turnout are drifting to the back burner. But with an exceedingly imbalanced electorate, the fight to create access to the voting rolls and enforce the voting rights of all Americans continues. With historic voter registration drives underway and a preview of the types of problems that could occur in November, the focus of the media is beginning to shift towards the less sexy, but crucial elements that work to maximize voter participation while ensuring eligible voters can cast their ballots and have them counted. In Project Vote's view, this is a welcome development since many of the potential issues require more time to sort out than is available if problems are noted only weeks in advance of the election. This week, election officials, advocates and a presidential candidate worked to assist in or restore voting rights for hospitalized veterans in Connecticut, minority citizens in Georgia, and former felons in Tennessee.
America's Democratic Promise The history of democracy in the United States is one marked by the steady, though intensely contested, expansion of the right to vote. Where once only male landowners were permitted the right to choose their representatives, the United States now proudly extends that right to all adult citizens. The most recent expansion of the franchise were the result of years of struggle through the Civil Rights Movement and the anti-Vietnam War movement. The seminal Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the 26th Amendment ratified in 1971 created enforcement mechanisms to protect minority voting rights and extended the right to vote to 18 year olds.
STATE BLOGS
